244

“I really do believe in IQ science”: Laura Loomer, Trump ally floated for a potential White House position, goes on wildly racist rant against Rep. Ilhan Omar (www.mediamatters.org)

submitted 7 months ago by stopthatgirl7@kbin.social to c/politics@lemmy.world

62 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Only months after Donald Trump Jr. floated Laura Loomer as a White House press secretary, Loomer used her platform on Rumble to launch into a half-hour long racist screed against Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN), Somalians living in America, birthright citizenship, and Muslims. Loomer begun the show by referring to Rep. Omar as a "black dog" whose "district is literally Somalia," and claimed that Omar's constituents are "breeding like rabbits.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Ragdoll_X@lemmy.world 39 points 7 months ago

I also believe in IQ science.

Specifically the science showing that conservatives have low IQs.

[-] Hyperreality@kbin.social 39 points 7 months ago

What the science actually suggests is this:

Despite their important implications for interpersonal behaviors and relations, cognitive abilities have been largely ignored as explanations of prejudice. We proposed and tested mediation models in which lower cognitive ability predicts greater prejudice, an effect mediated through the endorsement of right-wing ideologies (social conservatism, right-wing authoritarianism) and low levels of contact with out-groups. In an analysis of two large-scale, nationally representative United Kingdom data sets (N = 15,874), we found that lower general intelligence (g) in childhood predicts greater racism in adulthood, and this effect was largely mediated via conservative ideology. A secondary analysis of a U.S. data set confirmed a predictive effect of poor abstract-reasoning skills on antihomosexual prejudice, a relation partially mediated by both authoritarianism and low levels of intergroup contact. All analyses controlled for education and socioeconomic status. Our results suggest that cognitive abilities play a critical, albeit underappreciated, role in prejudice. Consequently, we recommend a heightened focus on cognitive ability in research on prejudice and a better integration of cognitive ability into prejudice models.

Which is something plenty of conservatives lack the functional literacy to understand.

[-] HWK_290@lemmy.world 21 points 7 months ago

Really interesting! Particularly that it's childhood intelligence, not adult, that determines later prejudice, suggesting that racist outlooks are deeply ingrained and set early in life. It's not clear if the second analysis considers contemporary reasoning skills, but I also suspect early and adult intelligence are highly correlated

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago

It’s also important to keep in mind that a lot of intelligence testing is meant for use on children. It’s a lot easier to gauge “how developed is your brain compared to what we expect at your age” than “how smart is this 25 year old”.

[-] agent_flounder@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I suppose it is possible that they only studied childhood intelligence in the study.

~~I'm curious if the intelligence tests somehow account for the quality of their education.~~ edit: it says yes right there in the abstract lol oops

[-] Zehzin@lemmy.world 20 points 7 months ago

You really shouldn't. IQ is mostly bullshit, the only thing it measures accurately is how well you do in an IQ test.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 15 points 7 months ago

Exactly. An Amazonian hunter-gatherer might be a genius. He might be able to do all sorts of prodigy-level things if he were raised in a modern Western society. And maybe as it is, he's the best hunter-gatherer in his tribe because of how smart he is.

But give him an IQ test (for the purposes of this thought experiment you're somehow able to do it despite him not knowing how to read) and he could very likely fail it simply because it is based on a Western view of the world for which he has no frame of reference.

I once did a music video for a guy who was the most amazing country music fiddle player you would have ever seen. Like fantastic complex improvisations when he played. I don't even like much country and I was blown away. When we had him sign the contract, he could barely write his own name.

Was he a genius or was he an idiot? Was his IQ high or low?

[-] Skua@kbin.social 15 points 7 months ago

for the purposes of this thought experiment you’re somehow able to do it despite him not knowing how to read

Don't worry, there's plenty of precedent for giving IQ tests to people in languages they can't read and then judging them for doing badly at it!

[-] Zehzin@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

Was the guy's name Johnny and did he win a fiddle battle against the devil

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

It was not and he did not, but he definitely played fiddle far better than Charlie Daniels.

[-] KnightontheSun@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

Every time I hear that song I think the devil played it better. ;-p

[-] DessertStorms@kbin.social 1 points 7 months ago

The frustration that we feel over bigotry can be expressed in so many ways. We don’t need to rely on ableist slurs. Alternative phrases are more descriptive, and more accurate; unintelligence is not the prevailing problem with right wing extremists, for instance, nor is it the cause of their actions. Ignorance, prejudice, and disregard for the rights of others are.
Conflating harmful actions with lack of intelligence does everyone a disservice. To suggest that “stupidity” that is what makes people act badly undermines any real accountability. The causes of problematic behavior rarely have anything to do with mental acuity, and we can’t properly address harmful behavior while being so reductive about its causes. Carelessness, bias, hatred, greed, closed-mindedness, indifference – these are the traits that lead to oppression. Our intelligence is not the issue so much as our sense of compassion and justice.
A person can be unintelligent and still know right from wrong. There are people with cognitive disabilities who I respect a thousand times more than those who are supposedly more abled. They have stronger principles, seek to better themselves, and are committed to being good people. They are just capable of being sensitive and caring as everyone else. To imply that they aren’t is outrageous.

source

this post was submitted on 02 Feb 2024

244 points (96.6% liked)

politics

18930 readers

3119 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News