Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    I’m Part Of An “Outgroup” — Send Money

    I’m Part Of An “Outgroup” — Send Money

    Shocking news from the frontlines of the anti-discrimination battles. 

    Liberals — particularly in academia and the social sciences — have a tribal mentality which results in discrimination against conservatives.

    What is shocking is not that such tribal mentality exists, but that anyone is expressing surprise.

    As reported by The New York Times, for which this really is shocking news, someone just discovered this reality (emphasis mine):

    Some of the world’s pre-eminent experts on bias discovered an unexpected form of it at their annual meeting.

    Discrimination is always high on the agenda at the Society for Personality and Social Psychology’s conference, where psychologists discuss their research on racial prejudice, homophobia, sexism, stereotype threat and unconscious bias against minorities. But the most talked-about speech at this year’s meeting, which ended Jan. 30, involved a new “outgroup.”

    It was identified by Jonathan Haidt, a social psychologist at the University of Virginia who studies the intuitive foundations of morality and ideology. He polled his audience at the San Antonio Convention Center, starting by asking how many considered themselves politically liberal. A sea of hands appeared, and Dr. Haidt estimated that liberals made up 80 percent of the 1,000 psychologists in the ballroom. When he asked for centrists and libertarians, he spotted fewer than three dozen hands. And then, when he asked for conservatives, he counted a grand total of three.

    “This is a statistically impossible lack of diversity,” Dr. Haidt concluded, noting polls showing that 40 percent of Americans are conservative and 20 percent are liberal. In his speech and in an interview, Dr. Haidt argued that social psychologists are a “tribal-moral community” united by “sacred values” that hinder research and damage their credibility — and blind them to the hostile climate they’ve created for non-liberals.  

    “Anywhere in the world that social psychologists see women or minorities underrepresented by a factor of two or three, our minds jump to discrimination as the explanation,” said Dr. Haidt, who called himself a longtime liberal turned centrist. “But when we find out that conservatives are underrepresented among us by a factor of more than 100, suddenly everyone finds it quite easy to generate alternate explanations.”

    Conservatives are the new “outgroup.”  No actually, we are the old outgroup.  It’s just that the real ingroup has convinced itself that it is the outgroup in order to keep out the real outgroup.  Get it?

    Regardless of whether I’m part of the new or old outgroup, can I get money for that?  After all, isn’t that what the discrimination business is all about?

    ——————————————–
    Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
    Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!
    Bookmark and Share

    DONATE

    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.

    Comments


    @maggie:
    "@Tlaloc, I think that you miss the whole point of the observation that Dr. Haidt was making and it has nothing to do with the unscientific message of his observation:

    “Anywhere in the world that social psychologists see women or minorities underrepresented by a factor of two or three, our minds jump to discrimination as the explanation,” said Dr. Haidt, who called himself a longtime liberal turned centrist. “But when we find out that conservatives are underrepresented among us by a factor of more than 100, suddenly everyone finds it quite easy to generate alternate explanations.” "

    The problem with that is that you can in no way relate gender/ethnicity and political views. They are entirely different things. When you see a field dominated by men there is good reason to ask if gender discrimination works because women and men are fundamentally the same. Sexual dimorphism in humans is almost nonexistent. And the one "carrer" where the few differences would be most meaningful (prostitution) is illegal in geenral ain the western world anyway.

    On the other hand conservativism/liberalism is a point of view, it arises nt from genetic chance but from experiences and upbringing. There's no reason in the world to assume that conservatives are as likely to want to become social scientists or that the process of training a social scientist is as likely to produce a conservative. Just as MBAs are predominately conservative, people who are conservative are more likely to see business as a good carreer option and the process of getting an MBA reinforces conservative concepts.

    Do you want MBAs then to be forced to take classes that reinforce liberal concepts so as to try and artificially even out this "imbalance?"


     
     0 
     
     0
    sort of runic rhyme | February 8, 2011 at 1:12 pm

    One tiny diff in effect of the ideological skew, whether statistically supportable or no, between MBAs and social scientists:

    One is in the biz of making business, understanding markets and managing money, and the other in the biz of being in our business, of parsing us and then managing Society according to The Correct Worldview.


    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend