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


    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.


    I'm a psychologist and know exactly what it's like to be the odd duck in a room full of 1000 bleeding heart liberals. It makes me want to vomit most of the time. The bias is real and hugely influential on the "scientific agenda." Tell them you're a gun owner and you might as well have leprosy, AIDS, and cancer.

    When do we start the forced integration?

    It is amazing that this man stood up and presented this truth to the crowd. Still more amazing is that he has seen it for what it is, called it what it is, and seems to be telling the Leftists that they need to do something about it.

    How about universities? How does his data relate to professors and university staff? I believe it would be quite similar to his statistics and study data results on "social psycologists". Perhaps someone can get a Ph.D. for that study! 😉

    I posted this on a whining Krugman blogsite:

    "Social sciences are not methodologically rigorous enough to comb out the biases that the people in the field uncritically accept as some sort of status quo. For a chronically-biased ultra-left preacher of economic nostrums who comically considers himself an "economist," Krugman must have felt a tiny pang of guilt before quashing it and writing this vapid piece of self-exoneration.

    I see a highly-regarded psychologist who considers 'cognitive psychology' and any science with the "c" word in front of it as automatically meriting consideration as a legally and academically authorized form of sheer gimquackery. Or as the British would say, "rubbish.""

    I would have said total garbage and lies, rubbish and nonsense, but at the New York Times, your comment is never posted until vetted by a certified member of the thought police looking for any excuse to strike down a submission.

    Dr. Haidt admits drifting from the left to the center. In the words of the great Scooby-Doo: "Ruh-roh!"

    Remember his name — you may be speaking it in the same breath with in future years with another outlier brave enough to ask, "Can someone explain to me why we don't like conservatives?": Bernard Goldberg.

    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