How Can Leftists Be Mutants if They Are More Intelligent than Conservatives?

I’ve become quite well known for arguing that leftists are “mutants;” that they are higher in mutational load than conservatives. Leftists, in general though not always, are, in my view, the descendants of those who would have died under the harsh Darwinian conditions of high child mortality that were prevalent until around 1800. However, it is perfectly possible that I am wrong. Unlike the Woke ideologues who have taken over Western universities, I am open to the possibility that I may be wrong, because I am interested in the empirical truth. A recent article in Aporia Magazine has raised the possibility that my theory might be incorrect, but I don’t think it is. The nub of the issue is that intelligent people, in Western societies, tend to be left-wing and intelligence is associated with low mutational load.

Dr Noah Carl and Dr Bo Winegard, both “cancelled” academics, have highlighted a fundamental problem with the theory that I, and, more technically, a young scholar called Joseph Bronski, have espoused [Can mutation load explain the rise of leftism?, By Noah Carl and Bo Winegard, Aporia Magazine, April 26, 2024].

As I explain my book Breeding the Human Herd: Eugenics, Dysgenics and the Future of the Species, my argument is that under harsh Darwinian conditions of 50% child mortality,  there was selection for physical health, mental health, conservatism, pro-sociality, and religiousness. We were selecting for that the latter two traits because they were under conditions of harsh group-selection – we were battling other groups – and the group which is high in positive and negative ethnocentrism tends to triumph according to computer models. Conservatism involves being fundamentally oriented toward group values, especially obedience to authority, ingroup loyalty and the sanctity of tradition and order. Religion promotes these as the will of God and also makes people more pro-social, as God is sitting on their shoulder, and reduces anxiety by giving people a sense of eternal meaning. Hence, all of these traits became bundled together – pleiotropically related – into a “fitness factor.” The genetic component of conservatism may be about 60%, demonstrating that it is an adaptation.

Every generation, high child mortality was purging mutant genes from the population, keeping it genetically fit. With the breakdown of harsh Darwinian selection, due to the Industrial Revolution and its advancements it medicine, we would expect a massive build-up of mutation and we would expect it to be associated with a deviation from the pre-industrial norm of conservatism and traditional religiosity involving the collective worship of a moral god.

Consistent with this, liberalism is associated with a number of markers of mutational load. Liberal males are less muscular and they are shorter while liberal males and females have less attractive and less symmetrical faces. These traits imply that, being genetically sick, they have fewer bio-energetic resources left over to accrue muscle, reach their phenotypic maximum height and maintain a symmetrical phenotype. Atheists are more likely to be left-handed, which implies, among other problems, a particularly asymmetrical brain. Leftists and atheists are higher in mental illness, atheists are less likely to recover from cancer, atheists and liberals are less fertile and they are lower in pro-social personality traits. Also, as Bronski has shown, liberals have older fathers. Paternal age is an accepted marker of mutational load. Older males are more likely to have de novo mutations on their sperm [Evidence for a Paternal Age Effect on Leftism, By Joseph Bronski, Open Psych, 2023]. 

My argument is that, across the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, there was, due to relaxed selection, a build-up of mutational load and, thus, a build-up favoring leftism. Eventually, a “tipping point” was reached—an experiment indicated that 20% of a group is enough for this to happen [Experimental evidence for tipping points in social convention, By D. Centola et al., Science, 2018]. Western societies tipped over very quickly, focussing on the liberal values of equality and harm avoidance; individualistic values that, in essence, put the individual over the good of the group.

It is here that the point made by Carl and Winegard becomes germane. Intelligence is also a marker of low mutational load. We were selecting for intelligence up until the Industrial Revolution, as I observe in Breeding the Human Herd. Carl and Winegard observe that, even today, intelligence is genetically correlated with mental and physical health. Yet it is also genetically predicts leftism: carrying alleles that are associated with very high education levels—and thus with high intelligence—and it predicts being left-wing. Not only that but there is evidence that intelligent people have changed, within their own lifetimes, from being left-wing to right-wing: So, this being the case, how can the change to a leftist society be mainly or even partly genetic in origin?

A possible reason for the broader anomaly may be that intelligence is associated with social conformity; it is associated with norm-mapping and the effortful control necessary to force yourself to believe that which it is socially useful to believe. Once you have adopt socially useful values, you attain social status by competitively signalling your conformity to these social norms. In a conservative society, this may signal runaway purity-signalling, until eventually, illegitimacy is so unacceptable that illegitimate children are put up for adoption. In a liberal society, this runaway concern with equality and harm avoidance leads us to Wokeness. It is the more intelligent who tend to direct the culture, helping to explain why intelligence is so central to this process. Consistent with this, in right-wing societies, that have not yet tipped over, intelligence is associated with conservatism [Political orientations, intelligence and education, By H. Rindermann et al, Intelligence, 2012]. Intelligence, when combined with mental illness, which it sometimes will be, will weaponize mental illness and selfishness: such people will be restless Machiavellians, pushing things in an ever more left-wing direction.

But, of course, what this means is that intelligence has a paradoxical relationship with other markers of mutational load. When mutational load builds-up and makes the environment left-wing, intelligent people will become the vanguard of the new dispensation, despite, ironically, being relatively low in mutational load. The result – and my research has shown that this happening – is a selection event among the more intelligent. Among the more intelligent, the big predictor of fertility is religiousness and conservatism, as I have shown in my co-authored book The Past is a Future Country: The Coming Conservative Demographic Revolution.

Intelligent people seem to be more environmentally sensitive, which makes sense because solving cognitive problems involves rising above your instincts, so you should be lower in “instinct.” This means that you are more reliant on being placed on an evolutionarily adaptive road map of life, where you are told to have children and behave in an adaptive way—and, in general, behave in a way that matches your evolved predispositions—the ecology which you are evolved to. If you are placed on a maladaptive road map – which Wokeness places you on – then your intelligence (your marker of low mutational load) will be your un-doing, unless it goes together with genetic conservatism, which makes you resistant to Wokeness.

In addition, the long documented weak negative relationship between religiousness and intelligence would be explicable by the fact that religiousness is an instinct (hence it increases at times of stress and mortality salience), intelligent people are lower in instinct and we are in an evolutionary mismatch of low mortality salience in which are instincts are less likely to be induced. Likewise, ethnocentrism increases at times of stress and mortality salience, implying that it is an instinct and that it is less likely to be induced, in easy conditions, in more intelligent people [Terror Management in a Multicultural Society: Effects of Mortality Salience on Attitudes to Multiculturalism Are Moderated by National Identification and Self-Esteem Among Native Dutch People, By M Sin & S. Koole, Frontiers in Psychology, 2018]. Intelligence, in summary, presents a paradox in terms of the mutational load model of our leftward shift, but it is a paradox that can be solved.

24 replies
  1. Weaver
    Weaver says:

    Urbanites vs Peasants

    Peasants tend to have natural ability, but urbanites are clever with learned ability. However, peasants are brain drained into the mixed race cities, suggesting urbanites are smarter.

    Peasants can unite more readily, tend to have faith and nationalism.

    Foxes vs lions
    Vampires vs werewolves

    My insights here might not be that interesting, but I doubt intelligent people are lower in instinct as this author believes.

  2. Tim Folke
    Tim Folke says:

    I had to laugh appreciatively when I saw the title of this essay. Thanks, Mr. Dutton!

    Even Solomon, said to be a very wise man, put his oar in the water on this subject, quote:

    ‘A wise man’s heart is at his right hand, but a fool’s heart at his left.’ (Ecclesiastes 10:2)

  3. Dr. Doom
    Dr. Doom says:

    Most of the left are now brown retards that couldn’t invent the wheel. The rest are deviants that are not smart enough to avoid maladaptive behaviors. At the top are Satan’s meat puppets. Big Lie about the right being dumb. They have fewer degrees than the inferior people on the left, but cardboard is not a good substitute for ability. Most of the degrees are shoveled out to retards that have “earned” them in teams that have White Men and Asian Men doing all the work and the retards getting an unearned credit. This whole fraud is obvious to any person that went to a communist college campus. All the Big Lie does is Identify the liars and the enemy. If you lie often enough, everyone knows who the liars are. Keep a list of the enemy. It will be useful for the future.

    • Tim Folke
      Tim Folke says:

      Regarding your comment that the right has fewer degrees than those on the left, that is true, but it may also be noted that most of the left’s degrees are in the soft sciences, i.e. – literature, art, philosophy, etc… while those on the right tend to be in the disciplined sciences, i.e. – chemistry, engineering, and so on.

  4. Tom
    Tom says:

    Another problem is that leftists are not intelligent people. The success of leftists is that many people are as stupid as they are. In a democracy, stupid votes for stupid. Stupid then has the power to plunder the creative and the productive, until catastrophe occurs.

  5. Santoculto
    Santoculto says:

    So nordics have accumulated more mutational load??? Or a great part of current dominant globalistic leftism is a combination of psycho-cultural (adaptational) and (((political))) factors, which genetic factors been minor, just like the secular increase of avg height??

    So smarter people in the past were more likely to be religious OR they were always been more inclined to “leftwing” or “nonconservative” point of views?? More like a counter effect of being more self aware and thus more individualistic and also empathetic??

    High IQ people are truly less “mutant”??

    • Weaver
      Weaver says:

      A more interesting trend is how cities and transient populations won’t tolerate, in some ways, those with problems. And the capable tend to marry the capable. And some rely more on technology, enabling defects to thrive.

      What’s needed is just an analysis of the data by someone who doesn’t just assume a doctorate makes one capable. High test scores are a better indicator of ability. But there isn’t a direct correlation.

      James Burnham wrote how the managerial elite tends to be more of what we call left wing. Elites run everything. Nationalists tend to assume population percentages matter; they don’t much. Elites matter.

      Nordics probably have accumulated more mutational load due to a lack of selection, survival of the weak.

      • Santoculto
        Santoculto says:

        My first question was provocative because i really cant see Nordic and Scandinavian peoples on general as more typically Left wing, stereotypically.

        If good part of this tesis above is based on mouse (human-made) “utopia” experiments so i think we have a problem because rats live way shorter than us, just to start. So the speed of genetic or biological changes among them induced by the experiments cant be fully reflected to the current very dysgenic trends happening everywhere on our species and primarily on the West. Also we just cant associate the “utopic” social model created to the mouse experiment to the current Western societies. It even can help zionists and fake opposition to use this tesis to counterargue against Jewish subversion of the Western World, like “it was a natural or inevitable situation”.

        Fertility rates on South Korea now is extremely low but few decades ago was not that low. I dont think we can use only or primarily genetics to explain this difference, just like we cant use natural or cultural selection to explain the increase on height throughout generations since the beggining of the last century.

      • Santoculto
        Santoculto says:

        Intelligence tests are good to analyse human capacities by a superficial way or perspective. Really not great to analyse on depth. What’s matter here most is not specific cognitive capacities but how we use them and also the “noncognitive” ones in real world contexts, i like to call “rationality”. IQ seems is concentrated on speed reasoning not its quality. It’s clearly for me the most rational of us tend to build their beliefs systems based on facts or evidences and the most thoughtful arguments, independently of what side of political spectrum It has been defended or produced. It seems very common to see irreflexive ideological partisans among high IQ people. The possible paradox of rationality and intelligence (in sense of learning skills, not reasoning), which while low intelligence make hard to develop rationality, too much of it can increase the risk of intellectual overconfidence, quite common among high IQ people.

        • Weaver
          Weaver says:

          Height increases due to nutrition and sexual selection.

          “Genius is 99% perspiration, 1% inspiration.”(Edison quote). It takes work and high standards to get correct answers. You can’t make a silk purse from a sow’s ear (a common proverb); but silk can be ruined.

          Regarding fertility in SK, there would be some genetic component. There always is. And, given time, you’d find a trend of some having more kids, replacing others who have fewer. Natural selection, or perhaps unnatural, is always taking place.

          I’m not suggesting you’re wrong on any of your statements. I’m just making small comments as a respectful reply.

    • Barkingmad
      Barkingmad says:

      There ya go. There’s research to prove every imaginable connection between A & B – as if there was never any bias in the first place.

      It sure would be nice if “intelligence” were thoroughly and properly defined. Is it just IQ? Where the above subject is concerned everything hinges on that quality but it looks to me as if there could be much overlapping between IQ type intelligence and aptitude (for particular job or activity or general way of life). You may have a sharp, quick mind (determined by IQ testing) but be thick as a stump in daily life, barely able to tie your shoelaces or keep your surroundings clean. And some Big Dummies live a well-ordered life with very little input for anyone. JMO.

      • James J O'Meara
        James J O'Meara says:

        “There ya go. There’s research to prove every imaginable connection between A & B – as if there was never any bias in the first place.”

        I was going to say that Santoculto’s own post above seems like a word salad produced by some kind of AI. Not to criticize his point, just an observation that all these “IQ studies prove my ideology is good mutation” articles and post from the Left and Right just seem like that: a whole bunch of words tossed together, satisfying until the next post arrives and “proves” the opposite.

        As they say, it’s not rocket science. Rather more like a cargo cult building plywood planes and waving at the sky.

      • Santoculto
        Santoculto says:

        This study is particularly interesting because it pays attention to the differences among non religious people, something many studies dont. Anyway, what’s matter about atheism is that it’s inequivocally more logical and rational than religion. But i understand the role of religious belief on social organization and on emotional stabilization of many people. But, someday, humans will need evolve from their evolutionary adolescence.

        Intelligence is not just IQ. IQ doesnt analyse rationality and creativity and emotional intelligence. IQ actually even dont measure anything because intelligence is not traditionally measurable if it is not a physical thing. IQ compare and rank results, based on a mathematical pedantry (using a fictious numerical system as a hierarchical map of performance localization and we as its “legends”). And correlate with lots of real world outcomes because is more generalist tests than Chess game, for example. IQ analyse how faster and accurate we are in answering its questions. Primarily, that’s all. But say nothing about how we are in real world contexts. Lots of highly intelligent people, based on IQ and other academic or scholastic performance, do poor or just avg on real world intelectual approaching and lots of them, maybe most, are left-leaners. IQ even dont touch one the most universally cross species definition of intelligence, the capacity to detect dangers at priori in the environment. So based on this very primary definition, conservatives, and specially “Far Right”, tend to perform way better, even thought Left leaners tend to be good to detect internal dangers of their own people, specially White Left leaners.

  6. Alan
    Alan says:

    The conflation of computerized “rational only”measures of “intelligence and political -cultural development leaves gaping holes of other factors..unpermitted to be recognized.. that whether lyshekoistic scientists believe it or not ,not only exist but eventually predominate.
    Adolph was a brilliant deeply frustrated romantic man a fine painter and an architect…who some called a reactionary …a ..reactionary to the blood line only Jewish lie and reactionary to the ,in his era…what can be called ..the Neoliberalism of the time.Willpower…!…Man and superman.”Duty before Pleasure!….
    .in group preference! The revulsion millions of younger and older folk feel when Schwab or Soros.the hideous one with 3feet in the grave… the gay jewpig speaks or is. seen retching his Jewish luciferian militant satanic communitarian gleeful cynicism onto the world…certainly..genuinely….we tend to love almost every article on Blessed TOO..non pareil as it was and as it is..but even with reading between the lines there was and there is more to..instinct..intuition. the inescapable feeling
    that…there is… .larger than life destiny…”No doubt stupid sclerotic monochromatic leftists..-JEWS!. leave millions feeling abandoned in sub zero temperatures of the mind…but throughout all known human history..instinct..intuition..inner vision..was never…and never will be.100percent comprehended by computer based demographical statistical base
    compilations.. ..sure..another very fine article here…but in these days of vengeance..rage… turmoil deepest dissatisfaction expanding all around us…no flat minded “science as God ” status quo model will suffice…point warriors will arise…some of the Nasdap points will work in the time to come..otherwise..because of Das Juden..only ……Mordor and black eyed babies with not long to live …will superdominate **

  7. WCH
    WCH says:

    Most people on both sides are stupid, ignorant etc. People who truly believe religious dogma is real are fools. The masses will never be anything more than meat popsicle.

    • Weaver
      Weaver says:

      “Alas! It is delusion all.” – Lord Byron.

      Religion provides meaning where none otherwise exists. It provides structure and value.

      • Santoculto
        Santoculto says:

        It is not so different than wokeness. And worst, Christianism is a cult of a “Jewish savior” who preach for a completely defenseless compassion. Actually, Christianism is an original wokeness. Most of White pathological altruism and self hate is induced by Christian faith. Even thought i agree atheism without any cultural structure behind just like we have today obviously doesnt work. Secularism today is capitalism + nihilism.

        • Weaver
          Weaver says:

          You’d be an interesting person to talk with. Belief in the immortal soul is essential to ethics, rooted in Creation. Separately, the root of culture is cult.

          If you dislike Christianity, look to another faith. Atheism is a sort of component of Christianity in the sense that it’s posited as the only alternative (Satanism is a similar anti-Christian alternative). So, those who reject “the faith” then embrace something that doesn’t work.

          If neither work, find or create something that works.

          A problem with Christianity is it’s at best neutral on nationalism. However, it creates the potential for a world of nations at peace.

          I would argue that it’s difficult to know what one wants. Reason isn’t so easy. Tradition and applying what has worked in the past is easier.

          Off topic, or back on topic: It’s difficult to say what is truly superior, what genes are mutational load, because as the environment changes the best suited genes change. So, having some diversity of genes, which you get without an overly strong selection pressure, can be good.

          • Santoculto
            Santoculto says:

            For many people, yes, but not for the brightest.

            Christianism has work as a brainwashing cult primarily for White people to emphasise themselves towards lies centered in a “Jewish savior” rather than building a culture primarily based on their own race. Anyway, true religion, the human seek to answer questions about existential perspective, would embrace atheism.

            Throughout great part of religion history it has been in war against reality. The damage Christianism have done to White people, so many wars “in the name of Jesus”, has been enormous. I only agree right now is the time to attack Christianism but always keeping in mind humans someday will need to evolve from this emotional dependence.

            The possible correlation between religioussness is due to an artfact in which conformist and magical thinking prone people have had more descendents than atheists and highly rational people, on general. Seems, when a phenotype is not under strong selection It tends to become more charged on mutations while the phenotype which is under strong selection tend to become less charged. Objectivelyspeaking, believe in God is not different than believe man can become a woman and você versa.

  8. blastoise
    blastoise says:

    Religion is based on fundamental metaphysical assumptions, which are personal, based on direct knowing and not open to scientific/rational analysis. Autistic people such as Dutton always arrogantly and flippantly state their metaphysical views as fact. But nothing ever changes – faith is a choice, and the idea of the world as fundamentally non-created without divine purpose is as much an assumption as that of us living in God’s creation.

    Funny how someone who spins himself into an incoherent mess trying to fit the square peg into the round hole of intelligent people being more leftist while simultaneously being lower in mutational load is so certain of such deep and heavy questions.

  9. Pierre de Craon
    Pierre de Craon says:

    … it is perfectly possible that I am wrong.

    This clause, which is included in the third sentence of Edward Dutton’s essay, is the essay’s intellectual apex. It is also the part of the essay with which I am in closest agreement.

  10. Tim Monaghan
    Tim Monaghan says:

    It sounds like the left has evolved to be a better fit for the pluralistic, multiethnic world we live in now and conservativism is an archaic adaptation.

Comments are closed.