Aibu to worry about general public intelligence

It’s smartphones, the Internet & social media. And now AI.
Whole families sitting on busses, in restaurants, at events.
Silently scrolling, gaming, slowly dying inside, not growing.
All of our education, progress, and free-will totally wasted…

After working with the general public for the last 20 years you are correct. Although I do have my moments where I have said some really stupid things when my brain doesn't catch up to my mouth so I assume this is actually the case the majority of the time.

You use the words lack of "wisdom" in place of the word "thick". Which is of course more polite. But you are judging a person's vote from no knowledge about their circumstances. And suggesting that the way they chose to exercise their vote is "unwise". I think more unwise to tar great swathes of people with the same brush and apply your own values to them.

As I said, we all walk in our own shoes. In my view, a vote for Reform is emminently wiser than a vote for the current Labour party ( or the Greens) if you are working class.

Edit. I see youve edited your post to say theres no evidence that Labour want to create a benefits class. The effects of their economic policies regarding ENI and extended workers rights is already leading to rising unemployment (therefore more people on benefits).

At least we aren't burning women at the stake anymore 😅

'i'm sure we can all agree'....
On mn? How sure?

I think some of the "thick" people you worry about are probably more intelligent than you realise. Some of the most idiotic people I've met in my my life have been PhDs.

@Hoardasurass I said on my last post the extreme of anything is bad news.
I remember PIE being highlighted late 70s early 80s it's astounding that anyone said yes that's fine.
Disgusting organisation no matter what side of the political divide you stood on.

I wasn't politically aware then as I was 14or 15at the time.

At no point have I used the word 'thick'. I haven't even linked my point to intelligence. A lack of knowledge of the ins and outs of party policies can arise from lack of interest and/or access to good quality and accurate information in even the most intellectually able.
There is far too much talking in unsubstantiated sound bites "labour are intent on creating a benefits class" being a good example. There is no onus on the speaker to justify or evidence their statements. People absorb the words, believe the statement and are influenced.
My point was that for whatever reason, there are observable patterns in voting behaviour. One of which is single issue voting, which is what we are seeing with the popularity of Reform. And that this isn't a new thing, so should not be indicative of a decline in critical thinking of the nation.
However, to answer your question, I do think that a person voting for a party who's policies include things that will objectively disadvantage them further, on the basis of a promise regarding one thing, is less likely to have thought it through than a person who votes for that party because all their policies are in their interests. The 'value' of their vote is the same, obviously. But the wisdom of it not.

People are annoying, but you're being ridiculous to think its anything out of the ordinary or not just what the world has always been like

Remarkable how the demographic of the left has changed. And rather sad.

The same can be said about the extreme far left, only now they push identity politics and hierarchies of victimhood.
Look at BLM and critical race theory which is directly analogous to white supremacy with its claims that all white people are born racist (a central tenant of CR theory) or trans rights activists who are permitted to openly call for the rape and murder of anyone who doesn't agree with their outrageous demands.
As for pedophiles and their supporters look up PIE and how many then Labour MPs and (now members of the lords) publicly supported them and their call to drop the age of consent to 4 yes 4 years old.
Being pro pedophilia is not a right or left wing trait.

And yet the intelligentsia of the country, the so called academic elite, are the ones who insist that men can become women, and that Marxism is a cutting edge social theory, despite all evidence to the contrary.

Ignoring the rights and wrongs of Reform for a minute, I never understand this point of view.

People voting for Reform are thick if they are poor. But if you are well educated and vote Reform (as many do) how does the value of a vote change? We walk in our own shoes.

Perhaps poor people would be stupid to vote Labour as they seem intent on creating a benefits class rather than getting people into work.

And if you judge someone else for being thick how do you know they aren't judging you for being thick. Which is what has happened to the OP.

Its interesting. That's why IMO better to steer away from judging the intelligence of vast swathes of people that you don't know.

Interesting thread.

What strikes me is the impression that these days people can't win.

We are overloaded with information and instruction, and herded by whichever zeitgeist is dominant, usually for profit making purposes cleverly disguised as beneficial in other areas.

Intelligence is basically a measure of how well one functions with regards to the system within which we operate.

Prior to industrialisation, people who grew our food and understood how to work with nature to do so optimally would be considered intelligent and useful. Now those who can swiftly adapt to the speed of technological advancement are revered.

What is being described as low intelligence in the OP strikes me more as personality traits, which may be related to intelligence I suppose. However, stopping inconveniently in a supermarket aisle could be due to a series of things going through a persons mind such as "Oh, pet food aisle, does the cat need biscuit? Is it still on the special diet or are we going back to the standard one - oh they've moved it all, oh that onr's on special offer, shall I stock up? Shall I ring OH and check - oh there's my neighbour - hello neighbour, how are you... " it's an ebb and flow of human experience.

I'm an overthinker so have a constant narrative and multiple variables going through my head most of the time. Whether it speaks to any level of intelligence or defect I don't know, but I am aware it can be exhausting for both myself and people around me, so I also spend alot of time trying to dial it down, adding another layer of preoccupation around fitting in and not pissing people off.

I am slightly envious of people who are unapologetically themselves, regardless of "intelligence".

In terms of bigger issues like politics and climate change, these are nebulous and ever changing. Being fixed on something that has been presented as "fact" where evidence can be contradictory is understandable as we need to feel secure as a species to function. And in this age of information overload, doubling down on the "unreasonable" or the "reasonable" is a self defence mechanism, underpinned by such soundbites as "if you stabd for nothing you'll fall for anything".

And teying to have conversations about this sort of thing often brings accusations of navel gazing or sixth form philosophical debate.

We're funny old creatures, ain't we?

As others have said, i don't think it's alack of intelligence, it's a lack of consideration. Getting in the way of people is because you aren't considerate of others around you for example. But I think it also extends to not being able to see anyone else's perspective - or even believe there can be more then one opinion on a given topic - as this is again not being considerate of other people's opinions and experiences. I do wonder if it's just laziness... it's a lot harder to be a considerate person than a very self-centred person!

The majority of the population vote without a good understanding of all aspects of policy of the party they are voting for. Some with very little. Voting behaviour is often influenced by one or two headline issues that relate to the persons self interest and lacks understanding of how the thing will come to pass, or what goes with it.
The same people who will vote Reform regardless of the fact they are the people most likely to suffer, on the promise of 'stopping the boats', are the same as the miners who voted for Thatcher 40 odd years ago, because they wanted to buy their council house. Its nothing new.

They can only do that if they were taught critical thinking and they have the time, energy and wherewithall to do so, we are now getting to the point where parents cant teach it because they were never taught it

Yes! I work in financial services and I have to ask customers to agree to statement along the lines of ‘I accept the risk that if x happens I am liable for y’ - it is very clearly a standard form and not a personal insult - the amount of people who come back with ‘but x won’t happen to ME!’ Is ridiculous. And I have to explain that we don’t know you, we don’t know your situation we are simply asking you to agree that IF x happens you understand that you will be liable for y. If you don’t want to agree to that then that’s fine, but we can’t do business with you.

People just have terrible manners these days. I don't think intelligence levels have dropped. People are used to dealing with others online so have forgotten how to navigate the world in public.

@Hoardasurass the extreme of anything is bad news.
When I said extreme far right such as Neo Nazi organisations they've never went away.
National Front
BNP
C18
Blood and Honour banned in Britain for terrorist involvement through selling white power music.
Britain First
There will be others I can't recall.These organisations may change name but the message is always the same.
It was stickers and News papers with po box numbers to join so a limited audience .Now online they can reach a wider audience.
Mostly the disaffected and who easier to blame than those of colour.
It's a well worn trope they've used for decades.

I just took an online reading test out of curiosity off the back off this thread, to find out my reading age. I scored 100% C1 reading age advanced 16+. Which is really weird, because I'm not intelligent at all. The test might not have been the best, and maybe it skewed. It seemed pretty easy. I was always good at English at school, but extremely poor at maths.

So maybe my reading age doesn't make me intelligent, because I would probably be one of those people in the supermarket. Although I'm not voting far right or anything

YANBU. I came across a clip last night of a man who called in to explain that during jury service they knew the person on trial was guilty of rape but decided the 'consequences' would be too much so going him not guilty. Under the belief that he would now appreciate what a serious crime it was and simply not do it again. And if he did they he would be brought back and then get guilty. The man had absolutely zero awareness. No understanding when the host pointed out there could be another victim.

Which means not only this man, but the entire jury thought it was their place to decide on the suitable punishment for a guilty man. They all completely failed their simply jury duty to simply decide on guilt or innocence. Thought it was for themselves to act as judge. The man completely stood by his decision. Showed a complete lack of a understanding for the gravity of what he said and thought he was completely in the right.

And yet you are doing the same thing by claiming that the poster is "probably right wing", as a dyslexic person I see the same superiority over grammar, spelling and punctuation from all political sides and would say it has more to do with looking down on those you deem unworthy and the righteousness of denigrating them because anything is acceptable if you're "on the right side of history" than political leaning.

Nah I like to pick my own fruit and veg so they don't give you all the bruised/near date ones. Doesn't make me dumb, just discerning!