Powered by Topple

Research shows scrawny guys favor higher taxes, strong men don’t

Powered by Topple

Men who are physically strong in their upper bodies are more likely to have conservative views, while scrawny guys tend to favor high taxes, a scrawny-looking researcher at a Denmark university says.

mpetersenAccording to the Daily Mail, Professor Michael Petersen (left, from his Aarhus University web page) has published an article in the journal Psychological Science that says a study of men in the United States, Argentina and Denmark shows that men with weak upper-body strength tend to favor wealth redistributionist policies (high taxes, welfare and the like) more than their better-muscled brethren.

Petersen’s study found no corresponding correlation between women’s physical strength and their political leaning, the Daily Mail reports.

“In all three countries, physically strong males consistently pursued the self-interested position on redistribution,” Petersen says in the Daily Mail report.

“However physically weak males were more reluctant to assert their self-interest – just as if disputes over national policies were a matter of direct physical confrontation between individuals.”

If all of that sounds stereotypically true – brawny, brainless he-man of the right versus slim, enlightened intellectual of the left – consider  the source.

If you were a weak, simpering researcher in a weak, simpering country like, say, Denmark, wouldn’t you want to find through your “research” that less physically strong men are more advanced socially and politically than those Neanderthals who used to get all the girls when you were a kid?

And wouldn’t you compare Denmark to some Neanderthal-strong country like the United States or, so help us, mucho macho Argentina, to prove it?

Of course you would. How else would you seduce grad students?

Ad hominem attacks aside, there’s actually a serious point to make here. Note how Petersen says “physically weak males were more reluctant to assert their self-interest” because they favor wealth distribution.

That’s not a reluctance to assert self-interest. It’s the essence of self-interest.

In other words, take from those who have earned – whether by dint of physical strength or intellectual ability – and give to those who have not, particularly meaning a researcher in a country no one would have heard of if an English guy hadn’t written a play about it 400 years ago. (And even then, there was something rotten about it.)

Leftists will go to any lengths to deny it, any depths of intellectual dishonesty to try to disprove it, but there is nothing about the left that isn’t at heart self-interest at its most evil.



Latest Articles