Why do leftists struggle so much with writing lyrics?

Why do leftists struggle so much with writing lyrics?

They don't seem to be capable of writing songs that aren't pretentious catastrophes

Other urls found in this thread:

politico.com/story/2013/08/opinion-jason-richwine-095353
www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jensen30years.pdf
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

>dude more lyrics = better song lmao

>leftist reading comprehension
Can you show me where I said "more lyrics = better song" in my post, pseud?

I thought not. Run along.

>music
>lyrics
>wasting the timbral element of vocals on lyrics
shit tier honestly

The obvious racism in the OP doesn't even shock me anymore.

Cac's gonna cac.

>complains about racism
>then immediately engages in it himself
Low IQ hypocrites gonna cognitive dissonance

>brings up IQ like that actually means anything
>Probably kisses his dog in the mouth

Seems I struck a nerve. I know you're too stupid to actually read anything about the subjects you opine on, but IQ is considered by educated professionals (i.e. not you, as you were too dumb for school) to be one of the most reliable psychological tests ever devised.

heres your (You)

Someone's never heard of Gil Scott Heron. And being that most right wing bands are punk, that's a pretty thin point you're making, and I don't think you're prepared to back it up.

how's high school psych going for an alt-righter like you? pass the ap exam?

That's not true, it's widely criticized for it's narrow assessments of intelligence, being that the test itself can be gamed and only recognizes pattern recognition skills valued in the western world.

Are we supposed to be or not to be?
Said the angel to the Queen
I lift up my skirt and Voltaire turns
As he speaks, his mouth full of garlic
White, yes, white
Misfortune of us two
He told you to be free
And you obeyed
We have to decide which is important
A war we never see
Or a street so black babies die?
A system and a theory
Or our wish to be free?
To organize and analyze
And at the end realize
That nobody knows
If it really happened

sylvia plath was pretty based tho op

Nope, that's the opinion of people who are completely detached from the field of psychometrics (dilettante pseuds) and need to invent arguments to preserve their egalitarian myths in the face of hard scientific facts.

The APA and numerous other prestigious psychological associations have repeatedly published works explicitly confirming the reliability of IQ. You don't know about this because a) you're an idiot who believes everything that is spoonfed to him by dilettante pseuds in the media, and b) you don't want to know this, as it would crush your fantasies of the inherent equality of all peoples.

Here's an article published by a Harvard Ph.D recipient on the media and lay publics's inability to recognize what experts in the field accept as fact, much like how many Americans deny climate change to preserve their preferred political narrative. I hope it's accessible enough for your room temperature-tier IQ.
politico.com/story/2013/08/opinion-jason-richwine-095353

Nah not stupid

Just not foolish enough to waste time with a alt-right pleb who doesn't even understand statistics let alone what a bias is, i.e. Cuckton writting for White nationalists publications totally not having an influence on studies in academia which were scrutinized and outright debunked.

Then again, you're too busy with your mouth on Fido's dick to think clearly.

when is this left vs right shit gonna end
>muh counterculture

lmao this guy is so pissed. Sup Forumstards get triggered so easily.

let this obvious troll post die

literally the most irritating part of this whole thread is the "right-wing" part is on the left and the "left-wing" part is on the right

like why tho

>Harvard-educated professor of educational psychology at Berkeley publishes a well-reasoned argument as to why both genetics and culture play a part in intelligence
>You: "Shit, I might be too dumb for this. I am literally too stupid to refute his argument."
>You: "I know. I'll call his argument biased! That way I don't have to admit to myself my entire worldview doesn't hold up to reality."
It's not working, kiddo. Don't reply to me again unless you can figure out how to string together and halfway coherent response to the argument at hand

It's a Social Sciences issue, not a psych issue. It's obvious you've never studied either, or you'd know that politico isn't a peer reviewed journal, and that Flynn (of the Flynn effect) has raised criticism of the IQ system, even though his work's based on it, while acknowledging that environment is the biggest influencing factor in IQ measurements. IQ only measures the ability to measure patterns and think abstractly, both of which can be learned. It's in no way an indicator of potential intelligence.

So someone who had a history writing for white supremacist/nationalists publications totally can, without bias write about the effects that genetics and culture have a hand at ones in intelligence.

Despite the fact you obviously posted data that highlighted specifically the IQ of limited tested black subjects.

4/10, good job, you're still a pleb.

What the fuck is this shit doing on Sup Forums

the Sup Forums alt-reich decided to come and shitpost in here too :/

best lyrics ever

>So someone who had a history writing for white supremacist/nationalists publications totally can, without bias write about the effects that genetics and culture have a hand at ones in intelligence.
Yep, and he did so with such objectivity and scholarship that you are still unable to refute a single argument he made, being forced to attack his character rather than look at his data and arguments and explain how they are inaccurate, as they are, again, objective and scholarly.

Blacks are highlighted in the graphic posted because they are by every measure the poorest performers on IQ tests and thus the largest concern for sanctimonious progressives who don't want to admit to any genetic component to their social and intellectual failures.

What exactly is your IQ, since you seem to be so into it?

The best right wing writers always end up coming to the left though

See Heidegger

You did not understand the purpose of my sharing the Politico article; please read my post again and do not reply to me unless you understand my incredibly clear and cogent writing.
The Flynn effect does not dispute the genetic component to intelligence; you seem unfamiliar as to what it argues

IQ measures the ability to acquire knowledge; being trained to take IQ tests results in a temporary boost which consistently falls back to original performance scores over time, which again is why IQ is considered one of the most reliable and least subjective psychological tests available, as their is little room for change in one's performance like say in a personality test.

In the future please read the posts you're replying to before responding

129 when I was in elementary school, 135 in early high school

...

Literally no one thinks Gucci Mane and Kanye are poetry
Someone could put Skrewdriver or Jason Aldean lyrics as 'right wing' and they'd be exactly as fucking dumb
Also the left wing makes literally all the greatest art and there is nothing you can do about it

I've been a few points higher than you for my entire life, and you've got no right to talk down to people, especially when you drop such shoddy research. No references, no actual research no way I can check for sampling errors and replications, "Some people say [x]", i.e. appeal to the masses. It's useless. Post an actual, peer reviewed study with a sufficiently strong sample size and we'll see exactly how it holds up. In the meantime, don't assume everyone's too stupid to recognize shoddy research and willful sampling errors.

>the left wing makes literally all the greatest art
wanna know how i know youre a lefty?

Did it seem like he was trying to hide that? If you're arguing bias, you'd have to be unbiased for that to stick.

nah, i was actually referring to the complete self-absorbtion and entitlement as well as the unwavering opinion that his opinion is so correct that there's no need to back up his claims

also the use of the word "literally"

Straw, meet rafter.

Statistically speaking, that's extremely unlikely, but I'll allow for the rare possibility that you're telling the truth and not trying to salvage you self-esteem in the face of a failed argument.

If you're actually curious in peer-reviewed studies (we both know you're not and just grasping for a way out of the argument) then you should read this peer-reviewed article which analyses not one study but thirty years of studies confirming the hereditary component to IQ.

www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jensen30years.pdf

You can't use the phrase opine on, you just say you opine. If you're going to try and inflate yourself with words you feel are more sophisticated, use those words correctly.

I get an erection every time a pedant fucks up. Maybe Google the word "opine" next time, ya fucking retard? My usage was entirely correct. Don't open your mouth if you don't know what you're talking about; you're making yourself seem less intelligent, not more.