- So we have a way of telling which political activists actually care about society and which are merely trying to portray themselves as caring: The ones who actually care will exert significant effort to make sure that their beliefs are correct.
- —Michael Huemer, Progressive Myths, p. 212
- It takes a lot more time and effort to thoroughly debunk a myth than it does to spread it to a receptive audience. Most people who have consumed political myths are not particularly interested in having their beliefs corrected, so they are not going to read a book like this one. p. 215
Huemer, a professor of philosophy, is careful to define terms and to anticipate counter-arguments. He defines a progressive myth as
- i. an empirical, factual claim, which
- ii. is believed by many progressives,
- iii. seems to obviously, strongly support an element of progressive ideology, and yet
- iv. is demonstrably false or highly misleading (p.2)
Progressives believe that racism is a significant problem in contemporary America. Huemer points out that a number of myths bolster this belief. For example, he examines the cases of Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown, who according to the mythology of Black Lives Matter, were killed solely because they were black. Careful investigation shows that purported witnesses were not present and/or lied, so that the details that many BLM supporters believe are false.
Why do progressives perceive racism as so important? Huemer says that the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s, which he praises, could not let go of the need to have a cause.
- They ramped up their demands, and they developed increasingly sensitive racism detectors and increasingly sophisticated accounts of how one facet or another of American life… was really a form of “white supremacy” or other bigotry. p. 197
I disagree with the diagnosis that the Civil Rights movement was too filled with righteous pride to declare victory and go home. As I interpret the history, people expected that once discrimination became illegal, racial tension would vanish and racial inequalities would fade. Instead, we had urban riots from 1965-1968, and gaps persist between the black and white population in the United States with respect to average educational attainment, income, and wealth. If we are not seeing the outcomes that were expected when racism ended, then progressives infer that racism has not ended.
Progressives bolster the theory of systemic racism by arguing that there is no significance to research showing differences in average IQ between blacks and whites. Progressives assert that such IQ research has been debunked. Huemer does not touch that myth, which I suspect is more important than the myths he does go after.
Huemer also examines progressive myths concerning gender relations, science, and economics. He quotes prominent progressive media stars and politicians articulating these myths, and then he proceeds to counter with facts.
For example, there is the myth that there is little economic mobility in America, and wealth mostly comes from inheritance. Instead, Huemer writes,
- A survey of 10,000 millionaires conducted in 2017-2018 found that 79% of millionaires had received no inheritance. Only 3% had inherited over $1 million. p. 145-146
“Regardless of one’s ideology, Huemer would bid us to become truth-seekers rather than seek esteem on the basis of membership in an ideological tribe.”
Regardless of one’s ideology, Huemer would bid us to become truth-seekers rather than seek esteem on the basis of membership in an ideological tribe.
- The main thing we should do is to be a lot more skeptical. When you hear some politically relevant information, ask yourself whether this is the kind of information that plays to a particular ideological orientation. p. 234
I like to say that people decide what to believe by deciding who to believe. Huemer offers advice on identifying reliable public intellectuals.
- They will cite evidence that a neutral party could reasonably be expected to agree with…. They will say that something is probably the case, or almost always true, rather than definitely always true… end to acknowledge reasons pointing in different directions, particularly about controversial matters… tend to discuss objections to their arguments… do not always agree with one of the standard political orientations… are not overly emotional… cite academic studies, government reports, court documents, and so on… will lead you through logical lines of thought… are clear p. 238
Similarly, I would advise people who express opinions to show your work, giving the sources for your claims and the logic of your thought process; and debate fairly, showing an awareness of the weaknesses in your position and the best points that could be made by the other side.
Throughout the book, Huemer models these behaviors. That may be the best reason to recommend reading it.
