- So we have a way to determine which political activists actually care about society and which are just trying to portray themselves as caring: those who actually care will put in significant effort to ensure that their beliefs are correct.
- —Michael Huemer, Progressive mythsP. 212
- It takes much 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 aren’t particularly interested in having their beliefs corrected, so they won’t read a book like this. P. 215
Huemer, a professor of philosophy, takes care to define terms and anticipate counterarguments. He defines a progressive myth as
- i. an empirical, factual claim, which
- ii. is believed by many progressives,
- iii. clearly seems to strongly support an element of progressive ideology, and yet
- iv. is demonstrably incorrect or very misleading (p.2)
Progressives believe that racism is a major problem in contemporary America. Huemer points out that a number of myths support this belief. For example, he investigates the cases of Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown, who, according to the mythology of Black Lives Matter, were murdered solely because they were black. Careful investigation shows that alleged witnesses were not present and/or lied, making the details false, according to many BLM supporters.
Why do progressives think racism is so important? Huemer says the civil rights movement of the 1960s, which he praises, couldn’t let go of the need to have a cause.
- They stepped up their demands, developing increasingly sensitive racism detectors and increasingly sophisticated narratives about how one or another facet of American life… was actually 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. When I interpreted history, people expected that once discrimination became illegal, racial tensions would disappear and racial inequality would fade. Instead, we had urban riots from 1965 to 1968, and disparities persist between black and white populations in the United States when it comes to average levels of education, income, and wealth. If we don’t see the results we expected when racism ended, progressives conclude that we do not ended.
Progressives reinforce the theory of systemic racism by arguing that research showing differences in average IQ between blacks and whites is meaningless. Progressives claim that such IQ research has been debunked. Huemer doesn’t touch on that myth, which I suspect is more important than the myths he does touch on.
Huemer also examines progressive myths about gender relations, science and economics. He quotes prominent progressive media stars and politicians who express these myths, and then goes on to counter them with facts.
For example, there is a myth that there is little economic mobility in America and that wealth comes largely from inheritance. Instead, Huemer writes:
- A survey of 10,000 millionaires conducted in 2017-2018 found that 79% of millionaires had received benefits No heritage. Only 3% had inherited more than $1 million. P.145-146
“Regardless of one’s ideology, Huemer would direct us to become truth-seekers rather than seeking appreciation based on membership in an ideological tribe.”
Regardless of one’s ideology, Huemer would charge us to become truth seekers rather than seeking esteem based on membership in an ideological tribe.
- The most important thing we need to do is be much more skeptical. When you hear politically relevant information, ask yourself whether this is the kind of information that aligns with a particular ideological orientation. P.234
I like to say that people decide What believing by deciding WHO to believe. Huemer provides advice on identifying trustworthy public intellectuals.
- They will cite evidence that a neutral party would reasonably be expected to agree with. They’ll say there’s something there probably the case, or almost always true, rather than absolutely always true… stop acknowledging reasons that point in different directions, especially when it comes to controversial issues… tend to discuss objections on their arguments… do not always agree with one of the standard political orientations… Are not overly emotional… citing academic studies, government reports, court documents, etc.… will guide you through logical lines of thought… are clearly P.238
Likewise, I would encourage people who express their opinions to do so show your workciting the sources for your claims and the logic of your thought process; And honest debatewhich shows that you are aware of the weaknesses in your position and of the best points that the other party can bring forward.
Throughout the book, Huemer models this behavior. That may be the best reason to read it.