Andrew Sullivan: "Denying Genetics Isn't Shutting Down Racism, It's Fueling It"; A Criticism

I like Sullivan very much, and he's certainly on the side of the angels, yet again, about this. It's particularly depressing to see that Ezra Klein has continued his slide toward the illiberal / irrational left. (And don't forget that Vox video on race in which every single argument is invalid.)

   But: Sullivan fails to sufficiently emphasize the most important point: with respect to the scientific (and philosophical) question "Are races natural kinds?,": questions about racism are irrelevant. The political (and even the moral) questions are irrelevant when what we are asking, of some factual/descriptive proposition: Is it true? To address questions of race scientifically, we basically can't care what the effects of our conclusions will be.

   I actual think Sullivan's right, and the left's penchant for substituting fantasy for reality with respect to its pet issues like race and sex (and "gender"...whatever that term means now...) is causing a certain amount of anger. People should get angry when powerful social institutions insist that obvious falsehoods are true. And they should get very angry when they are called racists (or some analog of racists) for refusing to ooh and ahh over the emperor's duds. It's good that a few of us, at least, are willing to call bullshit on bullshit. To the extent that this anger is purely intellectual, it's good. But I suspect that it may also be causing a backlash that could make racism worse. But I also think that those of us who are interested in the scientific question can't let that influence us in any way. So I tend not to talk about it.

   There's simply no doubt that the left's acceptance of "social constructionist" theories of more-or-less everything is largely political. The left prefers social explanations to biological ones, in part because they like social programs. And their preference for such accounts is almost entirely political in the case of race. Their goal is to fight (certain forms of) racism, not to find the truth. They have got it in their head that they can fight racism by arguing that racial similarities and differences are not biological. And they are inclined to believe what accords with their political preferences and allegiances. (Everybody does that to some extent; but the PC left is really, really bad about it.) What's needed here is a generic opposition to this kind of neo-Lysenkoism. To argue against them by arguing that their approach fosters racism is to come damn close to accepting their most erroneous and destructive premise--that concerns about "social justice" (a misnomer...but let it pass...) are relevant to settling scientific questions.