Wednesday, November 19, 2008

I've been going around telling people I voted for McCain because he's white. That isn't true, but it's interesting to see people's reactions. Usually, there is a look of disapproval, but politeness keeps people from saying what many of them are thinking, namely "you're a racist!" For those who actually wish to discuss the matter (not including most liberals, who have trouble cogently defending their positions), I point out that 90% or more of blacks voted for Obama because - lo and behold - he's black. So if I'm a racist, so are most of those black voters.

Is that true? I don't think so. The problem is that the term "racist" is now commonly used to discredit any contrary viewpoint on any subject that involves race. But human beings are wired to belong to groups. We have an ingrained affinity for our alma mater, our country, our fellow employees, etc., etc. If I vote for a citizen from my home state because he's from my home state, that doesn't mean I hate the candidate from the other state.

If I vote for the white (or black or brown or whatever) candidate because his color is like mine, that's not racist. It's racist if I vote against a candidate because I don't like people of his color. Put another way: If I always vote against a candidate who is black, regardless of qualifications, I'm probably being racist. If I always vote for the white candidate because I think he'll do more for people like me, I'm probably not being racist.

Why is this important? Because laws and regulations involving race are legitimate only if they deal with and attack real racism, not if they simply reflect white guilt and political correctness. The latter are no more than restrictions on liberty and individual choice that impose the will and views of one group on another without any compelling societal justification. And to boot they too often produce irrational and unintended results.

1 comment:

Steve Allen said...

The polling place abuses of a century ago produced the notion that elections work better when the ballot is secret. I think that's important, for nobody wants to see an election manipulated at any level from town boss to Anschluß.

So I note that wording here is legally precise such that it is not evident which candidate received the vote, and I'm okay with that. I perceive the point is to describe how much Rich likes to do what folks at Caltech would call the "mind f**k".

I question whether there is any correlation between ability to cogently defend and liberal vs. conservative. I think they're uncorrelated.

There's no question that people are tribally-oriented, and no question that neurological mechanisms which drive such orientation are subject to abuse.