Eugine_Nier comments on 2012 Survey Results - Less Wrong

80 Post author: Yvain 07 December 2012 09:04PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (640)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 02 December 2012 01:56:35AM 5 points [-]

You don't think that the "birther controversy" was racist in nature?

Yes, it's amazing how easy it is to find evidence of racism when you're willing to claim things are secretly motivated by racism with no evidence.

You think this whole thing is a coincidence?

Wow, there appears to be one twit a day that uses both the words "Obama" and "nigger", and almost half of those appear to be pro-Obama twits using "nigger" ironically.

You think this type of thing doesn't happen?

Given the correlation between race and crime, I don't see your point.

This seems like a complete failure of critical thinking.

Since you appear to be relatively new to LW, let me point out that this kind of ad hominem is completely inappropriate on LW even if it didn't follow laughably weak arguments.

Comment author: TimS 02 December 2012 02:04:33AM -1 points [-]

You don't think that the "birther controversy" was racist in nature?

Yes, it's amazing how easy it is to find evidence of racism when you're willing to claim things are secretly motivated by racism with no evidence.

What exactly do you think motivates the birther movement? It's pretty clearly irrational belief.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 02 December 2012 02:31:25AM 6 points [-]

Why isn't "politics is the mindkiller" sufficient?

Comment author: TimS 02 December 2012 02:45:01AM 2 points [-]

First, the claim is incredibly unusual compared to standard political irrationality. The last time this claim occurred was against Chester Arthur (US president 1881) - and John McCain (who was born in the Panama Canal Zone, outside the sovereign territory of the US) received no challenges to his eligibility for office.

Second, the ratio of intensity to plausibility is much higher that most American political irrationality - the long form has been released, after all. This suggests there's more than ordinary political mindkiller at play.

Comment author: Desrtopa 02 December 2012 03:11:08AM 1 point [-]

Why isn't "Politics is the mindkiller" sufficient for people to believe Obama is a space alien? Or for people to believe that John McCain isn't a natural born citizen, particularly given that he wasn't born in the US? "Politics is the mindkiller" isn't and shouldn't be able to account for just any negative belief that people hold about a candidate they don't believe in.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 02 December 2012 11:28:25AM 5 points [-]

Also, I find the birther controversy weird because I think some laws matter a great deal more than others, and the natural born citizen rule doesn't serve any important purpose that I can see.

I asked a birther what he expected to happen if it turned out that Obama was proven to have been born in Kenya, and he hadn't even thought about the question, which probably implied that few if any birthers had thought about it either, or they would have been discussing it. I'm not sure this proves anything about racism, but it's evidence that there was something weird going on.

Comment author: JoshuaZ 02 December 2012 02:55:43AM 1 point [-]

Why isn't "politics is the mindkiller" sufficient?

There's a danger in this being too broad an explanation, such that it doesn't actually explain anything. In this context, some ideas are so extreme, that simply using that explanation seems potentially insufficient. That said, while racism may be in play, there's some evidence otherwise that what is going on here is a combination of politics is the mindkiller with people who are already less connected to reality than others. Thus, for example, this probably explains why Alan Keyes was a birther (racism seems like it isn't likely to be relevant given that Keyes is black).

But at the same time, there's definite evidence for something other than just politics as the mindkiller. In particular, although some on the left did pick up on the birtherism early on (for example Phillip Berg), it didn't spread to the left-wing opponents of Obama in any substantial fashion, like it did to those on the right. In that context, the fact that Republicans in general are more racist seems robust. (For example, Republicans are much more likely than Democrats to have a negative opinion of interracial marriage or think it should be outlawed 1). And the possibility of a causal relationship has to be at minimum a located hypothesis. On the other hand, there are other possible hypotheses, such as the tendencies in the last few years for self-identified conservatives and Republicans to turn to their own news sources. While this occurs on both ends of the American political spectrum, it seems especially in the context of the last election and the response to people like Nate Silver and Sam Wang, that in the last two years it has occurred more on the right-wing. Moreover, it doesn't actually need to be more prominent on either side of the political spectrum to have had this sort of effect.

Overall, politics as mindkiller seems unsatisfactory in this context, but racism is definitely not the only possible other causal factor at work here. It seems likely that a variety of different factors are at play, and deciding how strong any given one of them is may be very tough.

Comment author: Desrtopa 02 December 2012 03:16:22AM 2 points [-]

There's a danger in this being too broad an explanation, such that it doesn't actually explain anything. In this context, some ideas are so extreme, that simply using that explanation seems potentially insufficient. That said, while racism may be in play, there's some evidence otherwise that what is going on here is a combination of politics is the mindkiller with people who are already less connected to reality than others. Thus, for example, this probably explains why Alan Keyes was a birther (racism seems like it isn't likely to be relevant given that Keyes is black).

I think xenophobia is at least as likely a motivation as racism, considering that his father wasn't a U.S. national, and he spent some of his formative years in Indonesia. People accuse him of not being a natural born citizen because they're specifically afraid that he's too foreign.

Comment author: TimS 02 December 2012 03:17:59AM 0 points [-]

What is the distinction you are attempting to draw between xenophobia and racism?

Comment author: Desrtopa 02 December 2012 03:22:24AM 5 points [-]

People may easily regard people of different races from their own country as being part of their cultural in-group, where people of different countries, particularly ones like Kenya and Indonesia which aren't Western first-world nations, are cultural outgroup members.

Comment author: TimS 02 December 2012 03:28:51AM 0 points [-]

I feel like we are having an unintentional definitional dispute. In the US political realm, the essence of the accusation of "racism" is unjustly treating others as cultural outgroup.

Comment author: Desrtopa 02 December 2012 03:36:48AM 4 points [-]

I think that's an inappropriate inflation of the term, since under that definition a person could easily be "racist" against members of their own race who have different cultural backgrounds, but not against ones who don't. Racism is a basis for unjustly treating others as outgroup members, but it can only lower the quality of our discourse if we describe all cases of unjustly treating others as outgroup members as racism.

Comment author: TimS 03 December 2012 02:04:26AM 0 points [-]

If I understand your distinction correctly, the irrational hostility of the Californians to Oklahomans during the 1930s Great Depression is xenophobia and not racism. I guess I'm having difficulty coming up with examples of irrational / hostile racism that isn't xenophobic. What exactly is the goal of the distinction you are making?