Huemer, a professor of philosophy, is careful to define terms and to anticipate counter-arguments. He defines a progressive myth as
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.
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,
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.
I like to say that people decide what to believe by deciding who to believe. Huemer offers advice on identifying reliable public intellectuals.
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.
*Arnold Kling has a Ph.D. in economics from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He is the author of several books, including Crisis of Abundance: Rethinking How We Pay for Health Care; Invisible Wealth: The Hidden Story of How Markets Work; Unchecked and Unbalanced: How the Discrepancy Between Knowledge and Power Caused the Financial Crisis and Threatens Democracy; and Specialization and Trade: A Re-introduction to Economics. He contributed to EconLog from January 2003 through August 2012.
Read more of what Arnold Kling’s been reading. For more book reviews and articles by Arnold Kling, see the Archive.
