How to reach the reachable

People are discussing this study showing a correlation between low IQ in childhood and racism in adulthood, but the following nugget in the article seems to be receiving less attention:

People who were poorer at abstract reasoning were more likely to exhibit prejudice against gays.

Besides perfectly explaining the comments left on gay-related articles on The Washington Post's Web site, this observation should give some insight into good ways to approach fence-sitters. Since not everyone is reachable, we should tailor our arguments to those most likely to accept them, including those who are good at abstract reasoning. In other words, we should downplay the emotion-driven twaddle that all too often accomplishes nothing but making us look bad.

Quote of the week

Newark Mayor Cory Booker on putting equal rights to a majority vote: "Frankly, I wouldn’t be where I am today."

Making your case: You're doing it wrong.

The argument over alleged gay male racism is a specific case of something that I've seen happen all too often, namely, the sort of argument in which only one side presents evidence, while the other side presents speculation, appeals to emotion, and "Because I said so." We've all seen arguments like that, such as arguments over school funding in which only one side presents funding statistics and arguments over the Bible in which only one side provides direct quotations in context.

If evidence exists that fairly supports your position, cite it already. On the other hand, if the evidence genuinely supports only one side, what are you doing on the other side?

Shiny mirror is shiny.

Corey Robin has been quoted as setting forth the one essential idea of conservatism “that some are fit, and thus ought, to rule others.” Do you know who else cleaves to that one essential idea? That one essential idea, far from defining conservatism qua conservatism, instead shows the essential philosophical unity of the control-freak right and the control-freak left.

Quote of the week

"American society tries to enforce good behaviour through the institutions of marriage, church and prison. This doesn’t work well." — Simon Kuper, Financial Times

Newt Gingrich, culture warrior

Newt Gingrich is serious about living his life in accordance with traditional and Biblical family values. Really. It's just that traditional and Biblical family values happen to include polygyny and concubinage.

The "allowance from my rich parents" view of the economy

One thing I've noticed both in the current debate about waterfront development in Alexandria and in discussions with LGBT lefties is that many people have what I call an "allowance from my rich parents" view of the economy. Such people seem to assume that because wealth just happened to some people, wealth just happens, so that we do not need to generate wealth before redistributing it or otherwise spending it on our pet projects. In other words, there is no point in asking where the rich parents got their money; just as it's turtles all the way down, it's trustafarians all the way back.