The Right's Unexpected Embrace of Science: A New Perspective
Written on
Chapter 1: The Right’s Shift Towards Science
Historically, the right has often been at odds with scientific consensus, particularly regarding climate change, evolution, and the Earth's age. However, a notable change is emerging, as a segment of conservatives—often with libertarian leanings—begins to adopt a science-based critique of leftist ideologies. This shift highlights a newfound appreciation for certain scientific claims that reinforce conservative beliefs about human nature and the perceived limitations of leftist politics.
In this context, we see the rise of "scientistic" conservatives, represented by platforms like Quillette and figures from the Intellectual Dark Web. Authors such as Jonah Goldberg and Noah Rothman have notably leaned on evolutionary psychology to support their arguments, particularly drawing from Jonathan Haidt's work.
Section 1.1: The Appeal of Deterministic Science
The type of scientific claims favored by these conservatives often focuses on fixed traits in human nature, highlighting our irrational behaviors, aggressive tendencies, genetic disparities, and tribal instincts. This scientific conservatism sometimes intersects with controversial topics like "human biodiversity," although figures like Goldberg and Rothman do not directly engage with race science.
As I mentioned in previous work for Arc Digital, the right's core belief is that the egalitarian aspirations of the left are either unattainable or undesirable. This perspective is reinforced by scientific assertions that seemingly validate conservative ideology—suggesting, for instance, that economic socialism is unfeasible due to innate self-interest, or that gender distinctions are biologically grounded.
Subsection 1.1.1: The Intersection of Science and Politics
Section 1.2: The Historical Context
Notably, the relationship between race and intelligence has been a contentious topic among conservatives for decades. Publications like Quillette have faced backlash for asserting that race is a legitimate scientific category. While some contributors denounce racism, their findings are often misinterpreted or misappropriated by a broader audience, including various online influencers who exploit these narratives for their agendas.
Chapter 2: The Cultural Implications of Scientific Claims
The attraction of deterministic science for conservatives lies in its portrayal of them as realistic truth-tellers—unafraid to confront what they view as harsh realities. By aligning themselves with scientific authority, conservatives can bolster their image as proponents of reason, particularly when these scientific claims challenge liberal orthodoxy.
This association with science not only enhances their credibility but also provides a framework for secular conservatives who may lack a religious basis for their beliefs. Figures like Goldberg argue from a perspective rooted in evolutionary psychology rather than traditional religious dogma, suggesting that human nature is shaped by millennia of evolution.
In contrast, religious conservatives often utilize scientific findings to support long-held beliefs about humanity's inherent flaws—drawing parallels between biological determinism and the concept of original sin.
Section 2.1: The Emergence of a New Conservative Identity
Today, younger conservatives, particularly those who identify as secular, are increasingly drawn to deterministic science as they navigate complex issues surrounding gender and identity. This trend has fostered a patriarchal and pessimistic outlook among certain right-leaning groups, where biology is often viewed as an immutable force shaping societal structures.
The implications of these beliefs are profound. If one accepts that human beings are naturally selfish and tribal, then the possibility of societal reform becomes bleak. This notion supports the idea that the left's attempts at creating an egalitarian society are fundamentally misguided.
Section 2.2: The Dangers of Scientific Misinterpretation
While some scientific claims that resonate with conservative ideologies may hold some truth, the danger lies in their potential misuse to justify social hierarchies and systemic inequalities. Historical examples illustrate how determinative science has been co-opted to promote racial prejudices or justify conservative policies.
Ultimately, the challenge is to approach human behavior and evolution with humility and an understanding that these facts should not be leveraged to perpetuate injustices. The resurgence of the concept of original sin serves as a reminder that acknowledging human flaws should not lead to resignation but rather inspire a commitment to combat inequities.
In closing, the dialogue surrounding science and conservatism is complex and multi-faceted. It demands a critical examination of the narratives being constructed and the implications they hold for society as a whole.
Joshua Tait is a columnist for Arc Digital and a Ph.D. candidate in History at the University of North Carolina. His work has also appeared in The Washington Post and The National Interest. Follow him on Twitter @Joshua_A_Tait.