Get That Tech Vote Back
Tevi Troy ·
Oct 19, 2010 at 5:29pm
Politico has an item today on how contributions from the high tech industry are continuing to skew Democratic, even as health and financial sector dollars have moved back to the GOP this cycle. I had a recent piece on this issue in City Journal in which I argued that the GOP has been losing highly educated elites over the last few decades, and suggested an agenda that could help bring them back into the Republican fold. While Republicans appear poised to make significant gains in the upcoming election, they are going to have to hold on to health and financial service workers, as well as win back those high tech workers, if they want to establish a long-term governing coalition.
- Comment (23)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
Jul '10
Re: Get That Tech Vote Back
I'd really like to hear George Savage's take on this.
Feb '10
Re: Get That Tech Vote Back
Don't all jump on me at once, but I strongly believe that supporting reasonable Net Neutrality principles as actually proposed (not as caricatured by the telcos!) should be a top priority for getting the tech vote. It's a very big issue (and people hold strong opinions about it) in my profession.
Last time we discussed this issue, I argued that it is the conservative position because it encourages innovation by keeping the Internet open. My philosophy about power (that it corrupts) applies to monopolies and duopolies as well as governments, and I don't trust them to do what's in our best interest any more than I trust government. They need checks and balances (through competition) as much as the branches of government do. It would be nice if there were greater competition in the Internet Service Provider market to keep them in check naturally via market forces.
But until I see that happening I'd like some rules in place to keep them from basically turning the Internet into a different version of cable TV, where they control who gets in or at least who has favored access to the latest and greatest features and speeds.
Edited on Oct 19, 2010 at 7:59pmFeb '10
Re: Get That Tech Vote Back
By the way, Tevi, thanks for bringing some attention to this issue. Sorry to hijack the thread a bit with my Net Neutrality spiel.
You raise a critical issue: in certain professions and industries there's a lot of group-think on politics, based on preconceived notions about which party best supports that profession or its views. It's often hard for me as an IT professional to express my political views amongst my colleagues. Yet they feel perfectly comfortable expressing theirs because they feel they are in the majority, or at least the "smart" majority.
If it's not obvious yet, IQ does not translate into being right on an issue. If anything, it translates into being less easy to persuade from whatever position you already hold. Someone who's smart usually knows it, and a) is less likely to give weight to others' arguments and b) is much more adept at formulating arguments to confirm their existing prejudices. Unfortunately, smart people aren't always aware of this self-defeating confirmation bias.
The most effective way to change their minds is for someone they respect as smarter than they to express a new position using an intellectually challenging argument.
Edited on Oct 19, 2010 at 9:41pmAug '10
Re: Get That Tech Vote Back
Busy System Admin:
If it's not obvious yet, IQ does not translate into being right on an issue. If anything, it translates into being less easy to persuade from whatever position you already hold. Someone who's smart usually knows it, and a) is less likely to give weight to others' arguments and b) is much more adept at formulating arguments to confirm their existing prejudices. Unfortunately, smart people aren't always aware of this self-defeating confirmation bias.
Were you the one that posted this article earlier today? Anyhow, it describes exactly what you say.
That's the quandary. There are enough people who respect me for being killer-smart -- or at least unusually smart with an extra "spark" of creativity. Yet if they knew my politics, they might revise their estimation of my smarts downward by default.
I can win a person's trust in my smarts, and then talk -- a little bit -- about politics with them in private, where no one overhears, but that's it.
Feb '10
Re: Get That Tech Vote Back
Midget Faded Rattlesnake:
Were you the one that posted this article earlier today? Anyhow, it describes exactly what you say.
Great article-- but no, I hadn't even seen it. I have read other things that expressed the same phenomenon. It should keep smart people humble.
Feb '10
Re: Get That Tech Vote Back
Midget Faded Rattlesnake
That's the quandary. There are enough people who respect me for being killer-smart -- or at least unusually smart with an extra "spark" of creativity. Yet if they knew my politics, they might revise their estimation of my smarts downward by default.
I was thinking more of a public figure. I'm basically saying that to get the tech vote, we need someone whip-smart and well-known in the field to articulate conservative points of view-- and be so smart as to figure out how to make it appealing and intellectually interesting to other techies.
Probably one of the big reasons there are so many libertarian techies is the influence of Eric S. Raymond, one of the great early figures in the Open Source movement. He was unabashedly and openly anarcho-libertarian ("an anarchist" in his words), and had a great influence on young techies forming their worldviews. They probably already had an affinity to libertarianism, but he gave them a good hard push.
Edited on Oct 20, 2010 at 5:07amRe: Get That Tech Vote Back
I appreciate the feedback. I agree that sheer IQ is no predictor of being right on an issue, or even a good President, for that matter. Jimmy Carter was probably one of the highest IQ presidents of the last half century. But you can't win over the high tech workers and high earning elite voters in general without someone who is in the ballpark. Once someone passes the smarts threshold, then you need to find someone with the right ideas, and who can articulate them. Needless to say, the three characteristics are not always found in the same package.
Re: Get That Tech Vote Back
First, I agree with Tevi's proposed agenda.
Second, I'd like to request that Republicans add a paragraph or two to public statements adding historical, economic or political context--every time. This may be a soundbite era, but techies have access to unlimited YouTube time and will sit through an extended clip--even make it viral--if it is good enough. "Socialism" is just a word for too many voters: start with the basics and repeat endlessly.
Third, this is necessary because most of our "highly educated elites" have no breadth. How could they? Earning a PhD in molecular biology is a daunting undertaking that only gets tougher each year as the knowledge base grows, but should should not be confused for a broad education. Face facts: being able to design a computer chip does not equip you to realize that the hope-and-change on offer is a retread. But these people are bright, ladle in the educational background and over time we will see results.
Edited on Oct 20, 2010 at 7:03amAug '10
Re: Get That Tech Vote Back
George Savage
Second, I'd like to request that Republicans add a paragraph or two to public statements adding historical, economic or political context--every time.
I think you're onto something.
The only time I've ever successfully discussed politics with my very smart left-leaning friends (and by successfully, I mean they at least admitted that they could see my point and it didn't sound so crazy, after all) is when I haven't started with the hot-button political issues of the day, but instead started with first principles -- philosophy, economics, history -- and got to the politics obliquely by something like Socratic method.
Also, it helps to listen very patiently to whatever their opinions are. Sometimes simply having to talk their opinions through in front of another bright person gets them to see for themselves the holes in their own thinking. And nobody enjoys the feeling of not being listened to.
Is perhaps part of the problem the techies have with Republicans the feeling (justified or not) that Republicans won't listen to them?
Feb '10
Re: Get That Tech Vote Back
Midget Faded Rattlesnake
George Savage
Second, I'd like to request that Republicans add a paragraph or two to public statements adding historical, economic or political context--every time.
I think you're onto something.
I second the sentiment. We need more of that all the time.
Agree 100% on that too. It also ties back in with being humble and knowing one's own weaknesses (one of which may be confirmation bias as described above). If you come out as willing to consider another's opinion, rather than as an arrogant know-it-all, they'll be much more likely to consider yours in return.
Furthermore, if you've been humble enough to listen to the other side's arguments, you'll be that much more prepared to counter them, and to recognize and avoid weak arguments on your own side when you see them.
Re: Get That Tech Vote Back
Another problem: Many politicians on our side are not well-equipped by education or temperament to argue from first principles. So remedial education may need to start with the Congress. Fortunately, the American people are supplying the first and most important lesson in just a couple more weeks.
Edited on Oct 20, 2010 at 8:21amJul '10
Re: Get That Tech Vote Back
George Savage
Second, I'd like to request that Republicans add a paragraph or two to public statements adding historical, economic or political context--every time. This may be a soundbite era, but techies have access to unlimited YouTube time and will sit through an extended clip--even make it viral--if it is good enough. "Socialism" is just a word for too many voters: start with the basics and repeat endlessly.
Third, this is necessary because most of our "highly educated elites" have no breadth. How could they? Earning a PhD in molecular biology is a daunting undertaking that only gets tougher each year as the knowledge base grows, but should should not be confused for a broad education. Face facts: being able to design a computer chip does not equip you to realize that the hope-and-change on offer is a retread. But these people are bright, ladle in the educational background and over time we will see results. · Oct 20 at 6:58am
Edited on Oct 20 at 07:03 am
Brilliant, George.
I've been struggling to find words to expand on what you wrote, but I just can't.
May '10
Re: Get That Tech Vote Back
I'm going to add my own enthusiastic agreement with George's proposal, and add that one benefit also is that it would force the party leaders to learn some of these things too, and be thinking about how their proposals fit within that context.
And one area where Republican leaders will be most challenged to define context is in technology policy, where they generally seem especially clueless. Not only frequently ignorant of the technology, but also the special concerns of tech industries.
The Dems don't so much better, but they seem more receptive to the tech crowd, who don't dress, talk or look like the typical Republican leader (that's changing, thank goodness.)
There were a lot of Ron Paul bumper stickers in tech company parking lots two years ago. These may be some of those Independents who reject the "Republican brand" discussed in another post.
Aug '10
Re: Get That Tech Vote Back
I think people are underestimating the force of cultural attitudes. Our society is gelling into a healthy stock of visceral traditionalism, smothered beneath a fetid layer of revolutionary progressivism. Conservative masses versus liberal elites--that by itself describes about half of everything that goes on in politics.
The high-tech elite isn't really that much different from the rest of the cognitive elite. They gravitate toward the Democratic party over cultural issues, like feminism, socialism, environmentalism, multiculturalism--all of which are essentially the same thing. Where do they get it from? Perhaps from four or more years of university brainwashing, which many in the lower classes were fortunate enough to have escaped.
Appeals to fiscal restraint in government may go a short way toward attracting the high-tech elite back to the Republican party, but as long as such people feel the need to imagine themselves as special, as part of any elite, they will have little affinity for the ordinary people who make up those conservative masses, and will continue to find something attractive in the perpetual contrarianism of the Left.
Re: Get That Tech Vote Back
Everybody views himself or herself as "special," and for good reason: we are all created in God's image. The political problem emerges when specialness is made contingent on backing something "completely new." Of course, nothing about human behavior is "completely new," but many of our elite university grads don't yet know this. So I keep coming back to education: rooting our public statements and proposed solutions in first principles.
Re: Get That Tech Vote Back
I agree with George that Republicans need to reassert core premises. Conservatives speak in shorthand too often, and not everyone knows the code.
Aug '10
Re: Get That Tech Vote Back
George Savage
Everybody views himself or herself as "special," and for good reason: we are all created in God's image. The political problem emerges when specialness is made contingent on backing something "completely new."
The political problem emerges, I think, because people want other people to consider them special. The fundamental exhibitionism of leftism is evidence of this. (Count left vs. right bumper stickers sometime.) People become leftist in large measure because they feel subliminally that it will make them attractive to, and part of, the cultural elite. This goes for high-tech people perhaps somewhat less than for humanities professors, but it's still a major effect.
To become a conservative is, to some extent, an abandonment of that: a decision that it's okay to be normal and ordinary; a recognition that the great masses of people, whom one might find uninteresting if they were the basis for a TV show, are the rock on which the civilization is based. But "Long live the bourgeoisie" is not a slogan that appeals to the young and hip.
May '10
Re: Get That Tech Vote Back
I think that the problem is a bit tougher than has been portrayed here, and probably a bit more inherent in the culture. I see two phenomena at work.
1) Highly educated high techies- by which I include scientists of all stripes- are frequently naturally elites in terms of raw capabilities. And hubris, generally unleavened by any religious dedications. When you are smart and marinated in the academy for extended periods, it is almost irresistible to adopt the prevailing view that problems can all be solved in a technocratic way by just getting the uinwashed to shut up and leave the decisions to the Smart People- as embodied by the state. Engineers like to engineer, and believe that they are better at it than anyone else, and also that the great unwashed should accept the control by their betters. There is a technical solution to everything.
2) Women are getting many more degrees these days than men, and are starting to dominate among new medical school entrants. This fact neatly tracks the trajectory of AMA moves left and Family Practice enthusiasm for single payer programs. You don't find the same phenomenon in, say, the American Academy of Orthopaedics.
Aug '10
Re: Get That Tech Vote Back
Duane Oyen: I think that the problem is a bit tougher than has been portrayed here...
Highly educated high techies- by which I include scientists of all stripes- are frequently naturally elites in terms of raw capabilities. And hubris... it is almost irresistible to adopt the prevailing view that problems can all be solved in a technocratic way... Engineers like to engineer, and believe that they are better at it than anyone else, and also that the great unwashed should accept the control by their betters. There is a technical solution to everything...
Hayek wrote an essay about this. Wonderful essay. It expresses many of your concerns.
But I believe having a scientific background ought to make it easier to understand some conservative/libertarian concepts like spontaneous order and incentives (when water molecules arrange themselves to form ice, no one has to tell them what to do, they just naturally respond to the "incentives" that each molecule feels), and should make it easier to understand that humans are natural creatures -- animals -- innately capable of adaptive behavior, and not infinitely plastic beings who must be dictated to.
Of course, what first must be overcome to learn these lessons is the hubris.
Aug '10
Re: Get That Tech Vote Back
Duane Oyen:
2) Women are getting many more degrees these days than men, and are starting to dominate among new medical school entrants...
This raises an interesting question: we know women, demographically, lean left more than men do. How much of this is innate and how much of it is an accident of history?
But a bigger influence, I think, than the increasing number of women in technical fields are probably the following: