Political DNA
Remember that Woody Allen movie where the hyper-liberal Upper West Side couple are mystified about how their son could've become a staunch Republican… until their doctor reveals that a medical condition was blocking the supply of oxygen to his brain?
Well, if it's not quite that simple, The New York Times is reporting on a new study suggesting that our gut-level political reactions may have as much to do with our DNA as with whether mom and dad reared us on National Review or The Nation. The study compared the views of fraternal and identical twins on a range of issues, and came up with this graph showing the purported heritability of opinion on various issues.
Count me a little skeptical: For one, unless these are studies on twins raised apart, you need to account for the fact that being raised as someone's identical twin is a difference in family environment that could conceivably shape one's attitudes in various subtle ways. On the other hand, so much political argumentation seems to amount to an elaborate rationalization for what we know in our bones has to be right that it's hard to entirely discount as well.
The article closes with the chilling observation that, since people tend to seek out ideologically congenial mates, genetic concentration of this sort may well be increasing. Yep, the zealots you see on the party convention floors? They're breeding.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Sorry to be off topic, but I have not seen a post from Brian Doherty in quite some time. Is he going to participate in this thing or what?
Brian is working on a book; he'll be back eventually.
The study compared the views of fraternal and identical twins on a range of issues, and came up with this graph showing the purported heritability of opinion on various issues.
If they were white males, they probably voted Republican. If they were female or black, they probably voted Democratic. Narrowing down their financial position would make the prediction even easier. What does being a twin have to do with this?
First, the Woody Allen movie is "Everyone Says I Love You." The parents are played by Goldie Hawn and Alan Alda.
Second, Andrew Sullivan is supposedly working on a book and yet has continued his blogging apace. Come on, Doherty! 😉
Today's Wall Street Journal actually has a piece about how the conservatives are outbreeding and can maintain domination no matter how many stupid things they do! http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110006847
unless these are studies on twins raised apart, you need to account for the fact that being raised as someone's identical twin is a difference in family environment that could conceivably shape one's attitudes in various subtle ways
This is why the study subtracts the "rate at which fraternal twins agree." The study is apparently designed to eliminate variability in non-genetic variables such as family environment or family finances. This also addresses digramma's question ("what does being a twin have to do with this.")
Paul:
Right. My point was that being raised as an identical rather than a fraternal twin is an *environmental* variable. Subtracting out fraternal twin agreement rates doesn't control for that.
Julian:
For what it's worth, I scooped the New York Times on the question of whether or not conservatism is a birth defect last October with my column on "Pathologizing Conservatism" at URL: http://www.reason.com/rb/rb102004.shtml.
I don't know about this study, but Pinker's Blank Slate mentions many studies of twins separated at birth that show correlations for all kinds of traits including political orientation. I don't think this is anything new. There are also similar though weaker correlations between non-identical siblings raised apart.
ISTR reading something about this in another book on genetics, and it really isn't that surprising when you think about it. Look at it this way: If you assume that everyone's behavior is, at some level, genetically motivated, then you can talk about -- very broadly speaking -- a natural disposition towards authoritarianism, or structure, or communitarianism, or what have you. To the extent that political parties are expressions of people with similiar dispositions and preferences grouping their interests, it isn't at all surprising that, say, a genetic tendency towards authoritarianism would result in a tendency to vote Republican.
I'm explaining it poorly, but it was interesting when I read it.
Todd- I also thought about Pinker's book when I saw this. The real question, I think, is: if these predelictions are actually genetic, can they be evaluated or overcome by reason?
their doctor reveals that a medical condition was blocking the supply of oxygen to his brain
Wouldn't that make him a "staunched" Republican?
Thank you, I'm here all week!
Yep, the zealots you see on the party convention floors? They're breeding.
Although those who are pro-choice on abortion and supporters of gay rights might be breeding at a slightly lower rate.
It's funny that in the chart, the issues I would think are more emotionally charged, more visceral, more instinctive if you will, appear to be less linked to genetics (if this study means anything). Does this mean your attitude toward capitalism and property taxes tends to be "wired" into you, while your attitudes toward abortion, segregation and gay rights have to be arrived at more through conscious reflection? I woulda thought the opposite.
An Angry Poem
By Smacky
All I wanna know is: if all these other wackjobs are breeding at a rapid pace
What's to happen to the Libertarians if I can't find a single Libertarian with whom to mate?! (or date)
Smacky actually brings up a good question. Has anyone here been raised to be a libertarian? I certainly wasn't. In 1988 I was about to vote for Dukakis in my first election when a friend lent me The Machinery of Freedom and I have been a libertarian ever since. Everyone libertarian I know started as something else.
mk,
I campaigned for McGovern back in the day!!
But frequent commenter Rick Barton's son has a different tale to tell!!
I've never met anyone who was raised a Libertarian, but I've met quite a few people who were raised to think that other people should stay the hell out of their business and that they, in return, should stay the hell out of the business of others, which is fairly close. It seems to be most common among people in western states whose family lived there for more than a few generations, which sort of leads me to think that it's a holdover from the days where those were the sort of people who went west. Maybe it's even genetic, although with the speed at which it's disappearing I'd have to think it's regressive. Maybe we'll have answers once the Free-Staters in New Hampshire start breeding.
fyodor,
Not to mention (I'm not sure if they have kids though), Mr. and Mrs. TWC, both libertarians. In fact, I believe Mrs. TWC had an article in the school issue of Reason. Let's hope if they have kids that they don't rebel and join the CPUSA.
I wasn't raised libertarian but I did get a big dose of the "reap-what-you-sow" individualism that personified so many midwestern conservatives up until the 80s (at which point religion became a Top Tier issue rather than an also-ran). From there, libertarianism is but a hop, skip, and jump away (though I've yet to convince either of my parents of that).
The regressive above should have been recessive. Just more proof that income tax debates can be hazardous to mental health.
My parents were both middle-of-the-road independents.
Possibly the only person in the world to be raised as a libertarian might be David D. Friedman, son of Milton and Rose Friedman.
Gentlemen, our duty is clear. We must sire as many libertarian offspring as possible, as quickly as possible. Ve must peform 'eroic zecksual service! To ze mineshafts!
I'd volunteer to raise super-libertarians with smacky, only I'm not sure I'd pass muster. (Too old, not enough earning power for "Daddy" status, need to drop several stone.)
Has anyone got any real data on family formation among self-identified libertarians? The Liberty magazine subscriber survey of a few years ago comes to mind, but I don't have it at hand. I do remember that the responses were overwhelmingly male. Libertarianism may be a meme that doesn't transfer well from father and/or mother to child, especially if we libs have fewer children than most. My gut feeling is that a tendency towards individualism may make one less willing to make the compromises necessary to establish a good long-term relationship. I did observe a tendency among my fellow LPers of marriageable age to be childless or divorced, but my active involvement with that group is about 10 years out of date.
Politics within families is a weird thing. The standard model among political scientists a generation ago was that the political identification of parents was the number one predictor of the ID of their children. I haven't kept up with the literature, and the dissaffiliation of many Americans with either of the major parties, sometimes referred to as "dealignment", may cloud the issue, but I haven't heard that some other factor has superseded it. In my family, we have gone from one party to another through the years. My grandmother, an immigrant from Ireland, was a Democratic Club member in early 20th Century New York City. Her son, my father, became a suburban Republican. I was following along in my Dad's footsteps when I was exposed to libertarian thinking and waved goodbye to the GOP. I once had a chat with my father about my party's positions. He wasn't happy that I had joined up with a bunch of church-skipping, porn-reading, tax evading, pot-smoking draft dodgers who practiced free love of all kinds, and just ran to the doctor for a penicillin shot or an abortion when reality intervened. I had to explain that while we certainly wanted such practices to be legal, that didn't mean that the LP recommended that anyone live their life that way. I mentioned that if the Republicans had stuck more with Goldwater's views than those of Ford, Dole, or even Reagan, I could have probably stuck with them. I quizzed my Dad about who he preferred in `52 - Taft or Ike. He told me that he always liked Bob Taft, so maybe the apple didn't fall that far from the tree. It's a big family though, and I've got at least one sibling who is a member of The Religious Left, while most of the others don't front-burner politics the way I do.
I have a theory that, given the explosion of media sources in the second half of the 20th century, fanily members went from absorbing political opinions from their parents, neighbors, schoolmates and co-workers, to greater exposure to those of relative strangers. The change from communally experienced political conversation, whether from taking a particular newspaper for home delivery, or listening to radio and later watching television as a family, to the current methods of accessing media individually, via portable radio, more than one TV in the house and now the internet may result in parents not having as much influence on their offsprings' opinions as they once did. As entering grad school isn't in my budget, I will have to wait for someone else to get the numbers to prove/disprove this, though.
Kevin
rather than talking about "breeding" libertarians, shouldn't we be aiming at breeding rational people, who would then agree with libertarian ideology, rather than planning to indoctrinate it through "breeding"?
kevrob,
I'm honored that you would sire my children. You can always be the "frozen pop", if I ever choose artificial insemination, which is beginning to look like my only viable option if I ever want to have a Libertarian father the children that I would presumably want to have someday (but not now).
Shem brings up a good point: Do Western Reserve squatters = the first US Libertarians??
Doctor: Here it comes....
Father: What is it?
Mother: Is it a boy?
Father: Is it a girl?
Doctor: No, it's.....a Libertarian!
Genetics vs environment studies using twins are always tricky. Using fraternal vs identical twins isn't a solution for the reason Julian notes. And identical twins separated at birth are so rare that the sample size of such a group is too small for anything approaching a scientific study.
Not to mention that this hypothesis would have a hard time explaining how so many people change their politics during their lives. I was raised in a staunchly Democratic family (my mom worked for Dukakis) and shared those values until I left home; when I found Jesus I became more politically conservative, working for Bush in 2000. As time went on, it dawned on me that govt action, even for a good cause, is almost always counterproductive.
So, which political viewpoint is in my genes, Democrat, Republican, or libertarian?
So, which political viewpoint is in my genes, Democrat, Republican, or libertarian?
I will divine the answer to that when I read the prophecy in the mashed potatos.
Another environmental variable to consider:
Twins separated at birth are almost certainly surrounded by a swarm of social scientists. That may have some effect on their development!
Adoptive Mother: Oh, look at him walk! You're a big boy now!
Grad student talking into tape recorder: Subject is walking! I repeat, subject is walking!
(a few years later)
Adoptive Mother: Oh, look, what a great report card! You got a B in arithmetic!
Grad student: Excuse, me, ma'am, but does that arithmetic grade say whether he was better at addition or subtraction?
Child: Mommy, why does that guy keep looking at my stuff?
Grad student: Any chance we could put the kid in an MRI machine to do some functional imaging the next time he takes a math test?
My gut feeling is that a tendency towards individualism may make one less willing to make the compromises necessary to establish a good long-term relationship.
Wow. You said a mouthful Kevin. My gut feeling says that your gut feeling might be on to something there.
artificial insemination, which is beginning to look like my only viable option
There's a good question. Are there any libertarians you have met that constitute a good genetic investment? I mean, if we are going to raise a master race of individualists, they should probably be healthy, have strong chins etcetera.
I'm not half bad looking (If your idea of a sex symbol is a cross between Tim Curry and Robert Downey Jr.) but I am a genetic minefield. It would probably be just as well to let the line die out.
if I ever want to have a Libertarian father the children that I would presumably want to have someday (but not now).
I have just been inspired to come up with the ultimate libertarian pass/pick-up line!
smacky: My gulch or yours?
If our political views are in part genetic, then maybe we could use stem cell implants to "correct" them. Some scientists have found ways to extract stem cells from body fat, so I'll undergo some liposuction and then we can implant some of my stem cells in Bush's brain.
Some scientists have found ways to extract stem cells from body fat
In that case, I'd like to donate some** stem cells, please.
** a lot of
Love Connection for Libertarians:
LPGirl: Bachelor #1, let's say your house catches on fire, what do you do?
B#1: First, I would head to the well and try to use my water pump to saturate the inferno. Failing that, I would pay all of my neighbors to help me put out the blaze.
LPGirl: Oh my, you must have strong libertarian genes. Bachelor #2, let's say we're on a date and while we're dancing in the club, my purse get stolen, what would you do?
B#2: I'd talk to the manager and failing that, call the cops.
LPGirl: Gasp! You statist mama's boy! Who let you on the show!?!? Bachelor #3, describe the perfect evening.
B#3: Well, first I'd take you to the firing range. Hopefully, we don't get pulled over because I don't have a drivers license. Then we'd take some bong hits and do some lines in front of a courthouse, just to show The Man, he can't control our bodies. And after that, I'd take you to my compund where we'd reenact the rape scene from The Fountainhead.
LPGirl: Oh my Goodness, I think I'm in love! [faints]
Mo, that was priceless.
Care to donate some stem cells to repair Bush's brain?
Does this mean there's no hope for poor old joe?
Of course there's hope, Doug! All he needs is some libertarian stem cells implanted in his brain and he'll be fine!
Gone are the days when you're political opponent was merely wrong...now, they are either "extremists" or, better yet, mentally ill (see here http://www.reason.com/rb/rb102004.shtml, or here http://www.homestead.com/prosites-prs/). Not only does this completely obliterate your foe's argument as the product of a diseased mind that no sane person could hold, but makes you look compassionate at the same time. It also lays the groundwork for involuntary commitment of your rivals (on humanitarian grounds, of course). The Soviets were ahead of the curve on this, and Thomas Szasz predicted it all.
Gone are the days when you're political opponent was merely wrong...
When was that? Back in the day the Adams faction accused the Jefferson faction of being French-loving atheists* and the Jefferson faction accused the Adams faction of wanting to turn the country back over to King George.
*Cheap Republican shot, "Gee, the Democrats haven't changed in 200 years, have they?" 🙂
thanks