The Consequences of Ignorance and False Assumptions in Activism

In the realm of social justice activism, it is a significant problem when advocates champion political or social positions that directly contradict the wishes and values of the minority groups they claim to support. This leaves one wondering whether these activists genuinely have the interests of these groups at heart. Upon reflection, it appears that their intentions are often well-meaning but clouded by ignorance, cognitive biases, emotional thinking, and other psychological factors that hinder objective and open-minded assessment. Sadly, a significant portion of activism and policies are rooted in misguided assumptions and ignorance. 

While this essay focuses on progressive activism, this critique is not limited to progressivism but extends across the full spectrum of political and social persuasions. We all have blind spots and cognitive biases and can fall into echo chambers.

Here are a few examples of policies that run counter to the majority views within the groups they aim to serve: 

• In 2020, Minneapolis activists vigorously pushed for defunding the police, leading to the city council to endorse the idea. However, when they later surveyed the black community, a large majority did not support this cause. As a result, a ballot proposal to defund the police was overwhelmingly rejected, with 75% of black voters opposing it. National polls consistently indicate that the majority of black Americans want an equal or increased police presence in their neighborhoods. 

• Some extreme disability activists advocate for the removal of "ableist" language such as "stand," "see," and "step," despite the fact that the large majority of those with mental and physical disabilities consider this extreme sanitizing of language condescending and offensive. Most disabled understand and use metaphors and don't appreciate being infantilized. 

• The large majority of blacks and Latinos polled said that they did not find offensive so-called microaggressions such as, "America is a land of opportunity," "Where are you from?," "I don't notice people's race," and "Everyone can succeed in this society if they work hard enough." Commenting on the poll, Columbia University sociologist Musa Al-Gharbi wrote, "(M)any whites, in their eagerness to present themselves as advocates for people of color and the cause of antiracism, neglect to actually listen to ordinary black or brown folk about what they find offensive, or what their racial priorities are."

• During a conversation with a recently ordained Unitarian Universalist minister who identifies as a progressive social justice activist, it became apparent that he was deeply immersed in social justice jargon and believed in the importance of "centering the voices" of minorities. However, when I pointed out that the term he used, "Latinx", was unpopular among most Latinos, he was surprised and said that he was taught otherwise in classes at his UU seminary. I produced numerous polls showing Latinx's immense unpopularity among Latinos. This exchange highlighted how even well-intentioned individuals can be misled by the sources they trust. 

The issue here is not whether these policies or terminology choices are good or bad but that they stemmed from ignorance about the very people they are intended to serve, resulting in actions that appear unpopular or unhelpful to those communities. 

Several factors contribute to this ignorance among advocates: 

• Blindly accepting the views of a small group of activists within a demographic without seeking a broader perspective.  

• Relying on a limited and biased set of news, social media and other sources.

• Personal political bubbles and selective listening, where people within one's own bubble pay more attention to like-minded individuals and disregard the views of minorities outside their circle. 

• Widespread ignorance and false assumptions about demographic groups.

Studies have shown that most Americans have significant misperceptions about various demographic groups, both wrongly guessing their size and their prevailing beliefs. Interestingly, individuals outside these groups often have a more accurate perception than those within them. 

Misperceptions of Population Demographics  

Many progressives often mistakenly assume that their progressive views align with the perspectives of most minorities when this is rarely the case. Progressivism is a predominantly white and culturally privileged movement, and progressive activists constitute a small minority within every minority group. Within the Democratic Party, the progressive faction is not only the smallest but the only one that is majority white. Most racial and ethnic minorities within the Democratic party identify as moderate or conservative. 

In the following link, American Indian author Sherman Alexie writes that most American Indians do not identify as progressives. He points out that of the American Indian members of the U.S. Congress, half are Democrats and half are Republicans. The misconception that all minority groups are composed of progressives represents a false stereotype and prejudiced perspective. 

Sherman Alexie: Not All Native Americans Are Leftist Political Activists 

Confirmation bias is a universal human tendency, where we tend to disregard perspectives and even facts that contradict our deeply entrenched beliefs. Dogmatic ideologues actively suppress divergent opinions, and individuals who dissent or present inconvenient facts often face criticism and silencing.

One example of this is when Democratic data and political polling expert David Shor posted a tweet during the 2020 racial justice uprisings and rioting statistically showing that rioting hurts the Democrats’ support from the public. While his post was accurate, racial justice activists thought it harmful and Shor was fired from his polling agency. Democrats later realized that what he posted was not only accurate but important insight for the party. 

A Democratic Cassandra Gets Canceled for Telling the Truth 

A common critique raised against certain aspects of progressive politics is that they are shaped and championed by cultural elites who possess privilege and advanced education. This critique asserts that these policies do not genuinely reflect the perspectives or life experiences of most minorities. A related complaint is that the promotion of progressive policies, such as those related to de-policing, is often driven by those who do not experience the direct consequences of these policies in their own living environments but do significantly impact disadvantaged minorities residing in inner cities and other poor areas. Psychologist and social critic Rob Henderson coined the term “luxury beliefs,” which he says are beliefs that only the culturally and economically privileged can afford to have, and that often hurt the poor. 

Luxury Beliefs: An Interview with Psychologist Rob Henderson 

In short, activism and policies should be grounded in a deep understanding of the people they are meant to benefit. To effectively serve or advocate for any demographic, it is essential to move beyond one's political and ideological bubble, seeking diverse perspectives and factual insights. This requires a willingness to consider unexpected opinions and facts that challenge preconceived notions and one’s beliefs.