Political Skepticism

I found a short post over at Skepticblog in which Michael Shermer simply attempts to demonstrate that the number 3.8 trillion is an almost inconceivably large number.  You have probably already recognized that particular number as the size, in dollars, of President Obama’s proposed budget.  Not surprisingly, that did not go unnoticed among the respondents in the comments section who immediately criticized Shermer.  Some felt that the post may not belong on the skeptical site, which is fair, but the very first commenter opined that “in this case your politics appear to be getting in the way and this is sounding like a personal blog”, while another inexplicably referred to the post as “Obama bashing”.  As always there are some very interesting comments from both sides of the argument but two interesting things come to mind from these responses to Shermer’s completely apolitical post.

First, it is illuminating that simply utilizing analogies to demonstrate how large a number is has some reactionaries on the Left up in arms.  Though Shermer does point out that the large number being discussed is the size of the President’s proposed budget, he does not get political at all.   At worst all he does is some math to show how much this spending would end up costing each American.  Too many of these alleged skeptics are letting the emotions of their politics cloud their vision.

Second, the responses illustrate once again that too many skeptics tend to suspend their skepticism when it comes to government, a phenomenon that I previously noted in a post about ClimateGate.  A commenter named Daniel put it very well:

I’ve often puzzled over the tendency of atheists, scientists, and skeptics to lean left. Maybe it’s simply a knee-jerk reaction to the sheer ignorance and stupidity displayed by the right. Whatever the case, I’ve noticed that most skeptics are NOT skeptical when it comes to politics- in fact, they seem to me to be even more gullible than their Neanderthalic, creationist, anti-gay counterparts on the right. For example, anyone who has read P.Z. Meyers’ blog will immediately notice that he is not the least skeptical of government bureaucrats or central planners. Shermer is a rarity- a libertarian skeptic, someone who’s not afraid to turn a skeptical, scientific eye on government planners.

This particular blog [post] is simply him to trying to put in perspective the gargantuan size of the Leviathan state, but I’m far more interested in the backlash he gets for simply by trying to comprehend the sheer scope and waste of government in America today.

There’s no reason why skepticism should stop at foot of Capitol Hill, any more than skepticism should stop at the threshold of churches and mosques.

For those of you who may be unfamiliar with Michael Shermer, I recommend an interesting post called The Other ‘L’ Word: Why I am a Libertarian.  If you have some time on your hands, you can read his much longer but very thoughtful post titled How I Became a Libertarian.  He starts the “L word” post with this:

In a nutshell, I am a libertarian because conservatives are a bunch of gun-toting, Hummer-driving, hard-drinking, Bible-thumping, black-and-white-thinking, fist-pounding, shoe-stomping, morally-hypocritical blowhards, and liberals are a bunch of tree-hugging, whale-saving, hybrid-driving, sandle-wearing, bottled-water-drinking, ACLU-supporting, flip-flopping, wishy-washy, Namby Pamby bedwetters. There’s a better way. Libertarianism.

As consistent as skeptics like to be, liberal skeptics have not yet figured out how to shine their logical skepticism on politics.  It perplexes me.