I Don’t Work In Politics

When I go home to Michigan or Chicago, I get some common questions from family and friends. The most frequent is: How do you like working in politics? 

In the words of Lucille Bluth, “I don’t understand the question and I won’t respond to it.”

I had one job in politics as a legislative assistant for a Michigan state representative. It was a pretty good job, a great one at the time (I was in college). I mostly answered emails from constituents and helped my boss draft legislation. 

When you work for a politician, you help them campaign. You also help them campaign for members of the same party. I had no interest in that. 

Politics is war. Now I don’t mind fighting, but there aren’t many battles worth fighting. As a general rule, politicians are amorphous blobs willing to do whatever it takes to ensure one thing: re-election.

We can talk about the separation of powers, how to interpret the constitution, the proper role of government, but at the end of the day politics is about gaining and wielding power. Nobody exemplifies this better than Donald Trump. Oh, and you’re kidding yourself if you think the Democrats are innocent of this. The weakest political criticisms are those of hypocrisy. People are hypocritical in politics all the time and there is no punishment for it. Political actors do not care about rules and ensuring those rules are followed. They care about promoting those of their political tribe. That matters more than procedural concerns.

I don’t work in politics. So what is it I do?

I have mostly worked at places that deal with ideas. I worked at a think tank, a student leadership network, and am now at an academic institute. The exact vision and strategy of each organization has been distinct. They all share the goal of fighting the battle of ideas and shifting the intellectual conversation which, in turn, would change the behavior of politicians.

If you have asked me this question and I have responded angrily, I apologize. I know you mean well. And I understand for most people, there is no difference between politicians debating policy and eggheads at think tanks doing the same thing.

Politicians have a seat at the decision-making table. Their power to create change is, in theory, vast. But they are so constrained by interest groups, public opinion, and political alliances their votes are often predetermined for them. 

Us eggheads admittedly don’t have that seat at the decision-making table. But it’s overrated.

Ideas matter. And breathtaking ideas, like those of Adam Smith or Ayn Rand, have amazing staying power. 

Political Inertia

I used to believe that people don’t change their political beliefs after 30. Well, I didn’t believe that statement completely. But I did believe that people don’t change their primary worldview or core political ideology, and rarely changed their views on particular stances. My mind on this has changed a bit (hey, I’m under 30!)

I still think worldviews are pretty stuck at 30. I can’t remember the last time I saw a radical change in the beliefs of someone I knew over 30, especially compared to how common it is for young adults. And I have seen a number of young adults who have a handful of radical changes before they hit their settling point.

But policy views are more flexible. While this will be good news to some people, my initial reading of is a bit depressing. My observation here fits with Jonathan Haidt’s book The Righteous Mind. Basically, beliefs work like this: people organize into groups based on their foundational beliefs (which, it seems, are at least partially driven by neurology). These foundational beliefs lead to intuitions towards particular issues, around which people form justifications to defend their beliefs. This is in contrast to the more standard understanding: people use evidence and logic to create arguments.

Basically, we decide our view on a specific issue, and create a rationalization to back it up.

I think this is pretty evident if you look at American politics today. You have Democrats praising the FBI while Republicans condemn it. I’m struck by the similar shift on free trade. I’m skeptical these were the result of sober, thoughtful reflection. The existing tribes, which have already organized around foundational beliefs, have seen their allies shift. Now they are changing up their policy stances to defend their allies.

This isn’t all bad news. If you are like me and want to see political and social change in the world, this means there is hope for activism and change. People over 30 can change their views. But presenting sound logical arguments may not be a very effective method. The question is, what is?