> As Bo Winegard recently argued, many on the radical left are committed to a kind of cosmic egalitarianism which manifests itself in the religiously held dogma

> As Bo Winegard recently argued, many on the radical left are committed to a kind of cosmic egalitarianism which manifests itself in the religiously held dogma that evolution cannot have produced group differences in socially valued traits, because that would be cosmically unfair. Instead of being open to evidence that genetics may partially explain such differences, many leftists construct increasingly exotic and untestable theories for why it is that in countries with a relatively high level of equality of opportunity, different groups still end up exhibiting different outcomes. What would you call the ideology of this writer? I don't know a term for someone who thinks they are some sort of centrist but still believes in the argument that "different groups end up exhibiting different outcomes, but man, all of the explanations that don't just relate to skin color are just too complicated and therefore--by Occam's razor--must not be true." I think I'll settle for alt-right. The fact is that race turns out to be sort of correlated to income, etc. in the U.S.! But so does, say, the level of education, or the affluence of the neighborhood in which you grew up... and it just so happens that due to massive historical events like slavery or racial discrimination in loans from the FHA, many black people live in poor neighbhorhoods with poor school systems and poor parents. I am definitely open to the possibility that "genetics may explain such differences." But given the world we live in and the evidence available to us, I am far more inclined to go with the explanation that requires fewer leaps of faith--instead of jumping from economic achievement to growing up in a poor neighborhood to race, I can just... leave out the last step.