Sunday, September 01, 2019

Evidence is optional

I see that James Allan, the conservative blow in legal professor who writes for reliably wingnut Quadrant and Australian Spectator, has a new contribution to the former magazine:  a report on a road trip through America. 

The article is lightweight guff, ending on the note that in all Red states they passed through, conversations with people having breakfast in diners convinced him that Trump will romp it in at the 2020 election, such is the love expressed for the Orange one.   Now, anecdotal evidence is something people like to cite, but I have my suspicion that talking to "locals who eat breakfasts in Red state diners on any regular basis" is not safe sampling - it's going to be selective for the more Right wing type under any President.  I could be wrong - I've never eaten at such establishments - but you would certainly get the impression from their depiction in US media that they would swing that way.

Anyway, that's not really why I am posting about his article.  It was this claim (my bold):
What saves time, and I think I mentioned this in my recounting of the 2013 road trip, is that the US has sane and normal speeding laws.  On interstate highways, the big ones that criss-cross the nation, you can drive at least 80 miles per hour (about 130 kph) before there is the slightest chance of a speeding ticket.  And there are no speed cameras.  Either the police catch you that day, then and there, or you don’t get a ticket.

And you know what?  All that revenuers’ propaganda about Australia’s ridiculously low speed limits promoting safety is guff. Compare deaths over distance travelled and Australia is no bastion of safety. 
Because I had only posted earlier this year about how I didn't realise the American road death rate was so high, I thought this sounded suss.

So, looking up an annual report comparing OECD countries road safety, I find this table:


Um, a rate of .52 is way under .73.

If Allan's throw away line is meant to imply that America's per distance travelled death rate (with its higher speeds and looser enforcement) is not so different to Australia's (and let's be honest, that's his intention), it is flat out wrong.

As with anyone who loves Brexit, sympathises with Trump and his voters, and (I am betting) doesn't believe climate change is a serious issue, James just doesn't care about evidence.

It's the marker for the state of conservative Right wing politics now.

5 comments:

TimT said...

I have a piece in Quadrant! Chuck me in the toolbox, cos I'm a wingnut!

Steve said...

As far as I can tell, your piece is apolitical, Tim, so you are given a pass.

I'm generous like that.



GMB said...

See this is why you can never get anything right in the field of science and energy economics. Whereas rational people focus on evidence and logic you keep rabbiting on about tangential stuff. Like that Swedish post, where a couple of morons dusted off the Frankfurt school technique of pathologising people who weren't lunatics like them.

TimT said...

I'm still musing over how to announce it to my lefty/far lefty poet friends.

GMB said...

Remember that one of the best poets of modern times was an outrageous chauvinist pro-Empire whitey born in India. Lefties always SAY they have poetic sensibilities. But in reality they are sissies and thats not the same thing.

Empire can never be acceptable but I'm pointing this out for balance.