To the editor: Jonah Goldberg is skeptical about a thought-provoking theory that someone’s genetics play a role in determining that person’s political predilections.
Like many of my contemporaries in the 1960s and ’70s, I was first influenced by my family’s political leanings until I left home, after which I became more influenced by my friends. So I went from being a Barry Goldwater supporter to a mildly progressive activist pounding the pavement for George McGovern.
Those who came of voting age in my era could be labeled an anomaly to this theory to the extent that our peers had tremendous influence on our politics.
However, as Goldberg points out, “conservative” is a relative term. To stay true to the definition of conservative, meaning wanting to hold on to values from the past, most of my colleagues today should be labeled as such for wanting to conserve our democracy.
Lynn Lorenz, Newport Beach
To the editor: In discussing the possible relationship between politics and DNA, Goldberg misses the point.
We should hope that there is a relationship, because if there is something genetic about conservatism, then there is hope that we can cure it.
Craig Zerouni, Los Angeles