At the end I'll cite some book and SF news, including some fun! Like part two of my comedy, The Ancient Ones.
Only now we'll return to the topic on everyone’s mind… WTF just happened? And what should we do now?
We'll start with Nathan Gardels – editor & publisher of the excellent Noēma Magazine - who always offers interesting observations. Though, he often triggers my infamously ornery “Yes… but…” reflex and a too-long response. (Several posts here originated in rémise to Nathan.)
In a recent missive - "How to Soul-Search as a Losing Party" - appraising What Democrats did wrong, Gardels points out many valid things… while reaching a conclusion that I deem spectacularly mistaken. Taking note of how so many Black and Hispanic males abandoned the old, Rooseveltean Coalition, he joins with so many others out there, urging a campaign of gentle conciliation.
“(O)nce informed and empathetically exposed to the concerns of others, participants move from previously held dispositions toward a consensus.“
Indeed, that participation can be widespread! As in the Truth and Reconciliation process led by Nelson Mandela, in South Africa, and similar endeavors in Argentina and Chile, wherein vast swathes of the public – on all sides – realized they must do this… or risk losing everything.
As for it happening in today’s USA? Well, I can think of one actual, real world example.
All across the nation, grand juries are selected from randomly-chosen voters and vetted for general reasonableness. In a majority of American counties, the resulting panels consist largely of fairly typical white retirees. And yet, it has been exactly those red county white retirees who – after exposure to arguments and copious evidence – have indicted so many Republican politicians and associates of a vast range of crimes.
I’d argue that is a kind of fact-based consensus-building, even if it leads to some well-deserved pain by the fomenters of one side.
That is the first of many reasons why the masters of that side will have no interest in allowing wider versions of consensus building.
I do not see any hope of such a thing happening in today’s America, at any kind of scale.
…with one barely plausible exception.
== Get the kompromat-compromised to trade 'Truth' for 'Reconciliation' ==
I am on record proposing an American version of a Truth & Reconciliation process. It’s kind of aggressive, like those grand juries, but it could begin a tsunami of revelation and light, leading to millions seeking common ground.
It might begin with one brave act. One so shocking and disruptive that it could rattle the echo chambers and draw millions of ostrich heads out of media holes. It might happen even right now, at the tail end of 2024, if Joe Biden were to offer the incentive of pardons/clemency, in order to draw forward any politicians in DC to admit that they are snared by blackmail.
As I say elsewhere, the pervasiveness of widespread blackmail in Washington is widely known in counter-intelligence circles. Honeypot entrapment of western elites has long been a specialty of Russian intel services – Okhrana, Checka, NKVD, KGB and FSB – all the way back to czarist times. Moreover, three Republican Congress members have recently attested to it likely being widespread among their GOP colleagues.
And hence, perhaps the incentive of presidential clemency just might be enough to draw some heroic – or simply fed-up – blackmail victims into cleansing light. And once a few have done so, others might follow, from all parties.
And yes, I do believe it’s one path that could lead to a Truth & Reconciliation process in America.
On the other hand, could T&R be achieved by preaching for a nationwide flow of commensal consensus, based upon building touchy-feely ‘mutual respect’ and listening?
Now?
That is fantasy.
Especially at this moment.
Because we have nothing to offer to those who are getting exactly what they want, right now.
You know perfectly well what that is, if you ask around, or follow social media at all. There is one voluptuous satisfaction that tens of millions of core MAGA folks seek – and are getting – that fills them with giddy joy, above all. To drink our tears.
If you do not know this, then you really, really need to get out more.
Anyone who thinks they can placate that with ‘can we all just get along?’ has no memory of the middle school playground, where we learned one of the deepest expressions of human nature -- from bullies, whose greatest joy came from hearing nerdy victims cry out - “Can we talk this out?”
== Twin prescriptions that are guaranteed to fail ==
Today’s Chasm of Political Recriminations within Blue America appears to be similarly unbridgeable.
First there’s a left wing that wants only to double down exactly upon a raft of combative identity stances that didn’t work…
(Abortion! Racism! Pronouns! Shun Bill Maher! Forget the economy; it’s all about abortion! And did I mention abortion? And abortion!)…
… vs. those murmuring “we need to reach out for consensus!” Consensus with those who have openly declared hatred of every single fact-using profession in America, along with universities, science, the civil service, the FBI and even the U.S. military officer corps.
To be clear, I am not rejecting consensus building! There have been times when rational politics used to be about negotiation, and those days may come again.
Please. If you read and grasp nothing else here, understand the following history lesson.
In olden times, Republican and Democratic legislators would socialize and get to know, rather than demonize, each other. Their kids went to the same schools! That is, until Dennis “friend to boys” Hastert established a rule (look it up) that GOP representatives must stash their families in the Home District and spend as little time as possible in Washington. And - above all - demonize those on the other side of the aisle.
During some previous eras, a president was able to negotiate – even horse-trade – for a few votes needed by this or that nominee. And each appointment was considered separately.
This was true even as late as the Speakership of Newt Gingrich who, for all of his fiery, right wingism, was there to negotiate and to pass legislation needed by the country. Hence we got Welfare Reform and the Budget Act and Clinton Surpluses.
Alas, at that point Karl Rove’s program to expand gerrymandering shifted the locus of power in hundreds of districts, away from the General Election over to district primaries. Primaries in which radical partisans gained outsized sway. It happened in both parties, but especially in the GOP. Threats of ‘being primaried’ became fierce tools to enforce uniformity.
(There are ways to defeat this! Decisively, in fact. Methods that don’t even require legislation. One simple, nationwide information campaign could destroy the effectiveness of Primary Radicalization… and no party politician will discuss it.)
== The roots of our present political impasse ==
This transformation reached fruition with the 1996 Congressional putsch, when Newt was jettisoned without so much as a thank you and replaced by a later-convicted child predator, whose “Hastert Rule” has ever since declared a political death sentence for any Republican who – ever again – actually negotiates with Democrats.
This resulted in the most tightly disciplined party and politburo America ever saw. (And some of the laziest, worst Congresses in U.S. history. Only once in the last 28 years has there been a session that passed needed legislation that directly resulted in major benefits for the nation.)
How effective is Hastert-Discipline? No hypocrisy is too great. As when GOP Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell refused even to meet with Obama nominees more than 13 months before the next election… but hurried to confirm Trump’s final appointments one month before Biden took office. Even “deeply concerned” Senators Collins and Murkowski get back in line at the slightest warning look from Trump or from Trump’s Potemkin puppeteer.
And all of that leaves out speculative supplements, like my well-based conjecture that blackmail is rife in D.C.
And so… amid all those highly refined tools of fanaticism, radicalization and discipline-enforcement… are we somehow supposed to seek consensus, when every single incentive is designed to thwart it?
== Bitter partisanship is a recurring American norm ==
Again and again, I am appalled by an unwillingness by our brainy, punditry castes ever to look at history.
- Like the 6000 years when 99% of human societies fell into drearily similar patterns of feudalism, dominated by male bullies who enforced power based on an inherited ruling class.
- Or how the American Experiment - in escaping feudalism - has experienced rhythmic pulses of cultural strife, with pretty much similar casts of characters, across 240-years.
- Or how Franklin Delano Roosevelt forged an alliance of rich, middle and poor that rendered Marxist notions of class war obsolete for a while… until Old Karl has lately been revived to fresh pertinence, by those who forget.
This latest phase of the recurring U.S. Civil War goes far beyond simply snaring the GOP political caste, as we saw in the previous section. It has been vital to re-create the 1860s alliance of poor whites with their rich overlords, in shared hatred of modernists. This required perfection of masturbatory media, offering in-group solidarity based on a Cultural Schism that has divided America since its inception.
(Look up how in 1850s plantation-lords arranged to burn every southern newspaper that did not hew to the slavocracy line.)
Want a keen insight about all this from a brilliant science fiction author? No, I mean the revered (if somewhat libertarian) Robert A. Heinlein, who describes a recurring American illness. In projecting a future America dominated by religious fundamentalism, he adds:
"Throw in a Depression for good measure, promise a material heaven here on earth, add a dash of anti-Semitism, anti-Catholicism, anti-Negrosim, and a good large dose of anti-“furriners” in general and anti-intellectuals here at home, and the result might be something quite frightening – particularly when one recalls that our voting system is such that a minority distributed as pluralities in enough states can constitute a working majority in Washington."
And he wrote that in the 1950s.
== So how to fix what went wrong in 2024? ==
I speak elsewhere about this recurring American psychic and political chasm. Biliously-addictive Culture War explains Red America’s rage, far better than self-flagellatory riffs like: “We blues are at fault for refusing to listen to legitimate rural concerns.”
Excuse me. From FDR to LBJ to Clinton and Obama, rural America has received generous largesse that transformed ‘hick’ Southern and Appalachia states into modern hubs, surrounded by comfortable towns that – under Biden – just received huge waves of infrastructure repair and high-speed Internet. Unemployment is super-low and inflation has fallen.
Did the Harris campaign fail to make all that clear? Of course they did. And that failure was godawful.
But nothing we try, no statistical proofs… and certainly no ‘outreach and listen’ campaign… ever stood a chance against the drug-like power of sanctimony. The volcanic flows of ingrate-hate pouring from Trumpian America, toward…
… toward whom?
Leftists claim that the hated groups are races/genders etc. And while there is some of that, their obsession is - in its own right - poorly based sanctimony-delusion. In its own right, it is delusionally insane.
Test it! Just watch Fox some evening and count the number of minutes spent spewing outright racism or repression of gender variety, or attacking the poor.
All of that is as a droplet next to tsunamis of bile aimed at … nerds. At fact professions. At civil servants. At the FBI and intel agencies. At the U.S. military officer corps. At exactly those who are targeted by Project 2025.
Elsewhere I go into the WHY of this open and insatiable hatred of every single fact-wielding profession. It's exactly the same cultural phenomenon as when Southern white males supported King George against city merchants… and supported slavocrat plantation lords, their actual class enemies, against urban northern sophisticates. And supported Gilded Age plutocrats against the original Progressives…
…and who now support today’s lucre-oligarchy against ‘smug university-smartypants know-it-alls’. The professionals who stand in the way of feudalism’s return.
(Just watch who Trump goes after… and how the red folk who you want us to ‘reach out to and understand’ will cry out gleefully, with every shout of nerdy pain.)
== Defend what they most avidly seek to destroy ==
Can such masturbatory joy at defeating all fact people be assuaged with ‘reaching out’ sessions seeking ‘consensus’?
Okay, sure. Give it a try. It seems worthwhile! I might be wrong!
But if I'm right about this being phase 9 of America’s recurring cultural Civil War, then shall we look at how the previous phases were resolved?
It doesn’t always have to involve violence! In fact, only one of those earlier phases was truly violent. And a couple were resolved by genius politicians like FDR!
But in this recurring madness, what never worked was supplication. Or looking weak.
What's worked is the same thing that caused bullies on the playground to step up from the dust, stare at the blood they just wiped from their noses, and go “Huh! I guess you aren’t meat, after all. Wanna come over and play X-Box?”
But sure. Read Nathan G's editorial in Noema! As usual, it is articulate and knowledgable and persuasive. So let's by all means assign some folks to give 'consensus-building' a try! Go with the carrots that have never worked. But maybe this time.
Meanwhile, I plan to continue offering sticks.
Tools for fact-folks to use.
Tools that establishment politicians have never-ever-ever actually tried. At least none since FDR and LBJ.
Sticks that worked.
88 comments:
Here’s a Mark Felton run-down of some of the ‘secrets from World War II’ that are still held classified and that may never see the light of day. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rN8FUqmI_aw
Dr. Brin, reading your point about losing the ability for effective governance struck home for an unusual reason.
By isolating politicians from one another, they lost the ability to work together. I have an unusual example in my own life how this works.
I used to play poker and was a moderately winning player (tracked on a spreadsheet, not a gestalt sense). I've given it up because, to be good these days, you need to play online.
The reason is when you play online, you can use extensive tracking tools to analyze your play and spot weaknesses in your game. It's absolutely critical to have this internal data.
The problem is that when you play online you end up playing in huge volume (which is good for data, but bad for your mental health). Hands play faster at the table b/c online accelerate the mechanics of dealing a hand. On top of that, players typically multi-table (play more tables at once).
Play 8 tables at once where the hands come about 2x as fast, and you're playing ALOT of poker. That's great for data purposes, but rather terrible for maintaining an even keel.
In short, I had a rage problem. When things didn't go my way (especially when an oppoentant got rewarded for doing something stupid due to luck), i'd get really angry. One big reason this happened online rather than live, is...live I get to know these people.
It's very easy to "blow up" at a disembodied name on a computer screen. Live play is entirely different. So I have no trouble accepting swings of outrageous fortune sitting at an actual table with real people, but start raving in rage while isolated in front of my computer.
THat's pretty much what we're doing when we isolate politicians into their districts.
Add that the supposed benefit of this change was to force politicians to remain connected to the populace doesn't actually happen. Politicians are usually removed from average concerns by their position (read affluent incomes).
Politiicans who cry poverty are full of it. Almost any imbecile can get rich in congress due to investment opportunities. When businesses TELL YOU WHAT THEY"RE GOING TO DO in congressional committees....well...investing becomes a snap.
Politicians are usually removed from average concerns by their position (read affluent incomes).
Not only that, but when they are forced by their leadership or their donors to take positions unpopular with their constituents, they tend to stop doing town halls and avoid taking questions from their public.
Dr Brin in the main post:
Even “deeply concerned” Senators Collins...
I've come to cast Susan Collins as the Synthian ambassador who leaves Garth toward the beginning of your Uplift War novel.
The Harris campaign pointed out the economic good that Biden and the Dems had done in every damn statement they made. It was the press that refused to corroborate the message. The oligarchs that run our media *wanted* Trump back in power and were not willing to even talk about the things that the Harris campaign wanted to talk about.
Media were the hostile force that Harris had to run against because media is owned by billionaires. Some media are even owned by the "good" billionaires our host imagines.
Even those "good" billionaires' media refused to tout the Democratic Party wins.
Even all the nerds at large media outlets refused to pass on the Harris campaign messages. Does that make the folks at MSNBC class traitors? How about when they went to Mar-a-lago to kiss Trump's ring after he won?
Matthew bah. Anyone, including liberal media, could tell that KH's good economy narratives weren't working because they were done crappily, sounding elitist. "We upper middle class folks are doing great! Why are you working stiffs complaining?"
There were ways to do it far better. But the Professional Dem political caste - while on the right side - are also utterly incestuous, and convinced they have nothing to learn from anything Not Invented Here.
because they were done crappily, sounding elitist. "We upper middle class folks are doing great! Why are you working stiffs complaining?"
matthew is partly right. Some of why the working stiffs were complaining was because their media was telling them over and over how badly they were doing.
Yes, it hurts when your grocery bill is high, but they did seem to have the spare cash to buy gold-plated Trump sneakers. And to travel in record numbers for Thanksgiving. Many actually told pollsters that they were personally doing fine, but that the overall economy was bad.
"under Biden – just received huge waves of infrastructure repair and high-speed Internet. "
Yet another example of why the Civil Servants are distrusted - with $42 billion in our tax money, not a single connection has actually been made https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/why-has-joe-biden-s-42-billion-broadband-program-not-connected-one-single-household/ar-BB1p1k0i .
Unlike my service provider, who has point to point microwave at 60 GHz to connect us at more than 100 megabit speeds https://www.xbar7.com with no government grants.
Larry, a lot of people ARE doing bad, which u can see in the high levels of food insecurity the last two holiday seasons ( I don't know about this yr).
You're never going to convince a hungry person the economy "is on the right track."
"There were ways to do it far better"
And chief among them is promoting scientific literacy, numeracy, and citizen science. Saviors are losers at best, vampires at worst. Hard work, takes years, but creates a Jeffersonian citizenry.
A typically interesting post :). I read it after reading a piece from The Atlantic back in 2022 which talked about the babelization of America (worth reading, check it out). Turns out wiring the world has both enormous benefits and significant costs...and, as per usual, we aren't doing a good job of "taxing" the benefits to mitigate the costs.
I won't pretend to understand why the Democratic pitch in 2024 failed. Granted, it didn't fail by much...but it did fail. I suspect there are lots of things that could have/should have been done differently.
FWIW, I tend to see political problems (at all levels of politics) as a result of a fundamental conflict in human nature.
We are social primates. The primate part makes us highly intelligent, master manipulators of our environment, and very good at defining and defending our self-interest. The social part enables us to work together at scales that few other animals can.
American culture is steeped in the ethos of individualism, which is reflective of the primate part of our nature. But the reality is we are all, as individuals, far more successful when we live in a high-functioning community, one whose members don't spend "too much" time looking out only for #1 (and our immediate relatives). Put another way, for the vast majority of us, we really succeed by working together.
But you can't get past the primate part of our make-up by appealing to the angels of our better natures. You have to structure a successful political pitch so it at least arguably answers the question "what's in it for me?"
Many Democrats, particularly ones in better off areas (I live smack dab between Biotech Gulch and Silicon Valley), are well-enough off that they don't really need to spend too much time thinking about protecting their self interests. They've got that covered.
That's not the case for most of the population, particularly the relatively less politically engaged middle. Consequently, pitches which heavily emphasize solving "distant" real problems (e.g., climate change) or protecting one (objectively discriminated against) group don't play well. It's why one of the biggest recent climate initiatives was called the Inflation Reduction Act.
I don't have a magic bullet to offer progressive forces. But I suspect what will work best is ensuring we always talk about "pocketbook issues" -- which aren't all financial -- more than we talk about existential crises (even though we face a number of those).
We need to amass enough political power to address the existential problems before they kill us all. But we can only get that power by appealing to a good portion of the self-interests of those who may not share our view of the crises, or at least the level of danger they present. Because as Josh Stein famously said on West Wing, if you don't win, you can't govern.
I get that. But the right-wing media is telling them who to blame for not being on the right track. "It's all Biden's doing, with Harris in complicity," is not really why they're hungry. Much has to do with Republican obstruction in congress and with Republican policies that have favored corporations over workers for decades.
Much of the Democrats' failed messaging has to do with not placing the blame where it belongs. And some of that is less the fault of the Democrats than of the media messengers.
Some are already starting to notice that tariffs will make the cost of living worse, not better.
Mark Olbert:
But I suspect what will work best is ensuring we always talk about "pocketbook issues" -- which aren't all financial -- more than we talk about existential crises (even though we face a number of those).
Interesting take. Republicans are able to pretend not to be in favor of things like national abortion bans or Project 2025 or white nationalism in order to appeal to the middle, confident that their wingnut supporters know full well they'll do those things anyway. Maybe we should be doing the same? Campaign on lowering the cost of living and trust our supporters to know what else we'll do after we're in office.
There's a real life example of that working. Obama didn't run on legalizing gay marriage. But once in power, Democrats got the job done.
Mark Olbert: the solution is a valuable but artificial construct called 'enlightened self-interest'. It has to be enlightened to deserve to exist, but it also has to be self-interested to be able to exist. Putting the two together requires artifice.
Point being, to mangle Ronald Reagan:
Republicans are not the solution to the problem [of being on the wrong track]. Republicans are the problem.
That's a one-sided exaggeration, of course. But I believe it to be more accurate than the solution being "Throw out the Democrats."
Many of you probably heard this already, but here at about minute 0:50 is Ukrainian boxer Wladimir Klitschko calling out Joe Rogan's b.s. about Ukraine.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbCFPwMrh6k
We are children of Adam Smith and we love nothing better than fair competition (and) I will bet my house...[DB]
It is quite obvious our Rancher does not consider us to be persons of good character...
All of that is as a droplet next to tsunamis of bile aimed at … nerds. At fact professions. At civil servants. At the FBI and intel agencies. At the U.S. military officer corps...
Yet again, I have failed to communicate effectively, as evidenced by (1) our good host's ongoing reliance on Competitive Wagering methodologies, (2) the false assertion that I do not respect the 'good character' of those with whom I argue and (3) the half-truth that the general public hates 'smart people' & 'fact-users' for their intelligence.
I fully concede that Dr. Brin is more intelligent than I am -- that he is the clear winner in any 'battle of wits' in which we may engage -- but these victories do not have the zero sum hierarchical significance that he appears to invest in them, as they neither confer upon the victor any command or leadership rights, nor do they reduce the status of the loser to that of subservient child.
Adults (in general) want find out for themselves, using trial & error in order to learn from direct personal life experience, because this is what adults do, even when we deny this freedom to young children in an attempt to protect them from undesirable outcomes, as the difference between conferred knowledge & direct experience is as stark as the difference between a textbook on human reproduction & actual fucking.
Ergo, it is not so much the 'smart people, nerds & fact-users' that most adults resent when we are being lectured to, but the infantilization that results when these smart people, nerds & fact-users try to protect and dominate other adults as if those others were retarded children rather than legal adults.
To quote Captain Archer from Star_Trek Enterprise:
"We’re going to stumble, make mistakes – I’m sure more than a few, before we find our footing. But we’re going to learn from those mistakes. That’s what being human is all about."
So, please stop denying the humanity of other adults, even if they did it to you first (you claim), because if you don't stop the dehumanizing cycle then you're not an adult, either.
Best
Dr Brin in the previous comments:
“Musk apparently gets a pass on being a nerd because he's also an asshole.”
Sorry. While both diagnoses may be correct, the connection is flawed. As you know, I believe that screeches and howls BY the left, spewing extremely stupid hate-masturbations at him, accomplishing nothing but their own sanctimony jizz, ...
That's an explanation for why Musk himself has swung rightward, not for why those who hate "elite smartypants who know stuff" don't consider billionaire engineer Elon Musk to be in that category.
You have just verified my argument that one of the main differences between you and others here is how much value should be placed on direct personal experience. You want to rely on it and think that you can most of the time. The rest of us see it as inadequate much of the time whether we like it or not. And we want our information to from sources that check what they report.
Maybe we should be doing the same? Campaign on lowering the cost of living and trust our supporters to know what else we'll do after we're in office.
(Sorry if that didn't italicize -- I'm not used to formatting in blogger)
Yep. It's a matter of prioritizing the pitch elements...which doesn't have to necessarily match the prioritization of action, as long as "enough" action for the highest priority pitch element gets made.
I agree, enlightened self-interest would work...if it could be achieved at scale in practice, which I doubt.
It's sort of like the philosopher kings that Plato offered as a way to create a desirable government: nice idea, but essentially a deus ex machina move. Which may work in novels, but not so often in the real world.
But I encourage you to keep up the appeals because, who knows? They might work, and it's hard to see how they'd hurt.
Enlightened self-interest can, and has, been done at scale in practice when it addresses common problems and aims for common wealth.
Therefore I advise against identity politics of any sort, for it is divisive and based mostly upon illusion. Unity politics is far better.
If you must resort to us-versus-them primate politics, then target the most artificial and illusory divide of all: class. There is a photo, from the Occupy Wall Street time, of a construction worker holding a sign saying "99 to 1. I like those odds."
"If God didn't want them to be sheared, he wouldn't have made them sheep"
That's how Trump treats his own supporters and they love it! Democrats keep trying to educate sheep - Republicans herd them. Time to set moral compunctions aside ( "sooner or later, you must answer for every good deed" ) and try new tactics.
Glad I made an exception and glanced at this by locum: "Ergo, it is not so much the 'smart people, nerds & fact-users' that most adults resent when we are being lectured to, but the infantilization that results when these smart people, nerds & fact-users try to protect and dominate other adults as if those others were retarded children rather than legal adults."
Vitamins? That whine was actually aimed in a direction that (if you squint reeal hard) has a kind of validity. If you remove 'dominate' (since we do all in our power to defend the only human system that ever tried to extend opportunity to all children and all who try hard to compete fairly...
...if you remove that word, then the paragraph is kind of valid. As an expression of how HE and other MAGAs feel the fact professions treat them. Often embarrassed when they say something ignorant to a doctor or teacher -- or their own children who went to university - it's easy to interpret even an innocent response as patronizing. And yes, I have OFTEN said that's gotta hurt.
Still, as a representation of actual reality among the 50 million fact professionals who every day keep America functioning and moving ahead and solving problems... and who were entirely responsible for defeating Stalinism>. No. It's a fucking delusional lie.
Do you hate and resent us? Sure, and maybe we do 1% of the patronizing shit you inflate or imagine. And we are your sons and daughters who stood on the shoulders of a working class who strove with FDR to truly make America great. And have we succeeded beyond your ability to squint and grasp? Well... maybe.
But decent people and loyal Americans would not resent that. They would not pour ingrate hate upon those who are verything the Greatest Generation fought and aspired to become.
---------------
"That's an explanation for why Musk himself has swung rightward, not for why those who hate "elite smartypants who know stuff" don't consider billionaire engineer Elon Musk to be in that category."
You're kidding, right? He is their excuse to shout "See? I don't JUST bow before "ex" commisars and inheritance brats! Some nerds -- like some negroes -- are the GOOD ones!"
Dr. Brin said:
"...if you remove that word, then the paragraph is kind of valid. As an expression of how HE and other MAGAs feel the fact professions treat them. Often embarrassed when they say something ignorant to a doctor or teacher -- or their own children who went to university - it's easy to interpret even an innocent response as patronizing. And yes, I have OFTEN said that's gotta hurt."
I think this is really close - I think a huge part of his appeal is he has been successful without appearing - even to his own supporters - very bright in the conventional sense.
Oh I noticed - akimming - one other thing... another lame squirm to evade Brin's wager demand gambit. Pah! If you believed you had provable facts on your side, you would step up with stakes in order to TAKE... MY... MONEY. Pure self-interest... plus the brains to gather real evidence plus the balls to act like a man would, in any other generation before ours.
Not one MAGA ever, ever, ever has gathered those three things, guts, brains and eagerness for cash, and had their atty contact me to arrange things. They always always squirm and writhe and weasel ... and then run.
And the fact that no one on the other side - those who DO have the facts on their side - refuse ever to notice how this works and try it themselves... is proof that our side ain't so smart either. How we ever got science is a mystery. And dang we sure need machines of loving grace.
Loc isn’t rejecting hierarchy, is he? He’s vacillating between hierarchy and autonomy.
We can be autonomous albeit do need to be reined in by those with more skills and experience. Round n‘ round he goes.
Discipline versus liberty (or license).
Verification versus placebo.
Individual rights/privileges versus collective responsibilities.
Tried-and-true versus de novo.
Ultra-materialism versus transcendence/escapism.
Sobriety versus celebration.
Even seriousness v jocularity.
Round ‘n round we all go.
We are talking at cross-purposes with MAGAs and the others.
They are saying:
the world is passing away;
thus live for Now and the family;
do as thou wilt, until thee wilt away.
We are talking past them.
I saw an online reference to Elon Musk as a 'henchgeek' to the incoming horror. Apropos.
Pappenheimer
P.S. So glad my Fullbright girl is heading out for good in few days. In the trousers of fate, we have taken the wrong leg.
"How we ever got to science is a mystery."? No, it's not. Every member of every band of humans that moved into a new territory was a jackleg natural scientist and meteorologist. We started recording our observations before we had history - pretty sure the Polynesians carried string-net star charts and people were marking moon phases in caves when a flint-headed arrow was cutting-edge killing equipment.
Pappenheimer
Been thinking - a dangerous thing
I spent some years working for the local council
Before that I was sure that council workers were lazy and that mostly they just got in the way of people trying to do things
Working for the council I was amazed at just how much we got done AND just how much hidden infrastructure even a small town had
I must admit that after a few years "politics" got involved - local not national - and they paid me to go away along with the most productive of my workforce
When OGH talks about the 50 million fact professionals - I suspect that a lot of people think in terms of council workers
Without those people things would grind to a halt -
But to most of the public they are faceless minions who get in the way!
They say "you can't dig here" and "that needs to be done this way"
We do need people to do all that and most (not all) regulations are necessary
But to the public.....
And to me as an engineer and manager before I worked for the council
I also think (on occasion) that infrastructure could and should be made more accessible. Being hidden in the walls and underground makes it a mystery.
David. I scanned the original post. Mostly the Usual Stuff but I do take exception to the suggestion that Conservatives are universally enjoying the discomfiture of the Progressives. I find the apparent sea change in our politics interesting, but I won't be gloating. I actually like many of you here. And not in a politically defined way. For instance I find LarryHart to be a genuinely likeable individual and Locum not to be. I doubt either of these gents will take exception to this, its how a community works. And likeability is not a comment on the quality of their ideas.
Now, one notion you did toss out caught my eye. Grand Juries and (if I did not misread) an extension into Truth and Reconciliation Boards. Do you not consider Grand Juries to be vulnerable to politically corrupt influences? Could one for instance convene a panel of horrid backwoods rednecks and find a politically ambitious Prosecutor to lead them into mischief? Serious question btw. And while we are at it, might you spell out a few deets regards how a T and R system would work in America? Perhaps give us a few names you think should appear before it? Or a methodology for how these people are identified, how T and R would interface with our existing justice system, etc.
Tacitus: I actually like many of you here
That is the greatest tragedy. Broken families aren't pretty. Even for this old Canuck, American Thanksgiving was a poignant time.
I have not been paying attention to the Republican field of contenders this year. I sense that any Republican running against either Harris or Biden would have had certain advantages and disadvantages compared to Trump.
I saw several types of Trump voters:
(1) enthusiastic MAGA,
(2) irrational/automatic partisans [always vote for the GOP],
(3) reluctant partisans [hate Trump but can't bring themselves to vote for a Democrat][many of these people were on the border of not voting at all or voting third party],
(4) right-wing populists [could partially overlap with (1)],
(5) left-wing populists [former Bernie bros who are angry at the Democratic party establishment - like Glenn Greenwald, Matt Taibbi, Bret Weinstein]
If Trump had admitted defeat in 2020 and turned over power peacefully without a January 6th, he would have won the election with a result similar to Reagan's defeat of Carter in 1980. If there had been some other non-Trump right-wing populist you possibly could have had the same result.
If Trump had not run in 2024 and the nominee had been a more "normal" Republican like Rubio, Christie or the like, they would have received more cross-over votes from Democrats frustrated by the negative perceptions of the Biden administration's actions. But, that type of nominee would have lost many of category (1), (4) and (5); those voters would probably have not voted in as high numbers as they did.
Side note. While many evangelical Christians flocked to Trump, I notice that the Christian Coalition of America (what's left of it) did not. Last time I saw its president, Roberta Combs, was in 2017 and she did not want to mention Trump at all. I saw zero election activity from the group this campaign. They put out their voter guides (which heavily favored Trump) but did nothing else.
Your tears re so salty, David.... more, more!
Tacitus, like most conservatives, seems to have a memory problem. I recall well how pre-MAGAs preached that the county grand jury is THE central locus of sovereignty, righteously empowered to over-rule anything passed by distant legislatures. Now? They are monstrous meddlers, simply because, when calmly presented facts, these panels – still mostly white retirees in HUNDREDS of mostly rural or suburban zones – have indicted FORTY TIMES as many Republicans as Democrats.
Could one start with the first order conclusion – by Occam’s Razor – that the GOP is largely a criminal gang? Especially in light of their all-out war vs every fact profession, against the FBI and against every part of American life that Putin blames for our success and his failure? And 40 years of Supply Side sucks of the middle class life blood without a single beneficial prediction coming true?
NAW! Instead of even glancing at the obvious, let’s scramble instead for a rationalization! Might scores and hundreds of GJs might be “vulnerable to politically corrupt influences? Could one for instance convene a panel of horrid backwoods rednecks and find a politically ambitious Prosecutor to lead them into mischief?”
Yeah, that’s the ticket. A vague armwave toward a vague what-if, ignoring that we are talking about SCORES and hundreds of these panels… indicting mostly very rich and influential men with big legal teams… AND THAT MOST of the indictments later led to convictions before OTHER juries. Or that rich and powerful men had perfect access to top lawyers and investigators and were perfectly able to make their own cases for innocence.
In other words, Tacitus just keeps writhing and wriggling and squirming to avoid LOOKING at what’s happening. He’ll keep doing so when the US military Officer Corps – the greatest accumulation of spectacularly mature adults the world has ever seen, gets reamed out and turned into a praetorian guard.
Truth & Reconciliation. If Biden did what I want, we might shatter the blatant blackmail ring in DC, that THREE GOP congressmen have said is rife in their party. THREE! A viper nest that all the counter-intel folks know about and that you can see, every time L Graham or T Cruz or M Rubio open their mouths. If that happened, then Biden’s PARDONING of truth tellers would lead to reconciliation and then others and others. The chances of that happening under Trump are nil. In fact I would bet that blackmail kompromat is THE central requirement for anyone seeking an appointment from him.
In theory, a T&R commission would involve folks like Tacitus, who supposedly can see all sides. Alas, he does so via monkey-no-see… monkey-no-hear… monkey-never-ever-speak about the hijacking of US conservatism by pure evil.
FJ thank you for making my point. Your taunts just make me faintly smile with a fart in , naw I won’t even turn in your direction.
GMT there is another crucial category…. Blacks and Hispanics who believe great progress HAS been made in racial justice and their ability to advance and felt patronized by libs sobbing “We’re here to HELP you poor things!”
I served as a locally elected official for nearly two decades. In all that time, I could count on the fingers of one hand the votes I took on non-trivial matters (e.g., I'm not talking about recognizing someone for good works) where I couldn't see that my vote was going to impact someone's self-interest negatively.
The idea that public policies should be held to some kind of Hippocratic standard is a shibboleth. Good public policies are about increasing the "health"/"strength" of a community without adversely impacting "too many" people "too much".
In fact, one of the lessons I learned from my experience is the goal of public policy setting isn't "enact good policies" but instead "enact least bad policies". That's because of the enormous diversity of (self) interests within any community, let alone our typically sized ones.
Interestingly, dealing with this is something every fellow elected struggled with. Because who can get excited about a "least bad" policy? And who wants to run on the platform of "vote for me, I enacted a whole bunch of least bad policies for you!!" :)
A year ago, Douglas Hofstadter (sometimes referred to as the patron saint of GOFAI), did this interview on the current state of AI. Near the end, he describes what it's like when some of your core beliefs begin to collapse. However, you need to learn, embrace, and internalize those beliefs before the collapse can appreciated or even be noticed. I'm beginning to realize that beliefs are not inherently evil, they only become so when the possibility of CITOKATE is totally absent. Perhaps that's what happened to Musk - he stopped learning. It's almost like a form of dying.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6e08RnJyxo
Tacitus also said: "Mostly the Usual Stuff but I do take exception to the suggestion that Conservatives are universally enjoying the discomfiture of the Progressives." To which: (1) I don't recall using 'conservatives' but rather MAGAs. There is a major distinction, in fact in many ways opposites, though self-described 'conservatives' bury their heads to ignore that.
(2) You really, really, really need to get out more. Social media and Trumpist TV& radio are exploding with orgasm glee over delighted hate-punishment of every fact-weilding caste... and yes also the leftists. Our fretful tears for the republic are their food and drink.
Which is why the only decent line in the Star Wars prequels (episodes 1 - 3) is "So this is how democracies die, to thunderous applause".
Thank God we'll have an anti vaxxer like rfk and a quack like Dr Oz in charge of our nation's health.
Don't worry. Herd immunity, horse pills and raw milk will save us.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/29/opinion/bird-flu-pandemic.html?unlocked_article_code=1.dk4.7M89.KZ_5TnVVWsuC
A Bird Flu Pandemic Would Be One of the Most Foreseeable Catastrophes in History
The H5N1 avian flu, having mutated its way across species, is raging out of control among the nation’s cattle, infecting roughly a third of the dairy herds in California alone. Farmworkers have so far avoided tragedy, as the virus has not yet acquired the genetic tools to spread among humans. But seasonal flu will vastly increase the chances of that outcome. As the colder weather drives us all indoors to our poorly ventilated houses and workplaces, we will be undertaking an extraordinary gamble that the nation is in no way prepared for.
Someone online was celebrating a recent anniversary of a death by bemoaning the retirement of a cartoon. I suggested an update: Death plays with a sideshow lucky dip machine. Caption updated to read: "Henry Kissinger!? Is RFK Jr even in this thing??"
Premature? Yes. An exaggeration? No.
I suggest naming the ensuing disasters after Trump. The Trump BIrd Flu (or just Trump Flu). Trump Polio. "Unmonitored Trump Hurricane ravages the south." That sort of thing,
I wish I knew any of those references. The joke must be quite funny. :)
Just showed daughter my 11-1962 MAD magazine. Cheerful jests on JFK and Car 54 where are you? Dang we were in for it.
I used to be the Jewish lawyer with the Christian Coalition. Good times. But I regret the time I spent sacrificing for Bush #43.
Somewhere I have the comedy album THE FIRST FAMILY. Such fun.
https://youtu.be/Xwu8S6Ekx9w?si=Y33Kqg5wKIPlyoU1
Almost as good as STAN FREEBERG PRESENTS THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
https://youtu.be/jjgxmlw43pw?si=oo24zOu3YbdCTOlF
At 6 min 18 seconds in is one of my favorite bits of humor: rumbles of mutiny.
Here's the original (the grim jest being the why: Kissinger was still alive at the time)
Trump would try to monetise naming rights.
David, your political cosmology seems a dark and disturbing place. Filled with blackmailers, pedophiles. Also lots of writhing. So much writhing. And wriggling and squirming. It's not exactly conducive to discussion. But hey, its Chinatown. I mean, its the Internet.
I get out and about quite a bit. Hence the long gaps between my appearances here. I wish brighter days for you. Mine are pretty good.
Ah, now I get it.
Could also read "Is Donald Trump...". Or Rupert Murdoch.
That might get him to go along with it.
Tacitus I really don't know why I bother. You can see the monsters, right in front of you. And yet, like Haley Mills in POLYANNA you can ignore the monstrous. At most, like Susan Collins and Sen. Murkowski, you are occasionally 'very concerned.'
I devoutly hope that we live in your world! I am accused across most spectra of being an 'optimist!'
But the direct and absolute correlation - they are coming for all the FBI, CIA, ,ilitary officers and civil servants who Putin blamed for the fall of the USSR - is too blatant. As is the delerious joy being spewed across all MAGA media over their soon-destruction.
If you have not seen that then... no... you do not 'get out' enough.
But still... Thrive. And persevere!
In defense of Tacitus, I'm not convinced that "MAGA media" is any more representative of reality than the lefty shouters on social media are. It is demonstrable that Democrats lose support when they mistake yelling about issues on Twitter for actual support of those issues in the real world. I suspect that the same is true of our perception of the other side--that just because people tweet about civil war doesn't mean they're ready and willing to actually fight in one.
Tac seems to spend less time on the internet than I do, and even I think I spend too much time online. He does more things that involve interactions with real human beings, and I believe him when he says his days are pretty good. I think that when I don't dwell on politics--something I've had trouble staying away from this past month--my life is pretty good too. That's probably one reason why neither of us voted for Trump.
People who aren't full-on MAGA but voted for Trump say it's because (to paraphrase) their days aren't good. So be it. My samaritrophia* is kicking in. They voted for Trump as their savior, which relieves me of any need or desire to care about their problems. "Let their God provide it."
(Bad liberal! Bad!!!)
* From Vonnegut's God Bless You, Mr. Rosewater
“Samaritrophia is the suppression of an overactive conscience by the rest of the mind. ‘You must all take instructions from me!’ the conscience shrieks, in effect, to all the other mental processes. The other processes try it for a while, note that the conscience is unappeased, that it continues to shriek, and they note, too, that the outside world has not been even microscopically improved by the unselfish acts the conscience has demanded.
“They rebel at last. They pitch the tyrannous conscience down an oubliette, weld shut the manhole cover of that dark dungeon. They can hear the conscience no more. In the sweet silence, the mental processes look about for a new leader, and the leader most prompt to appear whenever the conscience is stilled, Enlightened Self-interest, does appear. Enlightened Self-interest gives them a flag, which they adore on sight. It is essentially the black and white Jolly Roger, with these words written beneath the skull and crossbones, ‘The hell with you, Jack, I’ve got mine!’”
Why not simply say that the hate speech that the woke culture has been feeding the world (remember Kamala saying that Christians were not welcome? The shooter? The pro-Hamas groups in the Democratic Party?) was the reason most Americans voted them out?
While not entirely dismissing the gist of your point...what shooter? The Republican who managed to spray someone else's blood onto Trump's ear? The other Republican who was simply exercising his Constitutional right to carry weapons at a Trump rally? Or maybe any of the multitude of other shooters--mass or otherwise--who Republicans consider to be the price of freedom?
Oh, and no, I don't remember Kamala saying Christians were not welcome.
I'll give you the pro-Hamas groups. The result that they achieved* is my one consolation over Trump's election.
* Dave Sim: "Sometimes, you can get what you want and still not be very happy."
Hate speech from the woke?
Speaking of hate, has anyone noted what's been going on in Northern Syria in the last couple of days? Looks like Assad's forces have been routed from Aleppo, and Putin hasn't anything left in the tank to help out.
Fundamental, Alberto. Step up with wager stakes which side spews the most hate. And hate toward every single fact-using profession. We are in a cursed time when 'sides' hurl assertions, forgetting that it IS possible to tell the difference between a fact-supported assertion and an untrue spew of hot air.
@Tony Fisk, I just this afternoon heard about that on Hal Sparks's radio show, and his guest Phil Ittner who is in Kyiv. Not just the rebellion going on in Syria, but another in the streets of the capital of (ex-Soviet) Georgia.
Russia is dealing with unrest on several fronts. Putin was even dissed in Kazakhstan
https://www.reuters.com/world/ukraine-flag-appears-big-screen-during-putin-visit-kazakhstan-2024-11-28/
ASTANA, Nov 28 (Reuters) - Kazakh police are investigating the brief appearance of the Ukrainian flag on a large LED screen in the capital city, Astana, during a visit there by Russian President Vladimir Putin, Kazakhstan's interior ministry said on Thursday.
Putin's been using Syria to rest exhausted troops, having pulled all air defense systems out. They may be in a lot of pain, right now. Vulnerable. But I doubt IDF will attack Russians. They MIGHT hit Assad to curry favor with Sunnis & Turkey.
Thing I've wondered: fragging in the RF army must be huge, yet I never hear or see it mentioned. The ability of Russians to endure suffering is prodigious. Oh and I mention again the word Fog. And possible resurrection of a former queen of the battlefield weapon. If you guess what it is, do not say it aloud. Here or anywhere else.
North Koreans aside, there are a lot of non-Russians in Putin's forces. Their main use appears to be as cannon fodder.
Actually, fear of 'fragging' might be what's behind the upsurge in POW executions. 'What? You want to surrender? To people we've just done that to?'
There are other motives, of course, including the 'savouring of tears' mentioned in this article.
No idea what you're referring to, but I suspect any student of warfare wouldn't be puzzled for long.
Tony Fisk:
Hate speech from the woke?
Woke culture is intolerant of intolerance.
Apparently, enough voters now identify as intolerant, and are sick and tired of being oppressed for it.
I agree with our host about the identity-politics Left, but the classical economic Left, including the more democratic genuine Marxist, might have good prospects. I've noticed that Bernie was the only candidate in 2016 who could draw in substantial numbers of people who later went for Trump. Also, some of the sharpest criticism of woke in academia has come from independent (never aligned with the Communists) Marxists. I'm not on the Left myself, but there is a Left I can respect, and it's the classical Socialists.
There are also a lot (in absolute numbers) of genuine conservatives out there who have broken with the crazy Republicans, but they only add up to a small percentage, and have had zero effect on the 2024 election.
Bob Pfeiffer.
As evidenced by those who mistake a desire for balance for 'vacillation' and Aleister Crowley's 'do what thou wilt' for Christian teachings, I must conclude that subtlety is largely lost on the many who post here, except possibly for Tacitus who understands that the LR persona was specifically designed to be 'unlikeable' (critically unambiguous), so harsh truths follow the abandonment of subtlety.
(1) Expertism is an euphemism for Tribalism.
As in the case of Dr Brin, those who identify with the Expert, Intellectual, Educated, Professional & Progressive Tribe support 'Expert Rule' by their own tribe, and this is in no way different than any other tribe which believes that their own tribe is best-suited to rule, whether or not this tribe identifies as Irish, Christian, muslim, uneducated, conservative, white, blue, red or something else. It therefore follows that Dr Brin is an unapologetic tribalist.
(2) Dr Brin's "Competitive Wagering" tactic is one of Intimidation.
Despite & possibly because of Dr Brin's expertise in 'conflict negotiation', his incessant demand that his opponents put their finances 'where their mouth is' is a deliberately confrontational tactic to exploit polite society's aversion to direct confrontation, as this willingness to gamble one's resources amounts to a bluff at worst (or, at best, an expression of faith) that in no way correlates with any known type of scientific or empiric truth-testing, being most comparable to 'Trial by Combat' as a legal argument. The same is true in his 'Disputation Arenas' wherein Dr Brin seems to be much more concerned with victory than he does with rightness & objectivity.
I can only hope that Tacitus will stick around, since his criticisms are the few that seem to reach our fine host's ears, but I suspect that this will not happen until Tacitus abandons the people-pleasing aspects of his well-developed bedside manner in favor of honesty & directness.
This brings me to my final point:
(3) Politeness has become synonymous with Falsehood.
As illustrated by Larry_H's insane assertion that 'woke tolerance' equals intolerance, the West has allowed itself to be consumed & subsumed by lies & more lies in the mistaken belief that if we lie about social dysfunction then those social dysfunctions disappear as if by magic, so we substitute ideals for reality & meaningless 'happy talk' for honesty.
Tacitus is right to flee this truthless minefield, especially if he wishes to avoid conflict while simultaneously remaining 'likeable', even though nothing good can come from a dishonest culture because the Truth_Will_Out, eventually, and all these lies will collapse & take all these lying liars down with them, including those polite well-intentioned ones who only lied to avoid unpleasant conflict & increase social cohesion.
Best
I'll mostly agree with you on the wagering. It is a bad idea. You're wrong about why our host is supporting it, but I don't blame you for seeing it as an attempt at intimidation. He has become obsessed with it and can't see why others don't think it is a good idea. But his primary motive has been to use it as a way to deal with evasiveness and goal shifting. He is doing this out of exasperation.
Your first point is projection. To deal with the world you have to understand it. To do this you have to actually seek the truth and have ways of correcting error. And you have to use the knowledge that others have accumulated. You have to have methods that can lead to unpleasant conclusions and be willing to face up to unpleasant facts. Trying to believe that the World is the way that you wish it was can lead to disaster. An ethos of truth seeking is essential. The experts that you dismiss have that ethos. It does not mean that they cannot be wrong, just that it makes them less likely to be wrong. The ones attacking them do not have an ethos of truth seeking. They are looking for ways to continue believing what they want to believe.
And politeness is not falsehood. It is quite reasonable to criticize some of the ostentatious display of concern. But what is wrong is the ostentation, not the concern
“Woke culture is intolerant of intolerance.”
Yes but that’s simply reflex to the American/Hollywood preachings I talk about in VIVID TOMORROWS: Science Fiction and Hollywood – http://www.davidbrin.com/vividtomorrows.html
No, what’s impressive to me is that almost everyone sanctimoniously extolls “my kind of people is the most-oppressed and best kind of people!” reflex. And I openly admit I do that too! When I rave about scientists and the Protector Castes and fact folks being the core enemies denounced by Putin and warred against by the Mad Right…
…well, I can back it up with all the facts and stats in the world. But it still has an element of: “my kind of people is the most-oppressed and best kind of people!” And all I can do (beyond proving it over and over) is admit that, sure. I have the human reflex, too.
BUT woke-ists, while they are often self-defeating dingbats who drove millions of blacks and Hispanics out of the coalition… well… I admit their ravings are sometimes on behalf of types of folks other than themselves.
Robert… Scandinavian socialists are not Marxists, except to the extent that they heed warnings about class. But Adam Smith issued those, as well. What’s fundamental is “Does this socialism help to elevate all children and others to be encouraged to confidently and knowingly and even joyfully and creatively compete?
If so – and in raising all kids and preventing rule by inheritance brats – then that’s Smith, not Marx.
Quick skim of locum indicates vitamins in use. (I wish the f$%#$# he would make up his mind! Now I have to keeping quick skimming for a while, till he goes completely fecal, again.)
On this occasion he yammers untruths and rationalizations, but better than most times.
#1 is ironically a version of the “my kind of folks” riff I just typed, above! I admitted freely that there may be an element of that, psychologically… while every palpable assertion supporting it is utterly provable.
Alas, he is trying desperately to maintain the fundamentally ZERO-SUM premise that being smart and knowing stuff mean fact folks are therefore concomitantly unwise. It is – of course – total opposite to true bullshit and trivially disproved. Which leads us to his excuse for shrieking cowardice.
#2. Eeeeeek! Brin is being confrontational by demanding that macho yammerers step up with proof! Hey, goombah. Trying to guilt trip Americans for fighting back vs Confederate aggression may work with others. Not with me. Pretenses at MACHO are VITAL to your cult. And that pretense is savaged by exposure of your utter, weenie cowardice and writhing excuses.
If you can disprove ANY of my assertions – in my standard wager demand – then YOU … GET…. Money! Lots of it. Plus the satisfaction of crushing liberal talking points. You can’t. Moreover, if any of my assertions ARE true, then each one – all by itself – proves that your cult is a pack if jabbering, fact-hating traitors.
Here they are again:
"Have a reputable atty verify you escrowed $10k stakes. We'll put evidence to a RANDOM nonpartisan panel of retired Sr military officers. (Most former lifelong Republicans.) Pool with fellow MAGAs. Take MY $$!
*Grand juries across USA (mostly white retirees in red-run states) indicted almost 100X as many top Repubs as Dems! 80x convictions!Your cult is a criminal gang. Bets?
*Pick any RANDOM 10 of Trump's >>50,000 registered lies to fact-check. Or evidence of ANY election 'steal.' Or name 1 fact-profession NOT hated-on by Fox?
* Let's tally NDAs & hush payments! Which party wants to BAN them?
*Come to sea with me and a Ph meter! Bet whether CO2-caused acid is killing the oceans.
*Check Fox 'scientists are sheep!' rants. Let's knock on 20 RANDOM offices and labs at a nearby university!
*Compare DEATH rates of those who refused vaccines!
*Bet which party is ALWAYS more fiscally responsible? Compare economic outcomes! Or if Red-run States (except Utah) average higher on EVERY turpitude!
No MAGA/Putinist EVER shows manly guts to back up their blab, as grampa would've. Blowhards flee the ruins of their macho.
What L’s whine amounts to is admission that he’s lose in every single category, above. And so many more.
Dr Brin:
No, what’s impressive to me is that almost everyone sanctimoniously extolls “my kind of people is the most-oppressed and best kind of people!” reflex.
I still maintain there is a difference in the way a white male Christian subset of Republicans uses that argument from the way almost everyone else does. They consider themselves oppressed on the basis that they are prevented from oppressing others. Most "oppressed" people strive for equality. The ones who strive for supremacy are doing something different.
BUT woke-ists, while they are often self-defeating dingbats who drove millions of blacks and Hispanics out of the coalition… well… I admit their ravings are sometimes on behalf of types of folks other than themselves.
Liberals and Democrats have become the X-Men. "Hated and feared by those they've sworn to protect."
In the 1980s comics and probably later, mutants were a stand-in for any real-life oppressed minority, and the stories treated anti-mutant hysteria as analogous to racism, religious bigotry, etc.
In 2024, there might be a good story in portraying the "good" mutants as being off-putting in the same way the extreme woke left is and turning allies away from their cause. If done right (not too simplistically) it could open some eyes.
Something of this sort was tried with Spider-Man back when I was still reading new issues. They tried to retcon the history such that the reason Flash Thompson had been a bully to Peter Parker in high school was that Peter was so stand-offish and uninterested in hanging with the gang that he needed the piss taken. Problem was that the old stories themselves didn't support that viewpoint.
There have been numerous studies showing Conservatives are generally happier than Progressives. Why? Well that's an interesting pub question. Maybe the latter are doomed to alway struggle towards distant and perhaps unattainable goals. And the former live primarily in the here and now. In a world where the Great Library of Alexandria is at your keyboard, most of us have material possessions that previous generations could not have imagined, and people are generally nice to each other. In person of course, Larry is right in his supposition that I don't spend much time on the internet.
Is your ocean acidification showing the same thing as https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/?
Tacitus:
numerous studies showing Conservatives are generally happier than Progressives.
You might be correct in thinking that liberals are unhappier because there's always something else that needs fixing. I've got two anecdotes from personal experience* that back that up.
Your assessment of conservatives is a little iffier. People here have been insisting that the reason so many broke for Trump is that they were unhappy with the status quo. If non-MAGA conservatives are so content, they why did they need to vote for a change candidate? And the vibe I got prior to the election from the MAGA conservatives was more outrage than happy.
* Two anecdotes.
First, one of my grandmothers who originated in Hungary or Czechoslovakia (depending on the stage of WWI). She used to talk about the gypsies, who cried in summer because winter was coming.
Second, my first college girlfriend. She was lefty enough to make me sound like Ronald Reagan in comparison. And she just could not have a good time if she knew that someone, somewhere (say in El Salvador) was unhappy. It was from her that I learned that Jewish mother guilt had nothing on Catholic mother guilt.
Yes, I think philosophically you can boil down the difference between the two camps as Being vs. Becoming, Heidegger vs. Hegel, ontology vs. teleology. The Conservative doesn’t need to become anything; he already is what he needs to be. For the Progressive, life is defined in terms of what one is becoming, and may in some more ideal world be. Everything in the here and now must be judged in terms of its service to an imaginary future.
For most of human history, the second category of people and way of thinking barely existed, and would have been considered rather weird. But in modern times the weirdos have gotten full of themselves and got the crazy idea that they’re the normals and Conservatives are the aberrations – indeed are the Problem they need to solve. But it takes mass indoctrination to keep this idea going; it’s not stable or sustainable, since humanity is in constant “danger” of reverting to its normal way of Being, hence the frequent moral panic on the part of Progressives when history doesn’t seem to be bending the way they think it must. Meanwhile, Conservatives just laugh at these weirdos and try to enjoy their lives despite them (actually some do more than laugh; they get very agitated and become anti-Progressive activists, which is also mistake imo).
Re: "Expertism" (your term - not anyone else's)
If you hire new general contractor to renovate your house and takes over a team of expert drywallers and plumbers and painters who are working on your bathroom, your General Contractor is "ruling" the project. Decision making is his (as your representative).
If the expert plumber tells him that in her expert opinion he can't put the showerhead on an outside wall like he wants because it will freeze in the winter, your GC would be a damn fool to ignore that advice. That doesn't mean that the plumber is now "ruling" the project. It means that she's laying out feasible options (adding more insulation, moving the showerhead, etc). Experts provide advice that should be listened to, they don't "rule".
Congress / President / Voters are ruling the country. But they should take advice as to the consequences of their ideas ... and get reasonable options from experts.
So what our host ... F! it - the "nerd" tribe ... is in favor of is not "Rule" by experts - its rule by the people, who are responsible for their actions, but taking advice as to reasonable options / consequences of decisions from experts.
If you've read any of Brin's books, you'll see those themes - rule by the people - responsibility for our actions - expert advice, showing up over and over again. E.g. the most memorable scene of Existence where Tor and her posse of experts work together to prevent that blimp from {... spoiler}.
Similarly, if your GC tells you he's going to cut the number of skilled trades working on the house by 60 or 75% - including firing all the plumbers - on advice of his buddy who "has lots of common sense, and a can-do attitude, and doesn't raise objections like that annoying bitch of a plumber" .. you'd be very, concerned!
So what our host is railing against is that America's newly hired General Contractor, and his buddies eMusk and Ramaswamy have announced they're going to try to cull all the skill trades running America. He - we - aren't trying to protect "rule" by experts .. we're trying to protect expertise.
Everything in the here and now must be judged in terms of its service to an imaginary future.
For most of human history, the second category of people and way of thinking barely existed, and would have been considered rather weird.
I dunno. To me, that sounds an awful lot like Christianity.
Larry,
A few folks walk away from Omelas, but there's probably a waiting list to get in.
Pappenheimer
Everything in the here and now must be judged in terms of its service to an imaginary future.
No, it's looking at the here and now and saying that while it might be fine for me there are people for whom it isn't and we should do something about that. Now there are those who are too ready to frame an issue in terms of oppression but there are also systematic problems that work against whole groups.
And then there other things which are OK now but won't remain that way unless we do something.
I grant that there is plenty of undervaluing of what has been done already.
I suppose the slowly boiling frog is happy in its pot.
First, I congratulate the planets for somehow aligning - or slse it's vitamins - so that each of Locum, Treebeard and Tacitus offered us far better cogency, today. Relative, of course. Locum: still squirming nonsense, but far better-parsed squirming nonsense. Treebeard's bit was less nasty - but still nasty - tendentiousness...
...and Tacitus (far-better person that he is) offered us an interesting assertion that is well worth arguing with. Which I now (respecting him!) proceed to do.
Left and right tend to be teleologically mystical. The teleology of the left is 'progressive' in the sense of a belief that everything can get a lot more utopian than it is. MARXIST leftists have the scenario all worked out... a scenario that (unlike Marx's excellent historiography of the past) is fundamentally loopy and that FDR and the Greatest Generatiuon GG drove almost to extinction, by inviting the working classes into a flourishing middle class...
... though todays drooling indiot inheritance brats, who know LITERALLY nothing about class or Marx, are busy reviving him by smashing every wisdom of the GGs...
...but even NON-Marxist leftists believe in human improvability. They are caught though, in an emotional bind! If progress is possible then a lot of it has already happened. And for some - not all - their wretchedly-smug nature makes them think: "If we admit a helluva lot of progress has already happened, then peepul will feel less urgency to moke MORE progress."
THAT is why progressives come across as glum, patronizing and mean-minded, never willing to admit "YAY how far we've come! It proves we can do more and save the world!!"
Refusing to do that is the core thing that drove away many blacks/hispanics who know damned well that things are better, now.
If the left's teleology is limitless progress, the right's is CYCLICAL HISTORY. You all have seen me rage at this horrifically vile nonsense, a cult masturbation that all progress is illusion and those who benefited from hero genrations inevitably become soft, decadent fools bringing the next collapse.
https://davidbrin.blogspot.com/2012/10/the-tytler-calumny-is-democracy-hopeless.html
WHY are conservatives happier? You know damned well how satisfying that teleology is, compared to guilt-tripping lefty progress-ism! You are off the hook! No guilt trips or need to save the world. It's all ordained! Just find or build your ark or prepper bunker and all's great. Party on while the guilt-trippers get crushed!
Sorry Tacitus. There's your happiness.
But there is a third force in American life. scientifically -leaning liberals who don't masturbate to either teleology. We are CURIOUS more than we are fearful of facts. And we'll save the world for both of you.
It's time to quote Frank Wilhoit again: "Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit:
There must be in-groups whom the law protectes but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
Or then there's GK Chesterton:
"The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of the Conservatives is to prevent the mistakes from being corrected."
I don't think Tacitus exemplifies the right-wing of that Frank Wilhoit quote or the "The heck with you, Jack; I've got mine," prepper that Dr Brin refers to. He reminds me of no one more than my late father who had an unflagging faith in God and in American institutions, and always expected that everything would eventually work out for the best. He also didn't spend nearly as much time as I do thinking about politics as a force that actually has effects on our personal lives.
And I think that, more than anything else, is the difference in happiness that Tac is talking about. It's not so much liberal vs conservative as it is those who worry about potential threats that are not immediately apparent vs those who don't.
One way of putting it is, "People who worry too much about things that may or may not happen are less happy than those who don't." A different way is, "People who are willfully, blissfully ignorant are happier than those who aren't."
Each of those statements obviously preferences one side over the other. I think a more neutral appraisal is that conservatives' faith allows them to be happier in the present and worrying about the future tomorrow. Liberals tend to worry about the future today.
A health society needs both POVs cooperating.
AND
I'm not sure that happiness dependent on ignoring real danger is entirely a virtue.
I'd love to hear a direct disavowal from Tacitus. Does he, for example, think rich people who commit mass murder by prolonged torture with conspiracy for profit should be punished? For those not paying attention, that would be the executives of W R Grace or Purdue Pharma.
There's a group of trans individuals and their loved ones here in Spokane WA making plans to assist trans people in ID getting out of their increasingly hostile state. This is not a direct result of the 2024 election (although the 2016 election did change the Supreme Court makeup to make any legal challenges to new ID anti-trans laws nearly impossible). However there are likely to be other changes coming to the US that may damage even Tacitus' calm. We'll see what rolls downhill in 2025.
Pappenheimer
(And for those who say 'sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof', I reply, as an old Boy Sprout, 'be prepared'.)
"Don't be anxious, or be nervous..."
Post a Comment