Signifyin(g)Monkey

Interrupting this stream of nuanced and substantive debate to remind us all that liberals are not the only ones making stupid public gestures that reduce it all to ‘Team A good, Team B bad!’ (okay, maybe you didn’t need reminding, but whatever) Exhibit #1, from our favorite Orban wannabe.

There are a number of sociopolitical issues whose moral complexity makes them particularly unsuited for the mindless chauvinism of our ‘hot takes’ culture, and this is definitely one of them.

I know quite a few Trump-fans from both traditionally Democratic and traditionally Republican backgrounds, and over the years the diagnosis of their support’s unshakability I’ve formed is that it boils down to a kind of political nihilism. They believe the whole system of politics is rigged against them and rotten to the core, and Trump’s norm-breaking behavior and his tendency to insult and degrade other politicians on both sides of the aisle endears him to them. They instinctually believe, owing to this nihilism, that the attacks and allegations against Trump are the concoctions of the corrupt elites who control levers of traditional political power. That’s why his crimes and antics only strengthen their support. That’s one half of it. The other half is much less complex—namely, that Trump’s vulgar outbursts give them the kind of basic, juvenile thrill that people get from the act of trolling. You know the kind of sophomoric hahas people get from leaving an over-the-top incendiary comment in the comments section of a YouTube video that gets 10,000x more replies than the more thoughtful, nuanced takes? Yeah, Trump basically continually supplies them with that kind of dopamine hit, and it’s very addictive, particularly to people consumed by political cynicism. There is a touch of the whole ‘woke backlash’ sentiment, but it’s an ancillary aspect of their support, not an essential one. That’s why they don’t abandon Trump for pols like DeSantis. One more confirmation that we’re in late empire stage. (“Augustus who? Nevermind, I don’t care, Rome is a shitshow these days anyways; just put a clown on the throne. At least that would be funny.”)

The algorithm my friend…it’s watching you…the faster you click, the more it thinks you want more…

The guiding principles of Japan and German nationalism were more secular in character, too, and thus I would argue easier to reform through purely economic incentives. Islamic jihadist ideology won't be as responsive, IMO, because it focuses less on the here and now and more on the divine afterlife, to which economic logic doesn't really apply. Basically, the Palestinians not only need better economic prospects, but also IMO something of a religious reformation, if we really want a Japan or German-style pacification to occur. Outside parties can help with the former, but the latter has to come from inside the faith. Although better economic prospects would probably make a reformation more possible than conditions of perpetual squalor. The most peaceful and tolerant forms of Islam appear mostly in economically healthy countries, after all--but then many of its militant forms do, too. It's complicated.

So how credible is the claim that one of the main motives behind Hamas’s campaign is a (probably Iran-backed) drive to stop the possible normalization of Israeli-Saudi relations that had seemed to slowly be coming to fruition? I’ve heard the idea bandied about a lot but admittedly have been paying marginal attention to negotiations between the Israelis and the Saudis lately. (I kind of just assume any manner of ‘peace’ or ‘normalization’ initiatives in this region are inevitably doomed nowadays, even though I hope to be wrong someday)

It seems to be turning into political economy's African version of the Argentinian anomaly--rich, developed state gets stuck in a perpetual quagmire and degenerates into a less rich, developed state. It's puzzling. And it just shows what happens when you don't have a strong middle class. Non-authoritarian states truly do need a normal distribution of outcomes amongst their citizenry to function properly. Whodathunkit?

I think the Texas Republican platform technically has election denialism written into it, too, atm. Slowly but surely, the party’s getting ready to end American democracy. It’s kind of bizarre how blasé 49% of the country seems to be about it.

Very much like Ukraine, the information warfare aspect of this conflict is going to be interesting. (and horrifying and depressing, etc.). Biden’s already on record citing a story about Palestinian militants beheading children that was completely manufactured. Western society is totally not ready for social media to be weaponized as an organ of war propaganda on a mass scale…and it already is…

I found Yuval Noah Harari’s take on the ‘moral maze’ of the current conflict to be particularly thoughtful:

Interesting read in Der SPIEGEL on South Africa’s descent into failed state status. It will be really interesting to see how the generation that is growing up now having never experienced apartheid reckons with the situation. I wonder how common (or uncommon) the outlook expressed by the youngster cited at the end of the article is. Also, am I the only one who can see the US careening towards this kind of dysfunction, just at a slower pace?

To me this looks like the escalation conundrum in action. This is a more organized, more large-scale, more ‘professional espionage’-esque operation on the part of Hamas militants than the usual ad hoc acts of terrorism we’re used to from them. It’s so organized and wide-reaching, in fact, that it resembles…the disproportionately destructive IDF offensives that have been repeatedly executed in retaliation for said acts of terrorism. I can sort of see this as Hamas trying to ‘play at Israel’s level.’ Unfortunately we all know Israel’s response is likely going to be to ‘take things to the next level’ in the counteroffensive. In their mind it’s crucial that the warfare remains asymmetric. Consequently the level of hopelessness and despair I feel whenever I read or hear about new developments in this conflict has likewise escalated.

Private schools should be an option doe—but they should receive zero state subsidies. Current kludge of a system doesn’t even make sense from the perspective of industrial capital, which has to price the cost of education into its wages, making it less competitive internationally. The only entity gaining from it is finance capital. But then guess who has the industrialists (and the courts) by the balls these days…

It really does amaze me how bad the Democrats are at messaging sometimes, too. Sometimes it feels like it’s deliberate. Want to call out the strong support for Trump amongst racist/sexist right-wing groups? Call everyone who’s not 100% in your camp already a ‘deplorable’. Want a stronger welfare state with more robust state provision of basic needs to help everyone? Call it ‘socialism’, so it can be tethered to the totalitarianism of the Cold War’s communist bloc. Want to reform the police force so it’s less militarized and focused on community safety rather than constantly engaged in ‘the war on [insert illegal behavior]’? Say you’re gonna ‘defund the police’. Want to build a coalition of blue-collar workers, the youth vote, and minorities? Assume you’ve got a lock on the first, and that the third is a monolith that will automatically vote for you if you label your opponent as a racist. Like…it’s just criminal strategic ineptitude. I would also add ‘let’s force out the blue dogs from the party and not allow any local variation or dissent on some issues like gun control’ to those other mis-steps, but that’s a more controversial one. Either way, it’s aggravating to constantly watch the party shoot itself in the foot and alienate constituencies it’s aligned with, especially now that so much of the GOP has gone totally off the deep end.

Pretty historic. I don’t think any president’s picketed with the unions before. Teddy Roosevelt invited the Coal Miners to the White House, but I believe that’s the closest analog we have.

A sharply rising dollar will do a bit of the work for him as well.

Can confirm—true libertarians and anarchists are usually suspicious of all institutional power, and I can sympathize and respect that even if I don’t agree with them on particular issues. Straight-up movement conservatives (and *especially* evangelical conservatives) often think wielding institutional power over people is fine, even to a totalitarian or quasi-totalitarian degree, so long as that power is wielded in the name of right-wing notions of ‘traditional morality’. It’s not a view I can really respect—too fascist-adjacent. With them I just try to not talk politics. Fortunately I’ve found many of them to be quite friendly if you stay away from the subject. I can also usually have a reasonable political conversation with business conservatives who are liberal on social issues (or just indifferent to them) but conservative on economic ones. In a center-right country like the US I’d rather have the spokespeople of capital be tolerant of minorities and subcultures than abusive towards them. (Interestingly enough, most of the anarchists I know criticize me for that—they usually see said tolerance as a ploy by capital to pacify the people they oppress and stave off the revolution lol)

I distinctly remember a ton of friends and family of both (center-) left and right persuasion saying during the 2016 race “can’t we just have Romney back?” You never appreciate moderate opposition until it’s gone. Curiously enough I also remember all my far left (communist/left-anarchist) friends being very pro-Trump on accelerationist grounds. (and because they consider left-centrists to be their greatest enemies) They at least got part of what they wanted.

We’re clearly living in the end times. Except it might just be climate change.

I’ll actually speak up briefly in (limited) defense of contrarian viewpoints. Granted, I don’t think it’s good to be contrarian just for the sake of being contrarian. But I view contrarians as sort of the disciplinarians of discourse. They often help discourage you from falling into groupthink, and force you to keep the foundations of your views and beliefs sound and well-defended. Even if they’re ultimately wrong, they can serve a useful role. There are limits, of course; too much contrarianism is counterproductive. And it can be hard to distinguish between a sincere contrarian take and an attempt at trolling. But I do think there is a difference, and that the former can be useful—at the proper dosage. All said in full recognition that it’s SFLU’s forum, and he gets to make the call at the end of the day.

Seconded. Also my dog had a heart attack last night and is pretty much at death’s door. Double gut-punch. I just can’t take anymore loss this week. And it’s only f*cking Tuesday.

Interesting that Ramaswamy stands out as a target. I agree with bm_bm_bm that he would probably be the best General election candidate for the GOP. Seems I'm not the only one. Of course, it's highly improbable he gets the nomination, but what the hell does 'highly improbable' mean nowadays, when you've got an orange-skinned quadruple-indicted insurrectionist sex offender (who paid a porn star to keep quiet about their affair) with an overwhelming lead amongst the party that styles itself as the defender of 'traditional moral values', and in a dead heat in the polls with the sitting president? So far the 2020s are shaping up to be the decade of improbable realities. Anyway, I still maintain an early primary upset against Trump could give someone else a shot at toppling him. That sounds quixotic, but momentum is the key to winning races, and we live in a quixotic world now.

Not interested unless it looks like this

You really couldn’t blame the Japanese for thinking they could hold out and win the day. At that point they hadn’t lost a war for literally two millennia. I’m open to the idea that the only way you convince an opponent who hasn’t been defeated in 2000 years that they ought to surrender to you is to show them you literally have the power to cause Armageddon. But that doesn’t mean it wasn’t also a power trip for many of the military leaders involved, with a little racial fear of the ‘Yellow Menace’ at work, too.