American Politics Is Changing

 

For decades, Democrat politicians have based their campaigns on the idea that capitalism was mean to poor people.  Trickle-down economics doesn’t work.  Poverty and inequality can be cured only through socialism.  The only reason for you to complain that your taxes are too high is if you hate poor people.

Now that Democrats are in charge, and are implementing their preferred policies, we are seeing their impact in real-time.  Particularly on poor people.  Inflation bothers rich people like me, but it’s devastating to those trying to live on $50,000 a year.  Voters are starting to wonder if perhaps, just perhaps, centralized control systems are less humane than Democrats have claimed.  Bernie Sanders is responding to this as one might expect, by demanding expansions of Social Security and Medicare.  But other Democrats are reading the tea leaves differently.

I think that all Democrats can do, at this point, is double down on racism and global warming:  “Ok, our fiscal policies are horrifying.  But if you elect Republicans, they’ll kill black people and destroy Mother Earth!  Do you hate black people?  Do you hate our planet?  No?  Well then, you have no choice but to vote Democrat.  Never mind the economy, the border, European wars, or all those other petty complaints.  You vote on the side of the angels!”  This is an interesting, but fundamental, change to our national discussion.  But wait – there’s more!

Because Democrat policies were obviously destructive, Americans have long been hesitant to put too many Democrats in power.  Bill Clinton was a “New Democrat”.  Barack Obama was a saintly figure above earthly politics.  Joe Biden didn’t campaign on anything – in fact, he didn’t campaign at all.  No Democrat could win running on Democrat policies.

But the Democrat party continued our leftward surge with two institutions:  the media and the Supreme Court.  The media did their best to promote leftism, and the Supreme Court wrote new laws that Congress could never pass.  This worked fairly well, for a long time.

But the internet has created problems for the old media.  Fox News was the first crack in the dam, but The Daily Wire, Powerline, Ricochet, and many others have provided a source of alternative viewpoints that didn’t exist until recently.  Not just conservative viewpoints.  But alternative viewpoints.  People started to think, just a bit.

And the Supreme Court has changed.  It has recently developed an interest in the U.S. Constitution.  Which is obviously a very serious problem for Democrats.

So I look at the Democrats being forced to change their message from hope for a better day, to simply avoiding mean tweets.  And I look at alternative forms of media gaining a foothold.  And I look at a new Supreme Court which seems more interested in our Constitution.

And I think to myself, “The Democrats have a very serious problem, here…”

Of course, my optimism is based on the idea that America selects its leaders via elections.  If that is no longer true, then never mind – forget I said anything.

But if elections resume in the future, then perhaps the Democrats have a problem, and perhaps America has hope.

What do you think?

Are these changes as significant as I suggest?

Is there hope that America can climb out of the hole that we have dug for ourselves?

Perhaps things are changing.  Perhaps there is hope.

What do you think?

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 190 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    It is not being stupid. They are actively evil.

    Henry, you are just blind to that truth, no matter how many times they show it.

     

    I suppose it could be both, right? I mean, there are a lot of Democrats in office. Some of them are undeniably morons, worried about Guam tipping over and stuff like that. Others are obsessed with late-term abortion and letting babies die on abortion clinic tables, which seems pretty evil.

    But I’m not seeing much of a master plan unfolding here. The current darling of the left, the trans movement, is a perfect example of them trying to ride the tiger: they’ve allowed a farcical bit of social engineering to get legs, and now they can’t say a word about it even as normal Americans recoil from transvestite children’s hours and male athletes crushing females in women’s sports. This isn’t working for them, but they can’t back away without becoming a target for the rainbow crybullies.

    Meanwhile, the thugs and grifters of Black Lives Matter are being exposed for what they are. Crime is booming thanks to the left’s fabricated narrative of racist police brutality, and voters are complaining about it. Now Democrats have to figure out how to restore order in their urban hellholes without looking like they’re actually in favor of upholding the law.

    It’s all well and good to imagine sinister master plans unfolding in the dark, but it’s going to be hard to sustain that illusion when and if the sinister masterminds get their heads handed to them on a platter in November 2022 and 2024. The point of being an evil genius is to win — not to have a 6-3 majority tell you that, no, you don’t have a constitutional right to kill babies or arbitrarily regulate gun ownership or carbon emissions. That isn’t winning.

    Villains in movies are expected to be truly evil. That’s how we’re allowed to want to see them destroyed. Villains in real life are more normally human: they’re greedy, selfish, foolish, cowardly, opportunistic, lazy, stupid, mean, petty, vindictive, and vain. Sometimes they’re really evil. Mostly they aren’t. Mostly they’re just very imperfect humans, much like the rest of us.

    • #61
  2. Chuck Coolidge
    Chuck
    @Chuckles

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Cassandro (View Comment):
    They [Democrats] don’t care about appearance or credibility anymore.

    Occam’s Razor: When stupidity is a sufficient explanation, there is no need to have recourse to any other.

    I think a plausible explanation for the current Democratic intransigence is that the left has boxed itself in. They enjoyed having useful idiots in media and the institutions pushing all sorts of progressive narratives, but now it’s gone too far and they’ve discovered that they can’t change direction without their ridiculously extreme base turning on them.

    We got hints of this last election cycle, with a few sensible Democrats observing that they had to move away from “defund the police” and any mention of “socialism,” and that the “summer of love” stuff wasn’t working for them. But one thing the progressive left does well — perhaps the only thing — is protest: no one chants and screams and riots like true-blue leftist activists.

    I don’t think they have a secret plan. I think the Democrats are going to get crushed in November, that they’ll lose the House and the Senate, and that we’ll then have a couple of months of Biden doing what Biden does, which is effectively nothing, while the bureaucracy keeps doing what it does — regulating beyond its mandate — in an increasingly hostile judicial environment and despite an increasingly frustrated electorate.

    I sure do hope you’re correct

    • #62
  3. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    It is not being stupid. They are actively evil.

    Henry, you are just blind to that truth, no matter how many times they show it.

     

    I suppose it could be both, right? I mean, there are a lot of Democrats in office. Some of them are undeniably morons, worried about Guam tipping over and stuff like that. Others are obsessed with late-term abortion and letting babies die on abortion clinic tables, which seems pretty evil.

    But I’m not seeing much of a master plan unfolding here. The current darling of the left, the trans movement, is a perfect example of them trying to ride the tiger: they’ve allowed a farcical bit of social engineering to get legs, and now they can’t say a word about it even as normal Americans recoil from transvestite children’s hours and male athletes crushing females in women’s sports. This isn’t working for them, but they can’t back away without becoming a target for the rainbow crybullies.

    Meanwhile, the thugs and grifters of Black Lives Matter are being exposed for what they are. Crime is booming thanks to the left’s fabricated narrative of racist police brutality, and voters are complaining about it. Now Democrats have to figure out how to restore order in their urban hellholes without looking like they’re actually in favor of upholding the law.

    It’s all well and good to imagine sinister master plans unfolding in the dark, but it’s going to be hard to sustain that illusion when and if the sinister masterminds get their heads handed to them on a platter in November 2022 and 2024. The point of being an evil genius is to win — not to have a 6-3 majority tell you that, no, you don’t have a constitutional right to kill babies or arbitrarily regulate gun ownership or carbon emissions. That isn’t winning.

    Villains in movies are expected to be truly evil. That’s how we’re allowed to want to see them destroyed. Villains in real life are more normally human: they’re greedy, selfish, foolish, cowardly, opportunistic, lazy, stupid, mean, petty, vindictive, and vain. Sometimes they’re really evil. Mostly they aren’t. Mostly they’re just very imperfect humans, much like the rest of us.

    I said nothing about sinister master plans.

    But thanks for dreaming up I said that and spending several paragraphs telling me who wrong that is. 

    In response to these words, maybe you can spend another four paragraphs in smugly  telling me how wrong I am about something else I did n9t say.

    • #63
  4. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    It is not being stupid. They are actively evil.

    Henry, you are just blind to that truth, no matter how many times they show it.

     

    The significance of stupid vs evil may be that a stupid person would occasionally get something right, just by accident.

    • #64
  5. Cassandro Coolidge
    Cassandro
    @Flicker

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Cassandro (View Comment):
    They [Democrats] don’t care about appearance or credibility anymore.

    Occam’s Razor: When stupidity is a sufficient explanation, there is no need to have recourse to any other.

    I think a plausible explanation for the current Democratic intransigence is that the left has boxed itself in. They enjoyed having useful idiots in media and the institutions pushing all sorts of progressive narratives, but now it’s gone too far and they’ve discovered that they can’t change direction without their ridiculously extreme base turning on them.

    We got hints of this last election cycle, with a few sensible Democrats observing that they had to move away from “defund the police” and any mention of “socialism,” and that the “summer of love” stuff wasn’t working for them. But one thing the progressive left does well — perhaps the only thing — is protest: no one chants and screams and riots like true-blue leftist activists.

    I don’t think they have a secret plan. I think the Democrats are going to get crushed in November, that they’ll lose the House and the Senate, and that we’ll then have a couple of months of Biden doing what Biden does, which is effectively nothing, while the bureaucracy keeps doing what it does — regulating beyond its mandate — in an increasingly hostile judicial environment and despite an increasingly frustrated electorate.

    Yes, I see what you’re saying, and everything you say makes sense, and it is likely largely true.  But OTOH and to greatly oversimplify, Occam’s razor is an intellectual construct relying on a personally intellectual world view: every flaw is the result of faulty knowledge, as if asking, Can we do it?  To say that the clearest answer is malice, is a moral construct focusing on moral decision making in which every flaw is a moral failing: people don’t care, they don’t concern themselves with asking, Why not do it?  I think it was Bonhoeffer who said that stupidity is a component of evil, and generally I agree, but regardless of his formulation, he paints stupidity as fundamentally a moral failing.

    (I would say that wisdom is the comingling of intellect and morality.  And I might suppose that the opposite of wisdom might be folly, or a conspiracy of dunces.)

    After reading your comment, I was trying to think of any unfortunate circumstance that takes place in my experience being the result predominantly of a lack of knowledge, and can’t think of any off hand — other than expediency, which is more of a can-we-do-it moral failing.  This doesn’t have to be what you describe as a secret conspiracy, but that they believe that they can, but do not ask, Why not?

    Anyway, my axiom is: There is a point after which repeated incompetence must be reconsidered as malice.  And frankly, things like blocking oil extraction or castrating children does not come from incompetence or stupidity.

    • #65
  6. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    This is all very complicated. The left goes backwards if they aren’t creating more social problems so they can create more non-public goods and justify more government force. (I’m fully open to something being outside that paradigm, but I can’t think of it right now.) 

    They are probably overdoing it unconsciously. That doesn’t mean they can’t make it “work” later.

    It hurts my head. 

    • #66
  7. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    This is all very complicated. The left goes backwards if they aren’t creating more social problems so they can create more non-public goods and justify more government force. (I’m fully open to something being outside that paradigm, but I can’t think of it right now.)

    They are probably overdoing it unconsciously. That doesn’t mean they can’t make it “work” later.

    It hurts my head.

    I see only two extreme possibilities. Either leftists/progressives are evil geniuses, or they are naive fools. The institute a policy that has negative effects apparent to anyone with clear vision. When the negative effects occur, a sensible person would reverse the policy that caused the effects, but leftists/progressives will leave the policy in place and institute another policy to address the negative effects, say sending out checks to help pay for the higher gasoline prices that their stupid policies caused. Are they evil, ignorant, or both? 

    • #67
  8. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Django (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    This is all very complicated. The left goes backwards if they aren’t creating more social problems so they can create more non-public goods and justify more government force. (I’m fully open to something being outside that paradigm, but I can’t think of it right now.)

    They are probably overdoing it unconsciously. That doesn’t mean they can’t make it “work” later.

    It hurts my head.

    I see only two extreme possibilities. Either leftists/progressives are evil geniuses, or they are naive fools. The institute a policy that has negative effects apparent to anyone with clear vision. When the negative effects occur, a sensible person would reverse the policy that caused the effects, but leftists/progressives will leave the policy in place and institute another policy to address the negative effects, say sending out checks to help pay for the higher gasoline prices that their stupid policies caused. Are they evil, ignorant, or both?

    All of these things create a feedback loop that doesn’t get interdicted that much in my opinion. People use it and government to steal from each other and they are stupid not to do it, or it’s just an opportunity for more central planning and fewer Republicans in power.

    Here is where I start babbling about Austrian stuff and it makes people really mad  or makes them board. lol 

    The bond market collapse is going to fix all of this the hard way.

    • #68
  9. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    This is all very complicated. The left goes backwards if they aren’t creating more social problems so they can create more non-public goods and justify more government force. (I’m fully open to something being outside that paradigm, but I can’t think of it right now.)

    They are probably overdoing it unconsciously. That doesn’t mean they can’t make it “work” later.

    It hurts my head.

    I see only two extreme possibilities. Either leftists/progressives are evil geniuses, or they are naive fools. The institute a policy that has negative effects apparent to anyone with clear vision. When the negative effects occur, a sensible person would reverse the policy that caused the effects, but leftists/progressives will leave the policy in place and institute another policy to address the negative effects, say sending out checks to help pay for the higher gasoline prices that their stupid policies caused. Are they evil, ignorant, or both?

    All of these things create a feedback loop that doesn’t get interdicted that much in my opinion. People use it and government to steal from each other and they are stupid not to do it, or it’s just an opportunity for more central planning and fewer Republicans in power.

    Here is where I start babbling about Austrian stuff and it makes people really mad or makes them board. lol

    The bond market collapse is going to fix all of this the hard way.

    “Feedback loop” is a good way to describe the process. 

    • #69
  10. navyjag Coolidge
    navyjag
    @navyjag

    Django (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    This is all very complicated. The left goes backwards if they aren’t creating more social problems so they can create more non-public goods and justify more government force. (I’m fully open to something being outside that paradigm, but I can’t think of it right now.)

    They are probably overdoing it unconsciously. That doesn’t mean they can’t make it “work” later.

    It hurts my head.

    I see only two extreme possibilities. Either leftists/progressives are evil geniuses, or they are naive fools. The institute a policy that has negative effects apparent to anyone with clear vision. When the negative effects occur, a sensible person would reverse the policy that caused the effects, but leftists/progressives will leave the policy in place and institute another policy to address the negative effects, say sending out checks to help pay for the higher gasoline prices that their stupid policies caused. Are they evil, ignorant, or both?

    Good post DJ. I think we vote for No. 2. These folks are not real immersed in history of the Soviet Union, China, Venezueala etc. Too much time studying about gender stuff. If they prevail, hopefully not, will find out real quick, when in a line to buy bread or gasoline. 

    • #70
  11. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Django (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    This is all very complicated. The left goes backwards if they aren’t creating more social problems so they can create more non-public goods and justify more government force. (I’m fully open to something being outside that paradigm, but I can’t think of it right now.)

    They are probably overdoing it unconsciously. That doesn’t mean they can’t make it “work” later.

    It hurts my head.

    I see only two extreme possibilities. Either leftists/progressives are evil geniuses, or they are naive fools. The institute a policy that has negative effects apparent to anyone with clear vision. When the negative effects occur, a sensible person would reverse the policy that caused the effects, but leftists/progressives will leave the policy in place and institute another policy to address the negative effects, say sending out checks to help pay for the higher gasoline prices that their stupid policies caused. Are they evil, ignorant, or both?

    All of these things create a feedback loop that doesn’t get interdicted that much in my opinion. People use it and government to steal from each other and they are stupid not to do it, or it’s just an opportunity for more central planning and fewer Republicans in power.

    Here is where I start babbling about Austrian stuff and it makes people really mad or makes them board. lol

    The bond market collapse is going to fix all of this the hard way.

    “Feedback loop” is a good way to describe the process.

    I make people really mad when I keep repeating that stuff, but I don’t see how it’s wrong.  Libertarians and conservatives are going to be swimming upstream way too much unless they appreciate some realities. 

    What institution is in a position to play it straight to help our side? None outside of talk radio and the Supreme Court. Zero. Then the process just feeds back on itself.

     

    • #71
  12. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    I said nothing about sinister master plans.

    But thanks for dreaming up I said that and spending several paragraphs telling me who wrong that is. 

    In response to these words, maybe you can spend another four paragraphs in smugly  telling me how wrong I am about something else I did n9t say.

    Bryan, if you’ll go all the way back to comment #58, you’ll see that you jumped into a conversation that was, in fact, about the Democrats having a sinister master plan: that they no longer care about even the appearance of legitimacy because, as VTK said in #38, “It’s like they know it won’t matter because the fix is in.” I was continuing that conversation. I responded to you simply because you threw in a snarky critique of my own thoughtfulness and insight (which you are entirely welcome to do, as we’re all adults here who can stand a bit of snark).

    Speaking specifically about your stupid versus evil comment, I think you’re mistaken. I think this business of demonizing the opposition, of imagining that the only reason people would hold ideas that seem anathema to us is that they’re evil, is a trap that prevents us from communicating with and even understanding the opposition. I think foolishness and greed explain most of what’s wrong with the country, and I don’t think those are defects only evil people possess — nor even, frankly, that there are all that many evil people in positions of power.

    Yes, there are people who are, by any reasonable definition of the word, evil. And a few of them are undoubtedly in high office. But I don’t think the dummies who are convinced we have to cut carbon emissions to the bone to avoid a world-consuming conflagration are evil. I think they’re ignorant, and panicky, and irrational, and not very good at thinking and weighing risk. (I think that about a lot of people, actually.) But I don’t think most of them are evil.

    There. I told you why I think you’re wrong about something you did say.

    • #72
  13. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Chuck (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Cassandro (View Comment):
    They [Democrats] don’t care about appearance or credibility anymore.

    Occam’s Razor: When stupidity is a sufficient explanation, there is no need to have recourse to any other.

    I think a plausible explanation for the current Democratic intransigence is that the left has boxed itself in. They enjoyed having useful idiots in media and the institutions pushing all sorts of progressive narratives, but now it’s gone too far and they’ve discovered that they can’t change direction without their ridiculously extreme base turning on them.

    We got hints of this last election cycle, with a few sensible Democrats observing that they had to move away from “defund the police” and any mention of “socialism,” and that the “summer of love” stuff wasn’t working for them. But one thing the progressive left does well — perhaps the only thing — is protest: no one chants and screams and riots like true-blue leftist activists.

    I don’t think they have a secret plan. I think the Democrats are going to get crushed in November, that they’ll lose the House and the Senate, and that we’ll then have a couple of months of Biden doing what Biden does, which is effectively nothing, while the bureaucracy keeps doing what it does — regulating beyond its mandate — in an increasingly hostile judicial environment and despite an increasingly frustrated electorate.

    I sure do hope you’re correct

    Me too.

    If I’m not, and if there is some kind of coordinated conspiracy on the left, I think it’s more than a little amusing that President Donald J. Trump managed to so mess up their schemes that, thanks to him, the most important Supreme Court victory in the history of the progressive movement has just been undone.

    I mean, it’s as if Ernst Stavro Blofeld’s master plan was just exposed and defeated by Inspector Jacques Clouseau.

    • #73
  14. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    I said nothing about sinister master plans.

    But thanks for dreaming up I said that and spending several paragraphs telling me who wrong that is.

    In response to these words, maybe you can spend another four paragraphs in smugly telling me how wrong I am about something else I did n9t say.

    Bryan, if you’ll go all the way back to comment #58, you’ll see that you jumped into a conversation that was, in fact, about the Democrats having a sinister master plan: that they no longer care about even the appearance of legitimacy because, as VTK said in #38, “It’s like they know it won’t matter because the fix is in.” I was continuing that conversation. I responded to you simply because you threw in a snarky critique of my own thoughtfulness and insight (which you are entirely welcome to do, as we’re all adults here who can stand a bit of snark).

    Speaking specifically about your stupid versus evil comment, I think you’re mistaken. I think this business of demonizing the opposition, of imagining that the only reason people would hold ideas that seem anathema to us is that they’re evil, is a trap that prevents us from communicating with and even understanding the opposition. I think foolishness and greed explain most of what’s wrong with the country, and I don’t think those are defects only evil people possess — nor even, frankly, that there are all that many evil people in positions of power.

     

     Cancel culture is a dress rehearsal for genocide. Anyone, anyone, who wants to suppress the speech of another is engaged in evil. That is not demonizing the opposition. 

    However, saying that it is typical of your smugness. You feel that you have  Lock on being oh so rational and reasonable. Anyone responding to the evil of the left with emotion is less than you, not as noble a man, not guided by reason. It is a tiresome stance, and you take it endlessly, like you are somehow our wise old teacher, and we, who are alarmed, are just misguided children. It is as patronizing as any Never Trumper, or someone of the left who thinks he is my better.

     

    The Left does not want to talk. They have nothing but will to power. I defy you to point to anyone on the left willing to talk. 

    Yes, there are people who are, by any reasonable definition of the word, evil. And a few of them are undoubtedly in high office. But I don’t think the dummies who are convinced we have to cut carbon emissions to the bone to avoid a world-consuming conflagration are evil. I think they’re ignorant, and panicky, and irrational, and not very good at thinking and weighing risk. (I think that about a lot of people, actually.) But I don’t think most of them are evil.

    There. I told you why I think you’re wrong about something you did say.

    I did not say that paragraph.  I did say nothing on climate change. I said people on the left are not stupid, they are evil. Have you missed the riots, sir? Have you missed that attacks? Have you missed the increase in murders? The intimidation of justuces? The buring of pregnancy centers? The thrreast? The actually shooting of GOP members? That is stupidity? The left has fomented it. They call for it. They encourage it. 

    I’ll adress climate change. Brown outs kill people. There are dead people thanks to leftist polices. People are starving in Sri Lanka thanks t9 these polices. The people enacting them are not stupid. They have high IQs. They are evil. Evil and you refuse, you refuse to see it, and whe we call the out, you sit in judgement of people like me, as if you are better than I am, because I am appalled, and to you, it is no big deal.

    I refuse, Sir, to accept that. 

    • #74
  15. Cassandro Coolidge
    Cassandro
    @Flicker

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    I said nothing about sinister master plans.

    But thanks for dreaming up I said that and spending several paragraphs telling me who wrong that is.

    In response to these words, maybe you can spend another four paragraphs in smugly telling me how wrong I am about something else I did n9t say.

    Bryan, if you’ll go all the way back to comment #58, you’ll see that you jumped into a conversation that was, in fact, about the Democrats having a sinister master plan: that they no longer care about even the appearance of legitimacy because, as VTK said in #38, “It’s like they know it won’t matter because the fix is in.” I was continuing that conversation. I responded to you simply because you threw in a snarky critique of my own thoughtfulness and insight (which you are entirely welcome to do, as we’re all adults here who can stand a bit of snark).

    Speaking specifically about your stupid versus evil comment, I think you’re mistaken. I think this business of demonizing the opposition, of imagining that the only reason people would hold ideas that seem anathema to us is that they’re evil, is a trap that prevents us from communicating with and even understanding the opposition. I think foolishness and greed explain most of what’s wrong with the country, and I don’t think those are defects only evil people possess — nor even, frankly, that there are all that many evil people in positions of power.

    Yes, there are people who are, by any reasonable definition of the word, evil. And a few of them are undoubtedly in high office. But I don’t think the dummies who are convinced we have to cut carbon emissions to the bone to avoid a world-consuming conflagration are evil. I think they’re ignorant, and panicky, and irrational, and not very good at thinking and weighing risk. (I think that about a lot of people, actually.) But I don’t think most of them are evil.

    There. I told you why I think you’re wrong about something you did say.

    Evil is more than just really, really bad.  It’s a fundamental spiritual rebellion against God.  If one doesn’t believe in the supernatural, then, yes, all is incompetence or ignorance, and evil is just a convenient descriptor of really, really bad.

    • #75
  16. Cassandro Coolidge
    Cassandro
    @Flicker

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    I mean, it’s as if Ernst Stavro Blofeld’s master plan was just exposed and defeated by Inspector Jacques Clouseau.

    You see?  You keep making an exaggerated cartoon out of “evil”.

    • #76
  17. Cassandro Coolidge
    Cassandro
    @Flicker

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    All of these things create a feedback loop that doesn’t get interdicted that much in my opinion. People use it and government to steal from each other and they are stupid not to do it, or it’s just an opportunity for more central planning and fewer Republicans in power.

    It’s more like a spiral.  You don’t ever come back to the same spot.

    • #77
  18. Cassandro Coolidge
    Cassandro
    @Flicker

    navyjag (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    This is all very complicated. The left goes backwards if they aren’t creating more social problems so they can create more non-public goods and justify more government force. (I’m fully open to something being outside that paradigm, but I can’t think of it right now.)

    They are probably overdoing it unconsciously. That doesn’t mean they can’t make it “work” later.

    It hurts my head.

    I see only two extreme possibilities. Either leftists/progressives are evil geniuses, or they are naive fools. The institute a policy that has negative effects apparent to anyone with clear vision. When the negative effects occur, a sensible person would reverse the policy that caused the effects, but leftists/progressives will leave the policy in place and institute another policy to address the negative effects, say sending out checks to help pay for the higher gasoline prices that their stupid policies caused. Are they evil, ignorant, or both?

    Good post DJ. I think we vote for No. 2. These folks are not real immersed in history of the Soviet Union, China, Venezueala etc. Too much time studying about gender stuff. If they prevail, hopefully not, will find out real quick, when in a line to buy bread or gasoline.

    That’s the thing that indicates to me, that this is not just incompetence.  Knowledge of Communist societal and economic destruction followed by starvation and then mass deaths is ubiquitous.

    I simply can’t believe that those in power are not fully aware of this process, or at the very least strongly advised by those who are.

    This is rudimentary political science.

    • #78
  19. Randy Weivoda Moderator
    Randy Weivoda
    @RandyWeivoda

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):
    However, saying that it is typical of your smugness. You feel that you have  Lock on being oh so rational and reasonable. Anyone responding to the evil of the left with emotion is less than you, not as noble a man, not guided by reason. It is a tiresome stance, and you take it endlessly, like you are somehow our wise old teacher, and we, who are alarmed, are just misguided children. It is as patronizing as any Never Trumper, or someone of the left who thinks he is my better.

    I think, Bryan, that you are reading a whole lot more condescension into Henry’s comments than he is actually writing.  He is disagreeing with you, not attacking you.

    • #79
  20. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    navyjag (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    This is all very complicated. The left goes backwards if they aren’t creating more social problems so they can create more non-public goods and justify more government force. (I’m fully open to something being outside that paradigm, but I can’t think of it right now.)

    They are probably overdoing it unconsciously. That doesn’t mean they can’t make it “work” later.

    It hurts my head.

    I see only two extreme possibilities. Either leftists/progressives are evil geniuses, or they are naive fools. The institute a policy that has negative effects apparent to anyone with clear vision. When the negative effects occur, a sensible person would reverse the policy that caused the effects, but leftists/progressives will leave the policy in place and institute another policy to address the negative effects, say sending out checks to help pay for the higher gasoline prices that their stupid policies caused. Are they evil, ignorant, or both?

    Good post DJ. I think we vote for No. 2. These folks are not real immersed in history of the Soviet Union, China, Venezueala etc. Too much time studying about gender stuff. If they prevail, hopefully not, will find out real quick, when in a line to buy bread or gasoline.

    That’s the thing that indicates to me, that this is not just incompetence. Knowledge of Communist societal and economic destruction followed by starvation and then mass deaths is ubiquitous.

    I simply can’t believe that those in power are not fully aware of this process, or at the very least strongly advised by those who are.

    This is rudimentary political science.

    Naivete and ignorance are frequently accompanied by arrogance. You know, it just hasn’t been done properly because they had the wrong people in charge. We’re the “ones we’ve been waiting for”, and we know better. We’ll get it right! No more hesitation. It’s our time. 

    • #80
  21. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Randy Weivoda (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):
    However, saying that it is typical of your smugness. You feel that you have Lock on being oh so rational and reasonable. Anyone responding to the evil of the left with emotion is less than you, not as noble a man, not guided by reason. It is a tiresome stance, and you take it endlessly, like you are somehow our wise old teacher, and we, who are alarmed, are just misguided children. It is as patronizing as any Never Trumper, or someone of the left who thinks he is my better.

    I think, Bryan, that you are reading a whole lot more condescension into Henry’s comments than he is actually writing. He is disagreeing with you, not attacking you.

    Randy, in fairness, I thought Bryan was pretty much spot-on. I don’t find his celebration of righteous anger all that compelling, but I can be pretty insufferable. And, honestly, the sad reality is that I do often feel like the wise old teacher talking to a bunch of high-spirited but not entirely rational people: that is, I’m in semi-permanent dad mode.

    • #81
  22. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Randy Weivoda (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):
    However, saying that it is typical of your smugness. You feel that you have Lock on being oh so rational and reasonable. Anyone responding to the evil of the left with emotion is less than you, not as noble a man, not guided by reason. It is a tiresome stance, and you take it endlessly, like you are somehow our wise old teacher, and we, who are alarmed, are just misguided children. It is as patronizing as any Never Trumper, or someone of the left who thinks he is my better.

    I think, Bryan, that you are reading a whole lot more condescension into Henry’s comments than he is actually writing. He is disagreeing with you, not attacking you.

    Randy, in fairness, I thought Bryan was pretty much spot-on. I don’t find his celebration of righteous anger all that compelling, but I can be pretty insufferable. And, honestly, the sad reality is that I do often feel like the wise old teacher talking to a bunch of high-spirited but not entirely rational people: that is, I’m in semi-permanent dad mode.

    Not a celebration. Just reality.

    And, I know the smartest guy in the room games when I see it.

    • #82
  23. Dr. Bastiat Member
    Dr. Bastiat
    @drbastiat

    Randy Weivoda (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):
    However, saying that it is typical of your smugness. You feel that you have Lock on being oh so rational and reasonable. Anyone responding to the evil of the left with emotion is less than you, not as noble a man, not guided by reason. It is a tiresome stance, and you take it endlessly, like you are somehow our wise old teacher, and we, who are alarmed, are just misguided children. It is as patronizing as any Never Trumper, or someone of the left who thinks he is my better.

    I think, Bryan, that you are reading a whole lot more condescension into Henry’s comments than he is actually writing. He is disagreeing with you, not attacking you.

    I agree, Randy. 

    • #83
  24. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Dr. Bastiat (View Comment):

    Randy Weivoda (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):
    However, saying that it is typical of your smugness. You feel that you have Lock on being oh so rational and reasonable. Anyone responding to the evil of the left with emotion is less than you, not as noble a man, not guided by reason. It is a tiresome stance, and you take it endlessly, like you are somehow our wise old teacher, and we, who are alarmed, are just misguided children. It is as patronizing as any Never Trumper, or someone of the left who thinks he is my better.

    I think, Bryan, that you are reading a whole lot more condescension into Henry’s comments than he is actually writing. He is disagreeing with you, not attacking you.

    I agree, Randy.

    But, Henry does not.

    • #84
  25. Cassandro Coolidge
    Cassandro
    @Flicker

    Django (View Comment):

    Cassandro (View Comment):

    navyjag (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    They are probably overdoing it unconsciously. That doesn’t mean they can’t make it “work” later.

    It hurts my head.

    I see only two extreme possibilities. Either leftists/progressives are evil geniuses, or they are naive fools. The institute a policy that has negative effects apparent to anyone with clear vision. When the negative effects occur, a sensible person would reverse the policy that caused the effects, but leftists/progressives will leave the policy in place and institute another policy to address the negative effects, say sending out checks to help pay for the higher gasoline prices that their stupid policies caused. Are they evil, ignorant, or both?

    Good post DJ. I think we vote for No. 2. These folks are not real immersed in history of the Soviet Union, China, Venezueala etc. Too much time studying about gender stuff. If they prevail, hopefully not, will find out real quick, when in a line to buy bread or gasoline.

    That’s the thing that indicates to me, that this is not just incompetence. Knowledge of Communist societal and economic destruction followed by starvation and then mass deaths is ubiquitous.

    I simply can’t believe that those in power are not fully aware of this process, or at the very least strongly advised by those who are.

    This is rudimentary political science.

    Naivete and ignorance are frequently accompanied by arrogance. You know, it just hasn’t been done properly because they had the wrong people in charge. We’re the “ones we’ve been waiting for”, and we know better. We’ll get it right! No more hesitation. It’s our time.

    If all the country had an IQ below a hundred I suppose I could agree with you.  But even an IQ of 100 +/- 10 points can run a fairly decent auto shop.  And though I take my cars to guys who do the work right the first time, they are like everyone else in that they started out with basic knowledge and got better through experience to a point of expertise.

    If the country were run only by lawyers and poli-sci majors (and maybe it is) perhaps I could see ignorance and arrogance being the problem.  But this country has gotten along pretty darn well until, say, 2008, when suddenly every decision and initiative that could be made wrong, was made wrong.  I find it impossible to believe that so much wildly fantastic incompetence could come to power so completely in media, social sciences, entertainment, big tech, pharmacology and epidemiology, and finance so quickly.  For pete’s sake, we are castrating our own children.  To save the earth from extinction??

    Yes, it could be a perfect storm of coincidence, but the simplest answer is that it is malice.  In contrast to to Rufus’ comment, this answer doesn’t make my head hurt.

    • #85
  26. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Cassandro (View Comment):
    Yes, it could be a perfect storm of coincidence, but the simplest answer is that it is malice.  In contrast to to Rufus’ comment, this answer doesn’t make my head hurt.

    One of the problems I have with that perspective is that I find it hard to apply in individual cases in my own life.

    There are a lot of things very broken in America. I think the “trans” movement is awful, a deeply misguided, deeply destructive farce. But I know young ladies, children of friends, who are convinced that they are not in fact young women, but rather something else — male, or “trans,” or fluid, or whatever the hell their dopey friends on Tik Tok have told them is cool. I have a hard time identifying the malicious force leading these young women astray — just as I did when the unhealthy obsession was self-cutting, or anorexia, or whichever social contagion strikes their fancy.

    Similarly, I have good friends who are committed to alternative energy and carbon controls, even though I think it’s another misguided and ultimately destructive effort.

    Abortion, open borders, alternative energy, trans, minimum wage regulation, BLM, socialized medicine: all of these things have champions among the people I know, but none of those people are people whom I think are malicious, nor are they obviously under the influence of other people who are malicious.

    What I think they are are people who don’t have a sound foundation in ideas, and who are too quick to react emotionally to policy questions and spend little or no time considering how people and reality actually work.

    It’s more satisfying to see evil actors behind bad outcomes, and sometimes it’s even correct. But I don’t think it’s usually correct.

    The problem with too quickly adopting that position is the same as the problem with blaming the poor socioeconomic performance of young black men on systemic racism. It masks the real problem by invoking a hypothetical malicious actor — or, in the case of systemic racism, a whole system of malicious actors — and prevents people from owning their own foolishness and bad choices. And, as long as we focus our attention on these mythical villains, we fail to help people to start making better choices and to help them take responsibility for themselves.

    None of which is to say that evil doesn’t exist. I think there are people who wish to do damage and cause harm as an end goal, and I think that’s evil. But I think they’re rare, compared to those who are just cutting deals, pandering to mobs, and otherwise cheating their way ahead.

    • #86
  27. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    It has nothing to do with satisfaction. It has to do with understanding men are evil.

    • #87
  28. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    Cassandro (View Comment):
    But this country has gotten along pretty darn well until, say, 2008, when suddenly every decision and initiative that could be made wrong, was made wrong.  I find it impossible to believe that so much wildly fantastic incompetence could come to power so completely in media, social sciences, entertainment, big tech, pharmacology and epidemiology, and finance so quickly.

    That is what has my head spinning. It is as if the termites had been gnawing away at the foundations all along, and 2008 was the point at which the collapse began. 

    • #88
  29. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    It has nothing to do with satisfaction. It has to do with understanding men are evil.

    Fair enough. But I don’t believe that men are evil. I believe that a few men are evil and a few men are gloriously good and the vast majority are in between, and simply human.

    • #89
  30. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Bryan G. Stephens (View Comment):

    It has nothing to do with satisfaction. It has to do with understanding men are evil.

    Fair enough. But I don’t believe that men are evil. I believe that a few men are evil and a few men are gloriously good and the vast majority are in between, and simply human.

    There in, we disagree. We are all evil and good. Each of us has the capacity for both. Every day we choose, and sorry to say, when we sin we choose evil.

    Evil does not need a big EVIL to succeed. Indeed, it is in small acts that evil really gets done. One would think k someone as smart as you would get that, but I guess not. You think people are basically good.

     

     

    True conservatives know better.

    • #90
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.