ealluia.bsky.social
8,571 posts
979 followers
45 following
Discussion Master
comment in response to
post
I think there are both right and left wing subcultures where radicalism is taken as a sign of piety. That's a terrible trait to have as it creates a constant feedback loop of radicalism. The difference is the right-wing versions are larger and more powerful.
comment in response to
post
I think the strong reply here is that part of what is happening around the world involves US global cultural power. Our far right online culture is showing up in all sorts of places. It's intermingling with international equivalents and creating new iterations, but the US pulls the hardest.
comment in response to
post
Despite Americans being better educated than just about ever, they decided that historical levels of being uneducated in white Americans is what explains the rise of the far right. This is backwards and also ignores the global context.
comment in response to
post
They signaled out white Americans specifically as the poorly educated ones, probably because they have the common quirk where they think it is Ok to say something disparaging about a group if you put "white" in front of it. Americans are fairly well-educated, more so than they were in the past.
comment in response to
post
Describing CNN as a "social media network" is odd. It's also annoying when someone who has held a view for a long time expresses it and others respond with, "So you're figuring this out for the first time!?"
comment in response to
post
I don't think so. Many of these people are persuadable and are just being actively persuaded because they trust the wrong sources. You can't snap your fingers and pull them back, but whomever controls their sources controls them.
comment in response to
post
Obama was moderateish for a Democrat in 2008 on economic issues - though not as much as he tried to play himself up as - but that's quite far from economic conservatism of the Reagan wing of the GOP in the 80's.
comment in response to
post
Separate from this, he makes a nod to fiscal responsibility, which was in keeping with him trying to position himself as more economically moderate than Clinton, but in no way shape or form in the same zipcode as Reaganite desires.
comment in response to
post
The point of the comparison he was making here was to a President that transforms the political landscape and resets the contours of American politics, which is what a lot of people were hoping Obama would be (and ultimately wasn't). It's not an ideological point.
comment in response to
post
This was during the 2008 primary where the comparison here was with the idea of being a transformative President. Separate from that, he made vague nods to the idea of being fiscally responsible. This is not him ideologically aligning himself with Reagan.
comment in response to
post
1) Reagan wasn't a moderate Republican. The Reaganites were the radical wing. 2) Obama was just saying that for the same reason people might try to claim he'd be a Reaganite - to rhetorically position himself so his views are seen as the moderate compromise. He's lying.
comment in response to
post
I think you can go much further than this. Reagan was against the existence of Medicare. The writer here thinks Obama was basically a Reaganite.
comment in response to
post
I think all the important questions here were already answered by the act itself besides, "What are you going to do about it?"
comment in response to
post
Got a long ways to go to survive this.
comment in response to
post
If there is a 2 year lag on the political effects of shifts in inflation, you should be able to see that in historical trends and you don't. It's plausible that an economic effect can have lagging effects on public opinion, but you can't invoke it in an ad hoc way to be a all-purpose fudge factor.
comment in response to
post
It's also quite provocative to talk about, so it's not an issue of them seeing this as lacking audience potential. Got to search for an answer elsewhere if you want to know why this is happening, but even if we don't know why, that it is happening is important and disturbing.
comment in response to
post
There's a lot of coverage of online trends in the press. This one is just avoided relative to size and importance. I don't think this is caused by editors deciding people must find this too obvious.
comment in response to
post
The fact that this video is pretty funny is a good sign that there might still be gas in the tank.
comment in response to
post
If people's attitudes were determined by how much money is in their bank account - something we can measure - you would've seen drastically different attitudes over the past several years. And if that's how you think, why is your assessment of the nation as a whole so selfish?
comment in response to
post
There are anti-Semites, including original Nazis for a time, who felt that Jewish people needed to be segregated into their own nation. The idea of "what needs to be done" varies based on person and racial group. There definitely is a genocidal corner of anti-black racism.
comment in response to
post
You'd expect a blue wave on mid-term backlash and demographic sorting effects alone. The only reason to think the Dems won't at least take the House is reasonable fear that Trump-world will game the elections.
comment in response to
post
What white supremacists like Nazis believe is that the group they consider "whites" have the right mixture of traits to rule over others and/or believe that race chauvinism is natural and morally proper.
comment in response to
post
Racist stereotypes of East Asians have some cross-over with Jews as being wily, but also include ideas about being collectivist and submissive. You have an oddly narrow idea of what racism is.
comment in response to
post
You're creating a distinction in what racism is that is idiosyncratic to you. Racism can include stereotypes of traits other than intellectual ability or physical strength. A big part of anti-black racism is a belief that this group has a higher propensity to violence/anti-social behavior.
comment in response to
post
I'm sure you have gripes against Obama, but "neo-fascist authoritarianism" isn't a term that means, "politicians I have valid grievances with." And I am giving you an example of the kind of behavior you can predict out of the former category you say Obama belongs to that we didn't see.
comment in response to
post
Did you predict Barack Obama would refuse to leave office or try to abuse his office or use illegal maneuvers to determine election outcomes? If so, why? And why didn't that happen?
comment in response to
post
This was a feature of pseudoscientific racism, both past and present, though? Each racial category gets its own stereotypes that help explain the racists' relationship to them and why the in-group must dominate them. Jews are power-mad, greedy, cunning, and duplicitous.
comment in response to
post
Understanding Trump's movement is driven by neo-fascist like authoritarianism allows you to predict future behavior that keeps getting predicted and yet is still catching people off guard who are in denial about this fact.
comment in response to
post
Understanding that Trump's movement is filled with true believers tells you something about if and how they can be appeased that people are missing because they *don't* get that it's filled with true believers.
comment in response to
post
That's a deeper fault in the primary system, but it's hard to win a vote that there's too much democracy going on. If you want the party to have an org that just selects who runs w/o that collapsing into infighting, you have to wipe out the primary system.
comment in response to
post
You have journalists who write for major publications spending hours a day reading a site that's awash in discourse that isn't different from the uglier parts of Stormfront that you can see a beeline to both popular conservative media figures and politicians and the reporting on it is a whisper.
comment in response to
post
What's disturbing is that mainstream conservative discourse on Twitter has turned into a Nuremburg rally pining for the ecstasy of violence, and you'd never know that if you got your news from popular TV and newspaper sources. This is despite many journalists watching it happen on a site they use.
comment in response to
post
With the post gamergate rise of the alt-right, it used to be alarming what active young conservatives under the age of 24 often believed. Then 25, 26, 27, 28...
In the present, especially after the Musk transformation of Twitter, I think the alt-right has them if they're not old or offline.
comment in response to
post
These people read a few misleading graphs from Cremieux that flatter their bigotry and convince themselves they're doing low-dimensional topology while the libs just don't believe in data.
comment in response to
post
That's what most of this is. "I was easily bamboozled by an argument that used numbers because I associate that with rigor and lack the necessary skills to evaluate attempts at social science" becomes "my critics don't believe in reading about data."
comment in response to
post
No. I was referring to a range of arguments about the nature of cognitive differences, such as arguing that it is only natural for women to be underrepresented in positions of high academic merit because women are innately less likely to be at the extremes of intellectual ability due to biology.
comment in response to
post
They’re not correct. They’re ignorant, and virtually every person who has a plausible claim to expertise in poli sci would agree. That does make the idea that disagreement with them is from want of education obnoxious.
comment in response to
post
Quote me saying that.
comment in response to
post
No one uses the term "fascism" like the leftist subculture showing up in reply to my post besides them. It's one thing to have an idiosyncratic understanding of the term, but they then also bring with it a condescending "get educated" smugness, when its their usage that is odd.
comment in response to
post
I did not say anyone who isn't Hitler can be a fascist and have given more examples than Hitler of actual fascists in this thread alone. I asked to compare and contrast what "control of mass media" looks like with specific examples when comparing Adolf Hitler, Donald Trump, and George H.W. Bush.
comment in response to
post
He was specific about this. Trump's allies are attempting to portray an attempt to quash dissent with violence as policing a dangerous riot. He was suggesting that is ideal for protests to behave in a way that illustrates this. You have incorrectly stereotyped him with a point of view he does have.
comment in response to
post
That protest optics matter. He anticipates that some people might think he’s referring to waving Mexican flags or light vandalism and specifically disavows those critiques as dumb.
comment in response to
post
He’s not talking about appeasing those critics. You are assuming something that isn’t there.
comment in response to
post
What happened here is you assumed a post talking about the value of protest optics must be aligned with those criticizing Mexican flags as a bad look and saw it as a chance to do some self-righteous name calling. But that’s not what he was saying at all.
comment in response to
post
I know you are impressed with your own intelligence and all, but the point was about persuasion. If you think people cannot be persuaded because they are innately wrong and racist and must simply be ignored, one wonders what you think a protest is for.
comment in response to
post
He wrote a follow-up post before you wrote this one that specifically calls out criticism of Mexican flags as dumb tongue-clucking. You made a poor assumption about what he meant, then immediately followed up by insulting *his* intelligence.
comment in response to
post
People's irrational fantasies of street revolts turning into a successful conquest aside, the whole point of having a protest at all is to control the "optics." This doesn't mean every critique of them is good, but you don't want your protest to be taken over by people who just want to break stuff.
comment in response to
post
Occasionally you'll see a woman in that crowd go, "Wait. I thought we were just hating black people here?" and it's like watching a slasher film where the protagonist doesn't know the killer is right behind them.
comment in response to
post
The Venn diagram between people who proselytize race science who also think science shows sexual dimorphism in important cognitive traits that justify gender roles with women generally in subordinate positions is nearly a circle.
comment in response to
post
Yeah. And you can watch it evolve in response to tweaks to the knobs. That's why I tend to think the problem isn't people's ability to connect online, but the specific formats in which they do so.