Argentina's Libertarian Revolution?, Anti-Migrant Dublin Riots, Michael Anton vs. Con Inc. (Round Two), Botswana's Impressive Political Stability, Disappearing Cockneys
Hit the like button at the top of the page to like this entry. Use the share and/or re-stack buttons to share this across social media. Leave a comment if the mood strikes you to do so.
Sorry for being late everyone.....I have been under the weather since Saturday morning.
The Republican party is a middleman between donor money and liquor bills, with some shite political analysis scribbled in there too.
Seretse Khana of Botswana married a white Englishwoman. A few years ago the movie "A United Kingdom" starring David Oyelowo and Rosamund Pike was made about them. The previews emphasized the difficulties of their interracial marriage and made the movie look awful. Then I read it was more about Botswanian realpolitik in affairs with Britain and apartheid South Africa. I went and saw it; it was actually quite good. Though I think (don't remember it that well) it was set around the time the National Party took over South Africa, which was 1948 and not 1966-80, so perhaps some dates were fiddled with.
I have been (attempting to) delve into elite theory by brushing up on Mosca's and Pareto's thoughts as your piece on the Yellow Vests of France hinted to the fact that there is not a truly populist movement that is self sustaining. They must develop their own counter-elite that aim to replace/augment current ruling elites.
With that in mind on the first two pieces:
Milel is backed and has been given air time by someone...on the face to end their central bank sounds like a libertarians wet dream, but he plans to dollarize the economy which may be a stick in the eye of BRICS (and face it lolberts ending the Argentinian central bank to rely on the US central bank...seems like casting out a minor demon while cozying up to the devil?). I'm not totally read up on it but that's one of the things that sticks out to me.
Second, Conor McGregor seems to be a natural elite that has the broad support of native Irish people, but is and will be under extreme political persecution for his opinions and reach. It'll be interesting to see how it plays out. Will he eventually fold or use his wealth and fame to cement some political objectives?
Someone fairly reliable said that Millei is WEF (on their website). I didn't check. If he is, that would seem to contradict the libertarianism. Argentina may be going from bad to worse.
Not meant as an ad hominem, but worth pointing out that Matthew Continetti is married to Bill Kristol's daughter. I couldn't say whether Mr Continetti was always a RINO or became one through osmosis in Washington (an all too common fate!), but his ties to the monoparty establishment are now a matter both of preference and blood.
Denial is the most cost effective way to avoid embarrassment. Anton's problem with Continetti insofar as Continetti says Anton hates America is that Anton doesn't seem to want to embrace the business of DC. Speaking ill of the problems of America (and there are many) belittles the accomplished entitlement of the ruling class of PMCs. It would be silly for the ppl responsible to take accountability or even to take account of any failures because it would mean they are subject to replacement and why on earth would that even be a consideration unless it was forced. The business of DC is the business of Empire. It could care less about domestic issues as long as NY keeps generating more derivatives, Silicon Valley keeps pumping out new tech headlines, and DC gets to play Risk. Anton fails to appreciate Turbo. Oh and the Constitutional protections so lauded by Conservative circles are about 3 Supreme Court justices away from going bye bye so that's a pretty rough set of odds to have to deal with.
"Oh and the Constitutional protections so lauded by Conservative circles are about 3 Supreme Court justices away from going bye bye so that's a pretty rough set of odds to have to deal with."
You foreigners have no conception of the robustness of American 1st Amendment free speech law. You have no idea. You're incapable of imagining it.
I'm not a foreigner. I was born and raised in NJ. And the robustness of American 1st Amendment free speech law was violated by the Alien Sedition Act nearly 10 yrs since the inception of the Constitution. Ask yourself a question, if Merrick Garland was on the SC would you be more concerned or less concerned regarding those "robust" protections? Perhaps Clarence Thomas, Justice Alito, and Roberts all croak tomorrow and were replaced by more extreme Brown Jackson's, would you feel confident in those robust protections? If you answer yes, you really feel passionate about a mythology that you hold sacred but again, if you read this blog, are not attune to reality
"I'm not a foreigner. I was born and raised in NJ."
Close enough, guido (just kidding, my bad).
Seriously though, you're overly pessimistic. Not because it's impossible to imagine the next generation of SCOTUS throwing the 1st Amendment in the trash to counter 'hate speech' or whatever. They could do so. But they would have to do so, overturning a century of legal precedent in the process. Either that or expand the definition of 'sedition' to the absurd point of having memes on your phone, as they're trying to accomplish in Ireland. It's a tall bar to clear.
You mentioned mythology. For all our current Regime's depravity, it still relies on a veneer of justice as part of its political formula. And its minions keep floundering against the rock of the 1A. Over the past decade, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression has won every lawsuit its brought. And the Twitter Files-instigated Missouri v. Biden case is set to be a bloodbath for the disinformation managers of the FBI, DHS, CISA, etc. They're gonna get absolutely rocked, and it will be quite the show.
The consensus take is that Argentina was doing great and then Peron screwed it all up permanently with his bad policies. I'd be interested to hear an alternative perspective, if anyone is aware of one.
Argentina had a bloodless military coup in 1930 and a Central Bank was formed in 1935, headed by cosmopolitan and well-travelled europeanist Ernesto Bosch for two terms.
---The Roca-Runciman Treaty of 1933 and the resulting abandonment of the Caja de conversión governing monetary policy since 1890 led to the formation of the Central Bank of Argentina on May 28, 1935, upon which Bosch was named its first president; completing a seven-year term, he was reconfirmed in 1942.[7] His upholding treaty obligations to deposit World War II era trade surpluses in the Bank of England ran counter to nationalist policies advanced by the powerful Vice President, Juan Perón,[3] and Bosch was dismissed in 1945; his tenure, marked by a stable peso, would remain the longest in the Central Bank's history to date.[7]----wikipedia
Argentina became the plaything of $$ from US/Standard Oil to bankers of the world in Europe, especially England's Central Bank. The country's 1853 constitution was suspended. Technocracy was implemented as a scientific effort to run the country in this decade of the 1930's as was hoped would spread to other countries.
Nationalists took over in 1943 and Peron later became a socialist president that nationalized industries of the country.
The Great Depression and the creation of central banks, including the BIS, allowed the world's movers to root themselves as permanent power brokers around the world.
Late 19th c Argentina was an economy run on ranching, and 90% of its beef export went to the British empire. When for whatever reason* the British halted import of argentine beef, this, combined with the great depression and lack of investor capital, doomed the Argentinians. Come the late 1940s and the way out is barred, since the world's economic powerhouse, the master of the western hemisphere, is looking at revitalising Europe. Where they went from there, be it left or right, probably didn't matter. The damage to Argentina was done.
* (post great war imperial economic reorientation hit Europe quite hard. British debt was enormous and only in 80s did they return to pre great war debt levels)
Nov 27, 2023·edited Nov 27, 2023Liked by Niccolo Soldo
I'd stumbled across the happy story of Botswana a while ago - really have to look into this one a bit more in depth. Succession alone seems a bit too simple.
Preliminary research has yielded a decent number of papers on how and why Botswana avoided the resource curse/dutch disease, which i find puzzling as well. Maybe somewhere in there there's a cure for my cynical world view!
Ex British colony (tend to do better than French, perhaps because of the legacy of parliamentary system and no revolutionary tradition), no Muslim problem, 70% protestant, ethnically homogeneous and no apartheid legacy.
We've had several Botswanan grad students come through my Department. All down to earth, and get the job done. Ghanaians and Nigerians also do the job, but maybe a bit more elitist. I would consider living in Botswana, seems like a friendly place.
Another event this week- Geert Wilders and PVV won more seats in the Dutch elections than any other party. He’s lived under police protection for nearly 20 years because of his statements against Islam and immigration
He might fail to form a coalition, be hamstrung by his coalition partners or Brussels, etc but the Netherlands seems like a place to keep an eye on right now
I lived in Ireland for a decade before moving to the Netherlands last year. All about timing 😀.
I mentioned before that my belief is that Ireland, in an effort to cozy up to the corporations washing their money at its shores created this culture in which all politics has to remain within the domain of what is acceptable to the “People” teams in these organizations. I cannot say if it was a conscious twist, but I witnessed the Taoiseachs and Tanaistes paying pilgrimage to corporate bosses and it was genuinely weird, it’s like a minor player going to the Godfather, head down and all. For what it’s worth, I also think Ireland has massively profited from the immigration, but again the game was intended to be what it was and it was never supposed to benefit the underclass that cannot hitch its wagon to the bleeding edge of capitalism. The problem are not immigrants, the problem is the system. Also worth noting that the guy who subdued the attacker is Brazilian immigrant doing bike delivery service. Kind of job lads in sweatpants who torched buses would never take and are, I’d bet, overwhelmingly on dole themselves.
Rates of HIV infection in Africa are often overstated I believe.
There's an immense amount of aid money going towards fighting AIDS, a disproportionately large amount of money compared to other deadly diseases. African health services who claim many deaths by AIDS often get acces to more of that aid money, and so deaths for which the cause of death cannot be determined are usually just marked as AIDS.
The HIV rate in Botswana may thus not be as drastic as reported.
The way HIV has been defined in Africa is very, very different from how it is defined in North America, for example (based on my most recent understanding of the matter).
On “conservatism”, I don’t think all of these people are blind fools. I believe the stage we are at is “first they came for the Jews” or like a frog in a pot of water with the heat just starting to warm up on its way to reaching a boil.
Yes- things like censorship, warrantless surveillance, FBI investigations of school parents, imposition of vax mandates and sacking of unvaxxed soldiers and workers only after the “science” showed we were moving way past early Covid strains into Delta and Omicron and the original vaccines successfully prevented neither, uncontrolled immigration, the state of schooling and bizarre forms of discriminatory “equity” being enforced everywhere- are a concern, but frankly most of the above don’t really cramp the style of your average upper middle class professional - the kind of person who listens to “thought leaders” at think tanks or magazines or follows mainstream pols. I have to admit I fall into this category- things are bad on the civil liberties front, but they weren’t great under Wilson, FDR, Truman or Nixon; and the media, the bureaucracy and academia are completely nuts but their insanity doesn’t really impact my comfortable perch….yet. “Other people” are bearing the brunt of authoritarian policies, lawlessness and decay.
While mainstream pols have few good ideas and little urgency, they do appoint good judges and aren’t completely insane fiscally (by today’s standards- a low bar). I haven’t yet come across a populist pol who does anything but milk memes for cash and votes. Very little actually gets done by the Trump’s of the world, let alone the Gaetz’. These aren’t serious people. A creature like DeSantis in the US is a successful hybrid - good at governing and channeling the bureaucracy to his will (unlike Trump) but more acceptable to the comfortable middle class than a true populist. He is losing. I like Rand Paul a lot because he gets civil liberties and property rights, but not all of his ideas are winners and he isn’t the sort to be embraced by either the working class or the intellectuals.
There are a lot of people screaming “crisis” but the reality is most people aren’t feeling it and many of the politicians jumping on the crisis bandwagon are neither effective nor particularly impressive. The guy in Argentina is pretty impressive but he doesn’t have a legislative majority so is unlikely to be effective. Suella, Truss, Geert, Trump- meh.
Lind and the Claremont types need to build an agenda and a stable of good candidates and find a way to reach ordinary Americans and educate them about these issues. Comfortable types like me aren’t going to be the easiest sale- better to reach those who kids go to public schools and who have to interface with dysfunction daily. There are more of these people, too.
So long as there are sufficient carve outs and safe spaces for the contented the regime can count on support. The management of American decline depends on ensuring that the comfort zones remain viable for a half-generation longer or more.
I see that the website suggested reading also N. Strossen's piece on the topic. She was perhaps the last true free speech advocate at ACLU. So, kudos to the website for encouraging a true exchange of opinions!
There are several problems with the article you recommend. First, Hamas is no more terrorist than the state of Israel is. Arguably less so, in fact. Relying on the US government's designations of who is terrorist and who is not is inherently problematic to say the least. Speech that questions official government narrative should be protected above all else. The longstanding rule has been that only shouting "fire!" in a crowded theater is precluded. Shapiro's point about conduct is fair enough, though of course he writes only about such conduct directed at Jews. As if Muslims and Arabs are not being targeted. Albeit more through boycotts, threats of withholding donations, etc., which are all a different kind of conduct, but conduct nonetheless, and absolutely threatening. Lawsuits. Don't get me started about lawsuits. More than 70% of the world's lawyers are american. And though the rule of law was a great idea, at this point it is completely perverted. Pascal: "When virtues are taken to extremes, vices emerge."
"First, Hamas is no more terrorist than the state of Israel is"
Hamas's 2 major weapons are 1) the use of Palestinians as cannon fodder 2) the majority of Western Media.
Hamas's use of civilian infrastructure, a war crime, is not an exception, it is its rule. And the use of civilian infrastructure for martial purposes deletes their status as civilian spaces and become military spaces.
It's actually astounding how low the casualties are as reported by Hamas, aka as the Gaza Health Ministry. If Israel were committing the now demotic "genocide" that 15,000 would have a 0 added to it then multiplied a couple of times.
hey, as a free speech absolutist, I totally support you in spouting whatever nonsense you wish to put out there. We humans are capable of believing absolutely anything, and we prove it every single day.
Nov 28, 2023·edited Nov 28, 2023Liked by Niccolo Soldo
Continetti's charge that Anton hates America is unfounded but raises am important issue.
At what point would it be justifiable for the Right to hate America? The real, existent, America increasingly embodies beliefs and values that conservatives and any number of others can't help but hate. Why should Anton (or anyone else) feel enthusiasm or respect for, let alone loyalty to, a country in which schools groom children for gender reassignment? Why should white Americans identify with a country in which they can expect to be deprioritised by law? In which men get gaoled for posting satirical memes directed at Hilary Clinton or for trespassing on the Capitol?
Ultimately, loyalty is a matter of emotion. Instinct speaks for itself. It is unrealistic to expect people to feel any deep loyalty to a country that is more an economic zone than it is a homeland with an enduring way of life and culture.
Hit the like button at the top of the page to like this entry. Use the share and/or re-stack buttons to share this across social media. Leave a comment if the mood strikes you to do so.
Sorry for being late everyone.....I have been under the weather since Saturday morning.
The Republican party is a middleman between donor money and liquor bills, with some shite political analysis scribbled in there too.
Seretse Khana of Botswana married a white Englishwoman. A few years ago the movie "A United Kingdom" starring David Oyelowo and Rosamund Pike was made about them. The previews emphasized the difficulties of their interracial marriage and made the movie look awful. Then I read it was more about Botswanian realpolitik in affairs with Britain and apartheid South Africa. I went and saw it; it was actually quite good. Though I think (don't remember it that well) it was set around the time the National Party took over South Africa, which was 1948 and not 1966-80, so perhaps some dates were fiddled with.
You’re a champ Nic 👍😃
I'm about four shots of moonshine in. Hopefully my writing isn't too clunky/error-ridden in this SCR.
I have been (attempting to) delve into elite theory by brushing up on Mosca's and Pareto's thoughts as your piece on the Yellow Vests of France hinted to the fact that there is not a truly populist movement that is self sustaining. They must develop their own counter-elite that aim to replace/augment current ruling elites.
With that in mind on the first two pieces:
Milel is backed and has been given air time by someone...on the face to end their central bank sounds like a libertarians wet dream, but he plans to dollarize the economy which may be a stick in the eye of BRICS (and face it lolberts ending the Argentinian central bank to rely on the US central bank...seems like casting out a minor demon while cozying up to the devil?). I'm not totally read up on it but that's one of the things that sticks out to me.
Second, Conor McGregor seems to be a natural elite that has the broad support of native Irish people, but is and will be under extreme political persecution for his opinions and reach. It'll be interesting to see how it plays out. Will he eventually fold or use his wealth and fame to cement some political objectives?
Someone fairly reliable said that Millei is WEF (on their website). I didn't check. If he is, that would seem to contradict the libertarianism. Argentina may be going from bad to worse.
Looking forward to watching what happens with Argentina on this blog and in the comments section.
Not meant as an ad hominem, but worth pointing out that Matthew Continetti is married to Bill Kristol's daughter. I couldn't say whether Mr Continetti was always a RINO or became one through osmosis in Washington (an all too common fate!), but his ties to the monoparty establishment are now a matter both of preference and blood.
Bill Crystal and Jennifer Rubin are not conservatives; they are ‘Dem-pandering’.
Denial is the most cost effective way to avoid embarrassment. Anton's problem with Continetti insofar as Continetti says Anton hates America is that Anton doesn't seem to want to embrace the business of DC. Speaking ill of the problems of America (and there are many) belittles the accomplished entitlement of the ruling class of PMCs. It would be silly for the ppl responsible to take accountability or even to take account of any failures because it would mean they are subject to replacement and why on earth would that even be a consideration unless it was forced. The business of DC is the business of Empire. It could care less about domestic issues as long as NY keeps generating more derivatives, Silicon Valley keeps pumping out new tech headlines, and DC gets to play Risk. Anton fails to appreciate Turbo. Oh and the Constitutional protections so lauded by Conservative circles are about 3 Supreme Court justices away from going bye bye so that's a pretty rough set of odds to have to deal with.
"Oh and the Constitutional protections so lauded by Conservative circles are about 3 Supreme Court justices away from going bye bye so that's a pretty rough set of odds to have to deal with."
You foreigners have no conception of the robustness of American 1st Amendment free speech law. You have no idea. You're incapable of imagining it.
I'm not a foreigner. I was born and raised in NJ. And the robustness of American 1st Amendment free speech law was violated by the Alien Sedition Act nearly 10 yrs since the inception of the Constitution. Ask yourself a question, if Merrick Garland was on the SC would you be more concerned or less concerned regarding those "robust" protections? Perhaps Clarence Thomas, Justice Alito, and Roberts all croak tomorrow and were replaced by more extreme Brown Jackson's, would you feel confident in those robust protections? If you answer yes, you really feel passionate about a mythology that you hold sacred but again, if you read this blog, are not attune to reality
"I'm not a foreigner. I was born and raised in NJ."
Close enough, guido (just kidding, my bad).
Seriously though, you're overly pessimistic. Not because it's impossible to imagine the next generation of SCOTUS throwing the 1st Amendment in the trash to counter 'hate speech' or whatever. They could do so. But they would have to do so, overturning a century of legal precedent in the process. Either that or expand the definition of 'sedition' to the absurd point of having memes on your phone, as they're trying to accomplish in Ireland. It's a tall bar to clear.
You mentioned mythology. For all our current Regime's depravity, it still relies on a veneer of justice as part of its political formula. And its minions keep floundering against the rock of the 1A. Over the past decade, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression has won every lawsuit its brought. And the Twitter Files-instigated Missouri v. Biden case is set to be a bloodbath for the disinformation managers of the FBI, DHS, CISA, etc. They're gonna get absolutely rocked, and it will be quite the show.
It's a crowded theatre. "Fire! Fire! Fire!"
I don’t think we have laws or constitutional order now, but we’ll see what happens when Biden croaks.
I think we’re living through a unraveling of the New Deal Administrative State.
I think there’s no replacement.
There’s no succession in DC.
The program to eliminate or co-opt rivals into impotence worked very well.
Now DC dies of old age.
FIRE is what the ACLU once were. Terrific org!
Dirty Jerzy in da house!
As foreign countries go, I’m very fond of NJ.
The consensus take is that Argentina was doing great and then Peron screwed it all up permanently with his bad policies. I'd be interested to hear an alternative perspective, if anyone is aware of one.
To tell you the truth, so would I.
It may well be correct, but it seems awfully pat to me, and perhaps a bit too convenient for the neoliberal global oligarchy.
Argentina had a bloodless military coup in 1930 and a Central Bank was formed in 1935, headed by cosmopolitan and well-travelled europeanist Ernesto Bosch for two terms.
---The Roca-Runciman Treaty of 1933 and the resulting abandonment of the Caja de conversión governing monetary policy since 1890 led to the formation of the Central Bank of Argentina on May 28, 1935, upon which Bosch was named its first president; completing a seven-year term, he was reconfirmed in 1942.[7] His upholding treaty obligations to deposit World War II era trade surpluses in the Bank of England ran counter to nationalist policies advanced by the powerful Vice President, Juan Perón,[3] and Bosch was dismissed in 1945; his tenure, marked by a stable peso, would remain the longest in the Central Bank's history to date.[7]----wikipedia
Argentina became the plaything of $$ from US/Standard Oil to bankers of the world in Europe, especially England's Central Bank. The country's 1853 constitution was suspended. Technocracy was implemented as a scientific effort to run the country in this decade of the 1930's as was hoped would spread to other countries.
Nationalists took over in 1943 and Peron later became a socialist president that nationalized industries of the country.
The Great Depression and the creation of central banks, including the BIS, allowed the world's movers to root themselves as permanent power brokers around the world.
The theory I heard was basically what follows.
Late 19th c Argentina was an economy run on ranching, and 90% of its beef export went to the British empire. When for whatever reason* the British halted import of argentine beef, this, combined with the great depression and lack of investor capital, doomed the Argentinians. Come the late 1940s and the way out is barred, since the world's economic powerhouse, the master of the western hemisphere, is looking at revitalising Europe. Where they went from there, be it left or right, probably didn't matter. The damage to Argentina was done.
* (post great war imperial economic reorientation hit Europe quite hard. British debt was enormous and only in 80s did they return to pre great war debt levels)
The generals who disappeared people did their part.
The mother's in white....remember them? The tortured people in grandiose buildings.....
I'd stumbled across the happy story of Botswana a while ago - really have to look into this one a bit more in depth. Succession alone seems a bit too simple.
Daron Acemoglu, a well regarded economist, has used it as an example of a string national economy
Preliminary research has yielded a decent number of papers on how and why Botswana avoided the resource curse/dutch disease, which i find puzzling as well. Maybe somewhere in there there's a cure for my cynical world view!
If String Theory economics doesn't yet exist, me and Wikipedia shall remedy this oversight !
according to Mr. jimmy wiki string theory may be compatible with dark matter.
that's like dark money.
Or derivatives.
I'm halfway to fame, my Nobel prize and the economists slush fund.
I owe it all to your typo.
The Gods moved your finger.
Praise to the Gods.
You mean Strong right?
Not kidding.
I went searching for String National Economy.
If that exists I’m intrigued.
Ex British colony (tend to do better than French, perhaps because of the legacy of parliamentary system and no revolutionary tradition), no Muslim problem, 70% protestant, ethnically homogeneous and no apartheid legacy.
We've had several Botswanan grad students come through my Department. All down to earth, and get the job done. Ghanaians and Nigerians also do the job, but maybe a bit more elitist. I would consider living in Botswana, seems like a friendly place.
Another event this week- Geert Wilders and PVV won more seats in the Dutch elections than any other party. He’s lived under police protection for nearly 20 years because of his statements against Islam and immigration
He might fail to form a coalition, be hamstrung by his coalition partners or Brussels, etc but the Netherlands seems like a place to keep an eye on right now
Cordon Sanitaire around PVV might be too difficult to erect, so a coalition will be likely.
I know that Botswana isn't saddled with an expensive navy. Just like Laos and Kazahkstan.
I lived in Ireland for a decade before moving to the Netherlands last year. All about timing 😀.
I mentioned before that my belief is that Ireland, in an effort to cozy up to the corporations washing their money at its shores created this culture in which all politics has to remain within the domain of what is acceptable to the “People” teams in these organizations. I cannot say if it was a conscious twist, but I witnessed the Taoiseachs and Tanaistes paying pilgrimage to corporate bosses and it was genuinely weird, it’s like a minor player going to the Godfather, head down and all. For what it’s worth, I also think Ireland has massively profited from the immigration, but again the game was intended to be what it was and it was never supposed to benefit the underclass that cannot hitch its wagon to the bleeding edge of capitalism. The problem are not immigrants, the problem is the system. Also worth noting that the guy who subdued the attacker is Brazilian immigrant doing bike delivery service. Kind of job lads in sweatpants who torched buses would never take and are, I’d bet, overwhelmingly on dole themselves.
The Irish elites sold out for money.
The Algerian stabber was apparently upset that he couldn’t access his welfare payment...
How fitting...
Rates of HIV infection in Africa are often overstated I believe.
There's an immense amount of aid money going towards fighting AIDS, a disproportionately large amount of money compared to other deadly diseases. African health services who claim many deaths by AIDS often get acces to more of that aid money, and so deaths for which the cause of death cannot be determined are usually just marked as AIDS.
The HIV rate in Botswana may thus not be as drastic as reported.
The way HIV has been defined in Africa is very, very different from how it is defined in North America, for example (based on my most recent understanding of the matter).
On “conservatism”, I don’t think all of these people are blind fools. I believe the stage we are at is “first they came for the Jews” or like a frog in a pot of water with the heat just starting to warm up on its way to reaching a boil.
Yes- things like censorship, warrantless surveillance, FBI investigations of school parents, imposition of vax mandates and sacking of unvaxxed soldiers and workers only after the “science” showed we were moving way past early Covid strains into Delta and Omicron and the original vaccines successfully prevented neither, uncontrolled immigration, the state of schooling and bizarre forms of discriminatory “equity” being enforced everywhere- are a concern, but frankly most of the above don’t really cramp the style of your average upper middle class professional - the kind of person who listens to “thought leaders” at think tanks or magazines or follows mainstream pols. I have to admit I fall into this category- things are bad on the civil liberties front, but they weren’t great under Wilson, FDR, Truman or Nixon; and the media, the bureaucracy and academia are completely nuts but their insanity doesn’t really impact my comfortable perch….yet. “Other people” are bearing the brunt of authoritarian policies, lawlessness and decay.
While mainstream pols have few good ideas and little urgency, they do appoint good judges and aren’t completely insane fiscally (by today’s standards- a low bar). I haven’t yet come across a populist pol who does anything but milk memes for cash and votes. Very little actually gets done by the Trump’s of the world, let alone the Gaetz’. These aren’t serious people. A creature like DeSantis in the US is a successful hybrid - good at governing and channeling the bureaucracy to his will (unlike Trump) but more acceptable to the comfortable middle class than a true populist. He is losing. I like Rand Paul a lot because he gets civil liberties and property rights, but not all of his ideas are winners and he isn’t the sort to be embraced by either the working class or the intellectuals.
There are a lot of people screaming “crisis” but the reality is most people aren’t feeling it and many of the politicians jumping on the crisis bandwagon are neither effective nor particularly impressive. The guy in Argentina is pretty impressive but he doesn’t have a legislative majority so is unlikely to be effective. Suella, Truss, Geert, Trump- meh.
Lind and the Claremont types need to build an agenda and a stable of good candidates and find a way to reach ordinary Americans and educate them about these issues. Comfortable types like me aren’t going to be the easiest sale- better to reach those who kids go to public schools and who have to interface with dysfunction daily. There are more of these people, too.
So long as there are sufficient carve outs and safe spaces for the contented the regime can count on support. The management of American decline depends on ensuring that the comfort zones remain viable for a half-generation longer or more.
It’s good you’re comfortable .
You’ll know when I believe there is a crisis- I won’t be posting on Substack.
This is a great review of what constitutes protected speech in the United States......Thoughts?
https://www.thefp.com/p/where-free-speech-ends-and-lawbreaking-begins
I see that the website suggested reading also N. Strossen's piece on the topic. She was perhaps the last true free speech advocate at ACLU. So, kudos to the website for encouraging a true exchange of opinions!
There are several problems with the article you recommend. First, Hamas is no more terrorist than the state of Israel is. Arguably less so, in fact. Relying on the US government's designations of who is terrorist and who is not is inherently problematic to say the least. Speech that questions official government narrative should be protected above all else. The longstanding rule has been that only shouting "fire!" in a crowded theater is precluded. Shapiro's point about conduct is fair enough, though of course he writes only about such conduct directed at Jews. As if Muslims and Arabs are not being targeted. Albeit more through boycotts, threats of withholding donations, etc., which are all a different kind of conduct, but conduct nonetheless, and absolutely threatening. Lawsuits. Don't get me started about lawsuits. More than 70% of the world's lawyers are american. And though the rule of law was a great idea, at this point it is completely perverted. Pascal: "When virtues are taken to extremes, vices emerge."
"First, Hamas is no more terrorist than the state of Israel is"
Hamas's 2 major weapons are 1) the use of Palestinians as cannon fodder 2) the majority of Western Media.
Hamas's use of civilian infrastructure, a war crime, is not an exception, it is its rule. And the use of civilian infrastructure for martial purposes deletes their status as civilian spaces and become military spaces.
It's actually astounding how low the casualties are as reported by Hamas, aka as the Gaza Health Ministry. If Israel were committing the now demotic "genocide" that 15,000 would have a 0 added to it then multiplied a couple of times.
hey, as a free speech absolutist, I totally support you in spouting whatever nonsense you wish to put out there. We humans are capable of believing absolutely anything, and we prove it every single day.
Continetti's charge that Anton hates America is unfounded but raises am important issue.
At what point would it be justifiable for the Right to hate America? The real, existent, America increasingly embodies beliefs and values that conservatives and any number of others can't help but hate. Why should Anton (or anyone else) feel enthusiasm or respect for, let alone loyalty to, a country in which schools groom children for gender reassignment? Why should white Americans identify with a country in which they can expect to be deprioritised by law? In which men get gaoled for posting satirical memes directed at Hilary Clinton or for trespassing on the Capitol?
Ultimately, loyalty is a matter of emotion. Instinct speaks for itself. It is unrealistic to expect people to feel any deep loyalty to a country that is more an economic zone than it is a homeland with an enduring way of life and culture.