Zohran Mamdani claimed his hijab-wearing aunt stopped riding NYC subways after 9/11 due to anti-Muslim fear. Records confirm aunt Masuma lived in Tanzania (2000-2003) as a program officer for AMREF and does not wear a hijab. This discrepancy indicates the emotional anecdote was fabricated to emphasize perceived Muslim victimhood over the attack's actual toll by Islamist extremists.
Victimhood defines the Democrats but also has become a staple of the Republicans lately as well (we have to protect the Jewish students on campus who feel bad/ threatened. When I was in college WE felt threatened by athletes --not student athletes-- who would occasionally slam some nerd into a wall just to show dominance.) We were convenient targets not victims.
Our politicians care nothing beyond their next election. They are constantly trying to cut into their political opponents' demographic strengths.
"If a politician found he had cannibals among his constituents, he would promise them missionaries for dinner.-- HL Mencken
The days of the Democrats working for the Poor and Working Class and the Republicans working for the small business owner are long over. The donors rule the UniParty.
Obama had a good run as leader of the managerial class, but after the Wall Street Bailout and the Covid disaster, most American institutions have lost what little credibility (fact-based authority) they once had.
You had me shaking my head in agreement until you mentioned that Obama had a good run... Try as I might, I can't find much evidence of a good run in any context, let alone leadership. He was mainly ineffective policy-wise and relied heavily on 'us-against-them' to gain support. I agree that most American institutions have lost credibility; they worked overtime pissing it away.
The left and its pet groups must always be the victims, and nobody else’s suffering matters. I wonder if he ever shed any tears, real or fake, over those who died in the Towers. I suspect that like ta-nehisi Coates he felt nothing because those people were the outgroup and therefore bad. And these lefties are supposed to be the most compassionate and most advanced thinkers.
On this week's ATW, Matt said something like (this is a very rough paraphrase, so forgive me) Democrats trotted out lawfare/censorship never thinking it would be used against them. I don't disagree, but my take is that the Democrats have decided to get by on never looking more than one day ahead or one day behind. Longer term, we get pretty paintings of a future of equality and fairness and diversity and happy happy happy people, and you get remorse for a day or two after a horrible faux pas, but nothing of substance. Their overriding strategy is to ignore or deny reality, and to hammer on individuals or groups of individuals, with unceasing animus. And sad as it may be, realistically speaking, they have had and continue to have great success with that strategy.
As some others have brought up, I kind of miss the Saturday transcript and book talk Sunday posts. Those gave people a chance to comment and have their comments seen even if they weren't able to post five minutes after the Friday release. (If you don't post quickly and get immediate likes, your comment will quickly disappear into the morass of of comments.)
I posted that prior to the livestream, but I don't think they did. (I am halfway through, listening this morning.) I made that remark based on the recent change (which may be a temporary glitch.)
Civilization has always been a hodge podge of managed corruption.
When the corruption becomes too big to manage, is when you see civilizations fall apart, as the managers realize they have nothing to fall back on when power is truly taken from them.
I read Animal Farm in high school, one of three books which were teacher assigned in high school. The others were Brave New World and one by Ayn Rand that I can’t remember the title. I thought the pigs ideas were great until they turned against the other animals. I am sure I posed the question of “wouldn’t it work if the pigs were of better character?” My teacher, the offspring of Germans and born before WWII, taught me swiftly that it is human nature to corrupt power. The system of communism with its centralized power is easily corrupted . The system we have in America is corruptible, but harder to accomplish with checks and balances of power. I was 15 and I therefore have the instinctual reaction of aversion when I hear about free items, or the government taking care of us. I read Animal Farm again in 2021 when I figured out the talking heads kept rewriting the rules on the side of the barn. I will always be grateful for the elective reading class I took and the teacher who shared what she knew by assigning and discussing those three books with us before she turned us loose to read what we chose.
My understanding of Orwell's perspective is that the characteristics present in revolutionaries are not well-suited for power. The animals needed to keep the pigs in check or change leadership the moment they started playing games with the milk and apples. As I recall, Orwell saw that as a critical moment and sought to expand upon it with additions to the script in the radio version.
In theory, democratic socialism could have checks and balances to attempt to circuit breaker those moments as readily as democratic capitalism. In practice, there are many ways in either system to leverage vulnerabilities in human nature to circumvent these.
Even democratic socialism is based upon socialism. The theory, specifically the selling point, of everyone being and achieving equal shares is violative of human potential and capability. I do not want to perpetually take care of others who I have no connection to, and I do not expect that from others. Since that action has to be facilitated in a concentrated manner, it is highly corruptible instead of hard to corrupt.
I'm not trying to make the sale, of course. That said, the dynamic is quickly changing as the value of labor needed from the American worker declines.
We've already had industrial displacement, where the Chinese worker provides the lion's share of the labor economically needed. That has left us with a situation where even those working the McJobs that represent an increasing portion of the economy need people like you to pitch in for their care.
But soon, androids will be usurping the need for American labor as well. Much cheaper, like-for-like replacements for most of the labor we need.
They'll be the ones we need to tax to take care of others, as human potential becomes less valued -- resulting in a game of musical chairs that eventually leaves even the most skilled of us without a chair to sit on.
Hotchkiss. OMG. My college roommate circa 1985 went there. Marimekko bedding, cropped hair, cigarette, mummy calling from Connecticut. I didn't dislike her but, jeez, that's a distinctive type. And now he's cosplaying.
Matt said that no politician would have said even five years ago what Mamdani says today. What has changed is the electorate, just like it did in London or most big cities in western Europe. We may see NY to look and vote just like the people in London.
As AOC was passionately rattling of the NYC boroughs one-by-one, I kept waiting for John Dean’s trademark Wilhelm death scream. Gotta say I felt a little cheated.
Still bitter that Matt took to the Internet for a book poll, and we are cheated out of "Farewell, My Lovely", for a book that is just a mashup of 1984 and That Hideous Strength. We get it, George. Would prefer some apolitical writing to enjoy.
I'd imagine (well, hope) that all the books in the poll are likely at some point. Matt had Farewell, My Lovely in his Top 10 and Walter had said he wants to read Things Fall Apart.
I saw the poll and voted Animal Farm, because it has the sociopolitical significance to merit a dedicated discussion with Walter and Matt. I find the focal point to be quite a bit different than either 1984 or That Hideous Strength. I do hope we get the other three (Heart of a Dog was the third).
I think Matt was very perceptive when he said our Founding Fathers started from the point of recognizing the weaknesses in human nature and tried to devise a system to prevent the worst elements of human nature from subverting it.
Contrast that with communism, which tries to shoehorn human nature into its communal system, expecting human nature to adapt.
The Founding Fathers did a pretty good job, except I believe humans will eventually manage to subvert *any* system. It's just a matter of how long it takes.
I find capitalism, socialism and communism things which come to the same poor end, through different means. The major difference I see in their common dis functionality is capitalism is bifurcated. Where socialism and communism have their systems inevitably corrupted by only their inevitably corrupted governments alone. Capitalism has a dual track of the private and public sector corruption competing and colluding to screw everyone else to empower themselves.
The most pathetic outcome of all the systems is they become only concerned with self preservation of the internals of the system. Not the external intent of the well being of the people and their world. It is obvious as you see the system growing only internally. With ever less useful external effect being accomplished. The system consumes ever more. Produces ever less useful effect.
Government, corporate. They become a circle jerk of self administration. Bloat. Ever less concern of those external to their system.
Capitalism in concept is to destroy all competition. To be one central thing. Communism and socialism just start at that sad finish line.
A realistic system has a mix of these systems. With logical and strongly enforced rules. Learned and taught again and again.
Guys,
It is not true what Mamdani said:
“ “
Zohran Mamdani claimed his hijab-wearing aunt stopped riding NYC subways after 9/11 due to anti-Muslim fear. Records confirm aunt Masuma lived in Tanzania (2000-2003) as a program officer for AMREF and does not wear a hijab. This discrepancy indicates the emotional anecdote was fabricated to emphasize perceived Muslim victimhood over the attack's actual toll by Islamist extremists.
Victimhood defines the Democrats but also has become a staple of the Republicans lately as well (we have to protect the Jewish students on campus who feel bad/ threatened. When I was in college WE felt threatened by athletes --not student athletes-- who would occasionally slam some nerd into a wall just to show dominance.) We were convenient targets not victims.
Our politicians care nothing beyond their next election. They are constantly trying to cut into their political opponents' demographic strengths.
"If a politician found he had cannibals among his constituents, he would promise them missionaries for dinner.-- HL Mencken
The days of the Democrats working for the Poor and Working Class and the Republicans working for the small business owner are long over. The donors rule the UniParty.
Obama had a good run as leader of the managerial class, but after the Wall Street Bailout and the Covid disaster, most American institutions have lost what little credibility (fact-based authority) they once had.
You had me shaking my head in agreement until you mentioned that Obama had a good run... Try as I might, I can't find much evidence of a good run in any context, let alone leadership. He was mainly ineffective policy-wise and relied heavily on 'us-against-them' to gain support. I agree that most American institutions have lost credibility; they worked overtime pissing it away.
The left and its pet groups must always be the victims, and nobody else’s suffering matters. I wonder if he ever shed any tears, real or fake, over those who died in the Towers. I suspect that like ta-nehisi Coates he felt nothing because those people were the outgroup and therefore bad. And these lefties are supposed to be the most compassionate and most advanced thinkers.
I don’t disagree.
I love Mondays and Fridays.
Thank you Matt and Walter♥️
me too!
I'm the same way!
On this week's ATW, Matt said something like (this is a very rough paraphrase, so forgive me) Democrats trotted out lawfare/censorship never thinking it would be used against them. I don't disagree, but my take is that the Democrats have decided to get by on never looking more than one day ahead or one day behind. Longer term, we get pretty paintings of a future of equality and fairness and diversity and happy happy happy people, and you get remorse for a day or two after a horrible faux pas, but nothing of substance. Their overriding strategy is to ignore or deny reality, and to hammer on individuals or groups of individuals, with unceasing animus. And sad as it may be, realistically speaking, they have had and continue to have great success with that strategy.
As some others have brought up, I kind of miss the Saturday transcript and book talk Sunday posts. Those gave people a chance to comment and have their comments seen even if they weren't able to post five minutes after the Friday release. (If you don't post quickly and get immediate likes, your comment will quickly disappear into the morass of of comments.)
I don't listen to the livestreams. Was there a mention of the missing transcripts?
I posted that prior to the livestream, but I don't think they did. (I am halfway through, listening this morning.) I made that remark based on the recent change (which may be a temporary glitch.)
Walter at just under 27:00, "I don't think our politics is about ideology . . ., it's about corruption."
Bingo.
Civilization has always been a hodge podge of managed corruption.
When the corruption becomes too big to manage, is when you see civilizations fall apart, as the managers realize they have nothing to fall back on when power is truly taken from them.
I had a collegue in Albany whose family had to flee Cuba, as her father owned a grocery store. I think she said she was only 5 years old?
As soon as the nonsense of covid hit, she was having so many flashbacks of the communist take over, she was warning anyone who would listen.
Walter is correct, people who lived it are the first to point it out.
I read Animal Farm in high school, one of three books which were teacher assigned in high school. The others were Brave New World and one by Ayn Rand that I can’t remember the title. I thought the pigs ideas were great until they turned against the other animals. I am sure I posed the question of “wouldn’t it work if the pigs were of better character?” My teacher, the offspring of Germans and born before WWII, taught me swiftly that it is human nature to corrupt power. The system of communism with its centralized power is easily corrupted . The system we have in America is corruptible, but harder to accomplish with checks and balances of power. I was 15 and I therefore have the instinctual reaction of aversion when I hear about free items, or the government taking care of us. I read Animal Farm again in 2021 when I figured out the talking heads kept rewriting the rules on the side of the barn. I will always be grateful for the elective reading class I took and the teacher who shared what she knew by assigning and discussing those three books with us before she turned us loose to read what we chose.
My understanding of Orwell's perspective is that the characteristics present in revolutionaries are not well-suited for power. The animals needed to keep the pigs in check or change leadership the moment they started playing games with the milk and apples. As I recall, Orwell saw that as a critical moment and sought to expand upon it with additions to the script in the radio version.
In theory, democratic socialism could have checks and balances to attempt to circuit breaker those moments as readily as democratic capitalism. In practice, there are many ways in either system to leverage vulnerabilities in human nature to circumvent these.
Even democratic socialism is based upon socialism. The theory, specifically the selling point, of everyone being and achieving equal shares is violative of human potential and capability. I do not want to perpetually take care of others who I have no connection to, and I do not expect that from others. Since that action has to be facilitated in a concentrated manner, it is highly corruptible instead of hard to corrupt.
I'm not trying to make the sale, of course. That said, the dynamic is quickly changing as the value of labor needed from the American worker declines.
We've already had industrial displacement, where the Chinese worker provides the lion's share of the labor economically needed. That has left us with a situation where even those working the McJobs that represent an increasing portion of the economy need people like you to pitch in for their care.
But soon, androids will be usurping the need for American labor as well. Much cheaper, like-for-like replacements for most of the labor we need.
They'll be the ones we need to tax to take care of others, as human potential becomes less valued -- resulting in a game of musical chairs that eventually leaves even the most skilled of us without a chair to sit on.
A much more articulate explanation of what I tried to say in another comment.
I’d rather Farewell My Lovely also
Animal Farm makes me cry, I dig the horse
Right!
Guts me everytime
I've read Animal Farm several times and I always cry about Boxer and "I will work harder".
Susan Collins is more man than [Graham Platner]…ROTFLMAO
Hotchkiss. OMG. My college roommate circa 1985 went there. Marimekko bedding, cropped hair, cigarette, mummy calling from Connecticut. I didn't dislike her but, jeez, that's a distinctive type. And now he's cosplaying.
Matt said that no politician would have said even five years ago what Mamdani says today. What has changed is the electorate, just like it did in London or most big cities in western Europe. We may see NY to look and vote just like the people in London.
The Democratic Party has to focus on big City mayor races, as this is the only place their lunacy can win.
As AOC was passionately rattling of the NYC boroughs one-by-one, I kept waiting for John Dean’s trademark Wilhelm death scream. Gotta say I felt a little cheated.
Still bitter that Matt took to the Internet for a book poll, and we are cheated out of "Farewell, My Lovely", for a book that is just a mashup of 1984 and That Hideous Strength. We get it, George. Would prefer some apolitical writing to enjoy.
I'd imagine (well, hope) that all the books in the poll are likely at some point. Matt had Farewell, My Lovely in his Top 10 and Walter had said he wants to read Things Fall Apart.
I saw the poll and voted Animal Farm, because it has the sociopolitical significance to merit a dedicated discussion with Walter and Matt. I find the focal point to be quite a bit different than either 1984 or That Hideous Strength. I do hope we get the other three (Heart of a Dog was the third).
Has anyone proposed Red Harvest yet?
That would be a fun re-read, absolutely.
Yeah, I didn't see the poll.
I think Matt was very perceptive when he said our Founding Fathers started from the point of recognizing the weaknesses in human nature and tried to devise a system to prevent the worst elements of human nature from subverting it.
Contrast that with communism, which tries to shoehorn human nature into its communal system, expecting human nature to adapt.
The Founding Fathers did a pretty good job, except I believe humans will eventually manage to subvert *any* system. It's just a matter of how long it takes.
Listening again to entire episode, I'm reminded of the Cloward-Piven strategy.
In Cloward and Pivon's own article, from The Nation magazine, May 1966.
https://www.commondreams.org/news/2010/03/24/weight-poor-strategy-end-poverty
And an explainer of their strategy written Richard Poe almost 40 years after their original publications.
https://rickbulow.com/Library/Books/7-11-2024/TheClowardPivenStrategy.pdf
I find capitalism, socialism and communism things which come to the same poor end, through different means. The major difference I see in their common dis functionality is capitalism is bifurcated. Where socialism and communism have their systems inevitably corrupted by only their inevitably corrupted governments alone. Capitalism has a dual track of the private and public sector corruption competing and colluding to screw everyone else to empower themselves.
The most pathetic outcome of all the systems is they become only concerned with self preservation of the internals of the system. Not the external intent of the well being of the people and their world. It is obvious as you see the system growing only internally. With ever less useful external effect being accomplished. The system consumes ever more. Produces ever less useful effect.
Government, corporate. They become a circle jerk of self administration. Bloat. Ever less concern of those external to their system.
Capitalism in concept is to destroy all competition. To be one central thing. Communism and socialism just start at that sad finish line.
A realistic system has a mix of these systems. With logical and strongly enforced rules. Learned and taught again and again.