I feel that. I wish - in a perfect world - we weren't facing down an intolerant Left that guards culture like the ghost in Poltergeist. If they just let down the high wall, we could all talk like regular people again. Because man, do we all need shared culture...
Culture is based on shared values. We no longer have those. What we are experiencing, I believe, is a sorting out of shared value cohorts that will eventually result in the balkanization of the US. And I believe it will be quite violent.
Perhaps the most frustrating thing about our present "binary" (to use Matt's term) is that reliable survey data consistently demonstrates broad and deep consensus on values and policy positions among Americans. Even so-called hot button issues like abortion, immigration, healthcare, and criminal justice reveal a lot of shared values and preferences. BUT not among elites and partisan bases or the conflict entrepreneurs that infest the MSM and social media spaces.
I hear you, but its important to ask how many people and which ones. I suspect the ghoulish behavior on Tik Tok, Blue Sky, and Podcastistan is atypical.
99%? More than ½ the population lives in suburbia. Urban & rural are in the 20s. Across all 3 geographic types majorities want abortions to be safe legal & rare, reasonable gun control, sane immigration policy, voter ID, etc. even in urban centers, these are consensus values…our use of primaries (where the extremes dominate) produces nutters like Mamdani. And the equally whacky TDS-afflicted journos who give him a free pass. The other side spawns goofballs like MTG who are supported by unhinged “journalists” on the populist right.
Average voter turnout is approximately 63.8% of the voting-age population for Presidential election years. For mid-term elections the percentage falls to about 47.8%. Since the votes are oftentimes a tossup between the two parties, dependent on "getting out their bases", the only consensus I see is amongst the average 44.2% of non-voters. The apathetic, or possibly nihilistic, non-voters have reached the point of understanding that it's a pointless exercise. The extremists from both sides are fighting it out over culture disputes, meanwhile at the swamp, the parties converge and continue voting for their elitist and biggest donors.
I see your point, but I think you may be making an unwarranted assumption, namely that the 63.8% turnout reflects the bases turned out, leaving the 44.8% non-voters as the only ones outside the respective bases. A clear indication that the turnout includes way more than the bases is the fact that 223 counties voted twice for Obama and then for Trump in 2016. Moreover, we know that registered Ds and Rs are both under 30% and its safe to assume that the bases are fractions of those minority percentages. Many of the Democratic and Republican voters cast their ballots with a clothes pin on their noses because our plurality, winner-take-all electoral system forces moderates who lean left or right to vote with extremists on the respective sides. Reputable surveys consistently show strong consensus on issues and a "pox on both your houses" perspective across both Rs & Ds. One of the best analyses is the Hidden Tribes report: https://hiddentribes.us/
The problem with this, like the problem with just about every "Civil War II" prediction I can recall reading to date, is that conventional divisions rely on geography, and the present divisions rely less and less on geography or any objective reality. Also and as such, it's worth remembering that the worst of the hate is from/by/against the "terminally-online" or similarly-sequestered (e.g. pseudoacademics); this is a good thing to some extent, but it does pose a question of what's to be done about them.
I understand that LLMs, if left unchecked, will kill the Internet in the manner of electronic Mad-Cow Disease...not to mention the ever-looming specter of another Carrington/Miyake Event or other cosmic nuisance. Hardly ideal scenarios (I wish we could just roll the Internet back to "Web 1.0"), but if all else fails, maybe two problems solve each other?
Getting back to your point, I don't mean to purely dismiss it: Balkanization is something I've thought about for many years, and it doesn't HAVE TO BE a bad fate. Think of the 'amicable divorce' of Czechoslovakia, or maybe even Brexit, which at least has not yet resulted in sectarian violence (and is itself an interesting lesson in beyond-binary politics; I know at least one stridently "left-wing" British Web-pal who voted for it and has no regrets). I also recommend "American Nations", by Colin Woodard, for a guide to more reality-based cultural cleavage.
I assume he means dissolution into a number of smaller nations. I'd like to believe that federalism and a return to a smaller U.S. government on top of stronger state governments could forestall that, but it seems neither side really wants that any more -- the whole ball game for the left and the right is control of the federal government in order to suppress your enemies.
I wonder if it is only extreme threats that bring a country together (in a shared value way) such as WWII or 9/11? And absent that , a country, especially a free country will naturally gravitate to positions (right, left) and absent another extreme event those positions just become more fixed.
Certainly expect China and other external enemies to do what they can to encourage the process, from providing money, training and even weapons to separatists, to economic dirty tricks, and potentially much worse, such as diplomatic recognition of, and military assistance to, say, a Democratic Republic of Greater Oregon or People’s Republic of New England. There’s certainly precedent - the Cuba-based Venceremos Brigade for instance, which provided training in good old fashioned communist agitprop to thousands of American students. current Mayor of Los Angeles Karen Bass, is one such graduate.
One thing I’m sure the Chinese would hate to see coming out of the other side of domestic American chaos would be a unified radical Socialist United States of America that decided it’s the new Standard-Bearer for the international Socialist movement. China will do all it can to prevent such an outcome.
Hardly. I can’t count how many times I’ve heard Matt say something along the lines of “there are 10 million other people writing articles every day about how horrible Trump is; what could I possibly add.” He’s not picking sides. He’s exhausted with the people who won’t let him not pick sides.
oh, somehow I missed that the left does not have an insatiable need and drive for constant turmoil, change, and breaking from norms and nature that humanity has held for 1,000s of years.
the constant drive to increase government in size and scope until it encompasses every aspect of human life and the stakes so high that every election is an existential crises.
Democrats gave you Trump. The left I used to be a part of tried to give you Sanders in 2015. Instead the Dems cheated and tried to force Clinton down the nation’s throat, much like they tried to stuff a fully demented Biden and then a totally unpopular and unelected Harris down our throats.
Trump was the result both times. The only reason he lost to Biden in 2020 was Covid.
I don't believe we ever had a shared culture. We had a shared experience and we tolerated each other's culture because the getting was very good. My lifetime has seen a land of bounty, where there was always more than enough. Those days are over, and so is the tolerant America.
A new Ford F-150 was about $15k in 1996. Today it's $80-$90k out the door, meanwhile wages went stagnant. That is not a sign of success
I would argue that we got too big for our britches, and now it's all hangin out for everyone to see. Imo, this is not going to end well.
I think about this all the time. We have nothing since the internet and streaming services. Nothing like the evening news or even a popular radio station that you would know the person in the car next to you was listening to because they were belting out the same lyrics. No "Who shot JR?" cliffhangers to discuss at work. Heck, not wven a shared workplace for many of us to talk to other people in the breakroom. I think this is the very definition of divide and conquer.
Yes an intolerant Left and an ignorant, malignant Right that guards white Christian culture like it’s being swept out to see by Islamists and the secular.
Matt had me at "I never listen to good advice." That's so us. Extra points for citing Balzac.
Who doesn't live in a binary world? Just about everyone, that's why we think so little of pols, the media, and faux academics who use expressions like "settled science" and who wouldn't know J.S. Mill if he jumped up and down on their empty heads.
Great article - a total rejection of arbitrary values and timetables. I've mentioned Louis Mercier before - he was a dramatist and an observer/journalist - fairly prolific. Matt's piece on scandal of the day "Hoo, boy" was exactly right.
Auditory phonetics vs. Articulatory phonetics. So, I stumbled on the title of Matt's piece and his decision to place Crap Magnet at the top of his piece. A far better and braver choice for Sept 11 would have been a photograph of Charlie Kirk.
Matt's antipathy towards Trump is as well-known as Matt's tongue baths of Bernie which lie dormant yet alive in Matt's cluttered brain pan.
I know very few people who inhabit a binary environment in the real world. Matt is whining about the real world challenges of producing intelligent thoughtful journalism which attracts far fewer hits than the Crap Magnet/Emotional trigger - read Emmanuel Goldstein - except that Crap Magnet is a real person and inhabits a real space and is at least as complicated and complex as any human, which might be worth pointing out.
People choose to dismantle our capacities to find humanity, nuance, and complexity in others - its a popular, timeless, and entirely predictable evolutionary self-defense mechanism of our herd instinct, and one the clever chose not to deploy if possible.
Civilization requires that extra effort - to make a decision to light a candle as the opportunities arise throughout the day. I see this in others every day, acts of courtesy and kindness to others. Of course, that's coz I live in the real world with the other humans.
The media space is a gigantic sewer packed with garbage and flowers, as LC once sang to us - a guide or two holding up the mirror helps, but eras have nothing to do it. We make our own realities with the help of great artists and others in everyday life who remind us of the beauties - as Matt and Brad are doing now, thank goodness.
If you don't know much about acoustic phonetics as the frame for semantics and cognitive processes, and clouds of examplars maybe take a closer look.
I've known only a few professional journalists. One quit during the 80s because his job was to wait outside the home of "Scandal of the Day" to ambush the couple and create sound bites.
That's still the job - hasn't changed - but in a super expanded media space - using the biggest Crap Magnet is always going to be the default move - as Matt demonstrates concretely by placing Crap Magnet at the top of his piece - writers have to deploy tricks to win clicks.
More than anything that I used to listen to. They were the best. Yes Matt put up with Walter's sometimes abrasiveness and sometime angst but they were such a great pair to listen to. And the time spent discussing books was magic. I can honestly say that I regularly looked forward to Matt and Walter talk more than any other regular event in my life. Damn Matt, it sucks.
I am right there with you. Nothing else compared too it. Matt, maybe y'all can bring it back just one day a week, or bi-weekly even, and keep it more focused somehow to prevent it from slipping into commentary of the binary hellscape we're living in now.
I did try to make the point in an email with a relative that idolatry was not loving something necessarily, but centering that person; that we just broke it off with two couples we can no longer stand because they bicker and act out in public (and treat waitstaff horribly) and seem to hate each other yet stand united "against Trump" (a great foundation for a marriage!); and that talking about Trump 24/7 was a way to avoid one's owns issues and problems.
Trump and his more ardent idolators as well as the people who really, really hate him are interesting fun-house mirror images of one another. The only real difference is that the Trump Troop don't typically see the need to premptively seize the moral high ground on every issue, large and small. But both view politics and indeed life itself in purely transactional and materialist terms. Both take the "personal is political" to absurd lengths. Both are corrupt, though Trump is corrupt in the kind of crass, obvious ways that are easy to understand, whereas the Never Trumpers are intellectually corrupt but obfuscate with academic bafflegab larded with appeals to base emotions. They are the perfect example of Churchill's definition of a fanatic as someone "who can't change his mind and won't change the subject."
I think the people who hatey-hate him actually envy him his perceived control. If they could seize the crown, they would really straighten out the rest of us!
Trump has taken the tactics that leftists used against conservatives for decades and turned them upside down, and achieved a decent degree of success (though he has also sowed a lot of needless chaos) doing so. And it DRIVES THEM NUTS.
Every time Trump does or suggests something really dumb, I always wonder "is he punking them or does he really mean this?" I still haven't figured that out. I like your term "academic bafflegab". Must be sure to use this!
As a Canadian, I can assure you that there are many of who are not at all self-loathing. Your idea of what Canadians are like is a shallow media depiction. Come visit rural Canada sometime. What you’ll find are a lot of tough, hardworking people.
My (now ex-) mother-in-law got involved in state level IL politics about 15 years ago. Her husband has always owned small businesses and they had all these ideas about how to improve IL’s economy. But, out canvassing, people would stop them before they even got to that and ask how they felt about the gays, or abortion. Pro or con, too many people get fixated on one issue and ignore everything else, often to their own detriment. It does get boring quickly.
Culture War bogeymen have always been the go-to for convincing regular people to vote against their own self-interests.
Blame the immigrants for taking our jobs! Meanwhile the Uniparty is working to increase globalization and offshore as many American jobs as possible to increase shareholder profits.
Is abortion healthcare? Is a fetus the same as a fully-formed human? Who cares - don’t want an abortion? Don’t get one. Want more people to have kids? Ensure they can do so without being crushed by poverty, the most expensive healthcare in the world, price-gouging for food/groceries, gas and housing, and ensure those future-humans will have access to a decent education instead of all of these things being privileges for the wealthy.
The average American supports Medicare For All, better wages and fewer data centers and tech-oligarch corruption. They want less police state, and an end to pointless wars that no one voted for. There is no real contention there - we just need to take our government back from the goddamn lobbyists and crooks in both parties.
I think these arguments trivialize the importance of the so-called "culture wars" to many people. "Culture war" issues have to do with existential identity, and with justice. Would we flippantly say: "Don't want murder? Don't commit one," with the subtext that whatever murders someone else may commit are their own business?
The frustrated complaint made by the economic left, that culture war bogeymen cause regular people to "vote against their own self-interests" is awesomely condescending. The implication is that regular people are complete philistines who only care about themselves, and therefore should vote the left into power so that they can get more free stuff by taking it from others.
When I vote, I vote as a citizen of a country, with the responsibility to use that vote to preserve that country and to make it a fair and decent place for its native people. Existential identity and justice are essential considerations to my vote. Voting according to how it might help me economically strikes me as base and corrupt.
If your chosen reaction to someone making factual observations about reality is becoming offended, no one here can help you. The fact that you're trying to reframe my comments with some right/left tribalism bullshit tells me you're either unable or unwilling, and that's a whole lotta Not My Fucking Problem.
If you want to sell us disingenuous bullshit like "Don't want murder? Don't commit one," then you must also have strong-yet-stupid moral objections to, say, antibiotics. And it is your right as an American to hold whatever absurd opinions you want - it doesn't mean I or anyone else has to take those objections seriously. So ditch the hyperbole and address any of the real issues I called out in my comment, or get lost.
Vote how you want - I don't care. But while you're busy voting, acknowledge reality: our government is completely corrupted, largely worthless, and serves wealthy donors and corporations, not We The People. If you're happily voting in support of corruption, greed, and the daily violations of our civil liberties despite all the evidence of these things, that strikes me as base and corrupt.
I will say, I'm glad you are out there fighting to make America better for American Indians everywhere. Our government continues to give them the shaft, longer and harder than the rest of us. They all deserve a fair and decent place to live, amen.
Your response is a very good illustration of what Matt was ranting about in this article.
Your original thesis statement was: "Culture War bogeymen have always been the go-to for convincing regular people to vote against their own self-interests." You threw out your take on a smattering of political issues in support of that claim.
I disagreed with your thesis, which I think trivializes "culture war" issues, and arrogantly appropriates the conscience of people who vote contrary to what you would prefer. I did not attack you personally, and I did not reframe your argument or introduce left/right tribalism. I did not respond to your take on the miscellany of political issues you mentioned, because they were not important to the thesis we were discussing, and also because I happen to agree with your views on many of them.
Your reply was the raging disingenuity above. Are you really not able to handle any kind of civil disagreement?
Take your time. The fact that you recognize and can string together coherent words and thoughts to describe this bizarre circus is good enough for me. The world has turned into a never ending LSD laced with magic mushrooms trip of an experience - difficult to watch much less internalize in any meaningful way. So, have at it at your own pace - your efforts are appreciated.
Reading a newspaper, listening to the news, perusing social media. It is exhausting-Trump, climate change, far right, woke progressives. You get to a point where you discount everything as hyperbole. My trust in journalism is limited to a handful of people and I find that dangerous and incredibly disheartening.
I think it takes living in a dysfunctional municipality to see it. And then you talk with people who listen to kimmel, oliver, owens or alex jones and realize how easy it is to persuade large numbers of people to believe utter horse shit.
For me, that is the most disheartening. The most educated people are the easiest to fool. Their egos won't let them admit they're wrong.
Moving from a big (liberal) city to a bedroom community in a different part of the country has been a real eye-opener. By and large, this is a more working class/successful small businness owner community and ironically I find I can talk freely with people here over a much wider range of topics and politics rarely, if ever comes up, except maybe peripherally. The hyper-educated types that I used to dwell amongst are IMO hyper-obsessed with meaningless BS and all their "ideas" tend to come from the same place.
I know someone who made a similar move from the West coast to Michigan. He went Mount Vesuvius when Hillary lost, closed his online accounts and blew up friendships..... over politics. His MI move changed him because he met people who were outside his groupthink bubble. To his credit, he put his anger aside and listened. He doesn't agree with their politics, but he understands why they feel as they do. Mostly, it's hard to hate people you like.
So many thoughts. All I'll say is that the world needs... the country needs... *I* need journalists who care more about what's true than ideology. You're in such short supply. Insert the standard "I don't always agree with you, but..." caveat here. Because it's true. But I've been a subscriber here since the beginning and an avid reader since well before that (the lit discussions with WK were a cherished diversion, for the reasons given), with no intention to bolt. I'll stop there, except to say that every time you mention following the story where it takes you, no matter what, I cheer a little. And it's not boring.
Matt is one of just a few people I credit with helping me realize how much I didn't know about what was/is actually going on in the world. His reporting about the Twitter Files to Russiagate and more recently a simple comment he made on one of the last ATW podcasts about news coverage of detained migrants not being allowed to contact their families... something he claimed to know first hand because he wrote about it in one of his books... back in 2010! That one comment alone prompted me to spend hours doing a deep dive into current and past immigration enforcement to see how much was the same and how much was different, and I was shocked at how similar enforcement has been compared to past administrations. A fact finding journey I went on primarily because Matt made one simple statement that ran contrary to the current media portrayal.
Buddy, that sez a hell of a lot more about you than it does about Matt, man. And it looks good on you. People who do the sort of stuff you just described yourself doing renew my faith in humanity.
I credit Matt for being the one person who made me understand that there is never good censorship - there is no such thing. Free speech only exists if it's boundless.
I’ve pretty much cease to discuss any issues with people unless I know them so well that they know that I’m an independent thinker, which means maybe two or three of my closest family and friends.
The problem is if you voice an opinion on any issue, you’re immediately considered to be playing for “that” team. And I don’t play for a team. I have pretty eclectic positions on all kinds of issues that I’ve actually read position papers on and attempted to understand. And they’re all over the map.
I simply can no longer tolerate talking to people that will excuse anything no matter how disgusting if it’s a member of their “team” and condemn anything and subscribe the most horrible motivations to anybody on the other “team”.
You don’t even need AI for this. All you need is a simple formulation; if us equals virtuous, and if them equals evil.
You've characterized well the plight of independent thinkers. Reminds me of a saying from 60 years ago: Feel free to think however you like. Just be prepared to be alone.
Thanks for this. Ringside has a bell. But it still takes a referee to count the fighter out or winner.
Listen to the bell, rest on your knees or laurels for as long as it takes to get back up and win the fight. For us. For us. We are the referee. And we are partial to you as fighter.
Matt I never know to laugh or cry when I read some moron on X refer to you as a “conservative.” Fail to scream “Free Palestine,” or “86 47” and suddenly you’re a card-carrying member of the John Birch Society.
I appreciate your angst. Good luck on the book. I particularly understand trying to read the classics or things that are more life affirming, things humans have in common, and not political. Everything is political to a leftist. Everything. I had to quit the book club because I'm sick of leftist virtue signaling and over-simplified messaging at the expense of any kind of nuanced or complex character development. Or ANY attempt to frame the questions there are no real answers to with the insipid moralizing. I went back to reading classics, too. Thanks for doing that. However, about journalism. If I were a journalist, I'd be more concerned about framing the dangers of the communist left (and their "unholy" alignment with Islam--a group of atheists and religious fanatics--who would have figured) than how I handled Trump, who will soon be gone. The communist left will not be gone soon. Perhaps that should be somewhat rewarding since I can see writing about Trump would get tedious. If leftists actually wrote about the issues and NOT Trump, perhaps it wouldn't be such a garbage dump and people might have SOME shot at common sense and compromise. But I don't see that happening anytime soon. But I must say, my last five years would have been bereft without your work. I suspect it feels like tilting at windmills because it is; the virtue is doing it anyway. L
I feel that. I wish - in a perfect world - we weren't facing down an intolerant Left that guards culture like the ghost in Poltergeist. If they just let down the high wall, we could all talk like regular people again. Because man, do we all need shared culture...
Culture is based on shared values. We no longer have those. What we are experiencing, I believe, is a sorting out of shared value cohorts that will eventually result in the balkanization of the US. And I believe it will be quite violent.
Perhaps the most frustrating thing about our present "binary" (to use Matt's term) is that reliable survey data consistently demonstrates broad and deep consensus on values and policy positions among Americans. Even so-called hot button issues like abortion, immigration, healthcare, and criminal justice reveal a lot of shared values and preferences. BUT not among elites and partisan bases or the conflict entrepreneurs that infest the MSM and social media spaces.
Maybe. But when I see people celebrating murder, even of children, it think maybe not. And if people dont vote issues, what does it matter?
I hear you, but its important to ask how many people and which ones. I suspect the ghoulish behavior on Tik Tok, Blue Sky, and Podcastistan is atypical.
People would vote on these issues if they believed the candidates would deliver on their promises.
Again and again, Americans vote in the candidate proposing peace and we get more war.
Blue team got a super-majority to fix healthcare, & all they could deliver was an American Heritage Foundation wet dream.
ita still geographical. its the rural 99% of the land against the urban ratpacked cities.
99%? More than ½ the population lives in suburbia. Urban & rural are in the 20s. Across all 3 geographic types majorities want abortions to be safe legal & rare, reasonable gun control, sane immigration policy, voter ID, etc. even in urban centers, these are consensus values…our use of primaries (where the extremes dominate) produces nutters like Mamdani. And the equally whacky TDS-afflicted journos who give him a free pass. The other side spawns goofballs like MTG who are supported by unhinged “journalists” on the populist right.
“ conflict entrepreneurs” - brilliant observation
Credit where credit is due…I heard Gov. Spencer Cox )R-UT) use that term in a keynote he gave at the Braver Angels National Convention in Gettysburg.
Conflict entrepreneurs is just exactly the precise term. Thanks!
Dude. Duuuuuuude. You nailed it. Well said.
Average voter turnout is approximately 63.8% of the voting-age population for Presidential election years. For mid-term elections the percentage falls to about 47.8%. Since the votes are oftentimes a tossup between the two parties, dependent on "getting out their bases", the only consensus I see is amongst the average 44.2% of non-voters. The apathetic, or possibly nihilistic, non-voters have reached the point of understanding that it's a pointless exercise. The extremists from both sides are fighting it out over culture disputes, meanwhile at the swamp, the parties converge and continue voting for their elitist and biggest donors.
I see your point, but I think you may be making an unwarranted assumption, namely that the 63.8% turnout reflects the bases turned out, leaving the 44.8% non-voters as the only ones outside the respective bases. A clear indication that the turnout includes way more than the bases is the fact that 223 counties voted twice for Obama and then for Trump in 2016. Moreover, we know that registered Ds and Rs are both under 30% and its safe to assume that the bases are fractions of those minority percentages. Many of the Democratic and Republican voters cast their ballots with a clothes pin on their noses because our plurality, winner-take-all electoral system forces moderates who lean left or right to vote with extremists on the respective sides. Reputable surveys consistently show strong consensus on issues and a "pox on both your houses" perspective across both Rs & Ds. One of the best analyses is the Hidden Tribes report: https://hiddentribes.us/
yes, the parasite will have no choice but violence when it realizes its losing the host.
The problem with this, like the problem with just about every "Civil War II" prediction I can recall reading to date, is that conventional divisions rely on geography, and the present divisions rely less and less on geography or any objective reality. Also and as such, it's worth remembering that the worst of the hate is from/by/against the "terminally-online" or similarly-sequestered (e.g. pseudoacademics); this is a good thing to some extent, but it does pose a question of what's to be done about them.
I understand that LLMs, if left unchecked, will kill the Internet in the manner of electronic Mad-Cow Disease...not to mention the ever-looming specter of another Carrington/Miyake Event or other cosmic nuisance. Hardly ideal scenarios (I wish we could just roll the Internet back to "Web 1.0"), but if all else fails, maybe two problems solve each other?
Getting back to your point, I don't mean to purely dismiss it: Balkanization is something I've thought about for many years, and it doesn't HAVE TO BE a bad fate. Think of the 'amicable divorce' of Czechoslovakia, or maybe even Brexit, which at least has not yet resulted in sectarian violence (and is itself an interesting lesson in beyond-binary politics; I know at least one stridently "left-wing" British Web-pal who voted for it and has no regrets). I also recommend "American Nations", by Colin Woodard, for a guide to more reality-based cultural cleavage.
What do you mean by ‘balkanization?’
I assume he means dissolution into a number of smaller nations. I'd like to believe that federalism and a return to a smaller U.S. government on top of stronger state governments could forestall that, but it seems neither side really wants that any more -- the whole ball game for the left and the right is control of the federal government in order to suppress your enemies.
The “right” wants to be left alone. The “left” wants control of every aspect of your life.
...and consolidate your power
I wonder if it is only extreme threats that bring a country together (in a shared value way) such as WWII or 9/11? And absent that , a country, especially a free country will naturally gravitate to positions (right, left) and absent another extreme event those positions just become more fixed.
I wonder if progressives would be on the U.S. side if there was a WW III? Or, as Democrat Ilhan Omar said, World War Eleven.
Certainly expect China and other external enemies to do what they can to encourage the process, from providing money, training and even weapons to separatists, to economic dirty tricks, and potentially much worse, such as diplomatic recognition of, and military assistance to, say, a Democratic Republic of Greater Oregon or People’s Republic of New England. There’s certainly precedent - the Cuba-based Venceremos Brigade for instance, which provided training in good old fashioned communist agitprop to thousands of American students. current Mayor of Los Angeles Karen Bass, is one such graduate.
One thing I’m sure the Chinese would hate to see coming out of the other side of domestic American chaos would be a unified radical Socialist United States of America that decided it’s the new Standard-Bearer for the international Socialist movement. China will do all it can to prevent such an outcome.
Yes, and even in many states considered Red or Blue, there are often 30% of the opposing denomination.
- complains about the binary
- blames the left
This is why we’re where we are.
Hardly. I can’t count how many times I’ve heard Matt say something along the lines of “there are 10 million other people writing articles every day about how horrible Trump is; what could I possibly add.” He’s not picking sides. He’s exhausted with the people who won’t let him not pick sides.
I was referring to Sasha, not Matt.
Fair. I wouldn't blame Sasha for "why we are where we are," but she can't say she escapes the binary.
oh, somehow I missed that the left does not have an insatiable need and drive for constant turmoil, change, and breaking from norms and nature that humanity has held for 1,000s of years.
the constant drive to increase government in size and scope until it encompasses every aspect of human life and the stakes so high that every election is an existential crises.
it is your fuckin' fault. own it, coward.
I’m personally ruining your life and enjoying it, you’re right.
The left gave us Trump and I’ll never forgive that.
Where does that leave me?
Democrats gave you Trump. The left I used to be a part of tried to give you Sanders in 2015. Instead the Dems cheated and tried to force Clinton down the nation’s throat, much like they tried to stuff a fully demented Biden and then a totally unpopular and unelected Harris down our throats.
Trump was the result both times. The only reason he lost to Biden in 2020 was Covid.
I wish more people realized that!
A real good chunk of it, anyway. We've all been trained well.
Spot on. I guess I’m on “the left” whatever that means, but I’m not much like any of the descriptions of the left I read here.
You’re waxing binary still.
Thanks for noticing. 😜
Oh jeez, I had binary wax once! You have to dig it out with a nail.
eeww gross
I don't believe we ever had a shared culture. We had a shared experience and we tolerated each other's culture because the getting was very good. My lifetime has seen a land of bounty, where there was always more than enough. Those days are over, and so is the tolerant America.
A new Ford F-150 was about $15k in 1996. Today it's $80-$90k out the door, meanwhile wages went stagnant. That is not a sign of success
I would argue that we got too big for our britches, and now it's all hangin out for everyone to see. Imo, this is not going to end well.
I think about this all the time. We have nothing since the internet and streaming services. Nothing like the evening news or even a popular radio station that you would know the person in the car next to you was listening to because they were belting out the same lyrics. No "Who shot JR?" cliffhangers to discuss at work. Heck, not wven a shared workplace for many of us to talk to other people in the breakroom. I think this is the very definition of divide and conquer.
Amen Sasha
Yes an intolerant Left and an ignorant, malignant Right that guards white Christian culture like it’s being swept out to see by Islamists and the secular.
The loudmouth leftists are not guarding our shared culture, they're destroying it.
There's much intolerance on the right also.
You're still living in the binary and perpetrating it. Your neighbor isn't your enemy.
I wouldn’t be such a captive of the binary if my enemies weren’t so evil.
(Not sarcasm, sadly.)
You are the stupidest woman in North America.
This is pure Matt Taibbi and I love it. Take all the time you need, Matt, I’ll be waiting.
Matt had me at "I never listen to good advice." That's so us. Extra points for citing Balzac.
Who doesn't live in a binary world? Just about everyone, that's why we think so little of pols, the media, and faux academics who use expressions like "settled science" and who wouldn't know J.S. Mill if he jumped up and down on their empty heads.
Great article - a total rejection of arbitrary values and timetables. I've mentioned Louis Mercier before - he was a dramatist and an observer/journalist - fairly prolific. Matt's piece on scandal of the day "Hoo, boy" was exactly right.
Great article, Matt sounds much better!
Auditory phonetics vs. Articulatory phonetics. So, I stumbled on the title of Matt's piece and his decision to place Crap Magnet at the top of his piece. A far better and braver choice for Sept 11 would have been a photograph of Charlie Kirk.
Matt's antipathy towards Trump is as well-known as Matt's tongue baths of Bernie which lie dormant yet alive in Matt's cluttered brain pan.
I know very few people who inhabit a binary environment in the real world. Matt is whining about the real world challenges of producing intelligent thoughtful journalism which attracts far fewer hits than the Crap Magnet/Emotional trigger - read Emmanuel Goldstein - except that Crap Magnet is a real person and inhabits a real space and is at least as complicated and complex as any human, which might be worth pointing out.
People choose to dismantle our capacities to find humanity, nuance, and complexity in others - its a popular, timeless, and entirely predictable evolutionary self-defense mechanism of our herd instinct, and one the clever chose not to deploy if possible.
Civilization requires that extra effort - to make a decision to light a candle as the opportunities arise throughout the day. I see this in others every day, acts of courtesy and kindness to others. Of course, that's coz I live in the real world with the other humans.
The media space is a gigantic sewer packed with garbage and flowers, as LC once sang to us - a guide or two holding up the mirror helps, but eras have nothing to do it. We make our own realities with the help of great artists and others in everyday life who remind us of the beauties - as Matt and Brad are doing now, thank goodness.
If you don't know much about acoustic phonetics as the frame for semantics and cognitive processes, and clouds of examplars maybe take a closer look.
I've known only a few professional journalists. One quit during the 80s because his job was to wait outside the home of "Scandal of the Day" to ambush the couple and create sound bites.
That's still the job - hasn't changed - but in a super expanded media space - using the biggest Crap Magnet is always going to be the default move - as Matt demonstrates concretely by placing Crap Magnet at the top of his piece - writers have to deploy tricks to win clicks.
Always love a good Hunter Thompson reference. Thank you.
"... could be dismissed as throat-clearing..."
Yeah. I'll wait.
Matt, thanks for the shout out to Walter Kirn. I miss the podcast you two did.
More than anything that I used to listen to. They were the best. Yes Matt put up with Walter's sometimes abrasiveness and sometime angst but they were such a great pair to listen to. And the time spent discussing books was magic. I can honestly say that I regularly looked forward to Matt and Walter talk more than any other regular event in my life. Damn Matt, it sucks.
I am right there with you. Nothing else compared too it. Matt, maybe y'all can bring it back just one day a week, or bi-weekly even, and keep it more focused somehow to prevent it from slipping into commentary of the binary hellscape we're living in now.
If the Blues Brothers could put the band back together......
Thank you! I couldn't have said it better myself.
I did try to make the point in an email with a relative that idolatry was not loving something necessarily, but centering that person; that we just broke it off with two couples we can no longer stand because they bicker and act out in public (and treat waitstaff horribly) and seem to hate each other yet stand united "against Trump" (a great foundation for a marriage!); and that talking about Trump 24/7 was a way to avoid one's owns issues and problems.
No reply.
Trump and his more ardent idolators as well as the people who really, really hate him are interesting fun-house mirror images of one another. The only real difference is that the Trump Troop don't typically see the need to premptively seize the moral high ground on every issue, large and small. But both view politics and indeed life itself in purely transactional and materialist terms. Both take the "personal is political" to absurd lengths. Both are corrupt, though Trump is corrupt in the kind of crass, obvious ways that are easy to understand, whereas the Never Trumpers are intellectually corrupt but obfuscate with academic bafflegab larded with appeals to base emotions. They are the perfect example of Churchill's definition of a fanatic as someone "who can't change his mind and won't change the subject."
Well said!
I think the people who hatey-hate him actually envy him his perceived control. If they could seize the crown, they would really straighten out the rest of us!
Trump has taken the tactics that leftists used against conservatives for decades and turned them upside down, and achieved a decent degree of success (though he has also sowed a lot of needless chaos) doing so. And it DRIVES THEM NUTS.
Every time Trump does or suggests something really dumb, I always wonder "is he punking them or does he really mean this?" I still haven't figured that out. I like your term "academic bafflegab". Must be sure to use this!
You just described Canada.
Ha! Perfect. A National of self-loathers.
As a Canadian, I can assure you that there are many of who are not at all self-loathing. Your idea of what Canadians are like is a shallow media depiction. Come visit rural Canada sometime. What you’ll find are a lot of tough, hardworking people.
I have deep Canadian roots. That you would take the time to take offense to a one off tongue in cheek comment is very Canadian. Cheers, eh?
Eeeew.
My (now ex-) mother-in-law got involved in state level IL politics about 15 years ago. Her husband has always owned small businesses and they had all these ideas about how to improve IL’s economy. But, out canvassing, people would stop them before they even got to that and ask how they felt about the gays, or abortion. Pro or con, too many people get fixated on one issue and ignore everything else, often to their own detriment. It does get boring quickly.
Culture War bogeymen have always been the go-to for convincing regular people to vote against their own self-interests.
Blame the immigrants for taking our jobs! Meanwhile the Uniparty is working to increase globalization and offshore as many American jobs as possible to increase shareholder profits.
Is abortion healthcare? Is a fetus the same as a fully-formed human? Who cares - don’t want an abortion? Don’t get one. Want more people to have kids? Ensure they can do so without being crushed by poverty, the most expensive healthcare in the world, price-gouging for food/groceries, gas and housing, and ensure those future-humans will have access to a decent education instead of all of these things being privileges for the wealthy.
The average American supports Medicare For All, better wages and fewer data centers and tech-oligarch corruption. They want less police state, and an end to pointless wars that no one voted for. There is no real contention there - we just need to take our government back from the goddamn lobbyists and crooks in both parties.
I think these arguments trivialize the importance of the so-called "culture wars" to many people. "Culture war" issues have to do with existential identity, and with justice. Would we flippantly say: "Don't want murder? Don't commit one," with the subtext that whatever murders someone else may commit are their own business?
The frustrated complaint made by the economic left, that culture war bogeymen cause regular people to "vote against their own self-interests" is awesomely condescending. The implication is that regular people are complete philistines who only care about themselves, and therefore should vote the left into power so that they can get more free stuff by taking it from others.
When I vote, I vote as a citizen of a country, with the responsibility to use that vote to preserve that country and to make it a fair and decent place for its native people. Existential identity and justice are essential considerations to my vote. Voting according to how it might help me economically strikes me as base and corrupt.
If your chosen reaction to someone making factual observations about reality is becoming offended, no one here can help you. The fact that you're trying to reframe my comments with some right/left tribalism bullshit tells me you're either unable or unwilling, and that's a whole lotta Not My Fucking Problem.
If you want to sell us disingenuous bullshit like "Don't want murder? Don't commit one," then you must also have strong-yet-stupid moral objections to, say, antibiotics. And it is your right as an American to hold whatever absurd opinions you want - it doesn't mean I or anyone else has to take those objections seriously. So ditch the hyperbole and address any of the real issues I called out in my comment, or get lost.
Vote how you want - I don't care. But while you're busy voting, acknowledge reality: our government is completely corrupted, largely worthless, and serves wealthy donors and corporations, not We The People. If you're happily voting in support of corruption, greed, and the daily violations of our civil liberties despite all the evidence of these things, that strikes me as base and corrupt.
I will say, I'm glad you are out there fighting to make America better for American Indians everywhere. Our government continues to give them the shaft, longer and harder than the rest of us. They all deserve a fair and decent place to live, amen.
Your response is a very good illustration of what Matt was ranting about in this article.
Your original thesis statement was: "Culture War bogeymen have always been the go-to for convincing regular people to vote against their own self-interests." You threw out your take on a smattering of political issues in support of that claim.
I disagreed with your thesis, which I think trivializes "culture war" issues, and arrogantly appropriates the conscience of people who vote contrary to what you would prefer. I did not attack you personally, and I did not reframe your argument or introduce left/right tribalism. I did not respond to your take on the miscellany of political issues you mentioned, because they were not important to the thesis we were discussing, and also because I happen to agree with your views on many of them.
Your reply was the raging disingenuity above. Are you really not able to handle any kind of civil disagreement?
Amen
Take your time. The fact that you recognize and can string together coherent words and thoughts to describe this bizarre circus is good enough for me. The world has turned into a never ending LSD laced with magic mushrooms trip of an experience - difficult to watch much less internalize in any meaningful way. So, have at it at your own pace - your efforts are appreciated.
Reading a newspaper, listening to the news, perusing social media. It is exhausting-Trump, climate change, far right, woke progressives. You get to a point where you discount everything as hyperbole. My trust in journalism is limited to a handful of people and I find that dangerous and incredibly disheartening.
Please, don’t you give up hope as well, Matt.
I think it takes living in a dysfunctional municipality to see it. And then you talk with people who listen to kimmel, oliver, owens or alex jones and realize how easy it is to persuade large numbers of people to believe utter horse shit.
For me, that is the most disheartening. The most educated people are the easiest to fool. Their egos won't let them admit they're wrong.
Moving from a big (liberal) city to a bedroom community in a different part of the country has been a real eye-opener. By and large, this is a more working class/successful small businness owner community and ironically I find I can talk freely with people here over a much wider range of topics and politics rarely, if ever comes up, except maybe peripherally. The hyper-educated types that I used to dwell amongst are IMO hyper-obsessed with meaningless BS and all their "ideas" tend to come from the same place.
I know someone who made a similar move from the West coast to Michigan. He went Mount Vesuvius when Hillary lost, closed his online accounts and blew up friendships..... over politics. His MI move changed him because he met people who were outside his groupthink bubble. To his credit, he put his anger aside and listened. He doesn't agree with their politics, but he understands why they feel as they do. Mostly, it's hard to hate people you like.
So many thoughts. All I'll say is that the world needs... the country needs... *I* need journalists who care more about what's true than ideology. You're in such short supply. Insert the standard "I don't always agree with you, but..." caveat here. Because it's true. But I've been a subscriber here since the beginning and an avid reader since well before that (the lit discussions with WK were a cherished diversion, for the reasons given), with no intention to bolt. I'll stop there, except to say that every time you mention following the story where it takes you, no matter what, I cheer a little. And it's not boring.
Maybe we can all just agree that the boring thing is the people who insist on using every essay as a Trump-compass. Keep on keepin' on, Matt.
Boy I get it. My husband has stopped reading the news and told me if the world is ending let him know. He is much happier than me at the moment.
Matt is one of just a few people I credit with helping me realize how much I didn't know about what was/is actually going on in the world. His reporting about the Twitter Files to Russiagate and more recently a simple comment he made on one of the last ATW podcasts about news coverage of detained migrants not being allowed to contact their families... something he claimed to know first hand because he wrote about it in one of his books... back in 2010! That one comment alone prompted me to spend hours doing a deep dive into current and past immigration enforcement to see how much was the same and how much was different, and I was shocked at how similar enforcement has been compared to past administrations. A fact finding journey I went on primarily because Matt made one simple statement that ran contrary to the current media portrayal.
Buddy, that sez a hell of a lot more about you than it does about Matt, man. And it looks good on you. People who do the sort of stuff you just described yourself doing renew my faith in humanity.
I thought it was just me!
I credit Matt for being the one person who made me understand that there is never good censorship - there is no such thing. Free speech only exists if it's boundless.
I’ve pretty much cease to discuss any issues with people unless I know them so well that they know that I’m an independent thinker, which means maybe two or three of my closest family and friends.
The problem is if you voice an opinion on any issue, you’re immediately considered to be playing for “that” team. And I don’t play for a team. I have pretty eclectic positions on all kinds of issues that I’ve actually read position papers on and attempted to understand. And they’re all over the map.
I simply can no longer tolerate talking to people that will excuse anything no matter how disgusting if it’s a member of their “team” and condemn anything and subscribe the most horrible motivations to anybody on the other “team”.
You don’t even need AI for this. All you need is a simple formulation; if us equals virtuous, and if them equals evil.
We’re living in that movie Idiocracy.
You've characterized well the plight of independent thinkers. Reminds me of a saying from 60 years ago: Feel free to think however you like. Just be prepared to be alone.
Matt, I feel like you were not anti-Trump enough in this piece
(ducks)
hahahahah. best in thread. :) :) :)
I would say it goes without saying, but he IS a journalist...
I have never had the patience to look at trumps actions, costs too much energy
Thanks for this. Ringside has a bell. But it still takes a referee to count the fighter out or winner.
Listen to the bell, rest on your knees or laurels for as long as it takes to get back up and win the fight. For us. For us. We are the referee. And we are partial to you as fighter.
Matt I never know to laugh or cry when I read some moron on X refer to you as a “conservative.” Fail to scream “Free Palestine,” or “86 47” and suddenly you’re a card-carrying member of the John Birch Society.
I appreciate your angst. Good luck on the book. I particularly understand trying to read the classics or things that are more life affirming, things humans have in common, and not political. Everything is political to a leftist. Everything. I had to quit the book club because I'm sick of leftist virtue signaling and over-simplified messaging at the expense of any kind of nuanced or complex character development. Or ANY attempt to frame the questions there are no real answers to with the insipid moralizing. I went back to reading classics, too. Thanks for doing that. However, about journalism. If I were a journalist, I'd be more concerned about framing the dangers of the communist left (and their "unholy" alignment with Islam--a group of atheists and religious fanatics--who would have figured) than how I handled Trump, who will soon be gone. The communist left will not be gone soon. Perhaps that should be somewhat rewarding since I can see writing about Trump would get tedious. If leftists actually wrote about the issues and NOT Trump, perhaps it wouldn't be such a garbage dump and people might have SOME shot at common sense and compromise. But I don't see that happening anytime soon. But I must say, my last five years would have been bereft without your work. I suspect it feels like tilting at windmills because it is; the virtue is doing it anyway. L