Whether one is ignorant, willfully ignorant or lacks the intelligence to comprehend isn't that in the end the same result? The choices we make to inform or not our based on " beliefs", which aren't facts. Throw in tribal identity and culture and this is what we get. Unless folks are willing to separate belief / culture/ tribe to engage the critical thinking aspect of their brains nothing changes.
The end result whether someone is "ignorant" which is unaware mostly, " willfully ignorant " rejecting " facts" that do not fit a belief profile or the intelligence to comprehend is the same right? Ben is correct its a choice for the 1st 2 categories though.
The intelligence of voters is mitigated by their fears. Hence you have a successful, intelligent, MAGA gentry that is deeply fearful of: Socialism, perceived replacement, you name it. Conquering fear is the only remedy, but that requires reflection, humility, courage; virtues the MAGA gentry lacks.
One bit of good news: Yesterday was school board election day in New York. Only Yonkers has an appointed school board; New York City doesn't have a school board at all. A lot of "parental rights" candidates ran and most of them seem to have lost. And most school budgets passed.
Our culture conflates a variety of things with personal character/quality. It is amazingly forgiving to certain types of behavior by certain types of people.
As pointed out, the stereotype of the MAGAt tends a certain way, but it is obvious that these are not the only people involved in and supporting that movement. Purely "popular" movements do not tend to have long life cycles in this country--they ebb and flow like the tide as interest and focus waxes and wanes in Short Attention Span Theater (which is what a lot of American public culture is).
A lot of these other supporters, the non-stereotypical supporters are "nice people." The perception of them as being nice people depends upon a couple of things:
1) They treat ME nicely, they are my friends. We move in the same circles I work with or for them;
2) They are successful (by American standards);
3) They tend to be white and "traditional" in their beliefs;
4) They are at least nominally Christian.
They are also people that happen to willfully believe patently false things that benefit them--or if they do not actually believe it, will still support it or, as a minimum, not speak out against it.
They are also people who will tolerate a total lack of ethical behavior in their political leadership in support of their goals (which is usually the maintenance of the status quo that benefits them or a return to a supposed earlier status quo that benefitted them.
They will tolerate and excuse a range of other behaviors that are strongly based in inherent bias and in/out group structures (this is a polite way of saying racist and sexist behavior--though it is not limited to that, there is social class thing here as well).
They donate time, money, personal action and ethos to these things as part of serving their particular interests.
They attempt to maintain some distance from the less savory aspects of that stuff by either acting clandestinely (dark money) or in a collectivist manner (mistakes were made, it's just business, it is what you have to do to be successful). I'm not that way, I am an upstanding citizen.
We excuse a LOT of very bad behavior in the successful.
We excuse a lot of bad behavior in our friends (because aren't our friends, in a sense, a reflection on OUR character?).
I will stipulate that inherent bias is present everywhere and in everyone.
I will further stipulate that inherent bias comes in a variety of flavors and strengths and affects identity in vary degrees of strength and expressed action... and that the forms of inherent bias that we label as racism or sexism may not be major components of a person's identity.
But I will argue that, regardless of that, participation (by funding or voting) and tolerance of these things in fellow travelers is an enabling activity. And that the knowing use of these things or support of these things (by silence, if nothing else) in pursuit of self-interest is wrong. The cynical and knowing use of these things is even more wrong--and is, in my eyes, more grievous than sincere participation.
I will also argue that the position of the person with the inherent bias in the social/political/economic power hierarchy is also crucial.
"Democrats assume that there is no way that Doug Mastriano can be elected governor of Pennsylvania, and they are so confident that they actually helped him win the GOP primary."
Yes, indeed, be careful what you ask for. And try to remember the lessons of the past. It amazes me that people still confuse what should happen with what will happen when underestimating both the power of the opposition and the depth of their commitment. So many try to rationalize away the threat with logic, which so often does not apply to passion. So many assume that because they can see and distinguish commonly-accepted right and wrong, others will do so as well and eventually both act and vote accordingly. And so many still believe that this is just an aberration that will run its course before election day, when sanity necessarily shall prevail again.
Wrong, wronger, and wrongest. How many examples do we need in order to recognize that we are in an existential struggle against an opponent who lives amongst us and looks, talks, and acts in so many ways like the rest of us in our daily lives, but otherwise, in the political arena, does not recognize or accept arcane (to them) things like rules, traditions, evidence, science, and justice? There is only one guiding principle for them, and it is getting what they want, how they want it, with no apologies, no surrender, and no mercy.
You cannot rationalize with an irrational person. You cannot reason with someone who is unreasonable. And, evidently, you cannot defeat an opponent who simply refuses to lose, when enough people have their back that they can say and do whatever they want with no accountability. Far from dumb rubes and hicks, many of these people are smart, prepared, and systematic in how they have positioned themselves to take and keep power. Their best weapon has been our complacency, combined with our relative politeness toward them, that we have underestimated both the power of their convictions and the lengths to which they will go to achieve their goals while we remain within our lanes, essentially fighting back with one hand tied behind our backs -- of our own choosing.
That is what we are up against. We are under assault by a well-prepared and well-funded internal enemy, and the threat will not go away of its own accord. And we will not win by continuing to be the nice hosts at a party of gate crashers. I do not know better than anyone else here what the answer is. But I do know that more of the same will not yield better results. We have less than six months to gird our loins and take the fight to them with the same passion and energy, to save our republic, as they have to take it away from us. What is our game plan for success? Who is leading the charge? Somebody please convince me that we are in this to win it instead of merely hoping and expecting not to lose.
I'm just disgusted today. I have comments, but I'm keeping them to myself for now. I'll wait until I'm not so hot under the collar and willing to throw the word "dickheads" around. Great newsletter as always, Charlie.
Mona Charen is so correct. For all their talk of grass roots, the Democrats have a hard time tending the grass. Aside from money to unseat MTG, the crack-pot scheme to challenge her candidacy in court without a conviction, much less a charge, of insurrection was and continues to be a pipe dream.
I think people kind of miss the point when they criticize Pope Francis for taking fantasy positions on complex issues of state. In a perfectly moral world we would let in every single immigrant and migrant, lay down our weapons, hug the enemy and overcome them with love, never fight another war. All souls are precious. We should take his words as they come. The same way I ignore politicians when they pontificate about religious faith, I ignore the Pope opining on foreign affairs and policy. I admire him greatly and appreciate that he wishes humanity could embrace its higher self. It’s his job to speak for the ideal. The ideal is a world without war. But he’s not a defense secretary or minister of defense
Pope Francis may well be Politically wrong about the war... but I suspect he is Spiritually correct. Politics and Religion should never interlace... it's bad politically, and deadly spiritually. imho.
Before Judge Thomas’s comments about preserving institutions passes into the waste bin, can someone, perhaps with social connections, please ask him to give a copy of his comments to his bride.
Considering the current state of bonkersdom from the right it is time to remember the important learning from the lyrics from Spinal Tap's song "Majesty of Rock"
The top 5 *current* crazy conspiracies of Trumpers: "Plandemic", "Stolen Election 2020", "Great Replacement", QAnon/Pedos, and "Secularism Will Kill Christianity".
Prior crazy conspiracies of proto-Trumpers (Ron Paul CPAC people + post-Bush, anti-establishment conservatives): Birtherism, "Jade Helm '15", "Obama ACORN Armies", "Saul Alinsky/George Soros", "Crisis Actors", Benghazi, Clinton Emails, "Secularism Will Kill Christianity", "Voter Fraud", "Sharia Law", "Selling Fetus Parts".... the list goes on.
As an almost lifelong independent voter I’ve never been more surprised, dejected and downright pessimistic about the ability or even desire of the Dem Party to play politics in the real world as opposed to the make believe fantasy world they suppose exists or desire in the fever dreams. We cannot rely on our “better angels” , we need to be ready to battle and defeat the evil ones determined to overthrow our democracy foe their own grift and power. The last successful Democratic admin was Clinton’s. And no one listens to him? No one seeks him out? They’re drowning and don’t even know they are. Bring him and Carville back and torpedo all the other consultants and media people because they will drive the bus into the ditch right in front of them. Let’s get real people
Whether one is ignorant, willfully ignorant or lacks the intelligence to comprehend isn't that in the end the same result? The choices we make to inform or not our based on " beliefs", which aren't facts. Throw in tribal identity and culture and this is what we get. Unless folks are willing to separate belief / culture/ tribe to engage the critical thinking aspect of their brains nothing changes.
It's easy to see why they voted the way they did.
They are white.
The end result whether someone is "ignorant" which is unaware mostly, " willfully ignorant " rejecting " facts" that do not fit a belief profile or the intelligence to comprehend is the same right? Ben is correct its a choice for the 1st 2 categories though.
I do not agree with Mona's implication that GOP candidates should be allowed to run unopposed because the race might be unwinnable for a Dem.
The intelligence of voters is mitigated by their fears. Hence you have a successful, intelligent, MAGA gentry that is deeply fearful of: Socialism, perceived replacement, you name it. Conquering fear is the only remedy, but that requires reflection, humility, courage; virtues the MAGA gentry lacks.
One bit of good news: Yesterday was school board election day in New York. Only Yonkers has an appointed school board; New York City doesn't have a school board at all. A lot of "parental rights" candidates ran and most of them seem to have lost. And most school budgets passed.
Our culture conflates a variety of things with personal character/quality. It is amazingly forgiving to certain types of behavior by certain types of people.
As pointed out, the stereotype of the MAGAt tends a certain way, but it is obvious that these are not the only people involved in and supporting that movement. Purely "popular" movements do not tend to have long life cycles in this country--they ebb and flow like the tide as interest and focus waxes and wanes in Short Attention Span Theater (which is what a lot of American public culture is).
A lot of these other supporters, the non-stereotypical supporters are "nice people." The perception of them as being nice people depends upon a couple of things:
1) They treat ME nicely, they are my friends. We move in the same circles I work with or for them;
2) They are successful (by American standards);
3) They tend to be white and "traditional" in their beliefs;
4) They are at least nominally Christian.
They are also people that happen to willfully believe patently false things that benefit them--or if they do not actually believe it, will still support it or, as a minimum, not speak out against it.
They are also people who will tolerate a total lack of ethical behavior in their political leadership in support of their goals (which is usually the maintenance of the status quo that benefits them or a return to a supposed earlier status quo that benefitted them.
They will tolerate and excuse a range of other behaviors that are strongly based in inherent bias and in/out group structures (this is a polite way of saying racist and sexist behavior--though it is not limited to that, there is social class thing here as well).
They donate time, money, personal action and ethos to these things as part of serving their particular interests.
They attempt to maintain some distance from the less savory aspects of that stuff by either acting clandestinely (dark money) or in a collectivist manner (mistakes were made, it's just business, it is what you have to do to be successful). I'm not that way, I am an upstanding citizen.
We excuse a LOT of very bad behavior in the successful.
We excuse a lot of bad behavior in our friends (because aren't our friends, in a sense, a reflection on OUR character?).
I will stipulate that inherent bias is present everywhere and in everyone.
I will further stipulate that inherent bias comes in a variety of flavors and strengths and affects identity in vary degrees of strength and expressed action... and that the forms of inherent bias that we label as racism or sexism may not be major components of a person's identity.
But I will argue that, regardless of that, participation (by funding or voting) and tolerance of these things in fellow travelers is an enabling activity. And that the knowing use of these things or support of these things (by silence, if nothing else) in pursuit of self-interest is wrong. The cynical and knowing use of these things is even more wrong--and is, in my eyes, more grievous than sincere participation.
I will also argue that the position of the person with the inherent bias in the social/political/economic power hierarchy is also crucial.
It makes you actually NOT a nice or good person.
"Democrats assume that there is no way that Doug Mastriano can be elected governor of Pennsylvania, and they are so confident that they actually helped him win the GOP primary."
Yes, indeed, be careful what you ask for. And try to remember the lessons of the past. It amazes me that people still confuse what should happen with what will happen when underestimating both the power of the opposition and the depth of their commitment. So many try to rationalize away the threat with logic, which so often does not apply to passion. So many assume that because they can see and distinguish commonly-accepted right and wrong, others will do so as well and eventually both act and vote accordingly. And so many still believe that this is just an aberration that will run its course before election day, when sanity necessarily shall prevail again.
Wrong, wronger, and wrongest. How many examples do we need in order to recognize that we are in an existential struggle against an opponent who lives amongst us and looks, talks, and acts in so many ways like the rest of us in our daily lives, but otherwise, in the political arena, does not recognize or accept arcane (to them) things like rules, traditions, evidence, science, and justice? There is only one guiding principle for them, and it is getting what they want, how they want it, with no apologies, no surrender, and no mercy.
You cannot rationalize with an irrational person. You cannot reason with someone who is unreasonable. And, evidently, you cannot defeat an opponent who simply refuses to lose, when enough people have their back that they can say and do whatever they want with no accountability. Far from dumb rubes and hicks, many of these people are smart, prepared, and systematic in how they have positioned themselves to take and keep power. Their best weapon has been our complacency, combined with our relative politeness toward them, that we have underestimated both the power of their convictions and the lengths to which they will go to achieve their goals while we remain within our lanes, essentially fighting back with one hand tied behind our backs -- of our own choosing.
That is what we are up against. We are under assault by a well-prepared and well-funded internal enemy, and the threat will not go away of its own accord. And we will not win by continuing to be the nice hosts at a party of gate crashers. I do not know better than anyone else here what the answer is. But I do know that more of the same will not yield better results. We have less than six months to gird our loins and take the fight to them with the same passion and energy, to save our republic, as they have to take it away from us. What is our game plan for success? Who is leading the charge? Somebody please convince me that we are in this to win it instead of merely hoping and expecting not to lose.
I'm just disgusted today. I have comments, but I'm keeping them to myself for now. I'll wait until I'm not so hot under the collar and willing to throw the word "dickheads" around. Great newsletter as always, Charlie.
Mona Charen is so correct. For all their talk of grass roots, the Democrats have a hard time tending the grass. Aside from money to unseat MTG, the crack-pot scheme to challenge her candidacy in court without a conviction, much less a charge, of insurrection was and continues to be a pipe dream.
I think people kind of miss the point when they criticize Pope Francis for taking fantasy positions on complex issues of state. In a perfectly moral world we would let in every single immigrant and migrant, lay down our weapons, hug the enemy and overcome them with love, never fight another war. All souls are precious. We should take his words as they come. The same way I ignore politicians when they pontificate about religious faith, I ignore the Pope opining on foreign affairs and policy. I admire him greatly and appreciate that he wishes humanity could embrace its higher self. It’s his job to speak for the ideal. The ideal is a world without war. But he’s not a defense secretary or minister of defense
Pope Francis may well be Politically wrong about the war... but I suspect he is Spiritually correct. Politics and Religion should never interlace... it's bad politically, and deadly spiritually. imho.
Before Judge Thomas’s comments about preserving institutions passes into the waste bin, can someone, perhaps with social connections, please ask him to give a copy of his comments to his bride.
Considering the current state of bonkersdom from the right it is time to remember the important learning from the lyrics from Spinal Tap's song "Majesty of Rock"
"I know, for I told me so,
And I'm sure each of you quite agrees:
The more it stays the same, the less it changes!"
The top 5 *current* crazy conspiracies of Trumpers: "Plandemic", "Stolen Election 2020", "Great Replacement", QAnon/Pedos, and "Secularism Will Kill Christianity".
Prior crazy conspiracies of proto-Trumpers (Ron Paul CPAC people + post-Bush, anti-establishment conservatives): Birtherism, "Jade Helm '15", "Obama ACORN Armies", "Saul Alinsky/George Soros", "Crisis Actors", Benghazi, Clinton Emails, "Secularism Will Kill Christianity", "Voter Fraud", "Sharia Law", "Selling Fetus Parts".... the list goes on.
As an almost lifelong independent voter I’ve never been more surprised, dejected and downright pessimistic about the ability or even desire of the Dem Party to play politics in the real world as opposed to the make believe fantasy world they suppose exists or desire in the fever dreams. We cannot rely on our “better angels” , we need to be ready to battle and defeat the evil ones determined to overthrow our democracy foe their own grift and power. The last successful Democratic admin was Clinton’s. And no one listens to him? No one seeks him out? They’re drowning and don’t even know they are. Bring him and Carville back and torpedo all the other consultants and media people because they will drive the bus into the ditch right in front of them. Let’s get real people