100ProofTollBooth
Dumber than a man, but faster than a dog.
No bio...
User ID: 2039
100ProofTollBooth
Dumber than a man, but faster than a dog.
1d ago
Just for avoidance of doubt - my post is considered unacceptable?
100ProofTollBooth
Dumber than a man, but faster than a dog.
1d ago
Nate Silver wants to share what he wrote in his journal with you - LINK -
He's couching it as a "Reader Q&A" but it's a self-reflective series on him, his substack, the election, polls, and politics in general. If you're already fed up with Mr. Silver, it could be an exasperating read. I am not, however, and do find Nate's straight political takes (without any of the bulllshit "data journalism" or woo-woo risk and gambling stuff) to be better than the average pundit.
Just before the paywall, Silver concludes with a paragraph that reveals the rot at the core of the PMC-liberal elite;
For me, “Trump’s even worse!” worked one last time and I voted for Harris — largely because of January 6 and because Trump, like Biden, is too old. But maybe some of my gut feeling that Trump would win was because I sympathized with voters’ instincts to punish the Democratic Party more than I did in 2016 and 2020. Being willing to take a short-term hit to discourage coercion or punish broken promises is probably a pretty good default, an attitude that’s close enough to rational more often than not.
Dishonesty has a price. The Liberal/Left coalition has been held together by ducktape, glue, and the continued adherence to the idea of a "better tomorrow" as guided by the experts. But they're all inveterate liars and the American people finally called them out on it. Is it a full moon, Nate's turning into a self-awarewolf.
The Galaxy Brain move for Biden would be;
- Privately ask Trump, now, to pardon Hunter on Day 1 of his admin. Trump does seem to genuinely love his kids and so the father-to-father humility would work.
- Trump does this even though it pisses off some of his more conspiratorial supporters - but they forget about it in a news cycle when Kash Patel is defenestrating FBI bureaucrats or something.
- Biden publicly thanks Trump and shakes his hand at a rose garden meeting or some other photo op.
The only fly in this ointment is that the left has really gone all into the "Literally Hitler" line. It's not that Trump would be so vengeful to rebuff Biden if the Delaware Destroyer himself were to come, hat in hand, to Mar-A-Lago to ask for the favor, it's that Biden, BidenWorld, and the rest of the Left Establishment is so permanently apoplectic over Trump's continued existence that they cannot see a clever- but straightforward - move here. Pride before the fall. Lack of humility. Richness of spirit. And they wonder how they become the villains.
(Quick) Edit: Ah, well. Guess I was wrong
100ProofTollBooth
Dumber than a man, but faster than a dog.
2d ago
Yes. Dozens. Military as well.
None of the cops comes across as authoritarian-seeking power trippers. Most are deeply committed to the idea of justice. A minority are just doing what their Dads did. In High School, they were all athletes except for one who was just sort of a meathead.
100ProofTollBooth
Dumber than a man, but faster than a dog.
2d ago
and a lot of cops get into law enforcement because they get to exercise power over others.
I'd argue this is 100% culture war. Has there been any study that replicates that can point to a major motivating factor of police recruits being authoritarian impulses? Related, is there any data that backs up the (goofy) claim that X% of people who join the military do so in order to be able to kill people.
How would such a study even be constructed? Self-surveys? Big 5 personality traits? This is exactly the kind of data that can always been squinted-at in just the right way so as to "back-up" a latent intent kind of assertion.
100ProofTollBooth
Dumber than a man, but faster than a dog.
2d ago
most 24 year old men don’t want to be married with three children at that age.
24 year old men, for the overwhelming majority of human history, absolutely wanted to be married with multiple children. Modern society is the exception, not the rule. Now, let's not resists temptation to hit the RETVRN button.
Instead, let's figure out how to encourage earlier family formation while still enjoying the benefits - and avoiding the pitfalls - of modern technology and industrial capacity.
100ProofTollBooth
Dumber than a man, but faster than a dog.
2d ago
Surprised to see less coverage of these points from the article:
But the deterrent effect of crime being illegal at all, as opposed to basically legal and not even resulting in arrest, is very very strong.
There is substantial evidence that increasing the visibility of the police by hiring more officers and allocating existing officers in ways that materially heighten the perceived risk of apprehension can deter crimes.
Part of me wants to take some time to dunk here on the Defund The Police movement. The really do hate the most at risk communities. But, that's probably mostly fruitless, especially on the Motte.
The fact remains that Scott's article points to the fact that one of the most cost effective ways to reduce the occurrence of all crimes (leaving aside incarceration and rehabilitation dilemmas) is to have more cops all over the play. In one of Roland Fryer's papers, I seem to remember a similar conclusion.
The culture war angle to this is that, as long as I can remember, Cops have been the victims of cultural denigration on the left. This can range from the goofy-humorous (Chief Wiggum on the Simpsons, the trope of donuts, Sooper Troopers and smiliar movies) to the naked hostile; ACAB, Fuck Tha Police, 90s gangster rap that clearly identifies street cops as the primary bad guy in the hood (not the, you know, murderous criminals that kill the friends of the protagonist). Even more nuance depictions of cops often share tropes of personal failings and issues with leadership and corruption - Harvey Keitel in Bad Lieutenant, Matthew McCanaughey and Woody Harrelson in True Detective. The biggest pop culture cop show is probably Law an Order and its many spinoffs. Most of the cops here are pretty immaculate in their personal conduct, with the primary conflict in each episode generally being the dramatic discovery of a smoking gun or other key piece of information. Still, it being a drama, many episodes feature a less than comforting ending where a bad person goes to prison, but the victim is still victim-itized and has an implied hard life after the credits role. Law and Order: SVU had a rolling subplot about the emotional toll of those cases on the lead detectives.
Suffice it to say; the Culture War isn't great for cops. So, if one of the best solutions to crime is to have lots more cops, and we assume some sort of political minor miracle wherein we all agree on this and fund it, I worry about our ability to fill the ranks. Interestingly, this kind of dovetails with the other big thread this week on fertility collapse and population issues - women don't have good incentive to be Moms and we ought to improve the status of motherhood. Id argue that the status of cops - an implicitly male and patriarchal role - is also quite low and in need of some rehabilitation.
100ProofTollBooth
Dumber than a man, but faster than a dog.
2d ago
I don't think I see your point and, to the extent that (I think) I do, I reject it.
Are you saying that it's unreasonable to expect 80%+ of women to go through pregnancy and labor? I mean, I get it, it's not like this is a species level existential issue - oh, wait, that's exactly what we're talking about.
This is a deeply values based discussion. Pregnancy and childbirth might "suck" and "ruin your body" but the end result is the creation of a human life and, if done during peak fertility years, decades of love and joy. Furthermore, it's necessary for the species to continue itself.
100ProofTollBooth
Dumber than a man, but faster than a dog.
2d ago
I'm real dumb, can you tell me what the obvious third problem is so I feel less dumb?
100ProofTollBooth
Dumber than a man, but faster than a dog.
3d ago
@hyrdoacetylene
Can you share your most commonly seen models of family formation and early child rearing where you are? Genuine question / curiosity.
100ProofTollBooth
Dumber than a man, but faster than a dog.
3d ago
Uh, who waits for years after getting married to start having babies? Is it really something that's common in the blue tribe?
Yes, very.
The marriage is a big, self-referential celebration of Disney style True Love. Marriage inside of an actual church is less and less common and, for the couples that are doing it because Mom and Dad would be otherwise displeased, the "ceremony" is one reading and the vows. The real ceremony is always the reception which is a strange bacchanalia devotion to the Wife. The husband is pretty much a slightly drunk usher. The "best" weddings are the ones where everyone gets incredibly hammered, but there is no violence, vomiting, or immediately broken vows.
Usually it's about 2 years before the first kid.
Narcissism is strong.
100ProofTollBooth
Dumber than a man, but faster than a dog.
3d ago
"Permanent damage to your body" is something millions of people will willingly do if the STATUS incentive is high enough:
- Military Special Operations
- Professional Athletes
- High stress jobs with extreme levels of compensation (Banker, High end Surgeon, big Litigator etc.)
In fact, what I just listed above are some of the tippy-top status markers for men. Personal health is not at all sacrosanct (flip the coin; millions of people smoke, drink too much, eat too much, and never exercise).
100ProofTollBooth
Dumber than a man, but faster than a dog.
7d ago
Thank you for the detailed response and commentary. Great effortpost.
Let me know if this would make a suitable blogpost.
Probably. With the big "IF" upfront of - I don't think simply cataloging the NRx idea ecosystem is of a ton of interest on its own (outside of the morbidly curious like myself). What would be truly widely appealing, imho, is trying to trace how we got to NRx starting from post WW2 conservative / tradtional thinking (with pit stops in Big-L Liberalism) with a final section on what likely outcomes are.
This is exactly why I asked for recommendations. I'm try to build a deeper understanding of "how we got here" in order to have a stronger confidence in thinking about "where we are headed." It's important not to get too tied up in pure ideology - this was how Big-L liberals failed, how the neocons failed, and how the Progressive of today (Kamala) failed to even get off the launch pad*.
While the re-election of Trump has created a Right Wing honey moon period still very much in full swing, the Right in America / Britain is still very far from coalescing around a reality driven approach to the next 10,20,30 years. Right now, it's a coalition of angry populists (hardcore MAGA'ers), old Reagan style conservatives who have abandoned any idea of calm negotiation and co-existence with the Left, techno-libertarian bros (Thiel, Vance, etc.....frankly I think Yarvin is closer to this bucket that he wants to admit), and the centrist wanderers who have been so turned off by the really weird Left that they, for now, will happy vote against Blue Tribe. Oh, and then, of course, there's like 7-12 million younger men who feel utterly forgotten. This is a strange coalition to try to drive forward and, since 2016, it has been utterly dependent upon the person of Donald J. Trump. That lasts for 4 more years (Trump doesn't have the deep managerial ability nor the personality to existent as shadow emperor of the Republicans after the end of this term).
Sorry not sorry for the tangent. This is something I have a deep interest in. Again, thanks for the effortful response.
100ProofTollBooth
Dumber than a man, but faster than a dog.
8d ago
THIS IS A TANGENT POST
Humble request:
Something like this reading list for dissident right / post-liberalism. Think about "What would Oswald Spengler be reading today if he were still alive"
Thank you, Mottizens.
(Mods: This probably isn't the best place for this, but I don't know where else it would go? Maybe Sunday thread?)
100ProofTollBooth
Dumber than a man, but faster than a dog.
8d ago
but part of that problem is that Americans are just so unhealthy
Couldn't agree more. If you strip away chronic maladies that are directly due to poor lifestyle choices, you get rid of 50% of medical spend annually right there. If you then also exclude last two years of life care, you're at something like 90% of medical spend annually. And these two things interact. Getting old sucks, but it shouldn't be particularly painful or burdensome - but it is because people are getting obese first, then developing metabolic syndrome, and then getting old. Modern medicine and ethics keeps them alive, albeit with drastically reduced quality of life, pretty much up until the whole body just gives out.
Eventually, social security, medicare, and medicaid are going to run out of money. And, as this thread discusses, we're playing with the idea of a fundamental medical care shortage a la the NHS in Britain. If we don't grow our way out of this / come up with some seriously amazing medical technology innovations, I have two predictions:
-
The cohabitation with an elderly parent will become ubiquitous in American society outside of the top 5%. For the top 5%, assisted living and retirement communities will become even more opulent and lavish then they are now. The wealthy elderly will become bizarrely hedonistic.
-
There will be a large scale campaign for legalization of assisted suicide. It's already happening as a movement in the USA and they're already doing it in Canada.
I hate both of these things, personally. But I still believe they will happen. Getting wealthy in the next 50 years will be as simple as staying healthy, getting and staying married, staying employed (at pretty much any wage level that isn't working poverty), and caring about your children and family. Individualism will claim at least a third of society, perhaps more.
100ProofTollBooth
Dumber than a man, but faster than a dog.
8d ago
Even with the current regulatory environment...
I am arguing in the exact opposite direction. I would write that sentence as "Because of the current regulatory environment..."
We over-regulated general aviation and so froze it in time. If we had more people flying more planes more often, GA safety would progress faster. This is exactly what happened with cars - seatbelts, cruple zones, airbags etc.
I definitely agree that if cars were to be magically re-introduced today, we would preemptively ban them. And this is safteyism run amok and horrible for human growth and development. It is sad that people die in car crashes, I wish that wouldn't happen. I am extremely grateful for automotive transport, commerce, and sport - it helps the species generate more wealth, interact more broadly, and deliver more individual freedom.
Imagine the kind of wealth, interaction, and individual freedom one could get in an affordable and easy to fly aircraft.
100ProofTollBooth
Dumber than a man, but faster than a dog.
10d ago
In the book Where's my Flying Car?! The author does a great breakdown of how, because of over-regulation, general aviation died by the 1960s. If it hadn't, he lays out a good case that a pilot's license would be roughly equivalent of (good) driver's education for the same cost, and hundreds of thousands more people would probably fly. It would reshape highway systems and transportation in general.
Regulation doesn't just slow existing business / industry, it aborts new ones from forming and developing before they ever have a chance (emotive metaphor definitely used on purpose)
100ProofTollBooth
Dumber than a man, but faster than a dog.
10d ago
What's the long term upside of being a PA/NP? Are their managerial and executive equivalent roles for PAs/NPs? Beacuse while making $130k is great out of school and pretty good for a full career (inflation adjusted, of course) ... junior state department officials can build careers that end in Congress, advising /consulting F500 corporations, or just good old fashioned Sinecures at Think Tanks that can push them past $500k / yr. Sure, definitely not all of them will get there, but there's at least the possibility and the pre-established career path.
I'd argue that this is one of the defining features of the PMC approved career paths - that they all have the possibility of creating eye-watering levels of income (bonus points, however, if they have some way for you to pretend you're doing it out of genuine passion and not just for the money. This is why politics is so PMC attractive).
100ProofTollBooth
Dumber than a man, but faster than a dog.
10d ago
Cool comment (seriously).
In your opinion what is the area of law that is at the optimization frontier for raw compensation and intellectual gratification? I have friends who do legal advisory work for the big banks, and they make crazy money, but they kind of hate everything. On the other hand, I know a guy from church who does small to medium local business law, fucking LOVES it, and makes more than enough money (though not Christmas-in-Aspen money). I have an older family friend who spent her whole career in family law and is now emotionally broken and sorta-kinda broke financially.
100ProofTollBooth
Dumber than a man, but faster than a dog.
10d ago
Licensing is one thing, but self-selection signaling is another.
If I graduate from the American Samoa school of Law (that's a Better Call Saul reference) I can handle wills and whatnot, but no real going business concern is going to hire me for complex corporate litigation. If I, this hypothetical business owner, enjoy spending my weekends enjoying recreational Columbia narcotics, I'm going to hire the lawyer who is ex-DA's office and knows all the judges, instead of the one man libertarian law firm who will passionately argue about decriminalizing all drugs.
Basically, we're talking about signaling-credentialism. If a Lawyer went to Yale Law and now works at Latham & Watkins, he or she is probably quite good. If a banker went to Harvard and is now at Goldman Sachs, likewise*. For doctors, we don't quite have the same gradations. If you're an attending in any major metro hospital, you're roughly interchangeable outside of specialties.
I think what OP is saying is he'd like to see more doctors, even those who are the equivalents of Saul Goodman - they can write a prescription for some antibiotics, but you're not going to them for your hip replacement. I could be wrong tho (not op)
- They're good in the way that matters for these specific professions (law, banking) - they know the right people in the right places. Many of them are probably good at, you know, lawyerin' and finance and whatnot, but 80% of these jobs boil down to "yeah, I know that guy."
100ProofTollBooth
Dumber than a man, but faster than a dog.
11d ago
Oh, you touched a third rail for me here, Bro.
Modern Family is satanic. It's a show that makes fun of loser normies to their face in such a way that they, the losers, not only don't get that they are the punchline, but they actually like it.
The Phil-Claire family (the most "traditional" of the three featured) is a weird reverse domme fantasy wherein Claire, without a job, enjoys the success of her pliable and doting husband, Phil, as if it were her own. Phil is apparently a Real Estate salesman of some skill - how else can they afford their home in that part of California? But his success isn't the product of a shrewd and hard-working businessman - he's a human gold retriever who sells houses because he's just so darn nice!
And Claire hates his niceness and quirkyness. She is often, obviously, embarrassed by him. But the living is good and, gosh darn it, she just loves that big old goofball at the end of the day. Even in the infamous "Godfather" episode, wherein Phil is attempted to be portrayed as a cunning genius, it's all tongue-in-cheek and sophomoric. Simply put, Phil offers no real danger, competency, or capability and lustfully pines away for his father-in-law's second bride, Gloria. He's also financially stable and a devoted father. He's in good shape. He has his hair.
Phil is also an awful father despite, you know, being presented as a good dad. His oldest daughter dates a notorious dufus (in whom Phil sees himself) and is speedily on her way to Stripperdom. If I remember correctly, the later season had a literal teen pregnancy arc. The middle daughter, Alex, feels both a lack of attention from her parents and a sense of dread that she is obviously smarter than everyone she shares a home with. Although the show had to pivot once the actress playing her developed, that character was hurdling towards Sarah Lawrence levels of political lesbianism. Finally, Phil's son, Luke, is a profound idiot and bonds with his father, mostly, during his most intense bouts of senselessness. Remember, Phil is a multi-millionaire somehow.
I won't cover the other two families. The two gay men adopting an asian female child is so on the nose that the show makes fun of itself for that. The Gloria-Jay dynamic with the wise cracking Manny is some sort of weird Frasier redux. The eternal craziness of the original mother (name forgotten) is Hollywood stating firmly that yes, once you are old and a woman, the world hates you.
Modern Family is not a sincere gesture towards the changing realities of family life. It is a cruel imitation of all the dark patterns of family mis-formation that Hollywood feeds back to the masses to perpetuate a system that's already failed, but still has viewership to capture. We're starting to see this with fat people in health ads and perpetual man-children dating stand-in mom's in Taco Bell ads.
These people hate you, they will say it to your face, and then you will ask for more.
100ProofTollBooth
Dumber than a man, but faster than a dog.
11d ago
think about what kind of emotions must have driven him to that place, and have a little empathy.
But emotions can be flawed and often are.
If I see a stereotypical homeless schizophrenic person raving in the street, I definitely "feel" for them, but I'm not about to indulge their delusions of being Jesus Christ.
The thing that's never made sense to me about Trans ideology is that it seems to be firmly planted in the feeling and emotional camp for justification. If you really, truly feel you are the wrong gender, then, apparently, transition is a remedy for that. But there are thousands of people who, daily, really, truly feel that they are depressed, angry, lonely ... and still thousands more who deeply feel they are Jesus Christ. For this later group, we identify that that doesn't meet with reality and, therefore, that dissonance is a disease (or illness, whatever the preferred nomenclature is) and we ought to help that person through it (to the extent that they are capable. There's another thread in here about forced institutionalization, but let's stay focused). I would assume that any psychiatrist who has a patient who swears up and down that they are Napoleon reborn, and then offers that patient a prescription for Fancy French uniforms, they would be rightfully stripped of their professional license.
I have no problem with the idea of men or women wanting to dress, act, "present" as the other gender. If this provides joy and happiness in your life, that's wonderful. But the forced Kafabe of reality is a problem because society should never prioritize emotional comfort over truth (for adults ... we get to play a little fast and loose when raising children as they have to be taught emotional maturity gradually). The word games around "sex" versus "gender" don't make any meaningful distinction and only serve as a way to force conformity and create lines of demarcation for in-group and out-group.
Mostly, I think the trans issue is the same as the left-handed gun owners issue - there isn't one. For an vanishingly small percent of the population, they have severe mental and emotional issues that may or may not be alleviated through medical intervention. Many more are simply gay or lesbian folks reconciling with themselves. Some have generalized self-image issues. For example:
Sometimes -- during some periods in the past, at any time the thought would occur to me, which was quite often -- I want to be female... it's less common now because I don't indulge it as deeply -- I've almost never wanted to be what I actually am, male, except instrumentally... Why? I don't know why, that's just what is. Sucks to be me that I'm actually male, unlike half the human population.
Sorry to lightly edit your own words, but I think you can see how reading this could make someone think that it isn't about male-female, but more generally about self-conception/self-image acceptance. You could sub in some words about "fat" vs "skinny" and the sentences and ideas would still be coherent.
But the Trans-Ideology cult are none of those people and, instead, have taken up that cause as a political cudgel. Agreement with the ideology is far, far more important than empathy to the actual humans. Both of these are far, far less important than an accurate relationship with reality and the Truth.
100ProofTollBooth
Dumber than a man, but faster than a dog.
14d ago
then you're just jerking yourself off.
You can do this with LLMs too. I'll probably write an effort post on it if I can stop jerking myself off for an hour.
100ProofTollBooth
Dumber than a man, but faster than a dog.
21d ago
Mobile sports gambling is like, really, really bad, mmm'kay
Color me in the not surprised category. The article, and the additional one's it links at the bottom, do a good job of toe-ing the line between "people should be given the freedom to make choices" and "holy shit this is sentencing those with addictive personalities to lives of poverty."
I'm not super interested in talking about sports gambling itself, although I welcome any good anecdotes, and would instead like to invite comments on the concept of "digital addiction."
There's enough literature out there now that there's a strong enough case to be made that digital technology - very specifically smartphones - can cause behavior patterns that can accurately be described as addictive. However, there is still a delineation between digital addiction and physical/neurological addiction of alcohol and drugs. As a society, we acknowledge the basic danger of these substances by age-limiting some and outright prohibiting others.
My general question would be; what are the major culture war angles on digital addiction? For kids? For all of society?
This is an amazing conflation of two points. I wouldn't want to debate you in person as you seem adept at twisting an argument.
Point 1: Incentives matter. People will put themselves through extreme hardships given proper incentives (this was the Special Ops / pro military argument)
Point 2: We should expect the overwhelming majority of women to go through childbirth as the species is dependent upon it.
Your franken-counter-assertion "We are demanding that women be like special operations!"
I see what you did there. It was well done, my congratulations.
More options
Context Copy link