MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
No bio...
User ID: 1783
It plausible as well. It takes someone who knows economic theory well enough to do it right. I don’t think Trump is that kind of an expert. But it’s not insane to do something like that temporarily to protect a nascent industry until it’s strong enough for the global market.
Labor though is by necessity at least somewhat bound to the land simply because you can not easily pick up and move even within a large country like the USA to say nothing of moving from country to country in search of work. The jobs may be more plentiful in Kenya, but there are a lot of reasons I won’t be moving there.
Smart tarries can help by essentially protecting an industry of national security interests or an industry that the government wants to invest in for eventual export. If I have an industry like chips manufacturing, I want to keep it protected because those chips are also used in military gear, so I might heavily tax imports o& chips so that native chip manufacturers don’t get undercut by cheaper imports and we are then dependent on those imports for vital products or military hardware. Or you might decide that the future is solar panels an$ thus create a huge tariff on solar panels until your own are good enough to compete on the world market.
I think there are twin dangers of this.
First is that basically, for want of a better way to put this, cries of “this is literally Hitler” have done more to normalize Hitler than anything done by Nazis in the time since tge Second World War. If a guy looking for fraud in the government and who dreams of mars colonies is fascism, it’s actually not that bad. If the worst of literally Hitler is someone like Trump, who’s Blitzkreig thus far has managed to make whistle stops in Greenland, negotiate with Putin, and rename the Gulf of Mexico, Hitler isn’t that bad. Nobody is frightened of this government, and the left has no cards to play. And so, Hitler isn’t that boogeyman Voldemort that everyone fears. He’s just a conservative.
Secondly, there’s no longer any effective way to alert the public if a fascist actually shows up. After 40 years of everything I don’t like is Hitler, if a guy who actually wants to genocide Muslims shows up, it’s no longer possible to find unused verbiage that will tell them that the Antichrist is here and he wants to kill everyone.
I think most of the perpetual childhood stuff is social permissions. A woman is generally permitted to be the second income, worry about such nonsense as “work life balance” (which generally means working 40 hours a week or less, rarely taking work home, and getting lots of PTO), whether or not the job is fulfilling (in other words is it fun and do things that are good for virtue signaling), and so on. Men, unless they’re extremely privileged don’t get to think that way because their career has to feed, house and clothe the family. Sure, the wife’s income might supplement, but she almost always makes a lot less than he does. A man is expected to protect himself, his family, and if there’s a war, his country. In both cases, his actual wants take a very strong step back to the practical aspects of the job market. Men are forced to look to high paid jobs whether or not they want to do that sort of work. They are forced to work longer than they actually want to because they need to take care of a family, and they need to suck up to the boss by working late, they need to manage themselves to take advantage of trainings and promotions or job hopping opportunities even if they’re not interested in that work for itself because they have a family.
Even in social situations, there’s a constant need to make sure to not show weakness, or to be emotional, both of which make them look weak. The number of men who made an early on in dating mistake of admitting to being sad about something and thus lost someone they loved is astounding. Women are allowed feelings, in fact women are basically allowed tantrums over stupid things that they don’t have any right to be upset about. There are viral videos of women pissed off because their man can’t load the dishwasher. Left out — she’s generally a stay at home mom in a nice middle class neighborhood and he’s working 60+ hours a week so she can complain that he doesn’t do enough chores on top of all of that.
There are a lot of reasons for this. One is that most of the West is democratic and therefore there’s a sort of pandering that develops where people prefer leaders who tell them what they want to believe, and what people generally want is liberty from obligations both social and economic, liberty to do whatever they want to regardless of consequences, and someone else to be forced to pick up the tab.
But of course none of that works. A society in which no one has any obligations even to simply not be a drain on society is one that will not last. A society in which every social vice is tolerated is one that will quickly decline due to disease, drugs and associated crimes to pay for those drugs. And thus no one will want to go into the increasingly lawless parts of civilization, or if they do, they go prepared to defend themselves and trust no one until they can retreat into areas where social bonds prevent the social and economic rot they see in the city.
And this is why those old institutions are no longer trusted by anyone under 50. Nobody under 50 cites a story on the NYT website as a truth claim, because they have known since they began to understand the concept of bias in reporting that NYT and similar news sites are Cathedral sources and will push The Narrative. Getting that trust back would obviously require admitting it, fixing it, cleaning house to prevent it, and begin writing the news as it’s actually happening and not twisting it.
That’s what rebuilding trust is — until tge problems that caused the lack of trust are dealt with, trust is gone.
I mean to me it’s a little like a social version of socialism where the responsibility is given to the men while the benefits are given to women. Women want the option to get a girl-boss job, or serve in the military. They don’t want the responsibility that comes with it. Women even the most hard core feminists don’t sign up for the draft, and seem likely to oppose women being entered into selective service. They want the high powered jobs, but don’t want the responsibility of being a breadwinner, or even working the long hours necessary to earn such a position. For the feminist, it appears that adulthood is optional — they can take or leave whatever parts (generally the taking responsibility parts) they want while taking the benefits of being socially treated as adults. Weak when demands come but strong when the social credit or other benefits are available. It’s not inconsistent.
I think that equal ought to mean equal in both rights and responsibilities. If I’m perfectly capable of doing the girlboss thing, then I ought to be able to take responsibility to provide equal income to the family budget. If I’m capable of choosing sex, then I don’t get to cry rape when the guy doesn’t call me the next morning or bring me flowers. If I’m capable of fighting in the military, I need to sign up for the draft.
But many of these institutions are suffering self inflicted wounds. It’s been obvious since I’ve been paying attention to news (starting in junior high) that the news “of record” was liberal to a fault, was generally secular, and that it was pro-LGBT (this was in mid 1990s so well before Woke). And once you understand such a thing, and understand that “the news of record” has no interest in telling unbiased news, and will happily distort, misreport, play up or down different stories in order to create the impression that they want you to have. Learning that basically killed my trust in mainstream news.
University was much the same way. Outside of extremely skill or maths heavy courses, you could just simply expect that ideas like social libertarianism if not outright celebration of degenerate if not destructive lifestyles, government control, generous welfare states, free college, free healthcare, and basically socialism. And so you eventually understand that these scholars are not disinterested Confucian scholars simply looking for knowledge. If that were the case, it seems that at least some of them would come out t9 be socially conservative, or economically libertarian.
How can people trust with this level of malfeasance? How do we get the trust back? How do we stop people from doing this kind of thing? I just don’t know.
I say this of any institution public or private. The answer to restoring trust is a simple but apparently too difficult to actually do — be trustworthy. It’s kind of a crazy question. When doctors lie and misrepresent the truth, when they openly try to manipulate the public into believing things that are not supported by research in order to get them to obey, or when they push unneeded drugs and treatments on people, it’s easy to lose trust. And I find the loss of trust in medical professionals and institutions to be actually dangerous because honestly most people are horrible at understanding health information without a doctor to help them.
I mean I think there are limits. A real, legitimate citizen, naturalized absolutely should have every right in America as a native citizen. But when this get brought up, basically anyone who gate crashes the border is now a de facto citizen in the eyes of much of the left and of course only those terrible people on the right think such gate crashes should leave. And I don’t think that’s unreasonable. We can’t do that because we don’t have room for billions of people to come here and simply squat. They need to go home.
I like the monthly format a bit better simply because I think the passage of time will help make the case for a post having quality and insight rather than simply being the most popular long post on a popular topic for this week. If done correctly, a quality posts should be insightful and interesting content on their own even after the heat of the moment has moved on.
I’m in agreement on the incentives both for the protests on college campuses (in which at least two students lost visas) and the mass deportations. The point is to let both the public and potential immigrants that the days of crossing into the USA and just staying forever and doing whatever you want are over.
I think long term we need some sort of expedited hearing system to prevent mistakes and allow people to question the deportation. But that can’t happen until the numbers are low enough that you can have reasonable processes. As it stands now, the legal immigranttion process is extremely difficult and takes almost a decade unless you qualify for H1B. The process for asylum is overwhelmed because everyone who gets caught knows they get to stay if they claim asylum, and they know it will take years and suspect that Congress will eventually pass another amnesty before the hearing ever happens.
Until you get this into a position where the numbers are less than what can be reasonable to have our system handle with some speed — maybe clearing the median case within 3-4 months instead of a decade — I just don’t think the logistics work.
I think it’s a specific case of the more general hyper-normalization. The west has mostly given up on even trying to make life better for citizens. Cops are barely allowed to do anything about crimes that happen in front of them, and resources are limited so there’s pretty much permission to do low level street crimes as unless the cops happen to witness actual and undeniable stealing (they basically have to watch you take something off the shelf, stick it in your pocket, and walk out the door, and aren’t allowed to give chase off the store property). If a guy is walking around looking for a car to break into — literally shining a flashlight into cars to see if there’s anything there, the cops can be standing right there, but until your window gets smashed, he’s not allowed to do anything. If you call the cops? They take a report that both you and they know will never be read, let alone investigated. And even with an arrest, prosecutors are not going to actually prosecute the crimes that don’t involve a corpse.
Other parts of society are accepted as always been shitty and will always be shitty. Schools are expected to suck, which is why almost every person of means tries to send their kids to private schools rather than public schools, and the first question anyone asks about a property is “how bad is the school district.” Nobody expects potholes fixed, or safe public transport. In fact, Americans hate public transport because unlike Europe, it’s basically a skid row on tracks, and if the stop is close to a place you care about, you’ll watch is skid row moves in. Nothing will get Americans to oppose you faster than trying to put a public bus stop or train in their safe neighborhoods as the6 know it’s a rolling skid row and it will ruin their neighborhood and basically devalue their house.
There’s also the unstated but very real issue that the entire thing hangs on the idea that those deciding to push the button have reason to care about their own country or anyone else’s still exist, and be horrified at the thought of billions of dead humans. There are all kinds of reasons why someone might not: mental illness, a belief in the eminent end of the world, being dying themselves, or fear that losing the current conflict would be worse than all of that, or a strong belief in killing enemies of God. The default assumption was and still kinda is that the person making decisions is rational.
I’m not sure if I’m a hlynkaist or not, but my feeling on tradition that im looking at specifically what I would consider Classical Western European Christian culture. I think it has more right than our own era, and much more sane ideas about leadership and social norms and Justice than we do. I don’t think that means you can’t have a more lively form of music or art or have modern technology. Just that the bedrock ideas of the late medieval period seem more sane to me.
But in order to even get back to something approaching sanity you need to knock out a lot of rotten foundation, clear out a lot of rotten furniture, and you can’t do that by degrees. If you don’t fix it, it’s going to eventually fall down. Get the contractors in and get them busy shoring up the foundation and fixing the electrical and plumbing systems. Yes it means making big holes in the walls. But painting over foundation issues just doesn’t fix the real problems.
I think if the system is fundamentally broken, you need to take radical action to fix it. And I don’t think anyone sane can look at the old status quo and say “it’s fine, actually.” I don’t see the government as functional, doing useful things, or promoting ideas that are helpful to a civilization. And if anything, most of the indicators seemed to be moving very rapidly in the wrong direction. Slowly applying the brakes means we’re still going the wrong direction, but maybe not accerating as quickly. Instead of letting in 10 million illegal immigrants this year, we let in 5 million and pat ourselves on the back despite the fact that we’re still a net positive on illegals immigrants. Maybe we slow inflation of necessary goods from 10% to 5%. Okay, but that’s still much higher than it should be. Our school students struggle internationally, and we are not only not fixing it, but doubling and tripling down on pushing Woke on kids. A lot of this stuff is broken. Making it break more slowly is not fixing it.
At this point so much of our country just doesn’t work for the median American that I think the only answer is the wrest control from tha apperachniks running the government and to bring it to heel. I’d rather end the current departments and reinvent them because it guarantees that something will actually change. The school system will go back to educating kids and away from promoting The Narrative. A welfare system that works for the truly needy without giving money to people who refuse to work. A foreign aid policy tuned to support American interests and allies, rather than simply funding every do-gooder grant project that nets an over educated elite a sinecure for 100K a year.
You’re assuming n this question that no one else can learn to cook. Or t go back to the original question, that no one other than trans-positive progressives can run museums. Libraries, or university departments. Which is not true. What is true is that through the selection process, open conservatives are weeded out, and that the constant DEI shibboleths mean that any conservatives are cowed into silence.
Destroy and rebuild works better simply because the people in power positions in those institutions have no intention of allowing anything to happen. Graham won’t be giving cooking lessons to his enemies. In those cases, it’s simply better to get rid of him and even if at first you burn the roast, you learn quickly, rather than suffer the harm while getting nothing from him.
The model of transsexuals is exactly that. It’s medical, social and even political accommodation to a reality that exists only in a person’s brain. There is nothing physical about being a transsexual. If no biological or social intervention happens, a trans woman will develop into a man from the baby boy he was born as. A trans abled person is in exactly that position of wanting society and especially the medical establishment to not only accept them, but work to make the vision of themselves a reality in the real world.
My question is with so many of these issues — where and how do you stop the creeping of the concept into more related concepts? If we accept transgender, and force everyone to play along and force doctors to do surgery and insurance companies to cover it, why not trans-canines who want a tail, why not the trans-abled who want the doctor to cut off their legs? Why not allow for transracial people to live as their desired race?
I think a good working model of mental illness must naturally include deviation from observed reality, and the best option for treatment shouter accepting the reality that exists. I am not a Korean in a white American body. I can have all the surgery and act as Korean as I want. I’m still not Korean. And if I persist in that delusion then the problem lies between my ears, not with the reality that made me German American.
I think it depends. To me, in anything science, RCT is the gold standard. There are workarounds that can be used when doing RCT is unethical due to the danger to the control group or in some cases the data is impossible to gather. In those cases other methods can work, though I generally take them to be low value and require a lot more of them done under lots of conditions before I accept the results.
The problem with “slow reform” as a process is that it rarely actually solves the problem. It’s failed often enough that I think once an institution reaches a certain point of brokenness that it’s probably better to slash burn and rebuild than to go slowly simply because going slowly often means those opposed have a chance to regroup and defend the rot in various ways. It’s why I think DOGE is absolutely brilliant— the axe is against the tree before anyone can figure out what is happening. Had it been the same sort of slo2 reform were used to — forming commissions, holding hearings, and going line by line, most of the problems— the bad science, the corruption, the waste, and the lucrative sinecures — would be quietly shuffled into other parts of the budget before DOGE could do anything. Move quickly and they cannot fight back.
And it can’t work unless there are good tenure ready conservatives with a strong background and lots of published papers that are pushing their field forward. If old progressive universities are not going to hire conservatives, they can’t get in the door, let alone be in a position to hire conservative professors. Plus, having those conservative institutions around gives the public a fair test case. If conservative leaning universities are producing more useful research, better quality education, more capable graduates, either the old guard dies off, or they are forced to compete by producing the same results.
It’s a generations long project because the liberals have long been in charge of the hiring and are looking specifically for signs or being insufficiently progressive. That’s one thing that the DEI and Land Statements and Pronouns in Signature are meant to do — weed out those who aren’t actively progressive by forcing them under threat of losing their jobs to make performative progressive statements. And until you have at least non-progressives in those hiring positions, it’s going to be really hard to get conservatives into those positions and other high powered positions.
Near term, I think it’s best to also build parallel institutions where the conservative opinion can be put out in publi.
You also have to keep in mind that the actions of the public were stymied by their own government. There was no mechanism for driving out the Pakistani rape gangs because the cops were running cover for them — to the point that today, cops waste time and resources tracking down people posting mean things about the rotherham gangs and Pakistanis in general, while still not doing much about said rape gangs.
I think vigilante justice would probably be a perfectly reasonable way to keep grooming gangs from acting openly. They’d know that if they hang around primary schools they’re going to face consequences from the community, and they … don’t do it. They know that if they touch a girl they face being hung from a telephone pole, they’re not going to be doing that. Keeping Pakistani men from being able to gain access to children, and being willing to actually punish wrongdoing is protective. And as far as im concerned, noting who is likely to do harmful things to your community and acting to keep them out is a social good.
- Prev
- Next
Not only that, but I think we have a lot of over-education in America where people are choosing college as a path of least resistance who really don’t have the talent or inclination to succeed in academia. I think if given a viable alternative— trades, culinary, or general labor — a lot of people would choose that instead.
More options
Context Copy link