domain:alexberenson.substack.com
AnonymousActuary
9hr ago
One more comment - not sure if you can read the Atlantic, but always thought this story by Ezra Klein's wife (Annie Lowrey) to be a fascinating one (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/08/pregnancy-birth-complication-abortion-life-of-mother/671006/).
It's basically about her harrowing experience with pregnancy through truly truly terrible itching (among other things). She relates this horror story she went through...then get about halfway through the story and relates how she still decided (and followed through on) having another kid.
AnonymousActuary
9hr ago
Yeah I think it's hard to look at society writ large right now in the US (or Korea...) and think that increased parental attention is doing a lot of good for the median family (or even the 85th or 95th percentile family). I'm sure there's some Bryan Caplan's out there who are giving their kids a lot of good experiences but in general I think self sufficiency and learning how to entertain yourself without parental impact is generally quite good. I think you have good reasons to be wary, but I also think worrying about impact on your kids from a 4th is not it (kids like having little siblings too!)
No_one
9hr ago
He wasn't too liberal. He is a living fossil, him with his open mind and willingness to talk to people.
Today liberalism stands for western guilt, feelings and self expression over rationality, safety over openness, faith in solving social issues through social engineering, despite half a century of total failure of such efforts.
Mandatory spending (mostly social security, medicare, pensions, and welfare), plus interest, now exceeds total federal revenues. We could eliminate every discretionary budget item, shut down everything from NASA to the Army, and we'd still see the debt continue to increase.
The debt is about to hit $37 trillion. If we cut all spending in half, everything down to Grandma's social security check, that would give us a $1 trillion surplus, and it would still take half a lifetime to pay everything back.
If we eliminated all spending, including collecting social security taxes but paying no more benefits, it would still take around 9 years to pay off the debt, not just a few.
Goodguy
9hr ago
No, if it was a staged fight there is no reason for Musk to use what in our society is the rhetoric equivalent of nuclear weapons, which is implying that Trump had sex with underage girls on Epstein's island. It would be easy to effectively stage a fight without going that far.
Also, there's Occam's razor. It seems more likely to me that these two guys, both of whom have a track record of being emotionally volatile, abrasive, and vindictive, actually did just get into a real spat, than that it is staged.
pigeonburger
9hr ago
No, it's the Democrat aligned media that try to make a big deal of Republican controlled legislatures that try to (futilely) put the genie back in the bottle and require age verification for access to porn.
TheAntipopulist
Formerly Ben___Garrison
9hr ago
Saying "denial" is something that has gotten me warned by the mods in the past, and I was only using it in a vague general sense. You're using it as a personal attack. The moderators on this site are heavily tilted towards conservatives so I doubt anything will happen to you on that front. Still, personal attacks make me just not want to respond to people who make them.
widely known facts
I'm not sure which specific "widely known facts" you think I'm disputing, but the overall "Joe took bribes" story is disputed not only by Dems, it was completely abandoned by Republican House members since there was just nothing there despite all their fishing and their dozens of subpoenas. Filling in that hole, that there's just no evidence, with unfalsifiable claims that Joe was crafty enough to evade all detection, then claiming "it's obvious" while making personal attacks that people who disagree are naive and "in denial" is one way to go about it I suppose. Did you know Dem partisans made similar attacks when the Russia investigation failed to show much in regards to Trump's collusion? Flip the valence of what you said, how it's ludicrous to expect any sort of evidence, that Trump would never be so stupid to sign a big contract saying "I, President Trump, agree to sell out the USA to Russia", and it would sound very much like something a never-Trumper would say.
In any case I doubt we'll change each other's minds, so I'm going to drop this conversation.
Musk also routinely drives traffic to various random X posts by posting one-liners like "Interesting" or "100%" in response to them. Which, while not any sort of heinous deceptiveness, nonetheless is clearly just a way to put his finger on the scales of what gets amplified without having to literally manipulate the algorithms. It's not the kind of action that a pure guileless engineering-minded person would take, I would think.
I also find it a bit hard to believe that Musk would get $300 billion without having some understanding of Machiavellians. In our society, pure brilliant engineer-types tend to max out at a net worth of a few tens of millions, don't they? To get more than that people generally need to have a lot of business acumen, and it's a bit hard for me to imagine having that level of business acumen without understanding how to deal with Machiavellians.
I do think that the overall notion of Musk as being more of an autist type and Trump more of a Machiavellian type seems correct to me, but I quibble with some of the details of Davon Eriksen's purported explanation.
erwgv3g34
9hr ago
hydroacetylene
9hr ago
I mean, the last time they had an advantage in exploration they totally did.
No_one
9hr ago
Elon Musk is too guileless. He says exactly what he thinks is true with little regard for how others will react.
This is wrong. Musk has been consistently serving slop to the masses on twitter. Things he could not possibly believe but that were yet flattering the average 110 IQ twitter user.
I propose that Musk is not guileless, he has guile but is also erratic.
ThomasdelVasto
Κύριε Ἰησοῦ Χριστέ, Υἱέ τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἐλέησόν με τὸν ἁμαρτωλόν
9hr ago
Are you armin ferman? Also what makes you think that?
ThomasdelVasto
Κύριε Ἰησοῦ Χριστέ, Υἱέ τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἐλέησόν με τὸν ἁμαρτωλόν
9hr ago
The US electorate is too pants-on-head retarded to save itself from spending. That's it. There is only one way out of this, and it's riding the lightning until we're all consumed by a black swan event in the next couple of years.
Disagree. There is always hope to fix things, this mindset is a huge reason why we're in the political mess we are. We can and will fix spending, now or later. Unless a black swan comes of course, which is always a possibility.
Listening
9hr ago
Isn't that like the Republicans saying "vote for us or the Democrats will ban abortion?"
No_one
10hr ago
The next boom we'll conquer Mars, Venus, maybe the stars.
Chinese are just gonna burn their space program while you're dealing with boomer entitlement and the chickens of the Civil Rights Act coming home to roost.
I don't think they will oblige.
I don't have a particularly high opinion of British police, but, per Bounded Distrust, I'm not enough of a conspiracy theorist to think they would frame an innocent man for a terror attack just because the real perpetrator was of the wrong ethnicity. It invites the question of why this wasn't done for any of the high-profile public acts of violence committed by non-white non-natives in the recent past (Southport, 7/7, the murder of David Amess, Reading, London Bridge X2 etc.).
FruitfulLemonyLemons
10hr ago
Devon Eriksen effortpost on Twitter
He argues that Trump and Elon are sort of polar opposite personality types in terms of "guile". Elon being an autistic engineer has and expects a "guileless" communication style devoted to simply conveying the truth as you see it. Trump being a Machiavellian type sees communication as a tool of power (see also Scott Adams' talks on "persuasion" and Trump) and wants loyalty with no expectation that he'll give it to you straight.
Notably, despite calling Trump "Machiavellian" he sees both people as earnestly trying to avert disaster for America, with Elon seeing the debt as the most important existential threat and Trump seeing immigration and entrenched bureaucracy as the most important existential threats.
Fascinating take overall and worth the read, here's the full text:
These guys don't understand each other.
Elon Musk is too guileless. He says exactly what he thinks is true with little regard for how others will react. He alienates allies by airing disputes in public instead of settling them behind closed doors.
Because he is a sperg engineer who leads companies of sperg engineers, and to do this, you must be 100% truthful and transparent.
Donald Trump is too guileful. He says exactly what will advance his plans with little regard for telling people what he actually thinks. He alienates allies by expecting their unconditional support without sharing any aspect of his strategic plans with them.
Because he is a New York real estate developer, who thrives on winning negotiations and gaining advantage from unshared knowledge, and to do this, you must be 100% calculating and opaque.
Here's what happened.
Musk worked super hard, and took great personal risks, to get a head start on balancing the federal budget. He correctly believes that federal spending is an existential risk to the nation.
Trump regards those savings as a political asset.
And, since he lacks leverage in congress, he took them and traded them for other things he wanted, apparently dealing with border control, the courts, etc... problems which he correctly believes are an existential threat to the nation.
He may have concrete plans for balancing the federal budget in the future, but, frustratingly, he won't tell his own team what they are.
Trump could have squared this in advance with Musk, in private, but he appears to either have assumed his loyalty (treating an ally like a subordinate), or been unable to persuade him.
Likewise, Musk could have raised his complaints in private, but either he was too upset to try, or was not able to reach an agreement when he did.
Trump doesn't understand how to deal with spergs. You have to tell them the truth, not expect them to read subtext. They refuse to read subtext. They want to be spoken to honestly.
Musk doesn't understand how to deal with Machiavellians. They think of language as a power tool, and think of those who insist on truth as naive.
Both men are used to being in charge, and are used to dealing with subordinates, who must cater to their preferred style of communicating.
They are both therefore uniquely unsuited to having both the patience and the capability to speak the other's language.
The truth is that both the federal budget and the federal bureaucracy are existential threats to America. Maximum priority.
Trump's concerns about the "art of the possible" are probably valid, but Musk's sense of urgency should not be dismissed lightly.
It is churlish to leverage the superior strengths and talents of people on the autism spectrum while making zero allowances for their unique needs.
That said, spergs can be frustratingly dogmatic, even when they aren't the richest and most successful man in the world.
A few other things to notice:
The democrats have said nothing. That's because there are no democrats. They have no independent intellectuals, only paid schills.
A response will not be forthcoming until the wholly organic grassroots PR committees have met, and the wholly grassroots talking heads have been cut a wholly organic grassroots check.
There's also a strong case to be made for Team Nothing Ever Happens. Remember that Musk will sometimes shut up when he calms down, and Trump has no problem calling someone the Antichrist one day and working with him the next.
AlexanderTurok
Alt-MSNBC
10hr ago
The usual crap conservatives started believing around 2021.
Throwaway05
10hr ago
I've actually heard it described two very similar but subtly different ways - the "borderline between psychosis and neurosis" (as in pathology in those gaps) and as "borderline level of functioning" in contrast to psychotic or neurotic level of functioning (hardcore psychodynamics). I don't know which is more true, but the clinical pearl is the same for both - experiences (including negative self-talk) can become so overwhelming they approach the character of delusion and hallucination, but of course the actual effect on the substrate and underlining biology is radically different.
Still, it is a great teaching point lol.
It's useful you point out the "didn't have much personality of their own" because that is a significant feature in the severe cases - you can see them simply not have have preferences or wants in the way a normal and healthy person does.
A tip I've seen good physician diagnosticians lean into is simply "how long do your mood swings last" if they aren't in the 5-7 day range it's unlikely to be Bipolar (I, anyway). Another good rule of thumb is that if you don't have an inpatient stay (and likely an involuntary one at that) then you probably haven't had a manic episode.
But yes diagnosis for purpose of insurance coverage and other things like that does happen.
I'm not an expert on this but I think it's often driven by attachment dynamics - mother/daughter and mother/son relationship are fundamental different as are male patterns of reality and independence exploration.
I do know some thing you can rule of thumb it as APD=male BPD= female with that being the majority of the cases, but I've noticed plenty of men who are really just BPD instead of APD.
Less so the other way around.
Sunshine
10hr ago
Technically I didn't say never, I said 'ever'. And I genuinely don't believe Trump has the power to punish Musk any more than he already has been.
Yes? I feel like you're reading my comment out of context.
We were discussing
- A specific individual nowadays for whom the odds were 1%, not 10%, but who was discussing hypothetical 10%
- The past during specific time periods when maternal mortality spiked (because they got medical care and their medical care didn't wash their hands)
Edit: no actually I see your point. Yes, it makes no sense to invoke evolution for it for temporary periods (and in fairness when it spiked people surely didn't realize what was happening)
AlexanderTurok
Alt-MSNBC
10hr ago
Hanania's appealing to Musk to join team EHC:
https://x.com/RichardHanania/status/1930698606966960494
If forced to choose, Musk is probably the less bad option, but it's really not a good sign that he's decided the to make the first salvo "Epstein client list." All that does is alienate smart people, he's not going to win the support of pedophilia-obsessed losers.
Cirrus
10hr ago
I used to care about fiscal responsibility, but both sides (Republicans and Democrats) keep hitting the defect button. American fiscal policy in the 21st century is a spoils system. There is less in common and more in conflict between Red and Blue America. When one side pillages the Treasury, it’s a betrayal to your side if you don’t also pillage the Treasury once you get into power.
This will change, probably once Social Security runs insolvent within the next ten years. Then America, like a deadbeat Eurozone country, will be forced by necessity to implement austerity measures. And few of the current crop of geriatric politicians in Congress will be around to deal with the fallout.
Yeah, it's a quick "No" for me, but I live in the Portland area and the women in my age range (40-55) are basically the Pussy Hat brigade from 2016-2017. It does limit the options when an entire geo region is a meme. There are a few conservatives, but I don't fit in well with them, either, unfortunately: I'm not religious or outdoorsy, I'm blue culture with greyish-red politics, and I'm not a masculine ideal. That leaves me mostly with the silent cohort of women who simply don't care about politics, which also sounds dull.
More options
Context Copy link