WalkAway videos and changing minds: the interpersonal and the intrapersonal
What conservatives miss in this question of why do Democrats accept lies and ignore the debunkings is that Democrats realize, likely unconsciously, that their place in the circle is being jeopardized. It’s a tiny threat to their survival and they know better than to do that.
This is what raises the #walkaway videos to acts of courage. I guarantee each walkaway person is going to suffer socially.
I think that huxley is correct. But I’ll add that it’s not only a threat to their social survival. It’s also a threat to a deep marker of self-identity. The question “Who am I?” is one we all answer in an ongoing manner, and political leaning is a big part of that. So while the threat that the person perceives can indeed be social, it also involves the uncomfortable cognitive dissonance of having an internal belief system threatened.
I think that, for most (not all) people on left or right, the first reaction to such a threat is to entrench by coming up with reasons that the evidence contradicting a previous point of view is wrong, or to just shrug off that evidence in some way. In the WalkAway video by Georgia that I posted a while back, she describes that process very well several times in her video. Here’s one of those times (this and the other clips in this post are very very short, although her entire video is rather long):
It’s understandable. People are busy, and there’s a lot of confusing information coming at them. How to evaluate what to pay closer attention to, and what to dismiss? Authenticating information isn’t easy, and it takes time. And of course, the more deeply committed a person is to a side or a cause, the more it usually takes to change the person’s mind, and for many even an avalanche of convincing information will never do it.
This rejection of evidence is not exclusive to the left. But I have noticed it is especially common on the left compared to the right, at least among people I know.
At some point – but only for some people – there’s a critical moment where the doubt can no longer be overcome by rationalizations or just not thinking about it. As Georgia says later:
She makes several statements there that are especially important, I think, and one of them – “If I was wrong about that, what else was I wrong about? – is especially central. I’ve seen people say that in many WalkAway videos, and it’s something I experienced myself as part of my change experience. I maintain that it is the turning point (as Georgia also seems to be saying in her video): the moment of pivot when the entire edifice of belief begins to be questioned in a deep and meaningful way, and the person becomes committed to pursuing the truth wherever it may take him or her.
Not everyone will do that. It takes curiosity and – as Georgia also indicates – a certain amount of humility that means the person is able to entertain the notion of having been wrong about something very important, and wrong for a long time. Georgia also mentions that to do this she had to get some distance from feelings and emotions which had been a partial driver of her political opinions.
A commitment to finding out the truth as best as one can is by no means a universal need. But for some people it becomes a deep one. In this portion of the video, Georgia describes two things – the loss of the sense of social belonging to the Democratic group (you might say she perceives herself as being outside the circle dance already, and she can’t pretend anymore), and the sense of needing truth as much as she needs oxygen:
The social intersects with the sense of personal integrity, and everyone has a different need for each and makes a different decision – sometimes unconsciously. For me, I made the transition alone, in a time when I was socially isolated. I was naive, and had no idea people would ostracize me or get so angry at me – which shows you how long ago this happened to me. By the time I realized I had committed a grave social transgression, it was too late and there was no turning back. Not that I would have, anyway, had I known what was in store.
NOTE: I’ve been thinking that it might be a good idea to send the Georgia video to people you know who are not completely rabid leftists, especially younger people, and see how they react. Here’s the URL. The cuts are somewhat distracting, but I think she may have edited out meanderings or pauses, or stopped periodically to collect her thoughts. She certainly doesn’t appear to be reading a prepared statement, and she seems to be very sincere.
It takes a strong personality to self-correct, to realize “I don’t want to be part of that tribe,” and/or “I don’t want to be that person.” It’s rejecting a status that has been assigned to them by the dominant culture, and that they’ve probably lived with for years, in exchange for what? Peace of mind about not being another cog in the creaky and unreliable machine left, yes, but also credibility and autonomy in one’s own estimation. Walking (or running) away is an act of courage and intelligence.
Unfortunately, when people (even those of modest, above-average, and superior intelligence) have invested years of emotion in a particular ideology, there is a natural reluctance to change, no matter the amount of evidence available to refute the original belief. This is one of the best examples of falling prey to the “sunk-cost fallacy” whereby reason and logic are unable to alter a pattern of thought in which much time and great effort have already been invested.
I totally disagree with huxley’s thesis that “why … Democrats accept lies and ignore the debunkings is that Democrats realize, likely unconsciously, that their place in the circle is being jeopardized. It’s a tiny threat to their survival and they know better than to do that.”
He cuts the collectivist Dems a lot of slack, with “likely unconsciously” thinking, and only “a tiny threat to their survival”.
They are arm-in-arm collectivists, like Bolsheviks.
They are a great threat to the survival of all who believe in truth and freedom.
They have been on the march for a century now, never really faltering. It is we who have seen them as a “tiny threat”, an adversary with which we can and do compromise while they lie and lie and lie. We give them an inch and they take a mile.
Democrats have never been the Party of Good, ever.
Now they are frankly, overtly evil.
People change in different ways. Both my mother and father were raised in very religious households. My father’s breakaway was painful and difficult, and in someways it colored his life until his death. I asked my mother how she came to leave, and she said she just slipped away over the years, no drama. On political matters, at some point after age 40 I realized that most of what I believed simply wasn’t true. I was always skeptical — an early girl friend said I was born conservative — but becoming skeptical of oneself, which is the hard part, is a tricky matter.
I am not sure I am as walked away as some. But certainly enough to circle back and find myself in agreement with much of what neo has to say. I have been a moderate I suppose or slightly center right. What pushes me more toward the right is the issue that I tend to know and care most about – the right of Israel to exist. And what has motivated me as much as anything has been that for decades I have seen the media and academics either lie or be stupid about Israel. They have been – at best – disingenuous about the existential threat Israel faces. They have created a false equivalence between where people build houses and whether people live at all.
Given that the media and academia is so obviously wrong about Israel, I came to doubt their credibility on other topics. And I came to see that there was an unhappy consistency to their errors.
One important instance of my criticism is the awful notion of intersectionality. One problem with intersectionality is that its proponents want to put Jews in the intersection to get run over. This Jew is not on board with that.
Neo, it should be noted that a lot of people have walked away from the Republican party because of Trump. The Lincoln Project being one that is quite vociferous. But it looks like a good number of regular voters in the Midwest will too – granted they may just be swing voters. But hate them all you want it is a fact that they are walking away from the Republican party at the moment and many are also sincere.
I would argue it happens every election cycle. I recall through the years those who walked away from the party because of Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Obama. Sometimes it is permanent and sometimes it is expedient but It only really matters if it affects the election. So far I’m not sure walkaways from the Democrats will affect this election. Maybe in four years it will. [Or maybe two during the midterms?]
Montage:
GeorgiaH’s video has more than 1.1 million views in less than two weeks. I would argue that is more significant than your musings or your magic bicycle.
Montage:
IIRC a significant number of Democrat voters walked away in 2016, some of the states were MI, WI, PA, and OH(?). Something about jobs that weren’t ever coming back and some other wondrous, fantastic, policies of the Obama/Biden administration. Now you offer up the wondrous, fantastic, Harris/Biden ticket, systemic racism, riots, political assassinations, and a virus. Time will tell.
[huxley] cuts the collectivist Dems a lot of slack, with “likely unconsciously” thinking, and only “a tiny threat to their survival”.
…
Democrats have never been the Party of Good, ever.
Now they are frankly, overtly evil.
Cicero: I do cut slack. I prefer not to play the “evil” card against a hundred million of my neighbors. I consider them more human than evil.
As I recall, you are Catholic, as was I once. I suggest you consider the requirements of a mortal sin according to the Church:
________________________________________________
Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent.
http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s1c1a8.htm#IV
________________________________________________
It’s debatable whether supporting the left is a “grave matter.” Your current Pope seems entirely on board.
However, I would argue that the typical American Democrat lacks “full knowledge” that it is a “grave matter” to which he is giving “deliberate consent.”
IMO Democrats are imperfect humans, who are struggling not to lose friends while supporting their imperfect notions of making the world a better place.
I don’t see the moral truth or pragmatic upside for an American, especially a Catholic American, to call such people “evil.”
Social isolation? A conservative in the SF Bay Area would have more friends north of the Arctic Circle.
huxley:
I’m not Judge Barrett, so leave the Church out of it. You’re not my confessor! Or shall I call you Feinstein?
I just registered vehement disagreement with you, as I believe I indicated, and gave reasons that you’re trivializing what’s before us.
I use “evil” to indicate more than bad, ignorant, or both. I use evil to indicate the existence of malign intent. I stick to that.
Cicero: Yet you offer no evidence beyond your mindreading of Democrats that they have malign intent. I greatly dislike arguments which rely upon mindreading.
I’ll stick to that.
For those conservatives who imagine only weak, pathetic Democrats could sputter and refuse to consider contrary argument, I offer my interaction with Cicero.
My point is that Cicero is human and imperfect, just as I am, just as all of us are, if caught in a tight place.
om
1.1 millions views means simply that she has 1.1 million views. What are you divining from it? That someone who isn’t part of the MSM has a platform? That it means more votes for Trump?
It’s not hard to believe there are at least 60 million Republicans who plan to vote for Trump with or without this video. So the fact that a fraction of them may be watching this woman’s video [in an election year] doesn’t mean a whole lot. There are a lot of people with opinions that get seen daily on YouTube.
The Lincoln Project has numerous videos that have upwards of 2 million views each.
The point that you seem to be missing is that there are always people ‘walking away’ from one party or another. From one religion or another. And for numerous other reasons. But it’s mainly anecdotal. Good for them. Good for this woman. But I’m saying it doesn’t mean a whole lot in the grand scheme of things. Especially this election cycle when it seems pretty evident more are walking away from Trump. Yes, we will see in 22 days.
Georgia may find herself slowly but surely having won the internet without even realizing it. I predict that after this, she will begin to reveal her amazing ballroom dance moves.
For some people the process of thinking is like going down a very familiar road or watching a favorite movie for the nth time. It’s comforting and self medicating to go from thought A then to thought B, seeing this street pass by, then that house, this scene, then that plot point. It’s reassuring that in all the chaos that life presents, there they are, chugging along, always thinking this, then that and so on.
When you talk to a person like that they will listen, maybe even agree on that one point and then go right back to their well travelled thought pattern. You can actually watch them, looking at the point you’ve made, realizing that it doesn’t fit in their world view. Then they set it down and go right back to thought C then D with an overwhelming sense of relief.
Montage, who is a progressive at least and a closeted leftist (most likely) deigns to tell conservatives and Republicans to believe in the Lincoln Project (aka The Lenin Project) because it suits his goal; furtherance of progressive domination and oppression.
GeorgiaH was a progressive and her audience and message is directed IMO to other persuadable youths, not Republicans and conservatives. Her message threatens you Montage and your grand and good intentions that typically turn everything to excrement.
She is not a “project” funded by progressives; some info is breaking about The Lenin Project I’ve heard. It is telling that you bring up religion and the loss of faith. Is she a heretic, an apostate who has abandoned the one true faith, aka the Democrat Party?
huxley:
You ignore the evidence before you, dismissing it as me “mindreading” Democrats.
Who has talked about banning fracking? Raising income taxes? Packing SCOTUS? Shutting down the entire economy to suppress the dreaded COVID?
That is all from Dems. Major league Dems.
You do not see the Dems marching in collectivist lockstep in the House and in the Senate? Really?
This is the most critical presidential election since Abe Lincoln. It is no time to be blase’ and forgiving. If the Senate and White House fall into their hands, the country will have committed suicide by allowing that to happen.
There are any number of people who seem irrational about such things. And they are. Somehow, the came to be leftists before and in absence of the kind of facts which would cause them to make their selection.
After which they search for, make up, or accept nonsense as fact in order to support their position which, I suspect, has a lot to do with their self-image.
And they reject the simplest, most easily understood and provable facts which challenge their position.
The position came first. Talking facts to them is fruitless.
And worse are the mush heads for whom MEAN TWEETS are dispositive.
Montage is right about one thing: the walk aways won’t affect this election to any significant degree. In addition, I agree “walk aways” happen, to a certain degree in every election cycle.
A key distinction needs to be made between leaving a political party versus moving away from a political ideology. The former definitely happens frequently and for many reasons. The latter is rarer (at least for individuals over 30) and much more profound.
Montage mentions “The Lincoln Project” which appears to largely be a group of Beltway NeverTrumpers still convinced that if Trump is defeated, the GOP can return to it’s “roots” (specifically when they had power and influence). It is a tiny, largely inconsequential movement, but, from what I can tell, few of its members have changed their ideological views to any significant degree. They just hate Trump and want to “rescue” the Republican Party from him.
I don’t have any statistics on this (and would love to see some) but it’s highly likely moving ideologically from right to left is much, much more rare for people over 30 than moving left to right (insert Churchill quote here). There are many reasons for this, but the most salient has been pointed out many times: almost all Americans have been heavily exposed to liberal/progressive/democratic socialist ideologies throughout their childhood, teen years and young adulthood. Unless you are raised in a conservative family, in a red community, go to a religious school (or are homeschooled), go to one of the handful of right-leaning colleges (or don’t go to college), get your news from FOX, Rush and right-leaning blogs and largely ignore most of the entertainment industry, you’re going to get inundated with heaping doses of progressivism at every turn. If one hasn’t been convinced by about age 30, it’s highly unlikely to happen ever.
Neo is certainly correct that people like Georgia are likely to suffer socially for their ideological shift. I only did slightly when I made my shift, but…hard as it is to believe…the country was less polarized and the left less unhinged and intolerant back then (2008)! I cannot imagine openly “walking away” in 2020, which is why I admire Brandon Straka’s movement so much.
“Walking away” (I mean that term specifically referring to leaving the left) is a very difficult process. It’s challenging for anyone to realize and accept they now believe they were wrong on many fundamental matters. The more passionately you advocated, the more active you were, in progressive causes/issues/campaigns, the more painful it is to walk away. That’s leaving aside the social ostracism you are likely to face, at least to some degree.
Cicero:
I don’t see Democrats as having “malign intent,” although of course some do (particularly many leaders). Did Georgia, the woman in this video, have “malign intent” when she was a Democrat? I think it’s crystal clear that she did not.
Nor did I, I assure you.
Neo: You’ve mentioned the circle dance a few times in regards to walking away from an established political heritage. While I think I can understand that at some level, what I can’t understand is the dogged determinism to stick with a political party that just doesn’t work.
The Democratic cities in this country are cesspools of crime and poverty. The Republican suburbs are generally areas of safety and prosperity. The blue states are economic basket cases, while the red states are, at least in comparison, sound. California is a one-party state, and they can’t even keep the lights on any more.
Add in the recent riots, burnings, and shootings. Democrats flee, and then turn their new homes into carbon copies of the cesspools they left.
How does one’s sense of belonging override all this in the voting booth? *That* is what I just don’t understand.
I would argue this election is more important than even the election of 1860. Had that election gone badly the United States would have split apart into three or four separate countries. But at least one of them would have carried on in the faith and traditions of the Founding Fathers.
If this election goes badly and the Democrats actually do what they say they’re going to do, there won’t be an America left anywhere any more. There may or may not be a land called that, but it will not be governed by the principles of individual liberty. It will be at best a hollowed-out shell but more likely something much more nasty. Everyone’s chips are all in the center of the table.
Montage:
What makes you think that walking away from Trump has anything to do with walking away from the Republican Party? Trump is very different from the Republican Party itself, and most of the NeverTrumpers don’t like him for personal rather than policy reasons.
Also, many would argue that the people who walked away from Trump were RINOs anyway to begin with.
mkent:
I don’t think there are all that many people who are dissatisfied with being Democrats but stick around solely because they don’t want to give up that sense of belonging. That’s part of it. But as I wrote in this post, there is an entire internal struggle going on that has nothing to do with the interpersonal consequences or the “circle dance.”
Huxley, that’s a pretty good ministry you are doing with Cicero there. He does not accept it, of course, but the end results are still points accumulated for your dharma. It is the same whether they accept or not accept.
I’m not Judge Barrett, so leave the Church out of it. You’re not my confessor! Or shall I call you Feinstein?
This idea that it requires human priests to act as confessor when everyone or even anyone has a direct access channel to Yeshua as the bridge to the Godhead, is contradictory. But that would trigger too many ego death flags, so best not to talk about that and go for the usual mental defense of blaming/attacking/projecting/displacing other people. It is always their fault, after all that is what blacks and minorities were told about divisions in America.
Democrats have never been the Party of Good, ever.
Now they are frankly, overtly evil.
The same applies to humanity. When were you ever born, that humans did not have this taint of original sin that you need a baptism for just to cleanse yourself of the crime of being born?
The project of the Divine Godhead is to convert evil to good. So what good are you doing by talking about evil, if you can’t convert it?
If this is the job of priests only… well I am far more than a priest. Outsource this job too?
This is also why it was pointless to learn Alinsky to fight Alinsky. That is a dead end.
Using poison vs poison, fire against fire, is only a temporary stop gap. It never resolves the fundamental root of the problem or sin.
I greatly dislike arguments which rely upon mindreading.
On the topic of mind reading, when I replied to a Neo post about Donald Junior, I wrote something minor sarcastic like “welcome to the party, junior”, and it happened to be right underneath Huxley’s comments. Except I didn’t read any comments.
Huxley immediately did what he perceived to be a counter attack, and his emotions were particularly ugly even though the words were short.
Humans are flawed and also weak. Even when they recognize that they were wrong, they don’t really recognize it. It’s too inconvenient, so they change the topic.
Montage (thx for being here! tho you’re mostly wrong), the NeverTrumpers of the Lincoln Project do seem to be Republicans, but who do not support Trump. They did not support him in 2016. Unlike Georgia in the video who did vote Dem (Hillary) in 2016, and walked away in 2018.
Many pro-Trump folk call them RINOs (R In Name Only); many of them had been prominent Romney, McCain (tho often not so much Palin), Bush supporters. They claimed to support Tax Cuts & Deregulation, which Trump has done. They claim to want Conservative judges, like AC Barrett, which Trump had appointed. They weren’t so happy with reduced trade with Communist China, and were not so keen on enforcing the border. (Not much illegal immigration talk this election, as Neo noted a couple days ago). They paid lip service to being pro-life … but didn’t quite participate in the annual March for Life.
Trump is changing the Republican Party. But virtually none of those Republicans not on board with Trump in 2020, were also not supporting Trump in 2016.
It’s not clear now what the Rep Party will be after Trump. Less change if he loses now, bigger change if he wins again.
My guess is that Trump-supporters against illegal immigration are changing the Reps so that most Reps will favor the Wall, and be against illegal immigration, tho Rubio, for instance, would likely make a deal as before. Amnesty first, enforcement later … or maybe not so much enforcement ever.
But more Reps will be “fighting” more.
Some Trump fanboys, like Don Surber, claim there are no prominent folk who voted Trump in 2016 and are against him now. As I write this, I’m wondering about Gen. Mattis, and many other top generals – who failed to win in Iraq or Afghanistan. (Trump hates losing, sort of too much.)
42 min Georgia video is too long, but she covers so much. Here are a few highlights I noticed:
“Being anti-racist is part of an identity” – so solving the racism problem is threatening the identity, the heroic identity of being anti-racist. She likes ML King, who had the idea of judging people on their character, and ending racism.
“Conservatives don’t care about my kids. They only care about business, and share holders.”
Charter schools much better – teachers got more money, smaller classes, better results; but at a lower cost per student. When one teacher gets hired (in LA), two administrators get hired. Huge amounts of money go to administrators.
“Total disparagement of Trump-voters” – racist, transphobic, deplorable. Kind people she knew were “hating their neighbors, blindly disparaging their neighbors … like it’s praiseworthy to demonstrate contempt for millions of Americans”. Because they are brainwashed by the media.
32 min. Nurse seeing another miscarriage at 20 weeks. No fight left on abortion issue – “conservatives are not trying to control my body”. … “what else was I wrong about? … see nitty gritty of reality”.
“The Party of educated people … elite … all you people suck, but I’m different”. She became embarrassed about being a Dem, but she was still afraid of conservatives.
“A Republican can have a good idea, but they have the wrong reasons”.
“The things you see with your eyes and ears are not real, but TV is what you should believe”.
5-6 am is too late to track such a good video; too bad there’s not a good transcript. I might even watch it again to see what the Dem anti-Rep messages are more explicitly.
[It seems that the comment adds the + instead of a space in the name.]
Neo
I don’t agree about the RINO label for people who dislike Trump. I know parties tend to redefine themselves according to whomever is – in this case – Republican and president but Trump’s cult of personality is quite strong and some Republicans feels he has changed the party too much. Hence the Lincoln project – many of whom were rock-ribbed Republican until recently. I think they could be considered pre-Trump Republicans more than RINOS.
Ackler
No doubt people get ostracized for walking away from progressive Democrats but depending on where one lives they can easily get ostracized for walking away from conservative Republicans too. I’m not sure it’s less painful. Depends on how much one relies on either in their social lives or jobs.
Tom+Grey
Thanks for the comment. I read this blog and others on the right because I am curious about what is being said and I don’t hate conservatives. I do think there is middle ground and in fact I agree on some issues – especially the misguided anti-racist movement. You’ll note I said that maybe in two or four years such walkaways from the Democratic party could be more possible. Right now the pressure is on Trump. If he loses and the Democrats win then the pressure is on them. If they turn further left in a substantial way they could lose many more who may feel the party has walked away from them. We shall see.
Montage:
You don’t know what RINO means, apparently. People you would call “rock-ribbed Republicans” can indeed be RINOs, or worse.
The history of those in the Lincoln Project:
The problem with Democrats is not that they have malign intent – it’s that they tolerate people who do. Those who don’t tolerate that behavior are the best candidates for walking away from the Democratic Party.
“…cult of personality…”
Heh!
“If [the Democrats] turn further left…”
Heh, heh!
“…in a substantial way…”
Heh, heh, heh!
And, gosh, we’re even referencing “The Lincoln Project”. “Lincoln” and “project”! (Well, “projection” is far more likely.) When it comes to Orwellian “creativity, those visionaries could give Soros a run for his money (or at least a small fraction of it). For that matter, when it comes to misrepresentation and mendacity, they deserve the Democratic Party Medal of Honor.
https://nypost.com/2020/07/21/lincoln-project-founders-have-ties-to-russia-tax-troubles-docs/
Oh, and Eve, you’re far too decent (and Lincolnesque): “malign intent” is PRECISELY what the Democrats have demonstrated (eagerly and proudly) that they do have. In spades. In bucketfuls. Or if you prefer, oodles of.
File under: “With malice towards EVERYONE who doesn’t agree with us!!”
The anti-Catholicism shown in passive-aggressive comments here is interesting. It reads like Aaron Sorkin dialogue that Josiah Bartlet would use on West Wing.
And yes, and inquiry of one’s faith where an inquiry isn’t really needed is a strange one. It now reads like more of an opportunity to express an open sore, past memories or prejudices. All because someone said “evil” and “confessor.”
Related: A blast from the past.
Unfortunately, “the past is a different country”
https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/406248/
Absolutely refusing for all these years to “just go away”, Hillary Clinton, a “heavy hitter” in inspiring the incipient WalkAway movement four years ago, may be about to play another stand-out (stand-up?) cameo role this year:
https://justthenews.com/government/courts-law/federal-tax-judge-allows-whistleblower-case-against-clinton-foundation
Naturally, she will shout to the rooftops that that she’s done absolutely nothing wrong, that it’s all a political vendetta, that she’s a victim of a vicious tyrant…though all this could well evolve into…this must be a mistake, that she was taken out of context, that she was set up, that she was misled, that it wasn’t intentional, that she’s also human, that she’s given her country almost half a century of public service, that she’s a model citizen and a grandmother…
(Note for anyone a bit leery about the term “whistleblower”: we’re talking about a “whistleblower” of the non-Schiffian variety….)
It is fascinating to me that there are people whose sense of self and identity are so prominently tied to a political party and ideology. My political affiliation is so far down the list of ways I would describe myself as to be meaningless.
I had never seen nor heard of friends (or relatives) cutting friends dead over politics until you mentioned it several yesrs ago. I had not until the Clinton administration, seen the fundamental divergence in lifeway values between the two viewpoints as being as deep and as metaphysically and as anthropologically rooted, and as irreconcilable in the same living space, as they have since then been revealed to be.
The reason is that what progressives want out of life, social and otherwise, is not what conservatives and libertarians want. What progressives socially demand of and from conservatives and libertarians, conservatives and libertarians neither want nor need from progressives.
If Haidt is right, then there is is no resolution despite his hopes of a liberal/ conservative complementarity paradigm developing: Since, when, what the author of Aesopfan’s linked-to article describes as the “turbulent” personality, is coupled as he asserts it is to the justice as equality sensibility described by Haidt, it means that the resultant personality can in principle never admit or accept a condition of “peace” and tranquility. It will always be subverting, even gratuitously, even interpersonally, best process and established adjudicating rules in the name of a “deeper” concern. A concern which when analyzed, looks in large neasure to be fed by its turbulent, histrionic, and unstable personality and appetites in the first place.
Thus, its inner need for disruption will always seek outrages upon which it can focus its indignation. And as mountains shrink into molehills, micro aggressions will provide all the pretext that is needed for the emotionally turbulent progressive personality, whose definitions of inequality are always changing, and whose concept of mankind itself is highly unstable, to further stimulate itself to an ego satisfying social justice climax. And we get to be the offended audience compelled to witnesd this narcissistic performance.
Neo:
I respond to your “I don’t see Democrats as having “malign intent,” although of course some do (particularly many leaders). Did Georgia, the woman in this video, have “malign intent” when she was a Democrat? I think it’s crystal clear that she did not.
“Nor did I, I assure you.”
I should have made it clear that I refer to Democratic leadership. The rank-and-file Dems are basically drones, the brainwashed, trial lawyers or public employee union members. They are out to take and get. There is no Georgia there; there is no doubting, no analysis. That is why “changing” is unusual in our/your experience.
Trump is disliked as a person, his many good policies going unrecognized. Can anything of major political importance be more stupid?
Trump will be hounded to hell when out of office. He did not need to run for president. He was a billionaire, for gosh sakes.
The country is committing suicide.
If he took the whining and threats of Bill, the sensitive conservative and lifetime Republican from Houston seriously – as either a conservative or a Republican- then he might have come away with that impression. Yeah, Bill of Houston was going to abandon his beloved Republican party because of the uncouth, uncaring, unempathetic Trump, and all of his cruel and selfish enablers. Sniff sniff.
Bill’s one virtue was in finally answering the question I was badgering him with as to which was more important: our rule of law, or the unconditional acceptance and comfort of the illegal aliens he was championing.
The impartially applied rule of law, and the legal and territorial integrity of the USA, lost out. So much for the value of making a contractual agreement or keeping faith with a sensitive conservative.
You might as well hand an off meds schizophrenic a razor blade and dare him to slice your neck. If he is not hearing from his secret inspirations at that moment, you might come away whole. But in the long run? No.
The untrustworthy Republican primadonna John McCain, piss be upon him, proved that
Johnny Mac … he did it hisssss waaaaay (if on his wife’s money) just as he had proclaimed in an ostensibly Christian Church funeral service, no less. Yeah Johnny, “hallowed be YOUR name”
He and Lyndon Johnson both are probably down headfirst and sharing the same pit in the floor of Hell. They can stroke each others egos in that position for all eternity.
Wasn’t it great to be king, boys?
You ignore the evidence before you, dismissing it as me “mindreading” Democrats.
Cicero: You ignore the obvious that you are not a Democrat.
If you opposed fracking, given your understanding of what that means, you would indeed have malign intent.
Democrats don’t advocate banning fracking because they intend a worse world, but a better one. That they are mistaken doesn’t mean their intent is malign.
I find the Catholic teaching on mortal sin in this regard — that one must have malign intent as you put it — a perfect distinction in the often muddied waters of morality.
I have my issues with Catholicism, but I did learn much I still find useful from my sojourn within the Church.
huxley:
“Democrats don’t advocate banning fracking because they intend a worse world, but a better one. That they are mistaken doesn’t mean their intent is malign.”
The banning of fracking will obviously yield a worse-off America and a worse-off world.
Do you favor the destructiveness implicit in AOC’s New Green Deal?
Did Stalin and Mao just make mistakes?
No fracking=reduced supply of oil, plus higher extraction costs=higher gasoline
prices=reduced freedom of motion=reduced freedom.
You are a Progressive in disguise if you apologize for Democrat “mistakes”!
Cicero:
Now I get what you meant.
“If Stalin only knew.” It is a feature not a bug.
https://the-moneychanger.com/articles/comrade_stalin_doesnt_know
Huxley…”Democrats don’t advocate banning fracking because they intend a worse world, but a better one. That they are mistaken doesn’t mean their intent is malign.”
A relatively small % of people appear to understand the dynamics of electricity production and use. The difficulty and expense of *storing* large amounts of electricity is especially not understood, and this is a major issue when it comes to intermittent source such as solar and wind.
I’ve observed that very few journalists (including business and ‘tech’ journalists) understand that a kilowatt and a kilowatt-hour are two entirely different things. Measuring the storage capacity of a battery (or other energy storage system) in kilowatts or megawatts is like measuring the capacity of your car’s gas tank in horsepower.
October 4th was the 63rd anniversary of the Soviet sputnik launch focus, which resulted in America in a lot of focus and expenditure on science education in the schools. Maybe this resulted in some actual *knowledge*, but it’s certainly not continuing into the present era.
meirzev —
“One problem with intersectionality is that its proponents want to put Jews in the intersection to get run over.”
Oh, good turn of phrase!
huxley
The difficulties involved with banning fracking can be explained until you’re blue in the face. Makes no difference. The self-image of a Good Person wishing the best overrides any rationality and consideration of facts.
I said it before; perhaps our society has rounded off the rough edges to an extent that nobody learns what happens when they fail to think through a course of action. So, doing feel-good instead of thinking is also going to seem, to the extent the subject is consciously in front of the democrat, without penalty. Everything works out, or if it doesn’t, it’s somebody else’s fault. So no blame accrues to the democrats. And no learning, including learning to think through an issue.
There is this myth, or straw man, really, that people walked away from the Republican party merely because of Trump’s demeanor. That MAY be what motivates SOME people. Believing that to be true for the majority is self-delusional – a way to minimize the arguments and demonize those “other” people.
What these past few years have brought to light is that there really ISN’T any interest in “the truth” by either side of the political aisle. The GOP has devolved into the “Not Dem” party without much in the way of guiding principles – other than lip service and their own form of virtue signalling. What was the GOP’s convention statement of principles for 2020 – paraphrase: “Whatever HE says”. Hell, most of the content on this blog is about how bad the Dems are, and other content confirming priors. A healthy debate, it is not.
.
As to Trump’s “accomplishments” – we have an attribution problem. There has been some good that has happened. How much of that is really Trump delivering it vs McConnell and other key GOP officials?
I honestly cannot name one that he has taken a leadership role end-to-end on. Perhaps that is because it gets lost in all the other trash he generates in the news. Or, perhaps it is because he seems to frequently and erratically take positions on both sides of an issue.
About four years ago, I said I’d be on my knees happy to know that Trump was not an autocrat. Well, four years later, I have maybe one knee down as he is clearly a wannabe, but is too lazy or incompetent to be one.
I also thought we had sufficient guardrails on the Presidency to prevent an autocrat from succeeding. I now see that that assumption is wildly off.
Instead, I see that the “Overton Window” has grown / is growing on what a president can get away with, while a majority of the public voices within the GOP and so-called conservatives have stayed silent (would they have stood silent if it were a Dem POTUS?). And, this all is rather troubling given we could well have a competent POTUS (Dem or GOP) who is quite happy to expand that further to the breaking point.
I thought we all were worried about this kind of stuff – but only if it is the Dems, I suppose.
The ability for one’s own side to call out, criticize, and say “No” to a president as they run past these ethical and potentially legal barriers – has been one key to protecting America. It allows for self-correction. If neither party can do that when one of their own is in office, then all bets are off, as it becomes loyalty to the man rather than loyalty to the ideas / philosophy.
.
I bet that Neo and the group here cannot even come to an agreement on what conservatism is – what that means in practical terms. Here are some starter issues:
– More Tarrifs and other “Job Protection” Legislation vs Freer Trade
– Obama Care with Pre-Existing Condition Protection vs Free Health Insurance Markets
– Withdrawl Military Bases and Ending Support for International Organizations vs Peace Through American Leadership
– Record Deficits Don’t Matter / Tax the Rich / Bailouts vs Balanced Budget
Hard to tell where the GOP stand on any one of these on any given day, and more often seem to be leaning to the left items. Use to be strongly leaning to the right on these issues.
.
It seems that the GOP and “conservatives” today are all focused on the forward action (“own the Dems”) but are leaving their flanks and rearguard unprotected.
It is no longer about ideas, but about identity.
bigmaq:
Among other things, conservatives wouldn’t be expected to have complete agreement on what conservatism is. We value an exchange of ideas and differences of opinion – that would be part of the definition. We’re not Democrats or leftists and don’t need to all agree. But I bet there would be some agreement on things like decentralization of government, less agency power, fostering business rather than needlessly hampering it, civil order rather than disorder, free speech, fighting leftism and PC thought, no “legislating from the bench” – and many more.
The rest of your charges – such as calling Trump an “autocrat” without specifying what actions of Trump’s are especially autocratic – I don’t perceive him that way. Among other things, he has been a respecter of federalism, and has let the states handle things in many cases, and this is the opposite of autocratic.
As for accomplishments that are Trump’s, I can think of many – NAFTA renegotiation, pulling out of climate treaty, putting the screws on Iran, giving the order to kill Solemeini, negotiating the Abraham Accords and the Kosovo/Serbia agreement, and plenty of others.
Google “Trumps accomplishments” and you’ll find plenty of lists to chew on – and criticize, no doubt.
Actually, I don’t subscribe to the idea that people walked away from the GOP because of Trump’s demeanor. Some people say they did, but I think there were plenty of other reasons for them – the main one of which was that they never were ideologically committed to conservatism, and really were “Democrat-lite,” and Trump was too far to the right. Another entire group has been angry at the GOP because they feel the GOP was a “uniparty,” more or less like the Democrats – only in this case, unlike the NeverTrumpers, they wanted more conservatism from the GOP rather than less. They were previously walking away from the party – because of candidates like McCain and Romney – but Trump has brought them back into the party. At least, temporarily.
bigmaq:
What a sad clown your turned out to be. Haven’t learned anything since 2016? OrangeManBad has got you by the short hairs.
“it seems pretty evident more are walking away from Trump. Yes, we will see in 22 days.” – Montage
…or not, depending on how much fraud goes into the voting.