Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Clever Pseudonym's avatar

I tried having these conversations with my friends in the Brooklyn/Bay Area bubble during last summer's Floyd freakout, simply stating that this whole notion that police can be replaced by social workers was incredibly naive and dangerous, but 1) these are mostly people who've either grown up safely in suburbia or the much-safer-than-before cities of the past 20ish years, so they have no conception of crime, and 2) in the social media age, "discussing politics" is only and entirely a performance on Twitter that has absolutely nothing to do with what us older folks think of as the traditional purpose of politics, ie what are the best allocation of resources and what problems need clear and reasonable fixing, etc.

Political positions and discussions now exist entirely in the realm of the cultural, meaning sadly, that things like Defund the Police or Abolish the SAT are simply the new skinny jeans or plaid shirt that every cool kid must have.

None of this would matter much except for the fact that the perpetually neurotic blue-check Twitter class is the Democratic donor base and braintrust, so they set much of the national agenda (no matter how obviously silly and no matter how quickly their crowd-sourced dogma changes).

Expand full comment
Jake's avatar

This falls under the “no shit” category in my opinion. The question is how to inform the people that believe that they’re doing good things for “POC” when they remove police, remove academic testing and standards and when they remove school choice.

For many, chiefly the rich, white progressives and their Black lapdog counterparts (whom they’ve convinced that they hold power and are in charge, despite most Dean, provost and other high ranking university admin positions, not to mention Senate and House seats also not reflecting demographic percentages) there is no convincing needed. As Glenn has stated many, many times, they’re aware that it’s a ruse. Their livelihoods depend on an ignorant populace that will buy into it. But you know, authority is intoxicating, attention is addictive, and Congressional seats are more lucrative than ever: https://youtu.be/1g0MyLQEsjk so it should come to no surprise to anyone that these corrupt politicians will do anything keep the cash train rolling. They’re literally degrading their constituencies with false narratives so that they can continue to garner votes.

To those with the tools: collect data on any urban center that has had Democrat control for any length of time: they’re in shambles: Chicago, NY, LA, Seattle, Portland, etc. For more on this phenomenon: https://youtu.be/hNDgcjVGHIw

It is of no use to these folks to have an educated and critically thinking populace. But at this point, I don’t think it would matter. It doesn’t matter how many people have an opinion rooted in data, a breadth of knowledge, and years of demonstrated academic effort and so on, and it doesn’t matter how many people just shut it out and avoid it entirely. The only thing that matters in this current culture war is what someone is willing to say publicly and how many eyeballs are likely to see it- whether it be for high public esteem, outrage hunger, etc. There’s this line being danced upon what’s ok to say and what’s not. It’s fun in a perverse way to watch and see what stepping out of gibberish fantasy world back into reality looks like in real time (London Breed of SF comes to mind). Then there’s people that say whatever is asked because it’s just another distraction that needs to be dealt with, like holding a meeting with your team at work, or making a car payment. No one gives a shit because we’re too decadent, spoiled and soft, and we’d like very much to get back to the world of hyper convenience and gratification fueled by technology. If we gave a shit about corruption, we’d do something about what Assange made public, what Snowden made public, corporate lobbying in DC, etc etc.

This is a battle worth fighting, but it will be uphill, and you’re fighting the American culture that is neck deep in hedonistic norms, materialism, and consumerism as much as you are progressive policy and ideology.

Trying to prove to people that defunding the police is a bad idea in crime-addled areas should be a slam dunk, but it isn’t. Why? Why can’t the naturally logical conclusion that in already high crime areas, removing police presence will result in more crime be enough? Because it disagrees with a culturally authoritative, morally-based narrative and because it’s easier to agree with a narrative (if you don’t live in one of these places, and especially since disagreeing could mean losing your job) than it is to educate oneself on the issue at hand. And why aren’t the people (London Breed again comes to mind) that pushed this narrative and are now backpedaling at breakneck speed being held accountable everywhere, and every time they speak?

There’s something seriously wrong when statistically unassailable and evidence-based arguments still receive large amounts of pushback led by jargoneers that attack with emotion instead of with any viable evidence.

This message of decay needs to be spread by any means available relentlessly. Thanks to Glenn and Robert for doing what they can to help.

Expand full comment
61 more comments...

No posts