Substack Notes (#2)
Brief posted notes from the past six weeks
Sep. 27th, 2023:
“I think perhaps the greatest degenerative element of our Western social psychology over the last 60 years has been the displacement of a mentality of ‘we are all sinners’ by a narcissistic mentality of maximal ‘self-esteem.’ Once you are encouraged to view yourself as axiomatically personally blameless, the next step is to look for someone or something else to blame for each and every one of your discontents. Re-cast your wonderful self as ‘victim’ and then ask: Who needs to be cancelled?"
-Graham Cunningham
Sep. 27th, 2023
[REPYLING TO VON]
Von: Looking at the world in terms of ethics or other abstractions is a clear sign of education and distance from issues which matter to regular people.
I would be very interested in hearing this laid out in longer form. I may well be privileged, but it seems to me that 'ethics', broadly considered, lays at the heart of most conversations... and all of the important ones.
Me: I think you and I are both privileged. Anyone who has the time and the inclination to mull these issues and bring history or deontology or formal logic to bear is probably above average in intelligence and not viewing public policy debates from the nakedly self-interested vantage point of a poor single mother considering food stamps, or a farmer considering agricultural subsidies.
Privilege has been so thoroughly demonized that it's basically an insult now, but (conditionally) EVERYTHING is privilege: work ethic, family-of-origin situation/education/values, intelligence, honesty... all of these things are largely determined by genes and environment and therefore most of their advantage is privilege. The original conception of our national polity was for decisions to be made by the privileged (who had also demonstrated their virtue and energy in other areas of their lives) and it's only now, as we fade from a republic into a democracy, that privilege is considered negative. Almost everything we actually value is privilege, though.
On political issues we should make a distinction between arbitrary privilege and instrumental privilege. Arbitrary privilege (sex, race, childhood family income) is one thing... the objectivity to see issues without needing money or benefits from the state and the education to see them in a complicated way, and the intellect to do it well, are all instrumental privileges and are net benefits for the thinkers and the debates in which they participate.
Oct. 18th, 2023
“Welcome to the world of intersectionality…Anyone with any identity characteristics that rank high on the oppression scale is due respect, trust, deference, and entitled to have their feelings catered to, to the fullest extent possible.”
-Heather Heying
Oct. 18th, 2023
Oct. 10th is henceforth REAL WOMEN’S DAY
(10/10 = XX)
Oct.19th, 2023
“There are not many bright lines that divide good and evil in our world, but '[Hamas’ targeted killing of civilians] is one of them.”
-Sam Harris
Oct.19th, 2023
Responding to Von’s What is Marriage #3B
Me: This is a problem, and on with increasing implications for public policy... but like so many problems we can't even acknowledge (much less examine) it. Our cultural elites are committed to the idea that this is NOT a problem, implying that marriage is passe and housewifery oppressive and childbirth generally distasteful. If everyone felt this way society would collapse within 2 generations but no matter. Why plan 2 generations out when you have no kids?
Oct.19th, 2023
“For the past decade I’ve been told that jokes, words & scholarly debates need to be suppressed because they may cause ‘harm’ to vulnerable minorities. Yet when a global minority is butchered, tortured & maimed, those who suppress words shrug as if war crimes are no big deal.”
-Claire Lehmann, Quillette Editor
Oct.19th, 2023
The Hamas attacks have brought an issue to the fore: the necessity for individuals to have the skills and the tools to defend their own lives and property. When I have a more secure location (my OWN house or apartment) in which to store it, I will buy a handgun and get to the range every month or two. This has been on my to-do list for some time. I hope the world continues to get safer but I hope to never be victimized by evil much more and I understand the implications of that desire.
Arm yourself - train yourself - organize with others
Oct.19th, 2023
“Ideologies that call for the destruction of traditions and institutions are especially prone to engaging in mass murder.”
-Arnold Kling
Oct. 19th, 2023
Tolerance = everyone conforming on every important issue (or pretending to, on pain of severe social penalty)
Inclusivity = silencing, punishing, negating all individuals, groups, and ideas which are not in agreement
Oct. 20th, 2023
“How would you get rid of the demand for misinformation on Twitter? Off the top of my head, a demand-focused approach would be for Twitter to have dummy accounts that put out some unambiguous misinformation and find out who hearts it. If you heart misinformation, your account is suspended for a week.”
-Arnold Kling
Me: Brilliant!
Oct. 20th, 2023
“Over the past two decades it had become fashionable to lambast American hegemony, to speak derisively of “American exceptionalism”, to ridicule America’s self-arrogated function of “world police”, and to yearn for a multipolar world. Well, congratulations, now we have that world. See if you like it better.”
-Arnold Kling
Oct. 20th, 2023
“…speaking with Republicans, I am always reminded of all the ways in which I remain, despite having changed my mind on many important things, a relatively liberal person.
But those differences pale in comparison to the clear and present threat to freedom of speech by the government in collusion with tech platforms and by the very real weaponization of the FBI, DHS, CDC, and other government agencies.”
(Michael Shellenberger)
Me: Amen
Oct. 20th, 2023
“Egalitarian ideology and concerns over what is called “social justice” are primarily driven by ugly instincts, namely envy and feelings of inferiority.”
-Richard Hanania
Oct. 20th, 2023
When arguing with an opponent you should be able to quote their own arguments back to them in a way that they would accept and endorse. Arguing with a position that no one holds (i.e., that trans people shouldn’t have full civil rights or that schoolchildren in the U.S. shouldn’t learn the history of African-Americans) is eternally easy, emotionally satisfying… and completely pointless.
There’s no point in debating issues unless you’re actually willing to listen to the other side and to try to make real changes. If you dismiss the entire range of opposite opinions as bigoted or criminal then you have placed yourself on a neat pedestal from which you will always be safe from losing an argument. You’ve also isolated yourself and guaranteed that your position will never gain traction or convince anyone. To convince people you must first listen to them and take them seriously.
Oct. 20th, 2023
The Palestinian Refugee issue is actually an intentional misnomer. “There are currently more than 5.2 million registered Palestinian refugees. The vast majority live in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT)” according to Amnesty International. The residents of camps in Lebanon and Jordan are often the grandchildren or great-grandchildren of those who fled the Nakba. In any sensible consideration of public policy options the preference should be for those Jordanian and Lebanese residents (“refugees” according to the UN and Amnesty…) to be integrated into their home countries (their real home countries) and made full and productive citizens. The reason that doesn’t happen has far more to do with an international desire to keep pressure on the State of Israel (by leveraging a huge population of descendants of refugees, although most are not refugees themselves) than it does any accounting of the interests or welfare of the people in question.
Oct. 20th, 2023
(original post and reply linked here)
Oct. 23, 2023
Feminism’s vision (while politically useful in forming coalitions to fight for certain entitlements) is fundamentally flawed. It claims to want deep and absolute equality, yet it tries to achieve this in institutions and in a system built mostly by men. Men built railroads and corporations and the national mint and skyscrapers without much direct input from women in many cases. If feminists wanted complete equality, with all of the prestige and competence that carries, they would have formed unified coalitions of strong, independent, capable women and built their own institutions and systems and rules. We would have seen a powerful and productive matriarchy rise up alongside the ‘patriarchy’. Instead we have millions of women mostly avoiding the physical labor and technical knowledge required to build physical structures. These women are fighting for equal placement in the institutions but as long as all of the important systems have been organized and are maintained by men they can never have true equality. Instead we see exactly what we would expect: a charade in which everyone must pretend (upon pain of termination or reputation destruction) that women are exactly equal to men in every ambition and natural competency, while society continues to be a mostly male product.