War Room Lounge v64

[Sketch]

Easy. Trump is the richest, McConnell the most harmful to humanity, and Cruz is the best-looking (ugh, but, you know, true).

What the fuck?

 

[MMAisGod]

Can you summarize those points? That seems unfathomable to me. I think the worst candidates in the Democratic field (Gabbard or Williamson) would still be way, way better than Trump.

Also @kpt018

Tulsi is top 5 P4P.

I don't feel I've ever "won" in the sense an argument I've had with her, and I'm pretty good in Anti-Trump arguments. We've only had about 4-5 of them, but I might just not be knowledgeable enough to tackle her policy and legislative knowledge of American history. Would be more on me than anything because she's very, very smart so there might be some holes I don't know enough about to crack. She can run off endless lists of Republican policy off the top of her head from different periods and explain in details the positive effects, and combines it with democratic policy knowledge in reverse. I actually don't think she's as much a "Trump lover" as she appears to someone who doesn't know her as well, rather someone vehemently opposed to anything Democrat. She knows her stuff, but her bias seeps through. That's what I gather at least. I'm gonna message her for some ammunition and drop it in here for you guys to dissect.

I would have to hear these "completely logical and thoughtful points" as to why she supports Trump. Something tells me I would have a much different appraisal of her reasoning and her knowledge of policy and history.

And the difference in your last part is that not all liberals are supporting objectively bad policy and engaging in objectively hypocritical defenses of their support. All of (vocal, active) Trump supporters are. Ignorance, bad faith, or extreme and grotesque selfishness are absolute prerequisites to Trump support. Full stop. They are not prerequisites to being a liberal.

Possibly, I would very much enjoy a debate with her alongside someone like you or Jack. Would be interesting as someone would have to bend.

Isn't Trump hitting the 20%s these days? That's likely in the range as the lefty left's bad groupings. Just like I think there's a vast difference between Republicans, Trump supporters, and Neo-Nazi Trump supporters, I feel there is a vast difference between Democrats, Liberals, and Antifa supporting far lefties. Democrats and Republicans have some great ideas, but the farther you go in either direction the worse it degrades.

Russians again beating the Germans/Austrians

This is acceptable. In my top 10 all time. I will allow it.

 

[Jack V Savage]

It's hard for me to judge at the moment. I'm surprised it hadn't crossed your radar - Robin was a contributor to Crooked Timber back then and when the book came out it started probably as much of an online shitstorm as a book about politics ever could.

I read CT sometimes. Lots of good stuff (and good comments). Fan of Holbo and Quiggin in particular. But I wasn't as plugged into online shitstorms back then. The description makes it sound like something I'd agree with but maybe not learn from.

If you judge it based on whether it captures how American conservatives would like to be portrayed, then it is probably not very good. If you judge it based on how well it traces a reactionary line through American conservatism - pulling such figures as Ayn Rand and Sarah Palin under a single umbrella - then I thought it was reasonably well-argued.

Cool.

Comparing it to your statement earlier that conservatives are about tradition over reason, Robin gets a little more specific:

"Though it is often claimed that the left stands for equality while the right stands for freedom, this notion misstates the actual disagreement between right and left. Historically, the conservative has favored liberty for the higher orders and constraint for the lower orders. What the conservative sees and dislikes in equality, in other words, is not a threat to freedom but its extension. For in that extension, he sees a loss of his own freedom. "We are all agreed as to our own liberty," declared Samuel Johnson. "But we are not agreed as to the liberty of others: for in proportion as we take, others must lose. I believe we hardly wish that the mob should have liberty to govern us." Such was the threat Edmund Burke saw in the French Revolution: not merely an expropriation of violence but an inversion of the obligations of deference and command. "The levellers," he claimed, "only change and pervert that natural order of things."

"The occupation of a hair-dresser, or of a working tallow-chandler, cannot be a matter of honour to any person - to say nothing of a number of other more servile employments. Such descriptions of men ought not to suffer oppression from the state; but the state suffers oppression, if such as they, either individually or collectively, are permitted to rule."

By virtue of membership in a polity, Burke allowed, men had a great many rights - to the fruits of their labour, their inheritance, education, and more. But the one right he refused to concede to all men was that "share of power, authority, and direction" they might think they ought to have "in the management of the state."

and

"Conservatism, then, is not a commitment to limited government and liberty - or a wariness of change, a belief in evolutionary reform, or a politics of virtue. These may be the byproducts of conservatism, one or more of its historically specific and ever-changing modes of expression. But they are not its animating purpose. Neither is conservatism a makeshift fusion of capitalists, Christians, and warriors, for that fusion is impelled by a more elemental force - the opposition to the liberation of men and women from the fetters of their superiors, particularly in the private sphere. Such a view might seem miles away from the libertarian defense of the free market, with its celebration of the atomistic and autonomous individual. But it is not. When the libertarian looks out upon society, he does not see isolated individuals; he sees private, often heirarchical groups, where a father governs his family and an owner his employees.

No simple defense of one's own place and privileges - the conservative, as I've said, may or may not be directly involved in or benefit from the practice of the rule he defends; many, as we'll see, are not - the conservative position stems from a genuine conviction that a world thus emancipated will be ugly, brutish, base, and dull. It will lack the excellence of a world where the better man commands the worse... This vision of the connection between excellence and rule is what brings together in post-war America that unlikely alliance of the libertarian, with his vision of the employer's untrammeled power in the workplace; the traditionalist, with his vision of the father's rule at home; and the statist, with his vision of a heroic leader pressing his hand upon the face of the earth.

The conservative creed: "To obey a real superior... is one of the most important of all virtues - a virtue absolutely essential to the attainment of anything great and lasting."

Yeah, amen. This also goes to my point about Calhoun being a bigger influence on the American right than Locke (or especially Adam Smith).

 

[Sketch]

@Trotsky @kpt018

To stay in context from our inbox chat, I'll post this here-

I'll go anecdotal.

One of my close friends and coworkers is a hardcore Trump supporter. I'm talking MAGA hat at the BBQ, 8 guns in the house with her husband who is an Air Force pilot, red blooded American types. If you look at her physically however, she's your everyday slim cutesy always smiling 30ish year old 9-5 corporate accounting employee type. However, she is wildly successful for her age, incredibly smart, a good human. If you ask her why she supports Trump over a list of candidates (I myself have asked her this) she'll give you completely logical and thoughtful points as to why. I don't agree with her position much in regards to Trump, but she is very educated on both policy and history, much more than I ever could be, so I enjoy my discussions/debates with her. On top of that, she's a humanitarian type, one of the few who do volunteering outside of company events, donating large amounts to causes, has two pets she took in that were battered, etc. To have a position of "I'd instantly stop talking to her" over her political position is like the mind blow of mindblowing to me.

Yea there are some radical idiots on TV yelling out MAGA America Firsttttt, but a lot of them, the somewhat educated and above at least, are nothing like the perception. It would be like saying all liberals are highly emotional purple haired college failures who can't get a date. None of that is close to reality for either side. They are the extremes.

This is a great post and will sadly be overlooked or even worse, met with disdain.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Isn't Trump hitting the 20%s these days? That's likely in the range as the lefty left's bad groupings. Just like I think there's a vast difference between Republicans, Trump supporters, and Neo-Nazi Trump supporters, I feel there is a vast difference between Democrats, Liberals, and Antifa supporting far lefties. Democrats and Republicans have some great ideas, but the farther you go in either direction the worse it degrades.

Trump is the sitting president and is supported by like 90% of his party. A purple-haired "SJW" isn't holding office or widely supported by Democratic voters (and likely hates Democrats, too). Not the same thing.

 

[WarDosAnjos]

mcconnell is a weird looking bloke tho. i want to see his cum face

bruh....

 

[HockeyBjj]

That Florida handicapped parking spot stand your ground trial began in Florida today.

God I hope he gets found guilty for the sake of stand your ground laws remaining intact everywhere. If this guy does get off of yelling at someone, being pushed to the ground, then shooting a guy 10 feet away who's backing up then I'll be forced to agree that the wording of syg laws needs to change.

Pretty sure he'll be found guilty. I guess 3 months prior he threatened to shoot someone else over a handicapped parking spot as well.

 

[My Spot]

That Florida handicapped parking spot stand your ground trial began in Florida today.

God I hope he gets found guilty for the sake of stand your ground laws remaining intact everywhere. If this guy does get off of yelling at someone, being pushed to the ground, then shooting a guy 10 feet away who's backing up then I'll be forced to agree that the wording of syg laws needs to change.

Pretty sure he'll be found guilty. I guess 3 months prior he threatened to shoot someone else over a handicapped parking spot as well.

It's manslaughter and not murder. I won't have a problem with either outcome.
Of course we all know the only reason it's a story at all.

 

[MMAisGod]

Trump is the sitting president and is supported by like 90% of his party. A purple-haired "SJW" isn't holding office or widely supported by Democratic voters (and likely hates Democrats, too). Not the same thing.

Had to erase my whole message after looking it up. Apparently he's at 86% approval by Republicans. Wow. I'm done.

 

[JDragon]

Just wanted to share this:

http://atlasofemotions.org/

Gets framed as a way for 'self-leadership' in the context of positive leadership in my company. I like it as a way to become more aware of option spaces.

 

[Sketch]

That Florida handicapped parking spot stand your ground trial began in Florida today.

God I hope he gets found guilty for the sake of stand your ground laws remaining intact everywhere. If this guy does get off of yelling at someone, being pushed to the ground, then shooting a guy 10 feet away who's backing up then I'll be forced to agree that the wording of syg laws needs to change.

Pretty sure he'll be found guilty. I guess 3 months prior he threatened to shoot someone else over a handicapped parking spot as well.

Yeah, that was a gross and senseless shooting. He should be found guilty.

 

[Higus]

This is a great post and will sadly be overlooked or even worse, met with disdain.

Why's that?

 

[My Spot]

Yeah, that was a gross and senseless shooting. He should be found guilty.

 

[all caps]

That Florida handicapped parking spot stand your ground trial began in Florida today.

God I hope he gets found guilty for the sake of stand your ground laws remaining intact everywhere. If this guy does get off of yelling at someone, being pushed to the ground, then shooting a guy 10 feet away who's backing up then I'll be forced to agree that the wording of syg laws needs to change.

Pretty sure he'll be found guilty. I guess 3 months prior he threatened to shoot someone else over a handicapped parking spot as well.

I wonder when the amber guyger trial starts

We're about to have some very heated trials coming down the pipeline..

 

[PolishHeadlock2]

It's hard for me to judge at the moment. I'm surprised it hadn't crossed your radar - Robin was a contributor to Crooked Timber back then and when the book came out it started probably as much of an online shitstorm as a book about politics ever could.

If you judge it based on whether it captures how American conservatives would like to be portrayed, then it is probably not very good. If you judge it based on how well it traces a reactionary line through American conservatism - pulling such figures as Ayn Rand and Sarah Palin under a single umbrella - then I thought it was reasonably well-argued.

Comparing it to your statement earlier that conservatives are about tradition over reason, Robin gets a little more specific:

"Though it is often claimed that the left stands for equality while the right stands for freedom, this notion misstates the actual disagreement between right and left. Historically, the conservative has favored liberty for the higher orders and constraint for the lower orders. What the conservative sees and dislikes in equality, in other words, is not a threat to freedom but its extension. For in that extension, he sees a loss of his own freedom. "We are all agreed as to our own liberty," declared Samuel Johnson. "But we are not agreed as to the liberty of others: for in proportion as we take, others must lose. I believe we hardly wish that the mob should have liberty to govern us." Such was the threat Edmund Burke saw in the French Revolution: not merely an expropriation of violence but an inversion of the obligations of deference and command. "The levellers," he claimed, "only change and pervert that natural order of things."

"The occupation of a hair-dresser, or of a working tallow-chandler, cannot be a matter of honour to any person - to say nothing of a number of other more servile employments. Such descriptions of men ought not to suffer oppression from the state; but the state suffers oppression, if such as they, either individually or collectively, are permitted to rule."​

By virtue of membership in a polity, Burke allowed, men had a great many rights - to the fruits of their labour, their inheritance, education, and more. But the one right he refused to concede to all men was that "share of power, authority, and direction" they might think they ought to have "in the management of the state."

and

"Conservatism, then, is not a commitment to limited government and liberty - or a wariness of change, a belief in evolutionary reform, or a politics of virtue. These may be the byproducts of conservatism, one or more of its historically specific and ever-changing modes of expression. But they are not its animating purpose. Neither is conservatism a makeshift fusion of capitalists, Christians, and warriors, for that fusion is impelled by a more elemental force - the opposition to the liberation of men and women from the fetters of their superiors, particularly in the private sphere. Such a view might seem miles away from the libertarian defense of the free market, with its celebration of the atomistic and autonomous individual. But it is not. When the libertarian looks out upon society, he does not see isolated individuals; he sees private, often heirarchical groups, where a father governs his family and an owner his employees.

No simple defense of one's own place and privileges - the conservative, as I've said, may or may not be directly involved in or benefit from the practice of the rule he defends; many, as we'll see, are not - the conservative position stems from a genuine conviction that a world thus emancipated will be ugly, brutish, base, and dull. It will lack the excellence of a world where the better man commands the worse... This vision of the connection between excellence and rule is what brings together in post-war America that unlikely alliance of the libertarian, with his vision of the employer's untrammeled power in the workplace; the traditionalist, with his vision of the father's rule at home; and the statist, with his vision of a heroic leader pressing his hand upon the face of the earth.

The conservative creed: "To obey a real superior... is one of the most important of all virtues - a virtue absolutely essential to the attainment of anything great and lasting."

Interesting, just bought it.

 

[MMAisGod]

This is a great post and will sadly be overlooked or even worse, met with disdain.

Oh yea man I'm all for not talking to disgusting people, but that's reserved for you know, the philes, thieves, people like that. If someone is a good person and a good friend their religious, political, etc beliefs are theirs to have. Why would I care that someone worships a certain God, votes for a guy or girl, so much that I disown them in my life forever? People are cutting off best friends and family members out here for voting for/against Trump. I dunno man, just sounds so weird even typing it out lol.

 

[WarDosAnjos]

That Florida handicapped parking spot stand your ground trial began in Florida today.

God I hope he gets found guilty for the sake of stand your ground laws remaining intact everywhere. If this guy does get off of yelling at someone, being pushed to the ground, then shooting a guy 10 feet away who's backing up then I'll be forced to agree that the wording of syg laws needs to change.

Pretty sure he'll be found guilty. I guess 3 months prior he threatened to shoot someone else over a handicapped parking spot as well.

It's manslaughter and not murder. I won't have a problem with either outcome.
Of course we all know the only reason it's a story at all.

Yeah, that was a gross and senseless shooting. He should be found guilty.

Just another reason to ban guns.

 

[Sketch]

Why's that?

We both know by the way you've asked me "Why's that?" that no matter what I say you are going to disagree because it's Trump related.

 

[My Spot]

I wonder when the amber guyger trial starts

They're going for murder in that one.

 

[Sketch]

Just another reason to ban guns.

Why would we ban howitzers? They are effective at long range and provide infantry support.