Category Archives: Social Commentary

Twitter Censorship

Yes, “keep driving” would have been a better formulation, but as he says, it’s Twitter. I’ve also noticed that these suspension seem to be entirely one sided:

They tell users and investors that they don’t censor, but they seem awfully quick to suspend people on one side of the debate and, as people over at Twitchy note, awfully tolerant of outright threats on the other.

Not that I’m trying to be, but I’m a little surprised that I’ve never had a problem. Yet.

[Update a few minutes later]

Here’s the story from Legal Insurrection.

[Update a while later]

More thoughts from Nick Gillespie. I think I can guess what Glenn’s next USA Today column will be about.

[Update late morning]

Aaaaaand, the administration at the University of Tennessee reveal themselves to be asshats.

[Update mid-afternoon]

Here’s the story from PJMedia.

Bush For Clinton

Yes, this is indeed exactly why so many Republicans are supporting Trump, even though he’s a Democrat. More thoughts from Ed Driscoll. Someone should ask Papa Bush what he thinks about Bill Clinton’s history of raping women, and Hillary covering for it and attacking the victims.

[Update a few minutes later]

Hillary is a one-woman war on honesty. But despite her corruption, incompetence and lies, she’s part of the Washington “elite,” so she’s A-OK as far as the Bushes are concerned.

What Makes Socialism So Attractive?

Evolution has wired our brains for it, unfortunately.

The chief problem, he suggested, is that many people are beguiled by “romantic socialism”—that is, they imagine what their personal lives would be like if everyone shared and treated one another like family. We evolved in small bands that were an individual’s only protection from starvation, victimization, and inter-group aggression. People feel vulnerable if their band does not exist. Such sentiments are more or less appropriate when people lived in small groups of hunter-gatherers composed mostly of kin, but they fail spectacularly when navigating a world of strangers cooperating in global markets.

Tooby also argued that markets make intellectuals irrelevant. Consequently, academics have a huge bias against spontaneous order and the basic goal of most social science is to critique the social institutions associated with market-based society.

More darkly, Tooby pointed out that political entrepreneurs know how to appeal to romantic socialist sentiments as a way to establish themselves in power. The evolved psychological propensity toward romantic socialism facilitates political coalitions that oppose free-market societies. Since such coalitions are organized around romantically appealing ideas, any heresy is treated as betrayal. If things are not going well (and they never are in full-blown socialist societies) and since the ideology cannot be wrong, evildoers are undermining progress and must be found and punished (think kulaks and the Gulag). Such coalitions tend to revert to primitive zero-sum thinking: If there is something you don’t get that means that someone took it from you. The result is, according to Tooby, that there really are those who are willing to make poor people worse off in order to make rich people worse off.

In terms of defining socialism, I don’t make a distinction between it and Marxism, which was simply a failed attempt to explain economics and human nature scientifically. Simply put, though it’s more complex, it is the belief that one person can know better than another what that other person “needs,” and should have the power to ensure that those “needs” are met.

Fifteen Years On

Falling Man

It’s hard to come up with anything new to say about 9/11, but in the midst of this insane election, I think that this picture could be viewed by many as a metaphor for America, and the overreactionary result was Donald Trump, a man manifestly unqualified for the presidency, whose disqualifying characteristics are exceeded only by those of his sickly, corrupt, incompetent, mendacious, felonious opponent.

I don’t think that Trump will prove to be the parachute that saves the nation — he’s far too ignorant and contemptuous of the Constitution (and much else) — but many do, and that is how he has gotten as far as he has, and may yet win the presidency. And if he does, I think that history will record that the seeds of his victory, for good or ill, were sown on a bright sunny September Tuesday in 2001, and the feckless response of the nation’s “leadership” through three presidential cycles since.

[Update a while later]

Falling man, falling presidential candidate.

[Update a few minutes later]

I should note that one of the reasons I’m showing this picture is that too many people think we shouldn’t see it or be reminded, which gets back to the fecklessness of our “elites.”