pull down to refresh
Crux of the disagreement is you're not on board with defending the ground of 20% today, the perfect is the enemy of the not-worse etc... we need that as the staging ground to go for 10% or 0
Politics is tactical
It depends what you mean. I'll oppose anyone looking to expand that 20%, whether they're currently in power or not.
I'd say that's more where we differ. I don't perceive anyone near power currently as holding down the 20%. I see them all trying to expand it in various ways.
Sure its not as simple as tax rates or unwinding the state directly, that's why discernment is important.
We're more in a globalist vs nationalist battle today, perhaps even 5GW between great powers (afformentioned Thucydides Trap).
In that context, the choice is a global state or a localish one, or self-security vs. being a vassal.
Can't fight the next battle until you've won the current one.
Haha. After all that, it turns out we don't even disagree very substantially. You're making assumptions and calling us abdicators, but we aren't removing ourselves from the culture at all. We participate and try to convince people that there's a way to do better than that 20%.
I agree that it hasn't been demonstrated that we can get there. However, the available evidence from both theory and observation suggests it might be possible, which is enough for me to think it's worth trying.