Shameless self-promotion: My summary of what must happen after the election.
For a brief moment after Trump had won the first time, there was a viable reckoning, a mea culpa tour among intellectuals and journalists who promised to cover more of the country and feature more conservative voices. We, the intellectuals, failed you, the People. Lackadaisically, it lasted only for a few weeks [my original draft said "years" —no idea why editors changed it] before collapsing spectacularly in a cesspool of wokeism, COVID insanity, media censorship and deplatforming, gaslighting on inflation-triggering government spending, warmongering, and many other unseemly behaviors.
And:
For classical liberals, it’s important to remember that this election result doesn’t constitute any kind of “win.” We still have a Leviathan government larger than anything the founders could have conceived of even in their wildest nightmares. The debt and deficit are both out of control (if anything about to get much worse under Trump, bar an Elon cost-cutting miracle); Social Security is still a mess, defunct in a few short years. Military adventurism is despicable, the southern border a farce, health an institutionalized disaster, the central bank unfit for purpose.
Either way, there is some soul-searching required among America’s left, the thought leaders at The New York Times, or the Democratic Party as a whole. The classical liberal should extend them every possible olive branch there is, and for the health of the republic, let’s hope they take it.
Let me know what the Stackers think
For classical liberals, it’s important to remember that this election result doesn’t constitute any kind of “win.”
Its hard for me to agree with this. Its not the end of the war. But I don't see how it isn't any kind of win. As you point out, nothing has yet changed but we did see the defeat of Harris and this is an even bigger defeat for the corporate press. I call that a victory. Hopefully one of many to come.
We still have a Leviathan government larger than anything the founders could have conceived of even in their wildest nightmares. The debt and deficit are both out of control (if anything about to get much worse under Trump, bar an Elon cost-cutting miracle); Social Security is still a mess, defunct in a few short years. Military adventurism is despicable, the southern border a farce, health an institutionalized disaster, the central bank unfit for purpose.
Yes. These are things that I am not very optimistic about Trump actually fixing. I'd love to be wrong though and the fact that Ron Paul's name is even being mentioned. Same for Thomas Massey and a few others like Joel Salatin is positive and I consider that a win. The fact that this election has elicited immediate changes in stances of powers in two conflicts is good.
Any time we see neocons lose that's a win. I want to see a world with less war. I don't co-sign the Republican party or Trump but I want to see less war mongers in Washington with real power.
Of course these are my opinions. Not yours.
reply
I also see it as a win, if only because I think the corporate press and the democratic party needs repudiation. If they didn't get the rebuke they deserved, it would validate their tactics and they'd continue down their destructive path.
Trump may or may not end up being good for classical liberal causes, but the path the Democratic Party and their media allies were heading down needed a course correction.
reply
Thanks for sharing, friend.
Yeahz, I don't have much to quibble with here. This was written for a very different audience than the based peeps here on SN
we will see what he does. I am indeed relieved that it wasn't the other -- verifiably worst schmucks -- but still, politicians are politicians
reply
Yeah, that makes sense. I've written things for different audiences and posted it here and it is wild the difference in responses.
reply
And I mean this is a good way. One of the many reasons I rarely talk politics or economics with people in my life is that they don't have interesting thoughts on the topics. At best they repeat what they have been fed from media. They haven't read or thought deeply about these things. If I'm gonna disagree with people I'd rather learn something from the discussion than feel like I'm talking to a NPC.
And I say that with love. Some days I wish I didn't think about these topics and cared less. Found them less interesting. Life would be simpler.
reply
I'm curious what kind of wild different responses you got and where you posted them.
I imagine most of what we talk about here on SN would get shouted down on Reddit
reply
Wasn't political/economic. Was technical and I get privacy maximalist stuff here. That's the example I can recall.
reply
Indeed, they need repudiation. Honestly, their tactics seem to me less effective over time. We are fully in a crisis of authority era and its their fault. Its a good thing but I don't think they are learning the right lessons. That's also good. Let them further destroy their credibility.
reply
If they could learn just one lesson, I'd be happy:
  • Hysteria doesn't work. Not in the long-run. Stop hyperventilating about everything and just report the truth. I don't even care if you have a slant to your reporting, that's to be expected, no one is entirely unbiased. But for the love of God stop acting like everything Trump does is the "end of democracy", or that not affirming someone's pronouns is "denying their existence", or that the entire world is gonna be underwater in 50 years. Just stop with the theatrics, PLEASE.
reply
Indeed, that was pretty pathetic.
I really hope MSM and the new York times specifically get their shit together after this. A 2017 mea culpa but sustained and better!
reply
With some of the initial appointment news, Massie to USDA or RFK to HHS, we have some reason for optimism. Also, explicitly excluding Halley and Pompeo is a great sign that something may have been learned.
Considering Rubio for Secretary of State and some neocon warhawk for UN ambassador is a sign that not nearly enough was learned.
reply
Halley and Pompeo is a great sign
Amen. Trump isn't an ideologue. But he is a force of nature. It is clear to me that he has much better people talking in his ear this time. And I'm not talking about Peter Thiel here. The proof will be in the pudding though.
On RFK, I REALLY hope he is give a high level position just for the attacks on him to be destroyed. I don't agree with him on many things but he is right to question many of the things he attacks. The fact that the media has lied about him for years should be a signal to his threat to the "system".
reply
some spicy takes on the aftermath of the election
reply
reply