The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
Mail in Voter ID Has Widespread Support
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

At least in the state of Georgia:

The sample sizes for Hispanics and Asians are small but the general philosophical preference for simple measures to protect election integrity is clear. Despite Democrat pols and their allies screaming bloody murder about voter ID requirements, a slight majority of their actual voters–and most of the independents they are trying to court–support them.

Tangentially, a fascinating pair of potential poll questions no outfit will pose: If it is proven that Donald Trump legitimately won the presidential election, should Joe Biden concede the election or continue the presidential transition process and assume the presidency on January 20th? If Donald Trump cannot provide evidence to convince the courts that the presidential election was stolen, should he declare he won re-election anyway and remain in the White House on January 20th?

Where is the country on the question of interests vs principles? When the question is abstract, as is the case in the aforementioned SurveyUSA poll, the latter wins out. But what about when it’s your guy vs your putative principles?

 
Hide 56 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Voting is a sacred right and privilege that should also be exercised in a communal context. All voting should be in person (with an ID) and only those with unavoidable situations (serving overseas, sick/on bed rest, etc.) should be given exemptions for absentee voting.

    • Replies: @iffen
    @Twinkie

    Agree, but with the caveat that voting times and days should be extended to allow working people an easier lift. I like the idea of an 18 hour window on Friday and Saturday. If we can't do Friday and Saturday then election day should be a mandatory holiday.

    , @Cloudbuster
    @Twinkie

    I'd just modify that to say it is only a sacred privilege, not properly a right. The founders limited the franchise for good reasons.

    Replies: @iffen, @Adam Smith

    , @SaneClownPosse
    @Twinkie

    Used to be that one had to physically absent from the area to use absentee voting.

    Then it became a matter of convenience, avoiding having to show up at the polling place and standing in line.

    One has to present ID for most transactions. Know your customer, 9/11, etc. The likelihood of a citizen not having official ID with picture today is near zero.

    We have Real ID driver licenses in most states.

    Facebook requires a verified identification to join Facebook. It's harder to become a brick in the social media wall than it is to vote in national elections.

  2. Isn’t the U.S. the only first world democracy that doesn’t ask for ID at the polls? I thought Democrats were the ones who think Europe has all the bright ideas and should be the model for everything we do. Why is voter ID the glaring exception?

    Because a large percentage of their base is either illiterate or here illegally.

  3. @Twinkie
    Voting is a sacred right and privilege that should also be exercised in a communal context. All voting should be in person (with an ID) and only those with unavoidable situations (serving overseas, sick/on bed rest, etc.) should be given exemptions for absentee voting.

    Replies: @iffen, @Cloudbuster, @SaneClownPosse

    Agree, but with the caveat that voting times and days should be extended to allow working people an easier lift. I like the idea of an 18 hour window on Friday and Saturday. If we can’t do Friday and Saturday then election day should be a mandatory holiday.

  4. There is one way…

    Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War Civil War

    And NO MERCY.

    • Disagree: Audacious Epigone, 216
  5. @Twinkie
    Voting is a sacred right and privilege that should also be exercised in a communal context. All voting should be in person (with an ID) and only those with unavoidable situations (serving overseas, sick/on bed rest, etc.) should be given exemptions for absentee voting.

    Replies: @iffen, @Cloudbuster, @SaneClownPosse

    I’d just modify that to say it is only a sacred privilege, not properly a right. The founders limited the franchise for good reasons.

    • Agree: Adam Smith
    • Replies: @iffen
    @Cloudbuster

    I’d just modify that to say it is only a sacred privilege, not properly a right.

    What one considers to be a "right" evolves, you might want to keep centuries in mind when thinking about "rights".

    Replies: @Cloudbuster

    , @Adam Smith
    @Cloudbuster

    Merry Christmas Mr. Cloudbuster...

    Voting is a privilege, not sacred and not a right.

    While your vote may (or may not) count at the local level, I believe that the larger elections, in their current form, are too corrupt to be trusted. Many people seem invested in this idea that they are somehow voting for the President. Unless they are one of the five hundred and thirty eight electors, their vote is utterly meaningless. The founders limited the franchise for very good reasons. Perhaps I'm an "ableist" but I believe that any prospective voter in even the smallest local election ought to be able to pass a simple literacy test.

    The Federal Voting Rights Act provides:

    Any voter who requires assistance to vote by reason of blindness, disability, or inability to read or write may be given assistance by a person of the voter’s choice, other than the voter’s employer or agent of that employer or officer or agent of the voter’s union. (52 U.S.C. § 1058).

    People with Down syndrome have the right privilege to vote.

    Not that it matters if the vote count is fraudulent.

    I hope you have a nice evening.

  6. @Cloudbuster
    @Twinkie

    I'd just modify that to say it is only a sacred privilege, not properly a right. The founders limited the franchise for good reasons.

    Replies: @iffen, @Adam Smith

    I’d just modify that to say it is only a sacred privilege, not properly a right.

    What one considers to be a “right” evolves, you might want to keep centuries in mind when thinking about “rights”.

    • Replies: @Cloudbuster
    @iffen

    All you are saying is that you and I disagree. Whether an idea is old or new or whether views have "evolved" are completely unrelated to the objective truth or value of that idea.

    Replies: @iffen

  7. @iffen
    @Cloudbuster

    I’d just modify that to say it is only a sacred privilege, not properly a right.

    What one considers to be a "right" evolves, you might want to keep centuries in mind when thinking about "rights".

    Replies: @Cloudbuster

    All you are saying is that you and I disagree. Whether an idea is old or new or whether views have “evolved” are completely unrelated to the objective truth or value of that idea.

    • Replies: @iffen
    @Cloudbuster

    completely unrelated to the objective truth

    Objective truth died with a whimper in the 70's.

  8. @Cloudbuster
    @iffen

    All you are saying is that you and I disagree. Whether an idea is old or new or whether views have "evolved" are completely unrelated to the objective truth or value of that idea.

    Replies: @iffen

    completely unrelated to the objective truth

    Objective truth died with a whimper in the 70’s.

  9. Great questions:

    If It can be shown that Trump won, then Biden should concede. Completely agree with that.

    If Trump cannot get the courts to hear his case (and to the extent that I understand what has happened, a lot of Trump cases have been rejected for procedure reasons)—-he will have to leave. That is just how it’s goes.

    That said: Biden should know that he can “win” with a fraud, but it is going to be super tough to govern with fraud and 50+% of the people believing he is illegitimate.

    • Replies: @Realist
    @BostonJoe


    That said: Biden should know that he can “win” with a fraud, but it is going to be super tough to govern with fraud and 50+% of the people believing he is illegitimate.
     
    What will those 50+% do about it...piss and moan?
    , @216
    @BostonJoe

    BidenFraud is Birtherism Mk. II

    Much stronger than the original, but just as opposed by the cultural elite.

    And arguably black backlash to Birtherism helped Obama win in '12.

    Moderate whites are increasingly alienated from the GOP, which got 61% in 2010 and 2014, but only 57% (allegedly) in '20.

    The old Athenian practice of ostraka would be to both Trump and the R party's benefit.

    Replies: @RadicalCenter

    , @MBlanc46
    @BostonJoe

    I doubt that Biden or the Dems give a gig what we think.

  10. “Submit a copy” entails MAKE a copy. That’s easy if you work in an office. But for the tens of millions of people who do not, “submit” entails “run-off a copy on your home copy machine.”

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
    @Anon

    Then vote in person already, whiny dimwits.

    And by the way, there are still places known as public libraries and private copy/office centers. One can perform the arduous and exorbitant task of paying a quarter to make the one or two pages of copies one needs.

    Moreover, many of the people who do not work in offices have printers at home, and by no means just middle-income or upper-income people. Finally, lower-income people, like middle-income people in the usa, very often blow thousands of dollars per year on tobacco, alcohol, marijuana, lottery tickets, and television “service.” They too can afford to spare a quarter from their vices and stupidities to copy their driver license or buy a cheap printer (which also makes copies) for home.

  11. Hello…hello

    Since we no longer have a Democracy, why the hell is anyone talking about voting?

    Wake the fuck up…voting means nothing. It makes no difference how you vote…it doesn’t count.

    • Agree: Adam Smith
    • Replies: @216
    @Realist

    These stochastic calls for violence are cringe.

    The political Right is incompetent at organizing boycotts, its institutions are plagued with grifters. It manages to alienate large numbers of women, despite legion of paid consultants.

    Any insurrection is doomed to fail without the active support of Russia and China. Look around, how many Mandarin and Russian linguists are here.

    And an insurrection would mean the despoilation of the country, and seven figures of deaths.

    Our people can't turn the TV off, start there first.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @Realist

    , @HallParvey
    @Realist

    Joseph Stalin said that it didn't matter who voted or how they voted. All that mattered was who counted the votes. This year, he was proved right once again.

  12. @Cloudbuster
    @Twinkie

    I'd just modify that to say it is only a sacred privilege, not properly a right. The founders limited the franchise for good reasons.

    Replies: @iffen, @Adam Smith

    Merry Christmas Mr. Cloudbuster…

    Voting is a privilege, not sacred and not a right.

    While your vote may (or may not) count at the local level, I believe that the larger elections, in their current form, are too corrupt to be trusted. Many people seem invested in this idea that they are somehow voting for the President. Unless they are one of the five hundred and thirty eight electors, their vote is utterly meaningless. The founders limited the franchise for very good reasons. Perhaps I’m an “ableist” but I believe that any prospective voter in even the smallest local election ought to be able to pass a simple literacy test.

    The Federal Voting Rights Act provides:

    Any voter who requires assistance to vote by reason of blindness, disability, or inability to read or write may be given assistance by a person of the voter’s choice, other than the voter’s employer or agent of that employer or officer or agent of the voter’s union. (52 U.S.C. § 1058).

    People with Down syndrome have the right privilege to vote.

    Not that it matters if the vote count is fraudulent.

    I hope you have a nice evening.

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
  13. @Twinkie
    Voting is a sacred right and privilege that should also be exercised in a communal context. All voting should be in person (with an ID) and only those with unavoidable situations (serving overseas, sick/on bed rest, etc.) should be given exemptions for absentee voting.

    Replies: @iffen, @Cloudbuster, @SaneClownPosse

    Used to be that one had to physically absent from the area to use absentee voting.

    Then it became a matter of convenience, avoiding having to show up at the polling place and standing in line.

    One has to present ID for most transactions. Know your customer, 9/11, etc. The likelihood of a citizen not having official ID with picture today is near zero.

    We have Real ID driver licenses in most states.

    Facebook requires a verified identification to join Facebook. It’s harder to become a brick in the social media wall than it is to vote in national elections.

  14. Principles are for fools now.

    The only thing that could restore a sense of legitimacy is a complete redo nationwide with 100% voter photo ID (and in person) and 100% transparency.

    We won’t get that so we have an illegitimate government to which we should feel zero fealty.

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
  15. The POTUS election has been always between two individuals, both selected, supported, and promoted by national committees that are backed (owned and operated) by billionaires and corporations.

    Tweedle Dee versus Tweedle Dum, every time.

    The Individual has been devalued completely on all levels.

    Your vote doesn’t matter and the individual in the White House doesn’t matter.

    Punch and Judy. Trump and Pelosi. GMO bread and fake circuses.

    • Agree: Realist, Rosie
    • Replies: @216
    @SaneClownPosse

    1968, 1980, 1992

  16. @BostonJoe
    Great questions:

    If It can be shown that Trump won, then Biden should concede. Completely agree with that.

    If Trump cannot get the courts to hear his case (and to the extent that I understand what has happened, a lot of Trump cases have been rejected for procedure reasons)—-he will have to leave. That is just how it’s goes.

    That said: Biden should know that he can “win” with a fraud, but it is going to be super tough to govern with fraud and 50+% of the people believing he is illegitimate.

    Replies: @Realist, @216, @MBlanc46

    That said: Biden should know that he can “win” with a fraud, but it is going to be super tough to govern with fraud and 50+% of the people believing he is illegitimate.

    What will those 50+% do about it…piss and moan?

  17. f it is proven that Donald Trump legitimately won the presidential election,

    How could this conceivably happen at this point?

  18. @BostonJoe
    Great questions:

    If It can be shown that Trump won, then Biden should concede. Completely agree with that.

    If Trump cannot get the courts to hear his case (and to the extent that I understand what has happened, a lot of Trump cases have been rejected for procedure reasons)—-he will have to leave. That is just how it’s goes.

    That said: Biden should know that he can “win” with a fraud, but it is going to be super tough to govern with fraud and 50+% of the people believing he is illegitimate.

    Replies: @Realist, @216, @MBlanc46

    BidenFraud is Birtherism Mk. II

    Much stronger than the original, but just as opposed by the cultural elite.

    And arguably black backlash to Birtherism helped Obama win in ’12.

    Moderate whites are increasingly alienated from the GOP, which got 61% in 2010 and 2014, but only 57% (allegedly) in ’20.

    The old Athenian practice of ostraka would be to both Trump and the R party’s benefit.

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
    @216

    Please tell us what that is. My knowledge of ancient athenian practices is a little rusty ;)

    Replies: @RSDB

  19. @SaneClownPosse
    The POTUS election has been always between two individuals, both selected, supported, and promoted by national committees that are backed (owned and operated) by billionaires and corporations.

    Tweedle Dee versus Tweedle Dum, every time.

    The Individual has been devalued completely on all levels.

    Your vote doesn't matter and the individual in the White House doesn't matter.

    Punch and Judy. Trump and Pelosi. GMO bread and fake circuses.

    Replies: @216

    1968, 1980, 1992

  20. @Realist
    Hello...hello

    Since we no longer have a Democracy, why the hell is anyone talking about voting?

    Wake the fuck up...voting means nothing. It makes no difference how you vote...it doesn't count.

    Replies: @216, @HallParvey

    These stochastic calls for violence are cringe.

    The political Right is incompetent at organizing boycotts, its institutions are plagued with grifters. It manages to alienate large numbers of women, despite legion of paid consultants.

    Any insurrection is doomed to fail without the active support of Russia and China. Look around, how many Mandarin and Russian linguists are here.

    And an insurrection would mean the despoilation of the country, and seven figures of deaths.

    Our people can’t turn the TV off, start there first.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @216


    These stochastic calls for violence are cringe.

    The political Right is incompetent at organizing boycotts, its institutions are plagued with grifters. It manages to alienate large numbers of women, despite legion of paid consultants.
     
    It's particularly sad (and amusing) to hear dissident rightists calling for civil war. The dissident right couldn't organise a coup to take over the local tennis club, much less overthrow the government.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

    , @Realist
    @216


    And an insurrection would mean the despoilation of the country, and seven figures of deaths.
     
    The fact that you would rather live under repression...shows that you are not made of that which freed us of British rule two hundred and forty-four years ago.
  21. @216
    @Realist

    These stochastic calls for violence are cringe.

    The political Right is incompetent at organizing boycotts, its institutions are plagued with grifters. It manages to alienate large numbers of women, despite legion of paid consultants.

    Any insurrection is doomed to fail without the active support of Russia and China. Look around, how many Mandarin and Russian linguists are here.

    And an insurrection would mean the despoilation of the country, and seven figures of deaths.

    Our people can't turn the TV off, start there first.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @Realist

    These stochastic calls for violence are cringe.

    The political Right is incompetent at organizing boycotts, its institutions are plagued with grifters. It manages to alienate large numbers of women, despite legion of paid consultants.

    It’s particularly sad (and amusing) to hear dissident rightists calling for civil war. The dissident right couldn’t organise a coup to take over the local tennis club, much less overthrow the government.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @dfordoom


    It’s particularly sad (and amusing) to hear dissident rightists calling for civil war.
     
    Wait, have you and I disconnected?

    The dissident right with which I am familiar is not calling for civil war. Some happen to think (though I do not) that a civil war is coming and wonder whether some good might not perversely come of it, but they're hardly suborning rebellion at this time.

    Who constitutes the dissident right in you view? I am starting to realize that you and I may have been using the same word to speak of two different classes.

    If your only definition of dissident right were “stupid people who are not left,” then purely by definition, the dissident right would consist of persons that say and do stupid things. In that case, the term stupid right might be apter.

    Replies: @216, @dfordoom

  22. @dfordoom
    @216


    These stochastic calls for violence are cringe.

    The political Right is incompetent at organizing boycotts, its institutions are plagued with grifters. It manages to alienate large numbers of women, despite legion of paid consultants.
     
    It's particularly sad (and amusing) to hear dissident rightists calling for civil war. The dissident right couldn't organise a coup to take over the local tennis club, much less overthrow the government.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

    It’s particularly sad (and amusing) to hear dissident rightists calling for civil war.

    Wait, have you and I disconnected?

    The dissident right with which I am familiar is not calling for civil war. Some happen to think (though I do not) that a civil war is coming and wonder whether some good might not perversely come of it, but they’re hardly suborning rebellion at this time.

    Who constitutes the dissident right in you view? I am starting to realize that you and I may have been using the same word to speak of two different classes.

    If your only definition of dissident right were “stupid people who are not left,” then purely by definition, the dissident right would consist of persons that say and do stupid things. In that case, the term stupid right might be apter.

    • Replies: @216
    @V. K. Ovelund


    The dissident right with which I am familiar is not calling for civil war. Some happen to think (though I do not) that a civil war is coming and wonder whether some good might not perversely come of it, but they’re hardly suborning rebellion at this time.

     

    You've heard of the [email protected] cult?

    You read this thread?

    Lots of people are writing checks that shouldn't be cashed.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

    , @dfordoom
    @V. K. Ovelund


    The dissident right with which I am familiar is not calling for civil war.
     
    There are certainly people on the far right, right here at UR, who are doing so. It is of course impossible to know just how many on the far right are thinking that way. I get the impression that the numbers are growing, which worries me. The difficulty is that it's the craziest people who attract the most attention.

    Some happen to think (though I do not) that a civil war is coming and wonder whether some good might not perversely come of it, but they’re hardly suborning rebellion at this time.
     
    People on this very blog have done so, just recently.

    Who constitutes the dissident right in you view? I am starting to realize that you and I may have been using the same word to speak of two different classes.
     
    The dissident right is definitely not the MAGA hat brigade although there is an overlap. I tend to use dissident right as a synonym for far right.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @iffen

  23. @V. K. Ovelund
    @dfordoom


    It’s particularly sad (and amusing) to hear dissident rightists calling for civil war.
     
    Wait, have you and I disconnected?

    The dissident right with which I am familiar is not calling for civil war. Some happen to think (though I do not) that a civil war is coming and wonder whether some good might not perversely come of it, but they're hardly suborning rebellion at this time.

    Who constitutes the dissident right in you view? I am starting to realize that you and I may have been using the same word to speak of two different classes.

    If your only definition of dissident right were “stupid people who are not left,” then purely by definition, the dissident right would consist of persons that say and do stupid things. In that case, the term stupid right might be apter.

    Replies: @216, @dfordoom

    The dissident right with which I am familiar is not calling for civil war. Some happen to think (though I do not) that a civil war is coming and wonder whether some good might not perversely come of it, but they’re hardly suborning rebellion at this time.

    You’ve heard of the [email protected] cult?

    You read this thread?

    Lots of people are writing checks that shouldn’t be cashed.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @216


    You’ve heard of the [email protected] cult?
     
    No. I've heard of many things, but not the [email protected] cult.

    You read this thread?
     
    Sure, but low-grade one-off comments can be written by anybody.

    Lots of people are writing checks that shouldn’t be cashed.
     
    Hm. Well, I don't know those people, so can say nothing one way or the other. Most of them do not seem very serious to me. They usually sound to me like men who are not especially articulate who are trying to express a feeling with finality in a manner that discourages debate: like, “Throw all the politicians in prison and then drop a bomb on the Capitol building!”

    Let me turn the question around. What do you think of the QAnon crowd? Or ... wait ... [email protected]? Is that what you mean?

    I think that we've got our terms crossed. The QAnon crowd are harmless aging patriotic middle-American boomer special-forces secret-agent larpers. They're the kind of persons who fall for multilevel-marketing scams and watch infomercials for investment advice. They're decent people who like Jason Bourne movies. They'll give you the shirts off their backs, so to speak, but they're not dissident right.

    Replies: @216, @iffen

  24. @216
    @V. K. Ovelund


    The dissident right with which I am familiar is not calling for civil war. Some happen to think (though I do not) that a civil war is coming and wonder whether some good might not perversely come of it, but they’re hardly suborning rebellion at this time.

     

    You've heard of the [email protected] cult?

    You read this thread?

    Lots of people are writing checks that shouldn't be cashed.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

    You’ve heard of the [email protected] cult?

    No. I’ve heard of many things, but not the [email protected] cult.

    You read this thread?

    Sure, but low-grade one-off comments can be written by anybody.

    Lots of people are writing checks that shouldn’t be cashed.

    Hm. Well, I don’t know those people, so can say nothing one way or the other. Most of them do not seem very serious to me. They usually sound to me like men who are not especially articulate who are trying to express a feeling with finality in a manner that discourages debate: like, “Throw all the politicians in prison and then drop a bomb on the Capitol building!”

    Let me turn the question around. What do you think of the QAnon crowd? Or … wait … [email protected]? Is that what you mean?

    I think that we’ve got our terms crossed. The QAnon crowd are harmless aging patriotic middle-American boomer special-forces secret-agent larpers. They’re the kind of persons who fall for multilevel-marketing scams and watch infomercials for investment advice. They’re decent people who like Jason Bourne movies. They’ll give you the shirts off their backs, so to speak, but they’re not dissident right.

    • Replies: @216
    @V. K. Ovelund

    Euphemisms defeat algorithms

    , @iffen
    @V. K. Ovelund

    They’re decent people who like Jason Bourne movies. :)

  25. @V. K. Ovelund
    @216


    You’ve heard of the [email protected] cult?
     
    No. I've heard of many things, but not the [email protected] cult.

    You read this thread?
     
    Sure, but low-grade one-off comments can be written by anybody.

    Lots of people are writing checks that shouldn’t be cashed.
     
    Hm. Well, I don't know those people, so can say nothing one way or the other. Most of them do not seem very serious to me. They usually sound to me like men who are not especially articulate who are trying to express a feeling with finality in a manner that discourages debate: like, “Throw all the politicians in prison and then drop a bomb on the Capitol building!”

    Let me turn the question around. What do you think of the QAnon crowd? Or ... wait ... [email protected]? Is that what you mean?

    I think that we've got our terms crossed. The QAnon crowd are harmless aging patriotic middle-American boomer special-forces secret-agent larpers. They're the kind of persons who fall for multilevel-marketing scams and watch infomercials for investment advice. They're decent people who like Jason Bourne movies. They'll give you the shirts off their backs, so to speak, but they're not dissident right.

    Replies: @216, @iffen

    Euphemisms defeat algorithms

  26. @BostonJoe
    Great questions:

    If It can be shown that Trump won, then Biden should concede. Completely agree with that.

    If Trump cannot get the courts to hear his case (and to the extent that I understand what has happened, a lot of Trump cases have been rejected for procedure reasons)—-he will have to leave. That is just how it’s goes.

    That said: Biden should know that he can “win” with a fraud, but it is going to be super tough to govern with fraud and 50+% of the people believing he is illegitimate.

    Replies: @Realist, @216, @MBlanc46

    I doubt that Biden or the Dems give a gig what we think.

  27. @V. K. Ovelund
    @dfordoom


    It’s particularly sad (and amusing) to hear dissident rightists calling for civil war.
     
    Wait, have you and I disconnected?

    The dissident right with which I am familiar is not calling for civil war. Some happen to think (though I do not) that a civil war is coming and wonder whether some good might not perversely come of it, but they're hardly suborning rebellion at this time.

    Who constitutes the dissident right in you view? I am starting to realize that you and I may have been using the same word to speak of two different classes.

    If your only definition of dissident right were “stupid people who are not left,” then purely by definition, the dissident right would consist of persons that say and do stupid things. In that case, the term stupid right might be apter.

    Replies: @216, @dfordoom

    The dissident right with which I am familiar is not calling for civil war.

    There are certainly people on the far right, right here at UR, who are doing so. It is of course impossible to know just how many on the far right are thinking that way. I get the impression that the numbers are growing, which worries me. The difficulty is that it’s the craziest people who attract the most attention.

    Some happen to think (though I do not) that a civil war is coming and wonder whether some good might not perversely come of it, but they’re hardly suborning rebellion at this time.

    People on this very blog have done so, just recently.

    Who constitutes the dissident right in you view? I am starting to realize that you and I may have been using the same word to speak of two different classes.

    The dissident right is definitely not the MAGA hat brigade although there is an overlap. I tend to use dissident right as a synonym for far right.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @dfordoom


    It is of course impossible to know just how many on the far right are thinking that way.
     
    I agree with Thomas Jefferson, third U.S. president. It would worry me if the instinct for violent rebellion entirely evaporated.

    One does not wish for violent rebellion, of course. The outcome is too uncertain, the likelihood of empowering scoundrels too great, the cost far too high. Moreover, I believe that you are correct that violent rebellion on any substantial scale is improbable; yet worse than violent rebellion would be a wholly docile citizenry whose pathetic lack of spirit suited them for naught but abject servitude.

    The traditional American understanding is that violent rebellion remains a reserve power of the citizenry—not a power to be used, but a power that resembles a governor general's power to, say, discretionarily dismiss an Australian prime minister.

    Or as H. L. Mencken in 1919 opined, “Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.”

    , @iffen
    @dfordoom

    I tend to use dissident right as a synonym for far right.

    Do you use alt-right as a synonym?

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @dfordoom

  28. @V. K. Ovelund
    @216


    You’ve heard of the [email protected] cult?
     
    No. I've heard of many things, but not the [email protected] cult.

    You read this thread?
     
    Sure, but low-grade one-off comments can be written by anybody.

    Lots of people are writing checks that shouldn’t be cashed.
     
    Hm. Well, I don't know those people, so can say nothing one way or the other. Most of them do not seem very serious to me. They usually sound to me like men who are not especially articulate who are trying to express a feeling with finality in a manner that discourages debate: like, “Throw all the politicians in prison and then drop a bomb on the Capitol building!”

    Let me turn the question around. What do you think of the QAnon crowd? Or ... wait ... [email protected]? Is that what you mean?

    I think that we've got our terms crossed. The QAnon crowd are harmless aging patriotic middle-American boomer special-forces secret-agent larpers. They're the kind of persons who fall for multilevel-marketing scams and watch infomercials for investment advice. They're decent people who like Jason Bourne movies. They'll give you the shirts off their backs, so to speak, but they're not dissident right.

    Replies: @216, @iffen

    They’re decent people who like Jason Bourne movies. 🙂

  29. @dfordoom
    @V. K. Ovelund


    The dissident right with which I am familiar is not calling for civil war.
     
    There are certainly people on the far right, right here at UR, who are doing so. It is of course impossible to know just how many on the far right are thinking that way. I get the impression that the numbers are growing, which worries me. The difficulty is that it's the craziest people who attract the most attention.

    Some happen to think (though I do not) that a civil war is coming and wonder whether some good might not perversely come of it, but they’re hardly suborning rebellion at this time.
     
    People on this very blog have done so, just recently.

    Who constitutes the dissident right in you view? I am starting to realize that you and I may have been using the same word to speak of two different classes.
     
    The dissident right is definitely not the MAGA hat brigade although there is an overlap. I tend to use dissident right as a synonym for far right.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @iffen

    It is of course impossible to know just how many on the far right are thinking that way.

    I agree with Thomas Jefferson, third U.S. president. It would worry me if the instinct for violent rebellion entirely evaporated.

    One does not wish for violent rebellion, of course. The outcome is too uncertain, the likelihood of empowering scoundrels too great, the cost far too high. Moreover, I believe that you are correct that violent rebellion on any substantial scale is improbable; yet worse than violent rebellion would be a wholly docile citizenry whose pathetic lack of spirit suited them for naught but abject servitude.

    The traditional American understanding is that violent rebellion remains a reserve power of the citizenry—not a power to be used, but a power that resembles a governor general’s power to, say, discretionarily dismiss an Australian prime minister.

    Or as H. L. Mencken in 1919 opined, “Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.”

  30. @Anon
    “Submit a copy” entails MAKE a copy. That’s easy if you work in an office. But for the tens of millions of people who do not, “submit” entails “run-off a copy on your home copy machine.”

    Replies: @RadicalCenter

    Then vote in person already, whiny dimwits.

    And by the way, there are still places known as public libraries and private copy/office centers. One can perform the arduous and exorbitant task of paying a quarter to make the one or two pages of copies one needs.

    Moreover, many of the people who do not work in offices have printers at home, and by no means just middle-income or upper-income people. Finally, lower-income people, like middle-income people in the usa, very often blow thousands of dollars per year on tobacco, alcohol, marijuana, lottery tickets, and television “service.” They too can afford to spare a quarter from their vices and stupidities to copy their driver license or buy a cheap printer (which also makes copies) for home.

  31. @216
    @BostonJoe

    BidenFraud is Birtherism Mk. II

    Much stronger than the original, but just as opposed by the cultural elite.

    And arguably black backlash to Birtherism helped Obama win in '12.

    Moderate whites are increasingly alienated from the GOP, which got 61% in 2010 and 2014, but only 57% (allegedly) in '20.

    The old Athenian practice of ostraka would be to both Trump and the R party's benefit.

    Replies: @RadicalCenter

    Please tell us what that is. My knowledge of ancient athenian practices is a little rusty 😉

    • Replies: @RSDB
    @RadicalCenter

    The wiki article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostracism

    An exile by vote-- if an ostracism was held you would vote for the person you most wanted to exile for a ten-year period.

    (literally ostraka are oyster shells, roof tiles, or pottery fragments)

    Hope I'm not butting in.

  32. @Realist
    Hello...hello

    Since we no longer have a Democracy, why the hell is anyone talking about voting?

    Wake the fuck up...voting means nothing. It makes no difference how you vote...it doesn't count.

    Replies: @216, @HallParvey

    Joseph Stalin said that it didn’t matter who voted or how they voted. All that mattered was who counted the votes. This year, he was proved right once again.

    • Agree: Realist
  33. @RadicalCenter
    @216

    Please tell us what that is. My knowledge of ancient athenian practices is a little rusty ;)

    Replies: @RSDB

    The wiki article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostracism

    An exile by vote– if an ostracism was held you would vote for the person you most wanted to exile for a ten-year period.

    (literally ostraka are oyster shells, roof tiles, or pottery fragments)

    Hope I’m not butting in.

  34. If we can’t enact an immigration moratorium then immigrants should be required to wait 20 years before voting. It is complete B.S. that we allow roughly one million immigrants annually, 80% of whom are non-white, and they can immediately vote and change this nation’s politics to something it was never intended to be.

    That is how Virginia has now flipped from reliably red to blue and a hotbed of anti-confederate activism. The flood of leftard whites who arrived post 9-11 and work in the burgeoning national security apparatus hasn’t helped either.

  35. @dfordoom
    @V. K. Ovelund


    The dissident right with which I am familiar is not calling for civil war.
     
    There are certainly people on the far right, right here at UR, who are doing so. It is of course impossible to know just how many on the far right are thinking that way. I get the impression that the numbers are growing, which worries me. The difficulty is that it's the craziest people who attract the most attention.

    Some happen to think (though I do not) that a civil war is coming and wonder whether some good might not perversely come of it, but they’re hardly suborning rebellion at this time.
     
    People on this very blog have done so, just recently.

    Who constitutes the dissident right in you view? I am starting to realize that you and I may have been using the same word to speak of two different classes.
     
    The dissident right is definitely not the MAGA hat brigade although there is an overlap. I tend to use dissident right as a synonym for far right.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @iffen

    I tend to use dissident right as a synonym for far right.

    Do you use alt-right as a synonym?

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @iffen


    Do you use alt-right as a synonym?
     
    The word Alt-Right is too firmly attached to one particular personality who, though respected, is not especially representative of the movement. Alt-Rightists today still respond to the term Alt-Right, but now prefer less oblique terms like Fascist and, especially, White Nationalist.

    A few even prefer the term anti-Semite.

    I personally prefer the term Alt-Right, but what I personally prefer is not very important. The term no longer has cachet.

    Replies: @iffen

    , @dfordoom
    @iffen



    I tend to use dissident right as a synonym for far right.
     
    Do you use alt-right as a synonym?
     
    I was under the impression the alt-right just rebranded itself the dissident right when it became obvious that the alt-right label was political poison.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @Audacious Epigone

  36. The only time principles matter more than /ourguy/ is when they’re attached at the hip to a bigger /ourguy/ named God. So, principles are just the extension of /ourguy/ by other means.

  37. @216
    @Realist

    These stochastic calls for violence are cringe.

    The political Right is incompetent at organizing boycotts, its institutions are plagued with grifters. It manages to alienate large numbers of women, despite legion of paid consultants.

    Any insurrection is doomed to fail without the active support of Russia and China. Look around, how many Mandarin and Russian linguists are here.

    And an insurrection would mean the despoilation of the country, and seven figures of deaths.

    Our people can't turn the TV off, start there first.

    Replies: @dfordoom, @Realist

    And an insurrection would mean the despoilation of the country, and seven figures of deaths.

    The fact that you would rather live under repression…shows that you are not made of that which freed us of British rule two hundred and forty-four years ago.

  38. @iffen
    @dfordoom

    I tend to use dissident right as a synonym for far right.

    Do you use alt-right as a synonym?

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @dfordoom

    Do you use alt-right as a synonym?

    The word Alt-Right is too firmly attached to one particular personality who, though respected, is not especially representative of the movement. Alt-Rightists today still respond to the term Alt-Right, but now prefer less oblique terms like Fascist and, especially, White Nationalist.

    A few even prefer the term anti-Semite.

    I personally prefer the term Alt-Right, but what I personally prefer is not very important. The term no longer has cachet.

    • Replies: @iffen
    @V. K. Ovelund

    is not especially representative of the movement

    Y'all have a movement?

    Dang, I'm going to have to pay closer attention.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

  39. @V. K. Ovelund
    @iffen


    Do you use alt-right as a synonym?
     
    The word Alt-Right is too firmly attached to one particular personality who, though respected, is not especially representative of the movement. Alt-Rightists today still respond to the term Alt-Right, but now prefer less oblique terms like Fascist and, especially, White Nationalist.

    A few even prefer the term anti-Semite.

    I personally prefer the term Alt-Right, but what I personally prefer is not very important. The term no longer has cachet.

    Replies: @iffen

    is not especially representative of the movement

    Y’all have a movement?

    Dang, I’m going to have to pay closer attention.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @iffen


    Y’all have a movement?
     
    We do.

    You do not know that it exists because, since Charlottesville, August 2017, it has been censored.

    Dang, I’m going to have to pay closer attention.
     
    That's up to you, but I doubt that this movement is for you.

    Replies: @iffen

  40. @iffen
    @dfordoom

    I tend to use dissident right as a synonym for far right.

    Do you use alt-right as a synonym?

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @dfordoom

    I tend to use dissident right as a synonym for far right.

    Do you use alt-right as a synonym?

    I was under the impression the alt-right just rebranded itself the dissident right when it became obvious that the alt-right label was political poison.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @dfordoom


    I was under the impression the alt-right just rebranded itself the dissident right when it became obvious that the alt-right label was political poison.
     
    Unfortunately, your impressions in these matters are largely mistaken.

    That's okay. You are not obliged to understand the Alt-Right.
    , @Audacious Epigone
    @dfordoom

    John Derbyshire has been using the phrase "dissident right" for longer than the term "alt right" has been in existence.

    Replies: @dfordoom

  41. @dfordoom
    @iffen



    I tend to use dissident right as a synonym for far right.
     
    Do you use alt-right as a synonym?
     
    I was under the impression the alt-right just rebranded itself the dissident right when it became obvious that the alt-right label was political poison.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @Audacious Epigone

    I was under the impression the alt-right just rebranded itself the dissident right when it became obvious that the alt-right label was political poison.

    Unfortunately, your impressions in these matters are largely mistaken.

    That’s okay. You are not obliged to understand the Alt-Right.

  42. @iffen
    @V. K. Ovelund

    is not especially representative of the movement

    Y'all have a movement?

    Dang, I'm going to have to pay closer attention.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

    Y’all have a movement?

    We do.

    You do not know that it exists because, since Charlottesville, August 2017, it has been censored.

    Dang, I’m going to have to pay closer attention.

    That’s up to you, but I doubt that this movement is for you.

    • Replies: @iffen
    @V. K. Ovelund

    That’s up to you, but I doubt that this movement is for you.

    No need for any doubt.

    But I do like to be aware of the location and strength of potential enemies.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @dfordoom

  43. @V. K. Ovelund
    @iffen


    Y’all have a movement?
     
    We do.

    You do not know that it exists because, since Charlottesville, August 2017, it has been censored.

    Dang, I’m going to have to pay closer attention.
     
    That's up to you, but I doubt that this movement is for you.

    Replies: @iffen

    That’s up to you, but I doubt that this movement is for you.

    No need for any doubt.

    But I do like to be aware of the location and strength of potential enemies.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @iffen


    But I do like to be aware of the location and strength of potential enemies.
     
    Though you were unlikely to agree with us, we will give you little cause to regard us as enemies. That would gain us nothing.
    , @dfordoom
    @iffen



    That’s up to you, but I doubt that this movement is for you.
     
    No need for any doubt.
     
    Do you see yourself as more of a dissident left kind of guy? Or maybe a dissident centrist?

    Replies: @iffen

  44. @iffen
    @V. K. Ovelund

    That’s up to you, but I doubt that this movement is for you.

    No need for any doubt.

    But I do like to be aware of the location and strength of potential enemies.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @dfordoom

    But I do like to be aware of the location and strength of potential enemies.

    Though you were unlikely to agree with us, we will give you little cause to regard us as enemies. That would gain us nothing.

  45. @iffen
    @V. K. Ovelund

    That’s up to you, but I doubt that this movement is for you.

    No need for any doubt.

    But I do like to be aware of the location and strength of potential enemies.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @dfordoom

    That’s up to you, but I doubt that this movement is for you.

    No need for any doubt.

    Do you see yourself as more of a dissident left kind of guy? Or maybe a dissident centrist?

    • Replies: @iffen
    @dfordoom

    I see myself as a progressive classical liberal with a fair amount of class awareness and partisanship.

    Replies: @dfordoom

  46. @dfordoom
    @iffen



    That’s up to you, but I doubt that this movement is for you.
     
    No need for any doubt.
     
    Do you see yourself as more of a dissident left kind of guy? Or maybe a dissident centrist?

    Replies: @iffen

    I see myself as a progressive classical liberal with a fair amount of class awareness and partisanship.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @iffen


    I see myself as a progressive classical liberal with a fair amount of class awareness and partisanship.
     
    I'd see myself as a moderate social democrat. With lots of class awareness. With mostly socially conservative views but with an admixture of social libertarianism - I don't want social conservatism if it has to be imposed by force.

    So do you see liberalism as an ideology of the Left or the Right? I see it as an ideology of the Right.

    Replies: @iffen

  47. @iffen
    @dfordoom

    I see myself as a progressive classical liberal with a fair amount of class awareness and partisanship.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    I see myself as a progressive classical liberal with a fair amount of class awareness and partisanship.

    I’d see myself as a moderate social democrat. With lots of class awareness. With mostly socially conservative views but with an admixture of social libertarianism – I don’t want social conservatism if it has to be imposed by force.

    So do you see liberalism as an ideology of the Left or the Right? I see it as an ideology of the Right.

    • Replies: @iffen
    @dfordoom

    So do you see liberalism as an ideology of the Left or the Right? I see it as an ideology of the Right.

    Since classical liberalism assumes private property one should place it toward the right. Even so, I think that one could be a classical liberal and then either conservative or progressive, or right or left, if we frame it that way.

    Today's SJWs have abandoned rational thought and reason and do not qualify as liberals. On the other hand the libertarians are hardly more rational.

    Replies: @dfordoom

  48. @dfordoom
    @iffen


    I see myself as a progressive classical liberal with a fair amount of class awareness and partisanship.
     
    I'd see myself as a moderate social democrat. With lots of class awareness. With mostly socially conservative views but with an admixture of social libertarianism - I don't want social conservatism if it has to be imposed by force.

    So do you see liberalism as an ideology of the Left or the Right? I see it as an ideology of the Right.

    Replies: @iffen

    So do you see liberalism as an ideology of the Left or the Right? I see it as an ideology of the Right.

    Since classical liberalism assumes private property one should place it toward the right. Even so, I think that one could be a classical liberal and then either conservative or progressive, or right or left, if we frame it that way.

    Today’s SJWs have abandoned rational thought and reason and do not qualify as liberals. On the other hand the libertarians are hardly more rational.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @iffen


    Since classical liberalism assumes private property one should place it toward the right. Even so, I think that one could be a classical liberal and then either conservative or progressive, or right or left, if we frame it that way.
     
    Yes.

    You can be a classical liberal and be socially libertarian or socially conservative. Although a society organised on classical liberal lines will inevitably become less and less socially conservative. Right-wing economic policies are inherently destructive to social cohesion and social conservatism. You can have a free society (which is a fine thing) but it won't be socially cohesive or socially conservative.

    Unless you can somehow create a society organised on classical liberal lines that is rigidly authoritarian on social/moral issues. Which kinda defeats the purpose of classical liberalism.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

  49. @iffen
    @dfordoom

    So do you see liberalism as an ideology of the Left or the Right? I see it as an ideology of the Right.

    Since classical liberalism assumes private property one should place it toward the right. Even so, I think that one could be a classical liberal and then either conservative or progressive, or right or left, if we frame it that way.

    Today's SJWs have abandoned rational thought and reason and do not qualify as liberals. On the other hand the libertarians are hardly more rational.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    Since classical liberalism assumes private property one should place it toward the right. Even so, I think that one could be a classical liberal and then either conservative or progressive, or right or left, if we frame it that way.

    Yes.

    You can be a classical liberal and be socially libertarian or socially conservative. Although a society organised on classical liberal lines will inevitably become less and less socially conservative. Right-wing economic policies are inherently destructive to social cohesion and social conservatism. You can have a free society (which is a fine thing) but it won’t be socially cohesive or socially conservative.

    Unless you can somehow create a society organised on classical liberal lines that is rigidly authoritarian on social/moral issues. Which kinda defeats the purpose of classical liberalism.

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @dfordoom

    @iffen and @dfordoom:

    The Anglosphere has placed classical liberalism on the political Right since 1870 or so, because of private property, as you observe. However, is there not an older, European, altar-and-throne tradition which, if anything, would place classical liberalism on the political Left?

    Russell Kirk identifies Right and Left respectively with the "party of permanence" and the "party of progress." Kirk's identification seems sound to me, but if so, then which wing subsumes classical liberalism?

    Did Britain have it wrong in the days of Salisbury the Conservative and Gladstone the Liberal?

    If one judges modern liberalism to be an excess or mutation of classical liberalism, how then?

    Replies: @dfordoom

  50. @dfordoom
    @iffen


    Since classical liberalism assumes private property one should place it toward the right. Even so, I think that one could be a classical liberal and then either conservative or progressive, or right or left, if we frame it that way.
     
    Yes.

    You can be a classical liberal and be socially libertarian or socially conservative. Although a society organised on classical liberal lines will inevitably become less and less socially conservative. Right-wing economic policies are inherently destructive to social cohesion and social conservatism. You can have a free society (which is a fine thing) but it won't be socially cohesive or socially conservative.

    Unless you can somehow create a society organised on classical liberal lines that is rigidly authoritarian on social/moral issues. Which kinda defeats the purpose of classical liberalism.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund

    and :

    The Anglosphere has placed classical liberalism on the political Right since 1870 or so, because of private property, as you observe. However, is there not an older, European, altar-and-throne tradition which, if anything, would place classical liberalism on the political Left?

    Russell Kirk identifies Right and Left respectively with the “party of permanence” and the “party of progress.” Kirk’s identification seems sound to me, but if so, then which wing subsumes classical liberalism?

    Did Britain have it wrong in the days of Salisbury the Conservative and Gladstone the Liberal?

    If one judges modern liberalism to be an excess or mutation of classical liberalism, how then?

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @V. K. Ovelund


    The Anglosphere has placed classical liberalism on the political Right since 1870 or so, because of private property, as you observe. However, is there not an older, European, altar-and-throne tradition which, if anything, would place classical liberalism on the political Left?
     
    Yes. The Left-Right thing doesn't work does it? The conservative-liberal thing doesn't work either since virtually all modern conservatives are in fact liberals - what they want to conserve is liberalism. A single political axis doesn't work. Even if you use two axes you still have problems.

    You need multiple political axes. There's the collectivist-statist axis which works OK if you're dealing with economic issues. You have free-marketeers at one end and communists at the other.

    There's the authoritarian-libertarian axis which works OK if you're talking about social issues.

    But as you point out, there's also traditionalism versus progressivism. There's social conservatism versus social liberalism which often aligns with authoritarianism versus libertarianism. But not always. Today we have, perversely, social liberals who are authoritarians. And we even have social conservatives who see themselves as libertarians (or maybe we have libertarians who see themselves as social conservatives).

    Russell Kirk identifies Right and Left respectively with the “party of permanence” and the “party of progress.” Kirk’s identification seems sound to me, but if so, then which wing subsumes classical liberalism?
     
    But then we've had political leaders who identify themselves as being on the Right but who are actually revolutionaries who aim to overturn the established order (Margaret Thatcher comes to mind).

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @anon

  51. @V. K. Ovelund
    @dfordoom

    @iffen and @dfordoom:

    The Anglosphere has placed classical liberalism on the political Right since 1870 or so, because of private property, as you observe. However, is there not an older, European, altar-and-throne tradition which, if anything, would place classical liberalism on the political Left?

    Russell Kirk identifies Right and Left respectively with the "party of permanence" and the "party of progress." Kirk's identification seems sound to me, but if so, then which wing subsumes classical liberalism?

    Did Britain have it wrong in the days of Salisbury the Conservative and Gladstone the Liberal?

    If one judges modern liberalism to be an excess or mutation of classical liberalism, how then?

    Replies: @dfordoom

    The Anglosphere has placed classical liberalism on the political Right since 1870 or so, because of private property, as you observe. However, is there not an older, European, altar-and-throne tradition which, if anything, would place classical liberalism on the political Left?

    Yes. The Left-Right thing doesn’t work does it? The conservative-liberal thing doesn’t work either since virtually all modern conservatives are in fact liberals – what they want to conserve is liberalism. A single political axis doesn’t work. Even if you use two axes you still have problems.

    You need multiple political axes. There’s the collectivist-statist axis which works OK if you’re dealing with economic issues. You have free-marketeers at one end and communists at the other.

    There’s the authoritarian-libertarian axis which works OK if you’re talking about social issues.

    But as you point out, there’s also traditionalism versus progressivism. There’s social conservatism versus social liberalism which often aligns with authoritarianism versus libertarianism. But not always. Today we have, perversely, social liberals who are authoritarians. And we even have social conservatives who see themselves as libertarians (or maybe we have libertarians who see themselves as social conservatives).

    Russell Kirk identifies Right and Left respectively with the “party of permanence” and the “party of progress.” Kirk’s identification seems sound to me, but if so, then which wing subsumes classical liberalism?

    But then we’ve had political leaders who identify themselves as being on the Right but who are actually revolutionaries who aim to overturn the established order (Margaret Thatcher comes to mind).

    • Replies: @V. K. Ovelund
    @dfordoom


    Yes. The Left-Right thing doesn’t work does it? The conservative-liberal thing doesn’t work either since ...
     
    Your tour de force merits a reply for courtesy's sake, but really, leaves nothing to which I can add or subtract.
    , @anon
    @dfordoom

    You need multiple political axes.

    Yes. One could get a dissertation out of that idea...if it had not already been done over 50 years ago.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pournelle_chart

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4c/Pournelle_chart_color.gif

    Replies: @dfordoom

  52. @dfordoom
    @V. K. Ovelund


    The Anglosphere has placed classical liberalism on the political Right since 1870 or so, because of private property, as you observe. However, is there not an older, European, altar-and-throne tradition which, if anything, would place classical liberalism on the political Left?
     
    Yes. The Left-Right thing doesn't work does it? The conservative-liberal thing doesn't work either since virtually all modern conservatives are in fact liberals - what they want to conserve is liberalism. A single political axis doesn't work. Even if you use two axes you still have problems.

    You need multiple political axes. There's the collectivist-statist axis which works OK if you're dealing with economic issues. You have free-marketeers at one end and communists at the other.

    There's the authoritarian-libertarian axis which works OK if you're talking about social issues.

    But as you point out, there's also traditionalism versus progressivism. There's social conservatism versus social liberalism which often aligns with authoritarianism versus libertarianism. But not always. Today we have, perversely, social liberals who are authoritarians. And we even have social conservatives who see themselves as libertarians (or maybe we have libertarians who see themselves as social conservatives).

    Russell Kirk identifies Right and Left respectively with the “party of permanence” and the “party of progress.” Kirk’s identification seems sound to me, but if so, then which wing subsumes classical liberalism?
     
    But then we've had political leaders who identify themselves as being on the Right but who are actually revolutionaries who aim to overturn the established order (Margaret Thatcher comes to mind).

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @anon

    Yes. The Left-Right thing doesn’t work does it? The conservative-liberal thing doesn’t work either since …

    Your tour de force merits a reply for courtesy’s sake, but really, leaves nothing to which I can add or subtract.

  53. @dfordoom
    @V. K. Ovelund


    The Anglosphere has placed classical liberalism on the political Right since 1870 or so, because of private property, as you observe. However, is there not an older, European, altar-and-throne tradition which, if anything, would place classical liberalism on the political Left?
     
    Yes. The Left-Right thing doesn't work does it? The conservative-liberal thing doesn't work either since virtually all modern conservatives are in fact liberals - what they want to conserve is liberalism. A single political axis doesn't work. Even if you use two axes you still have problems.

    You need multiple political axes. There's the collectivist-statist axis which works OK if you're dealing with economic issues. You have free-marketeers at one end and communists at the other.

    There's the authoritarian-libertarian axis which works OK if you're talking about social issues.

    But as you point out, there's also traditionalism versus progressivism. There's social conservatism versus social liberalism which often aligns with authoritarianism versus libertarianism. But not always. Today we have, perversely, social liberals who are authoritarians. And we even have social conservatives who see themselves as libertarians (or maybe we have libertarians who see themselves as social conservatives).

    Russell Kirk identifies Right and Left respectively with the “party of permanence” and the “party of progress.” Kirk’s identification seems sound to me, but if so, then which wing subsumes classical liberalism?
     
    But then we've had political leaders who identify themselves as being on the Right but who are actually revolutionaries who aim to overturn the established order (Margaret Thatcher comes to mind).

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @anon

    You need multiple political axes.

    Yes. One could get a dissertation out of that idea…if it had not already been done over 50 years ago.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pournelle_chart

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @anon



    You need multiple political axes.
     
    Yes. One could get a dissertation out of that idea…if it had not already been done over 50 years ago.
     
    And yet people still cling to the left-right idea as if it still meant something. And 50 years from now people will still be clinging to the left-right idea.

    It's almost as if people don't want to accept that political alignments are complicated. People like the simple left-right axis because they see it as a nice simplistic good-bad axis. The further you are to the left the more wicked you are, or the more virtuous you are. People want politics to be about good vs evil.
  54. @dfordoom
    @iffen



    I tend to use dissident right as a synonym for far right.
     
    Do you use alt-right as a synonym?
     
    I was under the impression the alt-right just rebranded itself the dissident right when it became obvious that the alt-right label was political poison.

    Replies: @V. K. Ovelund, @Audacious Epigone

    John Derbyshire has been using the phrase “dissident right” for longer than the term “alt right” has been in existence.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    @Audacious Epigone


    John Derbyshire has been using the phrase “dissident right” for longer than the term “alt right” has been in existence.
     
    I don't normally read Derbyshire. How exactly does he define the “dissident right”?
  55. @anon
    @dfordoom

    You need multiple political axes.

    Yes. One could get a dissertation out of that idea...if it had not already been done over 50 years ago.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pournelle_chart

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4c/Pournelle_chart_color.gif

    Replies: @dfordoom

    You need multiple political axes.

    Yes. One could get a dissertation out of that idea…if it had not already been done over 50 years ago.

    And yet people still cling to the left-right idea as if it still meant something. And 50 years from now people will still be clinging to the left-right idea.

    It’s almost as if people don’t want to accept that political alignments are complicated. People like the simple left-right axis because they see it as a nice simplistic good-bad axis. The further you are to the left the more wicked you are, or the more virtuous you are. People want politics to be about good vs evil.

  56. @Audacious Epigone
    @dfordoom

    John Derbyshire has been using the phrase "dissident right" for longer than the term "alt right" has been in existence.

    Replies: @dfordoom

    John Derbyshire has been using the phrase “dissident right” for longer than the term “alt right” has been in existence.

    I don’t normally read Derbyshire. How exactly does he define the “dissident right”?

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS