The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Matt Yglesias's Substack Generates $860k in Revenue Per Year
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

From Vox:

Substack writers are mad at Substack. The problem is money and who’s making it.

The newsletter startup’s new controversy, explained.

By Peter Kafka Mar 19, 2021, 6:00am EDT

… In a very short time, Substack has supercharged the newsletter industry and helped make it newly attractive to a wide range of authors. But unlike other digital platforms, Substack doesn’t have any lock-in that will keep writers — popular or otherwise — from bolting to competitors.

I presume “lock-in” means, in effect, monopoly.

YouTube’s near monopoly is why YouTube stars tend to make less money than podcast stars, even though that sounds backwards: TV stars generally make more than radio stars who make more than journalist stars.

… Substack’s main business model is straightforward. It lets newsletter writers sell subscriptions to their work, and it takes 10 percent of any revenue the writers generate (writers also have to fork over another 3 percent to Stripe, the digital payments company).

The 2.9% fee that payment companies like Stripe and Paypal charge is ridiculously after all these years. Zelle is free.

… But in some cases, Substack has also shelled out one-off payments to help convince some writers to become Substack writers, and in some cases those deals are significant. [Matthew] Yglesias says that when it lured him to the platform last fall, Substack agreed to pay him $250,000 along with 15 percent of any subscription revenue he generates; after a year, Yglesias’s take will increase to 90 percent of his revenue, but he won’t get any additional payouts from Substack.

As Yglesias told me via Slack (he stopped working as a Vox writer last fall but still contributes to Vox’s Weeds podcast), the deal he took from Substack is actually costing him money, for now. Yglesias says he has around 9,800 paying subscribers, which might generate around $860,000 a year.

Yglesias charges $8 per month or $80 per year.

Had he not taken the Substack payment, he would keep 90 percent of that, or $775,000, but under the current deal, where he’ll keep the $250,000 plus 15 percent of the gross subscription revenue, his take will be closer to $380,000.

… More to the point, Substack is aware that it now has a reputation as a platform for white guys who don’t want to or can’t work at traditional publications anymore, and the company is eager to point out when it has high-profile writers who don’t fit that mold. The company’s most successful author, as of late last year, is Heather Cox Richardson, a Boston College professor who generates a daily explainer that puts the news of the moment in historical context.

Historian Heather Cox Richardson is a straight white woman who lives in the same fishing village in Maine as her great-great-grandmother. Her commentary on current events from the perspective of a specialist in 19th Century American history has 350,000 subscribers, largely liberal older women. She charges $5 per month to participate in her comments.

“It’s good for us to manage the perception [that Substack caters to conservative writers]. It would feel really bad for me if people who would be really great on Substack don’t feel like it’s a good place to be for them,” Substack CEO Chris Best told me in December.

… But since Substack — kickstarted with $17 million in venture money — seems to have proven that there’s a large group of people who want to write newsletters for a much larger group of readers, very big companies are now coming for the same market. …

Meanwhile, Substack has deliberately made it easy for new competitors to take root, since it tells authors that they can take everything they’ve built on Substack — both their archives and their mailing list — and move it anywhere they want. …

“I do think that the current Substack Discourse has sort of underweighted how big their business model challenge is here,” Yglesias told me when I asked him if he would stay on Substack after his first year on the platform. “In the long run, it seems like Substack is at serious risk of losing its biggest players.”

On the other hand, unless you’re running your own private newsletter business, it seems like anyone on any newsletter platform runs the risk of the same problem Doyle (somebody with the pronoun “they” who is mad that Yglesias, Greenwald, etc. are on Substack) identified in their first blog post. If you’re on someone else’s platform, then other people will be there too — perhaps even making money — and you may hate them.

This paywall sounds like a good business model for a veteran writer to extract money from his existing readers. But how do you get new readers?

That’s not necessarily a killer question. Many of the vast 21st Century Silicon Valley fortunes have been built on the philosophy that you get a lot of users first and then figure out how to make money off them later. Maybe some smart guy in Silicon Valley can figure out the reverse process: make money off existing users first, then get more users later.

 
Hide 150 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. All this information is available for free and there are still this many people who pay this amount of money for it? Maybe if you’re interested in patronising original research but what are you patronising Yglesias for? Him slowly realising things most people already understand? There isn’t anything novel and interesting he could possibly say. 100k subs?

    Sounds a bit suspicious in terms of subscriber numbers.

    • Agree: Kyle, I, Libertine
    • Replies: @Realist
    @Altai

    Agree

    , @I, Libertine
    @Altai

    You'd have to pay me to read Yglesias. What a dope. Here's an example that stuck in my memory. Would you pay to watch as he learns, to his amazement, that Jones was a more common surname in Wales than in England in 1881?

    , @Prof. Woland
    @Altai

    I enjoy patronizing things that either benefit me or advocate on my behalf. Trump had 75 million voters. If he could figure out how to get them to donate of spend $10 per month on right-wing organizations and causes it would be a game changer. Make it $100 and it would be a landslide. It is clear that the right needs to build their own institutions and that will take money; including banks, media, communications platforms, etc. The Republicans will never close the billionaire gap but by getting upper-middle-and lower middle class supporters they could severely blunt the left's paid army of Caliban's. It would also make the left more careful how they treat people on the right. Right now, there are no boycotts or sustained protests of institutions that are openly plotting our destruction. We have a lot more power then we think.

    Replies: @J.Ross

    , @James J O'Meara
    @Altai

    This whole article is stupid. Yglesias is a grifter running a scam. Substack is running a scam.

    Everything is a scam.

    Don't you get it?

  2. *Sorry I meant 10k subs, still a lot.

  3. But how do you get new readers?

    By going on podcasts that aren’t behind paywalls.

    • Agree: Kyle
    • Replies: @dcthrowback
    @Anon

    twatter for your free thoughts, substack for the paid ones + comments. (whether you reply or like twatter comments is up to you, but def stealing/incorporating ideas from the smart twitterati/commentariat seems like a wise idea).

    I dislike Ydiot more than most so it's highly amusing to me he "lost" $500k by not betting on himself.

    yarvin/Alexander should have about 10x more followers on S/S than yglesias fwiw.

  4. Rod Dreher is trying to monetise his existing readership by starting a pay platform on Substack focusing on his religious writing, his sweet spot. He saves his political blithering and emotional meltdowns for the public at TAC where he occasionally does product placement and other advertising for his Substack platform. I would be interested in whether he’s been successful getting new readers over to Substack from his product pitches on TAC.

    • Replies: @Verymuchalive
    @Another Canadian


    Rod Dreher is trying to monetise his existing readership by starting a pay platform on Substack focusing on his religious writing, his sweet spot.
     
    Obviously, he's taking a leaf out of E Michael Jones' book. Not that an uber cuck like Dreher would even admit to knowing Jones' name.
    , @Paperback Writer
    @Another Canadian

    That is interesting.

    I monitor Dreher because he's great at linking but his writing may be the most clotted, dense, crap in the history of the English language. His blog posts consist of masses of babble, quoting better writers, interspersing huge chunks of their better-written text with "More" and ending with, "It's really good."

    Also, I think that half the letters he quotes are written by Rod Dreher.

    I'm mystified as to how he became successful. Underneath that Andy Griffith exterior he must be a total shark.

    , @MEH 0910
    @Another Canadian

    Daniel Larison recently got fired from The American Conservative and subsequently joined Antiwar.com as a contributing editor. It appears that he moved his Eunomia blog to Substack in July. It doesn't appear to be behind a paywall.

    , @James Forrestal
    @Another Canadian


    Rod Dreher is trying to monetise his existing readership by starting a pay platform on Substack focusing on his religious writing, his sweet spot
     

    I would be interested in whether he’s been successful getting new readers over to Substack from his product pitches on TAC.
     
    Substack doesn't release specific subscriber numbers, just ranges. Iif you take a look at their data, he's #5 under "Faith." He's got "thousands of subscribers" at $5/ mo.
  5. The 2.9% fee that payment companies like Stripe and Paypal charge is ridiculously after all these years. Zelle is free.

    The 3% fee is because these payments are almost all via credit card (Zelle is by design a bank account-to-bank account transaction). 3% is almost the bare minimum of what the credit card monopolies charge the merchant and is very largely due to the fact that the merchant gets his money now while the credit card owner doesn’t have to pay anything for up to 30 days. Take it up with money changers at the temple if this arrangement makes you unhappy.

    • Replies: @AnotherDad
    @Abe


    The 3% fee is because these payments are almost all via credit card (Zelle is by design a bank account-to-bank account transaction). 3% is almost the bare minimum of what the credit card monopolies charge the merchant and is very largely due to the fact that the merchant gets his money now while the credit card owner doesn’t have to pay anything for up to 30 days. Take it up with money changers at the temple if this arrangement makes you unhappy.
     
    The point is *you* pay an additional 3%.

    They are an additional financial intermediary ... taking an additional financial cut ... and you pay for it.

    PayPal is doing--with credit cards--what credit card companies ought to have been required by law to do for online transactions, a secure transaction portal ... and then charging you money for it.

    A clever scam, but never understood the weird consumer side love for this. My thought: "why the hell do i want these people also dipping into my wallet? There's no good answer but nonetheless there are people who use it, heck who love it. There's a scout mom in our troop who pushed for PayPal payments ... so we can donate 3% of our scouting budget to some tech company.

    Replies: @ic1000, @TomSchmidt

  6. Maybe some smart guy in Silicon Valley can figure out the reverse process: make money off existing users first, then get more users later.

    Is that a hint aimed at Ron Unz?

    Seriously, this kind of stuff means little to most of us mere readers out here. First off, it seems kind of funny that a guy like Matt Y. can be important at all when he has only 9,800 paying subscribers. But, what do I know?

    This is, legitimately, a subject dear to Steve Sailer’s heart, though he apparently still manages to make a decent living as a writer for UR and Taki’s, with our additional contributions that he is allowed to solicit. I would venture to guess that he has more readers than Matt, but that is only because I don’t read Matt and would not even know about Matt if I didn’t read Steve. See how this works?

    Anyway, 8 bucks a month seems pretty cheap. Even those of us who randomly send cash to Steve have been paying way more than that. And we encourage all of the rest of you lazy SOBs to do the same. Together, we can generate more income for Steve than even Matt Yglesias gets.

    • Agree: Desiderius
    • Replies: @Polistra
    @Buzz Mohawk

    If only there were a way to contribute funds to the more edgy pundits without losing one's anonymity.

    I guess Bitcoin permits that? I can't afford any Bitcoins though.

    Meanwhile, if Matt has nearly a million dollars that's ten cents for each 'New American" he wants to let in, right?? Sounds legit to me.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @dcthrowback, @S. Anonyia

    , @SunBakedSuburb
    @Buzz Mohawk

    "See how this works?"

    No, I don't. But I do have some advice for Steve: Abandon objective truth because it's mostly bullshit. Journalism is a wretched profession teeming with wretches. Craft your own mythology to fit various mediums. Get in touch with Desert Inn Steve; he's the best Steve. After he shakes off the Mormon morphine daze you two will become one and have a grand creative adventure.

  7. The fact that there’s people who pay real money to read people like Yglesias shows that P.T. Barnum was right, “there’s a sucker born every minute”.

    Of course, I have no idea who would read things as what’s published in Vox even for free.

    Pay to be brainwashed with drivel.

    Sometimes, human stupidity baffles the mind.

    • Replies: @guest007
    @Dumbo

    Look at the conservative equivalent. Dailywire, Dailycaller, TheBlaze, Pjmedia have subscription models. So do other conservative writers. The alternative for conservatives is to find a rich sugar daddy who will fund an organization. See Charlie Kirk for this model.

    Think about all of the political reporters who will subscribe just to keep up on what is being said.

    , @AndrewR
    @Dumbo

    By Democrat standards, he's smart and insightful, and shows some capacity for original thought. But that's a low bar, obviously.

    , @Prester John
    @Dumbo

    "Sometimes, human stupidity baffles the mind."

    What Mencken said about never going broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public probably can be extended out to the rest of humanity.

    When you come down to it, most people are in one way or another just plain--stupid!

    Replies: @Odin

  8. I think authors like you are really cut out for Substack – but would they let you on?

    • Replies: @Ed
    @Anon

    They claim to be no or light moderation but I bet they have some inane policy against hate speech or something similar. If not, a few days of outrage tweets would get them to change their tune.

    , @Anonymous
    @Anon

    I think this should be Steve's next social experiment/performance art: setting up a Substack profile, to see how long before he can single-handedly destroy that gold rush.

    They do have an audition or screening process, so despite the deceptive impression of broadcast live right away, the input of bank/ACH info gives them a handle on your private area that "creators" from Blogger or Wordpress usually escape. It's far more skin in the game than the newer-breed social media sites like Twitter and Facebook require via (easily forged) SMS numbers.

    Ron Unz ought to make the account with his credit card and give Steve the password, on the condition of double-secret probation if Steve shares the password to @SecondGentlemanParody, or exceeds allowance of 3 golf posts per year. Then as soon as it goes live, I will register the AntiSteve.substack.com domain & profit from the back catalog. Incidentally, I think it is reasonable for Ron to earn points on that, so let's have your people talk to my nameless people.

  9. @Buzz Mohawk

    Maybe some smart guy in Silicon Valley can figure out the reverse process: make money off existing users first, then get more users later.
     
    Is that a hint aimed at Ron Unz?

    Seriously, this kind of stuff means little to most of us mere readers out here. First off, it seems kind of funny that a guy like Matt Y. can be important at all when he has only 9,800 paying subscribers. But, what do I know?

    This is, legitimately, a subject dear to Steve Sailer's heart, though he apparently still manages to make a decent living as a writer for UR and Taki's, with our additional contributions that he is allowed to solicit. I would venture to guess that he has more readers than Matt, but that is only because I don't read Matt and would not even know about Matt if I didn't read Steve. See how this works?

    Anyway, 8 bucks a month seems pretty cheap. Even those of us who randomly send cash to Steve have been paying way more than that. And we encourage all of the rest of you lazy SOBs to do the same. Together, we can generate more income for Steve than even Matt Yglesias gets.

    Replies: @Polistra, @SunBakedSuburb

    If only there were a way to contribute funds to the more edgy pundits without losing one’s anonymity.

    I guess Bitcoin permits that? I can’t afford any Bitcoins though.

    Meanwhile, if Matt has nearly a million dollars that’s ten cents for each ‘New American” he wants to let in, right?? Sounds legit to me.

    • Agree: YetAnotherAnon
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    @Polistra

    He only wants ten million more immigrants? That's news to me. Did you mean per year?

    Replies: @Polistra

    , @dcthrowback
    @Polistra

    This was Pax Dickinson's task when he partnered w/ Charles Johnson in 2016 before their operation (wesearchr + just news) blew up.

    Until then, I'll launder through VDare.

    Speaking of, Steve, when you headed to the new castle for some grog?

    , @S. Anonyia
    @Polistra

    Agreed, there needs to be a way to donate that is MORE anonymous.

    Older people don't need to worry about getting cancelled for quiet donations, but with the way things are spiraling, us millennials cannot be sure. Should we ever become important, who's to say our entire financial history couldn't be publicized and/or scrutinized?

  10. Incidentally, your important graph illuminating homicide trends in 2020 included some color indexing that didn’t quite make sense to me. So I edited it for your future use, should you agree that this version is clearer. If you don’t agree, please ignore.

    I actually don’t think the blue or green add anything and I’ll happily replace both with black or grey if you like.

    • Replies: @ic1000
    @Polistra

    Steve is too damn productive. That was dozens of posts ago.

    Day-By-Day Graph of Exactly When 2020's Huge Murder Surge Began: the First Weekend of the Mostly Peaceful Riots
    by Steve Sailer • February 19, 2021

    The Upper Class Media would have caught up with his scoop by now, were it not for the epidemic of xenophobia.

    , @Steve Sailer
    @Polistra

    Thanks.

  11. Who is dumb enough to pay Mathew Yglesias 80 dollars per year? Substack calls itself a newsletter service because you get the latest from their writers in the form of an emailed newsletter…lol lol lol…… Yes, you can also read and comment right at the Yglesias substack site. Maybe the comments and interaction in the so called Yglesias community is what reels them suckers in
    I am fairly sure an annual digital only subscription is not more than 80 dollars for the NY Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal.

    Unz should start a similar “newsletter” site and call it Sub-Unz.

    • Replies: @Dignan
    @Clyde

    WSJ online subscription is around $40 per month. Catering to the financial markets really pays.

    Replies: @Clyde

    , @James J O'Meara
    @Clyde

    The Weekly Standard could start one, called The Sub-Standard.

    Replies: @Clyde

  12. Will subs follow Matt to Yglesias dot com? The history of the internet has shown that aggregation crushes the indie internet nearly every time. There are people like the Stratechery guy who succeed by freelancing but I wonder how many of those subs are charged to the corporate account.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @bjdubbs

    Some guys have made a successful go of independence. Mark Steyn, for example. I think I heard of Matt Tiabbi and some others doing it too, though I don't read them, so who knows?

    But anyway, for content producers with a distinctive voice and a loyal following, it seems to be a possibility. But, as others have said, why anyone would pay any amount to read Yglesias's half-witted maundering is beyond me.

    I might pay money if I never had to hear of him again. Maybe he should look into that as a business model.

  13. Steve,

    The celebrity writers use media appearances, their own podcasts, appearances on other podcasts, appearances at think tanks, the book promotion circuit, the book fair circuit, and the SXSW/ASPEN/etc circuit to promote themselves.

    Maybe it is easier being a brand if one controls the distribution rather than being a writer in a large organization that has some control over the brand. Does anyone think Vox, NYTimes, slate is paying $850k a year to any writer?

  14. @Dumbo
    The fact that there's people who pay real money to read people like Yglesias shows that P.T. Barnum was right, "there's a sucker born every minute".

    Of course, I have no idea who would read things as what's published in Vox even for free.

    Pay to be brainwashed with drivel.

    Sometimes, human stupidity baffles the mind.

    Replies: @guest007, @AndrewR, @Prester John

    Look at the conservative equivalent. Dailywire, Dailycaller, TheBlaze, Pjmedia have subscription models. So do other conservative writers. The alternative for conservatives is to find a rich sugar daddy who will fund an organization. See Charlie Kirk for this model.

    Think about all of the political reporters who will subscribe just to keep up on what is being said.

  15. Steve, is this preparatory to your next panhandling drive? They seem to come around so quickly.

    • LOL: 3g4me
  16. @Anon
    I think authors like you are really cut out for Substack - but would they let you on?

    Replies: @Ed, @Anonymous

    They claim to be no or light moderation but I bet they have some inane policy against hate speech or something similar. If not, a few days of outrage tweets would get them to change their tune.

  17. The paywall is a moat that keep out the SJW lynch mob. Substack, Locals, others? Seems a sane business model in these trigger happy times.

    I’ve resisted paying to read just a single writer. It adds up fast if you support more than one. In the old days, you’d shell out the subscription to a magazine or newspaper and get access to the lot of them.

    • Replies: @guest007
    @Dr. DoomNGloom

    But magazines and their internet equivalents just use the gig model. Look at how few of them have any influence. Once a writers has climbed the ladder of gig writing and maybe a paying job on an internet site, then they go to Substack to make money off of their brand.

  18. George: You can’t have people shoving their arms into a 600 degree oven.

    Kramer: It’s all supervised!

    https://www.tvfanatic.com/quotes/you-cant-have-people-shoving-their-arms-into-a-600-degree-oven/

    Somehow the Left was able to apply this to Free Speech. Who knew until recently that all those dusty bookstores and public libraries presented such a threat?

    Once you start censoring, now playfully known as “curating” like they do in a Halloween house to cut down on the number of visitors throwing up, you gotta find a safe space (for all concerned) for the writers and intellectuals too old to learn and abide the new tricks.

    To use old-school leftist phrasing, CCP China “has done a lot of good work in this area” in recent years. If you also “consult the literature” the Soviet Union “took this subject seriously” while the US was still worried about video games.

    This paywall sounds like a good business model for a veteran writer to extract money from his existing readers. But how do you get new readers?

    Maybe that’s a feature rather than a bug. A Now/Today premium pass variant on the Soviet Union’s internal exile for eminent dissidents (e.g. Andrei Sakharov).

  19. These guys (yes, podcasters) do it without a platform or ads, simply by asking people to give value for the value they receive from the podcast:

    https://www.noagendashow.net

  20. @Altai
    All this information is available for free and there are still this many people who pay this amount of money for it? Maybe if you're interested in patronising original research but what are you patronising Yglesias for? Him slowly realising things most people already understand? There isn't anything novel and interesting he could possibly say. 100k subs?

    Sounds a bit suspicious in terms of subscriber numbers.

    Replies: @Realist, @I, Libertine, @Prof. Woland, @James J O'Meara

    Agree

  21. It dangerous to use the internet to send money. Someone in the Philippines managed to enroll me in Zelle and “I” sent them $5200 before I discovered my new ‘friend’. When I called my bank ( Chase ) to complain, I asked the girl requesting my ‘password’ where she was located she reluctantly told me. The Philippines!!! I immediately asked her to transfer my call to someone in the United States.

    • Thanks: wren
  22. Matthew Iglesias is the kind of “journalist” who should not be on Substack. Now we find out he’s getting paid extra money that others are not getting. Looks like Glenn is repeating the problems with his previous project, bringing on board people who fundamentally support the establishment and want to destroy free speech and real journalism. How long until Substack has a coup where woke and pro-system “journalists” seize control and expel the real journalists?

    • Replies: @guest007
    @ATBOTL

    One does not seem to understand the model. Substack does not have work journalist to sieze control. It just has a back-office that supplies writers a way to get paid. The attack plane of substack seems to be very limited with no advertisers/no inhouse writers, etc.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

  23. @Another Canadian
    Rod Dreher is trying to monetise his existing readership by starting a pay platform on Substack focusing on his religious writing, his sweet spot. He saves his political blithering and emotional meltdowns for the public at TAC where he occasionally does product placement and other advertising for his Substack platform. I would be interested in whether he's been successful getting new readers over to Substack from his product pitches on TAC.

    Replies: @Verymuchalive, @Paperback Writer, @MEH 0910, @James Forrestal

    Rod Dreher is trying to monetise his existing readership by starting a pay platform on Substack focusing on his religious writing, his sweet spot.

    Obviously, he’s taking a leaf out of E Michael Jones’ book. Not that an uber cuck like Dreher would even admit to knowing Jones’ name.

  24. What insight has Matt Yglesias ever provided? I don’t get it. Why would 10,000 people pay to read standard open borders liberal talking points?

    Same with Andrew Sullivan. If a writer was a specialist in some field and you got to comment and interact, it might be worth something. Or, if you were supporting a dissident for a cause you believed in.

    Heather Cox Richardson is a standard New England liberal anti-White. Who are the loony women who pay to read conventional opinion?

    • Replies: @anon
    @RichardTaylor


    What insight has Matt Yglesias ever provided? I don’t get it. Why would 10,000 people pay to read standard open borders liberal talking points?
     
    Because they have the same goals (open borders, destruction of the historic American nation). The talking points are weapons to use to achieve those goals.

    Yglesias produces weapons. He is very good at rhetoric and sophistry.
  25. Matt Yglesias’s Substack Generates $860k in Revenue Per Year

    LOL.

    This is a crazy world.

    • Replies: @epebble
    @AnotherDad

    Absolutely not crazy compared to what I feel when I see a man or woman or couple (sometimes with kids) roll down in a nice looking late model Mercedes SUV at the parking lot waiting for a cardboard box full of food and thanking the volunteer worker for "helping to feed the family in these difficult times". I have watched it so many times (on TV) in so many cities, I am truly perplexed. When I try to "research" this on internet, the usual phrase I read is "Cash Poor". i.e. The family (usually) has large income and spends it all (and then some) for extravagant lifestyle. Once the income stops for any reason, they quickly hit the food banks.

    , @Ed
    @AnotherDad

    In a a country of 300M there are 10k people willing to spend $8 a month for access to a writer they like. Seems fairly normal to me.

  26. So I guess this is the chosen angle of attack by the jealous legacy media.

  27. @Abe

    The 2.9% fee that payment companies like Stripe and Paypal charge is ridiculously after all these years. Zelle is free.
     
    The 3% fee is because these payments are almost all via credit card (Zelle is by design a bank account-to-bank account transaction). 3% is almost the bare minimum of what the credit card monopolies charge the merchant and is very largely due to the fact that the merchant gets his money now while the credit card owner doesn’t have to pay anything for up to 30 days. Take it up with money changers at the temple if this arrangement makes you unhappy.

    Replies: @AnotherDad

    The 3% fee is because these payments are almost all via credit card (Zelle is by design a bank account-to-bank account transaction). 3% is almost the bare minimum of what the credit card monopolies charge the merchant and is very largely due to the fact that the merchant gets his money now while the credit card owner doesn’t have to pay anything for up to 30 days. Take it up with money changers at the temple if this arrangement makes you unhappy.

    The point is *you* pay an additional 3%.

    They are an additional financial intermediary … taking an additional financial cut … and you pay for it.

    PayPal is doing–with credit cards–what credit card companies ought to have been required by law to do for online transactions, a secure transaction portal … and then charging you money for it.

    A clever scam, but never understood the weird consumer side love for this. My thought: “why the hell do i want these people also dipping into my wallet? There’s no good answer but nonetheless there are people who use it, heck who love it. There’s a scout mom in our troop who pushed for PayPal payments … so we can donate 3% of our scouting budget to some tech company.

    • Replies: @ic1000
    @AnotherDad

    > There’s a scout mom in our troop who pushed for PayPal payments … so we can donate 3% of our scouting budget to some tech company.

    You underestimate how difficult and awkward it can be for the Treasurer to consistently and pleasantly collect agreed-upon balances due from the membership of a volunteer organization. We concluded that PayPal's 3% was worth it, in terms of reduced wear and tear on that officer.

    Replies: @guest007

    , @TomSchmidt
    @AnotherDad

    Every year, Chase offers 5% back during one quarter for expenditures on PayPal. See if you cannot have your scout pack contribute to another scout pack, and vice-versa. I think there is a 3% fee, and the 5% is limited to $1500, but if you send them $1500, you get a $75 rebate while paying only $45 in fees.

    It's a small way to recover some of their griftbux.

    Replies: @very old statistician

  28. OT
    British scientists have discovered a cure for the Coronavirus!

    We can now all get back to normal!

    dailymail.co.uk

    Are more men dying from coronavirus because of testosterone? Prostate cancer experts believe the sex hormone plays a crucial role in helping virus infect cells

    Patient’s cells less likely to be infected when given testosterone reducing drug

    experts have now uncovered intriguing clues that the sex hormone seems to play a crucial role by inadvertently helping the virus infect cells

    medics discovered that prostate cancer patients given powerful drugs, known as androgen deprivation therapy, to radically cut testosterone levels were four times less likely to die of Covid-19

    Stock image: A man takes a Enzalutamide pill, which works by blocking the effect of testosterone on prostate cancer cells. Such treatments could be used to help coronavirus patients

    Now medics at London’s Institute for Cancer Research are examining the link further, while counterparts at the University of California, Los Angeles, are looking at testosterone-blocking drugs as a potential Covid-19 therapy for patients in hospital. Professor Nick James, of London’s ICR, said it was ‘biologically plausible’ that testosterone made men more susceptible to the coronavirus.

    Just present your Certificate Of Effeminization (or swipe your bracelet) and you can board the airplane.

  29. “How do you get new readers?”

    By offering a free version but not posting privs. All of them do, I think. If you really like the environment, you’ll eventually bite.

    You make a lot of fun of Andrew Sullivan, rightly so, but he’s great at engaging.

    Had he not taken the Substack payment, he would keep 90 percent of that, or $775,000, but under the current deal, where he’ll keep the $250,000 plus 15 percent of the gross subscription revenue, his take will be closer to $380,000.

    Boo fucking hoo. He should have known, the greedy little bastard.

    BTW, I’m the last person in the world to care what Bill Maher says, but he’s saying some awfully off the rez things nowadays. He’s sick of cancel culture and (gasp) gave a rant that it’s impossible to ensure equality of outcomes. (Why?)

    Will he be cancelled?

    • Replies: @Muggles
    @Paperback Writer

    Some complaints here seem off base.

    The 3% for cc processing fee is what most merchants have to pay, some less. Which is why Amazon wants to sell you their card. The "seller" pays it, as legally I believe it can't be separately charged by the merchant (though a cash discount is allowed, hard to do via the Internet). It may be the credit card processers/cards who won't let you break that out in the sales price.

    So Yglesiass took a one year "starter" deal for a guaranteed $250K payment plus 15%, rather than the standard 90% of the gross. So what? He made a choice to have SubStack assume the risk that he wouldn't attract enough subscribers to hit that $250K.

    So he "could" have made more in year One but didn't know the future with certainty. Welcome to the real marketplace where risk is a major factor in deals made.

    Now the year is up and he gets no guarantee. Good for him. Looks like he'll make more.

    What is his beef? That he made a sub-optimal decision at the outset? Welcome to reality Matt.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

  30. @Another Canadian
    Rod Dreher is trying to monetise his existing readership by starting a pay platform on Substack focusing on his religious writing, his sweet spot. He saves his political blithering and emotional meltdowns for the public at TAC where he occasionally does product placement and other advertising for his Substack platform. I would be interested in whether he's been successful getting new readers over to Substack from his product pitches on TAC.

    Replies: @Verymuchalive, @Paperback Writer, @MEH 0910, @James Forrestal

    That is interesting.

    I monitor Dreher because he’s great at linking but his writing may be the most clotted, dense, crap in the history of the English language. His blog posts consist of masses of babble, quoting better writers, interspersing huge chunks of their better-written text with “More” and ending with, “It’s really good.”

    Also, I think that half the letters he quotes are written by Rod Dreher.

    I’m mystified as to how he became successful. Underneath that Andy Griffith exterior he must be a total shark.

  31. If somebody offered me $250k and 15% for the first year, and 90% thereafter, my assumption would be that they weren’t expecting my success to last.

  32. Imagine if it turned out that woke mobs were a Substack conspiracy

    • LOL: kaganovitch
  33. “(somebody with the pronoun “they” who is mad that Yglesias, Greenwald, etc. are on Substack)”
    I’m assuming that’s your wording, rather than a quote from the article as is currently indicated.

  34. This paywall sounds like a good business model for a veteran writer to extract money from his existing readers.

    DON’T DO IT STEVE

  35. I don’t know the answer for Steve’s question. I do know I will likely never subscribe to a Substrack account now. Good grief almost 900 grand for some blowhard, while people doing real productive work that really matters for our daily living are happy to break even. I’m starting to think the internet makes everything upside down and wrong.

  36. Anon[169] • Disclaimer says:

    OT

    This is a supercut of all the men-women, relationship and attraction, by race and age, where did marrieds first meet, etc., blog posts and articles out there. Most of it I’ve seen, but it’s interesting to see it all together.

    The Masculinist #50: The Truth About Online Dating
    https://themasculinist.com/the-truth-about-online-dating/

    • Replies: @anon
    @Anon

    He has great economic analogies but leaves out the evolutionary angle that is mentioned here a lot. Hypergamy/hypergyny doesn't appear in the text and, more understandably, neither does Dads vs. Cads. Perhaps their absence is a business decision, haha.

    , @Jon
    @Anon

    The graph on how women and men view physical attractiveness was pretty shocking. We can all see how women obviously find a half dozen other things about men (status, money, personality, etc.) more important than looks. I had always assumed that was because women were much less picky and were able to see some attractive qualities in even the frumpiest of guys. But women are absolutely brutal in what they find attractive. They found 81% of men to be below average, versus guys finding just 40% of women below average. Which, I guess, just reinforces tje initial point - women really can get past looks. They subjectively think almost all of us are ugly, but they will happily marry/date an objectively ugly guy, no problem.

    Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard

  37. @Dumbo
    The fact that there's people who pay real money to read people like Yglesias shows that P.T. Barnum was right, "there's a sucker born every minute".

    Of course, I have no idea who would read things as what's published in Vox even for free.

    Pay to be brainwashed with drivel.

    Sometimes, human stupidity baffles the mind.

    Replies: @guest007, @AndrewR, @Prester John

    By Democrat standards, he’s smart and insightful, and shows some capacity for original thought. But that’s a low bar, obviously.

  38. @Polistra
    @Buzz Mohawk

    If only there were a way to contribute funds to the more edgy pundits without losing one's anonymity.

    I guess Bitcoin permits that? I can't afford any Bitcoins though.

    Meanwhile, if Matt has nearly a million dollars that's ten cents for each 'New American" he wants to let in, right?? Sounds legit to me.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @dcthrowback, @S. Anonyia

    He only wants ten million more immigrants? That’s news to me. Did you mean per year?

    • Replies: @Polistra
    @AndrewR

    Good God my math sucks. But I knew someone would correct me if necessary ;)

  39. There’s probably a word that describes my feeling learning that a self-loathing whitey-bashing butt-pimple like Yglesias is clocking any six-figure sum – from unwarranted to bloody outrageous – to regurgitate whatever the conventional wisdom of the moment happens to be. But it’s not likely to be a very polite word.

    It’s bad enough that our Millenial Bolsheviks…. who foment the sort of revolution that puts a brick through my window and pressures my bank to close my account, yet allows them to pamper their tootsies with warm woolen socks while luxuriously farting through silk drawers all through the bitter cold winter…. get to make the hated Capitalist cash register go ka-ching, and cough up hundreds of thousands of dollars to remind the rest of us that we have no right to live our lives and raise our children we see fit; but to bang their spoon on the high chair demanding (a) a daily transcript of everybody else getting the same deal, and of course (b) more money, is too much. Innat something? – how they hate perfidious capitalism, but loveloveLOVE glorious cash?

    It’s long past time for a venue, a platform, an app, a pay-wall boondoggle or what-have-you, alerting the hoi polloi to the inescapable reality of Leftist Privilege; which dwarfs every other sort of “privilege” animating America’s editorial writers and op-edders. I know what you’re about to say: but we already have one! – it’s called the Unz Review. True, but I’m referring to one that stuffs my pockets with glorious cash for middle-manning the deal; when I’m not otherwise striking heroic 21st-century-Zenger poses.

    • Replies: @anon
    @Ragno


    There’s probably a word that describes my feeling learning that a self-loathing whitey-bashing butt-pimple like Yglesias is clocking any six-figure sum
     
    Self-loathing? Yglesias seems rather proud of his jewish identity.

    from unwarranted to bloody outrageous – to regurgitate whatever the conventional wisdom of the moment happens to be.
     
    He is a skilled sophist. I would venture to say he is a valuable asset to his team.

    Replies: @Ragno

  40. Reading this article, some of the numbers were shocking – Yglesias only has 9,800 paying subscribers? If hardly anyone is actually paying attention to what he writes, why does everyone act like everyone else is paying attention to him? Are other prominent writers getting similarly low numbers? Also, $8/month sounds cheap, but it is actually insanely expensive because it is just one writer. If you cobbled together a newspaper/magazine worth of your favorite writers, what would the monthly charge be?
    And finally, are we supposed to just pretend like a liberal Latinx Jew who wrote for Vox is a “White guy who can’t work at traditional publications”?

  41. @Anon

    But how do you get new readers?
     
    By going on podcasts that aren't behind paywalls.

    Replies: @dcthrowback

    twatter for your free thoughts, substack for the paid ones + comments. (whether you reply or like twatter comments is up to you, but def stealing/incorporating ideas from the smart twitterati/commentariat seems like a wise idea).

    I dislike Ydiot more than most so it’s highly amusing to me he “lost” $500k by not betting on himself.

    yarvin/Alexander should have about 10x more followers on S/S than yglesias fwiw.

  42. @Polistra
    @Buzz Mohawk

    If only there were a way to contribute funds to the more edgy pundits without losing one's anonymity.

    I guess Bitcoin permits that? I can't afford any Bitcoins though.

    Meanwhile, if Matt has nearly a million dollars that's ten cents for each 'New American" he wants to let in, right?? Sounds legit to me.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @dcthrowback, @S. Anonyia

    This was Pax Dickinson’s task when he partnered w/ Charles Johnson in 2016 before their operation (wesearchr + just news) blew up.

    Until then, I’ll launder through VDare.

    Speaking of, Steve, when you headed to the new castle for some grog?

  43. “I presume “lock-in” means, in effect, monopoly.”

    If by that you mean “monopoly over the writer’s content” then yes. If you work for the Times, they control what you can publish elsewhere. And anything you write for them belongs to them. Substack isn’t doing that.

  44. …. it seems like anyone on any newsletter platform runs the risk of the same problem Doyle (somebody with the pronoun “they” who is mad that Yglesias, Greenwald, etc. are on Substack) identified in their first blog post. If you’re on someone else’s platform, then other people will be there too — perhaps even making money — and you may hate them.

    This is something that would have been considered funny during much of the 20th century and is now considered a legitimate complaint.

  45. @AnotherDad
    @Abe


    The 3% fee is because these payments are almost all via credit card (Zelle is by design a bank account-to-bank account transaction). 3% is almost the bare minimum of what the credit card monopolies charge the merchant and is very largely due to the fact that the merchant gets his money now while the credit card owner doesn’t have to pay anything for up to 30 days. Take it up with money changers at the temple if this arrangement makes you unhappy.
     
    The point is *you* pay an additional 3%.

    They are an additional financial intermediary ... taking an additional financial cut ... and you pay for it.

    PayPal is doing--with credit cards--what credit card companies ought to have been required by law to do for online transactions, a secure transaction portal ... and then charging you money for it.

    A clever scam, but never understood the weird consumer side love for this. My thought: "why the hell do i want these people also dipping into my wallet? There's no good answer but nonetheless there are people who use it, heck who love it. There's a scout mom in our troop who pushed for PayPal payments ... so we can donate 3% of our scouting budget to some tech company.

    Replies: @ic1000, @TomSchmidt

    > There’s a scout mom in our troop who pushed for PayPal payments … so we can donate 3% of our scouting budget to some tech company.

    You underestimate how difficult and awkward it can be for the Treasurer to consistently and pleasantly collect agreed-upon balances due from the membership of a volunteer organization. We concluded that PayPal’s 3% was worth it, in terms of reduced wear and tear on that officer.

    • Agree: Muggles
    • Replies: @guest007
    @ic1000

    Do you realize how many people to everything with credit/debit card. The alternative is people mailing checks and many people will not put that much effort into helping a small organization.

  46. As Yglesias told me…, the deal he took from Substack is actually costing him money, for now. Yglesias says he has around 9,800 paying subscribers, which might generate around $860,000 a year. Had he not taken the Substack payment, he would keep 90% of that, or $775,000, but under the current deal, where he’ll keep the $250,000 plus 15% of the gross subscription revenue, his take will be closer to $380,000.

    Peter Kafka should learn about “risk.” Prior to making the leap onto Substack, did Yglesias know how many readers would turn into $80/year subscribers? That $250k floor was worth a lot to him. Obviously.

    Lazy Vox reporter.

    • Replies: @Forbes
    @ic1000


    Lazy Ignorant Vox reporter.
     
    the deal he took from Substack is actually costing him money

    It can't cost you money you never had.

    Reporter discovers trade-offs, claims hindsight is prescient, 20/20.
    , @Almost Missouri
    @ic1000

    Ah thanks. That section of the article didn't make sense to me. Now I see that that, as usual, it was because the journalist was mischaracterizing/lying about the subject.

  47. @ic1000
    @AnotherDad

    > There’s a scout mom in our troop who pushed for PayPal payments … so we can donate 3% of our scouting budget to some tech company.

    You underestimate how difficult and awkward it can be for the Treasurer to consistently and pleasantly collect agreed-upon balances due from the membership of a volunteer organization. We concluded that PayPal's 3% was worth it, in terms of reduced wear and tear on that officer.

    Replies: @guest007

    Do you realize how many people to everything with credit/debit card. The alternative is people mailing checks and many people will not put that much effort into helping a small organization.

  48. the deal he took from Substack is actually costing him money, for now.

    Spoken like a true tax collector.

    What the hell does “it costs him money” even mean? He’s not putting money on the table to pay for something. He’s just making less money.

  49. Oh crap, Steve is thinking about moving to Substack. Now we’re in for it. Five dollars per month to comment. Used to be, we could vent for free. Soon, free speech will cost us a venti.

  50. P.T. Barnum was right, “there’s a sucker born every minute”.

    On the off chance that Heather Cox Richardson missed your post, we’ll have Wikipedia put it into historical context:

    Barnum’s biographer Arthur H. Saxon tried to track down when Barnum had uttered this phrase but was unable to verify it. According to Saxon, “There’s no contemporary account of it, or even any suggestion that the word ‘sucker’ was used in the derogatory sense in his day. Barnum was just not the type to disparage his patrons.”[1]

    In a slightly different form, the phrase shows up in the January 1806 European Magazine: “It was the observation of one of the tribe of Levi, to whom some person had expressed his astonishment at his being able to sell his damaged and worthless commodities, ‘That there vash von fool born every minute.’”[7]

  51. @Altai
    All this information is available for free and there are still this many people who pay this amount of money for it? Maybe if you're interested in patronising original research but what are you patronising Yglesias for? Him slowly realising things most people already understand? There isn't anything novel and interesting he could possibly say. 100k subs?

    Sounds a bit suspicious in terms of subscriber numbers.

    Replies: @Realist, @I, Libertine, @Prof. Woland, @James J O'Meara

    You’d have to pay me to read Yglesias. What a dope. Here’s an example that stuck in my memory. Would you pay to watch as he learns, to his amazement, that Jones was a more common surname in Wales than in England in 1881?

  52. Anonymous[401] • Disclaimer says:

    The 2.9% fee that payment companies like Stripe and Paypal charge is ridiculously after all these years

    Both are simply passing along the merchant fees from the bigs (Mastercard, Bankofamericacard/VISA, etc.) . If we got away from credit cards, things on-line would be cheaper. But doing it this way evades the regulatory costs of sitting on money, basically, of being a bank, which Substack along with a thousand other astral-projection capitalists are at the moment happier not paying. Just wait until the regulated telecoms start taking a fee for 1’s and 0’s of opinion journalism cross-domain from Verizon Views or Comcast Colloquy (which they probably should, IMO; we were better off accepting that the Internet was for serious business, and also for ostracized nerds, the twin pillars of digital economy).

  53. Anonymous[401] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anon
    I think authors like you are really cut out for Substack - but would they let you on?

    Replies: @Ed, @Anonymous

    I think this should be Steve’s next social experiment/performance art: setting up a Substack profile, to see how long before he can single-handedly destroy that gold rush.

    They do have an audition or screening process, so despite the deceptive impression of broadcast live right away, the input of bank/ACH info gives them a handle on your private area that “creators” from Blogger or WordPress usually escape. It’s far more skin in the game than the newer-breed social media sites like Twitter and Facebook require via (easily forged) SMS numbers.

    Ron Unz ought to make the account with his credit card and give Steve the password, on the condition of double-secret probation if Steve shares the password to @SecondGentlemanParody, or exceeds allowance of 3 golf posts per year. Then as soon as it goes live, I will register the AntiSteve.substack.com domain & profit from the back catalog. Incidentally, I think it is reasonable for Ron to earn points on that, so let’s have your people talk to my nameless people.

  54. Am thoroughly enjoying Substack and am making money from subs as well. It’s going much better than I expected it to go.

    The issue of Substack Fatigue will arise as there will be too many options for people to spend 5 bucks per on each one every month. That’s why bundling will come about soon enough. I’ve spoken to the CEO about this and they have planned for it already.

    niccolo.substack.com

    • Replies: @Clyde
    @Niccolo Soldo


    Am thoroughly enjoying Substack and am making money from subs as well. It’s going much better than I expected it to go.
     
    I took a look at your substack blog. The entries average 25 comments each. Based on the number of comments I cannot see how you are getting very many paid subscribers. With all due respect....

    While Matt Taibbi is getting average 600 comments with 5 entries at over 1000. This definitely signals oodles of paying subscribers.
    https://taibbi.substack.com/archive?sort=new

    Replies: @Niccolo Soldo

  55. Anon[474] • Disclaimer says:

    “I dislike Ydiot more than most so it’s highly amusing to me he “lost” $500k by not betting on himself.”

    I imagine it was more a bet that journalism and writing articles on the internet aren’t highly valued by the market – a reasonable one, really.

    I am basically Steve politically but I think Yglesias is a great writer and thinker – a bit of an advert for philosophy as a major. If you’re going to read anyone on the left at all, he should be one of them. The fact he couldn’t really stay at Vox speaks poorly of them and well of him.

    I usually find I agree with all his reasoning but not some of his opening premises.

    I remember him quoting approvingly the logic of some GOP voter with a very similar view to mine on Trump: not a nice man, wouldn’t want him to marry my daughter etc etc, but issues like reducing abortion are just way more important than that so she was voting Trump. He didn’t agree with her on abortion but other than that he saw her logic completely and agreed with it. I am like that with Yglesias.

    • Replies: @Peter Akuleyev
    @Anon

    issues like reducing abortion are just way more important than that so she was voting Trump.

    Of course, and very predictably, abortions actually started rising under Trump, for the first time since 2006. But that is part of a larger issue that conservatives tend to prefer prohibition and moral posturing to simply practical education and incentives to behave better. And yes, I am fully aware that the left has decided to follow the same counterproductive path on race issues. I suppose that approach works much better for fundraising from your base.

  56. @Dumbo
    The fact that there's people who pay real money to read people like Yglesias shows that P.T. Barnum was right, "there's a sucker born every minute".

    Of course, I have no idea who would read things as what's published in Vox even for free.

    Pay to be brainwashed with drivel.

    Sometimes, human stupidity baffles the mind.

    Replies: @guest007, @AndrewR, @Prester John

    “Sometimes, human stupidity baffles the mind.”

    What Mencken said about never going broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public probably can be extended out to the rest of humanity.

    When you come down to it, most people are in one way or another just plain–stupid!

    • Replies: @Odin
    @Prester John


    What Mencken said about never going broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public probably can be extended out to the rest of humanity.
     
    Not only can it be extended to the mass of humanity: it was so applied from the beginning. Here's Mencken's statement, as per the Yale Book of Quotations:

    No one in this world, so far as I know -- and I have searched the records for years, and employed agents to help me -- has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people.
     
    It's explicitly about "this world", not Americans in particular.

    It's bemusing to watch from Canada as American speakers so cheerfully adopt the down-with-Americans misquote.

  57. Matt Yglessias generating $860k is generating a lot of bloggers’ takes

  58. ***

    Historian Heather Cox Richardson is a straight white woman who lives in the same fishing village in Maine as her great-great-grandmother. Her commentary on current events from the perspective of a specialist in 19th Century American history has 350,000 subscribers, largely liberal older women. She charges $5 per month to participate in her comments.

    ***

    It is highly unusual for a person of Heather Cox Richardson’s age to have a great-great-grandmother who is still alive, let alone living in the same out-of-the-way fishing village! That does help explain, however, how Heather Cox Richardson is able to commentate “on current events from the perspective of a specialist in 19th Century American history;” she merely has to go to her great-great-grandmother and ask her for her 19th Century American perspective– assuming the old girl is not demented, at this late date!?!

    • LOL: Paperback Writer
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @D. K.

    (De)compose yourself. Steve may have made an error, but it wasn't grave.


    ...the same fishing village in Maine as her great-great-grandmother.

     

    Question for you: how long has Maine enjoyed statehood?



    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLPQRTdkzrU

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

  59. @Another Canadian
    Rod Dreher is trying to monetise his existing readership by starting a pay platform on Substack focusing on his religious writing, his sweet spot. He saves his political blithering and emotional meltdowns for the public at TAC where he occasionally does product placement and other advertising for his Substack platform. I would be interested in whether he's been successful getting new readers over to Substack from his product pitches on TAC.

    Replies: @Verymuchalive, @Paperback Writer, @MEH 0910, @James Forrestal

    Daniel Larison recently got fired from The American Conservative and subsequently joined Antiwar.com as a contributing editor. It appears that he moved his Eunomia blog to Substack in July. It doesn’t appear to be behind a paywall.

  60. @AnotherDad

    Matt Yglesias's Substack Generates $860k in Revenue Per Year
     
    LOL.

    This is a crazy world.

    Replies: @epebble, @Ed

    Absolutely not crazy compared to what I feel when I see a man or woman or couple (sometimes with kids) roll down in a nice looking late model Mercedes SUV at the parking lot waiting for a cardboard box full of food and thanking the volunteer worker for “helping to feed the family in these difficult times”. I have watched it so many times (on TV) in so many cities, I am truly perplexed. When I try to “research” this on internet, the usual phrase I read is “Cash Poor”. i.e. The family (usually) has large income and spends it all (and then some) for extravagant lifestyle. Once the income stops for any reason, they quickly hit the food banks.

  61. Kids won’t be going to DC public schools much longer

    • Replies: @anon
    @Danindc


    Kids won’t be going to DC public schools much longer.
     
    Why is that?
  62. @ic1000

    As Yglesias told me..., the deal he took from Substack is actually costing him money, for now. Yglesias says he has around 9,800 paying subscribers, which might generate around $860,000 a year. Had he not taken the Substack payment, he would keep 90% of that, or $775,000, but under the current deal, where he’ll keep the $250,000 plus 15% of the gross subscription revenue, his take will be closer to $380,000.
     
    Peter Kafka should learn about "risk." Prior to making the leap onto Substack, did Yglesias know how many readers would turn into $80/year subscribers? That $250k floor was worth a lot to him. Obviously.

    Lazy Vox reporter.

    Replies: @Forbes, @Almost Missouri

    Lazy Ignorant Vox reporter.

    the deal he took from Substack is actually costing him money

    It can’t cost you money you never had.

    Reporter discovers trade-offs, claims hindsight is prescient, 20/20.

    • Agree: ic1000
  63. By Peter Kafka

    Can there be a better byline for a reporter who covers this beat?

    Many of the vast 21st Century Silicon Valley fortunes have been built on the philosophy that you get a lot of users first and then figure out how to make money off them later.

    Before the Internet, this “philosophy” worked for Post-It Notes, loan sharking, and opium derivatives. At supermarkets like A&P, it was called a “loss leader”.

    If you’re on someone else’s platform, then other people will be there too — perhaps even making money — and you may hate them.

    Not quite “hate”, but F Scott Fitzgerald poked fun at Lothrop Stoddard in The Great Gatsby. They had the same publisher.

    • Replies: @James Forrestal
    @Reg Cæsar


    ...F Scott Fitzgerald poked fun at Lothrop Stoddard in The Great Gatsby.
     
    Yeah there are definitely some themes in Gatsby that are helpful in promoting pseudoscientific Boasian race denialism/open borders:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Gatsby#Race_and_displacement

    On a related note: The Great Gatsby was published in 1925. Despite heavy promotion, mostly glowing reviews, a stage adaptation and a silent film version, over the first 15 years after its publication, it sold a grand total of... 25,000 copies.

    So what happened? The "invisible hand" suddenly reached out and grabbed Fitzgerald's masterpiece? No, the "Council on Books in Wartime" bought up 155,000 copies and gave them away, mostly to GIs -- instantly septupling the novel's total sales. What was the CBW?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_on_Books_in_Wartime
    "The Council on Books in Wartime (1942–1946) was an American non-profit organization founded by booksellers, publishers, librarians, authors, and others"

    That's pretty vague. One might suspect that "others" is carrying a lot of weight here.

    "The Council co-operated with the Office of War Information (OWI) and other government agencies, but was itself a voluntary, unpaid, non-governmental organization.["

    Uh huh. And "Freedom" House is officially an "NGO" -- that gets almost 90% of its funding from the US government.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

  64. The preceding, elegant, anti- public education commentary has been brought to you by the Western Coalition for Small Government (i.e. me), as a public service.

  65. @D. K.
    ***

    Historian Heather Cox Richardson is a straight white woman who lives in the same fishing village in Maine as her great-great-grandmother. Her commentary on current events from the perspective of a specialist in 19th Century American history has 350,000 subscribers, largely liberal older women. She charges $5 per month to participate in her comments.

    ***

    It is highly unusual for a person of Heather Cox Richardson's age to have a great-great-grandmother who is still alive, let alone living in the same out-of-the-way fishing village! That does help explain, however, how Heather Cox Richardson is able to commentate "on current events from the perspective of a specialist in 19th Century American history;" she merely has to go to her great-great-grandmother and ask her for her 19th Century American perspective-- assuming the old girl is not demented, at this late date!?!

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    (De)compose yourself. Steve may have made an error, but it wasn’t grave.

    …the same fishing village in Maine as her great-great-grandmother.

    Question for you: how long has Maine enjoyed statehood?

    • Replies: @Paperback Writer
    @Reg Cæsar

    Continuing the nitpicking. Reg Caesar: can any state ENJOY statehood in a dystopia?

    Replies: @International Jew, @Reg Cæsar

  66. V says:

    So this article does a better job of characterizing the Substack Pro deal than the people who are leaving Substack do. But I think the ‘real story’ here is funnier and sadder than it seems.

    Substack knows newsletter subscriptions, and probably has a pretty good sense of how many people will subscribe to various authors. There are a lot of authors not on the platform who underestimate how much revenue they would get on the platform. And so Substack Pro is Substack going to those people, betting them that they’ll get more readers than they think they will, and then winning big. [If Yglesias had known how many people would subscribe, he would have joined Substack and not taken the Pro deal!]

    But imagine you’re not Yglesias or Alexander or Richardson; you’re Annalee Newitz, and nobody wants to pay to read what you write. When you hear “$250k for a year”, your eyes have dollar signs in them, because that’s way more than you could get in subscriptions, and Substack not offering you a Pro deal feels like corrupt cronyism. But… Yglesias lost $400k taking the deal! He transferred risk to the counterparty with more information, and unsurprisingly the counterparty with more information decided to bet on Yglesias instead of Newitz.

  67. @AnotherDad

    Matt Yglesias's Substack Generates $860k in Revenue Per Year
     
    LOL.

    This is a crazy world.

    Replies: @epebble, @Ed

    In a a country of 300M there are 10k people willing to spend $8 a month for access to a writer they like. Seems fairly normal to me.

  68. “they, them, Black” clearly need a platform that forces White males to pay for there newsletters as clearly free market choice is racist.

    In Denver, the city council is looking to racially socialize the marijuana industry. What they don’t explain is the complexity of indoor, hydroponic farming of pot. Turns out you have to be both botanically and technology smart person. https://www.9news.com/article/money/business/social-equity-denver-marijuana-industry/73-720f3989-d5fa-4151-a28d-b174e57032d4

  69. @Buzz Mohawk

    Maybe some smart guy in Silicon Valley can figure out the reverse process: make money off existing users first, then get more users later.
     
    Is that a hint aimed at Ron Unz?

    Seriously, this kind of stuff means little to most of us mere readers out here. First off, it seems kind of funny that a guy like Matt Y. can be important at all when he has only 9,800 paying subscribers. But, what do I know?

    This is, legitimately, a subject dear to Steve Sailer's heart, though he apparently still manages to make a decent living as a writer for UR and Taki's, with our additional contributions that he is allowed to solicit. I would venture to guess that he has more readers than Matt, but that is only because I don't read Matt and would not even know about Matt if I didn't read Steve. See how this works?

    Anyway, 8 bucks a month seems pretty cheap. Even those of us who randomly send cash to Steve have been paying way more than that. And we encourage all of the rest of you lazy SOBs to do the same. Together, we can generate more income for Steve than even Matt Yglesias gets.

    Replies: @Polistra, @SunBakedSuburb

    “See how this works?”

    No, I don’t. But I do have some advice for Steve: Abandon objective truth because it’s mostly bullshit. Journalism is a wretched profession teeming with wretches. Craft your own mythology to fit various mediums. Get in touch with Desert Inn Steve; he’s the best Steve. After he shakes off the Mormon morphine daze you two will become one and have a grand creative adventure.

    • LOL: Captain Tripps
  70. Anonymous[234] • Disclaimer says:

    Heather Cox Richardson

    Oh god! Out of curiosity, I read a few entries (penetrating the paywall is not that difficult). This is boring to death. At least Yglesias or Alexander or Greenwald or Sullivan are all talented writers. That lady’s writing (all of which is an insufferable leftist propaganda, non-stop) is about as inspired as bookkeeper’s notes.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Anonymous

    There is a market for boring liberalism, evidently.

    Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist, @Peter Akuleyev

    , @Peter Akuleyev
    @Anonymous

    Heather Cox Richardson, for better or worse, seems to be the only genuine American (WASP, descended from the founding colonists) mentioned in the article. Her writing and thoughts are a microcosm of the American tragedy. She is more erudite, more philosophically grounded and more temperate than anyone else on sub-stack (or Unz for that matter), but ultimately convinced that her superior moral values will inevitably prevail and blind to how she is opening the door to her own destruction. She reminds me of my New England liberal Republican grandparents and their friends, and the whole WASP hegemony that was swept aside in the 1960s.

    Replies: @ATBOTL, @Anon, @Paperback Writer

  71. @Clyde
    Who is dumb enough to pay Mathew Yglesias 80 dollars per year? Substack calls itself a newsletter service because you get the latest from their writers in the form of an emailed newsletter...lol lol lol...... Yes, you can also read and comment right at the Yglesias substack site. Maybe the comments and interaction in the so called Yglesias community is what reels them suckers in
    I am fairly sure an annual digital only subscription is not more than 80 dollars for the NY Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal.

    Unz should start a similar "newsletter" site and call it Sub-Unz.

    Replies: @Dignan, @James J O'Meara

    WSJ online subscription is around $40 per month. Catering to the financial markets really pays.

    • Replies: @Clyde
    @Dignan

    https://www.wsjsale-subscription.com/products/the-wall-street-journal-2-years-digital-subscription

    Wall Street Journal --- 2 year digital subscription $139!

  72. @Altai
    All this information is available for free and there are still this many people who pay this amount of money for it? Maybe if you're interested in patronising original research but what are you patronising Yglesias for? Him slowly realising things most people already understand? There isn't anything novel and interesting he could possibly say. 100k subs?

    Sounds a bit suspicious in terms of subscriber numbers.

    Replies: @Realist, @I, Libertine, @Prof. Woland, @James J O'Meara

    I enjoy patronizing things that either benefit me or advocate on my behalf. Trump had 75 million voters. If he could figure out how to get them to donate of spend $10 per month on right-wing organizations and causes it would be a game changer. Make it $100 and it would be a landslide. It is clear that the right needs to build their own institutions and that will take money; including banks, media, communications platforms, etc. The Republicans will never close the billionaire gap but by getting upper-middle-and lower middle class supporters they could severely blunt the left’s paid army of Caliban’s. It would also make the left more careful how they treat people on the right. Right now, there are no boycotts or sustained protests of institutions that are openly plotting our destruction. We have a lot more power then we think.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    @Prof. Woland

    Every ten seconds I get some sort of cheap scam appeal for money from him. Know what would have brought him more money was being more active when in office.

    Replies: @Prof. Woland

  73. @Prester John
    @Dumbo

    "Sometimes, human stupidity baffles the mind."

    What Mencken said about never going broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public probably can be extended out to the rest of humanity.

    When you come down to it, most people are in one way or another just plain--stupid!

    Replies: @Odin

    What Mencken said about never going broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public probably can be extended out to the rest of humanity.

    Not only can it be extended to the mass of humanity: it was so applied from the beginning. Here’s Mencken’s statement, as per the Yale Book of Quotations:

    No one in this world, so far as I know — and I have searched the records for years, and employed agents to help me — has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people.

    It’s explicitly about “this world”, not Americans in particular.

    It’s bemusing to watch from Canada as American speakers so cheerfully adopt the down-with-Americans misquote.

  74. @Anonymous

    Heather Cox Richardson
     
    Oh god! Out of curiosity, I read a few entries (penetrating the paywall is not that difficult). This is boring to death. At least Yglesias or Alexander or Greenwald or Sullivan are all talented writers. That lady's writing (all of which is an insufferable leftist propaganda, non-stop) is about as inspired as bookkeeper's notes.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Peter Akuleyev

    There is a market for boring liberalism, evidently.

    • Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist
    @Steve Sailer

    There is a market for liberal liturgy. Many people, as they get older, especially, find the repetition of familiar words comforting. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but it's better if the words are true in the first place.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    , @Peter Akuleyev
    @Steve Sailer

    “Sober and boring” is what a functional democracy requires. The sensationalism, outrage du jour and radical posturing on both the right and left is very damaging. Part of it is market driven of course, every writer has to get attention and clicks in a crowded market, but it is also a product of our failed demographics. A United States that had stayed majority WASP, German and Scandinavian would not have sunk to the depths America is at today.

  75. I still don’t understand how say even FB or Twitter are worth what people say they’re worth.

    FB does a few billion a year in ad revenue…..most under 30s I’ve met barely use it…..and under 25s it drops further….FB is luckier than Twitter in that it makes some $$ from its game business Mafia Wars etc offers premium upgrades idiot gamers can “buy”…

    Twitter has…..????

    I don’t use Twitter….does it even have ads? How does Jack Dorsey make cash off it?? Serious question.

  76. I finally figured out the answer to Steve’s headline. Dumb conformists have money. The same people giving Matt boat money probably have whole Ikea sets — and would also drop Matt in a heartbeat if he said anything true.
    However, since I am enduring WDET pleading for money, it pleases me to divert their fundraising energy and write a check. I might remember to date this one.
    This is the real answer. We can’t be like Matt, we can’t have our own apps, but we can hate normies and ceeare a perverse Hellfire Club anti-sunstack or whatever it’s called.

  77. @Polistra
    Incidentally, your important graph illuminating homicide trends in 2020 included some color indexing that didn't quite make sense to me. So I edited it for your future use, should you agree that this version is clearer. If you don't agree, please ignore.

    https://i.ibb.co/LSy0gsh/SAILER-2021-02-19-at-11-27-56-PM.png

    I actually don't think the blue or green add anything and I'll happily replace both with black or grey if you like.

    Replies: @ic1000, @Steve Sailer

    Steve is too damn productive. That was dozens of posts ago.

    Day-By-Day Graph of Exactly When 2020’s Huge Murder Surge Began: the First Weekend of the Mostly Peaceful Riots
    by Steve Sailer • February 19, 2021

    The Upper Class Media would have caught up with his scoop by now, were it not for the epidemic of xenophobia.

  78. @Prof. Woland
    @Altai

    I enjoy patronizing things that either benefit me or advocate on my behalf. Trump had 75 million voters. If he could figure out how to get them to donate of spend $10 per month on right-wing organizations and causes it would be a game changer. Make it $100 and it would be a landslide. It is clear that the right needs to build their own institutions and that will take money; including banks, media, communications platforms, etc. The Republicans will never close the billionaire gap but by getting upper-middle-and lower middle class supporters they could severely blunt the left's paid army of Caliban's. It would also make the left more careful how they treat people on the right. Right now, there are no boycotts or sustained protests of institutions that are openly plotting our destruction. We have a lot more power then we think.

    Replies: @J.Ross

    Every ten seconds I get some sort of cheap scam appeal for money from him. Know what would have brought him more money was being more active when in office.

    • Replies: @Prof. Woland
    @J.Ross

    Fair enough. I gave money to Trump too and get dripped on by the same people who are by now, mostly people who obtained his donor list. But even that should tell you something. The fact that you gave makes you much more likely to give more later on so you are marked. But we are in a war and you might have to give more than $10. Some of it will be used effectively and some not but unless the right begins to build its own organizations, institutions and communication networks we don’t stand a chance.

    Trump was able to win the Presidency because he ran on immigration. He was the only Republican to do so precisely because he had a billion dollars handy that he could have used to fund his own campaign rather than raise money from the usual suspects. The conundrum that all whites and their elected representatives face is that they only seem to raise money from business interests precisely because individuals don’t pony up enough of their own money. If they did so, it would open the doors to many good candidates that would do a good job but cannot win the financial primaries.

    Liberals have some of the same dynamics within their party which is why they have always pushed for ‘campaign finance reform’ which involves capping donations and giving free air time to candidates. By the way, raising money would also build the secondary and tertiary organizations that would give further structure on the right. The NRA was taken out (or took itself out) of the elections this year and look at what that did. Now imagine 100 fully funded right wing advocacy organizations all pushing for our interests. Now go back to my $100 per month x 75 million donors and see how that would change things.

  79. @Polistra
    @Buzz Mohawk

    If only there were a way to contribute funds to the more edgy pundits without losing one's anonymity.

    I guess Bitcoin permits that? I can't afford any Bitcoins though.

    Meanwhile, if Matt has nearly a million dollars that's ten cents for each 'New American" he wants to let in, right?? Sounds legit to me.

    Replies: @AndrewR, @dcthrowback, @S. Anonyia

    Agreed, there needs to be a way to donate that is MORE anonymous.

    Older people don’t need to worry about getting cancelled for quiet donations, but with the way things are spiraling, us millennials cannot be sure. Should we ever become important, who’s to say our entire financial history couldn’t be publicized and/or scrutinized?

  80. @Dr. DoomNGloom
    The paywall is a moat that keep out the SJW lynch mob. Substack, Locals, others? Seems a sane business model in these trigger happy times.

    I've resisted paying to read just a single writer. It adds up fast if you support more than one. In the old days, you'd shell out the subscription to a magazine or newspaper and get access to the lot of them.

    Replies: @guest007

    But magazines and their internet equivalents just use the gig model. Look at how few of them have any influence. Once a writers has climbed the ladder of gig writing and maybe a paying job on an internet site, then they go to Substack to make money off of their brand.

  81. @ATBOTL
    Matthew Iglesias is the kind of "journalist" who should not be on Substack. Now we find out he's getting paid extra money that others are not getting. Looks like Glenn is repeating the problems with his previous project, bringing on board people who fundamentally support the establishment and want to destroy free speech and real journalism. How long until Substack has a coup where woke and pro-system "journalists" seize control and expel the real journalists?

    Replies: @guest007

    One does not seem to understand the model. Substack does not have work journalist to sieze control. It just has a back-office that supplies writers a way to get paid. The attack plane of substack seems to be very limited with no advertisers/no inhouse writers, etc.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @guest007

    So all Substack has to do is never hire any people who might potentially become Woke?

    Replies: @guest007

  82. So, Steve, in your role as “I read The Slave-Owners Daily so you don’t have to” Superhero, any thoughts on this?

    A New York Supreme Court Judge last week excoriated the New York Times, ruling that they used “reckless disregard” and “acted with actual malice”

    https://www.zerohedge.com/political/judge-rules-new-york-times-used-deceptive-disinformation-smear-project-veritas

    Any forecast on what page in Sulzburger’s rag it will appear on?

    Any forecast on what sort of damages this is worth?

  83. Off topic but since you were a respected IQ commentator. Is being dumb less stressful? https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2021-03/ps-las031921.php

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    @Mikeja

    Today I dorked up what should have been a simple task by not taking one measurement. Being dumb is less stressful until you have to do something. Smart people are stressed "at rest" because then they're overthinking.

    , @MEH 0910
    @Mikeja


    Is being dumb less stressful?
     
    https://ih1.redbubble.net/image.963904804.9990/flat,750x,075,f-pad,750x1000,f8f8f8.jpg
  84. @Anon
    OT

    This is a supercut of all the men-women, relationship and attraction, by race and age, where did marrieds first meet, etc., blog posts and articles out there. Most of it I've seen, but it's interesting to see it all together.

    The Masculinist #50: The Truth About Online Dating
    https://themasculinist.com/the-truth-about-online-dating/

    Replies: @anon, @Jon

    He has great economic analogies but leaves out the evolutionary angle that is mentioned here a lot. Hypergamy/hypergyny doesn’t appear in the text and, more understandably, neither does Dads vs. Cads. Perhaps their absence is a business decision, haha.

  85. @guest007
    @ATBOTL

    One does not seem to understand the model. Substack does not have work journalist to sieze control. It just has a back-office that supplies writers a way to get paid. The attack plane of substack seems to be very limited with no advertisers/no inhouse writers, etc.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    So all Substack has to do is never hire any people who might potentially become Woke?

    • Replies: @guest007
    @Steve Sailer

    It would be the public relations, external communications, or HR people who would become work. What Substack would probably have to worry about is an attack on their hosting contractor or the provider of plug-ins. Any company sitting on servers owned by AWS, Google, etc are vulnerable to being attacked there.

  86. @Anon
    OT

    This is a supercut of all the men-women, relationship and attraction, by race and age, where did marrieds first meet, etc., blog posts and articles out there. Most of it I've seen, but it's interesting to see it all together.

    The Masculinist #50: The Truth About Online Dating
    https://themasculinist.com/the-truth-about-online-dating/

    Replies: @anon, @Jon

    The graph on how women and men view physical attractiveness was pretty shocking. We can all see how women obviously find a half dozen other things about men (status, money, personality, etc.) more important than looks. I had always assumed that was because women were much less picky and were able to see some attractive qualities in even the frumpiest of guys. But women are absolutely brutal in what they find attractive. They found 81% of men to be below average, versus guys finding just 40% of women below average. Which, I guess, just reinforces tje initial point – women really can get past looks. They subjectively think almost all of us are ugly, but they will happily marry/date an objectively ugly guy, no problem.

    • Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard
    @Jon


    The graph on how women and men view physical attractiveness was pretty shocking.

     

    Go look at the covers of one hundred paperbacks in the, "bodice-ripper," genre.

    End of story.
  87. Someone needs to start a /ssg/ for Steve at /pol/. Drive traffic here and raise the level of discourse above trannie shill level.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    @Anonymous

    Pol is like all Joan Didion attacks and spam and people who weren't there in '16. Good stuff is still there but it disappears quickly under the force of leftist spam. It would make people grateful that the comments here are moderated. Besides, tv is pol now, has been for years.

  88. @Paperback Writer

    "How do you get new readers?"

     

    By offering a free version but not posting privs. All of them do, I think. If you really like the environment, you'll eventually bite.

    You make a lot of fun of Andrew Sullivan, rightly so, but he's great at engaging.

    Had he not taken the Substack payment, he would keep 90 percent of that, or $775,000, but under the current deal, where he’ll keep the $250,000 plus 15 percent of the gross subscription revenue, his take will be closer to $380,000.

     

    Boo fucking hoo. He should have known, the greedy little bastard.

    BTW, I'm the last person in the world to care what Bill Maher says, but he's saying some awfully off the rez things nowadays. He's sick of cancel culture and (gasp) gave a rant that it's impossible to ensure equality of outcomes. (Why?)

    Will he be cancelled?

    Replies: @Muggles

    Some complaints here seem off base.

    The 3% for cc processing fee is what most merchants have to pay, some less. Which is why Amazon wants to sell you their card. The “seller” pays it, as legally I believe it can’t be separately charged by the merchant (though a cash discount is allowed, hard to do via the Internet). It may be the credit card processers/cards who won’t let you break that out in the sales price.

    So Yglesiass took a one year “starter” deal for a guaranteed $250K payment plus 15%, rather than the standard 90% of the gross. So what? He made a choice to have SubStack assume the risk that he wouldn’t attract enough subscribers to hit that $250K.

    So he “could” have made more in year One but didn’t know the future with certainty. Welcome to the real marketplace where risk is a major factor in deals made.

    Now the year is up and he gets no guarantee. Good for him. Looks like he’ll make more.

    What is his beef? That he made a sub-optimal decision at the outset? Welcome to reality Matt.

    • Replies: @Paperback Writer
    @Muggles

    Since there isn't a button for "exactly" that's what I'll say: exactly. Most Americans would give their left nut for Yglesias's gig: get paid $250K to urinate weak center left tea while clad in jammies.

    I'd have a bit more sympathy if this'd happened to someone like Greenwald or Taibbi, but if it had, we wouldn't have heard about it because they aren't pee-stained whiners.

  89. @AndrewR
    @Polistra

    He only wants ten million more immigrants? That's news to me. Did you mean per year?

    Replies: @Polistra

    Good God my math sucks. But I knew someone would correct me if necessary 😉

  90. @Anonymous
    Someone needs to start a /ssg/ for Steve at /pol/. Drive traffic here and raise the level of discourse above trannie shill level.

    Replies: @J.Ross

    Pol is like all Joan Didion attacks and spam and people who weren’t there in ’16. Good stuff is still there but it disappears quickly under the force of leftist spam. It would make people grateful that the comments here are moderated. Besides, tv is pol now, has been for years.

  91. @Mikeja
    Off topic but since you were a respected IQ commentator. Is being dumb less stressful? https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2021-03/ps-las031921.php

    Replies: @J.Ross, @MEH 0910

    Today I dorked up what should have been a simple task by not taking one measurement. Being dumb is less stressful until you have to do something. Smart people are stressed “at rest” because then they’re overthinking.

  92. @Dignan
    @Clyde

    WSJ online subscription is around $40 per month. Catering to the financial markets really pays.

    Replies: @Clyde

  93. @Muggles
    @Paperback Writer

    Some complaints here seem off base.

    The 3% for cc processing fee is what most merchants have to pay, some less. Which is why Amazon wants to sell you their card. The "seller" pays it, as legally I believe it can't be separately charged by the merchant (though a cash discount is allowed, hard to do via the Internet). It may be the credit card processers/cards who won't let you break that out in the sales price.

    So Yglesiass took a one year "starter" deal for a guaranteed $250K payment plus 15%, rather than the standard 90% of the gross. So what? He made a choice to have SubStack assume the risk that he wouldn't attract enough subscribers to hit that $250K.

    So he "could" have made more in year One but didn't know the future with certainty. Welcome to the real marketplace where risk is a major factor in deals made.

    Now the year is up and he gets no guarantee. Good for him. Looks like he'll make more.

    What is his beef? That he made a sub-optimal decision at the outset? Welcome to reality Matt.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

    Since there isn’t a button for “exactly” that’s what I’ll say: exactly. Most Americans would give their left nut for Yglesias’s gig: get paid $250K to urinate weak center left tea while clad in jammies.

    I’d have a bit more sympathy if this’d happened to someone like Greenwald or Taibbi, but if it had, we wouldn’t have heard about it because they aren’t pee-stained whiners.

    • Thanks: Muggles
  94. @Reg Cæsar
    @D. K.

    (De)compose yourself. Steve may have made an error, but it wasn't grave.


    ...the same fishing village in Maine as her great-great-grandmother.

     

    Question for you: how long has Maine enjoyed statehood?



    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLPQRTdkzrU

    Replies: @Paperback Writer

    Continuing the nitpicking. Reg Caesar: can any state ENJOY statehood in a dystopia?

    • Replies: @International Jew
    @Paperback Writer

    You beat me to it.

    , @Reg Cæsar
    @Paperback Writer


    ...can any state ENJOY statehood in a dystopia?
     
    What's the difference between a dystopia and a vale of tears? (עֵמֶק הַבָּכָא for IJ.)


    https://www.petitpalais.paris.fr/sites/default/files/styles/380x490/public/ValleeLarmesP%20DUT%201437.JPG?itok=PcqQ2U4E&c=85ddf9b14480a24e095117938184a002


    To answer the (original) question, Maine has enjoyed, or at least experienced, statehood for 233 years. And 44 days. Kentucky and West Virginia, a few months less.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer, @very old statistician

  95. @Niccolo Soldo
    Am thoroughly enjoying Substack and am making money from subs as well. It's going much better than I expected it to go.

    The issue of Substack Fatigue will arise as there will be too many options for people to spend 5 bucks per on each one every month. That's why bundling will come about soon enough. I've spoken to the CEO about this and they have planned for it already.

    niccolo.substack.com

    Replies: @Clyde

    Am thoroughly enjoying Substack and am making money from subs as well. It’s going much better than I expected it to go.

    I took a look at your substack blog. The entries average 25 comments each. Based on the number of comments I cannot see how you are getting very many paid subscribers. With all due respect….

    While Matt Taibbi is getting average 600 comments with 5 entries at over 1000. This definitely signals oodles of paying subscribers.
    https://taibbi.substack.com/archive?sort=new

    • Replies: @Niccolo Soldo
    @Clyde

    That's because most of the commentary stays on Twitter.

  96. @Mikeja
    Off topic but since you were a respected IQ commentator. Is being dumb less stressful? https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2021-03/ps-las031921.php

    Replies: @J.Ross, @MEH 0910

    Is being dumb less stressful?

  97. @AnotherDad
    @Abe


    The 3% fee is because these payments are almost all via credit card (Zelle is by design a bank account-to-bank account transaction). 3% is almost the bare minimum of what the credit card monopolies charge the merchant and is very largely due to the fact that the merchant gets his money now while the credit card owner doesn’t have to pay anything for up to 30 days. Take it up with money changers at the temple if this arrangement makes you unhappy.
     
    The point is *you* pay an additional 3%.

    They are an additional financial intermediary ... taking an additional financial cut ... and you pay for it.

    PayPal is doing--with credit cards--what credit card companies ought to have been required by law to do for online transactions, a secure transaction portal ... and then charging you money for it.

    A clever scam, but never understood the weird consumer side love for this. My thought: "why the hell do i want these people also dipping into my wallet? There's no good answer but nonetheless there are people who use it, heck who love it. There's a scout mom in our troop who pushed for PayPal payments ... so we can donate 3% of our scouting budget to some tech company.

    Replies: @ic1000, @TomSchmidt

    Every year, Chase offers 5% back during one quarter for expenditures on PayPal. See if you cannot have your scout pack contribute to another scout pack, and vice-versa. I think there is a 3% fee, and the 5% is limited to $1500, but if you send them $1500, you get a $75 rebate while paying only $45 in fees.

    It’s a small way to recover some of their griftbux.

    • Replies: @very old statistician
    @TomSchmidt

    You used to be able to get AmEX points by investing in gold using your Amex credit card. You did not need to hold on to the gold for long at all - just an hour or two, if I remember correctly (long enough so that your exit from your gold position was a sale rather than a cancellation of the buy - sorry if my lingo is 70s lingo, but I actually do know what I am talking about).
    Not sure you can still do that.

    Anyway, the world works this way:
    there is overlap between people who work for corporations (including Substack) and who charge for things that should not incur additional charges ...
    and people who do not work for corporations and who have the energy to zero in on what seem like flaws in the system (in my example, getting airline points for investing in gold instead of in, say, a Schumpeterian animal spirits stock market) -----
    that overlap excludes people who do not have the energy to game the system, or who have better things to do with their lives.

    Sailer once explained it this way, there are actually very very intelligent people who go to Stanford MBA school in order to figure out the best way to successfully charge hundreds of thousands of people a couple of extra cents each in difficult to decipher "hidden costs" on their phone bills. Lots of those guys live in the finite number of nice houses on nice lots in Silicon Valley, and nobody driving by their houses knows that the home-owners of those beautiful homes have wasted their intellectual gifts, literally, on pennies.

    I explain it this way (with a little help from a very bright guy who used to write airport business books). Poor Taleb, before he decided it was too much work to try and be right on all the major issues the poor man still bloviates about, came close to seeing all this perfectly ---- there is not a fine line between people who want money and devote time to scamming and not being scammed in turn on the little marginal things in what we pay for modern conveniences, and people who want to live their life and not waste their time on the scam-anti-scam efforts:

    it is not a fine line at all.

    It is an existential difference in wisdom, as applied to money-grubbing or the ethical decision not to be a money-grubber. We are not talking here about the difference between eating at Arby's every day and eating well. Anyways, you don't get to call yourself a very very old statistician if you don't get that.

    Replies: @TomSchmidt

  98. This paywall sounds like a good business model for a veteran writer to extract money from his existing readers. But how do you get new readers?

    You sue Google for tortious business interference for erecting barriers between you and your potential customers all these years, and when a jury awards you one million compensatory plus ten million punitive you use the publicity to build your subscriber base.

    https://ungoogle.us/

  99. Matty Yglesias takes no prisoners, reveals to the world that he thinks that “white nationalists” are bad:

    This may surprise you, but I actually think white nationalists are bad.

    Talk about courage !But what about Black nationalists, Matty? I mean, they’ve got reverential capitalization going for them….

    https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1373326452637204481

  100. @Altai
    All this information is available for free and there are still this many people who pay this amount of money for it? Maybe if you're interested in patronising original research but what are you patronising Yglesias for? Him slowly realising things most people already understand? There isn't anything novel and interesting he could possibly say. 100k subs?

    Sounds a bit suspicious in terms of subscriber numbers.

    Replies: @Realist, @I, Libertine, @Prof. Woland, @James J O'Meara

    This whole article is stupid. Yglesias is a grifter running a scam. Substack is running a scam.

    Everything is a scam.

    Don’t you get it?

  101. Check out Torrance Stephens on substack.
    Black academic. Looks to be a fellow traveler on the Right.
    Does not like BLM, Wokeism, HR 1, cancel culture, CCP, Antifa, you name it.

    Rants: https://torrancestephensphd.substack.com/archive

    Adjunct prof at Clark Atlanta University.
    Was research prof at Emory for 14 years.
    Ooh . . . medical statistician.

    Research: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Torrance_Stephens

  102. @Clyde
    Who is dumb enough to pay Mathew Yglesias 80 dollars per year? Substack calls itself a newsletter service because you get the latest from their writers in the form of an emailed newsletter...lol lol lol...... Yes, you can also read and comment right at the Yglesias substack site. Maybe the comments and interaction in the so called Yglesias community is what reels them suckers in
    I am fairly sure an annual digital only subscription is not more than 80 dollars for the NY Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal.

    Unz should start a similar "newsletter" site and call it Sub-Unz.

    Replies: @Dignan, @James J O'Meara

    The Weekly Standard could start one, called The Sub-Standard.

    • Thanks: kaganovitch
    • Replies: @Clyde
    @James J O'Meara


    The Weekly Standard could start one, called The Sub-Standard.
     
    Very sub-Standard. This mag stopped publishing in 2018.
  103. anon[384] • Disclaimer says:
    @RichardTaylor
    What insight has Matt Yglesias ever provided? I don't get it. Why would 10,000 people pay to read standard open borders liberal talking points?

    Same with Andrew Sullivan. If a writer was a specialist in some field and you got to comment and interact, it might be worth something. Or, if you were supporting a dissident for a cause you believed in.

    Heather Cox Richardson is a standard New England liberal anti-White. Who are the loony women who pay to read conventional opinion?

    Replies: @anon

    What insight has Matt Yglesias ever provided? I don’t get it. Why would 10,000 people pay to read standard open borders liberal talking points?

    Because they have the same goals (open borders, destruction of the historic American nation). The talking points are weapons to use to achieve those goals.

    Yglesias produces weapons. He is very good at rhetoric and sophistry.

  104. @Danindc
    Kids won’t be going to DC public schools much longer

    Replies: @anon

    Kids won’t be going to DC public schools much longer.

    Why is that?

  105. anon[164] • Disclaimer says:
    @Ragno
    There's probably a word that describes my feeling learning that a self-loathing whitey-bashing butt-pimple like Yglesias is clocking any six-figure sum - from unwarranted to bloody outrageous - to regurgitate whatever the conventional wisdom of the moment happens to be. But it's not likely to be a very polite word.

    It's bad enough that our Millenial Bolsheviks.... who foment the sort of revolution that puts a brick through my window and pressures my bank to close my account, yet allows them to pamper their tootsies with warm woolen socks while luxuriously farting through silk drawers all through the bitter cold winter.... get to make the hated Capitalist cash register go ka-ching, and cough up hundreds of thousands of dollars to remind the rest of us that we have no right to live our lives and raise our children we see fit; but to bang their spoon on the high chair demanding (a) a daily transcript of everybody else getting the same deal, and of course (b) more money, is too much. Innat something? - how they hate perfidious capitalism, but loveloveLOVE glorious cash?

    It's long past time for a venue, a platform, an app, a pay-wall boondoggle or what-have-you, alerting the hoi polloi to the inescapable reality of Leftist Privilege; which dwarfs every other sort of "privilege" animating America's editorial writers and op-edders. I know what you're about to say: but we already have one! - it's called the Unz Review. True, but I'm referring to one that stuffs my pockets with glorious cash for middle-manning the deal; when I'm not otherwise striking heroic 21st-century-Zenger poses.

    Replies: @anon

    There’s probably a word that describes my feeling learning that a self-loathing whitey-bashing butt-pimple like Yglesias is clocking any six-figure sum

    Self-loathing? Yglesias seems rather proud of his jewish identity.

    from unwarranted to bloody outrageous – to regurgitate whatever the conventional wisdom of the moment happens to be.

    He is a skilled sophist. I would venture to say he is a valuable asset to his team.

    • Replies: @Ragno
    @anon


    Self-loathing? Yglesias seems rather proud of his jewish identity.
     
    By George, when they say "every damn time!", they aren't kidding. I had no idea.
  106. @TomSchmidt
    @AnotherDad

    Every year, Chase offers 5% back during one quarter for expenditures on PayPal. See if you cannot have your scout pack contribute to another scout pack, and vice-versa. I think there is a 3% fee, and the 5% is limited to $1500, but if you send them $1500, you get a $75 rebate while paying only $45 in fees.

    It's a small way to recover some of their griftbux.

    Replies: @very old statistician

    You used to be able to get AmEX points by investing in gold using your Amex credit card. You did not need to hold on to the gold for long at all – just an hour or two, if I remember correctly (long enough so that your exit from your gold position was a sale rather than a cancellation of the buy – sorry if my lingo is 70s lingo, but I actually do know what I am talking about).
    Not sure you can still do that.

    Anyway, the world works this way:
    there is overlap between people who work for corporations (including Substack) and who charge for things that should not incur additional charges …
    and people who do not work for corporations and who have the energy to zero in on what seem like flaws in the system (in my example, getting airline points for investing in gold instead of in, say, a Schumpeterian animal spirits stock market) —–
    that overlap excludes people who do not have the energy to game the system, or who have better things to do with their lives.

    Sailer once explained it this way, there are actually very very intelligent people who go to Stanford MBA school in order to figure out the best way to successfully charge hundreds of thousands of people a couple of extra cents each in difficult to decipher “hidden costs” on their phone bills. Lots of those guys live in the finite number of nice houses on nice lots in Silicon Valley, and nobody driving by their houses knows that the home-owners of those beautiful homes have wasted their intellectual gifts, literally, on pennies.

    I explain it this way (with a little help from a very bright guy who used to write airport business books). Poor Taleb, before he decided it was too much work to try and be right on all the major issues the poor man still bloviates about, came close to seeing all this perfectly —- there is not a fine line between people who want money and devote time to scamming and not being scammed in turn on the little marginal things in what we pay for modern conveniences, and people who want to live their life and not waste their time on the scam-anti-scam efforts:

    it is not a fine line at all.

    It is an existential difference in wisdom, as applied to money-grubbing or the ethical decision not to be a money-grubber. We are not talking here about the difference between eating at Arby’s every day and eating well. Anyways, you don’t get to call yourself a very very old statistician if you don’t get that.

    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
    @very old statistician

    What a great comment. I thank you for writing it.

    I suspect the anti-scammer gene is related to an effect noted from the Ultimatum game. As you're doubtless aware, that game involves one person proposing a distribution of property (say, $10) with one part for himself and the other part for the other. If I propose to keep $9 for myself and let you have $1, you're likely to reject the offer, costing yourself the $1 to enforce a rule on fairness.

    Economists call this behavior irrational; most people see it as the basis of society. Americans routinely propose the 50/50 split, which I don't recall ever being rejected when this has played out. One researcher wrote that women might propose a 40/60 split so as to keep the partner pleased and willing to accept the offer. The 60/40 or 55/45 split is interesting; close to even, and usually accepted.

    One group is known to almost always punish cheaters: high-testosterone men, who are more likely than other groups to punish others to enforce the rules. It strikes me as the same motivation behind what drives men to run into burning buildings and charge into nation-defending battles at immense personal risk: the behavior is preservative of the overall society.

    That having been said, anti-scamming is not a great way to live. Nor, for that matter, is dying for a country that is run almost entirely by scammers. I suspect as both behaviors recede, the circle of society will shrink, and that's probably a good thing.

    Replies: @Anon

  107. @Paperback Writer
    @Reg Cæsar

    Continuing the nitpicking. Reg Caesar: can any state ENJOY statehood in a dystopia?

    Replies: @International Jew, @Reg Cæsar

    You beat me to it.

  108. @Paperback Writer
    @Reg Cæsar

    Continuing the nitpicking. Reg Caesar: can any state ENJOY statehood in a dystopia?

    Replies: @International Jew, @Reg Cæsar

    …can any state ENJOY statehood in a dystopia?

    What’s the difference between a dystopia and a vale of tears? (עֵמֶק הַבָּכָא for IJ.)

    To answer the (original) question, Maine has enjoyed, or at least experienced, statehood for 233 years. And 44 days. Kentucky and West Virginia, a few months less.

    • Replies: @Paperback Writer
    @Reg Cæsar

    Experienced, yes. Enjoyed, no. And in today's America: suffers.

    , @very old statistician
    @Reg Cæsar

    That is a very good painting - if you would be so kind, could you tell me who the painter was?
    It is an interesting take on the harrowing of Hell, the episode in the life of Jesus where, immediately after dying on the crucifix, he "descended to hell" and brought the good news to the souls that were waiting there.

    As you can imagine, there are literally thousands of different ways that the subject could be painted, because very few (seriously - very very few) painters were actually there or were ever friends with someone who was there. And since there are thousands of painters who are tempted by the subject, and only a handful of them were actually there or were ever friends with someone who was there ..... well, you can figure out what I am trying to say.

    I once tried to find as many of the paintings of that scene as I could, because I wanted to paint it better than it had been painted before, but I found, after long searches, that very very few painters of talent had even tried the subject.

    Anyway, on the off chance you are reading this, I , an artist, would like to know the name of the artist whose painting you used in your comment. IF you never read it, that is ok too. It was an event that only happened once, and as such, it is easier to paint (that is, the one-time harrowing of hell) than scenes that have taken place again and agains (betrothals, births, weddings, deathbed scenes, and so on). Still, I would like to know who painted that spectacular vision you used in your comment.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

  109. @Steve Sailer
    @Anonymous

    There is a market for boring liberalism, evidently.

    Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist, @Peter Akuleyev

    There is a market for liberal liturgy. Many people, as they get older, especially, find the repetition of familiar words comforting. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but it’s better if the words are true in the first place.

    • Agree: Desiderius
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @The Last Real Calvinist


    liberal liturgy
     
    That's good.

    I'm stealing it.

    Thanks.
  110. @Anonymous

    Heather Cox Richardson
     
    Oh god! Out of curiosity, I read a few entries (penetrating the paywall is not that difficult). This is boring to death. At least Yglesias or Alexander or Greenwald or Sullivan are all talented writers. That lady's writing (all of which is an insufferable leftist propaganda, non-stop) is about as inspired as bookkeeper's notes.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Peter Akuleyev

    Heather Cox Richardson, for better or worse, seems to be the only genuine American (WASP, descended from the founding colonists) mentioned in the article. Her writing and thoughts are a microcosm of the American tragedy. She is more erudite, more philosophically grounded and more temperate than anyone else on sub-stack (or Unz for that matter), but ultimately convinced that her superior moral values will inevitably prevail and blind to how she is opening the door to her own destruction. She reminds me of my New England liberal Republican grandparents and their friends, and the whole WASP hegemony that was swept aside in the 1960s.

    • Replies: @ATBOTL
    @Peter Akuleyev


    She reminds me of my New England liberal Republican grandparents and their friends, and the whole WASP hegemony that was swept aside in the 1960s.
     
    Tell us more about them.

    Replies: @Desiderius

    , @Anon
    @Peter Akuleyev


    but ultimately convinced that her superior moral values will inevitably prevail and blind to how she is opening the door to her own destruction.
     
    How exactly is she opening the door to her own destruction?
    , @Paperback Writer
    @Peter Akuleyev

    I'm a bit suspicious (well, very suspicious) of people who try to sweep arguments under the carpet by telling us, "We're been here before, never fear."

    I bet people were saying that the day before Fort Sumter.

    Replies: @Peter Akuleyev

  111. @ic1000

    As Yglesias told me..., the deal he took from Substack is actually costing him money, for now. Yglesias says he has around 9,800 paying subscribers, which might generate around $860,000 a year. Had he not taken the Substack payment, he would keep 90% of that, or $775,000, but under the current deal, where he’ll keep the $250,000 plus 15% of the gross subscription revenue, his take will be closer to $380,000.
     
    Peter Kafka should learn about "risk." Prior to making the leap onto Substack, did Yglesias know how many readers would turn into $80/year subscribers? That $250k floor was worth a lot to him. Obviously.

    Lazy Vox reporter.

    Replies: @Forbes, @Almost Missouri

    Ah thanks. That section of the article didn’t make sense to me. Now I see that that, as usual, it was because the journalist was mischaracterizing/lying about the subject.

  112. @Steve Sailer
    @Anonymous

    There is a market for boring liberalism, evidently.

    Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist, @Peter Akuleyev

    “Sober and boring” is what a functional democracy requires. The sensationalism, outrage du jour and radical posturing on both the right and left is very damaging. Part of it is market driven of course, every writer has to get attention and clicks in a crowded market, but it is also a product of our failed demographics. A United States that had stayed majority WASP, German and Scandinavian would not have sunk to the depths America is at today.

    • Agree: northeast
  113. I suppose it’s so late that it’s almost pointless to say, but while I approve of Substack I find the whole independent blogger phenomenon rather sad, in that one ends up paying (if one pays at all) one writer at a time instead of subscribing to a magazine where one can get many writers. How much would one have to pay to stay abreast of things today? I’d say two newspapers or more would be necessary and then some magazines and then some bloggers. It would be quite an expense. Perhaps this is one of the factors that tends to sort people into political factions.

  114. @Clyde
    @Niccolo Soldo


    Am thoroughly enjoying Substack and am making money from subs as well. It’s going much better than I expected it to go.
     
    I took a look at your substack blog. The entries average 25 comments each. Based on the number of comments I cannot see how you are getting very many paid subscribers. With all due respect....

    While Matt Taibbi is getting average 600 comments with 5 entries at over 1000. This definitely signals oodles of paying subscribers.
    https://taibbi.substack.com/archive?sort=new

    Replies: @Niccolo Soldo

    That’s because most of the commentary stays on Twitter.

  115. @Anon
    "I dislike Ydiot more than most so it’s highly amusing to me he “lost” $500k by not betting on himself."

    I imagine it was more a bet that journalism and writing articles on the internet aren't highly valued by the market - a reasonable one, really.

    I am basically Steve politically but I think Yglesias is a great writer and thinker - a bit of an advert for philosophy as a major. If you're going to read anyone on the left at all, he should be one of them. The fact he couldn't really stay at Vox speaks poorly of them and well of him.

    I usually find I agree with all his reasoning but not some of his opening premises.

    I remember him quoting approvingly the logic of some GOP voter with a very similar view to mine on Trump: not a nice man, wouldn't want him to marry my daughter etc etc, but issues like reducing abortion are just way more important than that so she was voting Trump. He didn't agree with her on abortion but other than that he saw her logic completely and agreed with it. I am like that with Yglesias.

    Replies: @Peter Akuleyev

    issues like reducing abortion are just way more important than that so she was voting Trump.

    Of course, and very predictably, abortions actually started rising under Trump, for the first time since 2006. But that is part of a larger issue that conservatives tend to prefer prohibition and moral posturing to simply practical education and incentives to behave better. And yes, I am fully aware that the left has decided to follow the same counterproductive path on race issues. I suppose that approach works much better for fundraising from your base.

  116. @bjdubbs
    Will subs follow Matt to Yglesias dot com? The history of the internet has shown that aggregation crushes the indie internet nearly every time. There are people like the Stratechery guy who succeed by freelancing but I wonder how many of those subs are charged to the corporate account.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    Some guys have made a successful go of independence. Mark Steyn, for example. I think I heard of Matt Tiabbi and some others doing it too, though I don’t read them, so who knows?

    But anyway, for content producers with a distinctive voice and a loyal following, it seems to be a possibility. But, as others have said, why anyone would pay any amount to read Yglesias’s half-witted maundering is beyond me.

    I might pay money if I never had to hear of him again. Maybe he should look into that as a business model.

  117. @The Last Real Calvinist
    @Steve Sailer

    There is a market for liberal liturgy. Many people, as they get older, especially, find the repetition of familiar words comforting. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but it's better if the words are true in the first place.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    liberal liturgy

    That’s good.

    I’m stealing it.

    Thanks.

  118. @Peter Akuleyev
    @Anonymous

    Heather Cox Richardson, for better or worse, seems to be the only genuine American (WASP, descended from the founding colonists) mentioned in the article. Her writing and thoughts are a microcosm of the American tragedy. She is more erudite, more philosophically grounded and more temperate than anyone else on sub-stack (or Unz for that matter), but ultimately convinced that her superior moral values will inevitably prevail and blind to how she is opening the door to her own destruction. She reminds me of my New England liberal Republican grandparents and their friends, and the whole WASP hegemony that was swept aside in the 1960s.

    Replies: @ATBOTL, @Anon, @Paperback Writer

    She reminds me of my New England liberal Republican grandparents and their friends, and the whole WASP hegemony that was swept aside in the 1960s.

    Tell us more about them.

    • Replies: @Desiderius
    @ATBOTL

    They weren’t swept aside.

  119. @James J O'Meara
    @Clyde

    The Weekly Standard could start one, called The Sub-Standard.

    Replies: @Clyde

    The Weekly Standard could start one, called The Sub-Standard.

    Very sub-Standard. This mag stopped publishing in 2018.

  120. @Reg Cæsar
    @Paperback Writer


    ...can any state ENJOY statehood in a dystopia?
     
    What's the difference between a dystopia and a vale of tears? (עֵמֶק הַבָּכָא for IJ.)


    https://www.petitpalais.paris.fr/sites/default/files/styles/380x490/public/ValleeLarmesP%20DUT%201437.JPG?itok=PcqQ2U4E&c=85ddf9b14480a24e095117938184a002


    To answer the (original) question, Maine has enjoyed, or at least experienced, statehood for 233 years. And 44 days. Kentucky and West Virginia, a few months less.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer, @very old statistician

    Experienced, yes. Enjoyed, no. And in today’s America: suffers.

  121. @Jon
    @Anon

    The graph on how women and men view physical attractiveness was pretty shocking. We can all see how women obviously find a half dozen other things about men (status, money, personality, etc.) more important than looks. I had always assumed that was because women were much less picky and were able to see some attractive qualities in even the frumpiest of guys. But women are absolutely brutal in what they find attractive. They found 81% of men to be below average, versus guys finding just 40% of women below average. Which, I guess, just reinforces tje initial point - women really can get past looks. They subjectively think almost all of us are ugly, but they will happily marry/date an objectively ugly guy, no problem.

    Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard

    The graph on how women and men view physical attractiveness was pretty shocking.

    Go look at the covers of one hundred paperbacks in the, “bodice-ripper,” genre.

    End of story.

  122. @Peter Akuleyev
    @Anonymous

    Heather Cox Richardson, for better or worse, seems to be the only genuine American (WASP, descended from the founding colonists) mentioned in the article. Her writing and thoughts are a microcosm of the American tragedy. She is more erudite, more philosophically grounded and more temperate than anyone else on sub-stack (or Unz for that matter), but ultimately convinced that her superior moral values will inevitably prevail and blind to how she is opening the door to her own destruction. She reminds me of my New England liberal Republican grandparents and their friends, and the whole WASP hegemony that was swept aside in the 1960s.

    Replies: @ATBOTL, @Anon, @Paperback Writer

    but ultimately convinced that her superior moral values will inevitably prevail and blind to how she is opening the door to her own destruction.

    How exactly is she opening the door to her own destruction?

  123. @J.Ross
    @Prof. Woland

    Every ten seconds I get some sort of cheap scam appeal for money from him. Know what would have brought him more money was being more active when in office.

    Replies: @Prof. Woland

    Fair enough. I gave money to Trump too and get dripped on by the same people who are by now, mostly people who obtained his donor list. But even that should tell you something. The fact that you gave makes you much more likely to give more later on so you are marked. But we are in a war and you might have to give more than $10. Some of it will be used effectively and some not but unless the right begins to build its own organizations, institutions and communication networks we don’t stand a chance.

    Trump was able to win the Presidency because he ran on immigration. He was the only Republican to do so precisely because he had a billion dollars handy that he could have used to fund his own campaign rather than raise money from the usual suspects. The conundrum that all whites and their elected representatives face is that they only seem to raise money from business interests precisely because individuals don’t pony up enough of their own money. If they did so, it would open the doors to many good candidates that would do a good job but cannot win the financial primaries.

    Liberals have some of the same dynamics within their party which is why they have always pushed for ‘campaign finance reform’ which involves capping donations and giving free air time to candidates. By the way, raising money would also build the secondary and tertiary organizations that would give further structure on the right. The NRA was taken out (or took itself out) of the elections this year and look at what that did. Now imagine 100 fully funded right wing advocacy organizations all pushing for our interests. Now go back to my $100 per month x 75 million donors and see how that would change things.

  124. I pay Curtis Yarvin (Mencius Moldbug) $10 a month to read his Grey Mirror substack.

    https://graymirror.substack.com/

    There’s plenty of free reading there, too.

    For me, dollar for dollar, it’s the second best investment in entertainment value I make, right after Apple Music – oh, and vodka, of course, though that’s more of a mental health self-care investment.

  125. @Peter Akuleyev
    @Anonymous

    Heather Cox Richardson, for better or worse, seems to be the only genuine American (WASP, descended from the founding colonists) mentioned in the article. Her writing and thoughts are a microcosm of the American tragedy. She is more erudite, more philosophically grounded and more temperate than anyone else on sub-stack (or Unz for that matter), but ultimately convinced that her superior moral values will inevitably prevail and blind to how she is opening the door to her own destruction. She reminds me of my New England liberal Republican grandparents and their friends, and the whole WASP hegemony that was swept aside in the 1960s.

    Replies: @ATBOTL, @Anon, @Paperback Writer

    I’m a bit suspicious (well, very suspicious) of people who try to sweep arguments under the carpet by telling us, “We’re been here before, never fear.”

    I bet people were saying that the day before Fort Sumter.

    • Replies: @Peter Akuleyev
    @Paperback Writer

    What on earth are you talking about?

  126. @very old statistician
    @TomSchmidt

    You used to be able to get AmEX points by investing in gold using your Amex credit card. You did not need to hold on to the gold for long at all - just an hour or two, if I remember correctly (long enough so that your exit from your gold position was a sale rather than a cancellation of the buy - sorry if my lingo is 70s lingo, but I actually do know what I am talking about).
    Not sure you can still do that.

    Anyway, the world works this way:
    there is overlap between people who work for corporations (including Substack) and who charge for things that should not incur additional charges ...
    and people who do not work for corporations and who have the energy to zero in on what seem like flaws in the system (in my example, getting airline points for investing in gold instead of in, say, a Schumpeterian animal spirits stock market) -----
    that overlap excludes people who do not have the energy to game the system, or who have better things to do with their lives.

    Sailer once explained it this way, there are actually very very intelligent people who go to Stanford MBA school in order to figure out the best way to successfully charge hundreds of thousands of people a couple of extra cents each in difficult to decipher "hidden costs" on their phone bills. Lots of those guys live in the finite number of nice houses on nice lots in Silicon Valley, and nobody driving by their houses knows that the home-owners of those beautiful homes have wasted their intellectual gifts, literally, on pennies.

    I explain it this way (with a little help from a very bright guy who used to write airport business books). Poor Taleb, before he decided it was too much work to try and be right on all the major issues the poor man still bloviates about, came close to seeing all this perfectly ---- there is not a fine line between people who want money and devote time to scamming and not being scammed in turn on the little marginal things in what we pay for modern conveniences, and people who want to live their life and not waste their time on the scam-anti-scam efforts:

    it is not a fine line at all.

    It is an existential difference in wisdom, as applied to money-grubbing or the ethical decision not to be a money-grubber. We are not talking here about the difference between eating at Arby's every day and eating well. Anyways, you don't get to call yourself a very very old statistician if you don't get that.

    Replies: @TomSchmidt

    What a great comment. I thank you for writing it.

    I suspect the anti-scammer gene is related to an effect noted from the Ultimatum game. As you’re doubtless aware, that game involves one person proposing a distribution of property (say, $10) with one part for himself and the other part for the other. If I propose to keep $9 for myself and let you have $1, you’re likely to reject the offer, costing yourself the $1 to enforce a rule on fairness.

    Economists call this behavior irrational; most people see it as the basis of society. Americans routinely propose the 50/50 split, which I don’t recall ever being rejected when this has played out. One researcher wrote that women might propose a 40/60 split so as to keep the partner pleased and willing to accept the offer. The 60/40 or 55/45 split is interesting; close to even, and usually accepted.

    One group is known to almost always punish cheaters: high-testosterone men, who are more likely than other groups to punish others to enforce the rules. It strikes me as the same motivation behind what drives men to run into burning buildings and charge into nation-defending battles at immense personal risk: the behavior is preservative of the overall society.

    That having been said, anti-scamming is not a great way to live. Nor, for that matter, is dying for a country that is run almost entirely by scammers. I suspect as both behaviors recede, the circle of society will shrink, and that’s probably a good thing.

    • Replies: @Anon
    @TomSchmidt


    That having been said, anti-scamming is not a great way to live.
     
    Why isn’t it?

    Replies: @TomSchmidt

  127. @TomSchmidt
    @very old statistician

    What a great comment. I thank you for writing it.

    I suspect the anti-scammer gene is related to an effect noted from the Ultimatum game. As you're doubtless aware, that game involves one person proposing a distribution of property (say, $10) with one part for himself and the other part for the other. If I propose to keep $9 for myself and let you have $1, you're likely to reject the offer, costing yourself the $1 to enforce a rule on fairness.

    Economists call this behavior irrational; most people see it as the basis of society. Americans routinely propose the 50/50 split, which I don't recall ever being rejected when this has played out. One researcher wrote that women might propose a 40/60 split so as to keep the partner pleased and willing to accept the offer. The 60/40 or 55/45 split is interesting; close to even, and usually accepted.

    One group is known to almost always punish cheaters: high-testosterone men, who are more likely than other groups to punish others to enforce the rules. It strikes me as the same motivation behind what drives men to run into burning buildings and charge into nation-defending battles at immense personal risk: the behavior is preservative of the overall society.

    That having been said, anti-scamming is not a great way to live. Nor, for that matter, is dying for a country that is run almost entirely by scammers. I suspect as both behaviors recede, the circle of society will shrink, and that's probably a good thing.

    Replies: @Anon

    That having been said, anti-scamming is not a great way to live.

    Why isn’t it?

    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
    @Anon

    As old statistician writes, you steal back pennies from the scammers like PayPal and the credit cards, when your focus might better be on less pedestrian matters.

  128. @ATBOTL
    @Peter Akuleyev


    She reminds me of my New England liberal Republican grandparents and their friends, and the whole WASP hegemony that was swept aside in the 1960s.
     
    Tell us more about them.

    Replies: @Desiderius

    They weren’t swept aside.

  129. @Polistra
    Incidentally, your important graph illuminating homicide trends in 2020 included some color indexing that didn't quite make sense to me. So I edited it for your future use, should you agree that this version is clearer. If you don't agree, please ignore.

    https://i.ibb.co/LSy0gsh/SAILER-2021-02-19-at-11-27-56-PM.png

    I actually don't think the blue or green add anything and I'll happily replace both with black or grey if you like.

    Replies: @ic1000, @Steve Sailer

    Thanks.

  130. Many of the vast 21st Century Silicon Valley fortunes have been built on the philosophy that you get a lot of users first and then figure out how to make money off them later.

    No, most of the time they never figure it out. That means they either go bust like MySpace or if they’re lucky or conniving enough, they sucker a Big Tech firm with the lure of all those users and sell for a princely sum right before they’re about to go bankrupt, as tumblr and youtube did (fun fact: youtube loses money to this day, 15 years after being acquired!).

    The truth is that the tech guys are fairly stupid when it comes to business and a couple gigantic successes like google search or FB ads sustain the entire market for consumer online services.

    Of course, the media business is replete with outright morons, as it’s been obvious for decades that they’d have to start charging and the advertising free ride was over, yet they are only starting to realize that now.

    But what do they have to offer writers and other content creators when they can just hang out a shingle themselves on Substack or Ghost and go direct to their audience? Nothing, which is why the long-predicted death of the legacy media business is finally happening now.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Bumpkin

    "the tech guys are fairly stupid when it comes to business"

    Think how rich they'd be if they were smart when it comes to business.

    Replies: @Bumpkin

  131. @Bumpkin

    Many of the vast 21st Century Silicon Valley fortunes have been built on the philosophy that you get a lot of users first and then figure out how to make money off them later.
     
    No, most of the time they never figure it out. That means they either go bust like MySpace or if they're lucky or conniving enough, they sucker a Big Tech firm with the lure of all those users and sell for a princely sum right before they're about to go bankrupt, as tumblr and youtube did (fun fact: youtube loses money to this day, 15 years after being acquired!).

    The truth is that the tech guys are fairly stupid when it comes to business and a couple gigantic successes like google search or FB ads sustain the entire market for consumer online services.

    Of course, the media business is replete with outright morons, as it's been obvious for decades that they'd have to start charging and the advertising free ride was over, yet they are only starting to realize that now.

    But what do they have to offer writers and other content creators when they can just hang out a shingle themselves on Substack or Ghost and go direct to their audience? Nothing, which is why the long-predicted death of the legacy media business is finally happening now.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    “the tech guys are fairly stupid when it comes to business”

    Think how rich they’d be if they were smart when it comes to business.

    • Replies: @Bumpkin
    @Steve Sailer

    Instead, think how poor they are going to be when the entire advertising scam collapses.

  132. @Steve Sailer
    @Bumpkin

    "the tech guys are fairly stupid when it comes to business"

    Think how rich they'd be if they were smart when it comes to business.

    Replies: @Bumpkin

    Instead, think how poor they are going to be when the entire advertising scam collapses.

  133. @Paperback Writer
    @Peter Akuleyev

    I'm a bit suspicious (well, very suspicious) of people who try to sweep arguments under the carpet by telling us, "We're been here before, never fear."

    I bet people were saying that the day before Fort Sumter.

    Replies: @Peter Akuleyev

    What on earth are you talking about?

  134. “Her writing and thoughts are a microcosm of the American tragedy. She is more erudite, more philosophically grounded and more temperate than anyone else on sub-stack (or Unz for that matter), but ultimately convinced that her superior moral values will inevitably prevail and blind to how she is opening the door to her own destruction. She reminds me of my New England liberal Republican grandparents and their friends, and the whole WASP hegemony that was swept aside in the 1960s.”

    Reasonable people before the CW (that’s Civil War, 1861-1865) thought that problems could be papered over with compromise and, like HCR, always had a historical allusion to soothe nerves.

    The attack on Fort Sumter was the first shot of the Civil War. You can look up the date.

  135. Yglesias’ kids won’t be bc he’s making enough money

  136. @Steve Sailer
    @guest007

    So all Substack has to do is never hire any people who might potentially become Woke?

    Replies: @guest007

    It would be the public relations, external communications, or HR people who would become work. What Substack would probably have to worry about is an attack on their hosting contractor or the provider of plug-ins. Any company sitting on servers owned by AWS, Google, etc are vulnerable to being attacked there.

  137. @Anon
    @TomSchmidt


    That having been said, anti-scamming is not a great way to live.
     
    Why isn’t it?

    Replies: @TomSchmidt

    As old statistician writes, you steal back pennies from the scammers like PayPal and the credit cards, when your focus might better be on less pedestrian matters.

  138. @anon
    @Ragno


    There’s probably a word that describes my feeling learning that a self-loathing whitey-bashing butt-pimple like Yglesias is clocking any six-figure sum
     
    Self-loathing? Yglesias seems rather proud of his jewish identity.

    from unwarranted to bloody outrageous – to regurgitate whatever the conventional wisdom of the moment happens to be.
     
    He is a skilled sophist. I would venture to say he is a valuable asset to his team.

    Replies: @Ragno

    Self-loathing? Yglesias seems rather proud of his jewish identity.

    By George, when they say “every damn time!”, they aren’t kidding. I had no idea.

  139. @Reg Cæsar

    By Peter Kafka

     

    Can there be a better byline for a reporter who covers this beat?

    Many of the vast 21st Century Silicon Valley fortunes have been built on the philosophy that you get a lot of users first and then figure out how to make money off them later.
     
    Before the Internet, this "philosophy" worked for Post-It Notes, loan sharking, and opium derivatives. At supermarkets like A&P, it was called a "loss leader".

    If you’re on someone else’s platform, then other people will be there too — perhaps even making money — and you may hate them.

     

    Not quite "hate", but F Scott Fitzgerald poked fun at Lothrop Stoddard in The Great Gatsby. They had the same publisher.

    Replies: @James Forrestal

    …F Scott Fitzgerald poked fun at Lothrop Stoddard in The Great Gatsby.

    Yeah there are definitely some themes in Gatsby that are helpful in promoting pseudoscientific Boasian race denialism/open borders:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Gatsby#Race_and_displacement

    On a related note: The Great Gatsby was published in 1925. Despite heavy promotion, mostly glowing reviews, a stage adaptation and a silent film version, over the first 15 years after its publication, it sold a grand total of… 25,000 copies.

    So what happened? The “invisible hand” suddenly reached out and grabbed Fitzgerald’s masterpiece? No, the “Council on Books in Wartime” bought up 155,000 copies and gave them away, mostly to GIs — instantly septupling the novel’s total sales. What was the CBW?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_on_Books_in_Wartime
    “The Council on Books in Wartime (1942–1946) was an American non-profit organization founded by booksellers, publishers, librarians, authors, and others

    That’s pretty vague. One might suspect that “others” is carrying a lot of weight here.

    “The Council co-operated with the Office of War Information (OWI) and other government agencies, but was itself a voluntary, unpaid, non-governmental organization.[”

    Uh huh. And “Freedom” House is officially an “NGO” — that gets almost 90% of its funding from the US government.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @James Forrestal

    The Lothrop Stoddard stuff in The Great Gatsby is self-parody. Fitzgerald was a Nordicist.

    The Great Gatsby will eventually get canceled: the Meyer Wolfsheim character is anti-Semitic and the only description of blacks in the book is highly satirical and anti-black.

    Replies: @anon, @James Forrestal

  140. @James Forrestal
    @Reg Cæsar


    ...F Scott Fitzgerald poked fun at Lothrop Stoddard in The Great Gatsby.
     
    Yeah there are definitely some themes in Gatsby that are helpful in promoting pseudoscientific Boasian race denialism/open borders:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Gatsby#Race_and_displacement

    On a related note: The Great Gatsby was published in 1925. Despite heavy promotion, mostly glowing reviews, a stage adaptation and a silent film version, over the first 15 years after its publication, it sold a grand total of... 25,000 copies.

    So what happened? The "invisible hand" suddenly reached out and grabbed Fitzgerald's masterpiece? No, the "Council on Books in Wartime" bought up 155,000 copies and gave them away, mostly to GIs -- instantly septupling the novel's total sales. What was the CBW?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_on_Books_in_Wartime
    "The Council on Books in Wartime (1942–1946) was an American non-profit organization founded by booksellers, publishers, librarians, authors, and others"

    That's pretty vague. One might suspect that "others" is carrying a lot of weight here.

    "The Council co-operated with the Office of War Information (OWI) and other government agencies, but was itself a voluntary, unpaid, non-governmental organization.["

    Uh huh. And "Freedom" House is officially an "NGO" -- that gets almost 90% of its funding from the US government.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    The Lothrop Stoddard stuff in The Great Gatsby is self-parody. Fitzgerald was a Nordicist.

    The Great Gatsby will eventually get canceled: the Meyer Wolfsheim character is anti-Semitic and the only description of blacks in the book is highly satirical and anti-black.

    • Replies: @anon
    @Steve Sailer


    The Great Gatsby will eventually get canceled: the Meyer Wolfsheim character is anti-Semitic
     
    What is Fitzgerald’s criticism of jewishness in the book?

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    , @James Forrestal
    @Steve Sailer


    Fitzgerald was a Nordicist.
     
    There's some truth to that -- but the views he expressed in his private correspondence are largely irrelevant. It's how the book comes across to readers that matters. Do you really think that the Council on Books in Wartime chose Gatsby because... its overall message promoted White supreemism and "anti-semitism"? That the War Department and the Office of War Information (whose explicit mission was propaganda/ psychological warfare) concurred? I'm gonna press "X" to doubt on that one.

    Sure, they sent out a lot of classics, as well as pure entertainment like westerns, etc. But relatively recent vintage "serious" novels? Two of the top titles were Strange Fruit and A Tree Grows in Brooklyn. Neither of these is particularly notable for their enthusiastic promotion of White supreemism or immigration restriction... to say the least. As one might expect given the overall American narrative of the war, and the desired portrayal of American identity.

    Why do you think they chose to rescue Gatsby from obscurity? Could be just the whole Jazz Age/ modernism aspect of Fitzgerald, I suppose -- trying to promote a distinct "American" culture. Laying the groundwork for postwar American cultural hegemony, though that's usually thought of as a postwar effort. State/ USIA/ Congress for Cultural Freedom/ CIA etc. Or it could be that they simply thought it was a great novel that had been unfairly overlooked. But in the context of WW2 anti-Nazi propaganda, that would not be a sufficient reason if it seemed to be promoting White supreemism.


    The Lothrop Stoddard stuff in The Great Gatsby is self-parody.
     
    Again -- how does it come across to the reader? The explicit message clearly mocks, not Fitzgerald himself, but The Rising Tide of Color. Stoddard's theory is haltingly/ incoherently "promoted" by Tom Buchanan, the least likable/ relatable character in the novel, while Nick, Daisy, and Jordan all subtly mock him -- but he's too dense/ self-absorbed to notice. Nick: "There was something pathetic in his concentration."

    Nick later on in the novel, apropos of nothing, when asked what he was talking about: "I can’t seem to remember, but I think we talked about the Nordic race. Yes, I’m sure we did. It sort of crept up on us and first thing you know"

    Sure, the overall narrative trajectory evokes Stoddard's view that the new materialistic environment of Europe and the eastern US had outpaced intellectual/ cultural adaptation -- but which message is stronger? Which hits harder?

    This guy's a PhD in American Studies, and likely a MOT (writes for The Forward). He thinks that scene should serve as a template for how to attack an evil "racist" like Drumpf:

    https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-great-gatsby-guide-to-taking-down-trump


    The Great Gatsby will eventually get canceled: the Meyer Wolfsheim character is "anti-Semitic"
     
    He's certainly problematic in the current year. And it's possible that this might be considered a little questionable by today's standards as well: "I almost married a little kyke who'd been after me for ten years. I knew he was below me."

    But this isn't the 1920s, when Henry Ford could publish The International Jew without immediately being crushed by the structures of systemic semitism. If Fitzgerald really was determined to gas 6 billion jews for no reason other than irrational, psychotic hatred, it's kind of unlikely that he would have spent the last few years of his life as a screenwriter in Hollywood, -- with a jewish secretary, and a jewish girlfriend. I'm thinking that someone in that milieu might have noticed.

    Also: Gertrude Stein, Trilling, Salinger, etc. Something about Gatsby seems to appeal to the Tribe.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

  141. @Reg Cæsar
    @Paperback Writer


    ...can any state ENJOY statehood in a dystopia?
     
    What's the difference between a dystopia and a vale of tears? (עֵמֶק הַבָּכָא for IJ.)


    https://www.petitpalais.paris.fr/sites/default/files/styles/380x490/public/ValleeLarmesP%20DUT%201437.JPG?itok=PcqQ2U4E&c=85ddf9b14480a24e095117938184a002


    To answer the (original) question, Maine has enjoyed, or at least experienced, statehood for 233 years. And 44 days. Kentucky and West Virginia, a few months less.

    Replies: @Paperback Writer, @very old statistician

    That is a very good painting – if you would be so kind, could you tell me who the painter was?
    It is an interesting take on the harrowing of Hell, the episode in the life of Jesus where, immediately after dying on the crucifix, he “descended to hell” and brought the good news to the souls that were waiting there.

    As you can imagine, there are literally thousands of different ways that the subject could be painted, because very few (seriously – very very few) painters were actually there or were ever friends with someone who was there. And since there are thousands of painters who are tempted by the subject, and only a handful of them were actually there or were ever friends with someone who was there ….. well, you can figure out what I am trying to say.

    I once tried to find as many of the paintings of that scene as I could, because I wanted to paint it better than it had been painted before, but I found, after long searches, that very very few painters of talent had even tried the subject.

    Anyway, on the off chance you are reading this, I , an artist, would like to know the name of the artist whose painting you used in your comment. IF you never read it, that is ok too. It was an event that only happened once, and as such, it is easier to paint (that is, the one-time harrowing of hell) than scenes that have taken place again and agains (betrothals, births, weddings, deathbed scenes, and so on). Still, I would like to know who painted that spectacular vision you used in your comment.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @very old statistician


    Still, I would like to know who painted that spectacular vision you used in your comment.

     

    Vale of Tears by Gustave Doré.

    Fun fact for sports fans: Gus Dorais, who co-invented the running catch with Knute Rockne, got his nickname because his surname was pronounced the same. Doré must have been well-known on this side of the Atlantic.
  142. @Steve Sailer
    @James Forrestal

    The Lothrop Stoddard stuff in The Great Gatsby is self-parody. Fitzgerald was a Nordicist.

    The Great Gatsby will eventually get canceled: the Meyer Wolfsheim character is anti-Semitic and the only description of blacks in the book is highly satirical and anti-black.

    Replies: @anon, @James Forrestal

    The Great Gatsby will eventually get canceled: the Meyer Wolfsheim character is anti-Semitic

    What is Fitzgerald’s criticism of jewishness in the book?

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @anon

    A Jew (Arnold Rothstein in real life) corrupted the World Series?

    Fitzgerald sounded pretty sore about it.

  143. @anon
    @Steve Sailer


    The Great Gatsby will eventually get canceled: the Meyer Wolfsheim character is anti-Semitic
     
    What is Fitzgerald’s criticism of jewishness in the book?

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    A Jew (Arnold Rothstein in real life) corrupted the World Series?

    Fitzgerald sounded pretty sore about it.

  144. @Another Canadian
    Rod Dreher is trying to monetise his existing readership by starting a pay platform on Substack focusing on his religious writing, his sweet spot. He saves his political blithering and emotional meltdowns for the public at TAC where he occasionally does product placement and other advertising for his Substack platform. I would be interested in whether he's been successful getting new readers over to Substack from his product pitches on TAC.

    Replies: @Verymuchalive, @Paperback Writer, @MEH 0910, @James Forrestal

    Rod Dreher is trying to monetise his existing readership by starting a pay platform on Substack focusing on his religious writing, his sweet spot

    I would be interested in whether he’s been successful getting new readers over to Substack from his product pitches on TAC.

    Substack doesn’t release specific subscriber numbers, just ranges. Iif you take a look at their data, he’s #5 under “Faith.” He’s got “thousands of subscribers” at $5/ mo.

  145. @Steve Sailer
    @James Forrestal

    The Lothrop Stoddard stuff in The Great Gatsby is self-parody. Fitzgerald was a Nordicist.

    The Great Gatsby will eventually get canceled: the Meyer Wolfsheim character is anti-Semitic and the only description of blacks in the book is highly satirical and anti-black.

    Replies: @anon, @James Forrestal

    Fitzgerald was a Nordicist.

    There’s some truth to that — but the views he expressed in his private correspondence are largely irrelevant. It’s how the book comes across to readers that matters. Do you really think that the Council on Books in Wartime chose Gatsby because… its overall message promoted White supreemism and “anti-semitism”? That the War Department and the Office of War Information (whose explicit mission was propaganda/ psychological warfare) concurred? I’m gonna press “X” to doubt on that one.

    Sure, they sent out a lot of classics, as well as pure entertainment like westerns, etc. But relatively recent vintage “serious” novels? Two of the top titles were Strange Fruit and A Tree Grows in Brooklyn. Neither of these is particularly notable for their enthusiastic promotion of White supreemism or immigration restriction… to say the least. As one might expect given the overall American narrative of the war, and the desired portrayal of American identity.

    Why do you think they chose to rescue Gatsby from obscurity? Could be just the whole Jazz Age/ modernism aspect of Fitzgerald, I suppose — trying to promote a distinct “American” culture. Laying the groundwork for postwar American cultural hegemony, though that’s usually thought of as a postwar effort. State/ USIA/ Congress for Cultural Freedom/ CIA etc. Or it could be that they simply thought it was a great novel that had been unfairly overlooked. But in the context of WW2 anti-Nazi propaganda, that would not be a sufficient reason if it seemed to be promoting White supreemism.

    The Lothrop Stoddard stuff in The Great Gatsby is self-parody.

    Again — how does it come across to the reader? The explicit message clearly mocks, not Fitzgerald himself, but The Rising Tide of Color. Stoddard’s theory is haltingly/ incoherently “promoted” by Tom Buchanan, the least likable/ relatable character in the novel, while Nick, Daisy, and Jordan all subtly mock him — but he’s too dense/ self-absorbed to notice. Nick: “There was something pathetic in his concentration.”

    Nick later on in the novel, apropos of nothing, when asked what he was talking about: “I can’t seem to remember, but I think we talked about the Nordic race. Yes, I’m sure we did. It sort of crept up on us and first thing you know”

    Sure, the overall narrative trajectory evokes Stoddard’s view that the new materialistic environment of Europe and the eastern US had outpaced intellectual/ cultural adaptation — but which message is stronger? Which hits harder?

    This guy’s a PhD in American Studies, and likely a MOT (writes for The Forward). He thinks that scene should serve as a template for how to attack an evil “racist” like Drumpf:

    https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-great-gatsby-guide-to-taking-down-trump

    The Great Gatsby will eventually get canceled: the Meyer Wolfsheim character is “anti-Semitic”

    He’s certainly problematic in the current year. And it’s possible that this might be considered a little questionable by today’s standards as well: “I almost married a little kyke who’d been after me for ten years. I knew he was below me.”

    But this isn’t the 1920s, when Henry Ford could publish The International Jew without immediately being crushed by the structures of systemic semitism. If Fitzgerald really was determined to gas 6 billion jews for no reason other than irrational, psychotic hatred, it’s kind of unlikely that he would have spent the last few years of his life as a screenwriter in Hollywood, — with a jewish secretary, and a jewish girlfriend. I’m thinking that someone in that milieu might have noticed.

    Also: Gertrude Stein, Trilling, Salinger, etc. Something about Gatsby seems to appeal to the Tribe.

    • Thanks: HammerJack
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @James Forrestal

    In 1921, Fitzgerald wrote to critic Edmund Wilson of his disgust engendered by a visit to Europe in language that sounds like Tom Buchanan waxing poetic: “The negroid streak creeps northward to defile the Nordic race. Already the Italians have the souls of blackamoors.”

    Fitzgerald was good at parodying his own prejudices, just as Waugh was.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

  146. @James Forrestal
    @Steve Sailer


    Fitzgerald was a Nordicist.
     
    There's some truth to that -- but the views he expressed in his private correspondence are largely irrelevant. It's how the book comes across to readers that matters. Do you really think that the Council on Books in Wartime chose Gatsby because... its overall message promoted White supreemism and "anti-semitism"? That the War Department and the Office of War Information (whose explicit mission was propaganda/ psychological warfare) concurred? I'm gonna press "X" to doubt on that one.

    Sure, they sent out a lot of classics, as well as pure entertainment like westerns, etc. But relatively recent vintage "serious" novels? Two of the top titles were Strange Fruit and A Tree Grows in Brooklyn. Neither of these is particularly notable for their enthusiastic promotion of White supreemism or immigration restriction... to say the least. As one might expect given the overall American narrative of the war, and the desired portrayal of American identity.

    Why do you think they chose to rescue Gatsby from obscurity? Could be just the whole Jazz Age/ modernism aspect of Fitzgerald, I suppose -- trying to promote a distinct "American" culture. Laying the groundwork for postwar American cultural hegemony, though that's usually thought of as a postwar effort. State/ USIA/ Congress for Cultural Freedom/ CIA etc. Or it could be that they simply thought it was a great novel that had been unfairly overlooked. But in the context of WW2 anti-Nazi propaganda, that would not be a sufficient reason if it seemed to be promoting White supreemism.


    The Lothrop Stoddard stuff in The Great Gatsby is self-parody.
     
    Again -- how does it come across to the reader? The explicit message clearly mocks, not Fitzgerald himself, but The Rising Tide of Color. Stoddard's theory is haltingly/ incoherently "promoted" by Tom Buchanan, the least likable/ relatable character in the novel, while Nick, Daisy, and Jordan all subtly mock him -- but he's too dense/ self-absorbed to notice. Nick: "There was something pathetic in his concentration."

    Nick later on in the novel, apropos of nothing, when asked what he was talking about: "I can’t seem to remember, but I think we talked about the Nordic race. Yes, I’m sure we did. It sort of crept up on us and first thing you know"

    Sure, the overall narrative trajectory evokes Stoddard's view that the new materialistic environment of Europe and the eastern US had outpaced intellectual/ cultural adaptation -- but which message is stronger? Which hits harder?

    This guy's a PhD in American Studies, and likely a MOT (writes for The Forward). He thinks that scene should serve as a template for how to attack an evil "racist" like Drumpf:

    https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-great-gatsby-guide-to-taking-down-trump


    The Great Gatsby will eventually get canceled: the Meyer Wolfsheim character is "anti-Semitic"
     
    He's certainly problematic in the current year. And it's possible that this might be considered a little questionable by today's standards as well: "I almost married a little kyke who'd been after me for ten years. I knew he was below me."

    But this isn't the 1920s, when Henry Ford could publish The International Jew without immediately being crushed by the structures of systemic semitism. If Fitzgerald really was determined to gas 6 billion jews for no reason other than irrational, psychotic hatred, it's kind of unlikely that he would have spent the last few years of his life as a screenwriter in Hollywood, -- with a jewish secretary, and a jewish girlfriend. I'm thinking that someone in that milieu might have noticed.

    Also: Gertrude Stein, Trilling, Salinger, etc. Something about Gatsby seems to appeal to the Tribe.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    In 1921, Fitzgerald wrote to critic Edmund Wilson of his disgust engendered by a visit to Europe in language that sounds like Tom Buchanan waxing poetic: “The negroid streak creeps northward to defile the Nordic race. Already the Italians have the souls of blackamoors.”

    Fitzgerald was good at parodying his own prejudices, just as Waugh was.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Steve Sailer


    Fitzgerald was good at parodying his own prejudices, just as Waugh was.

     

    If only more commenters were!
  147. @very old statistician
    @Reg Cæsar

    That is a very good painting - if you would be so kind, could you tell me who the painter was?
    It is an interesting take on the harrowing of Hell, the episode in the life of Jesus where, immediately after dying on the crucifix, he "descended to hell" and brought the good news to the souls that were waiting there.

    As you can imagine, there are literally thousands of different ways that the subject could be painted, because very few (seriously - very very few) painters were actually there or were ever friends with someone who was there. And since there are thousands of painters who are tempted by the subject, and only a handful of them were actually there or were ever friends with someone who was there ..... well, you can figure out what I am trying to say.

    I once tried to find as many of the paintings of that scene as I could, because I wanted to paint it better than it had been painted before, but I found, after long searches, that very very few painters of talent had even tried the subject.

    Anyway, on the off chance you are reading this, I , an artist, would like to know the name of the artist whose painting you used in your comment. IF you never read it, that is ok too. It was an event that only happened once, and as such, it is easier to paint (that is, the one-time harrowing of hell) than scenes that have taken place again and agains (betrothals, births, weddings, deathbed scenes, and so on). Still, I would like to know who painted that spectacular vision you used in your comment.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Still, I would like to know who painted that spectacular vision you used in your comment.

    Vale of Tears by Gustave Doré.

    Fun fact for sports fans: Gus Dorais, who co-invented the running catch with Knute Rockne, got his nickname because his surname was pronounced the same. Doré must have been well-known on this side of the Atlantic.

  148. @Steve Sailer
    @James Forrestal

    In 1921, Fitzgerald wrote to critic Edmund Wilson of his disgust engendered by a visit to Europe in language that sounds like Tom Buchanan waxing poetic: “The negroid streak creeps northward to defile the Nordic race. Already the Italians have the souls of blackamoors.”

    Fitzgerald was good at parodying his own prejudices, just as Waugh was.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Fitzgerald was good at parodying his own prejudices, just as Waugh was.

    If only more commenters were!

  149. I signed up for Matt Y – maybe half or a third of his notes are free. I get them in the email.

    He’s a pretty smart Dem liberal, who’s arguments mirror what the Dem dominated culture argues. And he’s not totally on board cancel culture and ending free speech.

    But I wouldn’t pay for him.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS