A lot of people have made this point but it bears repeating - there is a distinct difference between crossing an ocean with the idea of building something new, and getting an airline ticket and jumping into a society that will coddle you. This distinction is lost in all this ‘we are a nation of immigrants’ stuff.
@cactus2jack2@normposter Having worked with both i trust the pharmacist more.
A doc tried giving my wife medicine that would kill our baby while she was breastfeeding and the pharmacist caught it.
Finally, due to popular demand.
Cheap People: The Evil Within
Dedicated to the Cheap Bastard who originally inspired this concept for me, Stockton Rush of the infamous Oceangate Titan disaster.
Right wing politics “Let us build stuff for you”
Left wing politics “no, now give me free healthcare or I’ll kill you”
Right wing politics “all I have left is this burrito”
Left wing politics “pulls trigger”
@theistinthought@ErbunnNinja Black fatherlessness was significantly higher than white fatherlessness prior to welfare state. Black women chose the handouts and pushed their men away, which created a model to repeat the cycle.
found one dead ant high up in the cabinet i keep the honey bottle in. no other ants to be found. made it up to the goldmine and died without telling nobody. born to be a skeleton in an indiana jones temple
Helen Andrews’s thesis on the feminisation of Western institutions helps explain something increasingly obvious about progressive politics in both the US and Europe.
Politics is becoming less a contest between competing ideas and more a system of social conformity: you are either with us or against us. Disagreement is no longer merely disagreement. It becomes evidence that there is something morally wrong with you.
That mechanism matters because it allows emotionally compelling narratives to substitute for intellectual coherence. Wind and solar are “green”, therefore questioning their economics, intermittency or system costs makes you a climate denier.
Mass migration from low-trust societies is framed as compassion, therefore questioning its fiscal, social or institutional consequences becomes evidence of moral deficiency.
The contradictions inside the policies matter less than the emotional legitimacy attached to supporting them. Emotions matter, not facts.
Once politics operates this way, social enforcement becomes more powerful than argument. People do not need to believe every proposition. They merely need to understand the reputational cost of challenging it. Nobody wants to be expelled from the respectable tribe.
This is where Timur Kuran’s concept of preference falsification becomes so powerful. People publicly endorse positions they privately doubt because dissent carries a social price.
The apparent consensus then intimidates the next person into silence, making the consensus look stronger still. Eventually you have preference falsification at scale: weak ideas protected by powerful social conformity.
The extraordinary feature of this system is that policy can remain emotionally successful long after it has become economically or socially destructive.
The moral narrative is immediate; the consequences arrive with a lag. By the time energy costs rise, institutions deteriorate, fiscal burdens compound or social trust erodes, years of policy have already been locked in.
It’s a fucking nightmare but it is how a society can keep voting for the Greens or Democrats or Labour etc, subsequently destroy the best nuclear plants, de-industrialise entire sectors, welcome barbarians at the gates etc until the state discovers that the constant false virtue signaling does not balance a budget.