🧵My favorite things to schizopost about are the Kohlberg stages of moral development - a well-studied framework for how humans make moral decisions - and Mos Maiorum - the unwritten norms that allowed the Roman Republic to be self-governing. It occurs to me they are related!
You guys had 40 years to fix it, now instead you’re telling the successful young people that they have to pay even more than you did at take in less. Honestly go fuck yourself.
In 2026, half of NYC residents speak a language other than English as their primary language and one-quarter of NYC residents lack English language proficiency.
The benefit is that people enjoy it. The even greater benefit is that groups of people enjoy it together. They shouldn’t overdo it, obviously, but enjoying something is actually a worthwhile benefit for human beings. We aren’t robots. Not every single thing we do needs to be “optimized.” At a certain point you have to enjoy your life or else what’s even the point of trying to extend it?
Half the world cup over, 2.5 year old's impression of a soccer player: holds baby soccerball to head, goes "ball head!", then pretends to fall over and go "oh nooo owie"
Believing that "people wouldn't do crimes if their basic needs were met" while also believing that "greedy rich people are stealing from everyone" never registers to the people who say this shit as inherently contradictory.
I’ll remind you guys that on Halloween of 2025, JD posted this photo of himself and then announced his 4th child is due in late July exactly 9 months after Halloween
Something you should notice about the criminal justice debate is that liberals use concessions to liberal views on criminal justice to argue that actually we need to do even more progressive things, because the liberalism we’ve agreed to is too expensive or ineffective.
Remember that if there’s a right wing view on criminal justice it’s basically that we should execute felons shortly after they’re convicted. This is obviously the cheapest and most effective way to deal with violent criminals. It would very obviously act as an effective deterrent, but even if it didn’t, it would reduce the most future crime, both because of permanent incapacitation, and because we’d be quickly eliminating those genes.
The way we actually do things, in other words, the way things work today, almost entirely consists of concessions to liberals. We drag out the process, we have lots of appeals, we do fewer (or no) executions. All of this is about placating liberal objections to the right wing position stated above.
But these concessions are then used to argue that actually prison is too expensive, actually there’s too much recidivism, actually prison is criminogenic, so really what we need to do is spend a bunch of money on healthcare and education to try to pacify the most evil criminals.
But these downsides are the result of the concessions! They all go away if you just let me execute felons shortly after conviction. We’re doing all of this to placate liberals in the first place. You can’t use the existence of these downsides in order to get something even more progressive! I could’ve told you in the first place that these would be the downsides to avoiding timely executions.
@xwanyex This is true about many things in the post-war world. There is a lost conservative way of running economies, governments, society, and criminal justice from before WW1 that is essentially not even discussed in political debates. We argue what version of liberalism to implement.