The preference cascade

Glenn Reynolds makes a connection between the Trumpening and #Brexit:

In America, Donald Trump — who many of the experts thought had no chance — is dominating the polls. In Britain, meanwhile, much of the public seems to be mobilizing in favor of exiting the troubled European Union — a British Exit, or Brexit.

Writing in The Spectator, Brendan O’Neill puts this down to a class revolt on both sides of the Atlantic. And he’s right as far as he goes, but I think there’s more than just a class revolt. I think there’s also a developing preference cascade. O’Neill writes: “In both Middle America and Middle England, among both rednecks and chavs, voters who have had more than they can stomach of being patronised, nudged, nagged and basically treated as diseased bodies to be corrected rather than lively minds to be engaged are now putting their hope into a different kind of politics. And the entitled Third Way brigade, schooled to rule, believing themselves possessed of a technocratic expertise that trumps the little people’s vulgar political convictions, are not happy. Not one bit.”

Well, that’s certainly true. Both America and Britain have developed a ruling class that is increasingly insular and removed from — and contemptuous of — the people it deigns to rule. The ruled are now returning the contempt.

Robert Prechter predicted this more than a decade ago. It’s also happening in other European countries. This is what happens when the social mood changes. The blithe, mindless optimism that permits the populace to be used and abused by the financial elite is gone. People are seeing more clearly now, and they are beginning to recognize what was done to them, and by whom.

There will be a reckoning. There will be many reckonings. And unfortunately, not all of them will be pretty, or even civilized.

When the tide goes out, it’s easy to see who was naked all along.


Moderate loyalty

Remember when it was the mostest importantest election ever and it was vital that disappointed conservatives and libertarians rally around the Republican nominee? Yeah, well, it seemed those who appealed to party loyalty to get the disaffected right to vote for Bush, Dole, Bush, McCain, and Romney are suddenly singing a very different tune now that it is becoming apparent that Donald Trump is going to be the nominee:

Conservative donors have engaged a major GOP consulting firm in Florida to research the feasibility of mounting a late, independent run for president amid growing fears that Donald Trump could win the Republican nomination.

A memo prepared for the group zeroes in on ballot access as a looming obstacle for any independent candidate, along with actually identifying a viable, widely known contender and coalescing financial support for that person. The two states with the earliest deadlines for independent candidates, Texas and North Carolina, also have some of the highest hurdles for independents to get on the ballot, according to the research.

“All this research has to happen before March 16, when inevitably Trump is the nominee, so that we have a plan in place,” a source familiar with the discussions said. March 16 is the day after the GOP primary in Florida, a winner-take-all contest that Marco Rubio supporters have identified as a must-win to stop Trump’s early momentum.

I wish I could say that I’m even a little bit surprised. But I’m not. It is rather funny, though, that the rules the moderates installed to permit a Romney clone to keep out the Ronulans are going to seal Trump’s victory sooner rather than later.

Never trust a moderate. Never permit a moderate in a position of leadership. And the moment he snipes at you, treat him exactly like you would treat an enemy taking a shot at you.


“The Donald Trump of Science Fiction”

Prophetic words from the Puppinette:

Last year, during the lead up to the Hugos, I wrote a post about how this was more important than just a rocketship…. At the time, the idea that Donald Trump would be a serious front-runner for the Republican party was the fodder for jokes. It would never happen. But… if anyone was paying attention to what was happening in SFF, it should have been clear that the Rabid Puppies represented the same xenophobic, white supremacist drive that is giving Trump power.

Let me tell you, I’m terrified of the elections this year.

We’ve been writing dystopian novels as warnings for years. The Hunger Games? Reality Television as politics… not so far fetched right now, is it?

So let me be clear. The fight that is going on in SFF for inclusion is not small. It is not petty. It is a reflection of a much bigger problem, and if we, as a community, don’t start paying attention and trying to change the larger culture then we know how this will end.

Mary Kowall is a low-energy liar and a blatant cheater who bought over 40 Hugo votes last year. But “the Donald Trump of Science Fiction”? Flattering! Great honor!

(I have to admit, I thought her tweet on the subject was exactly eight percent funnier since it was about one “Theordore”.)

In any event, she’s right to be terrified of the elections. And she should be terrified of rather more than that. Little does she know what is on the horizon. Little does she know what is coming.

Her rather chagrined tweet in response to the reaction to her comparison was even more amusing.

Mary Robinette Kowal @MaryRobinette
I suspected this would be the case. 

See, she totally meant to do that. They still don’t seem to grasp that anything they say about the Supreme Dark Lord can and will be used against them. And not only by me and the Vile Faceless Minions. Like the Republican establishment, the self-righteous SJWs of what presently passes for science fiction have absolutely no idea how deeply and broadly hated they are.

Look at the novels on the right sidebar of her site. Does that look like science fiction to you? Does it even look like fantasy? No, it’s fucking romance and that’s exactly how her Pink SF publisher is trying to sell it. To even call it Pink SF is a bit of a stretch.

And like the Republican establishment, the SJWs of Pink SF simply do not understand why so many people are absolutely delighted to be able to support the man those SJWs fear and hate, whether they agree with him on many things or not. I’m now seeing traffic levels the PSF-SJWs used to fantasize and lie about having, and a fair amount of that is directly due to them.


Racial identity is dispositive

As I said, I always find Sarah Hoyt’s take on things both interesting and amusing. In this case, it’s because she completely fails to see how utterly predictable her response is, or how she is unwittingly providing observable support to the very argument she intellectually rejects:

One thesis I have seen a lot in recent months at The Blog Which Is A Misspelled Religious Latin Term is, to boil it down to its harshest formulation, “Shoot the Moderates”, because essentially the community there has given up on the idea that anything less than the extremism therein advocated will work, and that any attempt to restrain, control or suspend that extremism — for the sake of preserving future strategic alliances, for example — amounts to shooting your soldiers in the back when they look like they might be winning. From a certain point of view, I understand this reaction, but to me it is essentially saying, “We are sliding backwards so fast that we may as well disconnect the brakes,” without worrying about what will happen if you do successfully reverse the slide only to rocket back up the slope and go over the peak too fast. Reasonable men can argue in good faith over the difference in judgment required, but it strikes me as the stance of an unreasonable man to insist that even to ask to have the argument is sufficient grounds for rejecting it.

    accordingtohoyt | Reply   

THIS. and that’s why I said “they’re killing the republic I love and it feels like they’re killing me.” And when we respond we get told we’re insulting THEM. Oh, for heaven’s sake people, we’re just trying to understand why otherwise rational people would respond so irrationally. We would like you to leave us our republic. We’d like to keep it. And it’s not like I haven’t been fighting the progs all along. It’s not like I haven’t been in the trenches. What more could I do? Defend and imaginary “white race?” Screw that. any philosophy that enshrines your pasty white middle aged guy over Dr. Sowell is sick. I will not shut up. I will not submit.

The white race is not imaginary. America as an Anglo-Saxon nation is not imaginary. What is imaginary is the “proposition nation” version of America that she, the Portuguese immigrant, erroneously believes America to be. Red Eagle and I cover this in moderate detail in Cuckservative: How “Conservatives” Destroyed America.

We’re not killing “the republic that she loves”. It never existed in the first place. Nations are not places, governments, or ideas. Nations are people. Nations are, as the Founding Fathers wrote, posterity.

Sarah may want to consider herself their posterity, but she is not and they would not regard her as such either. Her position requires denying both history and reality, and her postnationalism is as deluded as any progressives. And it’s hardly a surprise that the immigrant declares immigration, the very issue that is propelling Trump to the White House, isn’t a problem.

“Look, immigration is not even a real thing anymore.”

So the largest invasion in human history isn’t “a real thing anymore”? Sarah, with all due affection and respect, it’s not our opinion that is not reflective of reality. And Trump will not be Obama’s third term. I don’t know what he will be, but he won’t be that.

That being said, I do rather like the sound of “Shoot the Moderates”. They’re certainly not good for much else besides target practice. But here is the very important point so many people fail to understand: we’re not the extremists. We’re the only viable alternative to the extremists.

Finally, Sarah, when you “respond” by telling people they are “confused” and “crazy” and “monsters” and “buffoons” and irrational and insane, you are insulting them.


Yeah, it’s not Latin at all

It’s always amusing how the midwits at File 770 are locked into the position that everything I do must, by definition, be stupid, evil, and wrong. A couple of them are still striking poses about the title of Opera Vita Aeterna:

No, that’s not how medieval Latin worked. It still had grammar!

That title is crap Latin whether it is supposed to be Classical or Medieval Latin.

You can’t just write out strings of straight dictionary words of Latin and hope they mean what you want them to.

The change from Classical Latin to Medieval Latin was a little more like taking this:

    To be, or not to be–that is the question:

And making this:

    It’s a question of being or not being.

That Beale title is more the equivalent of

    Is! Is! Negate! Is! Yonder! Query!

Actually, it’s not Latin at all. I don’t speak Latin. I speak Italian. And it’s not actually proper Italian either, which would be Un’opera della vita eterna, but in the hallowed tradition of my fallen intellectual hero, Umberto Eco, I abbreviated it, then added an extra A to give it a Latinate flavor. I not only didn’t “just write out strings of straight dictionary words”, I didn’t use a dictionary at all.

Now, if the File 770ers were genuinely familiar with my writing, or were doing anything more than posturing and virtue-signaling, they would have criticized my bad Latin in Summa Elvetica, where I did actually write in what is actually supposed to be Latin.

Praeterea, homo in Die Sexto creatus sunt. In ordine naturae qui in narratione Creationis descriptus, perfectius praestat. Ergo homo est perfectior quam aelvi. Tum, perfectissima res animae estseparatio ab corpore, quod in illa re similior Dei angelorumque, et purior, quod separatur ab ulla aliena substantia. Quandoquidem non aeque perfecti atque homines, aelvi ulterius quam homines ab perfectissima re animae. Ergo aelvi habent animae naturaliter sibi unita.

I would, of course, welcome any grammatical corrections they might suggest and will be happy to add them to the novel should they be able to provide any.

You can always tell a midwit, because he’s always in a hurry to show everyone how smart he isn’t.


“Something big has happened”

A surprisingly astute article from a dyed-in-the-wool member of the US establishment, Robert Reich:

Something very big has happened, and it’s not due to Bernie Sanders’ magnetism or Donald Trump’s likeability.

It’s a rebellion against the establishment.

The question is why the establishment has been so slow to see this. A year ago – which now seems like an eternity – it proclaimed Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush shoe-ins.

Both had all the advantages – deep bases of funders, well-established networks of political insiders, experienced political advisors, all the name recognition you could want.

But even now that Bush is out and Hillary is still leading but vulnerable, the establishment still doesn’t see what’s occurred. They explain everything by pointing to weaknesses: Bush, they now say, “never connected” and Hillary “has a trust problem.”

A respected political insider recently told me most Americans are largely content. “The economy is in good shape,” he said. “Most Americans are better off than they’ve been in years. The problem has been the major candidates themselves.”

I beg to differ.

Economic indicators may be up but they don’t reflect the economic insecurity most Americans still feel, nor the seeming arbitrariness and unfairness they experience.

Nor do the major indicators show the linkages Americans see between wealth and power, crony capitalism, declining real wages, soaring CEO pay, and a billionaire class that’s turning our democracy into an oligarchy.

Median family income lower now than it was sixteen years ago, adjusted for inflation.

Most economic gains, meanwhile, have gone to top.

These gains have translated into political power to rig the system with bank bailouts, corporate subsidies, special tax loopholes, trade deals, and increasing market power – all of which have further pushed down wages pulled up profits.

Those at the very top of the top have rigged the system even more thoroughly. Since 1995, the average income tax rate for the 400 top-earning Americans has plummeted from 30 percent to 17 percent.

Wealth, power, and crony capitalism fit together. So far in the 2016 election, the richest 400 Americans have accounted for over a third of all campaign contributions.

Americans know a takeover has occurred and they blame the establishment for it.

Damn straight it has. And damn straight they should. They’ve created a system that is every bit as centralized and bureaucratic as Soviet communism and they called it “capitalism” and “free trade”.

It isn’t. It’s financial rape and plunder.


Rabid Puppies: Best Dramatic Presentation, Short Form

The preliminary list of recommendations for the Best Dramatic Presentation, Short Form category:

  • Grimm, Season 4 Episode 21, “Headache”
  • Tales from the Borderlands Episode 5, “The Vault of the Traveller”
  • Life is Strange, Episode 1
  • My Little Pony, Friendship is Magic, Season 5, Episodes 1-2, “The Cutie Map”
  • A Game of Thrones Season 5, Episode 8, “Hardhome” 

Other 2016 Hugo categories


    Neoreaction and the failure of democracy

    A very good, very intelligent article called “What is Neoreaction” by Clark, formerly of Popehat.com, at his new group blog Status 451:

    Why democracy doesn’t work

    In what ways does democracy fail?

    First, as noted above, many people vote as an expressive act. The typical Obama voter knew nothing of his policies, but wanted to be “part” of “something”. There are all sorts of cultural and emotional connotations associated with Team Pepsi, and people want to affiliate themselves with those signals. Team Coke is no better: many Republican voters are in favor of a culture of God, Flag, and Apple Pie, and cast a vote for the GOP as an expressive act, without knowing or caring the actual positions of the candidates they vote for.

    Second, we are rationally ignorant: even if every voter chose to vote based on policy, not emotions, our individual contribution to the outcome of an election is insanely close to zero, and — at some level — we all know this. Thus, almost none of us bothers to educate ourselves about the candidates and their positions. This is, individually, a smart choice.

    Third, democracy has the principal-agent problem: we voters send politicians to Washington DC for — well, for whatever purposes we have. We hope that, once there, they will do our bidding…and we expect to motivate them to do that bidding by using the threat of our future votes and future campaign donations. But a lot is hidden in that “voters hope to motivate them”. Because voters don’t have time or inclination to monitor politicians, and because they tend to vote for expressive purposes rather than policy purposes (think of all the anti-war Democrats who support Obama and his various undeclared overseas wars), politicians need only do just enough to appear to serve the voters, while actually pursuing their own policies.


    Fourth, we humans are hyperbolic discounters. Given the
    promise of one marshmallow now over two in five minutes, we choose the
    one now. Is it any surprise that we, en masse, repeatedly vote for the
    politicians who promise us bread and circuses today, and a bill that
    won’t come due for … a while?
    Fifth, democracy has the public choice problem. There are many
    issues which affect each of us very little — ten cents per person in
    extra taxes for program X, or three dollars per person more in the price
    of a commodity because of trade barrier Y, or a slight bit of extra
    hassle in doing thing Z. These hassles, collectively, destroy a lot of
    value in our lives, but individually, harm us very little. However,
    these small barnacles did not randomly accrete on the body politic —
    each is placed there by the dedicated lobbying of some group that
    benefits quite a lot from the tax, regulation, or trade barrier.
    Ethanol in our gasoline harms all of us a little, but helps a small
    influential group quite a lot. The outrageous salaries of some tenured
    public school teachers harms all of us a little, but helps a small
    influential group quite a lot. As long as one small group benefits from a
    regulation, they will be motivated to secure an outsized influence on
    politicians. And they will succeed.

    However, I would note it should be kept in mind that what the author means by “democracy” here is “representative democracy” and not genuine direct democracy of the sort practiced in Greece, US state referendums, and European national referendums of the sort in which Great Britain is presently engaged. But regardless, a very good article.

    My opinion, as I have previously expressed, is that the problems of “mob rule” of which the Founders so famously warned have proven to be considerably fewer and less problematic than the problems of establishing a political elite that uses the illusion of democratic approval as a protective shield. Now that technology makes it viable for larger polities, direct democracy is a moral imperative in any society with a government that is justified by the will of the people.



    The coming Trumpslide

    Historical model predicts Trump will win the general election in a landslide:

    The odds of Donald Trump becoming America’s next president currently range from 97 percent to 99 percent…. Norpoth predicts that Trump has a 97 percent chance of beating Hillary Clinton and a 99 percent chance of beating Bernie Sanders.

    Norpoth announced his prognostication on Monday night during Stony Brook Alumni Association event at the SUNY Global Center in Manhattan.

    “The bottom line is that the primary model, using also the cyclical movement, makes it almost certain that Donald Trump will be the next president,” Norpoth said, according to The Statesman. “When I started out with this kind of display a few months ago, I thought it was sort of a joke,” the professor told the alumni audience, according to the student newspaper. “Well, I’ll tell you right now, it ain’t a joke anymore.”

    “Trump beats Hillary 54.7 percent to 45.3 percent” in terms of popular vote.

    Well, it’s obviously now time for all those pragmatic Republicans whose only concern is electability to get on the Trump train, isn’t it. After all, we have been repeatedly assured that principles are not important, winning elections is important.