I find OTB to be fairly reliable Republican-Libertarian but you are right that as a Democratic Party supporter, I find it is a kind of conservatism that I can read and debate on an intellectual manner. OTB does not read as jeering extremism to me. It is not Michelle Malkin or Sean Hannity. It helps that Joyner and Taylor are both academics and Mataconis writes like a lawyer instead of a partisan.
At the same time, they are not David Brooks, who is the epitome of being the conservative writer that liberals can read and tolerate. They are more willing to go out and criticize liberal and Democratic policies on harsher terms than David Brooks.
I think it is possible to be a strong Democrat, Republican, or Libertarian and still have respectful arguments. TVD's problem is his special combination of victimhood with jeering partisanship as stated above.
I am no fan of TVD but would removing his FP status really help?
I remember someone making a comment in another thread that if we did not have a TVD, we would need to create him. This seems to be more of an iron-law of internet communities. Every community seems to have a troll that will not go away and eventually becomes "tolerated" by the community at large.
Sociologically this is interesting but you are also right that it can prevent a community from growing.
Personally I don't understand the psychological need to troll but it seems that this anonymity is hear to stay. The only places that manage to suppress trolling make people comment using facebook.
Also Judaism is in many ways an archly pragmatic religion. We have our esoterics and contradictions like all religions but we also like things to make a reasonable amount of sense.
There is also the fact that Judaism lacks the concept of original sin.
Sex is pleasurable and feels good. Why would God make the procreative act pleasurable? To encourage it. In Judaism, it simply does not make sense for an act that causes pleasure to be bad. Maybe there should be restraint and moderation but not full on shame and repression.
IIRC, I read that a lot early Christian theology was created as a rejection of rational and legalistic Judaism of the time.
I think the late early Christians adopted a lot of these views to make the break from Judaism more complete especially the ones who were arch-disciples of Saul the Traitor.
"Several gay activists wonder if one reason that evangelicals speak out so strongly against homosexuality (far more so than much more serious sins) is because they think that gays are having too much fun."
A Puritan is someone who lies awake at night worrying that someone, somewhere, is having a good time-HL Mencken
My issue is not really what religious conservatives believe. If they believe that sex should only exist in the realm of marriage that is fine as long as they don't tread on others.
The issue as you note is that there is a wide gap between what many religious conservatives preach and what they practice when it comes to sex.
There has always been pre-marital sex and always will be pre-marital sex. I don't think the levels of pre-marital sex have changed but what has changed is the taboo is gone and we can now engage in it without shame. Also we talk about it a bit more.
Many religious conservatives seem to want a return to taboo and stigma and as far as I can tell don't practice what they preach.
Porn Consumption is higher in red states. Teenage Pregnancy Rates are higher in Red States. Plus it seems like there are always a few news stories every year about a male, socially conservative preacher or politician getting caught with a male escort. I've read articles from sex workers in New York who claim that some of their biggest clients are Orthodox and Haredi Jewish men who use prostitution to have sex with non-Jewish women. I can't verify the last story but it would not surprise me.
Clearly all of these contortions damage the body and psyche. I don't think we need to go poly or full on return to our pagan routes. I am not poly. Polyamoury often gives me a headache and most poly couples I've met seem to end poorly. However, it should not be a radical notion that sex can be 100 percent recreational and happen before marriage. It always has and always will.
Of course what I am really curious about is that a lot of these social conservatives are also small-government types. How do they expect to create their preferred social order with small government? I knew someone who grew up in Communist Poland during the 70s and 1980s and he told me how easy it was to obtain pornography in Poland during a time of really big government.
1. Invite Karen Finley to do a performance on your front lawn, or
2. Have Richard Serra design a sculpture that bisects your front lawn and is meant to be a permanent installation that causes people to cross your lawn in weird ways to reach the front door.
I am sure plenty of neo-hippies still listen to Phish though. I saw Phish in concert once. It was 1994 and I just finished the 8th grade.
The truth is that the music scene is so diverse and niche now that there is not one-unified scene. At my very small undergrad, most people probably listened to what is generally described as "indie" rock. In 1998-2002, this included The Magnetic Fields, Superchunk, Belle and Sebastian, Sleater-Kinney, etc. Basically anyone on Merge, Matador, Sub-Pop or Kill Rock Stars. I remember Dr. Octagon was also popular.
It is probably the same at my underground now but with more indie bands added.
Stigma is generally another word for taboo. Almost every culture and society have taboos.
I am not sure that a culture or society can survive without taboos.
I agree that a lot of social stigmas and taboos can be harmful because they prevent people from seeking help or aid and can be tools of oppression. For example, taboos about gender norms can be very damaging to gender non-conformists or people just slightly out of the mold even.
However as Rose pointed out above, stigma and taboo can also act as anchors for our actions (hopefully) and make people question their thoughts and assumptions. Sometime this can lead to very painful and depressing introspection but hopefully a better person emerges from these internal struggles.
The very tricky problem is that there is always going to be wild disagreement about what is a good stigma/taboo and what is a bad stigma/taboo.
Public Displays of Affection might be a good example here. Is refraining from being super-affectionate with a lover in public a sign of consideration for being out among strangers or is it suppression of desire? There is never going to be consensus on this or many other stigmas/taboos.
I honestly don't get when political scientists, libertarians, and economists talk about how voting is irrational.
The only reason that comes to mind about why this constantly comes up is that they hope enough people will just not vote and then they can enact their preferred policy preferences. There was an episode of NPR's Planet Money when they talked to 6 economists about policies they agree on. All the econ people described themselves as being on different ends of the ideological spectrum but they all agreed that the various things were the best policy. All of the policies would be wildly unpopular if enacted.
Though one of the fundamental problems of any society seems to be why there is a vast difference between good policy and good politics.
Voting is simply the system we have in a democratic republic. I vote the way I vote because one party is closer to my politics and the other party looks like the inmates have taken over the asylum.
Perhaps my Democratic votes really don't matter in San Francisco, CA overall. But they matter in primaries. They matter in the proposition system (which I am against but will participate in as long as it exists or I live in California).
Plus what is hard about understanding yourself to be part of an aggregate here for the poli sci types? My vote doesn't matter as an individual but it matters in the aggregate towards the group effort.
As to Jason's question, voting for Romney would make me feel like I committed an act of betraying my friends, family, party, and Country. Romney has almost no chance of winning the electoral college votes from California but if he did and I voted for him to fulfill this experiment, I would feel horrible.
Prove that psychology is just paying someone to be your friend. I happen to think that psychology and mental health are often very valuable.
Prove that half of doctors just dole up placebos. Sources please.
As for restaurants, I like eating at restaurants because they can do much more original things with food than I can. And tastier stuff as well.
What does your non-consumer economy look like? You are not the first and will not be the last person I have ever met that has argued against consumerism. But no one has an alternative for a non-consumer based economy. The only examples from history tend to involve masses of people living at sustenance levels.
This is where a lot of people seem to confuse how economists think about efficiency.
Normally, I see this in the debate about Amazon.com or Book Stores. A Tech writer will talk about how book stores are so inefficient compared t0 Amazon. My friend with a PhD tells me that in economics, a purchase is efficient if someone is willing to pay for it and thinks it is worth that price.
So people who shop at book stores are being efficient because they want that experience and value in their community.
I don't think that all business people are trying to swindle people.
I do believe that there is such a thing as disparate bargaining power and am suspicious of things like binding arbitration a scam in contracts of adhesion. I generally also think that at-will is more friendly towards the employer than the employee.
Arbitration can be great if between two equally sophisticated parties. Marvel and DC are fine in dealing with binding arbitration clauses. Mr or Ms. Smith against Megacorp, not so much often.
Likewise, disparate bargaining power is what makes Freedom to Contract a sham and Lochner a joke. It is one thing for a skilled professional with five or more years of experience to bargain with an employer. It is entirely another thing for an un or low to moderate skilled worker to do the same. It is a fiction to say that the bakers in Lochner really wanted to work those long and brutal hours.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.
On “On Signaling Behavior (UPDATED!)”
I don't know. I feel like there are a lot of people on the right-wing who specialize in this kind of combination.
"
What do you mean by "weak Republican?"
I find OTB to be fairly reliable Republican-Libertarian but you are right that as a Democratic Party supporter, I find it is a kind of conservatism that I can read and debate on an intellectual manner. OTB does not read as jeering extremism to me. It is not Michelle Malkin or Sean Hannity. It helps that Joyner and Taylor are both academics and Mataconis writes like a lawyer instead of a partisan.
At the same time, they are not David Brooks, who is the epitome of being the conservative writer that liberals can read and tolerate. They are more willing to go out and criticize liberal and Democratic policies on harsher terms than David Brooks.
I think it is possible to be a strong Democrat, Republican, or Libertarian and still have respectful arguments. TVD's problem is his special combination of victimhood with jeering partisanship as stated above.
"
How about Hannah Arendt?
On “A Letter to Fox & Friends”
James,
I am no fan of TVD but would removing his FP status really help?
I remember someone making a comment in another thread that if we did not have a TVD, we would need to create him. This seems to be more of an iron-law of internet communities. Every community seems to have a troll that will not go away and eventually becomes "tolerated" by the community at large.
Sociologically this is interesting but you are also right that it can prevent a community from growing.
Personally I don't understand the psychological need to troll but it seems that this anonymity is hear to stay. The only places that manage to suppress trolling make people comment using facebook.
On “Human Sexuality and Religious Norms”
Maybe groupon has a deal
On “A Letter to Fox & Friends”
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!
"
I am waiting for the day when it is revealed that all Internet trolls really belong to a performance art collective that operates out of New York.
"
The day Chevy Chase lies to me is the day I lose my faith in humanity!
On “Human Sexuality and Religious Norms”
Agreed.
I find it curious that the Kennedy-Nixon race was the start of decay. Maybe he can even place the exact start somewhere in early November 1960.
"
I see the same article every four years.
Though my favorite was the billboard that Welcomed Republicans and proudly stated that the Mayor of Tampa and the entire city council were Democrats.
"
Noted.
As we forever bar ourselves from achieving elective office.
"
Also Judaism is in many ways an archly pragmatic religion. We have our esoterics and contradictions like all religions but we also like things to make a reasonable amount of sense.
There is also the fact that Judaism lacks the concept of original sin.
Sex is pleasurable and feels good. Why would God make the procreative act pleasurable? To encourage it. In Judaism, it simply does not make sense for an act that causes pleasure to be bad. Maybe there should be restraint and moderation but not full on shame and repression.
IIRC, I read that a lot early Christian theology was created as a rejection of rational and legalistic Judaism of the time.
"
I think the late early Christians adopted a lot of these views to make the break from Judaism more complete especially the ones who were arch-disciples of Saul the Traitor.
"Several gay activists wonder if one reason that evangelicals speak out so strongly against homosexuality (far more so than much more serious sins) is because they think that gays are having too much fun."
A Puritan is someone who lies awake at night worrying that someone, somewhere, is having a good time-HL Mencken
"
My issue is not really what religious conservatives believe. If they believe that sex should only exist in the realm of marriage that is fine as long as they don't tread on others.
The issue as you note is that there is a wide gap between what many religious conservatives preach and what they practice when it comes to sex.
There has always been pre-marital sex and always will be pre-marital sex. I don't think the levels of pre-marital sex have changed but what has changed is the taboo is gone and we can now engage in it without shame. Also we talk about it a bit more.
Many religious conservatives seem to want a return to taboo and stigma and as far as I can tell don't practice what they preach.
Porn Consumption is higher in red states. Teenage Pregnancy Rates are higher in Red States. Plus it seems like there are always a few news stories every year about a male, socially conservative preacher or politician getting caught with a male escort. I've read articles from sex workers in New York who claim that some of their biggest clients are Orthodox and Haredi Jewish men who use prostitution to have sex with non-Jewish women. I can't verify the last story but it would not surprise me.
Clearly all of these contortions damage the body and psyche. I don't think we need to go poly or full on return to our pagan routes. I am not poly. Polyamoury often gives me a headache and most poly couples I've met seem to end poorly. However, it should not be a radical notion that sex can be 100 percent recreational and happen before marriage. It always has and always will.
Of course what I am really curious about is that a lot of these social conservatives are also small-government types. How do they expect to create their preferred social order with small government? I knew someone who grew up in Communist Poland during the 70s and 1980s and he told me how easy it was to obtain pornography in Poland during a time of really big government.
On “A Letter to Fox & Friends”
Thanks for the invitation to dive into surrealism!
Giraffe Skylark Moonbeam.
"
An excellent comment, sir!
"
I thought Franco was still dead.
On “Voting Part I: I Am Jason, of the Lizard People.”
If you really want to cause discomfort, you can:
1. Invite Karen Finley to do a performance on your front lawn, or
2. Have Richard Serra design a sculpture that bisects your front lawn and is meant to be a permanent installation that causes people to cross your lawn in weird ways to reach the front door.
"
My comment on poli-sci and economists and libertarians was meant to be a joke that obviously failed and probably was not very funny.
I am sorry.
"
You have been out of college a long time.
I am sure plenty of neo-hippies still listen to Phish though. I saw Phish in concert once. It was 1994 and I just finished the 8th grade.
The truth is that the music scene is so diverse and niche now that there is not one-unified scene. At my very small undergrad, most people probably listened to what is generally described as "indie" rock. In 1998-2002, this included The Magnetic Fields, Superchunk, Belle and Sebastian, Sleater-Kinney, etc. Basically anyone on Merge, Matador, Sub-Pop or Kill Rock Stars. I remember Dr. Octagon was also popular.
It is probably the same at my underground now but with more indie bands added.
On “Social Stigmas (An Open Thread)”
Stigma is generally another word for taboo. Almost every culture and society have taboos.
I am not sure that a culture or society can survive without taboos.
I agree that a lot of social stigmas and taboos can be harmful because they prevent people from seeking help or aid and can be tools of oppression. For example, taboos about gender norms can be very damaging to gender non-conformists or people just slightly out of the mold even.
However as Rose pointed out above, stigma and taboo can also act as anchors for our actions (hopefully) and make people question their thoughts and assumptions. Sometime this can lead to very painful and depressing introspection but hopefully a better person emerges from these internal struggles.
The very tricky problem is that there is always going to be wild disagreement about what is a good stigma/taboo and what is a bad stigma/taboo.
Public Displays of Affection might be a good example here. Is refraining from being super-affectionate with a lover in public a sign of consideration for being out among strangers or is it suppression of desire? There is never going to be consensus on this or many other stigmas/taboos.
On “Voting Part I: I Am Jason, of the Lizard People.”
I honestly don't get when political scientists, libertarians, and economists talk about how voting is irrational.
The only reason that comes to mind about why this constantly comes up is that they hope enough people will just not vote and then they can enact their preferred policy preferences. There was an episode of NPR's Planet Money when they talked to 6 economists about policies they agree on. All the econ people described themselves as being on different ends of the ideological spectrum but they all agreed that the various things were the best policy. All of the policies would be wildly unpopular if enacted.
Though one of the fundamental problems of any society seems to be why there is a vast difference between good policy and good politics.
Voting is simply the system we have in a democratic republic. I vote the way I vote because one party is closer to my politics and the other party looks like the inmates have taken over the asylum.
Perhaps my Democratic votes really don't matter in San Francisco, CA overall. But they matter in primaries. They matter in the proposition system (which I am against but will participate in as long as it exists or I live in California).
Plus what is hard about understanding yourself to be part of an aggregate here for the poli sci types? My vote doesn't matter as an individual but it matters in the aggregate towards the group effort.
As to Jason's question, voting for Romney would make me feel like I committed an act of betraying my friends, family, party, and Country. Romney has almost no chance of winning the electoral college votes from California but if he did and I voted for him to fulfill this experiment, I would feel horrible.
On “Charity and Stigma”
Kimmi,
Again you make no citations.
Prove that psychology is just paying someone to be your friend. I happen to think that psychology and mental health are often very valuable.
Prove that half of doctors just dole up placebos. Sources please.
As for restaurants, I like eating at restaurants because they can do much more original things with food than I can. And tastier stuff as well.
What does your non-consumer economy look like? You are not the first and will not be the last person I have ever met that has argued against consumerism. But no one has an alternative for a non-consumer based economy. The only examples from history tend to involve masses of people living at sustenance levels.
"
At James,
Well said. I agree with you on this stuff.
This is where a lot of people seem to confuse how economists think about efficiency.
Normally, I see this in the debate about Amazon.com or Book Stores. A Tech writer will talk about how book stores are so inefficient compared t0 Amazon. My friend with a PhD tells me that in economics, a purchase is efficient if someone is willing to pay for it and thinks it is worth that price.
So people who shop at book stores are being efficient because they want that experience and value in their community.
I think Kimmi is largely moralizing.
"
I don't think that all business people are trying to swindle people.
I do believe that there is such a thing as disparate bargaining power and am suspicious of things like binding arbitration a scam in contracts of adhesion. I generally also think that at-will is more friendly towards the employer than the employee.
Arbitration can be great if between two equally sophisticated parties. Marvel and DC are fine in dealing with binding arbitration clauses. Mr or Ms. Smith against Megacorp, not so much often.
Likewise, disparate bargaining power is what makes Freedom to Contract a sham and Lochner a joke. It is one thing for a skilled professional with five or more years of experience to bargain with an employer. It is entirely another thing for an un or low to moderate skilled worker to do the same. It is a fiction to say that the bakers in Lochner really wanted to work those long and brutal hours.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.