Republicans thought they’d run on high inflation, a bad economy, and border concerns. But with inflation easing, a good economy, and a blocked border bill, the GOP is struggling.
I don’t agree with all your conclusions or timelines, but you’re perfectly cogent enough. Ignore the haters. You literally pointed them to Kahneman 4 sentences in and they couldn’t be bothered.
I enjoy the use of language. Not that you need me to say it but keep on doing you and know that—to the extent you’re willing to make yourself understand—the message can be received.
To all the haters:
Look at OP’s post history. This person’s views are coherent and nuanced. Their creative unusual use of language doesn’t merit ad hominem attacks. How about calling yourself out as unwilling or unable to grok the communication?
The background to OP’s comment is that human beings have two modes of engaging with the world:
feeling
reason
And that we use reason to justify feeling.
Our world order counts on reason being sufficiently related to reality. Otherwise, law (which is entirely reason-based) can be weaponized for the sake of the feelings of the powerful. Rule of law then becomes a smokescreen for “might makes right.”
None of this should be surprising so far. OP then makes some pessimistic predictions about the inevitability of a Trump presidency and its dire consequences for the more-or-less reason-based world order we’ve grown accustomed to.
Will a sufficiently powerful mass of anger, greed, and fear snuff out the infinite possibilities of empowerment, creativity, and uplifting spirit that human beings can generate? OP says yes (referencing the Great Filter) and predicts some timelines.
OP, if you’re willing to share I’d be interested in hearing how you came to the timeline conclusions.
OP, I don’t think a Trump presidency is inevitable. And, tangentially, the scope of the underlying structural situation scares me. Seems like we can have a good conversation (maybe here?). Thanks for posting.
I don’t agree with all your conclusions or timelines, but you’re perfectly cogent enough. Ignore the haters. You literally pointed them to Kahneman 4 sentences in and they couldn’t be bothered.
I enjoy the use of language. Not that you need me to say it but keep on doing you and know that—to the extent you’re willing to make yourself understand—the message can be received.
To all the haters: Look at OP’s post history. This person’s views are coherent and nuanced. Their creative unusual use of language doesn’t merit ad hominem attacks. How about calling yourself out as unwilling or unable to grok the communication?
The background to OP’s comment is that human beings have two modes of engaging with the world:
Our world order counts on reason being sufficiently related to reality. Otherwise, law (which is entirely reason-based) can be weaponized for the sake of the feelings of the powerful. Rule of law then becomes a smokescreen for “might makes right.”
None of this should be surprising so far. OP then makes some pessimistic predictions about the inevitability of a Trump presidency and its dire consequences for the more-or-less reason-based world order we’ve grown accustomed to.
Will a sufficiently powerful mass of anger, greed, and fear snuff out the infinite possibilities of empowerment, creativity, and uplifting spirit that human beings can generate? OP says yes (referencing the Great Filter) and predicts some timelines.
OP, if you’re willing to share I’d be interested in hearing how you came to the timeline conclusions.
OP, I don’t think a Trump presidency is inevitable. And, tangentially, the scope of the underlying structural situation scares me. Seems like we can have a good conversation (maybe here?). Thanks for posting.