5 ms·

You're grossly underestimating the power of "progressives" within the overall governmental and administrative structure. Sure, to win in 2020 the Democrats had

by Siddarth1977 4y ago

You're grossly underestimating the power of "progressives" within the overall governmental and administrative structure. Sure, to win in 2020 the Democrats had to go with a more pragmatic candidate. But behind the scenes, the legion of government employees, aides, administrators, lobbyists, and bureaucrats are implementing policies and interpreting rules with more or less the exact set of values and beliefs that you're attributing to "weirdos" on twitter and in academia. You're not going to see Biden give a speech where he says "Give minorities preferential access to covid treatments to compensate for systemic racism against them" but some committee of people appointed by his office will write the rules as such. So does it matter that Biden publicly claims moderate, centrist positions if all his appointments and policymakers put racial progressivism as their top priority?

tptacek 4y ago
This is a just-so story, presented without evidence. No matter who gets elected --- even a Republican! --- you could claim that a shadowy web of deep-state progressives were undermining the rulemaking process. I made a specific claim: that progressives get roflstomped in Democratic primary elections. A fantasy football debate about the Democratic party that exists in our respective minds might be fun, but it won't get us anywhere, so I elect not to participate. Upthread, I pointed out that in contrast to the Democratic party, the fringiest, least-defensible elements of the Republican party control the party. That's true! But it's also a dumb argument, and not one I'd want to have to make outside of zinging Rayiner for pretending Biden is a defunder. Just because a bunch of batshit crazy people run the Republican party (or a bunch of out-and-proud racist authoritarians with the Libertarian party) doesn't mean you can't reasonably be a member of either party; in fact, supporting those parties are the only way they'll change. So the whole thing is pretty dumb, and we'd be better of discussing the ideological movements themselves (progressivism, America-first nationalism, or, in the case of the Libertarian party, fascism) than the parties.
- rayiner 4y ago
  > Upthread, I pointed out that in contrast to the Democratic party, the fringiest, least-defensible elements of the Republican party control the party. While Republican voters are definitely nuttier than democratic voters, the intellectual institutions of the broader right are saner than those of the left. I don’t have to deal with this at Fed Soc meetings: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/northwestern-universitys-interim-dean-admits-to-being-a-racist-during-digital-town-hall https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/northwestern-univers... And what threat do they pose to Asians anyway? The people saying “there’s too many Asians in tech” are mostly on the left, not the right. And the ones with the power to do anything about it are almost all on the left. There’s a lot worse that can happen to Asians in this country than being called names, and most of those threats are coming from progressives. And, frankly, whatever MTG says about Muslim immigrants, my mom has said worse about white southerners with GEDs. That stuff isn’t a political issue with a political solution. And what happens if MTG becomes President? My kids will have to say the pledge of allegiance three times a day? Great! That’s far less scary to me than some progressive trying to teach my kid to build their “AAPI identity” around shit that happened to Chinese people 150 years ago: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/schools-are-starting-mandate-asian-american-studies-follow-suit-rcna11118 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/schools-are-start.... Asians believe that the way you view the world, and the attitudes you have, matters for your success. Progressive education is terrifying in this respect.
  - tptacek 4y ago
    Why would anybody care what you have to deal with in a Fed Soc meeting? I care about elected officials because they can actually do things. I don't care what the Sunrise Movement does, except to dunk on them. Anybody can start any kind of "intellectual institution" (see: UATX). How much control over your own thoughts and beliefs are you going to give random collections of people in positions of self-proclaimed authority? The reality is that if MTG becomes President, nothing about the pledge is going to change; the issue will be that she's an incompetent nitwit, and the government will fall apart and we'll make especially stupid foreign policy decisions, which is the area where the executive branch has the most authority. Likewise: despite the fact that no President the Democrats elect would support your schools forcing your kids to "build their AAPI identity" (the D party elects normies, as I keep pointing out), even if it did elect such a person, nothing would actually change, modulo their basic level of competence running the world's most complicated organization.
rayiner 4y ago
> Sure, to win in 2020 the Democrats had to go with a more pragmatic candidate. But behind the scenes, the legion of government employees, aides, administrators, lobbyists, and bureaucrats are implementing policies and interpreting rules with more or less the exact set of values and beliefs that you're attributing to "weirdos" on twitter and in academia. Also, Democratic donors. For non-white professionals, addressing “how you add diversity” is now part of daily professional life. https://www.americanbar.org/groups/litigation/committees/diversity-inclusion/articles/2017/spring2017-0517-hp-general-counsel-diversity-mandate/ https://www.americanbar.org/groups/litigation/committees/div... Apart from being rather demeaning, it’s farcical. You have to be all “I’m a proud Bangladeshi!” But also there’s an unstated “but don’t worry, I’m extremely white washed in the ways you care about.”
- tptacek 4y ago
  Addressing "how do you add diversity" was part of your own set of operating principles until quite recently. Have you changed your mind about all this now? https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=affirmative%20action%20author%3Arayiner&sort=byPopularity&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - rayiner 4y ago
    I thought we would just hire more Black people, not create this absurd caste system of “diverse people” and associated purifying rituals. Also, if I’m being perfectly honest, that was before I was on the receiving end. I wasn’t the one having to attest to about my diversity a decade ago. Nobody was trying to teach my kids oppression narratives, or cultivate their non-white identity. Mea culpa. I still support it for women because, get this, I think men and women are different in significant and meaningful ways.
    - tptacek 4y ago
      Do you still support it for Black people? You could coherently support affirmative action for Black people while not accepting a complicated hierarchy of grievances (which: most people outside of Twitter and nonprofits don't). I'm glad you support it for women, but I'm not sure what the "different in significant ways" thing means in relation to it. Almost everything thinks men and women are different in ways.

tptacek 4y ago

This is a just-so story, presented without evidence. No matter who gets elected --- even a Republican! --- you could claim that a shadowy web of deep-state progressives were undermining the rulemaking process. I made a specific claim: that progressives get roflstomped in Democratic primary elections. A fantasy football debate about the Democratic party that exists in our respective minds might be fun, but it won't get us anywhere, so I elect not to participate. Upthread, I pointed out that in contrast to the Democratic party, the fringiest, least-defensible elements of the Republican party control the party. That's true! But it's also a dumb argument, and not one I'd want to have to make outside of zinging Rayiner for pretending Biden is a defunder. Just because a bunch of batshit crazy people run the Republican party (or a bunch of out-and-proud racist authoritarians with the Libertarian party) doesn't mean you can't reasonably be a member of either party; in fact, supporting those parties are the only way they'll change. So the whole thing is pretty dumb, and we'd be better of discussing the ideological movements themselves (progressivism, America-first nationalism, or, in the case of the Libertarian party, fascism) than the parties.

rayiner 4y ago
> Upthread, I pointed out that in contrast to the Democratic party, the fringiest, least-defensible elements of the Republican party control the party. While Republican voters are definitely nuttier than democratic voters, the intellectual institutions of the broader right are saner than those of the left. I don’t have to deal with this at Fed Soc meetings: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/northwestern-universitys-interim-dean-admits-to-being-a-racist-during-digital-town-hall https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/northwestern-univers... And what threat do they pose to Asians anyway? The people saying “there’s too many Asians in tech” are mostly on the left, not the right. And the ones with the power to do anything about it are almost all on the left. There’s a lot worse that can happen to Asians in this country than being called names, and most of those threats are coming from progressives. And, frankly, whatever MTG says about Muslim immigrants, my mom has said worse about white southerners with GEDs. That stuff isn’t a political issue with a political solution. And what happens if MTG becomes President? My kids will have to say the pledge of allegiance three times a day? Great! That’s far less scary to me than some progressive trying to teach my kid to build their “AAPI identity” around shit that happened to Chinese people 150 years ago: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/schools-are-starting-mandate-asian-american-studies-follow-suit-rcna11118 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/schools-are-start.... Asians believe that the way you view the world, and the attitudes you have, matters for your success. Progressive education is terrifying in this respect.
- tptacek 4y ago
  Why would anybody care what you have to deal with in a Fed Soc meeting? I care about elected officials because they can actually do things. I don't care what the Sunrise Movement does, except to dunk on them. Anybody can start any kind of "intellectual institution" (see: UATX). How much control over your own thoughts and beliefs are you going to give random collections of people in positions of self-proclaimed authority? The reality is that if MTG becomes President, nothing about the pledge is going to change; the issue will be that she's an incompetent nitwit, and the government will fall apart and we'll make especially stupid foreign policy decisions, which is the area where the executive branch has the most authority. Likewise: despite the fact that no President the Democrats elect would support your schools forcing your kids to "build their AAPI identity" (the D party elects normies, as I keep pointing out), even if it did elect such a person, nothing would actually change, modulo their basic level of competence running the world's most complicated organization.

rayiner 4y ago

> Sure, to win in 2020 the Democrats had to go with a more pragmatic candidate. But behind the scenes, the legion of government employees, aides, administrators, lobbyists, and bureaucrats are implementing policies and interpreting rules with more or less the exact set of values and beliefs that you're attributing to "weirdos" on twitter and in academia. Also, Democratic donors. For non-white professionals, addressing “how you add diversity” is now part of daily professional life. https://www.americanbar.org/groups/litigation/committees/diversity-inclusion/articles/2017/spring2017-0517-hp-general-counsel-diversity-mandate/ https://www.americanbar.org/groups/litigation/committees/div... Apart from being rather demeaning, it’s farcical. You have to be all “I’m a proud Bangladeshi!” But also there’s an unstated “but don’t worry, I’m extremely white washed in the ways you care about.”

tptacek 4y ago
Addressing "how do you add diversity" was part of your own set of operating principles until quite recently. Have you changed your mind about all this now? https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&query=affirmative%20action%20author%3Arayiner&sort=byPopularity&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- rayiner 4y ago
  I thought we would just hire more Black people, not create this absurd caste system of “diverse people” and associated purifying rituals. Also, if I’m being perfectly honest, that was before I was on the receiving end. I wasn’t the one having to attest to about my diversity a decade ago. Nobody was trying to teach my kids oppression narratives, or cultivate their non-white identity. Mea culpa. I still support it for women because, get this, I think men and women are different in significant and meaningful ways.
  - tptacek 4y ago
    Do you still support it for Black people? You could coherently support affirmative action for Black people while not accepting a complicated hierarchy of grievances (which: most people outside of Twitter and nonprofits don't). I'm glad you support it for women, but I'm not sure what the "different in significant ways" thing means in relation to it. Almost everything thinks men and women are different in ways.