4.18.25 - Read This/Politics/Anger/Figuring Things out
More individuals from X dot come have visited this site recently, and plenty from Reddit continue to visit it for a few law school advice posts I have shared.
With a little bit of increasing attention (but still marginal) I would like to reiterate a few points I've made earlier on this site.
Purpose.This website is a public notebook. It's not an engine of persuasion. If I do that it would be on social media platforms, not here, really. There may be exceptions to this and I may say so on a post if that's what I'm doing, but generally these are the most unstructured reflections I can muster. These are NOT polished thoughts. I do not edit or think very hard about them, its about as close to a stream of consciousness you can get. It's useful to do this becuae here and there some thoughts are useful and writing them down improves retention, and I can say them in contexts that actually matter, you know to my friends or loved ones or something. But I do think a lot of the entries are enjoyable.
Politics.I get the sense I'm going to keep being extremely angry about what the Trump administration is doing and will keep talking about it online and here. I spent an unhealthy amount of time online following the Kilmar saga and made the foolish decision to engage with RW trolls on it, and was honestly taken aback by how fast people tried to peg me as a very specific kind of lib/leftist. I broke my generally "cooler" demeanour and got too angry, which I think I will avoid in the future. Unfortunately, this is all just characteristic of our times.
It's a little annoying to say so, but I don't believe in political labels all that much, because a lot of smart people have unbundled views on many things and a view on one thing isnt extremely predictive of views on another thing.
But I also recognize people want to know who people are, and don't want to go wading through vague signals and proxies that often contradict eachother to make guesses. Here are some labels that I think capture my politics, imperfectly, and that are sometimes at odds with one another.
- elements of classical liberalism (inherent skepticism for the centralization of power and state authority, often bullish on markets)
- civil libertarianism (often used to describe some of the sentiments of liberalism, generally, but often connotes a focus on privacy and property interests)
- christian democracy/distributism (I'm a believer in redistribution, a modest and effective welfare state, a moral obligation to the needy and vulnerable)
- generally pro-migration for America (this is a policy preference, not an ideology, but its such a wedge issue it requires treatment. I am very sympathetic to migration to America, especially from Mexico and South America. I think being against this migration is as silly and shortsighted as being against catholics or irish people in the 19th century. I think the evidence is very strong that this is good for our society and culture. But my commitment to Democracy is stronger than this policy preference, and I do think native citizens have a RIGHT to decide what their country looks like and who is part of it. Illegal immigration is thus, a threat to the democratic order, and in that sense, I am against it. We should enforce our laws but do it in accordance with our laws and Constitutional principles, and with mercy and compassion.)
- cultural conservatism (nuclear families centered around rasing children and traditional gender roles remain the ideal way to organize society, mostly, our society should promote this model and countenance exceptions with respect, surely, but not applause. people who deviate from this path are often some of the best, brightest, and most celebrated people in our history . . . but this traditional path will always be the best for the vast, vast majority of people and we should not lose sight of that.)
- color blindism (people of different national backgrounds are different, culturally, biologically, historically. we are not the same and thats good. these differences reflect themselves in difference of outcomes in many places, some uncomfortable. but trying to engineer parity causes serious, serious social issues which tear societies apart. I am extremely skeptical at many variants of the civil rights regime, DEI, and affirmative action. I don't think there is no place for race-consciousness, but I think America generally works best on meritocratic principles).
- elements of progressivism (this word is soo loaded now and so abused that I hesitate to use it. But progressivism, at its core, is the idea that humans are inventive and malleable enough to improve their society. I don't ascribe to the stong variant of this ideology, which devolves into leftism and utopianism––humans have constraints, there arent infinite cultural forms that will work for us. But I think that a thinking person, fundamentally, should be interested in how things can be better, how we can deploy better real and social technologies to improve human fluorishing. In this sense, I am a cautious progressive. I want to make life better, I want to explore policies that can help poor people, invest in technologies that can improve life for everyone.)
- Anti-Maoism/Anti-Fascism.(I don't know how else to put this, but I'm essentially against anything rooted in the politics of organizing group resentment. That's the path to hell. Right now, Trump is a Maoist. So his movement has to be opposed by all means at our disposal, with no fear and no mercy. When these strains pop up in societies, they are a threat to civilization itself.)
Best,
knxnts