The idea that TWW gave dems a false playbook as mistake theorists I find bananas. In general, progressive movements are always the masters of subversion and whatever-it-takes strategies since they are the ones demanding change. They've certainly never treated Trump as though they are mistake theorists - he's been a beyond-the-pale man of…
The idea that TWW gave dems a false playbook as mistake theorists I find bananas. In general, progressive movements are always the masters of subversion and whatever-it-takes strategies since they are the ones demanding change. They've certainly never treated Trump as though they are mistake theorists - he's been a beyond-the-pale man of evil to them from the outset. Trump may have mastered brazenness as an individual, but the dems/media are masters of coordinated brazenness, which ultimately then selects for individuals of exceptional brazenness on the other side.
I largely agree with you. My post was something a steelman of their position, but also a way of pointing out that they're just as brazen, but, as you point out, their brazenness looks different, and is more subversive.
I do think that they want to appear to be mistake theorists, and sometimes they even are, but as I pointed out often what this results in is the worst of both worlds.
> [dems] brazenness looks different, and is more subversive.
I think this goes to the heart of the matter. Dems are conflict theorists too but try to play the mistake theory game on the surface - see the removal of Sanders in 2016 (you mention this.
Overall a really good thought-provoking article. with a very useful mental model to think about US political culture - thanks!
I think that a distinction between "dems" as politicians and "dems" as voters would be helpful here. All politicians are arbiters of brazenness, but they must tailor/temper their brazenness to the voters. Trump changed the rules on brazenness, and voters are arguably in a deep flux because of steep changes in culture. It's a pretty chaotic space right now for both subjects and objects.
Your point about flux is dead on. And I could have done a better job differentiating between the various groups of Democrats, though that can sometimes end up being a bottomless pit of clarifications.
The idea that TWW gave dems a false playbook as mistake theorists I find bananas. In general, progressive movements are always the masters of subversion and whatever-it-takes strategies since they are the ones demanding change. They've certainly never treated Trump as though they are mistake theorists - he's been a beyond-the-pale man of evil to them from the outset. Trump may have mastered brazenness as an individual, but the dems/media are masters of coordinated brazenness, which ultimately then selects for individuals of exceptional brazenness on the other side.
I largely agree with you. My post was something a steelman of their position, but also a way of pointing out that they're just as brazen, but, as you point out, their brazenness looks different, and is more subversive.
I do think that they want to appear to be mistake theorists, and sometimes they even are, but as I pointed out often what this results in is the worst of both worlds.
> [dems] brazenness looks different, and is more subversive.
I think this goes to the heart of the matter. Dems are conflict theorists too but try to play the mistake theory game on the surface - see the removal of Sanders in 2016 (you mention this.
Overall a really good thought-provoking article. with a very useful mental model to think about US political culture - thanks!
I think that a distinction between "dems" as politicians and "dems" as voters would be helpful here. All politicians are arbiters of brazenness, but they must tailor/temper their brazenness to the voters. Trump changed the rules on brazenness, and voters are arguably in a deep flux because of steep changes in culture. It's a pretty chaotic space right now for both subjects and objects.
Your point about flux is dead on. And I could have done a better job differentiating between the various groups of Democrats, though that can sometimes end up being a bottomless pit of clarifications.