@moreacomment.bsky.social
1. You read a little too much into it - Athens/Sparta is a familiar binary and is quite often used in Israel, 2. The concession to “Athens” means “we must somehow keep educated liberals in the country to maintain our technological edge”. “Athens”, in this context, merely maintains Sparta’s arsenal.
September 16, 2025 at 11:37 AM
1. You read a little too much into it - Athens/Sparta is a familiar binary and is quite often used in Israel, 2. The concession to “Athens” means “we must somehow keep educated liberals in the country to maintain our technological edge”. “Athens”, in this context, merely maintains Sparta’s arsenal.
The real point is a confusion between messaging to win elections (Shor is right about that) and messaging to change minds between elections (Shor is wrong about that). We are now between elections!
August 24, 2025 at 10:59 PM
The real point is a confusion between messaging to win elections (Shor is right about that) and messaging to change minds between elections (Shor is wrong about that). We are now between elections!
You’re absolutely right, and also “conservative” had a separate, minimal and negative meaning, as “against the changes proposed by socialists”. As socialist parties retreated since 1975, so did this meaning of “conservative”.
August 23, 2025 at 11:42 AM
You’re absolutely right, and also “conservative” had a separate, minimal and negative meaning, as “against the changes proposed by socialists”. As socialist parties retreated since 1975, so did this meaning of “conservative”.
You make good points, but I would also say that just as every good citizen should try to learn history, so every good citizen should try to become as numerate as possible. Democracy, among other things, involves numbers.
August 19, 2025 at 4:55 PM
You make good points, but I would also say that just as every good citizen should try to learn history, so every good citizen should try to become as numerate as possible. Democracy, among other things, involves numbers.
On one narrow point you’re wrong, real hippie-punching has not recently been tried. In fact being eloquent against the far right would probably demand being eloquent against the far left, too. But you’re right that the key is passion and eloquence.
August 19, 2025 at 4:28 PM
On one narrow point you’re wrong, real hippie-punching has not recently been tried. In fact being eloquent against the far right would probably demand being eloquent against the far left, too. But you’re right that the key is passion and eloquence.
We will need to find the precise balance, the most radical Democracy-building strategy that still does not lead to massive right-wing backlash. (DC and PR statehood yes, court-packing no?)
August 19, 2025 at 3:45 PM
We will need to find the precise balance, the most radical Democracy-building strategy that still does not lead to massive right-wing backlash. (DC and PR statehood yes, court-packing no?)
The question is which of the two is the more realistic: (1) eradicating nationalism, or (2) taming it by grounding it in liberalism.
August 19, 2025 at 12:24 PM
The question is which of the two is the more realistic: (1) eradicating nationalism, or (2) taming it by grounding it in liberalism.
This also explains the Putin /mail in votes conversation. Trump said to Putin: give me something, this is killing me politically. Putin, prepared, responded with “you don’t need to give them anything, you’re winning by a mile, it’s just that mail-in rigs it against you”.
August 18, 2025 at 8:12 PM
This also explains the Putin /mail in votes conversation. Trump said to Putin: give me something, this is killing me politically. Putin, prepared, responded with “you don’t need to give them anything, you’re winning by a mile, it’s just that mail-in rigs it against you”.
Frankly that’s par for the course for colleges’ promotional prose.
August 18, 2025 at 8:07 PM
Frankly that’s par for the course for colleges’ promotional prose.
It’s perhaps more useful to compare each issue polling separately to overall approval. Eyeballing it, this seems like immigration moved up in this metric, the economy moved down. Perhaps the summary is: thermostatic backlash plus realization this is not a generic Republican.
August 18, 2025 at 6:40 PM
It’s perhaps more useful to compare each issue polling separately to overall approval. Eyeballing it, this seems like immigration moved up in this metric, the economy moved down. Perhaps the summary is: thermostatic backlash plus realization this is not a generic Republican.
You say Zionists hid their actual plans. You think in the terms of conspiracy, about what was a democratically run, pluralistic mass movement.
August 17, 2025 at 9:13 PM
You say Zionists hid their actual plans. You think in the terms of conspiracy, about what was a democratically run, pluralistic mass movement.
So you seem to concede the fact that most Zionists did not expect or desire ethnic cleansing. The common assumption was that Jewish migration would be such to make this question moot. The easiest counterfactual is the 47 partition plan; it could have worked.
August 17, 2025 at 8:31 PM
So you seem to concede the fact that most Zionists did not expect or desire ethnic cleansing. The common assumption was that Jewish migration would be such to make this question moot. The easiest counterfactual is the 47 partition plan; it could have worked.
If your comment is still on-topic, it must mean that, in your view, supermajorities of Jews in Palestine supported “apartheid and genocide” right from the beginning. This is demonstrably false, and you may rely on bad sources.
August 17, 2025 at 8:04 PM
If your comment is still on-topic, it must mean that, in your view, supermajorities of Jews in Palestine supported “apartheid and genocide” right from the beginning. This is demonstrably false, and you may rely on bad sources.
The point is not who was at fault, the point is the narrow one that all through the 20th century there were majorities or near-majorities of the Israeli public, in support of just solutions to the conflict. The supermajority we see today does not follow from the ethnic project as such.
August 17, 2025 at 7:46 PM
The point is not who was at fault, the point is the narrow one that all through the 20th century there were majorities or near-majorities of the Israeli public, in support of just solutions to the conflict. The supermajority we see today does not follow from the ethnic project as such.
There really wasn’t this supermajority before the second intifada. What I’m saying is, Israel isn’t an example of the supposed evil of a state founded on national liberation, it’s an example of the brutalization of endless war.
August 17, 2025 at 6:33 PM
There really wasn’t this supermajority before the second intifada. What I’m saying is, Israel isn’t an example of the supposed evil of a state founded on national liberation, it’s an example of the brutalization of endless war.
Your ability to be specific based on your experience is an important signal. (Also, I think everywhere nowadays care a *lot* about teaching).
August 15, 2025 at 1:43 AM
Your ability to be specific based on your experience is an important signal. (Also, I think everywhere nowadays care a *lot* about teaching).
Actually I think Trump’s still doing historically better than past GOP with blacks? Is race depolarization still on?
August 14, 2025 at 9:26 PM
Actually I think Trump’s still doing historically better than past GOP with blacks? Is race depolarization still on?
The Hispanic numbers are almost identical to the overall numbers.
August 14, 2025 at 9:23 PM
The Hispanic numbers are almost identical to the overall numbers.
I think the real (and difficult to operationalize) question about the electoral value of moderation is: how much would it have helped electorally overall if, in the run-up to 2024, anyone who talked about, e.g., Gaza would have talked about, e.g, reproductive freedom instead?
August 13, 2025 at 3:38 PM
I think the real (and difficult to operationalize) question about the electoral value of moderation is: how much would it have helped electorally overall if, in the run-up to 2024, anyone who talked about, e.g., Gaza would have talked about, e.g, reproductive freedom instead?
The pivot to KH in 2024 and the fact that the last Secretary of State was a technocrat mean there’s no “next in line”.
August 12, 2025 at 4:31 PM
The pivot to KH in 2024 and the fact that the last Secretary of State was a technocrat mean there’s no “next in line”.
Prediction markets spooked by Maine 2020. The unbeatable appear unbeatable until they get beaten and 49% in this environment may be optimistic for Collins?
August 12, 2025 at 3:27 PM
Prediction markets spooked by Maine 2020. The unbeatable appear unbeatable until they get beaten and 49% in this environment may be optimistic for Collins?
I’m willing to do that now! Sorry for making you angry, and honestly sorry for sounding condescending about it, but I think you’ll do better once you recognize that we operate in a reality that imposes limits on the possible.
August 11, 2025 at 9:18 PM
I’m willing to do that now! Sorry for making you angry, and honestly sorry for sounding condescending about it, but I think you’ll do better once you recognize that we operate in a reality that imposes limits on the possible.
There’s a genre of “we get X from Trump because centrist Dems argued for Y, which somewhat resembles X”. 1. The argument from Y to X is inherently unlikely (as if Trump needs the centrist approval!), 2. This is presented as an argument against Y and, as such, is a non sequitur.
August 11, 2025 at 5:26 PM
There’s a genre of “we get X from Trump because centrist Dems argued for Y, which somewhat resembles X”. 1. The argument from Y to X is inherently unlikely (as if Trump needs the centrist approval!), 2. This is presented as an argument against Y and, as such, is a non sequitur.
You see this sentiment a lot but I find it dubious. (A) the pressure the federal government can exercise is enormous, (B) given A, it’s not even correct to say most institutions are surrendering, there is lots of effective resistance.
August 11, 2025 at 3:19 PM
You see this sentiment a lot but I find it dubious. (A) the pressure the federal government can exercise is enormous, (B) given A, it’s not even correct to say most institutions are surrendering, there is lots of effective resistance.
You’ve got a point in general but it’s probably wrong to argue, based on the last decade, that “imitate Trump” is a good political strategy. Guy got lucky.
August 10, 2025 at 9:55 PM
You’ve got a point in general but it’s probably wrong to argue, based on the last decade, that “imitate Trump” is a good political strategy. Guy got lucky.