@radicalrealism.bsky.social
At least in this guy's case, the cog dissonance between those paradoxical ideas/contradictory beliefs was apparently too much for him to handle--he killed himself. All of wch augurs for standing up to fascist bullies, & just legal prosecutions if our sys survives Trump/GOP & we elect a DEM gov't.
November 16, 2025 at 6:44 PM
At least in this guy's case, the cog dissonance between those paradoxical ideas/contradictory beliefs was apparently too much for him to handle--he killed himself. All of wch augurs for standing up to fascist bullies, & just legal prosecutions if our sys survives Trump/GOP & we elect a DEM gov't.
Fascism entails the bullying of ppl, inst'ns, parties & mvmnts wch abide or exemplify liberal dem'c prins/processes. Supporters who value bullying only "understand" being stood up to. Shunning can, as you alluded, reinforce allegiance to bullies. So, standing-up is the best way thru the conundrum.
November 16, 2025 at 6:24 PM
Fascism entails the bullying of ppl, inst'ns, parties & mvmnts wch abide or exemplify liberal dem'c prins/processes. Supporters who value bullying only "understand" being stood up to. Shunning can, as you alluded, reinforce allegiance to bullies. So, standing-up is the best way thru the conundrum.
You're putting the cart b4 the horse. That 1 group of ppl constitute an Übermensch is a conceit adopted as a premise for subjecting anyone excluded, & their behavior, to more stringent scrutiny & application of laws, a/w/a denying them rights/privileges/immunities reserved for purported Übermensch.
November 16, 2025 at 2:54 AM
You're putting the cart b4 the horse. That 1 group of ppl constitute an Übermensch is a conceit adopted as a premise for subjecting anyone excluded, & their behavior, to more stringent scrutiny & application of laws, a/w/a denying them rights/privileges/immunities reserved for purported Übermensch.
Ask Tom to explain when & how we will know it is appropriate to use the term fascism in public discourse. He either won't or can't. That should reveal just how suspect his premises, assessment of our predicament, & reasoning are.
November 16, 2025 at 2:38 AM
Ask Tom to explain when & how we will know it is appropriate to use the term fascism in public discourse. He either won't or can't. That should reveal just how suspect his premises, assessment of our predicament, & reasoning are.
If we wait until Trump has instituted a fascist regime, it will be too late to use the term, let alone to protest, dissent, criticize acts/behavior/policy of the regime. Then the most contrary idea anyone will be able to utter is Edward R. Murrow's CBS News refrain, "good luck & good night."
November 16, 2025 at 2:38 AM
If we wait until Trump has instituted a fascist regime, it will be too late to use the term, let alone to protest, dissent, criticize acts/behavior/policy of the regime. Then the most contrary idea anyone will be able to utter is Edward R. Murrow's CBS News refrain, "good luck & good night."
Tom's position seems to extend to, 'refrain from applying the term fascism to ppl, inst'ns, parties or movements, in public discourse, even tho it is warranted, bc that dilutes the valence of the term.' That position is inherently paradoxical & self-handicapping, tho prototypically conservative.
November 16, 2025 at 2:38 AM
Tom's position seems to extend to, 'refrain from applying the term fascism to ppl, inst'ns, parties or movements, in public discourse, even tho it is warranted, bc that dilutes the valence of the term.' That position is inherently paradoxical & self-handicapping, tho prototypically conservative.
I had hoped to convey that con elites instrumentally muddle the distincxn btwn deference & consent, turning it into a privilege reserved for con elites. There4, con elites will reject any academic/abstract theorizing abt consent, bc it undermines the basis of their social arrangements & privilege.
November 16, 2025 at 12:00 AM
I had hoped to convey that con elites instrumentally muddle the distincxn btwn deference & consent, turning it into a privilege reserved for con elites. There4, con elites will reject any academic/abstract theorizing abt consent, bc it undermines the basis of their social arrangements & privilege.
To the degree that conservative plebs believe deference is an obligation or duty, or worse, value it as a responsibility, is the degree to wch they are entangled in a self-sealing culture & cycle of surrender, if not abasement. This begs for intervention, rather than a theory of consent!
November 15, 2025 at 7:17 PM
To the degree that conservative plebs believe deference is an obligation or duty, or worse, value it as a responsibility, is the degree to wch they are entangled in a self-sealing culture & cycle of surrender, if not abasement. This begs for intervention, rather than a theory of consent!
Any Cons immersed in that circular dynamic from an immature age, whether as an elite or a pleb, will come to believe--tho they may be loathe to articulate it--that deference constitutes consent. Many plebs come to view it as a duty, an assumption of an obligation, or esteem it as a responsibility.
November 15, 2025 at 7:17 PM
Any Cons immersed in that circular dynamic from an immature age, whether as an elite or a pleb, will come to believe--tho they may be loathe to articulate it--that deference constitutes consent. Many plebs come to view it as a duty, an assumption of an obligation, or esteem it as a responsibility.
To the extent that dynamic goes unarticulated, it can't be contested. To the extent this characterization of 'conservative conceit' is valid, it is the self-serving nexus btwn a rhetorical & an empirical practice of Cons in wch the rhetoric reaffirms practice & practice reinforces the rhetoric.
November 15, 2025 at 7:17 PM
To the extent that dynamic goes unarticulated, it can't be contested. To the extent this characterization of 'conservative conceit' is valid, it is the self-serving nexus btwn a rhetorical & an empirical practice of Cons in wch the rhetoric reaffirms practice & practice reinforces the rhetoric.
What you call an "authoritarian approach to power" I view as the foundation of conservatism. That is the conceit, that when those esteemed as elite by virtue of wealth, genealogy, role, office, convention, tradition, myth &/or rhetoric, demand "do as I say, not as I do," all discourse terminates.
November 15, 2025 at 7:17 PM
What you call an "authoritarian approach to power" I view as the foundation of conservatism. That is the conceit, that when those esteemed as elite by virtue of wealth, genealogy, role, office, convention, tradition, myth &/or rhetoric, demand "do as I say, not as I do," all discourse terminates.
I previsly noted Trump's use of power as an aphrodisiac or bait to lure ppl into his orbit. By the end of the the Warzel piece I realized Epstein used girls as an aphrodisiac TO bait traps, then used evidence of individ illicit behavior to create a network of illicit power.
bsky.app/profile/radi...
bsky.app/profile/radi...
Some ppl use power like an aphrodisiac upon those who can be seduced, & bait for those who can't.
Some ppl view finance & accounting like a religion.
Some ppl's craving for attention/status is like an addiction.
All three are true of Donald Trump.
Some ppl view finance & accounting like a religion.
Some ppl's craving for attention/status is like an addiction.
All three are true of Donald Trump.
November 14, 2025 at 8:09 PM
I previsly noted Trump's use of power as an aphrodisiac or bait to lure ppl into his orbit. By the end of the the Warzel piece I realized Epstein used girls as an aphrodisiac TO bait traps, then used evidence of individ illicit behavior to create a network of illicit power.
bsky.app/profile/radi...
bsky.app/profile/radi...
Some ppl use power like an aphrodisiac upon those who can be seduced, & bait for those who can't.
Some ppl view finance & accounting like a religion.
Some ppl's craving for attention/status is like an addiction.
All three are true of Donald Trump.
Some ppl view finance & accounting like a religion.
Some ppl's craving for attention/status is like an addiction.
All three are true of Donald Trump.
November 14, 2025 at 7:08 PM
Some ppl use power like an aphrodisiac upon those who can be seduced, & bait for those who can't.
Some ppl view finance & accounting like a religion.
Some ppl's craving for attention/status is like an addiction.
All three are true of Donald Trump.
Some ppl view finance & accounting like a religion.
Some ppl's craving for attention/status is like an addiction.
All three are true of Donald Trump.
It would be more beneficial/democratic to take each case on its own merits, but let the accused publicly submit to cross-examination by a competent stakeholder--not a journalist--rather than defaulting to rhetoric--for or against--wch only fosters the deleterious dynamic of endless recriminations.
November 14, 2025 at 6:46 PM
It would be more beneficial/democratic to take each case on its own merits, but let the accused publicly submit to cross-examination by a competent stakeholder--not a journalist--rather than defaulting to rhetoric--for or against--wch only fosters the deleterious dynamic of endless recriminations.
What she claims is a conspiracy is a sys that has been corrupted. The diff is vast--beyond this medium--but imperative to understand if we have any hope to mitigate or reverse its progress, let alone if we want to rectify the system. She muddles that diff, precluding solutions, for her own benefit.
November 14, 2025 at 5:19 PM
What she claims is a conspiracy is a sys that has been corrupted. The diff is vast--beyond this medium--but imperative to understand if we have any hope to mitigate or reverse its progress, let alone if we want to rectify the system. She muddles that diff, precluding solutions, for her own benefit.
She's barely more than a left wing conspiracy theorist. She uses journalistic techniques to find all kinds of dots, a few w/ tenuous connections. The elaborate tapestries she weaves from those dots & sparse sinews are pretty but useless, in that light & cold come right thru. Hyperbole is her power.
November 14, 2025 at 5:00 PM
She's barely more than a left wing conspiracy theorist. She uses journalistic techniques to find all kinds of dots, a few w/ tenuous connections. The elaborate tapestries she weaves from those dots & sparse sinews are pretty but useless, in that light & cold come right thru. Hyperbole is her power.
Former Labor Secretary @rbreich.bsky.social has a clear & persuasive explanation for the lack of affordable housing, & the socially undermining impact (the last sentence in 2nd graph) in his new book, Coming Up Short.
November 13, 2025 at 11:40 PM
Former Labor Secretary @rbreich.bsky.social has a clear & persuasive explanation for the lack of affordable housing, & the socially undermining impact (the last sentence in 2nd graph) in his new book, Coming Up Short.
Fuck ppl who use statistics to make ambiguous, unsupported, unexpounded &/or unexplained asserxns. Esp out of partisanship, & may those who do it to justify inflicting immiseration for partisan political purposes suffer eternal ignominy & be prosecuted under intern'l human rights law. Fuck Rollins.
November 13, 2025 at 9:31 PM
Fuck ppl who use statistics to make ambiguous, unsupported, unexpounded &/or unexplained asserxns. Esp out of partisanship, & may those who do it to justify inflicting immiseration for partisan political purposes suffer eternal ignominy & be prosecuted under intern'l human rights law. Fuck Rollins.
How many ppl on SNAP die per year? 3,090,000 Americans died in 2023. Approx 20% of the pop receive SNAP benefits=618,000 SNAP beneficiaries die/year = 51,500/month. 186,000 cld just represent a 3 ½ month backlog in updating data, wch is explainable by DOGE cuts alone.
November 13, 2025 at 9:31 PM
How many ppl on SNAP die per year? 3,090,000 Americans died in 2023. Approx 20% of the pop receive SNAP benefits=618,000 SNAP beneficiaries die/year = 51,500/month. 186,000 cld just represent a 3 ½ month backlog in updating data, wch is explainable by DOGE cuts alone.
It makes sense if we consider that she is apologizing for/giving cover to an institution whose purpose/mission has been corrupted by her & its inextricable, deferential & even subordinate relationship to the system of capitalism. She can't both make a living & expound on capitalism's supremacy.
November 13, 2025 at 8:48 PM
It makes sense if we consider that she is apologizing for/giving cover to an institution whose purpose/mission has been corrupted by her & its inextricable, deferential & even subordinate relationship to the system of capitalism. She can't both make a living & expound on capitalism's supremacy.