I think you are quite well informed, Donald, and trust your information.
I do too, and I notice that when you are not particularly knowledgeable about a subject, you say so.
there are simply no "good" Republicans today, and they need to be politically neutralized root and branch, even the one's who wj avers are "good ones".
If they were "good" they would not be Republicans.
I'd agree with you that there are no good Republicans on the national level, I think the situation is a bit different on the local level. Not that there aren't a lot of terrible local Republican office holders. Just that there are also some good ones.
You suggest that, if they were good, they wouldn't be Republicans. But that's simplistic. In some areas, the Republican primary essentially is the general election. If you want to hold office and do some good, you run as a Republican. (If tilting at windmills is your thing, you run as a Democrat.) Gerrymandering has made that worse. But it would be true in a lot of places even without that.
The other thing is, most people find it hard to change parties. Call it psychological momentum or something. But even if their voting habits in the general election shift, they resist changing their party registration.
It's even harder if you are already an elected official. It can be done; my Congressman was originally elected to the state legislature as a Republican. But it's hard. And you probably need some years in office to build a personal brand to get you through.
I might accept that good young people, in a lot of places, would find it hard to look at the current Republican Party (especially as the national party is so high profile) and register with them. Twenty years down the line, that will make your observation more true. But there will still be places where you can't get elected and do good, especially the first few times, without the label.
I've been thinking about inequality and authoritarian voting and pondering what research has been done to measure this effect. I'm linking to this op ed in the Guardian from George Monbiot not so much for his opinion and commentary as for his having gathered a lot of useful and publicly available research on the topic. There is strong evidence of a causal association between growing inequality and the rise of populist authoritarian movements. A paper in the Journal of European Public Policy found that a one-unit rise in the Gini coefficient (a standard measure of inequality) increases support for demagogues by 1%.
Why might this be? There are various, related explanations: feelings of marginalisation, status anxiety and social threat, insecurity triggering an authoritarian reflex and a loss of trust in other social groups. At the root of some of these explanations, I feel, is something deeply embedded in the human psyche: if you can’t get even, get mean. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/apr/13/trump-populists-human-nature-economic-growth
You can't see it in the excerpt I quoted above, but Monbiot links to eight academic studies to establish the claims he makes in these two paragraphs and to support his own claim that this is about disaffection.
I'll also add that there seems to be some argument in political science circles about whether it is inequality itself (measured by the Gini coefficient that Monbiot mentions), or if it is perceptions of fairness around the distribution of economic reward that most drives this shift towards support for retributive authoritarianism.
I think Monbiot has, as he often seems to me to do, oversimplified his conclusion (taking inequality as the marker and not taking on the arguments of which sorts of inequality are most driving the trend), but I also understand that it's hard not to oversimplify when trying to distill so much information and make it accessible in a short piece aimed at a popular press readership.
I suspect that the question is just how bad it will get, and how long it will take us to repair the damage.
The task now is triage. The trend to start reversing extreme concentration of wealth (HSH abv.) is first on the list. Both of our main political parties (aka "elites") have pushed for policies enabling this, but only one of them actively promotes this as a positive political and social goal. https://paulwaldman.substack.com/p/why-they-did-it
That is your Republican Party.
I appreciate wj's standing in for his ideosyncratic concept of "conservatism", but there are simply no "good" Republicans today, and they need to be politically neutralized root and branch, even the one's who wj avers are "good ones".
If they were "good" they would not be Republicans.
As we seem to be approaching the event horizon in our politics, those of us who care are required to take sides.
Gentle reader, I say unto you, "Pick one".
FWIW, Donald, I didn't take lj's initial commentary as being aimed at you in particular, but rather being more meta-commentary about the current media environment.
I agree with lj that the social media algorithms are having a distorting and divisive effect on public discourse and on public policy discussions. That does not mean that I think that there is no good information to be found on X or Substack, it just means that I think these sites make it harder for the average person to practice good media literacy, and that I prefer it when any particular writer/commenter takes the time to either follow information back closer to primary sources or to do some work to evaluate sources and show their reasons for selecting a particular source to cite. I value an ethos built on transparency of information and of biases.
I also recognize that this is a) a more academic, less mainstream attitude to take towards information and b) a lot of work that takes time, and that often pushes one out of the conversation as the back-and-forth of social media flows on.
Having said this, though, it doesn't mean that I think that other commenters and bloggers have poor media literacy skills and that their own views are inevitably biased because their sources do not match my preferences.
I think you are quite well informed, Donald, and trust your information. If I comment on the venue, it's because I want other readers and lurkers to think about their own information literacy practices and not get swept away in the algorithmic current. I know from teaching research that a lot of readers do end up getting swept away.
But we're still a prosperous country. People aren't pushing wheelbarrows full of cash to the grocery store because of hyperinflation. Unemployment remains low.
We're still a prosperous country for now. Whether we remain one rather depends on how Trump's trade wars play out. But individual areas are going to get hit hard, and sooner rather than later.
To take just one example, without USAid, the prairie states are going to get hammered starting next year. The silos are still pretty full from last year's harvest. This fall, they're not going to be able to buy what the farmers produce. Of course some of the grain might be diverted to cattle feed. Except that, with ICE rounding up all the workers from the slaughter houses, the market for cattle will be tanking also. Those states are going to be hurting big-time -- and while Trump might talk about "family farms" on the campaign trail, he's basically a city boy who just doesn't really relate.
Between that and the damage to the vegetable farming here and tariffs on imports from (mostly) Mexico, food prices will be going up. Probably not to hyperinflation levels, but enough that discretionary spending will drop, which will hurt industries far beyond the farm.
That, in turn, will join with the other side of the trade wars (why should they, or can they, buy our stuff if we won't buy theirs?) to kick unemployment up. Some of those unemployed might try some of the agriculture jobs that ICE is opening up. "Try" being the operative word. Farm work is nothing like office work -- I've done it, and I know. Some of the unemployed might eventually get in shape to do it. But even if you spend a lot of time in the gym, that's nothing like doing hard work 40+ hours a week.
Short story shorter, it's going to get ugly. Republican Congress critters may not feel the impact next year. But by 2028, they're going to join the ranks of the unemployed. (And their usual post-Congress positions as lobbyists aren't going to be interested -- few members to the next Congress are going to go anywhere near them.)
So, there's your summary predictions from the resident optimist.
Okay, LJ, you are right,
I am a moron easily misled by internet grifters like Welsh, stirring me up over issues I know nothing about, and also being fooled by algorithms on Twitter and I should take your ever so subtle hints to about this.
I have been reading a lot about governmental repression of pro- Palestinian demonstrators in Germany and in Britain and in other places. Here is a list of articles about Germany at Jewish Currents. One of them I remembered reading from before Oct 7. https://jewishcurrents.org/results?query=Germany
The Guardian has an endless number of articles on this topic. Here is one. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/jul/08/germany-importing-antisemitism-migrants-jewish
However, I see now that I was misled retroactively by that notorious Welsh, whose powers of deception are evidently so great they violate causality as physicists typically understand it. He may have written all those articles under various names, or perhaps it was the dreaded algorithm.
I am taking a break from this site. Being condescended to by someone who assumes I am an ignorant doofus who needs his guidance kinda gets on my nerves just a bit.
We're building gulags and far too many people think it's just great because immigrants are ruining the country. But we're still a prosperous country. People aren't pushing wheelbarrows full of cash to the grocery store because of hyperinflation. Unemployment remains low.
What is happening more insidiously is the continued acceleration of the concentration of wealth. Too few people care about that ... because too many people want to blame immigrants for their perceived problems. (I could go on again about the $80K pickup trucks and nice, large fishing boats with tRump flags flying from them, obviously owned by people who have been ruined by immigrants, the woke agenda, and all the socialism happening everywhere.)
It hurts my head.
We're building gulags and far too many people think it's just great because immigrants are ruining the country. But we're still a prosperous country. People aren't pushing wheelbarrows full of cash to the grocery store because of hyperinflation. Unemployment remains low.
What is happening more insidiously is the continued acceleration of the concentration of wealth. Too few people care about that ... because too many people want to blame immigrants for their perceived problems. (I could go on again about the $80K pickup trucks and nice, large fishing boats with tRump flags flying from them, obviously owned by people who have been ruined by immigrants, the woke agenda, and all the socialism happening everywhere.)
It hurts my head.
I imagine that just how bad it will get depends a lot on how bad the effects of climate change become, but that's not a problem isolated to the United States. Things could get very bad for every country.
Just in terms of the US, though, absent major effects from climate change, I'd expect greater inequality and weaker federalism. Poor states will suffer. Tech hubs and coastal cities will continue to do relatively well. I wonder if we will start to resemble Brazil, with favelas rubbing shoulders with rich neighborhoods and militarized police maintaining the separation.
But the middle of the country is likely going to look like the land that time forgot.
I sincerely appreciate, as always, your unflagging optimism, wj
I truly wish I was optimistic at this point. But, while I have hopes, I don't really have expectations. (At least, not positive ones. :-)
I suspect that the question is just how bad it will get, and how long it will take us to repair the damage.
I think we actually do have a common culture.
I sincerely appreciate, as always, your unflagging optimism, wj.
I think we have have some language - some rhetoric - in common. But I do not think we have a common understanding of what those words mean.
The US doesn't really have a single, common, consensus culture or history. New Englanders are not the same as folks in the Pacific Northwest, or the Southwest, or the Southeast, or the Plains. And none of those folks are the same as each other.
I think we actually do have a common culture. Or did. Certainly we have different subcultures, both regional and otherwise. But there is, or was, far less difference from one region to another than there is from anywhere in the US to, for example, Australia.
Even now, I don't think the biggest cultural divide is geographic. As a first approximation, the difference is between those who get their information primarily from Fox News and those who don't. (There are newer, more disconnected from reality, news sources. As I said, a first approximation.). That's why I don't see partition as a viable future; the two groups are just too intertwined geographically.
I'm not sure how we restore some kind of national unity. What I hope is (and I know it's a faint hope) is that the Fox News aficionados get burned enough, personally, by this administration that they recoil back to reality. Many are all in unto death, as we saw during covid. But if anywhere near half come to their senses, we're back to a single culture with variations.
Btw, I just looked and Welsh’s most recent posts are about Trump’s crazed tariff policies towards Brazil and the other one is about Epstein. Neither sounds rightwing. He despises Trump as vehemently as anyone here.
Last one from me. I did not say Welsh was right wing. I don't think he is right wing. I'm not claiming he is right wing. And I'm not disagreeing with him because he is or is not right wing. I am just saying that what you are doing with him is the same that the fox news viewer is doing when they react to the last immigrant is taking our social security chryon.
You keep telling us that you don't see why we are so down on twitter/X, you don't see any algorithm at work etc. But the algorithm is not based on whether something is accurate or not, it is based on how well it can push your buttons. Getting you more reactive is what it does.
Welsh is buying into that when he asks you to subscribe and tries to monetize this. You buy into that when you say you had never heard of Hüseyin Doğru, but damn, this really reinforces your opinion of government.
There`s nothing to really do about it in the larger world, but you may want to consider my point rather than reflexively assume I am classifying Welsh as right wing, (I'm not) or assume that everyone knows LGM has a stable of writers so we can treat them all the same.(does everyone?)
and that's the last I'll speak of Welsh.
To put something of a point on my previous:
What I'm feeling lately is just a kind of crushing disappointment in my own country. It's just unbelievable to me that, after all the work that generations of people put into overcoming the horrible legacies of the worst of our history, we're back fighting the same damned fights.
Again.
Which makes me feel like we never really got past them. They've just been waiting in the wings for an opportunity to re-emerge.
Predatory capitalism, misogyny, white supremacy, anti-Semitism, xenophobia. Open hostility to gays and anybody who is in any way unusual or atypical. I'm sure you can add your own items to the list. All front and center, once again. And the freaking cruelty of it, the appeal that has for way too many people, just shocks me.
We have to fight this reeking pile of crap once again? Still? I'm just so freaking tired of it all.
Some of it is just human nature, for sure. But other places seem capable of at least maintaining a stance that it's wrong. We appear to be inviting it all in to have a seat at the table. As if it's all just another "point of view".
I thought we were past a lot of this. Turns out it's apparently bred in the bone. It turns my stomach.
Several years ago, the first time I said that I expected a peaceful partition of the US, the idea was ridiculed and people piled on.
Things are pretty different from what they were even just a few years ago.
The US doesn't really have a single, common, consensus culture or history. New Englanders are not the same as folks in the Pacific Northwest, or the Southwest, or the Southeast, or the Plains. And none of those folks are the same as each other.
And that's just the regional aspect.
Different cultures, different history. Different values.
Folks in New England have more in common with folks in maritime Canada than they do with folks in Texas, for example. Or Alabama, or Florida, or Kansas, or Minnesota, or Kentucky. And so on.
Trump is shredding Constitutional small-r republican governance, which is really the main thing we have in common. So I'm not sure what's left. And I have no idea how that gets resolved.
To be perfectly honest, I'd be fine with New England separating from the US in its current incarnation. Whether just becoming a country of its own, or becoming a Canadian province. I just have no idea how we would get from here to there without people being harmed, so I'm not really an advocate of that.
Perhaps a stronger model of federalism? Which would also take a lot of work, and I don't see that we're in a place where that could be discussed in a reasonable way - a way that could lead to an actionable plan.
My expectation is that we're just going to stumble forward into a heavily conflicted mediocre future.
By many measures, compared to other OECD countries we're already mediocre. We have a lot of money and a lot of guns. That seems to be what we value, and what we're good at.
Which I find kind of disappointing.
Btw, I just looked and Welsh’s most recent posts are about Trump’s crazed tariff policies towards Brazil and the other one is about Epstein. Neither sounds rightwing. He despises Trump as vehemently as anyone here.
And regarding freezing bank accounts, do you support it without first going through a trial and convicting someone of committing a serious crime? I don’t and I think Welsh states it well here—
——-
Back when the Trucker Protest happened in Ottawa Canada I opposed freezing their accounts, even though I thought they were a bunch of fools and opposed their agenda. Why? Because it is punishment without a trial or facing a jury. It’s devastating. And I understood that if it could be done to people I disagree with, it could be done to people I do agree with.
———-
Makes sense.
To repeat, I’m not endorsing Welsh in general. Sometimes I just think he is wrong. Though his extreme pessimism about our trajectory is looking more plausible in the past six months.
Btw, I just looked and Welsh’s most recent posts are about Trump’s crazed tariff policies towards Brazil and the other one is about Epstein. Neither sounds rightwing. He despises Trump as vehemently as anyone here.
And regarding freezing bank accounts, do you support it without first going through a trial and convicting someone of committing a serious crime? I don’t and I think Welsh states it well here—
——-
Back when the Trucker Protest happened in Ottawa Canada I opposed freezing their accounts, even though I thought they were a bunch of fools and opposed their agenda. Why? Because it is punishment without a trial or facing a jury. It’s devastating. And I understood that if it could be done to people I disagree with, it could be done to people I do agree with.
———-
Makes sense.
To repeat, I’m not endorsing Welsh in general. Sometimes I just think he is wrong. Though his extreme pessimism about our trajectory is looking more plausible in the past six months.
“ kind of feel that the attitude that Welsh puts out is the same attitude that has someone like a Robert Kennedy or a Tulsi Gabbard effortlessly slide from left to right.”
I don’t agree with that. As for the German government, , they have been repressing pro- Palestinian voices for awhile, certainly since Oct 7. I would expect them to tread very lightly when it comes to criticizing Israel, but there is a sense that they atone for their history on the backs of Palestinians. But again, this is on the long list of things I don’t care to argue. There is more than enough hypocrisy in this country to talk about.
Regarding Welsh, this sort of conversation drives me nuts. I suppose if there is another occasion where Welsh makes a point I find valid, I will spend time looking for some mainstream source making the same point so I can avoid irrelevancies. I very quickly learned that with Chomsky decades ago. Any mention of a human rights issue that cited him as a source became about him and not the issue. I don’t honestly give a crap if ten years down the road Welsh becomes David Horowitz. Or Christopher Hitchens or Matt Taibbi. I don’t expect it though. Still, Hitchens wrote some great stuff when he was still a lefty and occasionally even afterwards.
On Epstein, I have no attachment to any specific conspiracy theory but I would expect, given his associates and activities, he would have attracted intelligence agencies and potential blackmailers like flies to rotting meat. Intelligence agencies are not always the most ethical bureaucracies in the world and given what they are, they would be incompetent not to look for some way to take advantage of Epstein, his associates, and the way some of them spent their time.
Granted, I said the cause would be dealing with climate change -- which I still say -- and the people today are talking fighting between the fascist and non-fascist sides. Or between the urban and rural sides. Or between the fundamental Christians and everyone who isn't. Criticism tends to be limited to the fact that those divisions don't correspond well with existing state boundaries.
They can talk about all of those things and be right without it meaning that climate change is not a major factor in the situation. Climate change is a vulnerability/threat multiplier. It puts pressure on human systems and creates conditions that leave marginal populations desperate and exposed, and open to predation and exploitation. It drives urbanization and migration, and those are the issues that are driving the slide into xenophobia and authoritarianism.
It's all of a piece, and climate change sits there at the base of it all like expansive soil under a foundation.
Mr. Fuentes, 26, is a white supremacist, Hitler fan and vocal antisemite. A far-right influencer who hosts a weeknight streaming show called “America First,”
Fuentes?!?!? Somebody alert Stephen Miller that there's a Hispanic in our midst! Get him on the next flight to South Sudan!
For all I know, the guy's family has been in the US a couple of centuries. Does anyone think Miller cares?
As for LGM.... There is a certain atmosphere there, a way of acting, just as there is here and at every blog I have ever visited for any length of time. You pick up on what opinions are acceptable and which ones will induce a pile on and yes, also the topics where people within the community will rip into each other.
And which opinions are which have changed over time. Several years ago, the first time I said that I expected a peaceful partition of the US, the idea was ridiculed and people piled on. Today, it is perfectly acceptable to say that things are soon to come down to an actual shooting civil war. People are applauded for saying that they are leaving the country to avoid the war.
Granted, I said the cause would be dealing with climate change -- which I still say -- and the people today are talking fighting between the fascist and non-fascist sides. Or between the urban and rural sides. Or between the fundamental Christians and everyone who isn't. Criticism tends to be limited to the fact that those divisions don't correspond well with existing state boundaries.
You didn’t explain what is wrong with taking on Welsh’s bias in this case.
I'm not really sure we are talking about the same thing. I'm talking about Welsh's overall bias in that he wants to be right and he wants to tell everyone so. Neither of us knows anything about Hüseyin Doğru, so neither of us can comment intelligently, but if Germany is going too far, stepping back a bit, we can see how it comes about. Germany, given its history, not only the Holocaust, but also Munich, has a lot to overcome and it is understandable that pro Israel bias, along with the forceful campaign to equate any questioning of Israel with anti-semitism makes me wonder about the idea that Germany is simply doing this as a way of repressing voices. Making this out to be simply an argument about what levers government should use misses that whole problematic history. So it's hard to ignore that bias for me. YMMV
I kind of feel that the attitude that Welsh puts out is the same attitude that has someone like a Robert Kennedy or a Tulsi Gabbard effortlessly slide from left to right.
About LGM, I have noted that I avoid the comments and I've also posted about how I feel uncomfortable with Loomis' take no prisoners attitude. I don't know how the other front pagers feel, though when things get really bad in the comments, it does bubble up to the front page. It's pretty remarkable to have the situation where it looks like a front pager is trolling the commentators, but I do think a lot of their issues are not their political position, it is the speed at which conversation goes on over there, and the underlying snarkiness, which tends to magnify a lot of differences. So when you talk about the blog in that aspect, as I think you are when you talk about a 'certain atmosphere', I agree, but when you say "I fall about halfway between him and the LGM lefties" it sounds to me like you are suggesting the bloggers there occupy a point on the political spectrum, which I don't see.
About Epstein, your link says this There are so many explanations and unanswered questions raised by the release, which also says that there is “no credible evidence … that Epstein blackmailed prominent individuals as part of his actions.” That means that the theories alleging Epstein was operating some kind of operation to collect incriminating information for a foreign government (most notably the Israelis) has also been dismissed by the U.S. government.
A friend on facebook noted that Ghislaine Maxwell's father, Robert Maxwell, was given a state funeral in Israel and that what Epstein did bore all the marks of what an intelligence agency would do to get leverage. Being in that framework, there was another post that zoomed that was someone posting a tweet from someone saying that they lived in an area where there were a lot of Russian émigrés and there was a noticable absence of ICE agents. So I do wonder.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.
On “An open thread on July 4th”
Sorry, that first sentence is a quote from nous, and should have been in italics.
"
I think you are quite well informed, Donald, and trust your information.
I do too, and I notice that when you are not particularly knowledgeable about a subject, you say so.
"
there are simply no "good" Republicans today, and they need to be politically neutralized root and branch, even the one's who wj avers are "good ones".
If they were "good" they would not be Republicans.
I'd agree with you that there are no good Republicans on the national level, I think the situation is a bit different on the local level. Not that there aren't a lot of terrible local Republican office holders. Just that there are also some good ones.
You suggest that, if they were good, they wouldn't be Republicans. But that's simplistic. In some areas, the Republican primary essentially is the general election. If you want to hold office and do some good, you run as a Republican. (If tilting at windmills is your thing, you run as a Democrat.) Gerrymandering has made that worse. But it would be true in a lot of places even without that.
The other thing is, most people find it hard to change parties. Call it psychological momentum or something. But even if their voting habits in the general election shift, they resist changing their party registration.
It's even harder if you are already an elected official. It can be done; my Congressman was originally elected to the state legislature as a Republican. But it's hard. And you probably need some years in office to build a personal brand to get you through.
I might accept that good young people, in a lot of places, would find it hard to look at the current Republican Party (especially as the national party is so high profile) and register with them. Twenty years down the line, that will make your observation more true. But there will still be places where you can't get elected and do good, especially the first few times, without the label.
"
I've been thinking about inequality and authoritarian voting and pondering what research has been done to measure this effect. I'm linking to this op ed in the Guardian from George Monbiot not so much for his opinion and commentary as for his having gathered a lot of useful and publicly available research on the topic.
There is strong evidence of a causal association between growing inequality and the rise of populist authoritarian movements. A paper in the Journal of European Public Policy found that a one-unit rise in the Gini coefficient (a standard measure of inequality) increases support for demagogues by 1%.
Why might this be? There are various, related explanations: feelings of marginalisation, status anxiety and social threat, insecurity triggering an authoritarian reflex and a loss of trust in other social groups. At the root of some of these explanations, I feel, is something deeply embedded in the human psyche: if you can’t get even, get mean.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/apr/13/trump-populists-human-nature-economic-growth
You can't see it in the excerpt I quoted above, but Monbiot links to eight academic studies to establish the claims he makes in these two paragraphs and to support his own claim that this is about disaffection.
I'll also add that there seems to be some argument in political science circles about whether it is inequality itself (measured by the Gini coefficient that Monbiot mentions), or if it is perceptions of fairness around the distribution of economic reward that most drives this shift towards support for retributive authoritarianism.
I think Monbiot has, as he often seems to me to do, oversimplified his conclusion (taking inequality as the marker and not taking on the arguments of which sorts of inequality are most driving the trend), but I also understand that it's hard not to oversimplify when trying to distill so much information and make it accessible in a short piece aimed at a popular press readership.
"
I suspect that the question is just how bad it will get, and how long it will take us to repair the damage.
The task now is triage. The trend to start reversing extreme concentration of wealth (HSH abv.) is first on the list. Both of our main political parties (aka "elites") have pushed for policies enabling this, but only one of them actively promotes this as a positive political and social goal.
https://paulwaldman.substack.com/p/why-they-did-it
That is your Republican Party.
I appreciate wj's standing in for his ideosyncratic concept of "conservatism", but there are simply no "good" Republicans today, and they need to be politically neutralized root and branch, even the one's who wj avers are "good ones".
If they were "good" they would not be Republicans.
As we seem to be approaching the event horizon in our politics, those of us who care are required to take sides.
Gentle reader, I say unto you, "Pick one".
"
FWIW, Donald, I didn't take lj's initial commentary as being aimed at you in particular, but rather being more meta-commentary about the current media environment.
I agree with lj that the social media algorithms are having a distorting and divisive effect on public discourse and on public policy discussions. That does not mean that I think that there is no good information to be found on X or Substack, it just means that I think these sites make it harder for the average person to practice good media literacy, and that I prefer it when any particular writer/commenter takes the time to either follow information back closer to primary sources or to do some work to evaluate sources and show their reasons for selecting a particular source to cite. I value an ethos built on transparency of information and of biases.
I also recognize that this is a) a more academic, less mainstream attitude to take towards information and b) a lot of work that takes time, and that often pushes one out of the conversation as the back-and-forth of social media flows on.
Having said this, though, it doesn't mean that I think that other commenters and bloggers have poor media literacy skills and that their own views are inevitably biased because their sources do not match my preferences.
I think you are quite well informed, Donald, and trust your information. If I comment on the venue, it's because I want other readers and lurkers to think about their own information literacy practices and not get swept away in the algorithmic current. I know from teaching research that a lot of readers do end up getting swept away.
"
But we're still a prosperous country. People aren't pushing wheelbarrows full of cash to the grocery store because of hyperinflation. Unemployment remains low.
We're still a prosperous country for now. Whether we remain one rather depends on how Trump's trade wars play out. But individual areas are going to get hit hard, and sooner rather than later.
To take just one example, without USAid, the prairie states are going to get hammered starting next year. The silos are still pretty full from last year's harvest. This fall, they're not going to be able to buy what the farmers produce. Of course some of the grain might be diverted to cattle feed. Except that, with ICE rounding up all the workers from the slaughter houses, the market for cattle will be tanking also. Those states are going to be hurting big-time -- and while Trump might talk about "family farms" on the campaign trail, he's basically a city boy who just doesn't really relate.
Between that and the damage to the vegetable farming here and tariffs on imports from (mostly) Mexico, food prices will be going up. Probably not to hyperinflation levels, but enough that discretionary spending will drop, which will hurt industries far beyond the farm.
That, in turn, will join with the other side of the trade wars (why should they, or can they, buy our stuff if we won't buy theirs?) to kick unemployment up. Some of those unemployed might try some of the agriculture jobs that ICE is opening up. "Try" being the operative word. Farm work is nothing like office work -- I've done it, and I know. Some of the unemployed might eventually get in shape to do it. But even if you spend a lot of time in the gym, that's nothing like doing hard work 40+ hours a week.
Short story shorter, it's going to get ugly. Republican Congress critters may not feel the impact next year. But by 2028, they're going to join the ranks of the unemployed. (And their usual post-Congress positions as lobbyists aren't going to be interested -- few members to the next Congress are going to go anywhere near them.)
So, there's your summary predictions from the resident optimist.
"
Okay, LJ, you are right,
I am a moron easily misled by internet grifters like Welsh, stirring me up over issues I know nothing about, and also being fooled by algorithms on Twitter and I should take your ever so subtle hints to about this.
I have been reading a lot about governmental repression of pro- Palestinian demonstrators in Germany and in Britain and in other places. Here is a list of articles about Germany at Jewish Currents. One of them I remembered reading from before Oct 7.
https://jewishcurrents.org/results?query=Germany
The Guardian has an endless number of articles on this topic. Here is one.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/jul/08/germany-importing-antisemitism-migrants-jewish
However, I see now that I was misled retroactively by that notorious Welsh, whose powers of deception are evidently so great they violate causality as physicists typically understand it. He may have written all those articles under various names, or perhaps it was the dreaded algorithm.
I am taking a break from this site. Being condescended to by someone who assumes I am an ignorant doofus who needs his guidance kinda gets on my nerves just a bit.
"
I had a feeling that was going to happen. "No root for comment."
"
We're building gulags and far too many people think it's just great because immigrants are ruining the country. But we're still a prosperous country. People aren't pushing wheelbarrows full of cash to the grocery store because of hyperinflation. Unemployment remains low.
What is happening more insidiously is the continued acceleration of the concentration of wealth. Too few people care about that ... because too many people want to blame immigrants for their perceived problems. (I could go on again about the $80K pickup trucks and nice, large fishing boats with tRump flags flying from them, obviously owned by people who have been ruined by immigrants, the woke agenda, and all the socialism happening everywhere.)
It hurts my head.
"
We're building gulags and far too many people think it's just great because immigrants are ruining the country. But we're still a prosperous country. People aren't pushing wheelbarrows full of cash to the grocery store because of hyperinflation. Unemployment remains low.
What is happening more insidiously is the continued acceleration of the concentration of wealth. Too few people care about that ... because too many people want to blame immigrants for their perceived problems. (I could go on again about the $80K pickup trucks and nice, large fishing boats with tRump flags flying from them, obviously owned by people who have been ruined by immigrants, the woke agenda, and all the socialism happening everywhere.)
It hurts my head.
"
I imagine that just how bad it will get depends a lot on how bad the effects of climate change become, but that's not a problem isolated to the United States. Things could get very bad for every country.
Just in terms of the US, though, absent major effects from climate change, I'd expect greater inequality and weaker federalism. Poor states will suffer. Tech hubs and coastal cities will continue to do relatively well. I wonder if we will start to resemble Brazil, with favelas rubbing shoulders with rich neighborhoods and militarized police maintaining the separation.
But the middle of the country is likely going to look like the land that time forgot.
"
I sincerely appreciate, as always, your unflagging optimism, wj
I truly wish I was optimistic at this point. But, while I have hopes, I don't really have expectations. (At least, not positive ones. :-)
I suspect that the question is just how bad it will get, and how long it will take us to repair the damage.
"
I think we actually do have a common culture.
I sincerely appreciate, as always, your unflagging optimism, wj.
I think we have have some language - some rhetoric - in common. But I do not think we have a common understanding of what those words mean.
"
The US doesn't really have a single, common, consensus culture or history. New Englanders are not the same as folks in the Pacific Northwest, or the Southwest, or the Southeast, or the Plains. And none of those folks are the same as each other.
I think we actually do have a common culture. Or did. Certainly we have different subcultures, both regional and otherwise. But there is, or was, far less difference from one region to another than there is from anywhere in the US to, for example, Australia.
Even now, I don't think the biggest cultural divide is geographic. As a first approximation, the difference is between those who get their information primarily from Fox News and those who don't. (There are newer, more disconnected from reality, news sources. As I said, a first approximation.). That's why I don't see partition as a viable future; the two groups are just too intertwined geographically.
I'm not sure how we restore some kind of national unity. What I hope is (and I know it's a faint hope) is that the Fox News aficionados get burned enough, personally, by this administration that they recoil back to reality. Many are all in unto death, as we saw during covid. But if anywhere near half come to their senses, we're back to a single culture with variations.
"
Btw, I just looked and Welsh’s most recent posts are about Trump’s crazed tariff policies towards Brazil and the other one is about Epstein. Neither sounds rightwing. He despises Trump as vehemently as anyone here.
Last one from me. I did not say Welsh was right wing. I don't think he is right wing. I'm not claiming he is right wing. And I'm not disagreeing with him because he is or is not right wing. I am just saying that what you are doing with him is the same that the fox news viewer is doing when they react to the last immigrant is taking our social security chryon.
You keep telling us that you don't see why we are so down on twitter/X, you don't see any algorithm at work etc. But the algorithm is not based on whether something is accurate or not, it is based on how well it can push your buttons. Getting you more reactive is what it does.
Welsh is buying into that when he asks you to subscribe and tries to monetize this. You buy into that when you say you had never heard of Hüseyin Doğru, but damn, this really reinforces your opinion of government.
There`s nothing to really do about it in the larger world, but you may want to consider my point rather than reflexively assume I am classifying Welsh as right wing, (I'm not) or assume that everyone knows LGM has a stable of writers so we can treat them all the same.(does everyone?)
and that's the last I'll speak of Welsh.
"
To put something of a point on my previous:
What I'm feeling lately is just a kind of crushing disappointment in my own country. It's just unbelievable to me that, after all the work that generations of people put into overcoming the horrible legacies of the worst of our history, we're back fighting the same damned fights.
Again.
Which makes me feel like we never really got past them. They've just been waiting in the wings for an opportunity to re-emerge.
Predatory capitalism, misogyny, white supremacy, anti-Semitism, xenophobia. Open hostility to gays and anybody who is in any way unusual or atypical. I'm sure you can add your own items to the list. All front and center, once again. And the freaking cruelty of it, the appeal that has for way too many people, just shocks me.
We have to fight this reeking pile of crap once again? Still? I'm just so freaking tired of it all.
Some of it is just human nature, for sure. But other places seem capable of at least maintaining a stance that it's wrong. We appear to be inviting it all in to have a seat at the table. As if it's all just another "point of view".
I thought we were past a lot of this. Turns out it's apparently bred in the bone. It turns my stomach.
"
Several years ago, the first time I said that I expected a peaceful partition of the US, the idea was ridiculed and people piled on.
Things are pretty different from what they were even just a few years ago.
The US doesn't really have a single, common, consensus culture or history. New Englanders are not the same as folks in the Pacific Northwest, or the Southwest, or the Southeast, or the Plains. And none of those folks are the same as each other.
And that's just the regional aspect.
Different cultures, different history. Different values.
Folks in New England have more in common with folks in maritime Canada than they do with folks in Texas, for example. Or Alabama, or Florida, or Kansas, or Minnesota, or Kentucky. And so on.
Trump is shredding Constitutional small-r republican governance, which is really the main thing we have in common. So I'm not sure what's left. And I have no idea how that gets resolved.
To be perfectly honest, I'd be fine with New England separating from the US in its current incarnation. Whether just becoming a country of its own, or becoming a Canadian province. I just have no idea how we would get from here to there without people being harmed, so I'm not really an advocate of that.
Perhaps a stronger model of federalism? Which would also take a lot of work, and I don't see that we're in a place where that could be discussed in a reasonable way - a way that could lead to an actionable plan.
My expectation is that we're just going to stumble forward into a heavily conflicted mediocre future.
By many measures, compared to other OECD countries we're already mediocre. We have a lot of money and a lot of guns. That seems to be what we value, and what we're good at.
Which I find kind of disappointing.
"
Btw, I just looked and Welsh’s most recent posts are about Trump’s crazed tariff policies towards Brazil and the other one is about Epstein. Neither sounds rightwing. He despises Trump as vehemently as anyone here.
And regarding freezing bank accounts, do you support it without first going through a trial and convicting someone of committing a serious crime? I don’t and I think Welsh states it well here—
——-
Back when the Trucker Protest happened in Ottawa Canada I opposed freezing their accounts, even though I thought they were a bunch of fools and opposed their agenda. Why? Because it is punishment without a trial or facing a jury. It’s devastating. And I understood that if it could be done to people I disagree with, it could be done to people I do agree with.
———-
Makes sense.
To repeat, I’m not endorsing Welsh in general. Sometimes I just think he is wrong. Though his extreme pessimism about our trajectory is looking more plausible in the past six months.
"
Btw, I just looked and Welsh’s most recent posts are about Trump’s crazed tariff policies towards Brazil and the other one is about Epstein. Neither sounds rightwing. He despises Trump as vehemently as anyone here.
And regarding freezing bank accounts, do you support it without first going through a trial and convicting someone of committing a serious crime? I don’t and I think Welsh states it well here—
——-
Back when the Trucker Protest happened in Ottawa Canada I opposed freezing their accounts, even though I thought they were a bunch of fools and opposed their agenda. Why? Because it is punishment without a trial or facing a jury. It’s devastating. And I understood that if it could be done to people I disagree with, it could be done to people I do agree with.
———-
Makes sense.
To repeat, I’m not endorsing Welsh in general. Sometimes I just think he is wrong. Though his extreme pessimism about our trajectory is looking more plausible in the past six months.
"
“ kind of feel that the attitude that Welsh puts out is the same attitude that has someone like a Robert Kennedy or a Tulsi Gabbard effortlessly slide from left to right.”
I don’t agree with that. As for the German government, , they have been repressing pro- Palestinian voices for awhile, certainly since Oct 7. I would expect them to tread very lightly when it comes to criticizing Israel, but there is a sense that they atone for their history on the backs of Palestinians. But again, this is on the long list of things I don’t care to argue. There is more than enough hypocrisy in this country to talk about.
Regarding Welsh, this sort of conversation drives me nuts. I suppose if there is another occasion where Welsh makes a point I find valid, I will spend time looking for some mainstream source making the same point so I can avoid irrelevancies. I very quickly learned that with Chomsky decades ago. Any mention of a human rights issue that cited him as a source became about him and not the issue. I don’t honestly give a crap if ten years down the road Welsh becomes David Horowitz. Or Christopher Hitchens or Matt Taibbi. I don’t expect it though. Still, Hitchens wrote some great stuff when he was still a lefty and occasionally even afterwards.
On Epstein, I have no attachment to any specific conspiracy theory but I would expect, given his associates and activities, he would have attracted intelligence agencies and potential blackmailers like flies to rotting meat. Intelligence agencies are not always the most ethical bureaucracies in the world and given what they are, they would be incompetent not to look for some way to take advantage of Epstein, his associates, and the way some of them spent their time.
"
Granted, I said the cause would be dealing with climate change -- which I still say -- and the people today are talking fighting between the fascist and non-fascist sides. Or between the urban and rural sides. Or between the fundamental Christians and everyone who isn't. Criticism tends to be limited to the fact that those divisions don't correspond well with existing state boundaries.
They can talk about all of those things and be right without it meaning that climate change is not a major factor in the situation. Climate change is a vulnerability/threat multiplier. It puts pressure on human systems and creates conditions that leave marginal populations desperate and exposed, and open to predation and exploitation. It drives urbanization and migration, and those are the issues that are driving the slide into xenophobia and authoritarianism.
It's all of a piece, and climate change sits there at the base of it all like expansive soil under a foundation.
"
From the article bobbyp links to:
Fuentes?!?!? Somebody alert Stephen Miller that there's a Hispanic in our midst! Get him on the next flight to South Sudan!
For all I know, the guy's family has been in the US a couple of centuries. Does anyone think Miller cares?
"
As for LGM.... There is a certain atmosphere there, a way of acting, just as there is here and at every blog I have ever visited for any length of time. You pick up on what opinions are acceptable and which ones will induce a pile on and yes, also the topics where people within the community will rip into each other.
And which opinions are which have changed over time. Several years ago, the first time I said that I expected a peaceful partition of the US, the idea was ridiculed and people piled on. Today, it is perfectly acceptable to say that things are soon to come down to an actual shooting civil war. People are applauded for saying that they are leaving the country to avoid the war.
Granted, I said the cause would be dealing with climate change -- which I still say -- and the people today are talking fighting between the fascist and non-fascist sides. Or between the urban and rural sides. Or between the fundamental Christians and everyone who isn't. Criticism tends to be limited to the fact that those divisions don't correspond well with existing state boundaries.
"
You didn’t explain what is wrong with taking on Welsh’s bias in this case.
I'm not really sure we are talking about the same thing. I'm talking about Welsh's overall bias in that he wants to be right and he wants to tell everyone so. Neither of us knows anything about Hüseyin Doğru, so neither of us can comment intelligently, but if Germany is going too far, stepping back a bit, we can see how it comes about. Germany, given its history, not only the Holocaust, but also Munich, has a lot to overcome and it is understandable that pro Israel bias, along with the forceful campaign to equate any questioning of Israel with anti-semitism makes me wonder about the idea that Germany is simply doing this as a way of repressing voices. Making this out to be simply an argument about what levers government should use misses that whole problematic history. So it's hard to ignore that bias for me. YMMV
I kind of feel that the attitude that Welsh puts out is the same attitude that has someone like a Robert Kennedy or a Tulsi Gabbard effortlessly slide from left to right.
About LGM, I have noted that I avoid the comments and I've also posted about how I feel uncomfortable with Loomis' take no prisoners attitude. I don't know how the other front pagers feel, though when things get really bad in the comments, it does bubble up to the front page. It's pretty remarkable to have the situation where it looks like a front pager is trolling the commentators, but I do think a lot of their issues are not their political position, it is the speed at which conversation goes on over there, and the underlying snarkiness, which tends to magnify a lot of differences. So when you talk about the blog in that aspect, as I think you are when you talk about a 'certain atmosphere', I agree, but when you say "I fall about halfway between him and the LGM lefties" it sounds to me like you are suggesting the bloggers there occupy a point on the political spectrum, which I don't see.
About Epstein, your link says this
There are so many explanations and unanswered questions raised by the release, which also says that there is “no credible evidence … that Epstein blackmailed prominent individuals as part of his actions.” That means that the theories alleging Epstein was operating some kind of operation to collect incriminating information for a foreign government (most notably the Israelis) has also been dismissed by the U.S. government.
A friend on facebook noted that Ghislaine Maxwell's father, Robert Maxwell, was given a state funeral in Israel and that what Epstein did bore all the marks of what an intelligence agency would do to get leverage. Being in that framework, there was another post that zoomed that was someone posting a tweet from someone saying that they lived in an area where there were a lot of Russian émigrés and there was a noticable absence of ICE agents. So I do wonder.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.