It really is about elites consciously and willfully “breaking eggs” to make their “omelette.” Because, finally, they can pursue their Chiliastic dream.
On the very last point, are you arguing that only the most ideological would vote Democrat at the coming election, so they could only do well with Normie support?
Is it that in normal times Normies can go either left or right so that you get a fairly even split, but more are pushed one way by the abnormal times we are in?
That's a very good question... The question occurred to me when I was reading the piece over for typos. And I don't have good answer.
I am still puzzling about it: How are 'Normies' distributed along ideological dimensions? The veteran back from Afghanistan who finds himself attending a party in someone's back yard might perceive that the folks who are getting worked up about (a) lawn treatments or (b) the problem of finding matching dinnerware patterns might perceive friends to be living too, too comfortably in Normie-dom. But, would such folks tend to vote one way or another? I am not sure.
I can say that folks who identify as People of the Left like Bari Weiss or Andrew Doyle have had their "red pill" experiences. Meanwhile, last November, there was a ten-point swing in Loudon County Virginia in the gubernatorial election. That's a heavily blue county right outside DC, but the CRT issue in the schools spontaneously erupted there; folks who may have been reliable Obama/Biden voters found themselves being vilified in the media for having spoken up in school board meetings. They've had a harsh "red pill" experience.
Whether these folks vote D or R, they have all come around to rediscovering appreciation for individual rights. But, how will the vote? Hmm ...
At best it seems we must suffer our way though the episodes of collective insanity. Quite agree with the the 1/3 division that seems to be a constant. The utopia that lies in he future for the socialistic-communistic believers continues to affect those who don't need to actually live in that world. Those that do know perfectly well that it doesn't work and leads to social failure.
I do think our current period related to that notion of mass hysteria related to the pandemic. We have leaders desperate for political advantage using the tools of a compliant press to sway opinion. That followed by remarkable incompetency in managing society, fearful of any criticism to be a real lack of character. Still, a third thinks all is well while another third is angry both hoping to influence the middle third of their positions.
The coming harder times after a very long period of relative prosperity will likely bring another pendulum swing. Technology has been able to keep Malthus at bay for a very long time but such advancements demand a degree of excess capacity. I suspect we still have enough in the useful third to guide us forward once that red pill arrives for more.
Agreed, brother. One thing that worries me is that some pendulum swings can span whole lifetimes. For example, the Soviet experiment really got underway in 1928, but it didn't collapse until 1990. Whole lifetimes got subsumed and destroyed by it.
May our current madness (which has been building for some decades) not prove as resilient.
On the very last point, are you arguing that only the most ideological would vote Democrat at the coming election, so they could only do well with Normie support?
Is it that in normal times Normies can go either left or right so that you get a fairly even split, but more are pushed one way by the abnormal times we are in?
That's a very good question... The question occurred to me when I was reading the piece over for typos. And I don't have good answer.
I am still puzzling about it: How are 'Normies' distributed along ideological dimensions? The veteran back from Afghanistan who finds himself attending a party in someone's back yard might perceive that the folks who are getting worked up about (a) lawn treatments or (b) the problem of finding matching dinnerware patterns might perceive friends to be living too, too comfortably in Normie-dom. But, would such folks tend to vote one way or another? I am not sure.
I can say that folks who identify as People of the Left like Bari Weiss or Andrew Doyle have had their "red pill" experiences. Meanwhile, last November, there was a ten-point swing in Loudon County Virginia in the gubernatorial election. That's a heavily blue county right outside DC, but the CRT issue in the schools spontaneously erupted there; folks who may have been reliable Obama/Biden voters found themselves being vilified in the media for having spoken up in school board meetings. They've had a harsh "red pill" experience.
Whether these folks vote D or R, they have all come around to rediscovering appreciation for individual rights. But, how will the vote? Hmm ...
At best it seems we must suffer our way though the episodes of collective insanity. Quite agree with the the 1/3 division that seems to be a constant. The utopia that lies in he future for the socialistic-communistic believers continues to affect those who don't need to actually live in that world. Those that do know perfectly well that it doesn't work and leads to social failure.
In thinking about the Strong Men-Good Times meme, it seems to relate to our cycling of a huge pendulum of life, but only for those who have the luxury of time to ponder. In times past we had to spend considerable time and energy in staying alive. Seeing this https://medium.com/@masswrites/hard-times-create-strong-men-strong-men-create-good-times-good-times-create-weak-men-weak-men-1b5333657a0a, I see equating strong with physical rather than a strength of character. I found Siebenga blog in my confirmation bias https://www.jansiebenga.com/blog/good-times-create-weak-men-and-weak-men-create-hard-times.
I do think our current period related to that notion of mass hysteria related to the pandemic. We have leaders desperate for political advantage using the tools of a compliant press to sway opinion. That followed by remarkable incompetency in managing society, fearful of any criticism to be a real lack of character. Still, a third thinks all is well while another third is angry both hoping to influence the middle third of their positions.
The coming harder times after a very long period of relative prosperity will likely bring another pendulum swing. Technology has been able to keep Malthus at bay for a very long time but such advancements demand a degree of excess capacity. I suspect we still have enough in the useful third to guide us forward once that red pill arrives for more.
Agreed, brother. One thing that worries me is that some pendulum swings can span whole lifetimes. For example, the Soviet experiment really got underway in 1928, but it didn't collapse until 1990. Whole lifetimes got subsumed and destroyed by it.
May our current madness (which has been building for some decades) not prove as resilient.