July 29, 2016

"The whole affair has been a festival of inclusiveness. The media is eating it like cake.... That’s how it looks on the surface."

"And if you’re already a Clinton supporter, it probably looks great all the way down. But if you’re an undecided voter, and male, you’re seeing something different. You’re seeing a celebration that your role in society is permanently diminished...."

Wrote Scott Adams, yesterday, before the Hillary speech. He's got a theory that "the Democratic National Convention is probably lowering testosterone levels all over the country." He means that literally.  "And since testosterone is a feel-good chemical for men, I think the Democratic convention is making men feel less happy."

I'm linking to him not just because I always link to him, and not just because I've been saying the whole convention has been a "celebration of diversity and the platitudinous assurances of commitment to equality" (and I like his phrase "festival of inclusiveness"), but because I'm extremely interested in the way equality/inclusiveness/diversity is supposed to substitute for actually doing well and becoming prosperous. That problem with the Democratic Party's message jumped out at me last night when Hillary said:
I've gone around our country talking to working families. And I've heard from so many of you who feel like the economy just isn't working. Some of you are frustrated -- even furious. And you know what??? You're right. It's not yet working the way it should. Americans are willing to work -- and work hard. But right now, an awful lot of people feel there is less and less respect for the work they do. And less respect for them, period.
See the problem with the framing of the problem? People just need to feel better about what they are already doing. You could have the same bad, low-paying job but what needs to change is that you should be — should feel — respected for staying right there.

The next line was also telling:
Democrats are the party of working people. But we haven't done a good enough job showing that we get what you're going through...
How does "we" become "you" in that sentence? I thought all were in the party. But there are the real insiders — those consolidating their own party power — who are the real "we," and they need to show you — you, the people — that they care about you, because we need you to vote for us. 
... and that we're going to do something about it. So I want to tell you tonight how we will empower Americans to live better lives.
See? She doesn't say she's going to empower you to get ahead economically. The idea is "to live better lives" — which sounds like some sort of elevation of your character. You can be "better." You can be "respected."

Yes, she does proceed to declare it her "primary mission ... to create more opportunity and more good jobs" and to make a bunch of disjointed assertions like "our economy isn't working the way it should because our democracy isn't working the way it should" and "That's why we need to appoint Supreme Court justices who will get money out of politics and expand voting rights" and "American corporations that have gotten so much from our country should be just as patriotic in return." You can diminish my point with that additional material if you like, but what jumped out and grabbed me jumped out and grabbed me.

239 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 239 of 239
Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...

"And since testosterone is a feel-good chemical for men, I think the Democratic convention is making men feel less happy."

I suspect estrogen is no less "happy-making" (or sad-making. Is UFC aggression somehow happier than crying at commercials?) But I digress. Estrogen is obviously a passivity chemical. Testosterone active. People can be either passive idiots or actively blundering idiots. I fail to see how either disposition is good for the country, or its governance. Just take the damn hormones out of politics, already. The same we need to take gender out of it. Just fuck off already with these silly sex obsessions. They screw up the decent running of things. Leave your sex stuff and your hormones to something else. To something more inherently and legitimately sexual.

walter said...

Exhiled,
I assumed the NRA had them. They shouldn't be alone on this.

Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...

R&B,
Them's a lotta words for little content.
Do tell us how "social contract theory" supports the statement of Hil's that Altparse parsed.


I think it's obvious.

I also think you're just trolling my comment.

I'm not convinced you know anything about social contract theory anyway. It wouldn't be hard for me to imagine that at the least you have no respect for it.

You think there's something so suspect in the quote? Tell me how what she said violates or disconnects from social contract theory.

I don't have to make Hillary's case for her. The fact that more people agree with her (and certainly that statement - since it's the same sentiment that Trump and Bernie echo) proves that the case is valid.

You go ahead and make your case for why anyone should conclude that it is not.

walter said...

Blogger Rhythm and Balls said...
Estrogen is obviously a passivity chemical.
--
see Hillary Clinton.

walter said...

Nice dodge R&B: "Troll!"

"The fact that more people agree with her (and certainly that statement - since it's the same sentiment that Trump and Bernie echo) proves that the case is valid."
Take meds..now.

Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...

see Hillary Clinton.

For what? This/she proves that sex is not gender. She inherited more than enough of the testosterone overflow that couldn't be contained in daddy Hugh Rodham's earthly vessels to more than make up for whatever testosterone you guys wish your conservative women had. Hillary's got enough testosterone to lend to Ben Carson AND Scott Walker AND Harry Reid AND then some.

Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...

Take meds..now.

More trolling, mr lowercase. You're not saying a damn thing, just sniping like a bitch.

It's widely agreed by the American people, given their declining living standards, that the social contract is broken. And you can put that in whatever blue collar terms or Trump bluster you want. The idea is the same. No one thinks the economy is doing the sort of things it was doing in the 1950s, and they believe that needs to change.

Unless you're one of those lowercase guys who works in financial speculation, walter. But even Wall Street isn't too bullish anymore, these days.

Man, are you out of it. Get out of your bubble or your cardboard box more and walk around some, man. Or just move it to a nice spot under a bridge - where trolls like you belong.

Lewis Wetzel said...

I've ad two semester of political science. I've never heard of "social contract theory." I've heard of the social contract, of course. It is why people do things like pay for public schools when they don't have kids. No one is allowed to define the social contract. It just sort of is. Civil unrest follows if the social contract is frayed or broken, as it is in Venezuela.

Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...

Civil unrest follows if the social contract is frayed or broken, as it is in Venezuela.

Or Ferguson. Or Washington or Philadelphia. etc.

Jon Ericson said...

We get it now.

Bill R said...

Re: How does "we" become "you" in that sentence?

A sentence like that is why we love the professor. Perfect,

mockturtle said...

And since testosterone is a feel-good chemical for men

Is there any evidence for this?

mockturtle said...

Civil unrest follows if the social contract is frayed

I would say our contract is getting a little frayed.

Rusty said...

AReasonableMan said...
hombre said...
Alpha males have different expectations.

Apparently they expect to get picked on.
Goes with the territory'
Something you'll never have to worry about.

walter said...

R&B,
"an awful lot of people feel there is less and less respect for the work they do. And less respect for them, period."
How do your many words relate to that again?
I doubt the part of the so-called "social contract" most people are concerned about isn't how others view their jobs...specially those who are unemployed.

Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...

I doubt the part of the so-called "social contract" most people are concerned about isn't how others view their jobs...specially those who are unemployed.

Then no president would ever be able to run for office on things that pertain to unemployment rate, or underemployment, or wage stagnation, or benefits, or any of the many things related to jobs that presidents regularly run on - jobs being a sort of crucial factor in the very economy that every president always and explicitly runs on.

exiledonmainstreet, green-eyed devil said...


Or Ferguson. Or Washington or Philadelphia. etc.

7/29/16, 7:58 PM


R & B: all those places are run by Democrats and have been for decades. The social contract in Chicago is pretty damn frayed as well. I visit there regularly and the affluent Northsiders I know there (all solid Dems) are surprisingly complacent about the gang violence and deaths - they reassure me that it's not happening on "this side of town." So apparently it doesn't matter. What happens on the South Side stays on the South Side, or so they think. But what if it doesn't? What if it moves morth? They have no answer to that.

The GOP is hardly blameless but you can't blame the state of the inner cities on them.

walter said...

People want jobs. People want good or better jobs. Respect? The vast majority will take the former and consider respect later.
Now..it might factor way more in a true public service job like Police work...not the overarching "social contract" you speak of.

Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...

R & B: all those places are run by Democrats and have been for decades.

Cities are harder to run than villages or cornfields. Republicans seem to hate complexity. That's why it's harder for them to get voted in as mayor of a major city.

A good example of a Republican taking his simplicity at all costs philosophy into a complex society to disastrous effect (the state of California) was Arnold Schwarzenegger. OTOH, Rudy Giuliani wasn't that bad for New York - but he hardly hated the complexity of the place to the degree that most Republicans would.

In any event, I think the response is digressive. I brought up Ferguson and Philadelphia etc. as civil unrest responses to policing problems and the disconnect between party elites from the working class, respectively. But those are generally national and bipartisan problems. They just played out as flashy examples in Ferguson and Philadelphia because of recent, relevant events in those cities (a cop-black youth killing and the Democratic convention).

mockturtle said...

@exiled So apparently it doesn't matter. What happens on the South Side stays on the South Side, or so they think. But what if it doesn't? What if it moves morth? They have no answer to that.

In Seattle and its surrounding communities, homelessness is spreading into the posh neighborhoods where many of the liberals have their homes. These liberals were very outspoken about helping the homeless by organizing protests to prevent the city's ousting them from the downtown areas, even though aggressive panhandling, drug use and excrement were becoming a big problem. But NIMBY [not in my back yard] has now changed their perspective and they are petitioning to stop people from parking in their streets overnight, etc. Don't get me wrong. I wouldn't want people peeing and pooping in my yard, either. But their hypocrisy is stunning. And so very typical of liberals.

Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...

People want jobs. People want good or better jobs. Respect? The vast majority will take the former and consider respect later.

When you combine the lacking availability of good paying jobs with the ubiquity of poor working conditions, then the people conclude that the social contract for how government interacts with their economy has failed. There is no trade-off to be made because wages are low and not rising and working conditions are sub-par and not improving. Opportunities have failed on both fronts.

exiledonmainstreet, green-eyed devil said...

R & B: the Dems built up Tammany Hall machines in many of those cities that are now well entrenched and very, very difficult to defeat. However,it is true, I think, that the Republicans have hardly put up a fight when it comes to the cities. Jack Kemp was the last Republican that I can think of who had any sort of plan re: the inner cities and you might dismiss his ideas, but he at least tried to address the problem. I think Trump could make headway among blacks if he tried, but I'm not holding my breath.

Bleach Drinkers Curing Coronavirus Together said...

I think Tammany Hall was specific to New York and remains specific to the Democratic party, but it's still true that all politics are local. The Democratic machine can't or won't do much to get in the way of a popular mayor. It is annoying however the nearly incestuous level of relationship between the DNC and the Philadelphia mayors. That may have something to do with the very successful tenure of later PA governor Ed Rendell and how closely allied he was with the DNC. Before Ed Philly was in steep decline.

Jack Kemp was a truly decent guy and it's a shame that there never was and probably never will be another like him.

I'm sympathetic to the concept of W's "ownership society" but am skeptical about how well it can be or could even foreseeably be implemented, at least at the present moment. But I'm open to it.

exiledonmainstreet, green-eyed devil said...

mockturtle: the same is true of the well-heeled, very liberal 'burb I now live in. There are a zillion Hillary signs around and yet a black guy I work with told me that when he has walked though the area, people glare at him like they think he's casing the place.

Ironically, the blue collar urban neighborhood I grew up in 10 miles to the south, is far more diverse (in both ethnic and political terms) than where I live now. It was Polish/Italian/Eastern European when I was growing up there. And yes, there was prejudice and a great deal of resistance to integration in the 70's. But you know, those people have changed -changed much more than the Dems who believe every white working class dude is Bull Connor think they have. They've accepted, and in some cases, embraced their non-white neighbors. My liberal suburbanite neighbors don't have non-white neighbors. Now the old neighborhood has more Latinos and blacks and Asians living side by side with whites and, judging by my elderly relatives and childhood friends who still live there, the mark of a good neighbor is not skin color but who looks after their house and doesn't let their property look like hell. I moved into a "better" neighborhood because I could afford to do so, but I like the people in the old neighborhood much more. And it's a neighborhood that my present neighbors still sneer at - because they knew it as the "Polack factory worker" neighborhood when I was growing up. There are Bernie and Trump signs and anti- Hillary signs there.

Those are the people the Dems have thrown under the bus. I'm not sure Trump will do anything to help them, but I'm damned sure Hillary won't.

Jeff with one 'f' said...

As the FB memester "Disdain for Plebs" posted:

So what we have learned from the DNC is, they boo people are advocating the destruction of ISIS, single mothers of criminals are respected more than murdered police, hopping the fence at the DNC will land you in jail while hopping the border will land you 30 minutes to speak at the DNC, not a single American flag in the room, and Bernie supporters rioted yet again.
.
Is it me, or is this party actively destroying the country?

Bad Lieutenant said...

Rhythm and Balls said...
Civil unrest follows if the social contract is frayed or broken, as it is in Venezuela.

Or Ferguson. Or Washington or Philadelphia. etc.
7/29/16, 7:58 PM


Thanks for reminding me. I wanted to ask you:


Were Alton Sterling and Philando Castle beta males lacking in testosterone?

If so, I wish you would tell their mothers.

Rusty said...

exiledonmainstreet said...
"R & B: the Dems built up Tammany Hall machines in many of those cities that are now well entrenched and very, very difficult to defeat. However,it is true, I think, that the Republicans have hardly put up a fight when it comes to the cities. Jack Kemp was the last Republican that I can think of who had any sort of plan re: the inner cities and you might dismiss his ideas, but he at least tried to address the problem. I think Trump could make headway among blacks if he tried, but I'm not holding my breath."

want to see something funny? Watch a Republican run for mayor of Chicago.

damikesc said...

Hasn't Trump spent, you know, WAY less money than Hillary has to date?

And our economy is in the toilet with interest rates at basically zero. There are no more arrows in the quiver --- and we're still wallowing in a never-ending recession/depression.

FOUR MORE YEARS OF THIS!!!

damikesc said...

Were Alton Sterling and Philando Castle beta males lacking in testosterone?

If so, I wish you would tell their mothers.


They had guns, which you have said makes them sissies.

Kep Hartman said...

R&B: Cities are harder to run than villages or cornfields. Republicans seem to hate complexity. That's why it's harder for them to get voted in as mayor of a major city.

Overly simplistic, but possible, even if it is argument by assertion. And I'm sure it fits your confirmation bias.

Useful generalizations can be made in another direction, with greater accuracy:

Conservatives hate the corrupting influence of aggregating power in government, therefore desire smaller government that can be held to account. That is why their principle is skepticism of government.
Exhibit A: Ronald Reagan (iconic), and the 30 of the 50 states in which the people have elected Republicans to hold both governorships and legislatures to manage their affairs.

OTOH, Progressives love massively complex governmental structures that create opportunities for corruption. So they always advocate for bigger government. Got a problem? More government! Governance itself a problem? MORE governance!!

Exhibit B: The Obama/Clinton Kleptocracy, starring Reid, Pelosi, Feingold.
Exhibit C: All major Democrat controlled cities that are hell-holes: Detroit, Baltimore, St. Louis, Chicago, Los Angeles., Houston.

Have you seen Clinton Cash yet? Documents the complexities that the "charitable" Democrats set up to hide their corruption in collusion with despots and "progressive" corporations. While Hillary was Sec of State.

mockturtle said...

OTOH, Progressives love massively complex governmental structures that create opportunities for corruption. So they always advocate for bigger government. Got a problem? More government! Governance itself a problem? MORE governance!!

Truer words were never spoken.

Bad Lieutenant said...


damikesc said...
Were Alton Sterling and Philando Castle beta males lacking in testosterone?

If so, I wish you would tell their mothers.

They had guns, which you have said makes them sissies.
7/30/16, 7:33 AM

Dami, wrong hole. I'm pro-gun and calling R&B on his psychological projections. HE said carrying makes you a sissy, not I.

EsoxLucius said...


Please explain something to me: How can baby boomers say that the world we live in now is rigged, crooked, or selfish when, in the 50's they grew up in blacks couldn't play baseball, women couldn't own a home, and latins had to be out of town before sundown. If anything, the the world is fairer, more just, and better for it. Donald Trump might be the last male baby boomer to run for president, and we millennials say good riddance. I come to this site to laugh at all you yuppies, but now that you're trying to elect an orange manchurian manatee, it's not so funny anymore.

mockturtle said...

Please explain something to me: How can baby boomers say that the world we live in now is rigged, crooked, or selfish when, in the 50's they grew up in blacks couldn't play baseball, women couldn't own a home, and latins had to be out of town before sundown.

I don't know where you millennials get your information but none of the above is true.

EsoxLucius said...

mockturtle:

-I don't know where you millennials get your information but none of the above is true.

Maybe in Billo's historical fiction there was no color line in baseball, rampant sexism and redlining, but in actual history books, they exist. If you're too lazy to read, please don't vote and ruin the future for all of us that do.

Bad Lieutenant said...

Jackie Robinson broke the color line in 1947.

Bad Lieutenant said...

Do you need a reference or can you Google it yourself?

Night Owl said...

EsoxLucius

You're really going to have the hubris to tell people who lived through an era to go read a history book about it? That's pretty funny, actually.

mockturtle is right; the things you posted are caricatures of the fifties. My mother was one of those so-called "latins" who grew up in the 50s in a poor "white" working-class neighborhood, and no one drove her or my family out of town; (she met and married my Irish father in that neighborhood, and I lived there for a while). Of course there was racism and discrimination. But my mother -- nor my grandparents or uncle-- didn't whine about it. She paved her way and graduated valedictorian of her HS in 1960. (My mother is proud to tell how her family, who arrived in the 40s with nothing, was one of the few who actually owned their own home in her 50s neighborhood.)

As for whether things overall are "better" today than in the past, it's more complicated than just picking a few metrics and drawing a conclusion based on your chosen data points. Some things got better, some things got worse. One can be happy about the positive progress while also very concerned about the negative.

Unknown said...

Oh boy! Again Scott Adams is saying strange things that Ann Althouse thinks are interesting. He opened that piece by wondering aloud if the Democratic convention will be the first in history to see their candidate's polls numbers plunge after the convention. Well, the numbers are in and...wait for it, Clinton got a bigger bounce than Trump. Of course, this is the same man that predicted Trump will win the general in a landslide which is a very interesting thing to say. Not particularly likely though. So far the map is shaping up to look a lot like the 08 and 12 maps which is about what I would've predicted. That's not a particularly interesting thing to say in a blog post, though. How about this! I predict that Dick Cheney is going to make a last minute run for President in a crazy October surprise move. He'll be more macho than Trump and more experienced than Hillary! After he wins the election he'll shoot Merrick Garland in the face and nominate Ted Cruz to replace Scalia. Interesting, huh?!

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 239 of 239   Newer› Newest»