Pages

Tuesday, August 18, 2015

Morgan Warstler on Trump

     So Morgan and I had a long chat on Twitter this morning. He seemed to take issue with my post on Dred Scot Republicans.

     http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2015/08/dred-scott-republicans.html

     Or at least he thinks I should offer the most charitable position on Trump's immigration plan. To be sure my view on his plan is not charitable-though I do have a charitable view on Trump. So I'll let Morgan give us the charitable view on is plan.

    "As noted, once #Uber4Welfare is in place – the illegal immigration problem is solved."

    "Note kids, for years at Breitbart I tested both this plan and Manifest Destiny Mexico amongst the most hardcore."

    "The PROBLEM with minor thinkers like Bryan Caplan, is that they do not understand how to use Libertarianism to appeal to the reptile brain."

    "You take the most ardent of trump supporters and you say, “Mexico should be OURS! It’s a NEW FLORIDA! Let’s force them to allow our middle class to buy up all their good beaches and respect our property rights under threat of repercussions”

    "And that Trump supporter will get a wild look in his eye. Psssttt… Trump supporters ALL want to be Trump."

    "Another Pssst…. gird your loins kids…."

    "You think for a god damn second, Trump isn’t INCREDIBLY WELL VERSED in the property rights situation in Mexico????"

    "He never buys foreign property without first world property rights"

     "He licenses his name to foreign development. Read up on his Ensenada nightmare."

     "Look, real Libertarians are not passive little introverts, we don’t care about DEMOCRACY in foreign lands, we care about PROPERTY RIGHTS."

     "Anyway, 5-10M middle class Americans, and 500 American corporations DESERVE to go colonize Mexico with capitalism."

    "Nobody will even think about manual labor coming to pluck chickens and pick cabbage."

    "Think big Lars, think like a Trump."

    http://www.themoneyillusion.com/?p=29472#comment-397033

   Again, he talked a lot about being charitable and how that's the key to blogging greatness. I appreciate him trying to help me out-I certainly do aspire to blogger greatness. It outrages me that everyone doesn't read me and I'm not discussed on tv as I'm clearly smarter than most of what is disucssed. Ok well you have to admit I'm at least more prolific than just about anyone on the Internet and I'm pretty knowledgeable.

   What he's discussing comes down to something I've discussed with Sumner-framing effects. What Morgan is claiming is that the GOP base which seems so rabidly anti immigration really isn't. You just have to frame the idea in the right way to make it sound good.

 Wouldn't it be great though if all seeming political problems could be solved so easily.

 I do think Trump is very good at framing effects. To believe Morgan here, Trump is brilliantly moving the GOP base to a more productive view without it's knowing it.

 I do agree with Morgan that Trump has been healthy for the GOP.

 "Agreed. I've said all along, I think Trump is healthy bc he is finally making GOP deal with some serious stuff."

  https://twitter.com/i/notifications

 Morgan has as he says been on this Manifest Destiny Mexico idea for awhile. Basically the GOP base will buy into open borders if it's represented to them in this way is his point. Here he is post Romney defeat.

 "Long before our epic loss on Romney’s election, I have favored “Open Door” immigration with Mexico."

  "I believe it is the natural conservative position, and I think there’s a deal to appeal to Hispanics and traditional GOP voters:"

  http://www.morganwarstler.com/post/35346903657/manifest-destiny-mexico

  I reccomend you read the whole thing but I do note with some irony that his idea too calls for changing the constitution-of Mexico in this case.

 "The Mexican govt. must change their Constitution to allow American citizens to own title on beachfront property in Mexico, paying the same property and land taxes as Mexican citizens pay… changed specifically in their Constitution."

 "Conservatives are buffoons in that we don’t view Mexico like Alaska and the Louisiana Purchase before it. Where is our pioneering spirit? Where is our Manifest Destiny?"

"In the modern day, we don’t have to topple governments and colonize people to assimilate them… we just have to let our Senior citizens move there, get cheap health care, go to dinner in the afternoon, and leave their children their condos when they die."

 I don't know if I buy his argument on Trump exactly but I agree that Trump is what the GOP needs.

He also does make a great point in general about framing effects. You wonder what the real posisbilities of FE is.

If nothing else he agrees with me that Trump has had a very strange and fascinating effect on our politics. They are much more interesting for it.

P.S. One problem with framing effects is that different ones are required for different audiences. There are people on the progressive side of things who will go nuts at the very words Manifest Destiny.

Not me but many will. To be sure I consider myself not a progressive but a liberal and there's a big difference in my mind.

One diference between liberals and progressives is that progs tend to fall victim to the single issue syndrome.

http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2015/08/lawrence-lessigs-single-issue-campaign.html

    

17 comments:

  1. Mike, I'm glad you can understand Morgan. I confess that his usual mode of communication is something my dull, lumbering, straightforward, pedantic brain is not good at deciphering: his turns of phrase and overall style leaves me in the dust most of the time.

    ReplyDelete
  2. So maybe you should call me-the Morgan Warstler Whisperer. LOL

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ha!... yes, you could come in handy in that regard. It's interesting that Morgan can see Trump's & the base's immigration concerns in a positive light. He's clearly at home with "his people"... I, on the other hand, start to get a sense of actual panic when interacting with people (right, left or center) who get emotional and express confident, unwavering knowledge about things that seem utterly bat shit crazy to me... like 9/11 truthers, birthers or my neighbor who thinks he's being sprayed with "chem trails" every time he spots a contrail in the sky. I actually have a physical sensation of losing contact with the ground ... like good ol' reliable gravity has started to fail, and I'm beginning to drift away like an untethered balloon... and all I can think of is nodding until the noise stops and I have a chance to safely escape (at which point I have an urge to get down on my hands and knees and affectionately kiss mother Earth).

      Delete
    2. Wow that's a pretty visceral reaction. So basically you don't like people who have any beliefs or convictions at all? So maybe the one belief you have is utter agnosticism about everything?

      Let me admit that Truther's don't sound utterly bat shit crazy to me. I mean the Necons really wanted a war and they did talk about a Pearl Harbor like event previous to 9/11.

      LOL. Look it certainly proved efficacious for them.

      This is an absolutely fascinating book.

      http://www.amazon.com/Cognitive-Infiltration-Appointees-Undermine-Conspiracy/dp/1566568218/ref=sr_1_8?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1439947038&sr=1-8&keywords=david+ray+griffin

      Is it true? Well it's a very interesting theory anyway. I mean is it crazy to believe that conspiracies happen?

      Delete
    3. Ha!... No, I'm OK with beliefs and convictions (especially when the person holding them is aware that they should be classified as beliefs and convictions (rather than unquestionable facts) and that a reasonable person might disagree with them). But I've literally been trapped in a room or car with people like I describe on several occasions... and my nodding and attempt to turn the conversation was somehow interpreted as a challenge to present more evidence.... at which point I was subjected to FAR more than just one subject... for example my aforementioned neighbor (whom is a very nice guy actually) subjected me (on a car ride somewhere) to a long and far ranging monologue about how Bill, Hillary (and maybe her lesbian lovers?), H.W. and W, and LBJ personally have killed dozens of people, how the AMA squashed a brilliant scientist who found a way to cure cancer with "radio waves," how oil companies have done the same with inventors of perpetual motion machines, and how the Rothschild's are pulling the strings on the world's central banks, and how it's a proven fact that extra-terrestrial aliens are on Earth, that the government can teleport objects as large as aircraft carriers across the globe (like on Star Trek) and a HOST of other similar things... FAR from anything resembling mainstream consensus. Just one or two of those ideas would be plenty for me... but it's rarely just one thing, it's almost always a landslide of ideas that leave me thinking that this person inhabits a totally different reality than I do. That's why I feel like I'm floating away. I certainly COULD BE wrong about any number of things, but the combined effect leaves me wondering how this person can possible be seeing the same world that I am. I'm left thinking that if this person is right about even 1/10 of the things they're telling me, then I must be the crazy one... that I've completely misinterpreted every shred of evidence coming through my senses up to this point in my life. It's NOT a comfortable feeling.

      I'm with you on Cheney and Bush and company wanting a war. I just find it difficult to believe that he (or rather "they") would knowingly slaughter 3000+ Americans to get one, at least in the way that 9/11 was carried out (rather than the good old traditional way of sending people off to war to die). I think Bush looked like the proverbial deer in the headlights that day, and I don't believe he's that good of an actor. If somebody is suspicious of the evidence ... fine, but when they present it like I'M the crazy one for having any doubts about the extraordinary things they're saying, then I want to change the subject (I don't feel like I can have a meaningful discussion with such a person ... at least not on that topic).

      Anyway, I think Steven Novella describes my sentiments about belief and truth and conspiracy theories (some of which, of course, ARE real... 9/11 in fact was a conspiracy amongst the hijackers (at least)... as was the Lincoln assassination, etc). I just listened to that piece from Novella last night, and I can't think of anything in there that I have a substantial disagreement with him about.

      Delete
    4. I've found that there's something about dentists. My experience: they are always old, male, very angry, and hate Obama was an absolute passion.

      And they are all Jews-I know, what can I tell you. Older, male Jewish dentists all hate Obama.

      I knew one guy at the library who would never leave me alone about Obama. Never shut up. I know what you mean

      Delete
    5. I have a couple of Jewish co-workers... both extremely bright engineers. One, is normal. The other one has lots of unconventional ideas. I went shooting with him once many years ago (2007?), and so he started to think that I must agree with his right wing ideas. I compounded the problem one evening when it was just he and I in the building... he started telling me about how he saw an "Arms are made for hugging" bumper sticker on a car and "felt like dragging the pussies out and beating them up." It was during one of those times in recent history during which the IDF was bombing Gaza in retaliation for rocket attacks... so I suspect that somehow translated into an aggressive feeling on his part... why do I think that? Because the conversation quickly turned to Gaza and the IDF and the IDF being 100% justified in bombing the Palestinians back to the stone age. This was a rare occasion during which I didn't just try to escape... but I still couldn't quite confront his ideas directly (I should mention that both of us worked with a very nice Muslim engineer who's family was from Gaza and who was at the time extremely worried about this grandmother and other family members still living there during the IDF assault). So I reacted in a weird, indirect passive aggressive way... I leap frogged his war mongering... and pretended like I suspected he was "soft" for not wanting to kill ALL the Palestinians... he was taken aback by my psychotic outburst. I used the opportunity to suggest that maybe HE should be the one we drag out of his car and beat up for being a pussy. Lol!... ever since that day he's regarded me as some kind of soft spoken engineer who under the covers is a right wing extremist worthy of respect. Lol... Oh boy. I meant the whole thing to highlight how crazy he sounded, but he took me at face value!

      Needless to say, he's not an Obama fan either. During the Ferguson upheaval (again when I was the only person left in the office) he made some racially insensitive comments... I thought it curious for him being a Jew and all, so I thought I'd mention that I'd seen some skin heads with Nazi tattoos at our local McDonalds a couple years back... to which he responded that maybe white supremacy wasn't so bad... that in fact, perhaps that's exactly what this country needs more of. LOL!!! A Jewish Nazi??? WTF? Anyway, I didn't pull a repeat performance and instead just retreated to my office... what do you say after something like that?

      My dentist is a right winger too... I don't know if he's Jewish or not. I'm positive I'm not going to ask him. ;^)

      Delete
    6. See what I mean. There's something about dentists.

      I can relate to your passive-aggressive antics-pretending to be to the Right of guys like that is the only way to possibly make them shut up. LOL

      Delete
  3. I know they kind of people you mean and the floating sensation. As to 9/11 I don't have a definitive position but I can't help but wonder...

    If the only thing ruling out this theory is the sense of restraint from Bush-Cheney 'they wouldn't go that far' then I can't rule it out.

    I mean Cheney is really nuts. Back in the 80s he used to particpate in these drills of what would happen if the country was hit by a nuclear bomb.

    In gaming it out he argued that much as it pained him, there should be no Congress.

    Then after 9/11 he had a new reason for the same drills. He would be underground for months.

    He seems to genuinely live his life in a constant state of panic where no rollback of liberty is too great to give even a modicum extra sense of security.

    ReplyDelete
  4. No I don't think you're crazy for having doubts. I agree I see that attitude with the Bernie Sanders maniacs as well.

    But I don't think someone is crazy for at least wondering. Besides who knows how it could have been done. Bush's expression isn't necessarily a conversation stopper-as Richard Rorty would put it-who knows, maybe Cheney and friends realized that Bush had to be kept out of the loop.

    To me I find i plausible-which certainly doesn't make it true. I like reading about it. feel like even if the Truther literature is wrong-and Griffin is the best by far, he has so many books-you learn a lot about all kinds of things from politics to history, to physics.

    That book I linked to is particularly great because it's about Cass Sunstein as well-who according to some firebaggers-my name for the extreme Obama hating leftists-Sunstein is some sinister guy controlling everyone's mind.

    A theory doesn't have to be true to be interesting anyway. And I'm far from certain it isn't.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mike the difference between people like you and I and the "bat shit crazy" types I was referring to is that it's possible to have a conversation with you. I HOPE the same is true of me and whatever unconventional ideas I have (don't give up on me Mike!). I think it's when a conspiracy theorist (which, as Novella points out, we ALL are to some degree) is an across the board or a "Grand conspiracy" theorist (as Novella discusses) that they start to become paranoid about everything, which makes having a conversation with them impossible.

      If you can ask yourself the following "What evidence would it take to convince me to change my mind?" and the answer is something that just about any disinterested party would agree is a reasonable level of evidence, then you're not "epistemically closed" to the world.

      Delete
    2. Yes but some beliefs are not really malleable. Like I don't think there's anything-nothing I can think of-that would make me agree with Scott Walker that a woman who's life is in jeopardy shouldn't be allowed to get an abortion.

      Or agree with Mike Huckabee that a 10 year old girl who's raped shouldn't be allowed to have an abortion.

      I can't think of what would convince me I'm wrong here and I don't want to even try.

      Delete
    3. But those are more towards the subjective judgements end of the spectrum. You can't convince me that I don't like dark chocolate either. I'm talking more about objective facts. I don't regard many opinions on ethics to be objective facts. Perhaps they can be influenced by objective facts, and perhaps a utilitarian type argument can apply, but they are in a whole other league than are historical or scientific facts.

      Delete
  5. But that's my point. Subjective judgments are positive facts work together. Let's put it this way to ask you a tough one would you say it's an objective fact that slavery is wrong?

    ReplyDelete
  6. I mean subjective judgments and positive facts work side by side. Like Uncle Milty talked about positive and normative economics.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I'm thinking of Richard Rorty too-Sumner says he's aa Rortian-who argues that scientific facts are still based on social consensus.

    We have a kind of social agreement that certain things are true and in science there is also consensus building. You and I with all the time we spend on the economic blogs see this firsthand among the economists.

    http://www.amazon.com/Philosophy-Social-Hope-Richard-Rorty/dp/0140262881/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1440010969&sr=8-3&keywords=richard+rorty

    http://www.amazon.com/Contingency-Irony-Solidarity-Richard-Rorty/dp/0521367816/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1440010969&sr=8-2&keywords=richard+rorty

    http://www.amazon.com/Philosophy-Mirror-Nature-Richard-Rorty/dp/0691141320/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1440010969&sr=8-1&keywords=richard+rorty

    On 1984, Rorty argues that Winston has no hope against O'Brien as society agrees with him and not Winston.

    So the implication here is that 2=2=4 is not a fact of nature but just a social fact. It's possible to do as O'Brien did and take over and decree that 2+2=5

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Now I'm not necessarily agreeing with this but I think this is a very provocative argument

      Delete