Fictional things can't lose elections, silly.

> Power corrupts...

"And absolute power is kind of neat."

Evidence is socially constructed. It's the view of the public that neckbeards and debate-bros should be expunged. This isn't a debate.

Meritocracy isn't real and hard work doesn't work, but there are lots of real factors under your control. Vote in your own best interest. Get involved in politics. Favor class, gender, ethnic interests. Sharpen your social skills.

That's a real internal locus of control. Shaping society is just another job, and a lot more rewarding to learn.

Get out, touch grass, do real things, meet real people, help your friends, let them help you. (Confound your enemies.)

The groups that have focused on “class, gender, [and] ethnic interests” have made much less forward progress compared to groups that have eschewed political approaches. It’s a boat anchor around the neck of individuals in those groups who could otherwise succeed. It yokes individuals to the worst and most hopeless members of whatever group they belong to, dragging them down and holding them back.

No group not stale, beardy, and lacking EQ has ever eschewed politics, though claiming so is of course a tactic.

In any case, we were discussing locus of control and individual mobility? I'm not offering advice for group success.

But group solidarity and political organizing foster an external locus of control. It makes you think of your fate as being linked to that of your group rather than your individual efforts.

Ah, sorry for the confusion. I'm not advocating group solidarity.

("Group" and "solidarity" are such fuzzily broad terms. But I think, not in the sense you intend. Real humans are, of course, social creatures.)

"No, John. You are the neckbeards." And then John was an incel.

I think we should probably ban reading old books. They seem to infect people with bad ideas.

Hm. I see them as connected - "we must confront our problems domestically before we fight them abroad."

Please could you expand? I'm very confused by what's going on in the states, particular the attitude in the tech community, so any clarity would be appreciated!

Not particularly. The matter is no longer up for discussion. Silence and action are best.

(Unsafety and fear always motivate silence and action. You might expect certain people to understand that better than most.)

> The progressive left’s recent deviation into science-mongering is so hot and heavy with irony that it can be difficult to hold onto it long enough for serious examination. We may at least say that it represents desperation, and a tragic descent into dogmatism. It’s always been hard for our Editorial Board at least to hear “Trust the Science” as demanding anything other than: “Trust us”. If asked why one should do so, the only truly plausible answer is the one that none who mouth this phrase could ever actually give: “Trust the science because we are the ones in power, or because it is through our claims to a knowledge-monopoly that we hope to retain power, or better to secure it.”

> We may imagine that it was in some measure this intervention on ALC’s part that led some months later to that similarly acronymous New York woman-to-watch AOC’s removal, just this past week, of the pronouns from her social-media bios. We doubt this removal will lead to any confusion or social faux-pas, as we presume that more or less everyone has the “trained judgment” necessary to “sex” AOC as she would prefer.

Whoever wrote this is a truly towering idiot.