We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
The overwhelmingly left/liberal professoriate has been looking for psychological defects in their political opponents for some time, but the intensity of these efforts has increased markedly in the last two decades. The literature is now replete with correlations linking conservatism with intolerance, prejudice, low intelligence, close-minded thinking styles, and just about any other undesirable cognitive and personality characteristic. But most of these relationships were attenuated or disappeared entirely when the ideological assumptions behind the research were examined more closely...
The Internet, after all, is a playground of impossible fantasies. The digital self, as L.M. Sacassas has noted, is a featureless and colorless reproduction of an actual human being, intrinsically devoid of identity, so that, in principle, it is capable of becoming anyone or anything. The will to believe in a hidden prophet called “Q” is no more bizarre than the will to believe in a proliferating variety of “genders.” For those born with a smartphone in hand, the whole concept of reality, to the degree it exists, appears in the guise of a soft and pliable substance to be molded according to one’s dreams.
The former has been one of my soapboxes for twenty years, and i am always grateful whenever anyone mentions it. These are people who have much greater knowledge, understanding of perspective, and access to good criticism than any of us. they understand everything but themselves, the elephant in the room in every discussion, that their answers always somehow favor the interests of their tribe in 2021.
What their "tribe" is is not easy to describe in a sentence, though there are approximations. Even the identification of who is in the tribe can be subtle, as in CS Lewis's "The Inner Ring." Yet those of us who have lived in those lands know how to identify the natives.
Assistant Village Idiot
The consequence of living in internet land and never having a job that involves real things (ie horses or corn or manufacturing) is that you start to think words are prior to reality--so you can just declare yourself female or wear a ribbon or something to protest boko harram and think you did something. You can pretend China is our friend. etc. but reality is not so easy to manipulate as these people seem to think.
Martin Armstrong tracks an interesting cycle that he labels as public vs private. Public meaning government solutions and private meaning individual solutions. This cycle rolled over into the private cycle about 2 years ago. Expect government to have ever increasing difficulty leading or mandating.
Isn't being online a lot like being a bookworm? Human civilization has accommodated the phenomenon of sharing ideas abstractly and impersonally for thousands of years. In the past, I suppose, it was mostly a small fraction of people who holed up with books and neglected in-person discussion and exchange of ideas, so you could make the case that we're in unfamiliar territory now that people who rarely read books dabble in written communication via smartphones and laptops, but isn't the complaint mostly that these people aren't smart enough to be included in the book club?