Feminism and the perils of blogging
The internet doesn’t do nuance.
Early on in my blogging career, I discovered that many people are poor readers. And they tend to misread posts in a very specific way. Let’s say you make a very specific point about X. A reader will note that people who believe X often also believe Y, Z and 100 other things. Thus assume it’s only logical that you must also be advocating Y, Z and a 100 other things.
This sort of mood affiliation reaches comical proportions in my comment section, where Trumpistas assume that because I hate Trump, I must also subscribe to dozens of left wing views that I in fact reject. I am now at peace with that fact and have come to view this as a source of amusement.
Back in 2005, Larry Summers got into hot water for some rather unexceptional statements about the lack of women in science. His critics claimed that Summers had argued that men were superior to women at science, which is not what he claimed. (Even Harvard faculty struggle with nuance.). Based on that misinterpretation, Summers was viewed as hostile to feminism.
Now Bryan Caplan says, “Don’t be a feminist.” Because I believe that Summers was treated unfairly, I am somewhat inclined to support Caplan’s position. And feminists also support lots of other political positions that I oppose.
But in the end I reject the anti-feminist label. And the reason is simple—I look at things from a global perspective. And from a global perspective there is one gender issue of overriding importance in the 21st century—the war against women’s rights by right-wing authoritarian nationalists.
Putin is the most famous example of a misognynist leader, but a backlash against women’s rights is gaining strength in many other places, including China, India and indeed most lower and middle income countries. This is often combined with a cult of masculinity and a contempt for “sissy boys”, trans people, and anyone else who doesn’t fit the traditional mold of gender difference. To be fair, this is much less of an issue in rich countries, but even here you see conservatives trying to ban abortion and mocking gay politicians like Pete Buttigieg. In some European countries it’s even worse.
Contra Caplan, at the global level you very much should identify as a feminist. So perhaps I could say I’m an American anti-feminist and a global feminist? I’d rather just avoid tribal labels entirely.
In recent years, many on the right have been attracted to Putin’s anti-woke rhetoric. One theme is that the nationalist right is masculine and strong, while the woke left is a bunch of sissy boys. But the war in Ukraine upends that framing (just as WWII undercut the American admirers of fascism and the Hitler-Stalin Pact undermined American communists.) The Ukrainian soldiers fighting back against Putin sure don’t look like sissies.
Love him or hate him, Jordon Peterson is generally an extremely effective debater. But the recent Russian setback in Ukraine seems to have put him out of sorts—I don’t ever recall seeing a grouchier intellectual interviewed by a major network. At times his attempt to sound cynical comes across as so over the top as to be almost comical. Judge for yourself. (Tip to Peterson: If you aren’t using your trademark humor, you’re losing.)
In the interview, Peterson starts right off by saying that Putin is nothing like Hitler and Stalin, and then immediately pivots to the claim the there’s more than a bit of Hitler in us all. Well, we do share 99% of DNA with chimps, so . . .
But then how is Putin nothing like Hitler? They both invaded a neighboring country, annexing a portion of that country. Later, they both decided they wanted the entire country. They both invaded multiple European countries. They both wanted to recreate a grand empire. They both headed fascist personality cults. And yet while (according to Peterson) there’s a fair bit of Hitler in all of us, somehow Putin is nothing like Hitler? As for Stalin, he was an authoritarian Russian dictator that massacred lots of Ukrainians in 1933. So again, nothing like Putin.
To his credit, Peterson does not support the Russian invasion. But he sure goes out of his way to make excuses for Russia. Here’s David French in The Atlantic, with two embedded quotes of Peterson:
I want to focus on a specific claim by Peterson—that Russia has not only gone to war to protect itself from what he describes as Western degeneracy, but that our alleged degeneracy robs the West of the moral high ground in the conflict. Here’s a key quote:
“And are we degenerate in a profoundly threatening manner? I think the answer to that may well be yes. The idea that we are ensconced in a culture war has become a rhetorical commonplace. How serious is that war? Is it serious enough to increase the probability that Russia, say, will be motivated to invade and potentially incapacitate Ukraine merely to keep the pathological West out of that country, which is a key part of the historically Russian sphere of influence?”
And what is this degeneracy? Peterson talks about radical gender ideology, the nomination of Ketanji Brown Jackson (yes, really), and her reluctance to define a “woman” during her confirmation hearings. Here’s more Peterson:
“The culture war in the West is real, and culture is losing. And Russia is part of the West. And the culture war is now truly part of why we have a war, and it’s a real war. And it is certainly the case that we do not therefore have all the moral high ground, for some part of the reasons that [political scientist John] Mearsheimer details, and for these reasons of insanity. In fact, how much of it we have at all is something rightly subject to the most serious debate.”
In Putin’s Russia, rape is a minor issue as long as it’s within the family:
In 2018, the government statistics agency recorded a total of 8,300 women killed. That works out at 22 a day. Contrast that with the UK rate of one woman murdered every three days.
Like in Britain, NGOs say the majority of those happened in the home. The official number for domestic violence murders for 2018 was just 253.
Most European countries, especially given a widely reported increase in domestic violence during the pandemic, are toughening their laws. Russia is going the other way.
In 2017 Russia decriminalised first instance domestic battery, meaning anything which doesn’t end up in hospital is classified as an administrative offence. There is no specific category for violence by a relative. The penalty is the same as being punched by a stranger on the street.
Of course rape outside the family is taboo, as for people on the far right there is no worse fate than being a cuckold.
But Peterson thinks the real problem is flaky Westerners having trouble defining the term “woman”.
I would encourage Bryan Caplan to look beyond America, and ask himself whether he wants to be seen (unfairly) as part of the global anti-feminist crusade.
Tags:
25. September 2022 at 00:11
Some backstory you may be unaware of: Jordan Peterson had some issues with perscription drug dependence and withdrawal symptoms last year or so, with the end result being that he was put into an artificial coma for a while. He hasn’t been the same since, and this kind of rant is unfortunately something he does now.
25. September 2022 at 00:41
Matty, Yes, I was unaware of that. Perhaps my tone was a bit too sarcastic.
25. September 2022 at 00:48
>In recent years, many on the right have been attracted to Putin’s anti-woke rhetoric. One theme is that the nationalist right is masculine and strong, while the woke left is a bunch of sissy boys. But the war in Ukraine upends that framing (just as WWII undercut the American admirers of fascism and the Hitler-Stalin Pact undermined American communists.)
The Ukrainian soldiers fighting back against Putin sure don’t look like sissies. Absolutely nonsensical point.
The Ukrainian soldiers fighting against Russia are for the most part nationalists.
25. September 2022 at 00:49
Trying again
>In recent years, many on the right have been attracted to Putin’s anti-woke rhetoric. One theme is that the nationalist right is masculine and strong, while the woke left is a bunch of sissy boys. But the war in Ukraine upends that framing (just as WWII undercut the American admirers of fascism and the Hitler-Stalin Pact undermined American communists.) The Ukrainian soldiers fighting back against Putin sure don’t look like sissies.
The Ukrainian soldiers fighting against Russia are for the most part nationalists. Absolutely nonsensical point.
25. September 2022 at 01:16
I’m not a trumpista, anymore than you are a bidenista.
You are like a third grade school kid who throws around epithets at everyone you don’t like. It’s childish, and boring.
The fact is that Peterson is correct. You are a brainwashed fool, who is incredibly biased, and bigoted and hateful, towards anything Russian.
The situtation in Donbass is complicated. The U.S. started this in 2014 when they thought it would smart to overthrow the regime, and when Donbass, who overwhelmingly voted for Yanukovych decided to leave the union, you and your lover Bolton, and the other band of thugs in Washington sent arms to Kiev which landed on their doorstep for nearly seven years. If you are going to overthrow their guy, then shell them when they decided to leave, you are tyrant.
Now Russia on the other hand probably should not involved itself in the civil war, nevertheless, the problem is on their border. When Israel conducts a premptive strike and the international community lauds their effort to deal with “issues on their border” then Russia does the same thing, and you call them “hitler” — well, that is where you fail to find consistency in your logic. You fail to put the shoe on the other foot.
If Russia sent Arms to Mexico city, and there was an ongoing conflict in Tijuana, I think you would support U.S. action. People who call you out on your inconsitencies are not not “comical” or “hitler” or “crazed trumpistas or bidenistas” or whatever other third grade epithet comes to mind.
25. September 2022 at 02:01
Once again, Sumner believes that the problem is not him but everyone else. It’s never him. He’s infallible. He’s god. If only we supported his view, we’d all live in perfect order an harmony and anyone who disagrees with him cannot read well. They struggle reading.
When you praise Bolton, a known liar and one of the architects of a twenty year war, and believe him without any evidence whatsoever other than his own words, in a poorly written book, which he wrote after being fired, then people take notice of that bias.
When you praise China, over and over, support TikTok a company that was banned in India for sending out malware, and NEVER criticize them publicly (you have in private), then people take notice of that strange behavior..
When you call for a one-world-nato, which would require a one-world-government, people take notice.
When you want to write a “living book” presumably so you can delete and modify sections later on, almost like a living constitution that doesn’t uphold inalienable rights, then people take notice of that type of subjective, utilitarian, post modernist, neo-marxist, anti-enlightenment garbage.
When you blindly claim that Russia is a terrible, horrible, no-good-rotten agrressor that should be “confronted” and “stopped”, and like a biased person refuse to admit U.S. involvement and the provacations that led to this war between 2014 and 2021, then people take notice.
When you say things like “inflation is transitory” and it turns out your model and your opinion were dead wrong, then people take notice.
When you talk about Trump corruption, but never talk about Biden corruption, people take notice of this strange bias.
When you lament that “we” (WHO THE FUCK IS WE) are not doing enough to stop Russia, and you advocate sending young men to their death, too chicken-shit to go yourself, then people take notice.
When you call for sending more ammunition and armaments to Kiev, to prolong war and death and destruction, and havoc upon people in Donbas, then people take notice.
You, sir, are a thug! You don’t support liberty. You support subjugatiuon. You want a homogenous world that follows your view, and everyone else who disagrees is a horrible “trumpista”.
25. September 2022 at 05:09
economist-manque-retired sumner should stick to floundering in economics rather than self immolation in benighted political/social theory
25. September 2022 at 05:36
I liked to describe myself as an “egalitarian”. I suppose that would now work less well than years ago when I last used it in conversation.
25. September 2022 at 05:59
Arilando, You said:
“The Ukrainian soldiers fighting against Russia are for the most part nationalists.”
No, they are patriots. Ukrainians want to join international organizations like the EU and NATO. They welcome both ethnic Russians and ethnic Ukrainians. They are the opposite of nationalists, who oppose those organizations and are bigoted against other ethnicities.
Ricardo, You said:
“I’m not a trumpista”
Who said you were? Are you one of those who makes up phony claims about what I believe? Is that why you believe I view you as a Trumpista?
25. September 2022 at 06:01
Brent, I’m a utilitarian, which is egalitarian in one sense of the term, but not the other.
25. September 2022 at 06:33
Scott,
A few comments/ questions.
1. “…..but a backlash against women’s rights is gaining strength in many other places, including China, India and indeed most lower and middle income countries.”
Do you have any evidence that supports this. Political rhetoric aside, that is not my perception.
2. Excluding politicians (most of whom will say anything for political advantage) my read on the mainstream conservative position on abortion is that it is not opposition to abortion per se, but rather opposition to the Supreme Court making up laws (either for or against) abortion or other matters,
3. Could you clarify your position on utilitarianism. Do you favor maximizing aggregate utility or do you believe that the distribution of utility is also important. Also, what discount rate should be applied to future utility versus current utility.
25. September 2022 at 09:46
Even before Peterson’s mental illness became public, he was obviously an idiot. I’m still shocked Tyler Cowen ever gave him the time of day, given the usual quality of his guests and level of discussion on his podcast. Peterson is less intellectual than Joseph Goebbels.
Before the coma and his now usual breakdown into tears during interviews, he was promoting increased societal pressure for enforced monogamy and similar moronic ideas, which helped him sell millions of books to so-called incels.
By the way, if you’re not so directly familiar with the incel community, look up their Reddit threads and you’ll find multiple groups of hundreds of thousands who regularly post misogynist, racist rants about how corporate-friendly alpha males take all the women, with sometimes anti-semitic conspiracy theories woven in. Many of them promote dropping out of society, including the dating and job markets, and finding ways to live off family. Peterson was their hero, though I haven’t glanced at any of their posts since his mental illness became obvious.
Peterson was always obviously a closet-case himself. I think he’s one of those who cannot deal with his own homosexuality and lashes out at the world as a result. People like him are not only more predisposed to chemical addiction, but also to depression, anxiety disorders, and OCD. The feelings of disgust that come with an inability to deal with homosexuality can send OCD symptoms into overdrive.
Today, of course, Peterson is just a living parody of himself, ranting incoherently about threats to masculinity with his rather highly feminine voice, breaking down into crying fits, and showing the world what an absolute mess he’s been his entire adult life.
25. September 2022 at 09:52
dtoh, I frequently see articles discussing the backlash against women’s rights. I would encourage you to look into the increasingly misogynistic views of the extreme right in many parts of the world. They are quite hostile to women’s rights, gay rights, etc. Women are often seen as the property of the husband. Look at what’s happened to Chinese women who have gone public about sexual abuse. Look at the condition of women in India. And do I even need to mention the Middle East and Africa?
My impression is that conservatives are upset with both the logic of Roe and the act of abortion. Certainly the writers at the National Review are extremely anti-abortion, and I think they at least partially represent conservative opinion in the US.
I believe that all utils should count equally. Across people and across time. Hence no discounting. (Of course you may want to discount future dollars, but that’s another issue.)
25. September 2022 at 10:02
[…] The wisdom of Scott Sumner (on feminism, and […]
25. September 2022 at 10:10
[…] The knowledge of Scott Sumner (on feminism, and Putin). […]
25. September 2022 at 10:16
No, Putin is not a “fascist”, but then you also absurdly claim that communist China is “fascist”. Putin did not rise to power via a personality cult. He was just part of the security service of the previous regime, and from there became Yeltsin’s chosen successor. Hardly anybody outside Russia even knows the name of his political party, because he didn’t obtain power via creating & mobilizing a political party.
You are old enough to have been alive when Jeane Kirkpatrick wrote “Dictatorships and Double Standards” distinguishing between traditional authoritarians and revolutionary totalitarians. Putin is just the former. He has invaded “multiple” countries over his 20+ years in power if you count Georgia, which remains an independent country which didn’t even have its regime replaced because Putin’s goals were the limited ones of realpolitik (setting aside their morality). Contrast with the GWB administration, which invaded and overthrew the governments of both Afghanistan & Iraq within just his first term. I am not going to claim GWB was a “fascist”, because like Orwell I know better than to use it as a synonym for politics I dislike.
25. September 2022 at 10:33
My earlier argument with Scott over whether the current Chinese regime is fascist took place at EconLog, so I’ll link to it here.
As for whether anyone is “increasingly” misogynistic, one would need to compare the past to the present. Within the US we can look at things like the GSS, while internationally there is the World Values Survey. Razib Khan often makes use of both to track social changes over time, I highly recommend his work (though his forte is population genetics, he also seems to know more history than even professional historians).
Michael Sandifer: I never read Peterson’s books or consumed other content he put out (I regard Jungian psychology as BS pseudoscience), but even I know he’s anti-incel.
https://existentialespresso.substack.com/p/6-proofs-that-jordan-peterson-is
25. September 2022 at 10:34
“I discovered that many people are poor readers”
Most people don’t read carefully or comprehension, sadly: https://jakeseliger.com/2022/01/31/most-people-dont-read-carefully-or-for-comprehension
25. September 2022 at 10:45
For those who want to view a brief, much more intelligent discussion over the issues Peterson so ineptly tries to address about problems between men and women in modern society, there’s this dicussion with an evolutionary biologist:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nronTIt99ag
25. September 2022 at 10:55
TGGP,
I never said Peterson wasn’t anti-incel. In fact, I was critical of one of Peterson’s proposed solutions to the problem.
But, Peterson is a hero to many incels and most women find Peterson to be a complete idiot and his ideas as adopted by men are a complete turnoff.
25. September 2022 at 11:05
The mistake you and Tyler make, if only implicitly, is asssume feminism is saner outside the US. Not true. The conditions women face may or may not be worse in the third world, but the class of activists identifying themselves as feminists has the same principles everywhere. This means their beliefs and lobbying generates policies just as insane in Argentina (where there is a trans quota in government and businesses that have x amount of protected class employees get preferential access to dollars) as in the US. Not only that, but the non-obviously-feminist policies they favour and push result in worse outcomes for women and minorities because of the obviously true fact that most of the “emancipation” that characterizes (post-)modernity comes down to the banal fact of economic growth and capitalist development breaking traditional bonds, which yes, for better and worse, tend to be patriarchal and suppress certain identities. These people tend to push for the most hilariously economically illiterate policy…
If these bonds are worse for people on net is up for discussion, but we can both agree improved material welfare, a product of capitalist development, is an unalloyed good, and you seem to believe that breaking the patriarchy is also good, so, there.
Also the notion Putin has a personality cult in Russia is hilarious. I am not trying to be rude, but if you seriously believe this you know close to nothing about the actual character of 21st century Russia. Start here to correct your obvious ignorance:
https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/portrait-of-power/
And no, invading a country and killing many of its armed forces and ultimately civilians (it has been a largely urban war, it happens) doesn’t imply massacring them in any serious sense. Did the US go to Vietnam to “massacre” civilians? I am aware of Mai Lai, but to imply Vietnam was anything like a forced famine or the Armenian genocide is profoundly unserious.
Finally, the Ukrainians performing well in combat proves exactly nothing about who is more manly and who is less. Russia tried the ultimately idiotic route of invading a fully mobilized country of around 40 million people with 200k soldiers. Their failure is down to this banal truth and the fact that the West (the single most powerful bloc on earth) has done its best to make sure Ukraine wins. Will Ukraine win? I really really doubt it, but it surely won’t look as a miracle if you take those things into account.
25. September 2022 at 11:05
I wish there was a name for this fallacy, and maybe there is.
There is little more frustrating that arguing for X, only to have your opponent draw the mistaken conclusion that you must also be arguing for Y, and then criticize you for believing Y. Their muddled reasoning becomes your liability.
25. September 2022 at 11:08
. First time commenting here, apologies if my comments are duplicated, but there seems to be something fucky going on with the comment submission mechanism.
25. September 2022 at 11:23
Hi Scott.
I agree with you on feminism.
1. On Peterson, I think he is great when talks about the psychology of the individuals and his life advice for people based on his knowledge of the academic literature of psychology and his years of experience as a clinician, but I tune out the moment he talks about politics, society, economics, etc.
2. I don’t find calling Putin “like hitler” insightful. Calling someone “like Hitler” doesn’t mean he conquers and annexes land. Thats nothing special. It means “he has a doctrine of racial superiority which demands racial purity by exterminating all foreign races, homosexuals, disabled, etc. like vermin” That’s what made Hitler unique. Clearly that’s not Putin.
3. Given my time spent reading the history of Fascism (a difficult word to define), I don’t find calling Putin a fascist insightful. Him being anti-feminist, anti-gay, xenophobic, pro-religion, etc. is standard right-wing attitudes in all countries. So I would call him far right. But I won’t quibble. After all, I’m prone to call Bernie a Communist.
4. I think some of the fear of children being feminists, gay, transgender is pure prejudice towards people who aren’t “normal”, but I think some of it is also just fear that they won’t grow up to sexually reproduce with a partner, which has generally been thought of has healthy “normal” adult behavior both for individuals and society.
5. I don’t find your distinction between the terms patriotism and nationalism helpful. You’re just playing a game of labels and defining one as the good kind of loving your country and the other as the bad kind of loving your country. But most people have a foot in each camp.
You have had a major influence on my thinking and I hope you enjoy your retirement.
JoeMac
25. September 2022 at 11:34
Scott,
“I believe that all utils should count equally. Across people and across time. Hence no discounting. (Of course you may want to discount future dollars, but that’s another issue.)”
1. So if I get all the utils and you don’t get any, that’s OK?
2. So personally, how much do you think we should discount future utils?
3. On women’s rights, I’m curious if there is an actual retrenchment or if it’s just rhetoric?
4. With Roe gone, I suspect politicians and pundits promoting either no abortion or abortion up to 9 months will both be dying breeds. Now that the rhetoric actually matters, those promoting views that are out of touch with 70% of the American public will be de-platformed by their voters or their readers.
25. September 2022 at 11:44
Joemac,
Patriotism is rooting for your country, but not seeing your citizens as inherently superior in some fashion, and/or seeing your country as being defined by a certain genetic or ethnic heritage. It also means not assuming your culture is superior.
Nationalism involves a chauvinism of some kind, and divides people into immutably exclusive groups between “us” and “them”. It’s believing your people in your “nation” have a superiority, the purity of which must be maintained.
The concept of America is supposed to be anti-nationalist. Anyone can be an American, as it involves a set of political and philosphical beliefs. Ironically, Reagan spoke eloquently about this in his last speech as President:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2R8QxCD6ir8
25. September 2022 at 12:06
Ukraine, ukrainians and Ukrainaian culture is actually quite conservative and macho.
Oursiders want to name this war with fancy labels: democracy vs autocracy, woke vs anti-woke, etc.
But from inside Ukraine, it is much simpler: freedom or not freedom, sovreignty or not sovreignty.
I would say that old fashioned imperialism, colonialism framework is much better if you want to understand Russian invasion.
Americans and russians want to talk through Ukraine their own story.
I am not ukrainian, but I have been in Ukraine many-many times and story is simple: Ukraine is democracy, conservative and macho and they fight for their freedom. Nothing more, nothing less.
25. September 2022 at 12:49
“The fact is that Peterson is correct. You are a brainwashed fool, who is incredibly biased, and bigoted and hateful, towards anything Russian.” — Ricardo
Like a Russian war of aggression? — Franco
“Russia tried the ultimately idiotic route of invading a fully mobilized country of around 40 million people with 200k soldiers.”
Not enough Russians willing to die for the Reich, it seems.
“When you call for sending more ammunition and armaments to Kiev, to prolong war and death and destruction, and havoc upon people in Donbas, then people take notice.” — Sara
If only the Ukrainians shortened that war by surrending their country to the invader…
25. September 2022 at 13:00
TGGP, Putin is the closest to the textbook definition of fascism that we’ve seen since the 1940s. China is also a fascist country.
“Contrast with the GWB administration, which invaded and overthrew the governments of both Afghanistan & Iraq within just his first term.”
LOL, You are exactly the sort of person Jeanne Kirkpatrick used to mock. And yet you cite her?
Franco, You said:
“The conditions women face may or may not be worse in the third world”
I should have stopped reading right there (honor killings?), but out of morbid curiosity I continued until you mentioned the Claremont Review. Do you know anything about that rag?
Joemac, I have many posts at Econlog that address your misconceptions about Putin, fascism, nationalism etc. Nationalism is nothing like patriotism. BTW, one of the world’s leading experts of fascism claims that Putin is an almost textbook example:
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/19/opinion/russia-fascism-ukraine-putin.html?unlocked_article_code=AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACEIPuomT1JKd6J17Vw1cRCfTTMQmqxCdw_PIxftm3iWka3DIDm8TiOMNAo6B_EGKf7d4fNo6mjqSX9RAK7pqWf9ox-5ZMgl1VhWppN2EhJEBaW0TmL6EY1kXjdjLTKxqtnjjdHW4I-Nyg-bls0LePGK6RKPe2SA-IA0z849vdQuvxXUNkvzDQuZz3oZ52OwzRcwvHUd2byaIuvjoDRR-KY_GOkmasl9qLrkfDTLDntec6KYCdBFRAT_FTHB44GU667BMKY9dffa_f1N7Jp2I0fhGAXdoLYypG5Q1W4De8r1purLPohGMo9GkyZHUntc_C1189dwcnZPLtA&smid=url-share
You said:
“I don’t find calling Putin “like hitler” insightful. Calling someone “like Hitler” doesn’t mean he conquers and annexes land. Thats nothing special.”
Actually it’s extremely “special” in the modern world to invade a neighboring country with the intention of annexing land. Yes, it used to be common, but with the exception of Saddam and Kuwait it’s something one almost never sees in the modern world.
In any case, I only brought up Hitler because Peterson did, and in a rather bizarre fashion by claiming that you and I are more than a bit like Hitler but Putin isn’t. Seriously?
dtoh, Not OK with me! (I’m selfish.) But yes, whatever makes aggregate utility higher is good for the world. As a practical matter that ends up being a rather egalitarian ideal. I have many posts explaining my view of utilitarianism. And no discounting of future utils.
I gave one example of retrenchment in my post. Afghanistan is another obvious recent example.
The GOP is wildly out of touch with voters on abortion, as we saw in the recent Kansas vote. The Dems are also out of touch, but much less so.
Mikk, “Americans and russians want to talk through Ukraine their own story.”
People think they are being sophisticated when they make these inane comments.
25. September 2022 at 13:10
First, I hope I don’t misread and mis-represent and mis-oppose your opinions, Scott ( I hope it’s okay I address you with your first name).
Is the anti-abortion stance of conservatives inspired by the desire to limit women’s rights? I would say that they want to protect the right of unborn babies. Also, surprisingly, more women are pro-life than men, according to Vox:
https://www.vox.com/2019/5/20/18629644/abortion-gender-gap-public-opinion
I understand the attraction right-wing leaders have for certain conservatives. They recognize some similarities between their ideas and those of Orban* and Putin. And: the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
They fear that wokeism is encroaching on their freedoms, especially the freedom to teach their children their values. To me those seem valid fears (and I am open to arguments why I am wrong).
The fact that a Supreme Court Justice doesn’t want to define the word “woman” is shocking to me. It proves that wokeism has penetrated the highest court of the land (eh, I mean your land). At least, from her refusal to define the word woman I infer that she holds (or at least pretends to hold) the woke belief that someone with a male body can be a woman.
I think it is cheap to imply Peterson thinks westerners are flaky because they don’t want to define the word woman. Of course he uses this as an example of a much bigger phenomenon.
Why is it strange that Peterson is against the election of a particular Justice? Not stranger than someone being opposed to Brett Kavanaugh or Clarence Thomas, I would think.
(Because you quote him, I treat David French’s opinions as yours)
I think it is reprehensible to imply that for Peterson the refusal to define a word is a greater sin than rape (and I hope this is a case of me mis-reading you).
Let me finish by expressing my appreciation for you Scott. You are a true truthseeker. Apart from that, the piece in which you told us about your life touched me (I can’t find it anymore, did it appear on the blog?)
* To be clear, Orban and Putin are not in the same category, imo
25. September 2022 at 13:15
No mention of the real threat to women’s rights in countries rigorously adhering to one of world’s major religions? Proves your analysis can’t be trusted.
No mention of Ukraine basically being historical Russia, very complex situation? Pretending Putin’s authoritarianism is anything like the Nazi terror and attendant death toll? Proves your analysis can’t be trusted.
Fine to support “feminism” (whatever Bryan meant by that, or you mean), fine to think Putin’s bad, perhaps even evil. But your bias is showing.
(Similarly, fine to hate Trump, but no mention of how Biden is almost exactly like Trump, except fails worse along all the same parameters Ds pretend to care about? (E.g., bad touching, stupidity, corruption, age, etc.) Proves your analysis can’t be trusted.)
25. September 2022 at 13:31
Henk, You said:
“I understand the attraction right-wing leaders have for certain conservatives. They recognize some similarities between their ideas and those of Orban* and Putin. And: the enemy of my enemy is my friend.”
Unfortunately, I fear you are correct. The conservative movement in America has sold its soul to the devil.
“I think it is reprehensible to imply that for Peterson the refusal to define a word is a greater sin than rape”
I agree that that would be reprehensible.
“First, I hope I don’t misread and mis-represent and mis-oppose your opinions, Scott”
It seems like you did, doesn’t it?
Facile, You said:
“No mention of Ukraine basically being historical Russia, very complex situation?”
Well I certainly cannot deny that you have provided a facile analysis. Are you suggesting that countries have a right to invade neighboring countries because of where boundary lines were drawn in the past?
“No mention of the real threat to women’s rights in countries rigorously adhering to one of world’s major religions?”
LOL, try reading my replies to dtoh.
25. September 2022 at 14:13
Scott, you may have seen this before, but Medhi Hasan had a great segment from back in March about a Russian fascist philosopher who’s now one of Putin’s biggest influences. https://youtu.be/bfVYiHY7lok There’s also been all the comparison’s between Putin and the Tsars, and it bears repeating that the White Army brought the Protocols of the Elders of Zion into Western Europe with them after they lost the civil war. Marx always viewed Russia as a backwards, reactionary country, and I think he had it right.
25. September 2022 at 14:19
Scott:
You didn’t address a single one of my points. Instead, you focused on an inane speech convention and on the fact that I linked a publication you find distasteful. I sent you a piece by an obviously serious scholar, who has written well-reviewed books; most recently one on the evils of Stalinism, by the way. Highly emotional, amateurish response.
And again, I’d repeat you said absolutely nothing to my other points. I didn’t make up the abortive Chilean constitution, and I didn’t make up the trans quota in the Argentine government. You are free to look up which sort of people are setting up empowerment NGOs in eastern europe and Asia, too.
But you wont. Keep your smartypants contrarian position, you and Tyler Cowen are both geniuses, surely.
25. September 2022 at 14:26
Since everyone is talking about Ilyin, a philosopher all of you learnt about approximately three weeks ago, it would do you good to read what type of philosopher the guy actually was. People who have been interested in Russia for a while already read this stuff, already saw it debunked, and already moved on. But you guys are just getting into it; its the current thing, after all.
https://irrussianality.wordpress.com/2015/09/23/more-on-putins-philosopher
It’s hilarious how one of the most sophisticated people on monetary policy will seriously be swayed by a NYT op-ed page by a historian that spent the Trump years yelling derangedly. Never meet your idols, Gellman amnesia, etc, whatever.
25. September 2022 at 15:07
No, Putin is not the closest to fascism since the 40s. Franco had actual Falangists in his government throughout the 50s, and Lebanon also had Phalangists explicitly inspired by their similarly named Spanish progenitors as well as Italian fascists. Juan Peron of Argentina was also inspired by Italian fascism. You were alive when Peron & Franco were, so I shouldn’t have to remind you.
“LOL, You are exactly the sort of person Jeanne Kirkpatrick used to mock. And yet you cite her?”
I don’t see you making an actual argument. I said GWB was not a fascist even though he invaded & toppled two governments within one four-year term. Perhaps you want to argue he was a fascist?
“Actually it’s extremely “special” in the modern world to invade a neighboring country with the intention of annexing land. Yes, it used to be common, but with the exception of Saddam and Kuwait it’s something one almost never sees in the modern world.”
Did post-independence India count as not modern, or fascist? Did Sukarno’s Indonesia? Admittedly, he did collaborate with the Axis during WW2. Or perhaps Argentina trying to obtain the Falkland islands? But then if you had considered Argentina the question of whether they were closer to fascism than Putin’s Russia would have come up.
25. September 2022 at 16:20
What’s interesting about posts like this, where Scott expresses his opinions on the liberal democratic order, is that they are his most controversial in the comment section, despite his views being very conventional. Scott defends the post-WWII international order, properly citing its tremendous success in preventing wars between major powers, and wars in Europe, until recently.
Those who attack him typically imply they have no understanding of the history of international relations since the Peace of Westphalia, and hence they don’t value the longest ever era of relative peace in Europe and among great powers generally. The pre-WWII era was far more violent and dangerous, despite, and I’d argue somewhat because of, the lack of nuclear weapons.
Nihilists are often ignoramuses who want to throw out the baby with the bathwater, because they have no understanding about how things work. They attack organizations like the UN, World Bank, and IMF, from the perspective of silly conspiracy theories, failing to understand that these are just essentially cartels that the US set up to help promote our interests within the international order we want. There are valid criticisms of these organizations, but the idea that they’re anti-American is ludicrous. The UN is based in New York, and the US is still its biggest funder, followed by our close allies.
This is all ironic, as this blog became popular due to what were contrarian views on economics and monetary policy. Scott is not very contrarian on international relations.
25. September 2022 at 16:25
By the way, the attacks on the WTO and EU, for example, are equally stupid, as these are also cartels that simply operate as members want them too. Being a member of a cartel means you sometimes don’t get everything you want, but you think you get more with membership than without.
25. September 2022 at 16:43
Great nuanced work as usual.
The trick of measuring where to be regarding feminism in the US is that there isn’t just one America, but many. There are places with massive feminist biases that are counter productive. At the same time, there are states where e is no legal abortion, and a miscarriage be looked at with suspicion, and possible state involvement. So it’s quite say that feminism has gone overboard and is now overbearing and materialistic, harming our culture, and to also say that American misogyny is alive and well, and be right on both counts, just depending on where you are looking. Kind of like how college can be a great deal that raises future earnings or a racket, depending on major and institution.
The unfortunate bit is that announcing those things will lead to being call a moderate, which can both mean being nuanced, or thinking that Hillary’s emails and the nonsense that a certain former president did are equal, and should just offset. When people’s goals are to reject first, there’s always a way to pretend everyone is a fool and discount them.
25. September 2022 at 16:44
Michael:
None of the people currently debating Sumner is talking about conspiracy theories and the threat the UN poses to the United States or whatever. Full disclosure: I don’t even sympathize with America as a country or ideal or sovereign libertarian utopia. For all I care, the UN can send commissars to every hicktown in Montana tomorrow.
Smart, skeptical, economically liberal types are hilarious in that they ridicule everyone for being emotional about X or Y while at the same time being completely married to the idea of the liberal international order and the instrinsic evil of regimes that people in Washington dislike. Detachment, openness to unconventional explanations, awareness of mood affiliation and status games… All these things go out the window the minute someone paints a pencil mustache on some Asiatic despot.
It’s sad, but it’s good to read them flounder about. Everyone should be taken down a notch. It’s a good reminder that the only real difference between them and Krugman is that he has a Nobel prize and mainstream friends and they don’t. They have the same analytic limitations, they just happen to run into them in different settings.
25. September 2022 at 16:57
“even here you see conservatives trying to ban abortion”
What does that have to do with anything? The people who are against abortion, the majority of whom are women, don’t think it is anti-woman.
25. September 2022 at 17:33
Franco,
First, I find your comments about Russia self-evidently silly. Then, you link to a book. That’s also silly.
Second, my comments reference Scott’s posts on the liberal world order generally. They are not merely referencing the current post.
Third, if you have a better idea for a world order, post it for people who aren’t already discounting what you offer, due to the laughability of your initial claims.
25. September 2022 at 17:56
anonymous,
There is some overlap between anti-abortion women and those women who think women should be subservient to men due to their interpretation of bibilical doctrine.
Of course, I remind that very few non-religious people are very anti-abortion.
25. September 2022 at 17:56
Michael:
Which of my assertions was self-evidently silly? State it clearly.
I did not link to a book. That is just factually incorrect. Read more carefully, that is embarassing.
I don’t have an idea for a better world order. What exactly does that prove? This is elementary school level rhetoric. “If you don’t like it, move to Russia”-type boomer derangement. Are you serious?
Even if this truly is the best of all possible worlds, that is no excuse to write sloppy arguments in its defense.
Again, I’m inviting you to state clearly what exactly about my initial claims is so laughable.
25. September 2022 at 18:18
Franco,
I failed to type “review” after book. You link to a book review, which is silly. Some of us have been following Putin since even before he rose to power. He was the right-hand man of a criminal mob-boss type mayor in Saint Petersburg, after the fall of communism. One reason Yeltsin liked him, is because he was such a corrupt “good soldier” that he would never prosecute anyone in the Yeltsin government for robbing the country blind. Quite the contrary, Putin may be the biggest thief and mobster in the world. He’s more motivated by a desire to undermine the rule of law around the world than anything else, so he can get his hands into the pockets of foreign interests as well, along with having plenty of profitable places to launder his stolen money.
25. September 2022 at 18:41
“Now Bryan Caplan says, “Don’t be a feminist.” Because I believe that Summers was treated unfairly, I am somewhat inclined to support Caplan’s position. And feminists also support lots of other political positions that I oppose.”
“But in the end I reject the anti-feminist label. And the reason is simple—I look at things from a global perspective. And from a global perspective there is one gender issue of overriding importance in the 21st century—the war against women’s rights by right-wing authoritarian nationalists. ”
The number one overriding gender issue of the 21st century is below-replacement fertility. If the solution to this requires eliminating “feminism” (which I think is at least a possibility, at least as that term is conceived by current year American activists) I’m a hard line anti-feminist and I think you should be too.
When “right wing authoritarians” like Putin or Orban attack “women’s rights” (right to what?) they’re mostly trying to solve the family/fertility problem. Islamic fundamentalists are just implementing the well known and documented tenets of that religion, but they’ve been around for a while now — Margaret Atwood has stated that she based The Handmaid’s Tale on the recently established Islamic Republic of Iran. It also has little to do with figures like Putin, Franco, Hitler, Napoleon, etc.
One more thing regarding feminism, people overseas are often capable of consuming media reports about what’s going on in the United States. If “feminism” in America involves a bunch of things that you (or any other sane person) finds distasteful or just excessive, why would you want more of it where you live?
“In recent years, many on the right have been attracted to Putin’s anti-woke rhetoric. One theme is that the nationalist right is masculine and strong, while the woke left is a bunch of sissy boys. But the war in Ukraine upends that framing (just as WWII undercut the American admirers of fascism and the Hitler-Stalin Pact undermined American communists.) The Ukrainian soldiers fighting back against Putin sure don’t look like sissies.”
That’s true, but they also don’t look like HR-compliant “professionals”. Several important Ukrainian units were openly founded (recently!) as ultranationalist militia outfits and the “Ukrainian Democracy Wheel” (Sonnenrad) in various forms is a common sight in candid photographs. The combatants are overwhelmingly white and male — the government only subjects men to involuntary service of course — and while I’m not aware of any polling among the AFU on attitudes towards women or LGBTQI+ issues, casual dehumanizing language about their adversaries is widespread.
As for their cause frankly I find your insistence that the Ukrainians are “not nationalists” to be bizarre. Unless nationalism is bad so if something is good it can’t be nationalism, it’s patriotism or human rights or whatever. OK.
25. September 2022 at 18:52
I did not link to a book review, actually. Wrong again.
The claim I disputed was that Putin was fascist. If he truly is a glorified mobster whose chief interest is getting money and laundering it, he definitely is no fascist. Say whatever you want of Hitler or Franco or Mussolini, but petty pecuniary concerns by and large did not motivate them.
The notion that the easiest way of practicing corruption is by becoming an international pariah and launching an expensive and ultimately not at all unrisky war against a large, well-armed neighbor is truly self-evidently silly. You may recall that the 90s, an era of mutual comprehension between the West and Russia, featured some of the grossest corruption in all of human history.
Overall, I see no reason to consider my claims silly. On the contrary, you provide yet another model for Putin that excludes fascist inclinations. It may or may not be an accurate model, but a model it is and ultimately agrees with my assertions. Thanks for that. You might want to share your findings with Sumner and see what he thinks of them.
25. September 2022 at 19:26
Franco,
The fact that you assume that one cannot be a kleptocrat and a fascist is telling. Of course, even a passing familiarity with the Nazis reveals that they plundered Europe of its treasures, including art. Fascist governments have always been famous for kleptocracy and corruption in general. Do you think the fascists of World War 2 limited themselves to modest formal public salaries?
Putin obviously miscalculated in his invasion of Ukraine in many ways. I won’t confuse his incompetence for his motives concerning the outcome. He underestimated the resolve of Ukraine and NATO. He thought Ukraine would surrender in the face of a small invasion force, and that NATO would be paralyzed by division, and would perhaps even break up. He’s long had a divide and conquer strategy.
Regarding that essay you linked to, that I mischaracterized as a book review, I regret giving it the limited attention I did.
25. September 2022 at 20:58
Is it just me or is being able to define woman just unimportant for woman’s rights?
25. September 2022 at 21:47
Everyone, It’s sad how few people understand the difference between nationalism and patriotism. Maybe this will help:
A European patriot is proud when his country’s basketball team does well in the Olympics. A European nationalist is ashamed that the team has lots of blacks.
Attempts to justify Putin’s invasion by citing India grabbing a tiny sliver of an abandoned colony, or Bush attacking Afghanistan Iraq don’t even pass the laugh test. Bush wasn’t trying to annex territory and these regimes were a danger to the world. Afghanistan harbored Al Qaeda and Irag invaded multiple countries, killing vast numbers of innocent people. Ukraine was just minding its own business, and unlike Goa had internationally accepted borders. Even Russia recognized Ukraine as a sovereign nation.
No, Putin’s action is completely unprecedented in modern times.
The biggest problem is low fertility with the world’s 8 billion is on track to exceed 10 billion by 2100? Okay . . .
As for all of you Putin/Orban apologists, you are so far down the alt-right rabbit hole that nothing I say will help. So I won’t even try.
25. September 2022 at 21:47
Berend, Both.
25. September 2022 at 23:19
With regard to Summers, I remember that controversy well. I started with a lot of sympathy for the fact that he never made the claims that his detractors said he did.
But my sympathy rapidly receded when I started meeting people in real life who were now triumphantly telling me that even the president of Harvard claims that women can’t do science. And when that included a high school science teacher, that pretty much drained the last drop.
17 years later and I still occasionally hear Summers thrown in as an authority as to why we shouldn’t waste money trying to get girls to study science. Sigh.
If you are president of a major institution (or a country), your job responsibilities include not saying things that can easily be used for evil ends. It probably stops you from saying much of interest, but that’s the cost of rising that high in the hierarchy.
In this, he dramatically failed as a senior administrator.
26. September 2022 at 00:31
Ricardo,
“When Israel conducts a premptive strike and the international community lauds their effort to deal with “issues on their border” ”
That doesn’t sound like the international community that I know…
26. September 2022 at 00:37
Scott,
The most recent (rough) parallel with Putin’s invasion that I know is Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait.
Even the Yugoslav Wars were more understandable, in that Serbia and Montenegro hadn’t recognised the borders of the breakaway republics prior to the wars. If Yugoslavia had waited until this year to invade Bosnia, it would be more of a parallel. In fact, Yugoslavia was not breaking international law by invading per se, since it was their sovereign territory (unless you buy the dubious argument that Yugoslavia somehow ceased to exist around 1992) the problem was that the Yugoslav People’s Army was committing crimes against humanity against the Bosnians and Croats.
26. September 2022 at 04:04
I dislike Hitler analogies. They tend to make little sense. I like to joke that he loved his German shepherd, therefore, you are like Hitler if you love German shepherds. Hitler was a unique and very weird figure——-and stupid—-stupid in the sense that he had no plausible end game. How one compares Putin to Hitler is beyond me. This does not make Putin good, just because he is not Hitler. And why is Hitler always the go to guy? Why not Pol Pot, Mao, Stalin or Guevara?
I am for freedom of thought and action, within our constitutional framework. I am a very conflicted on gender theories. I definitely do not care how one seeks to define themselves—why should I?
However, gender theory as a philosophy that is taught is at its extreme ridiculous. If you have male genitals and define yourself as a woman—-I could care less. But if you have male genitals and state that objectively it does not mean you are a biological male——or that men can menstruate—-we are just changing the meaning of words. It is the dumbest form of deconstructionism.
Deconstructionism is very close to nihilism——and is a dangerous form of thinking.
What is a feminist? I am unsure. Perhaps, looking at changes since, say 1950, women have as much equality as they want—-I might argue they have begun to surpass men. Hopkins won the infamous Summers/Hopkins battle——when she won it thru propaganda and got Summers fired—-and she wasn’t even from Harvard.
Summers quoted studies showing that at extremes of “IQ” men are both dumber and smarter——extremes are in the 1 percentile range. That could explain, for example, why the greatest companies are founded by men. However, women have begun to dominate senior positions in many companies.
So what is a feminist? I don’t really know. I try to be an “anti-label” kind of guy. But it’s hard.
Re Petersen. I read his first best selling book. I admit to not having read it that carefully——and I really did not understand his major hypothesis. But I guess some of our commenters find him dangerous.
When Buttegieg first arrived on the scene I liked him. Then it became obvious he is a fake and and your typical pol——big deal. I disagree with Scott’s anti-gay concept as the reason Pete is not liked by the right. Peter Thiel is liked by the right.
It reminds me of how conservatives supposedly don’t like Blacks——because they disagree with Blacks who are from the left. Liking Black conservatives does not count—-after all if they were “really Black” conservatives would not like them.
26. September 2022 at 04:30
> No, they are patriots. Ukrainians want to join international organizations like the EU and NATO. They welcome both ethnic Russians and ethnic Ukrainians. They are the opposite of nationalists, who oppose those organizations and are bigoted against other ethnicities.
Wow, those patriots in the Azov Battalion sure have a lot of swastika tattoos for guys who welcome all ethnicities!
Sumner, your inability to recognize the troubling neo-Nazi military units within Ukraine’s army really undermines your credibility. It would have been easy to acknowledge the nationalists while saying that they’re in the minority (which is true, although they wield outsized influence, largely due to US backing). Instead, you just deny deny deny whenever someone cites where the public record contradicts your narrative. This attitude permeates your writing. Without it, you’d be worth reading.
26. September 2022 at 05:44
@Scott
“So perhaps I could say I’m an American anti-feminist and a global feminist?”
I liked the way this was framed – as a person with many self defined “feminist” friends here in the US, almost all of them have wildly different definitions of what that means (i.e. “Feminist” about issues like the pay gap in professional sports in the US, but no opinion on Tehran’s treatment of women, or the Palestinian Authority which most of them seem to regard in such high esteem)
I’d love to see both the left and the right in the United States take a harder stance on women’s rights issues in places all over the world. I’m optimistic that the Abraham Accords will at least continue to bring some liberalism to the gulf states that were involved (that includes Saudi Arabia who clearly was implicitly involved).
RE: Peterson – he is objectively a highly intelligent person, anyone who claims he is an idiot is just silly. I disagree with Mayor Pete on a lot of things, but he is objectively also a very bright guy. That interview Peterson gave isn’t the best, but I dare anyone to do thousands of hours of TV/Radio/Podcasts and not have 5 minute segments here or there where they perform poorly. When you are given a few minutes of live TV to make a big point, it’s usually tough to articulate.
@ Michael Sandifer. Clearly you’ve barely read or listened to anything Peterson has done. My guess is most of his knowledge comes from second hand sources. You also seem wildly sexist in that you think crying makes him less masculine; the irony here is that he frequently says the opposite… lol
26. September 2022 at 05:45
Michael Rulle,
Hitler comparisons should be very common now, given how many fascist politicians are popping up in so many countries. Stalin, Mao, etc were communists. That’s why it doesn’t make sense to mention them right now. This is basic political science.
When it comes to anti-gay discrimination on the right, it is very much present, though not all on the extreme right are necessarily anti-gay. Recall that there were Jewish collaborators with the holocaust. It just means that the collaborators are among the last ones into the ovens.
Yes, many right-wing voters will get behind minority candidates, as long as those candidates aren’t pushing for civil rights.
26. September 2022 at 05:50
Also- I don’t understand how anyone could claim Putin is NOT a fascist?
Authoritarian – Yes
Ultranationalist – Yes
Political Ideology Characterized by a Dictator – Yes
Central Autocracy- Yes
Militarism – Yes
Forcible Suppression of Opposition – Yes
26. September 2022 at 06:01
prior to about 2020 I wouldn’t have called myself a feminist but I do now. I’m basically a 2nd wave feminist. While I have real problems with 3rd wave Judith Butler feminism it’s been pretty clear to me a backlash against even moderate feminism is building and coming from the far right and to me this means I need to dig in and defend basic feminist principles because they are under attack.
A prior poster said the biggest issue we face is “the fertility crisis” and if feminism needs to be eliminated to save the human race blah, blah, blah. (I’m paraphrasing).
Using fertility as the rationalization to roll back basic women’s rights in a very right-wing position – the right wing position is using any pretext to roll back basic women’s right because the RW is filled with bitter angry dudes. Some of that bitterness is rational but most isn’t. it’s just petty resentment and a desire to control.
World population is 8 billion now. It was 1 billion in 1800 and 2 billion in 1900. We don’t have a fertility “crisis”
26. September 2022 at 06:29
There are many different nationalisms, and assuming that “nationalist would be ashamed by black in national team” is absurd projection of one particular vision of nationalism on all other kinds. Nationalism basically means you think it’s good your nation exists and you have duties towards your nation (not a state! Nation can exist without a state!). It does not imply any feeling of superiority or chauvinism. That’s all. Traditional Polish nationalism thought, for example, is that everyone who truly wants to be Pole and is ready to accept Polish culture as his/her own, and who is ready to made sacrifise for Polish nation, is a true Pole (though it’s true that many modern Polish nationalist ape western thinkers instead of reaching to the corpus of traditional Polish nationalist thought).
Ukrainian soldiers are not woke soldiers. They fight for Ukraine, not for human rights, Europe and anything else. They (the soldiers) wear much more often Ukrainian symbols and wave Ukrainian flags, not european or international. Trying to portrait them as example of woke leftist being masculine is absurd.
26. September 2022 at 06:32
One more thing – by western standard everything in central and eastern Europe is heavily shifted to the right. The Polish mainstream right would be probably labeled far extreme right fascist party in western Europe. I guess it’s the same in Ukraine.
Plus we all know that no matter how much yhou would made a distinction between nationalism (bad) and patriotism (good), history teaches us taht when left takes over, they will took al patriots, label them fascist and put into concentration camps (true story. Happened in my country).
26. September 2022 at 07:16
szopen,
When did leftists put “patriots” into concentration camps in am advanced western country? Leftists largely controlled the US from 1933 until about 1994. Nothing close even happened.
26. September 2022 at 07:20
Tom M,
I certainly wouldn’t waste time reading anything Peterson has written, but I’ve seen extended interviews he’s done with Rogan, Fridman, Cowen, etc. He well-established his idiocy in those interviews.
There’s nothing wrong with a man crying, and it doesn’t mean anything about masculinity, when a man is particularly touched. Crying in every interview lately is another matter. Peterson is a mentally ill mess, and he does have a very effeminate voice for a person constantly complaining that masculinity is under attack.
At least he’s good for laughs, in addition to the physical disgust he causes many of us.
26. September 2022 at 07:25
I agree with your distinction between patriotism and nationalism. At the same time I realize it doesn’t explain where patriotism comes from. People feel loyal to something unique to which they belong. They don’t feel loyalty to some non-distinct administrative entity. That belief is shared by patriots and nationalists. I guess one difference is that the nationalist tends to focus on threats to his/her uniqueness whereas the patriot tends to focus on threats to his/her survival.
26. September 2022 at 07:42
What’s both hilarious and disgusting about Peterson is, he’ll insult the SI Swimsuit cover model on Twitter by saying she’s ugly because she’s overweight, and then he literally cries as he complains about his subsequent Twitter suspension and the attacks from mean progressives, all while barely getting out his words in his ultra-feminine, blubbering voice.
This typifies todays extremist right wing. They’re all paranoid sissies, many of whom are gay or bisexual and can’t deal with it, but can’t suppress their related histrionic personality disorders.
26. September 2022 at 08:08
@Michael Sandifer
“This typifies todays extremist right wing. They’re all paranoid sissies, many of whom are gay or bisexual and can’t deal with it, but can’t suppress their related histrionic personality disorders.”
Looks to me a lot like you’re projecting…
26. September 2022 at 08:28
Tom M,
I’m insulting women on Twitter, getting banned, and then crying about it in interviews? Or, I’m unknowingly gay? I’m liberal and would be proud to be gay. My brother’s gay and I have a nephew that is a trans male.
It does seem highly probably though that defenders of Peterson are very much like him.
26. September 2022 at 08:34
Tom M,
Just to be “straight”, do you condone Peterson’s behavior? Do you like insulting swimsuit models online because you think they’re fat and ugly? Do you root for Peterson when he literally cries uncontrollably about the supposed loss of masculinity in western culture, struggling to get words out in his annoying feminine voice?
You don’t find it funny that someone who cries in most interviews now gives advice about how to deal with depression, often in the same interviews? How about that same person giving advice about drug addiction, when his addiction was severe enough to undergo coma therapy at the beginning of detox? Do you think people should take his relationship advice, given the disaster he admits his personal life has been? Should you take his advice on social interactions?
lol Thanks for making me laugh.
26. September 2022 at 08:41
@Michael Sandifer
You’re welcome
26. September 2022 at 09:23
Sumner using the term “alt-right” in the middle of 2022 might be one of the funniest things ever. Using it to justify his bizarre non-engagement is even funnier, though.
It’s your blog, have fun, but I am now convinced that the only thing you are fit to grasp is esoteric problems in monetary policy.
26. September 2022 at 14:46
“there is one gender issue of overriding importance in the 21st century—the war against women’s rights by right-wing authoritarian nationalists.”
That’s Fake News
26. September 2022 at 14:50
Franco,
It’s easy to understand why the site owner writes what he does.
His main source for “global” information is the propaganda arm of the radical left Democrat party communists: MSM.
So, he falsely believes the #1 threat against women is, coincidentally, the political opposition of the very same source he trusts (despite years of lies/projection).
https://i.imgur.com/qcIH90J.jpeg
26. September 2022 at 15:02
https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2022/09/22/letter-reveals-obama-foundation-is-keeping-classified-docs-in-abandoned-furniture-warehouse-n1631408
26. September 2022 at 15:06
Robin has a proposal for raising the fertility rate that doesn’t require reversing any women’s rights but instead granting them more:
https://www.overcomingbias.com/2020/10/win-win-babies-as-infrastructure.html
There aren’t really many politicians popping up who identify as fascists, as it instead is a term used by the detractors of politicians today, like Orwell described. China is a one-party state, with that party being the Communist party of Mao, whose current leader insists on undoing post-Mao reforms to go back to the good old days when they were undeniably communist. Sumner calls that “fascism” for some inexplicable reason.
If Goa had not been a recognized territory it would have been gobbled up by another power. India itself had a consulate in Goa for years. Don’t make up excuses after the fact for the existence of annexation (you didn’t come up with any for Indonesia, so now you don’t have to).
Iraq did invade a neighbor (two of them, but we can ignore Iran for now since the international community was ok with that), and the response to the last one by GHWB was not to overthrow the government (for reasons Dick Cheney sensibly explained at the time) but instead to kick them out of Kuwait (perhaps comparable to Putin kicking Georgia out of disputed territory without overthrowing their government) and impose sanctions under which they didn’t do that again. GWB invaded & overthrew the Iraqi government for imaginary reasons of WMD and links to 9/11. Which didn’t make him a fascist, just ignorant & reckless.
As for Afghanistan, the name “Hamburg cell” should tell you where the 9/11 attackers were actually based out of. Afghanistan didn’t exactly have a defense industry or valuable infrastructure worth attacking either. When we eventually killed OBL it was not on Afghan soil, and we kept troops in Afghanistan even after for reasons known only to the Foreign Policy Blob.
“When did leftists put “patriots” into concentration camps in am advanced western country? Leftists largely controlled the US from 1933 until about 1994. Nothing close even happened.”
There were ethnic concentration camps under the first president you’d classify as a leftist. Some people inside them were patriotic enough to volunteer to fight for the US. I should note that I’m not going to call FDR a fascist either, though his administration did contain people who’d expressed admiration for European fascists.
Putin is not an “ultranationalist”, he explicitly rejects ethnonationalism (which is part of why he was so dismissive of Ukrainian nationalism). The Russian Duma contains 125 members who are not part of Putin’s party (who here knows the name of his party without looking it up?). The system is stacked against the opposition, but that has been true of plenty of regimes that don’t qualify as fascist. Years ago Vox surveyed experts who reported that Trump was not a fascist for such reasons as that he was “not sufficiently committed to the belief that violence is good for its own sake, as a vital cleansing force”. In all the years that Putin was not invading other countries, he was not failing in his ideals for some vital cleansing force. Rather, he’s a more standard authoritarian strongman who views it as a tool.
26. September 2022 at 15:07
And now I’m smacking myself for omitting Robin Hanson’s last name in my first sentence there.
26. September 2022 at 15:22
“It’s sad how few people understand the difference between nationalism and patriotism”
It’s sad how many times site owner seeks to command exclusive epistemic authority over definitions sourced by fake news. Yes, there are only a “few” people, namely ONE, who are eliciting the “approved definition”.
That’s why every second post has site owner saying how most people are stupid/uninformed/ignorant/wrong about what site owner writes about. It’s a constant stream of projection.
A patriot is loyal to the constitution, which is the supreme law of the Nation, and a Nationalist is loyal to their Nation, so, patriotism and nationalism are synonymous.
What the site owner is doing is insisting that the definitions imposed by globalist communists as to what words are supposed to mean, must be used by readers and everyone else too.
The fake news likes to take “National Socialism” and oopsy daisy crop off the “socialism” part and just say Nationalism, then associate that word as referencing all political opposition to the radical left democrats over and over, like Nazis.
Trump rally goers pointed their index finger to the sky, fake news is now smearing those patriots as giving a ‘nazi salute’. Site owner trusts the matrix, and so we see attacks on good people because they support Trump.
The globalists who want to control all countries, thus destroying all countries, push “anti-country” narrative to make trusting minds echo that narrative and begin to dislike their own country for being a country instead of a mere bloc in a communist global dictatorship.
You like your country? You don’t like your communist globalist overlords? Nationalist! Fascist! Attacks over and over until people are intimidated into conformity.
———-
Sara
25. September 2022 at 02:01
I’d say Sara is awake.
26. September 2022 at 15:54
Scott, if you want to improve the quality of comments, require people who are posting to give their full, true names. There are some circumstances where anonymity is necessary to protect people from retaliation, but I don’t think that’s the case on your blog. Here, anonymity is just a license for idiocy.
26. September 2022 at 16:12
Sumner wrote:
“Ricardo, You said:”
“I’m not a trumpista”
“Who said you were? Are you one of those who makes up phony claims about what I believe? Is that why you believe I view you as a Trumpista?”
Who said YOU said Ricardo said you called him a “Trumpista”? He just said what he’s not, he did NOT “claim” “You Sumner believe I am a Trumpista”.
How ELSE can a person say what they are not in relation to your own language choice of “Trumpista”? Do they have to wait for you to label them as such before they are allowed to say what they are or are not?
See how that game works? YOU make up phony claims about what people did, falsely asserting that Ricardo CLAIMED to read your mind about what you believe, then to cover that up, Ricardo is accused of making up phony claims about what you believe, as if he even “claimed” what you asserted he “claimed”!
A poster makes a statement of what they’re not after seeing a barrage of “Trumpista” epithets in post after post against those who may share some of the same ideas as Trump, and in order to clarify mutual self awareness, and uses your own language and says he is not the word you use, he gets a reply “WHOEAVER SAID YOU WERE?” as if your speech to that exact detail must occur first for a poster’s self identity to have meaning!
If you write “I’m not a Bidenista”, would the proper reply be:
“Who said you were? Are you one of those who makes up phony claims about what I believe? Is that why you believe I view you as a Bidenista?”
or
“OK thanks for clarifying about yourself, when I throw around the term “Bidenista” to refer to lots of people but nobody in particular, I am not referring to you”
26. September 2022 at 16:12
Who are the real racists again?
https://i.imgur.com/WoXdltB.jpeg
26. September 2022 at 16:20
https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/all-things-trump/old-case-over-audio-tapes-bill-clintons-sock-drawer-could-impact
https://www.newsweek.com/2016/09/23/george-w-bush-white-house-lost-22-million-emails-497373.html
https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2022/09/22/letter-reveals-obama-foundation-is-keeping-classified-docs-in-abandoned-furniture-warehouse-n1631408
Where are the posters calling for Obama and Clinton and Bush to be indicted?
Indict Trump for keeping documents behind a DOJ/FBI lock and key with secret service protection…because fake news said so.
Obama and Clinton and Bush do much MUCH MUCH MUCH worse…and CRICKETS.
This is what happens when “Bidenistas” are farmed in the population by fake news brainwashing, who are conditioned to use words like “Trumpista” to keep themselves occupied while actual corruption goes unchecked.
This is what operation mockingbird is designed to do.
Hook, Line, Sinker.
26. September 2022 at 21:26
William, Good point.
Michael Rulle. We are talking about Putin’s foreign policy, which closely resembles Hitler’s and is nothing like Pol Pot’s. If we were talking about genocide then we might want to compare Hitler and Pol Pot.
Picador, You might not want to rely on RT for your information.
Tom M, Add in the use of fascist symbols. And the Big Lie. And the xenophobia. The contempt for cosmopolitanism. The list goes on and on.
TGGP, LOL, go visit China if you think it’s communist, and tell me what you find. Is Shanghai communist? How about Shenzhen? To think that a country is communist or fascist because that’s how they self-identify is beyond naive. Xi is not bringing back Mao’s economjc policies.
“GHWB was not to overthrow the government (for reasons Dick Cheney sensibly explained at the time) but instead to kick them out of Kuwait (perhaps comparable to Putin kicking Georgia out of disputed territory without overthrowing their government)”
LOL, the nutty things you Putin apologists come up with. Quite the imagination.
And Goa? Seriously? That’s your analogy for the Ukraine War?
27. September 2022 at 03:52
You always take quotes out of context, and make wild accusations without basis.
You were wrong about Trump and Russia colluding. You were wrong about Trump being a “threat to democracy” which oddly enough is the same rhetoric being used to denounce Italy’s new prime minister who just wants to put Italians first.
The liberal world order, today, is based on centralizing power. It’s about imposing oneself and one’s values on others. 80% of Russians support Putin. Walk up and down any street, go to any club, visit anyone, anywhere, in any city, and you will find overwhelming support.
So why do you feel the need to intervene? If Russians didn’t want Putin, they could easily dispose of him. They don’t need you to save them.
And that is what Peterson is talking about. He’s talking about Russians wanting to protect their culture, and their tradition, from your form of global imposition. When you take quotes out of context and talk about raping women — I have many Russian friends and none of them believe in that, so you are just talking out of your ass.
You are calling for tens of millions of Chinese to enter the United States, which will immediatly change the culture, and push down the price of wages. Russia doesn’t want any of that. They don’t want people like you to tear down the fabric of their country because you think your ideas are liberal ideas.
It’s not liberal to destroy a people in pursuit of an agenda. It’s not liberal to treat them as a means to an end. Indeed, there is nothing liberal about any of that.
27. September 2022 at 04:18
There has been continuity of capital-C Communist government from Mao to Xi. Fascists reject the governments which precede them and try to replace them with a new one (in that respect they resemble communist attitudes toward pre-communist governments).
I am not an “apologist” for Putin anymore than I am an “apologist” for GWB when I deny the latter is a fascist. He has launched a foolish and destructive war, which is something that has been done by many who are not fascists.
I brought up India (not specifying Goa, since it wasn’t the only state annexed by India) because you said annexation almost never happens post-WW2. I notice you haven’t said anything about Indonesia doing that as well. I could add that Israel has annexed land (and the US has recognized that land as now Israeli, and has done the same for Morocco’s annexation of land in the western Sahara), or that in the case of Korea & Vietnam the communist north invaded the non-communist south, failing to conquer it in the former case but succeeding in the latter. Were both Communist regimes actually fascist despite their avowed communism? Was China also fascist under Mao when it annexed Tibet? It would explain why you think China is fascist today even though it hasn’t launched wars under Xi.
27. September 2022 at 05:05
William, I started my post as follows:
“This sort of mood affiliation reaches comical proportions in my comment section, where Trumpistas assume that because I hate Trump, I must also subscribe to dozens of left wing views that I in fact reject. I am now at peace with that fact and have come to view this as a source of amusement.”
And you said:
“You were wrong about Trump and Russia colluding.”
Do you not know how to read?
“You were wrong about Trump being a “threat to democracy” ”
LOL, he literally tried to overturn the 2020 election.
Where do all of you Putin apologists come from? Are you all Russian bots?
BTW, my wife came from China. She had the effect of raising our wages and improving our culture.
TGGP. Wake me up with you have something other than a disputed colonial territory, when you have an internationally recognized sovereign nation being conquered. Even Russia recognized Ukraine as an independent nation. Did Indonesia recognize Portugal’s tiny East Timor colony as an independent nation? Did North Vietnam recognize South Vietnam? Your civil war analogies are laughable.
Ukraine is a sovereign European nation with 40 million people, the size of France. Get serious.
27. September 2022 at 08:00
Sumner:
“He literally tried to overturn an election”
That’s the Regime’s dialectic projection to cover their own overturning of the election.
Overturning is exactly what the Democrats DID DO in the 2020 election. They overturned what was legally a landslide Trump victory. Secretaries of State broke the law by implementing new rules to make it easier to chest. Election rigging is now open source evidence. Denying it and then referencing the denial as consistent with the same msm propaganda arm of the D party pushing the big lie, isn’t a better argument than the evidence that is pouring out that the world can see for themselves.
You were WRONG about Trump colluding with Russia:
“my continued belief that Trump colluded with Russia in an attempt to stop Hillary.”
https://www.themoneyillusion.com/impeach-him-2/
CONTINUED BELIEF…SOURCED BY DEMOCRAT PROPAGANDA ARM MSM!
You were WRONG to conclude Democrats didn’t collude with Russia WHICH THE LAPTOP PROVED OCCURRED.
The very same source you’re using to ‘justify Trump lied’, LIED FOR YEARS ABOUT THE LAPTOP BEING ‘RUSSIAN DISINFORMATION’, LIED FOR YEARS THAT TRUMP ILLEGALLY COLLUDED WITH RUSSIA, LIED ABOUT THE UKRAINE PHONE CALL THAT HE DECLASSIFIED PROVING SCHIFF LIED ABOUT WHAT TRUMP SAID, THEY LIE LIE LIE AND YOU STILL TRUST THEM.
WAKE UP YOU’RE SLEEPING.
Trump didn’t collude with Russia as you falsely wrote, Democrats on the other DID collude with Russian Nationalist Igor Danchenko, by hiding his lies under ‘sources and methods’ firewall away from congress and the public, the FBI KNEW HIS INFORMATION WAS BUNK JAN 2017, BUT THEN THEY HIRED HIM AND CONTINUED TO EMPLOY HIM UNTIL 2020, all of which is also now open source with Durham’s recent court filings.
Hillary colluded with Russia, not Trump. The ENTIRE TRUMP COLLUSION NARRATIVE WAS A HOAX DESIGNED TO COVER HILLARY’S COLLUSION AND OVERTURN THE 2016 ELECTION.
IMPEACHMENT HOAX AFTER IMPEACHMENT HOAX DESIGNED TO OVERTURN THE ELECTION.
You seem to be suffering from MASSIVE cognitive dissonance. Poster correctly describes your past posts as wrong about Trump colluding with Russia, and your only reply is REEEEEE, accusations of lying, accusations of not reading properly, accuse accuse accuse! PROJECT PROJECT PROJECT!
Just admit you were wrong, admit you were lied to by the sources you trusted, admit that what you’re accusing Trump of doing, is being sourced by the biggest psychological warfare ever perpetrated on the public protecting a political party that is engaging on the very activities the fake news is accusing Trump of doing.
You see the FBI raiding Trump’s home, and in your psychosis you and other posters get giddy with the prospect of indictments on the basis of no law being broken.
And then information comes out about how Clinton, Bush, and Obama handled documents, in furniture warehouses, in sock drawers, AND THERE NOT A PEEP FROM ANYONE CALLING FOR TRUMP TO BE INDICTED. ASK YOURSELF WHY THE DOUBLE STANDARD.
The nutty defenses of China is a whole other series of cognitive dissonance.
27. September 2022 at 10:06
Sumner, you are so pathetic.
Just two short years ago, Azerbaijan launched a war to reconquer ethnically Armenian territories that lay within its internationally recognized borders. By common consensus, they waged the war with implacable savagery and cruelty, way more than whatever the Russians put on in Ukraine. This is to be expected, since Armenians and Azerbaijanis are two genuinely very different peoples, who profess different religions and have a long history of trying to murder each other. The only thing that kept them from more or less destroying Armenia was Russia, who is also the only player that prevents an open genocide in Nagorno-Karabakh. Note, I said open.
There are some differences with Russia and Ukraine in this case. One, Azerbaijan is technically acting within its rights, as stipulated by the international community and the most holy and sacred borders Soviet apparatchiks drew up half a century ago. Two, the territories being taken over obviously don’t want to have anything to do with Azerbaijan, while this is not obviously the case in at least some portions of Ukraine. Three, Azerbaijan wages an actual genocidal war, while Russia didn’t even dare inconvenience civilians with actual urban battles well into the conflict.
Some others. Azerbaijan is openly more nationalistic and much more authoritarian than Russia. Azerbaijan is also an alternative energy provider for Europe so… well, you are a smart guy, figure it out.
Oh, and by the way, as Russian setbacks became obvious recently, Azerbaijan, smelling blood, started attacking Armenia proper. Once more, the only thing stopping another Armenian genocide was precisely the big bad Russians, who somehow managed to cobble together a ceasefire, but if they lose in Ukraine…
What exactly makes Russian actions completely unprecendented and exceptional while Azerbaijan gets congratulatory tweets from Von Der Leyen is a mystery to me. You are a smart guy, maybe you can figure it out.
Some wars of conquest are more equal than others etc etc etc.
27. September 2022 at 14:44
Feminist is one of the innumerable labels I can’t squeeze under. I can’t even define the word feminist. American and market monetarist are about the only ones that do fit. I used to be a conservative, but that one morphed out from under me. (I realize that my metaphors are um all over the place, but this is a comment, not an essay.)
27. September 2022 at 16:07
“But Peterson thinks the real problem is…”
This is one of those standard openings to a bad argument. It says you’re too lazy to rebut what the person’s actually saying, so you assume there’s only one problem we’re allowed to care about, and if it’s not The most important thing in the world (that you probably won’t care about in 2 years), they’re doing something wrong. 2/3 of what you blog about here is trivial nonsense you read about politicians you don’t like in Yahoo news; “But Sumner thinks the real problem is” would soundly refute most of your blog.
I suspect Bryan believes caving in to people who want to unfairly tarnish his reputation cowardice, and I’m inclined to agree. The rest of your argument about ‘global feminism’ makes as much sense as saying Germany needs more fascism to correct the fact that they’re spending too little on their military. Ideologies aren’t arrows pointing in a direction on a one-dimensional spectrum. It’s usually not even an approximately useful way to think about politics. If you’re an anti-feminist in America, then you should consider how we ended up here, because that’s where everyone else in the world will get to eventually with feminism, and maybe they shouldn’t take the exact same direction as us.
27. September 2022 at 17:51
economist-retired manque sumner:
“To think that a country is communist or fascist because that’s how they self-identify is beyond naive.
Sumner now denying self-identification is a basis of truth in actual identity? is he on the road to serfdom?
28. September 2022 at 03:43
Franco, A silly analogy. That region has never been internationally accepted as part of Armenia. And Azerbaijan is not trying to recreate the Soviet Union. By the way, how many nuclear warheads does Azerbaijan have pointed at the US.
Larry, I feel your pain.
Mark Z, You said: “If you’re an anti-feminist in America, then you should consider how we ended up here, because that’s where everyone else in the world will get to eventually with feminism,”
Wait, You think the rest of the world has better policies on women’s rights (and gay rights) than the US? Seriously?
I’d be thrilled if the Soviet Union and Saudi Arabia and Iran and and Pakistan and India and much of Africa adopted our “feminist” policies.
28. September 2022 at 04:57
At least since his immense health problems, Jordan Peterson is not the same person anymore. In 2018 he may still have been an interesting person (in very few areas), in 2022 one can only be shocked by his views and shake one’s head. The days-long coma in Moscow didn’t necessarily do his brain any good now either, an understandable but unfortunate reaction. I would say he is dead to me after his Ukraine statements, but that’s not really true, because he actually died years ago.
28. September 2022 at 07:51
https://thegreggjarrett.com/the-brief-it-was-okay-for-bill-clinton-to-keep-presidential-records-but-not-trump/
A former president can keep whatever presidential records he wants and the government has no authority to seize them. Period.
That was the Department of Justice’s legal opinion a decade ago. It was a conclusion shared by both the National Archives and a U.S. District Court in Washington D.C. On that basis, ex-president Bill Clinton was allowed to maintain custody of whatever he wanted, including allegedly classified audio tapes that he stored in his home.
**Raid hoax fizzles, next hoax: Never Trumper NY AG ‘investigation’**
And the ‘I trust MSM’ watchers are led from one hoax to the next.
Don’t all you ‘we got Trump this time’ moviegoers feel manipulated and targeted for disinformation yet? Or will pride be your downfall? Keep going and you’re really going to not like yourselves very much. There’s always a new day with a new trust in yourself.
Get out of the op mockingbird weaponization of information while you still can and save yourself.
28. September 2022 at 14:35
Hi Scott.
1. I repeat, you are just choosing simple definitions of nationalism and patriotism that suits your personal political program, similar to how conservatives use “socialism” and “freedom”. In fact, all I have to do is google Nationalism and I get these…
A. “identification with one’s own nation and support for its interests, especially to the exclusion or detriment of the interests of other nations.”
B. “advocacy of or support for the political independence of a particular nation or people.”
C. “Nationalism is an ideology that emphasizes loyalty, devotion, or allegiance to a nation or nation-state and holds that such obligations outweigh other individual or group interests”
D. “Characteristics of Nationalism: One Nation. An idea of a common government always implies in a nation, Group Feelings, Distinction, Defined Territory, Common Interest: Existence of same common interest shared by all is also one of the most important features of nationalism. General Picture of State.”
Nationalism and nation-building has been a very particular historic program that first the Western world pursued beginning in the 18th century and which spread to the Third World in 20th century. In some cases it includes all races equally (French Republicanism) and in other it excludes other races (the Confederacy).
Most nationalism has been somewhere in between, breaking down parochial local differences through equal citizenship under the law of a common state and national identity, while still excluding this or that groups explicitly or implicitly.
For example, the USA engaged in a concerted effort at nation building in the decades following the Civil War, while exclusion of blacks and sometimes other groups were expanded. Your definition is simply a very particular version of it.
2. With respect to Putin, obviously there can be no justification for his invasion, it is a crime, and he should be hanged. And you are right there is a categorical difference to America’s invasion of Iraq/Afghanistan to his own, though its still not obvious to me that the invasions were justified.
But so what, everyone earnestly thinks their invasions are justified as a response to a threat, even if such belief is bs and self serving. As a utilitarian, you should care about the consequences more than motives.
The results of America’s war on terror are every bit as horrible as what Putin has done: We destroyed half a dozen countries, got a million people killed, destroyed countless millions of lives, waisted trillion of dollars, supported/allied horrible regimes, committed many war crimes, took away American civil liberties, etc. And for what in return?
The governments of Russia and China and are 100x more reprehensible compared to our own in their treatment of their own citizens. I hope they fall and liberalism springs fourth. But I do not know how to look at the results of the American foreign policy since 9/11 and conclude it is anything but an enemy of the human race, particularly the middle east.
3. I agree (I think you wrote this in a different post, but I don’t wish to misrepresent you) that Trump and the MAGA Republicans tried to steal and overturn the 2020 election and are very bad. But I also believe the Russiagate conspiracy and accusations, their respective Congressional/FBI/media investigations, the first impeachment of Trump, the blatant election denying rhetoric by Democrats in later years, and the Washington DC riots in front of the White House in May 2020, were every bit the same attempt by Democrat elit and voters to overturn the election of 2016. I see striking parallels between the Democrats response to 2016 and the Republicans response to 2020. Both sides lost their minds and tried to cancel an election’s results.
4. My opinions on Orban are two sided, but I will keep my mouth shut to not be a troll on your blog.
Warm regards.
28. September 2022 at 22:32
“…As for Stalin, he was an authoritarian Russian dictator that massacred lots of Ukrainians in 1933…”
I foolishly thought Stalin was from Georgia and in 1933t he country was the Soviet Union…
Thanx for clarifying Professor!
28. September 2022 at 23:02
Christian, I haven’t really followed his career, so I can’t comment.
joemac, 1. Communist intellectuals used to argue that the the Soviet Union, Cuba, China etc., were not “real communism”, which was some sort of glorious ideal that had never been tried.
You can define nationalism any way you like, but what I see is that actual existing nationalism is dishonest, xenophobic, racist, militaristic, authoritarian, and misogynistic. I’m talking about white nationalism in America, Han nationalism in China, Hungarian nationalism in Hungary, Russian nationalism in Russia, Hindu nationalism in India, Serb nationalism is former Yugoslavia, etc., etc. This is the type of nationalism I’m referring to when I use the term. It’s always about ethnicity, not political entities. You can define the term differently if you like.
I’d encourage you to study the history of nationalism, it always ends poorly. To me, nationalism and communism are the two great evils of the past 100 years.
2. If you’ve followed my blog, you know that I’ve been highly critical of our bullying foreign policy, so you are preaching to the converted on that point.
3. Your comparison of the Dems in 2016 to the GOP in 2020 is so absurd I won’t comment. It just makes me believe you are a brainwashed Trumpista. Might I suggest you branch out your news sources beyond Fox News?
29. September 2022 at 06:19
Scott:
What is the difference between your definition of nationalism and what is commonly referred to as ethnic nationalism or ethnonationalism? I ask because if you used one of those terms you’d more easily be able to draw distinctions to civic nationalism which is generally considered benign.
4. October 2022 at 06:25
Just for general reference,
besides the mentioned characteristics of fascism regarding “values” and behavior – some of the most important criteria for fascism are at the intersection of economics and politics.
Roughly, communism means state ownership of the means of production while fascism means private ownership of the means of production but under tight government control. Another important distinction is that both historically and in philosophy, fascism is just socialism that becomes nationalist (blood based) in the distribution of spoils, rather than internationalist (class based).
In many ways, fascism is the natural end product of socialism. Internationalism becomes nationalism: instead of helping all of humanity, the government is “helping its own” exclusively. State economics becomes more efficient by infusing some competition: private ownership of means of production is retained, it just comes under total political control. To make sure that competition does not spiral out of control, tight societal hierarchies and a supreme leader maximus are needed.
And this describes the philosophical evolution of Mussolini (who used to be a socialist) and Hitler (who used the shell of a socialist worker’s party), as well as the historical evolution of Russia (remaking the Soviet Union on nationalist and state controlled economical grounds) and China (nationalist socialism with infused private property for efficiency).
All this to say, “fascism” isn’t just some random label, it is quite a precise definition that fits Russia and China just as well as it did Italy in the 1930s. It has less to do with the way the leader rose to power and more to do with the structure of society and how the economy is ruled. This also means that Trump is not a fascist, in my eyes, just a disgusting and infantile populist. Many in his entourage however seem to be actual fascists who adore state control (without the checks and balances of an independent civil service), the exercise of power, and racist / sexist societal hierarchies.
4. October 2022 at 12:28
Carl, I’m talking about nationalism as a political force in established states. When people speak of civic nationalism they generally mean patriotism.
Independence movements are often not very nationalist beyond the desire to achieve independence.
mbka, You said:
“fascism is just socialism that becomes nationalist (blood based) in the distribution of spoils, rather than internationalist (class based).”
Good description. And (modern American) wokism is a brand new ideology, to be added to those two.
5. October 2022 at 02:34
Scott,
“And (modern American) wokism is a brand new ideology, to be added to those two.”
Wokism actually puzzles me a little. It doesn’t seem to travel well. I always have to rub my eyes when i see it mentioned as an actual force to be reckoned with. I haven’t seen it here in Asia and I see little sign of it in Europe either. Not in the original form and shape. There are other forms of uninformed hypocrisy elsewhere in the world, mostly old-leftist, neo-fascist and climate-absurdist including all of Germany’s energy “policy”. But wokism? Maybe Christian List can help, I am too disconnected from Europe these days to say for sure.