Ecclesiology, organization Afficher plus
Ecclesiology, organization Afficher plus
Ecclesiology, organization Afficher plus
Ecclesiology, organization Afficher plus
Ecclesiology, organization Afficher plus
Ecclesiology, organization Afficher plus
Ecclesiology, organization Afficher plus
Ecclesiology, organization Afficher plus
@celesteh I don't think Scott's a libertarian, per se, though he might have leanings that way. He published a FAQ about this, actually: http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/02/22/repost-the-non-libertarian-faq/
@celesteh I don't think Scott's a conservative, either. Unless you meant someone else? :/
@celesteh @Angle
From what I understand, Scott Alexander sees himself as a centrist. However, the online community around him leans pretty far right (probably on account of his various attempts to steelman neoreaction), so I feel like we can't trust how he positions himself here without considering his overton window.
He's probably significantly left of the people he spends the most time discussing politics with, but that could still put him to the right of literally all of congress.
@enkiv2 @angle Fair enough, but 'classical liberal' and neoliberal have a fair bit in common. For instance, his biggest problem with hanging around with Nazis is that they might be embarrassing. And he imagines that working with them ('wearing a swastika every tuesday...') would make the movement *bigger*.
At this point, I'm willing to lump anybody who tolerates Nazis in with the far right, as that's what they'll become as soon as it's the most expedient action.
On the other hand, his arguing with libertarians does show how the pre-fascist right is actually trying to put the brakes on things and might actually be useful for that. But it also seems clear his association with the far right is shifting his overton window. I think this might show that it's possibly worthwhile to identify and promote 'moderate' voices like his to confused people who are ready to be convinced of things, but not to engage with the far right directly in argument.
@angle @enkiv2 Also, his FAQ implicitly claims that libertarians are not arguing in good faith, which suggests they're not primarily motivated by logic, but some sort of emotional or identity politics. Given the way race in the US has been driven into obtuse metaphor, I'd suggest that most white libertarians are at least comfortable with white supremacy.
As Lee Atwater said in 1981, "You start out in 1954, by saying n*****, n*****, n*****. By 1968, you can’t say n*****, that hurts you, back-fires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states rights, and all that stuff and you’re getting so abstract. Now you’re talking about cutting taxes. We want to cut this is much more abstract than even the busing thing and a hell of a lot more abstract than n*****, n*****."
His failure to engage with the elephant in the room might be good strategy, but again, it seems Nazis are merely embarrassing.
Ecclesiology, organization Afficher plus
@Angle I agree with that, except that a hierarchy is utterly opposed to my principles as libertarian (anarcho-capitalist, nightwatchman state, ecological, non-aggression pact, etc. subgroups) and atheist (Hitchens-like, materialist, show me a god and I'll kill it subgroups). So I can't ever have a Church.
Well, sort of. I was in the Church of the SubGenius for a while, but that faded out.