11 thoughts on “Suicide Of The West”

  1. I like the title of the interview: “Is Jonah Goldberg Turning Into a Libertarian? It Sure Sounds Like It.”

    1. That would be fitting because then he can complain about everything with never being responsible for doing anything. He can preach utopia to the faithful.

      It is kind of funny to watch Goldberg claim he is being rational but he is just so emotional.

      He says Trump is making everything worse but how would Goldberg fix a corrupt government, deal with illegal immigration, or get other countries to stop unfair trade practices? Turns out Goldberg doesn’t have an answer except that maybe issues he used to hold out of principle are no longer his principles because Trump advocates for them.

      The end where they talk about identity politics and sidetrack off into their stereotypes for conservatives is interesting. It unintentionally demonstrates their own blind spots.

        1. I get along with lots of people of different cultures, and I know a lot of people who get on with people of other cultures. As far as I know we’re not breaking some law of nature, so perhaps it’s just you and people who think like you that can’t get along with others.
          Or maybe you can get along and the problem is that you’re just thinking the worst of other people, assuming people of other cultures can never get along because it suits your personal ideology – that would mean your claim is based on nothing other than silly confirmation bias, you see what you want to see and ignore all the evidence to the contrary.

          1. Hint: Europeans still make up the overwhelming majority of the population of New Zealand, and most of them came from the UK.

            Wait until they drop to around 60% of the population, and see what fun you have in store.

            And I was paraphrasing the President of Singapore, who knows a few things about this. I don’t remember the exact quote, but it was something very much along those lines.

          2. Ah, here we go:

            http://infoproc.blogspot.com/2005/08/lee-kuan-yew-interview.html

            “In multiracial societies, you don’t vote in accordance with your economic interests and social interests, you vote in accordance with race and religion. Supposing I’d run their system here, Malays would vote for Muslims, Indians would vote for Indians, Chinese would vote for Chinese. I would have a constant clash in my Parliament which cannot be resolved because the Chinese majority would always overrule them. “

          3. Oh, you might also want to look at ‘Politics in Plural Societies’, an academic study of the subject, whose conclusions were not exactly in accord with yours.

            Though it was written in the 70s, so maybe human nature has magically changed since.

          4. so perhaps it’s just you and people who think like you that can’t get along with others.

            You still don’t understand identity politics.

            It isn’t an inability to get along with other people. It is the intentional atomization of society with the intent of pitting one group against the other and preventing them from getting along.

            I agree that identity politics is a default outcome, at least not the militant extreme we see from Democrats in the USA.

          5. “Supposing I’d run their system here, ”
            So Lee set up the system in Singapore so that the race conflict problem was overcome. In New Zealand we also have a system that ensures fair minority representation. Other countries around the world also manage to work well despite being multiracial, multicultural and multi-ethnic.

            Often when people point to examples of multiculturalism failing they use examples in which the two cultures have been mutually hostile from before they were forced into the same sovereign nation, in which case the country was set up to fail.

            “Though it was written in the 70s, so maybe human nature has magically changed since.”

            Human nature hasn’t changed, but how we mentally define “us” and “them” certainly has changed, overall the cross culture relationship has massively improved around the world over the last few centuries, also, the way we think has changed and that change would make us more capable of relating to people unlike ourselves.

  2. The part where he suggests there was a point in time during 2016 where a Tom Hanks or Oprah could have parachuted in and won the election is so precious. “The American electorate, half voting for an orangutan, half voting for a pantsuit, what to make of it all? BUY MY BOOK!”

    I did like his assertion that there should always be a single libertarian at the policy table because you’ll always have at least one voice saying “Maybe we should not do something and just stand here.” Actually I think the libertarian would more likely remind everyone that maybe that driverless truck rolling down the hill toward us will do what 99% of the ones before it did: roll into the ditch on its own.

  3. I was thinking a little more about Goldberg. How can he be so uninformed about current events but so knowledgeable about other things? He is probably like most people, who don’t have the time (because he is researching for his next book) to wade through media coverage and look behind the stories to find what they aren’t telling you.

    He was on Fox News Sunday last week and he didn’t even know that American companies already faced tariffs and other trade restrictions before Trump was President. He actually thought Trump started it all out of the blue. I bet Goldberg knows a tiny bit about how China plays rough with out business but only because China has been subject of conversation for a couple decades now. What about the EU, South Korea, or any other country?

    Well, that would take intentional research because it isn’t something our media covers, especially the media that Golberg participates in.

Comments are closed.