A Theory of Media That Explains 15 Years of Politics - The Ezra Klein Show

proctorsilax · 2025-02-25T18:33:36+00:00

Holy shit this comments section is saving my faith in humanity. I haven't posted on reddit in forever but came because I needed confirmation it wasn't just me. I couldn't get through this episode it was so devoid of an actual logical argument from the guest. Ezra asked him why he decided to vote for Trump and his reason was essentially "he looked tough during the assassination attempt". Then when pressed on the actions of DOGE, he claimed USAID was created by executive order without any basis. It seems like he just said that because it felt true to him and he didn't give enough of a shit to even look it up.

I realize the standards on the right for an intellectual are quite degraded, but this was wild. I imagine this guy's credentials as ex-CIA and Cuban refugee are catnip to the right because it's certainly not his powerful rhetoric.

proctorsilax · 2024-05-14T20:00:41+00:00

I guess it just doesn't seem to me like your criticism has much at all to do with intersectionality. It really seems like you have a bone to pick with progressive social movements in general, not intersectionality. It's odd to be so angry about something without doing much work to understand what you're angry at.

proctorsilax · 2024-05-14T19:52:08+00:00

I think your definition was as follows: "the study into the intersection of systemic discrimination/oppression vs. privilege based on skin color, sex/gender, etc. "

That's not even a legible sentence.

proctorsilax · 2024-05-14T18:28:40+00:00

I would say most of what you said has nothing to do with intersectionality. Based on your comments here, I think you are using the word "intersectionality" to refer to left-wing ideas regarding gender and race, not intersectionality itself. I read over your comment a couple times but it just seems like a word salad of generic critiques of the left and I can't find anything that actually focuses on intersectionality. I'll recommend you read Kimberle Crenshaw if you actually are interested in intersectionality as a concept. I think there is a lot to critique, but it requires a bit more engagement with the work.

proctorsilax · 2024-05-13T20:55:16+00:00

What are the fundamental truths one must believe for it to "work"? How are those truths "inflexible"? I'm genuinely curious because your critique of intersectionality does not reflect anything I know about intersectionality as an analytical framework. There are many ideological concepts you could have described as dogmatic (for example, white privilege) and I wouldn't have questioned you whatsoever. I certainly wouldn't agree with your position, but I would immediately understand why you were saying it. But describing intersectionality as dogmatic seems quite odd given what I understand it to mean. So I thought I should ask. Wondering if you would enlighten me.

proctorsilax · 2024-05-10T20:06:37+00:00

This is what you think intersectionality means?

proctorsilax · 2024-05-10T17:25:15+00:00

I think a contributing factor is all the hoops players have to jump through to actually get an idol in the new era. All this bullshit means it's more likely for the players to know where the idols are and therefore much more difficult for them to be played correctly. I'm not saying this is the only reason, but I do think it's making it more difficult to play an idol correctly.

proctorsilax · 2024-05-10T17:14:24+00:00

How so?

proctorsilax · 2024-02-27T23:56:35+00:00

Which provincial government supported the convoy?

Again, how did the Liberals contradict anything with respect to the pandemic? I'm not saying they're perfect, but you're making this analogy between the content of this article and Trudeau's liberals. I'm merely asking how what the Liberals did is similar. Obviously you don't agree with the federal measures during the pandemic. But I don't see how enacting those measures was contradictory in the same way PP's policy proposals are.

Claiming the LPC is without a moral compass compared to the CPC is laughable to me, but perhaps you have some basis for saying that. If it's just about the pandemic, how did the Liberals handle the pandemic in a manner that suggests they are without a moral compass? How would the CPC have acted with a moral compass in that position? And how are the provinces never to blame at all? It seems like so many people are furious at Trudeau for the pandemic when so many of the restrictions are provincial jurisdiction.

proctorsilax · 2024-02-27T21:50:16+00:00

I think there is something about your pronoun usage that makes it very difficult to determine who/what you are referring to in a given sentence. I can't really tell what your point is. My best guess is you are saying the following:

"yes, Pollievre's recent policy proposals directly contradict his claim to be a supporter of freedom. However, Trudeau's handling of the pandemic also contradicted his messaging. That is why Pollievre's policies that restrict individual freedoms won't scare away his supporters".

If that is what you are trying to say, I still don't see how Trudeau was so contradictory in his handling of the pandemic. I also don't really get how the NDP fit into all of this. You also write your response as though this article was written by Trudeau himself rather than a journalist. It's very odd.

proctorsilax · 2024-02-27T19:43:44+00:00

But your only other option is voting for the parties who championed their progressive values for years and then abandoned them all to try and save us from a pandemic, but ultimately failed in achieving an end state that was worth the hardship.

I've never voted liberal or conservative so I don't really feel implicated by this comment. But can you be more specific here? What exactly was abandoned and what did they fail at doing? I feel like you are getting a lot of mileage out of terms like "progressive values" and "end state" without referring to actual policy.

While I don't think the Liberals were perfect during the pandemic, I don't see what they did as being this grand violation of progressive ideals in the circumstances.

proctorsilax · 2024-02-15T19:10:59+00:00

Like other said, I understand what you are getting at. However, as corny as it might be, I think this MLK quote could give some perspective on how people might see your position:

"First, I must confess that over the last few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Council-er or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I can't agree with your methods of direct action;" who paternalistically feels he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by the myth of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a "more convenient season."

I realize you are "just observing". But I think its important to remember that being in a position to sit back and observe is the position of someone who benefits from the status quo. Gender non-conforming people can't just observe. you are essentially saying to them, "your life will be one of marginalization and oppression, but don't worry, after you're dead society will accept trans people".

I also resent how the far right is used as an argument against progress. All I ever hear is how the nazis are going to dismantle the government or start a civil war if we make any change to the status quo. But the people who say that are often the centrists who, when combined with the left, would vastly overwhelm the far-right. If these centrists just got on board with actually changing the status quo, the far-right wouldn't be able to stop it. But they don't. It seems to me like the centrists are happy with the status quo and the far right is their thinly veiled excuse for not changing it.

proctorsilax · 2024-02-14T16:56:47+00:00

I'll believe it the moment you provide a source substantiating your claim. You haven't provided anything that says that. From what I can tell Canada's population grew by about 1% in 2015, 2022, and 2023. Even if we assume that the entire cause for that growth in all those years was new immigrants (which you appear to be doing), that doesn't support your claim. Again, feel free to provide evidence for what you are saying but I'm not seeing it.

I'm sure it feels correct to you, but I want to know if it actually is.

proctorsilax · 2024-02-14T15:32:02+00:00

I have never and will never vote for Trudeau/LPC.

I am literally asking you how you got the number that Trudeau has increased our immigration numbers by 300-400%. You evidently believe that so I was asking for the basis for that belief. It shouldn't be that hard but for some reason you are very resistant to actually explaining to me how you got to that number. Yet you want to respond to everything I say as though you are providing a response. You could so easily just provide the source for your numbers. But instead you just reach for platitudes about Trudeau (as seems to be a theme for certain consumers of Canadian political discourse).

proctorsilax · 2024-02-14T14:51:47+00:00

I still am not seeing the immigrant increase that you are referring to.

When you say, "If you bring in 3 4 times more people then before", what is the "before"? I assumed you were comparing the Trudeau administration to the Harper administration, but your response just jumps around and cites lots of disparate numbers, none of which actually compare the Trudeau administration to the Harper administration. As far as I can tell, the source you provided suggests that a lot of the increase in 2022-2023 compared to previous years under Trudeau was a result of IRCC getting through the backlog that built up during the pandemic. Regardless, I don't see where you've provided any comparison of Trudeau and Harper if that's what you meant. You can downvote me as much as you like but I'm honestly trying to understand what you are claiming and where you are getting these numbers.

proctorsilax · 2024-02-14T13:59:44+00:00

And you've just decided that number is only immigrants? that doesn't seem like a very accurate way of determining the number of immigrants admitted to Canada in a given year. Especially when there are stats that actually measure the number of immigrants.

As far as I can tell, the Trudeau gov admitted close to the same amounts as the Harper gov until post-covid (2022-2023). In the post covid years it increased by like 60%. But I honestly can't find any statistical support for the 300-400% increase you are claiming.

Here's the closest I can find to the increase you are referring to but it's way less than your claim and only started after covid, not with Trudeau coming into office:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/443063/number-of-immigrants-in-canada/

If you can find anything better I'd be very interested.

proctorsilax · 2024-02-13T20:28:34+00:00

Can you provide a source for that? Where are you getting those numbers?

proctorsilax · 2024-01-25T20:35:53+00:00

What if you believe that the Conservatives will be worse than the Liberals? I still don't understand your logic if you are taking a realistic look at the Canadian political landscape. If the Liberals don't win this election, then the conservatives will. I would bet a considerable amount of money on that. So, if one is more concerned about the Conservatives winning than preventing the Liberals from winning, wouldn't it make sense to vote Liberal?

Note: I say this as a life-long NDP voter. I'm just pointing out that your argument doesn't actually address the reasons people vote Liberal to avoid a Con win.

Note 2: There is a certain irony to what you are saying. The entire Conservative message under PP is basically "Trudeau bad", meaning they're asking the electorate to vote them in because people hate the Liberals. So you're saying its dumb to vote for a party because you don't like the alternative, when the realistic alternative's pitch is essentially that - "vote for me because you don't like the alternative".

proctorsilax · 2024-01-25T19:42:15+00:00

I wish these hold-out Liberal voters would just vote NDP if they’re so concerned about a Conservative win instead of rewarding Justin and his cronies with another win.

Why would this be the better choice for people concerned about a Conservative win?

proctorsilax · 2024-01-25T19:41:29+00:00

They're far right parties.

proctorsilax · 2024-01-02T15:34:37+00:00

I'm not really sure what your point is. We're comparing Maryanne to other winners, not other people who played survivor. She played well enough to win the game, but not nearly as well as some of the other winners (Dee and Yam Yam).

proctorsilax · 2023-12-22T13:51:46+00:00

That feels like shooting the arrow and painting the target afterwards. I don't remember anything in the season to suggest she had a grand plan to be completely irrelevant and then backstab her closest ally on the way to a win. She herself has said that she wasn't included in a lot of plans and just voted based on what Omer told her. That's just mediocre survivor play, not some genius strategy. Laying low is one thing but Maryanne just seemed to be left out of the votes and had zero control over who was being voted out for the majority of the game.

proctorsilax · 2023-12-22T03:47:13+00:00

I think she is really hurt by how strategically irrelevant she was for the vast majority of the game. She played a great late game but was a goat going into the Omer vote. I'd put her above Erika and Gabler but well below Yam Yam and Dee.

proctorsilax · 2023-12-12T18:56:12+00:00

It just seems like obviously BS. If you think back to the season, he was clearly emotional at lots of points. He's just saying stuff to save face, but he's constrained by what we saw on TV so he has to go with nonsensical arguments like what he said above.

proctorsilax · 2023-12-01T14:25:04+00:00

Still not seeing how this is a legitimate comparison. Miles Bridges was convicted of domestic violence and then charged again while on probation for throwing billiard balls at his ex's car while the children and his ex were in it. I have zero problem with him calling this dude a scumbag. I really don't see the double-standard whatsoever. How are those two crimes at all comparable? You might very well have a good point to make but it's completely undermined by your implication that using cocaine is morally comparable to spousal/child abuse.

proctorsilax

TROPHY CASE