EZRA KLEIN v MATT YGLESIAS

Yeah, the eradication of wild poliovirus from all but two countries in the world is a travesty.

might want to check out what bill gates is trending for today

My general impression was that Klein would write well-argued columns about a particular political situation that viewed Republicans as mainly good-faith actors with principles that he didn’t share, and then the Republicans would do something to make it clear they had no interest in governing, and then Klein would write something castigating Republicans for their behavior, and then his brain would reset and he would not have changed his general viewpoint at all.

― JoeStork, Tuesday, April 27, 2021 1:00 PM (one minute ago) bookmarkflaglink

It's entirely conceivable that Klein operated in this way in the Bush/Obama era. I don't recognize it at all as a description of his writing in the Trump/Biden era.

(I say "entirely conceivable" because I didn't read him back then. It wouldn't surprise me!)

It's entirely conceivable that Klein operated in this way in the Bush/Obama era. I don't recognize it at all as a description of his writing in the Trump/Biden era.

― jaymc, Tuesday, April 27, 2021 2:04 PM (twenty-nine seconds ago) bookmarkflaglink

thats become untenable due to uhh developments but his approach with gates et al is no different

don't really care about these people but i sure do enjoy reading lag00n pinning them down.

*bows deeply*

its my personal feeling that it would be best if everyone just agreed that accumulating billions of dollars is a fundamental moral wrong, but if anyone wants some details on how exactly bill gates is saving the world

Gates's role in vaccine apartheid is laid out in exquisite detail in @nataliesurely's outstanding @newrepublic feature, which delves into Gates's longstanding project to sideline democratic governments and cooperation in favor of monopoly tyranny.https://t.co/ZCKTy1CGOU

7/

— Cory Doctorow (@doctorow) April 13, 2021

you gotta tip you hat to the gates pr machine while he was running microsoft it wouldve been hard to find someone who took issue with calling him ruthless, even his fans lol

I like The New Republic and will read that article. I don't have much interest in defending Gates as a person, though I do maintain that his foundation has done good work.

sideline democratic governments and cooperation in favor of monopoly tyranny

People who stand at the apex of hierarchical institutions are predominately biased in favor of monopoly tyranny. They see it as supremely efficient and fail to see its inherent weaknesses, because its greatest weakness is complete reliance on one highly fallible individual: themself. They're far more likely to be megalomaniacs than egalitarians.

I like The New Republic and will read that article. I don't have much interest in defending Gates as a person, though I do maintain that his foundation has done good work.

― jaymc, Tuesday, April 27, 2021 11:45 AM (thirteen minutes ago)

and Hitler was a vegetarian, or whatever.

i am reading No Such Thing as a Free Gift: The Gates Foundation and the Price of Philanthropy, it's pretty good

in defending Gates as a person, though I do maintain that his foundation has done good work.

Would better work have been done taxing the shit out of him for the last 40 years, though?

If we had a 98% estate tax we wouldn’t even have to know his name.

That book sounds good, harbl. I've liked some of Anand Giridharadas's work in a similar vein.

Would better work have been done taxing the shit out of him for the last 40 years, though?

― Joe Bombin (milo z), Tuesday, April 27, 2021 2:05 PM (six minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

The answer to that question doesn't seem very clear to me. He absolutely should be taxed to the hilt; as far as I'm concerned, we should go back to Eisenhower-era marginal tax rates. On the other hand, there are a lot of people in developing countries who have benefited from the Gates Foundation's funding of large-scale public-health initiatives.

His money could have built us some cool aircraft carriers though

If you've seen one cool aircraft carrier, you've seen 'em all.

I guess...in a universe where the US still had Eisenhower-era tax rates...the military budget would also be slashed to the bone? I mean, if we're dream-wanking and all.

don't dream, it's wanking

I guess...in a universe where the US still had Eisenhower-era tax rates...the military budget would also be slashed to the bone?

https://i.imgur.com/dfzbMN1.jpeg

a funny thing about matt and ezra as old millennials is that not long ago coming up as bloggers they were considered state of the art, but then everyone younger than them ended up taking a hard left turn and now theyre like total grandpapaws, you couldnt pay a 25 year old to take technocratic ideas, turns out they were the last of a dying breed

you couldnt pay a 25 year old to take technocratic ideas,

I'm hesitant to wade into this mess but, uh, have you met Elon Musk stans?

Musk stans can't organise their thoughts enough to pass as pundits

obviously individuals will vary but all evidence points towards a large and unprecedented in at least most peoples living memory generational shift to the left, god forbid we ever see a generation that has a substantial musk fan cohort lol

lol sic

Oh god, the thought of an entire generation in thrall to Musk is terrifying, but I don't think we can completely throw dirt on the technocrat dream (read: nightmare) just yet.

it still has a lot of institutional power but its unclear how much said institutions are aware of the ground shifting beneath their feet

Musk and Yang people aren’t really technocrats. They don’t want to turn society over to rationalized systems, they want to turn it over to “smart guys.”

yeah true

I don't know that there is a meaningful difference between those to your average Twitter Musk stan tho, wherein lies the problem imo.

The Fuehrer principle but the Fuehrer is always Joe Rogan’s most recent guest.

Musk stannery is only possible through a subsumation of your own ability to interpret things into obviously fallacious belief in a strong daddy who tells you he's great. The stans have no arguments to even make, only faith, that vigorously conflicts with existing evidence.

The failure of Trumpism, religion, and all cults show us what little chance that ideology has of gaining a substantial foothold.

There’s a huge difference to them. The appeal of Musk/Yang is that they’re asystematic (as persons and in the sense of being outside of systems like NASA or traditional car manufacturers) - they keep it real man, fly by the seat of their pants just bang bang bang good ideas everywhere.

Fwiw, I'm not advocating for Musk, his stans or any of them getting within sniffing distance of meaningful leadership, but I would argue that there is a competing (or maybe not?) definition of "technocracy" that doesn't emphasize rationalized systems so much as "we think this dude is smart so he should be a decision maker for our society". Obviously Musk isn't that smart, but my point was his fans really think he is a galactic brain genius that should make more decisions that impact our day to day lives. It's a dark, dystopic version of "technocracy" when a dumb dude hides behind a veneer of "science" to gain money and power, but isn't it still a "technocracy"?

not in the way people usually use that term, no

it means policy wonks who tinker with incentives and macroeconomic policy

The answer to that question doesn't seem very clear to me. He absolutely should be taxed to the hilt; as far as I'm concerned, we should go back to Eisenhower-era marginal tax rates. On the other hand, there are a lot of people in developing countries who have benefited from the Gates Foundation's funding of large-scale public-health initiatives.

Maybe not the best example, as Gates is currently actively making the pandemic worse in developing countries!

But let's rephrase - when you say you won't defend him personally but his organization has done 'a lot of good,' shouldn't we treat that good as a balance sheet with all the harm the acquisition of $80 billion caused in the first place?

Argh, I botched part of that in getting distracted by a work call. I'm not saying that would make us a "technocracy" by definition if Musk rose to power, but rather that his fans think it would. There seems to be a lot of use of that word among his stans, is part of what I was (badly) getting to.

they think "technocracy" means "government by tech people"

gates and musk are similar in that they are doing "good" while actively working for the long term success of the underlying bad that made the good necessary

musk has already risen to power!

xpost - Right, I'll back out of my detour here and let this thread go back to EK and Matty Y, I really shouldn't try to jump in on these when I'm distracted by work, my point was mangled and lost.

i think real technocrats would see themselves as the good guys fighting against the overweening vanity and mercurial personal ambition of yr musks or gateses (or trumps) on behalf of a better-functioning establishment

lol np xpost

My point was more that I think there is a competing vision of what a "technocracy" would look like in the US and voodoo chili's definition is the one that Musk stans embrace. It's technically incorrect, but I think it's another term that is being bastardized.

aiui, technocracy was a movement in the 1930s when there was a lot of political ferment and people searching for remedies to the massive social crash of the Great Depression. Its appeal was based more on analogical thinking than anything else. It assumed that the increasing technological complexity of the world, as typified by radio, combustion engines, airplanes, urban electrification and such, meant that society needed to be fixed by putting it in the hands of scientists and technologists, who would neutrally and objectively find and fix whatever was wrong, like an auto mechanic working on a car or truck. Its program was never sophisticated and it had some affinities with fascism.

But let's rephrase - when you say you won't defend him personally but his organization has done 'a lot of good,' shouldn't we treat that good as a balance sheet with all the harm the acquisition of $80 billion caused in the first place?

― Joe Bombin (milo z), Tuesday, April 27, 2021 5:37 PM (three minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

Sure, I just don't know how it's possible to assess this in any kind of meaningful quantifiable way.

Also, I get that people want to trash Gates over COVID. I haven't had time to dig into that, so I can't really speak to it. But I think it is inarguable that the Gates Foundation has done a lot to support public-health initiatives in the developing world over the past 20 years, which has helped to reduce rates of infant and maternal mortality, stop the spread of infectious diseases like polio, HIV, and malaria, etc. Should a private foundation have as much power, money, and influence as the Gates Foundation has? Probably not! But its size also enables it to make a tangible impact and not just dole out a few small grants here and there for the sake of publicity.

gates is blatantly using his foundation to support and expand the systems that cause people to need his help

and is whitewashing his reputation in the process