Reason Roundup

Study: YouTube's Fringe Video Viewers Aren't Passive Zombies

Plus: Cryptocurrency crashes, prison abuse protests in Florida, the death of the center-right, and more...

|

On YouTube, "viewership of far-right videos peaked in 2017," according to Penn State political scientists Kevin Munger and Joseph Phillips, who have been studying YouTube politics and the spread of "extremist" content on the popular video platform.

In a new working paper detailing their findings, Munger and Phillips challenge the trendy notion that YouTube's algorithms and auto-play features are responsible for radicalization, and they pan the theory that viewers of alt-right and alt-right-adjacent videos become easily "infected" like zombies.

In the paper ("A Supply and Demand Framework for YouTube Politics"), Munger and Phillips note similar panic spawned by previous communications media, including cable television. In the current narrative, they write, "YouTube audiences are at risk of far-right radicalization and this is because the YouTube algorithm that was designed to maximize the company's profits via increased audience time on the platform has learned to show people far-right videos."

"There exist many alternative media clusters on YouTube that explicitly define themselves in opposition to mainstream structures of knowledge production, they are remarkably popular, and they tend to skew to the right," the authors point out. To explain this, many people have coalesced on the idea that it's something nefarious about YouTube's recommendation system. The author disagree:

The algorithm tends to recommend alternative media (the theory goes), leading users down a "rabbit hole" into which they become trapped, watching countless hours of alternative media content and becoming hardened opponents of liberal democratic values and mainstream knowledge production institutions. Even if we accept the premise that YouTube is an important space for radical politics, we argue that a model of YouTube media effects that centers the recommendation engine is implausible, an unfortunate update of the "hypodermic needle" model of media effects that enjoyed some prominence in the 1930s and 1940s but which has been consistently discredited ever since.

New cultural contexts demand new metaphors, so in place of the hypodermic needle, we call this the "Zombie Bite" model of YouTube radicalization. The reference is to [an August 2019] working paper (the most comprehensive quantitative analysis of YouTube politics to date) which deems people who comment on videos produced by figures associated with the "Alt-Right" as "infected," and that this "infection" spreads.

We think this theory is incomplete, and potentially misleading. And we think that it has rapidly gained a place in the center of the study of media and politics on YouTube because it implies an obvious policy solution—one which is flattering to the journalists and academics studying the phenomenon. If only Google (which owns YouTube) would accept lower profits by changing the algorithm governing the recommendation engine, the alternative media would diminish in power and we would regain our place as the gatekeepers of knowledge. This is wishful thinking that undersells the importance of YouTube politics as a whole.

Munger and Phillips implore journalists and scholars studying social-media effects "to be much more explicit in deploying research designs that are capable of falsifying the strong Zombie Bite theory" of YouTube radicalization.

"Normatively, we desperately hope the strong version of the theory is false," they add. "If far-right content on YouTube is uniquely powerful, zombifying people after a single exposure, liberal democracy is in a very dark place indeed." Fortunately, the evidence suggests otherwise.

The August paper referenced ("Auditing Radicalization Pathways on YouTube") ultimately failed "to demonstrate that the algorithm has a noteworthy effect on the audience for Alt-Right content," write Munger and Phillips:

A random walk algorithm beginning at an Alt-Lite video and taking 5 steps randomly selecting one of the ten recommended videos will only be recommended a video from the Alt-Right approximately one out every 1,700 trips. For a random walker beginning at a "control" video from the mainstream media, the probability is so small that it is difficult to see on the graph, but it is certainly no more common than one out of every 10,000 trips.

In their own analysis, they found:

• The most extreme branches of the [Alternative Influence Network] (the Alt-Right and Alt-Lite) have been in decline since mid-2017.
• However, the Alt-Right's remaining audience is more engaged than any other audience, in terms of likes and comments per view on their videos.
• The bulk of the growth in terms of both video production and viewership over the past two years has come from the entry of mainstream conservatives into the YouTube marketplace.

What does that mean? For one, while viewers of less extreme videos may have indeed been recommended and consumed more extreme far-right content, that doesn't necessarily mean they were enchanted by it. Now, with the entry of (relatively) more compelling mainstream conservative content on YouTube, it seems more people are watching that. And while some folks did get deeply into hateful and far-fringe content, YouTube did not create that audience, say the study authors.

Rather, "YouTube has affordances that make content creation easy for fringe political actors who tap into an existing base of disaffected individuals alienated from the mainstream, encouraging parasocial relationships."

Munger and Phillips' paper has received some pushback. Rebecca Lewis, author of a 2018 paper on the "Alternative Influence Network" paper on which they rely, said that the decline in alt-right and alt-light video viewership they measured could be explained by shifts in popular far-right content creators.

"Some of the creators she included in the list of Alternative Influence Network channels have lost popularity since her study was published, while others have emerged to take their place," notes Wired. "However, this latter group was not included in the Penn State researchers' report. Munger said the findings are preliminary and part of a working paper."


FREE MINDS

Jim Antle tackles the state of certain libertarian-conservatives alliances. "Proponents of limited government have to identify an electoral coalition and social base that can turn their political aspirations into reality," he notes at The American Conservative. But, he argues, "the center-right remains the only coalition that has shown any receptiveness to checking government growth, and there is no plausible center-right majority or plurality without the voters Trump activated."


FREE MARKETS

Bitcoin continues to crash. "The price of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies tanked today, continuing a months-long slide that has seen the value of the digital currency slide by more than $2,000 from highs of above $10,000 earlier in the year," reports TechCrunch. Yesterday alone, Bitcoin dropped from around $8,000 down to $7,448.75.


PROTECTING & SERVING

Floridians are protesting a prison guard's severe beating of an inmate. The attack left the woman, 51-year-old Cheryl Weimar, paralyzed. "Its unacceptable. Nothing is happening. We want arrest. We want change," said Debra Bennett, who organized a protest outside Lowell Prison last weekend.

"Florida Department of Law Enforcement officials are investigating the incident, and so far no one has been arrested," reports the Ocala Star Banner. "State officials said the guards have been re-assigned. Weimar, once a patient at Ocala Regional Medical Center, has been removed and is presently at the Florida Women's Reception Center in Lowell."


QUICK HITS

  • The president seems to think that Colorado shares a border with Mexico.
  • Sen. Josh Hawley (R–Mo.) introduced a bill to move the majority of employees at 10 federal agencies out of D.C. and into economically suffering areas around the country.
  • "We don't know whether the number of worlds is finite or infinite, but it's certainly a very large number. There's no way it's, like, five," says the author of a new book on alternate realities.
  • Congress wants to change cruelty to animals from an issue for local police and animal welfare authorities to something investigated by the FBI and prosecuted in federal courts.
  • Anti-sex-work activist and author Rachel Moran is suing for defamation over social media claims that she never actually was a street-based sex worker in Ireland.
  • The "ACCESS Act" serves as another reminder that Josh Hawley "seems to think he should be appointed the product manager for the internet."
  • The Federal Highway Administration is pressuring Ames, Iowa, to get rid of rainbow-colored crosswalks.
  • Happy Halloween!

NEXT: Is William Taylor the John Dean of Ukrainegate?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. On YouTube, “viewership of far-right videos peaked in 2017…”

    When that guy videoed making his girlfriend’s dog do a Nazi salute.

    1. So that’s what happens when they demonitized and alter search results!

      1. I was surprised that this didn’t make it into the discussion.

        Limiting not just the alt-right, but anything and everything of the right has been a high priority for internet companies and progressive activist groups. We hear about the extreme cases – like Alex Jones – but there are countless tales of less public deplatforming.

        I happened on an interview with that guy who does the “convince me I’m wrong” college campus videos on the radio last night. He has a channel – youtube I think it was – that is basically a podcast or radio show. He says a couple of months back he suddenly stopped getting new views. No new subscribers at all. He said it was a form of shadow ban – where you couldn’t find him and couldn’t subscribe.

        But the big thing he was talking about was Tulsi Gabbard. She has a lawsuit based on having her advertisements pulled right during her big moment after the debate. Well, it happened again. On Facebook you could not search her name and get her page right after Clinton made the charge that she is a Russian asset.

        So his team looked in to it. From anywhere in the US, a search on Tulsi Gabbard did not go to her page – it went to content about Clinton saying she was a Russian asset, other people making those charges, etc. From outside the US, her page came up first.

        So, he asked, why would that be? Why would a US presidential candidate not be searchable within the US, but only in the US?

        And apparently after a few days, that situation has gone away. So right at the peak, when she needed her platform to respond to a character assassination, anyone wanting to find her couldn’t get there by searching, and instead was given the character assassination.

        So the thing he is worried about – in addition to deplatforming and demonitizing people like himself – they are hitting people and ideas right at that critical window . Those few hours or days when an idea can take hold or be refuted, they control who can see which opinion.

        This is what they have been promising when they say they are “stopping viral ideas” and “fake news”. When you combine that push with companies like “The Groundwork” that are designed by tech leaders to integrate directly into the back end of the big tech companies specifically to help democrat candidates, you get this result. Hillary Clinton smears Tulsi Gabbard, and the tech industry gives her two days of clear run without an effective response from Tulsi Gabbard. Her only choice was to run to the mainstream media to get the word out…. and if HRC says no, then the only place left for her to go is FOX News.

        1. Which should also be shadow banned, as should Reason (Fox and Reason both are Transphobisc and anti-Wealth Tax)

        2. Guy is Steven crowder if the louder with crowder show. Not a bad podcast. Political comedy for the most part. But hes been huge in the censorship fight with youtube.

        3. Yeah, that’s Steven Crowder.

        4. It’s the cathedral. Mencius Moldbug is the guy to read on this stuff if you haven’t already.

      2. I admit, that’s the one that sucked me into the alt right rabbit hole

        1. Kara Swisher of Recode offered up this lie:

          My son, who is 13 years old, started watching Ben Shapiro videos. And he’s like the gateway drug to the next group. And then it goes right to Jordan Peterson, then it goes down and in three clicks he was in Neo-Nazi stuff. It was astonishing. And then I had to listen to it at dinner.

          So, the yarmulke-wearing Orthodox Jew Ben Shapiro is the gateway drug to neo-Nazism. Yeah right.

          1. Well, when you start to define conservatives and rationalists as Nazi’s it starts to make sense one supposes.

            1. In academia the “how can a Jew be a Nazi” question was resolved 30 years ago when Jewish Derrida defended Paul de Man’s having written in support of the Nazis when he lived in Belgium during the occupation.

              “Self-Hating Jew” is the term you’re supposed to use.

              1. How can a jew be a nazi? Ask moses, he was bitching about jews being worldly 6k years ago

    2. Hello.

      “becoming hardened opponents of liberal democratic values”

      Right. Because the Liberal party of Canada and the Democrat party of the United States are such proponents of that.

      Are these people for real?

      Also. I’m no expert but youtube is clearly up to something because I’m subscribed to channels who aren’t political but the second they touch on subjects that go against the ‘left-wing narrative’ they get demonetized.

      Not saying it’s aliens but….

      Scholars who are claiming there’s some sort of ‘far right plot’ are repeating the exact same mindset liberals showed between WW1 and 2.

      I argue the alt-media, just based on their content and arguments, are infinitely more committed to liberal democracies than the elites running our institutions. They’re reacting to the ILLIBERAL actions and rhetoric from academics and politicians alike.

      It’s so fricken obvious. Hello.

      It’s not the alt-right constantly looking to suppress free speech, restrict gun rights, subvert democratic results (2016 and Brexit and Salvini are prime examples) or looking to demonize to push a far left agenda.

      In Canada, Trudeau has been found guilty of four serious ethics violations, faced a couple of sexual allegations and pushed forth anti-liberal legislation.

      This is not liberal democratic. IT’S ILLIBERAL PROGRESSIVISM.

      These scholars are creating an alt-reality to counter an alt-media that’s trying to preserve what’s left of our Western heritage and values.

      Don’t be useful idiots to them.

      1. On the “Far Right Plot” front, remember the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy?

        It didn’t get much play, but there was just a book out about the Clinton machine. At the exact time that Hillary was obsessing about the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy that was out to get them, she was actually running a vast conspiracy. Like, for real.

        They had teams of paid shills listening to talk radio all around the country. This was back in the 90’s, before the internet was important and when Talk Radio was the only outlet for conservative voices. So the Clinton machine was listening, and calling in with talking points distributed from above to blunt any republican criticism. They were trained to pretend to be conservative callers but hitting Clinton talking points.

        An actual vast conspiracy.

        And now they have their “fake news” and “russian interference” to ferret out in social media and in the press. And all of the major platforms are on board. And they all are using far-left highly partisan sources to determine what is “face news” and what counts as “foreign interference”.

        But please… don’t call it a vast left wing conspiracy. That would be insane.

        1. An axiom of human understanding and nature dictates, the more someone screams about something that’s when the attention turns to them about what they’re railing against.

          As in, ‘why are you so concerned about Russian interference Hilary? What are YOU hiding?’

          Also known as projection in some form. It’s one thing to make the assertion or accusation only to have it proven false. It’s quite another to keep harping on about it despite the truth and brings into question the character and credibility of the person making the claim.

          I dare someone to disprove this axiom.

      2. I mean, I personally don’t think the people arguing for turning the US into white ethnostate are by any plausible measure “infinitely more committed to liberal democracies than the elites running our institutions.” That may not be the opinion of everyone who considers themselves alt right, but it is certainly the opinion of some of them. So however biased the “mainstream” media may be (and it often is) I’m definitely not buying this notion that the torch-wielding assholes insistent they won’t be “replaced” are somehow paragons of tolerance and liberty.

        1. Well, the channels I watch are. And they’ve been targeted for demonetization.

          I’m sure there are some other ones less so committed and are as you say but I don’t know of them.

          Wouldn’t surprise me if they consider Peterson ‘alt-right’ as Reason does. I flatly reject that and will argue anyone at Reason who makes this ridiculous claim.

          1. There’s also a weird situation where Democrats will demand free speech be curbed for ‘feelz’ and to silence opposing views (both sides do it perhaps but one is much more aggressive and up front about it and has made it a feature of their intellectual repertoire and policy – I’ll let you guess who) and if you oppose it, you’re the bad guy. Or the extremist.

            Imagine. You’re a free speech absolutist extremist.

            Liberal democracies my ass.

          2. Peterson spreads the fascist message that kids should clean their rooms.

            1. Does that come with an allowance? Because that might be need for trick or treaters 13-15 to pay their fine.

      3. Not to mention, the people decrying “alt-right” and “alt-right-adjacent” content consistently ignore where that content comes from— It’s almost always a reaction to some insane or inane shit pulled by the left and catalyze by breathless media headlines designed to be read by people who have no interest whatsoever in reading the underlying article.

        You want people to stop getting “infected” by the content creators that are calling out the stupid shit you do, then stop doing the stupid shit in the first place!!!

    3. When a bunch of morons believed in Q anon.

  2. Oddly missing from most news outlets after raging against the Syria withdrawal for over a week…

    Kurdish general thanks trump for working out a permanent cease fire with Turkey and Russia.

    https://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2019/10/23/military-leader-of-syrian-kurds-thanks-trump/

    1. LOL

      Breitbart is not a legitimate source.

      #LibertariansForStayingInSyria

      1. Good parody of baby jeffrey. I tried finding alternate sources but no major outlets decided this was newsworthy despite Syria being front and center for over a week. This article is just the tweets and the agreement.

    2. Meanwhile CIA armed militias are now fighting DOD armed militias in Syria.

      http://www.chicagotribune.com/nation-world/ct-syria-militias-us-cia-islamic-state-20160326-story.html

      Leaving Syria was such a disaster. I mean who wouldn’t want the US in the middle of all that?

      1. It’s happening now because Trump needed a distraction from the investigation of his criminal conspiracy. There was calm and peace in NE Syria up until the moment Trump rolled over and unleashed this chaos.

        1. You say really stupid shit. That border in both syria and turkey have had decades of conflict.

          1. This is where you post Turkish propaganda about the Kurdish terrorists. You’re too stupid apparently to realize thar Turkey is aligned with ISIS. Their plan is to ethically cleanse the border lands and repopulate it with people who are sympathetic to ISIS.

            1. Well, at least they are being ethical about it.

            2. Again, you’re back to saying stupid shit.

        2. You really need to get out of your mother’s basement, Plod. Turkey was going to invade whether we had 2 dozen guys there or not. We chose to get our guys out of the way.

          1. Turkey is our bitch. They were never going to invade and kill American troops without Trump’s permission. Do you understand power and who has it?

            1. Is this a parody account?

              1. It’s a Poe account…

              2. I hope it is.

                Unless illiterate, shrill psychos from DU are beginning to find their way here.

              3. naw, parodies are funny, like OBL. This is just sad, like an orphan with no arms or legs, who has progeria. The humane thing would be to abort it.

            2. They were never going to invade and kill American troops without Trump’s permission. Do you understand power and who has it?

              I think this is a bit of a stretch, especially the “Trump’s permission” part.

              In Turkey’s opinion, the USA is arming and assisting a separatist terrorist organization in clear violation of our treaty with Turkey as a fellow NATO member. Some of our largest military bases in the region are in Turkey.

              If Turkey attacked the YPG and some Americans got killed, it would be spun as “it’s unfortunate that some Americans were standing next to those terrorists we had to kill. Sorry ’bout that.”

              Is the US going to respond with “no, we were military assisting those armed groups working to overthrow your government,” or do you think they’ll respond with “we are outraged by Turkey’s carelessness and demand that they immediately apologize directly to the family members of those slain Americans?”

              “Power” – I actually don’t think you understand it as well as you think you do.

        3. So Trump ended our involvement in a war as opposed to starting a war to distract from a domestic issue?

          That is not how this works! What is wrong with you.

          1. Trump unleashed fighting that wasn’t happening. Trump didn’t end a war you stupid sob.

            1. Cry “Pod”, and unleash the dogs of boor.

                1. Would have been far cleverer if you said “suck my pod”. Oh well, I can’t do everything.

            2. Yeah because our involvement in the middle east is never discussed.

              Sure dude.

            3. Trump unleashed fighting that wasn’t happening.

              Are you under the impression this is the first time Turkish troops have crossed the border into Syria, as opposed to merely the most recent?

          2. Over 100 ISIS captives escaped because Trump is a fucking idiot.

            1. I thought ISIS was JV. Moreover, what do you want to do with them? They are all European citizens whose countries will not let them return home. I am all for hanging all of them but if Trump did that you retards would be having a stroke. So what do you want? Just leave them in camps forever? How did that work out at Guantanamo?

              They were going to be released at some point. Putting that day off isn’t worth going to war with Turkey. Maybe Obama should not have made an alliance with a bunch of communists who have been waging a terror campaign against a NATO Allie for the last 30 years. Just a thought.

              Trump is just cleaning up Obama’s mess.

              1. You’re just an idiot if you think we had to go to war with Turkey. Turkey would never have invaded without our PERMISSION you stupid mfer. And we got nothing for giving that permission and running away. We had bomb our own bases. The Russians are laughing at your stupidity. They love you. Everyone in the world realizes Republicans are easy marks for manipulation.

                1. Your understanding of global politics is child like.

                  1. You think Turkey would have attacked without Trump’s permission?

                    1. Trump didn’t give “permission”.

                      You are falsely equating Trumps troop movement with permission just because it creates an opening for Turkey to make a move.

                      Did Obama give Libya permission to engage in slavery because he worked to remove Gadhafi? No.

                    2. “Trump didn’t give “permission”.”

                      He absolutely fucking did. Why do you guys have to deny facts?

                      https://www.npr.org/2019/10/07/768032841/trump-says-u-s-will-let-turkey-launch-military-offensive-in-syria-prompting-outr

                    3. They’ve attacked syria plenty of times without our permission dumbfuck. I do like how you are back to wanting the us to be the global police.

                    4. Jeff’s proof of permission is a bald assertion as to the meaning if one clip and a second clip where trump says he told Turkey to not do anything…

                      Do you fucking read your links baby Jeffrey?

              2. John, cmon man. If this was such a great policy, then why was there absolutely no planning for it? Why were our guys in Syria the last to find out? This was a spur of the moment caving by Trump because he likes dictators, sucks at negotiating, and has no spine.

                Now we have released ISIS dues back into the wild.

                That’s not cleaning up a mess. That’s creating another one.

                1. Quite a few bald assertions in there. I’m pretty sure the troops knew they were moving before the press reported they had moved dumbfuck.

            2. You can’t even troll right.

              It was over 1,100 “isis” associated women and children. The wives and kids of suspected ISIS fighters.

              The intersectionality of that tar-baby might set some kind of record.

        4. That is the best take I’ve heard all year.

          I heard that a day or two ago. They were talking about Clinton’s impeachment and how he bombed an aspirin factory to take over the news cycle. They didn’t mention the phrase “wag the dog” on the talking head show I was listening to – but it even made it into the movies.

          Anyway – they were joking around about Trump doing the same thing… Clinton bombs foreign countries to distract from impeachment news, and Trump works for peace and withdraws troops! How dare he!!

          It was pretty funny. They were also riffing on Obama’s Nobel Peace prize for his apology tour, saying that if Obama had brokered that cease fire with the Turks and Kurds, the Nobel committee would have held an emergency meeting and awarded him an emergency second Nobel. But since this is Trump, he’s evil for getting a peace agreement, however tenuous.

        5. There was calm and peace in NE Syria up until the moment Trump rolled over and unleashed this chaos.

          lol

        6. “”It’s happening now because Trump needed a distraction from the investigation of his criminal conspiracy””

          Happening now? The story is from March 2016.

    3. thanks for crutches after breaking my legs.

      1. Jeff thinks kurdish turkey relationships were placid prior to trump. Jeff is retarded.

    4. Kurdish general thanks trump for working out a permanent cease fire with Turkey and Russia.

      He’s clearly flattering Trump hoping that Trump will send the troops back in, which the SDF publicly called for just this morning.

      1. Or he was thanking him. One requires fact, the other requires TDS.

        1. Take a deep breath and read the actual statement from the SDF rather than the summary you found in Breitbart.

  3. …they pan the theory that viewers of alt-right and alt-right-adjacent videos become easily “infected” like zombies.

    We’ll just see when all those teen boys rise from the proverbial dead and vote Trump in 2020.

    1. “alt-right” is a term without a serious definition. Don’t use it.

      1. Not to mention “alt-right adjacent.” WTF?

        1. However, alt-right kitty corner is solid.

      2. Actually “alt-right” roughly translates to “opponent of the Koch / Reason open borders agenda.”

        Used in a sentence: I stopped being friendly with Frank when I learned he doesn’t want to #AbolishICE because I refuse to associate with the alt-right.

        1. It isn’t even a joke. The first time I heard “alt-right” was back in 2016, and the very next day I learned that libertarians are alt-right and reason is an alt-right site.

      3. Back in the Usenet days I learned very quickly to avoid any site with “alt” in its name. I thought “alt.sex.alt.alt.alt.hamsters” was a parody. I still wake up screaming in the middle of night over three decades later.

        1. Ah.. the good old days! When “free porn” was nekkid pictures UUencoded in alt-binaries.

          We had a 486-SX set up in the lab that had a modem connection. One day after hours one of the guys set up a news reader and started pulling down photos…. they’d take a long time to download and maybe 30 seconds to render. Line by line the photo would draw down the screen.

          A blond head appeared… line by line it drew a topless body standing at a roadside…. “hey, isn’t that Ted’s wife??” About then Ted comes waking by…… and the computer is so RAM starved that we can’t get the program to quit! We ended up cutting the monitor off at the last second before he rounded the corner.

          Yeesh. I’ll take “awkward workplace moments for $1,000″…..

          1. My first PC was a 486SX, also my first PC regret. Really should have gone in on the DX.

            Live and learn.

      4. *Throws out matching his-and-hers “I’m alt-right.” “<- I'm with stupid." t-shirts.*

      5. Well you guys get all butthurt when people notice the stark similarities in the alt right and fascism, so we soft pitch it as alt right. Would you prefer “proto-fascist”?

        what would your chosen term be for it? And isn’t objecting to labels so sjw-ish?

        1. Well you guys get all butthurt when people notice the stark similarities in the alt right and fascism, so we soft pitch it as alt right

          Who is the “you guys” and the “we” in this?

          1. You guys = alt right
            us = everyone else

            1. Your brushes may be a bit broad.

              1. Depends how broad you think the “alt right” label is. In my experience, that depends on who is using it. Like many categorical words, the left and right boundaries are up for debate.

                1. In my experience, that depends on who is using it.

                  What does that mean about your categories of “you guys” and “everyone else?”

                  1. I never stated those categories. And so we can quit this circular bit of tedium, I’ll quote the part you left off: “Like many categorical words, the left and right boundaries are up for debate.”

                    1. De Oppresso Liber
                      October.24.2019 at 3:21 pm
                      You guys = alt right
                      us = everyone else

                    2. You create a circular defense of your phrasing… and then tire of it.

                      Fuck off Jeff.

        2. Finally, baby jeffrey admits he is a retarded lefty by saying “we” here.

    2. The numbers assume only alt righters are watching these videos and not people who after hearing about them viewed them out of curiosity to see what the silliness is about

      1. Or
        Researcher: The average radio listener listens for eighteen minutes. The average Howard Stern fan listens for – are you ready for this? – an hour and twenty minutes.

        Pig Vomit: How can that be?

        Researcher: Answer most commonly given? “I want to see what he’ll say next.”

        Pig Vomit: Okay, fine. But what about the people who hate Stern?

        Researcher: Good point. The average Stern hater listens for two and a half hours a day.

        Pig Vomit: But… if they hate him, why do they listen?

        Researcher: Most common answer? “I want to see what he’ll say next.”

  4. There was also an article yesterday about how many of the Witnesses so far have strong ties to the Atlantic Council, a group heavily funded by Democrats and also funded by Burisma, the company at the center of the Ukranian issues regarding impeachment.

    Schiff has still refused to let even one witness be subpoenaed by the minority party, proving this is a partisan “investigation” while transcripts continue to be hidden from the public (yet witness statements formed in conjunction with democrats continue to be leaked).

    1. I can’t believe how many people I normally view as reasonable have been spouting opinions based just on the glimpses of testimony that Schiff has allowed them.

      1. Worse…media glimpses of the glimpses schiff allows.

        Also the number of people treating second and third hand testimony in which the witnesses state it was their opinion as fact.

        1. It was *bombshell* testimony, people.

          Bombshell!

          What do you expect after that? Of course people are on board! It was a bombshell!

      2. Everybody with a job that uses a computer opens up to Msnbc propaganda.

    2. Well, I remember what happened the last time the dems got together behind closed doors without adults in the room.
      ACA.

    3. (yet witness statements formed in conjunction with democrats continue to be leaked)

      When you build a boat with the intent to keep water out and a hole gets poked in it, it’s a leak. When you build a container around a hole to hold the water and let it out in a controlled manner, it’s a funnel.

      1. And when you just go ahead and put the water in a bunch of cups and hand it out while pointing at a really nice, empty and unused container…. that’s what we’ve actually got.

        (I was going to take it up from your “funnel” to a “filter”, but that’s insufficient. They’re spoon feeding a line and pretending that they are just letting the chips fall where they may. That’s not even filtering.)

      2. “Schiff squirts”

    4. Can you provide a link to the article?

        1. Thanks. I read a lot of it, but then had to admit I searched through it for terms like “witness”, “Taylor”, “impeachment” to try to find the part of the article that relates to JesseAZ’s claim, “many of the Witnesses so far have strong ties to the Atlantic Council”. Can you point me to the relevant part of the article (it’s rather long)?

          1. Mike.. you can Google Taylor’s full name with atlantic council and you will find it you retarded fuck. He has spoken at many of their conferences and been funded to write policy papers.

            How fucking dumb are some of you?

          2. I mean honest question for you dumbfuck…

            Did you even bother to try searching the atlantic council’s website?

            https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/why-ukraine-s-politicians-must-put-aside-partisanship-and-populism-now/

            It is like some of you pride yourself on how dumb you can be.

        2. And I should say, it was a very interesting article. Despite baseless and immature accusations that I’m a “Jeff” or liberal sock puppet, I’m not more of a fan of the Democrats than I am of the Republicans. It wouldn’t surprise me at all that there would be an organization that ties together the Bidens, arms contractors such as Raytheon, and other folks who want to get some cash from dealings with the Ukraine.

          1. I’ve only called you Jeff 2.0 because you use the same argument put of ignorance he does. Even when you are given a link you will immediately forget about it even in the same thread. You’re not intellectually serious.

  5. Munger and Phillips implore journalists and scholars studying social-media effects “to be much more explicit in deploying research designs that are capable of falsifying the strong Zombie Bite theory” of YouTube radicalization.

    For gosh sakes, reporters and academics, we’ve been pushing a three year narrative of taking on Russian trolls and now you want do a hard left and rebrand as zombie-fighters?

    1. Trolls and zombies. Sounds like a bunch of D&D nerds got together for the strategy session. So the counter-strategy would be push them down and take their lunch money.

  6. I’m sure if I sit here at zero comments, read the entire page, and then post, I will be first! Wait no…. drat!

  7. I thought you’d mention something about the ACLU deciding that free speech is an ancillary concern to fighting racism on campuses.

    1. Sounds interesting. Link?

    2. While the Brave Defenders of Free Minds and Free Markets at Reason were cheering the idea of UConn kicking students out of school for saying racist words, the lawyers at the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) were writing a kick-ass letter to the school telling them any punishment of these kids was clearly unconstitutional.

      http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/346312/

      Go read it. Six pages of awesome.

  8. …and there is no plausible center-right majority or plurality without the voters Trump activated.

    He is seemingly making inroads in reducing the regulatory burden.

    1. there is no plausible center-right majority or plurality without the voters Trump activated

      You need us, bitches!

      1. We don’t want you, though. Libertarians are perfectly used to losing for the sake of principle. Why do you think we’re so upset when they put up a non-libertarian for the candidacy and he did far better than we ever have before? If we cared more about winning than about the philosophy of government we’d be wearing a red or blue jersey and cheering wildly for the Impeachment games.

        1. No true libertarian would compromise with conservatives.

          Or liberals.

          Or other libertarians.

          Hell, no true libertarian would bother posting about it on…. Oh. Rats.

          1. I know, right? You have to wonder why we have a party at all.

            1. I was pretty sure it was so fat, middle-aged guys could show us what “embarrassing nudity” is at the national convention.

              But maybe I got that one wrong.

              1. I love that about the libertarians though. Sawark complains that we’re not “professional” which to me only seems like a plus, since if there’s one thing libertarians agree on, it’s that we absolutely hate professional politicians. Including our own!

                Seriously though, anyone who comes to us claiming that they deserve our votes because they’re our only hope of getting someone in who’ll make vague nods in the direction of our philosophy is barking up the wrong tree. The Tea Party was the closest we’ve gotten to doing that, and look how quickly those assholes bent the knee and licked the imperial cockring once they figured out the racists are more numerous than we are.

                I have a particular contempt for people who claim that I should knuckle under for the lesser evil. This country was founded by people with more outrage than good sense, who persisted well past the point of reason into severe frostbite, and won largely through dumb luck and sheer cussedness. If the system will ensure that my liberties get violated unless I “get with program” then it’s the system that should change, because I certainly won’t.

                1. “vague nods in the direction of our philosophy”

                  The basic philosophy is that there is no “our” so you’ve been tripped up by your own idea.

                  If I were to vote, it would certainly be against furthering socialism, against pushing for war, and against silencing dissenters.

    2. Yeah! Really enjoying the reversal of a decades long trend of air and water quality improving in the US. We libertarians will just have to explain to the families of the thousands of deaths caused every year by air pollution that their loved ones’ deaths were good for the Trump 2020 campaign. Promises kept!*

      *(no not the wall one)

      https://www.apnews.com/d3515b79af1246d08f7978f026c9092b

      1. From your article.

        “Scientists say that it is too early to see the effects of changes in environmental policy of the Trump administration, which took office in January 2017.”

        1. Too early to see, not too early to predict with high certainty. I know, I know, you don’t believe in science.

          1. Lol. Jeff claiming other people dont believe in science. God be is stupid.

    1. Depends. If they change the US tax code so that you can make purchases in bitcoin without owing capital gains (on purchases under $600, like euros or other foreign currency), I’d definitely think it’s on stronger footing. As it is now, the daily volume really doesn’t support its current price, and while I think it could be big in the future it’s hardly a sure (or even probable) thing yet.

  9. “the center-right remains the only coalition that has shown any receptiveness to checking government growth, and there is no plausible center-right majority or plurality without the voters Trump activated”

    No Shit. There’s dozens of people who have been saying that here for years but Reason can’t admit it because open borders and cocktail parties.

    1. But please continue to pump out pro CIA and FBI material because they hate Trump… it’s definitely not hurting your brand.

      1. Do you remember when you first switched from suspecting a globalist zionist conspiracy was behind everything to suspecting a secret cabal of bureaucrats was behind everything?

        1. “globalist zionist conspiracy”

          Not me, I’m fine with the jews. Also, deep state bureaucrats can also be globalists. What do you think the UN is?

          1. You don’t notice striking similarities between the deep state conspiracy theory and the (((globalists/zionists/illuminati))) conspiracy theory?

            I do; they seem like direct copies of each other with the character names changed.

            1. “Deep State” = the permanent bureaucracy that remains in place while elected officials cycle in and out over them, and that will always act to preserve itself apart from partisan politics.

              That there is such thing is indisputable.

              That left wingers invariably refer to it as “the deep state conspiracy theory” tells you more about them than it does about “the deep state.”

              And recognizing that there is a permanent bureaucracy that transcends partisan politics is not the same thing as thinking that the Illuminati is controlling world events.

              That you so easily conflate the two is symptomatic of why many here don’t feel you argue in good faith.

              1. But they are conflated. People on here don’t talk about the deep state as career bureaucrats, but as a cabal with hidden and shared intentions and conspiracy. The deep state is a secret group that is all powerful yet also stupid and weak, and can be used to blame any of Trump’s many failures on. Much like the Germans’ excuse, “If only the fuhrer knew about this!”

                1. People on here don’t talk about the deep state as career bureaucrats, but as a cabal with hidden and shared intentions and conspiracy.

                  Some people do.

                  Do you know this to be the case with Ryan?

                  Are you familiar with the notion that people who happen to have shared intentions can often look like they are working in concert with one another?

                  And do you really not see why jumping straight to “deep state conspiracy theory” and equating it with antisemitism may rub people the wrong way who might otherwise be trying to make a point that shouldn’t be dismissed quite so easily and with such character-smearing?

    2. The Center right and center left live in this fantasy world where you can somehow win elections without actual voters or with voters that exist only in their imaginations. It is like the “socially liberal fiscally conservative” voter both of them are always yapping about. If a significant minority much less a governing majority actually were that, we wouldn’t have a culture war or a 19 trillion dollar national debt.

      1. This is actually why I think compromising isn’t really in the best interests of the few that actually are. We’re not getting anywhere near the levers of power, unless we abandon our principles sufficiently to become just like the ones we oppose. It makes more sense to select someone based on their ability to express what libertarianism is about, in the hopes of winning a few over to our side.

        1. The only thing winning them over to “our side” gets is more commenters here pissed off about socialism and a president saying bad words

      2. “If a significant minority much less a governing majority actually were that, we wouldn’t have a culture war or a 19 trillion dollar national debt”

        There’s actually a way for Trump to win on both. If Trump would actually cut military spending rather than simply talk about pulling troops. I’d vote for him, and I imagine there would be some leftists that would too, they just wouldn’t tell anyone.

        1. The House controls the purse. Trump can’t cut military spending himself.

          All Trump can do is spend less by pulling troops from war zones, which are infinity more expensive than US bases. Pulling troops from overseas bases that are not war zones would also save a bundle. DoD bureaucrats get savvy with stuff like that and simply spend the allocated funds on new chairs, desks, computers, etc to keep operating numbers high for the next fiscal year.

          1. That’d be swell if he could pull it off.

  10. Florida Department of Law Enforcement officials are investigating the incident, and so far no one has been arrested…

    Evergreen statement.

  11. The president seems to think that Colorado shares a border with Mexico.

    We are all border states now.

    1. All 57 states. And as a proud denizen of America’s wang, my entire state is also in a border enforcement zone with reduced constitutional rights! So I’ve got that going for me….

  12. I think Google / Youtube should immediately ban any channel that argues against the Koch / Reason open borders agenda. They’re a private company so they can do what they want.

    1. They definitely can. I doubt it’d be good for business though – and in the end, isn’t that what Kochatariasm all about?

  13. Sen. Josh Hawley (R–Mo.) introduced a bill to move the majority of employees at 10 federal agencies out of D.C. and into economically suffering areas around the country.

    DC-level cost of living increases, here we come!

    1. Top level bureaucrats would do well to live more among those they regulate. If nothing else, they could get some prima nocta.

      1. Translation: Prime Nookie.

    2. Good news. Even in the toughest of times, these communities have an abundance of tar and feathers.

      1. The whining over this is hilarious. People are claiming on Twitter that you can’t expect these guys to move to Kansas City because there are no professional jobs there. They really are a bunch of dumb hicks with no idea what the rest of the world is actually like.

        1. I generally think of Hawley as a font of bad ideas but this is one I wholeheartedly support – though I think we should select the most miserable places to live in that we can find, so as to deter people from government service.

          On a serious note, though, we should be able to save some money on salaries if they pick places with low costs of living.

          1. Part of the problem is the perception that all these places in flyover land are ‘miserable.’ When really it’s all just a matter of personal tastes. Although, if you like nine months sweltering swampland followed by three months of freezing rain then Kansas City is probably not for you.

            What will be worst for the DC people forced to relocate is that they will finally have to learn how to live a tolerant life – living among a populace that largely doesn’t share their abiding love for an over weening state. Walking the walk being much harder than talking the talk.

            1. For the record, I grew up in KC and now live in Washington. The climates are nearly identical. The wind blows a bit more in KC and the thunderstorms are worse but that is about it.

              The cost of living and quality of life in KC is however much better than DC. I would be euphoric if my job moved to Kansas City.

          2. Or…. now, stay with me on this, because it’s gonna get complicated…. or, we could just, you know…. cut the size and scope of the government thereby reducing the overall number of employees.

            I know… crazy talk…

            But if we just had some kind of guiding document that would provide some limits to the scope of the federal government. A document that lays out a small and enumerated list of powers that the government can wield. And then we simply cut everything that doesn’t fit within that mandate…..

          3. I believe the administration had already started the process, so I don’t think it’s Hawley’s idea unless he gave it to Trump in the first place.

          4. So you’re saying we should find the most miserable places in the country…..and make them more miserable? I say we move them all to San Francisco.

            1. I say we move them all to San Francisco.

              But they have to live in tents.

              1. If we make sure not to pay them very much they’ll have to live in tents anyways, since SF sure isn’t going to allow any new housing to get built.

  14. “the center-right remains the only coalition that has shown any receptiveness to checking government growth, and there is no plausible center-right majority or plurality without the voters Trump activated”

    “Conservatism is progressivism driving the speed limit” – MM

  15. Congress wants to change cruelty to animals from an issue for local police and animal welfare authorities to something investigated by the FBI and prosecuted in federal courts.

    Thanks to the Interstate Commerce Claws.

        1. I had to google ‘bifrost’ so I’m going to call that one “over my head”.

    1. This is my fault.

      When I was in 2nd grade I wrote a letter to Pres. Ford about making a law because someone threw rocks at my dog.

      I’m sure it’s been winding it’s way thru committee since

  16. Floridians are protesting a prison guard’s severe beating of an inmate.

    Shawshank is in Florida?

    1. He asked the guard if he trusted his wife.

  17. Ideas are infectious — unfortunately, progressives interpret this literally.

    Nevertheless, since ideas are literally viral, it is therefore the responsibility of government, and society in general, to put an end to the contagion – excepting, of course, progressive ideas, which are not only not viral, but appealing, accurate reflections of reality.

    Consequently, expect vicious reprisals against Munger and Phillips for publishing their dangerous study; all loyal citizens of good conscience should understand that it serves as nothing more than a misguided (perhaps, evil) springboard to undermine public health. And, to be sure, there can be no doubt that the Russians somewhere be involved in the dissemination of this vituperative “dezinformatsiya.”

  18. Anti-sex-work activist and author Rachel Moran is suing for defamation over social media claims that she never actually was a street-based sex worker in Ireland.

    She and Nunes should team up.

    1. O brave new world, when women sue people who say they *weren’t* prostitutes.

      1. Reminds me of that episode of Bloom County where the lead singer of Deathtongue, Bill the Cat, was caught reading the Bible with a former nun.

        His angry denial was “We partied! I swear! She’s a tart!”

    2. Nunes sued over negligence. Claim is twitter was negligent in enforcing their TOS.

  19. The Federal Highway Administration is pressuring Ames, Iowa, to get rid of rainbow-colored crosswalks.

    They become too slippery due to bifrost.

  20. More bad economic news.

    Charles Koch current net worth: $60.2 billion

    Oh great, he’s above sixty billion again. And within a few days he’ll fall back down into the fifty-eight to fifty-nine billion range.

    Our. Billionaire. Benefactor. Cannot. Prosper. Without. Highly. Skilled. Doctors. And. Engineers. Crossing. Our. Border. With. Mexico.

    #HowLongMustCharlesKochSuffer?

    1. He should get a better financial planner. All his better billionaire brothers are doing incredibly well. In fact it’s going so good Bernie took millionaires off his endangered species list.

  21. So the Democrats were having their “impeachment hearings” in a fucking SCIF. They are now are claiming the Republicans are guilty of treason!! for barging in.

    This shit is beyond parody.

    1. I was wondering why they’d need a secure facility…for testimony. And the Washington Examiner is hopping mad…that Republicans didn’t just roll over.

      “Conservative media”.

      As an aside, I doubt we’ll see more Harsanyi here. Going to National Review to, God willing, clean that shit storm up.

      1. Also, and this is just a coincidence, Amb Taylor met with a Schiff staffer during an event paid for by the Atlantic Council back on 8/25.

        Again, I’m sure it’s just a coincidence. Just seems weird how many leakers have talked to Schiff before all of these leaks…

        1. Watch put, Mike Laursen will ask you how to google that.

      2. I doubt we’ll see more Harsanyi here

        Have we seen Harsanyi here since he went over to The Federalist?

    2. The funniest thing was them crying about the texting from within the SCIF, and some of the Rs doing a “tweet by staff” revision afterwards to try and avoid getting in trouble.

      The Rs should have just responded that, since there’s nothing about this investigation that warrants classification, tweeting from the SCIF is irrelevant anyways. No one was ever going to lose their clearance over this.

      The Dems would be pulling the same shit if the Rs were trying this stunt, so it’s all just kabuki theater to give the Blue Checkmark Morons something to whinge about.

    3. You mean the republicans who already had access to the hearings, but can’t defend the substance of the argument so they are going after the process instead?

      https://www.axios.com/house-republicans-scif-impeachment-inquiry-67cf94d5-b2be-4420-ab4c-0582eb1369ef.html

      1. For fuck sakes dumbfuck Jeff. Schiff is only allowing members from 2 committees in. He is not letting reps from the judiciary in. Stop being so fucking stupid.

  22. “Sen. Josh Hawley (R–Mo.) introduced a bill to move the majority of employees at 10 federal agencies out of D.C. and into economically suffering areas around the country.”

    This has been a theory bandied about by libertarians for decades and needs to be done. Stop the cultural infestation of D.C. on workers. D.c. is a corrupt shithole. Moving departments to be around the country in different cultural centers may help d.c. represent the actual country just a tiny bit more.

    1. It’s a good idea provided they don’t overwhelm the native population. While were at it we should remove the congress from D.C. too. They should either teleconference from their home districts or meet under a circus tent that must travel to a different state each session. Plenty of bargains to be had from Ringling Brothers.

      1. The call to send in the clowns might produce some confusion, though.

  23. “We don’t know whether the number of worlds is finite or infinite, but it’s certainly a very large number. There’s no way it’s, like, five,”

    Five is, like, like, a large number.

  24. …a group of municipal law makers affirmatively banded together in agreement over the decision to jail 13 year olds up to 6 mos for over-age trick-or-treating?

    Looks like next Halloween this trick-or-treater…

    [dons sunglasses]

    …will be dressing up as an ex-con.

    1. Virginia, no less.
      Birthplace of the American revolution against Great Britain, Mother of Presidents, leader in individual freedoms.
      Then they began electing democrats.

      1. Virginia’s fault for being too close to D.C.

      2. While the blue infestations, due to the proximity of DC, have made Virginia worse of late the state has been surprisingly (for the birthplace of American liberty) authoritarian since long before that shift.

  25. Happy Halloween!

    Triggered. I’m literally shaking.

  26. http://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/10/24/james-younger-luna-transgender-greg-abbott/

    Has the country or at least part of it really gone so insane that we can no longer agree that the parent of a seven year old child should not be allowed to mutilate him with puberty blocking drugs?

    If adults want to mutilate themselves that is a question of personal autonomy and their right. But a society that does such things to children is a society that has gone insane.

    1. What is wrong with people?

      1. I really don’t know. I can’t believe a judge and jury would allow this. If I were that kid’s dad, I would head off with my son to some country with no extradition treaty with the US and tell these people to fuck off. This is just horrifying.

        1. Its the new Eugenics. It wouldn’t surprise me if they start making all kids do this to be woke to the problems that opposites face

          1. How long before some school counselor decides a kid is really the other gender and the state subjects them to this over the objection of the parents? It wouldn’t surprise me if that hasn’t already happened in the UK or Europe.

    2. The court didn’t just allow this, they mandated it.

      And yet, your children can be taken from you if they walk to school alone.

        1. My divorce decree said I’d consult my ex on issues involving our child, but I’d have the final say.

          Thank God I went that route.

    3. mutilate him

      *gender-affirming care

      1. Excuse me. Where are my manners?

        *gender-affirming care for them

  27. “The “ACCESS Act” serves as another reminder that Josh Hawley “seems to think he should be appointed the product manager for the internet.””

    Should I find it weird that Reason didnt mention the other two authors, Blumenthal and Warner? Why were they left off the condemnation?

    1. Narrative Uber Alles.

    2. Should I find it weird that Reason didnt mention the other two authors, Blumenthal and Warner?

      Not at all. It was deliberate. When it passes and turns out to be a good thing, Reason can applaud Blumenthal and Warner for saving us from that idiot Hawley.

      Their fawning and supplication will be a thing of beauty

    3. Blumenthal and Warner are die-hard authoritarians. Not sure it hurts Hawley to not be mentioned in the same sentence as those two jackasses.

  28. Fuck that ‘awaiting moderation’:
    Natural gas is the fossil fuel with the least emissions, and with fracking becoming into wide-spread use, it’s getting downright cheap:

    “10 Democratic candidates would ban fracking. Here are the others who won’t.”
    ( the ones that won’t will regulate the hell out of it)
    https://www.nationofchange.org/2019/06/05/10-democratic-candidates-would-ban-fracking-here-are-the-others-who-wont/

    1. Meanwhile, that evil orange guy wants people to make money, darn him:

      “President Trump embraces natural gas industry in Pa. campaign visit”
      https://www.lehighvalleylive.com/business/2019/10/president-trump-embraces-natural-gas-industry-in-pa-campaign-visit.html

    2. Fracking means we no longer have to worry about the stability in the Middle East. How anyone who objects to US interventions in the Middle East can then object to fracking is beyond me.

      1. Getting off Mid East Oil has been the wet dream since the 70’s.

        1. And with good reason. I hear people complaining that China and Russia are now the dominant players in the Middle East. How is that a bad thing? Russia is the one who depends on oil to keep from starving. China’s entire economy now depends on middle eastern oil like ours did in the 1970s. Meanwhile thanks to fracking we have our own oil and don’t have to care. Let them have it. I wish them luck.

          1. Wouldn’t it nice to have power over something China and Russia depend upon?

            1. We do. It is called our market. And I thought going to war for oil was a bad thing? Or did that go out with Bush?

              We don’t need to be involved in a quagmire that will do nothing but make us hated, kill our soldiers and drive us broke. Even you are not stupid enough to try and make the case for US involvement in wars in the Middle East.

              1. The Left’s anti-war sentiments, at any given time, are contingent upon the party affiliation of the president.

                1. They love to go to war and then immediately turn on the war and ensure the US can’t win it and they profit politically from the war being unpopular.

            2. Wouldn’t it nice to have power over something China and Russia depend upon?

              Sacrificing American lives to take the lives of Middle Eastern dissenters so that we can control the lives of Russians and Chinamen is a pretty fucked up world view.

              Wouldn’t it be nice to have power over something China and Russia depended upon and it wasn’t a material good that required us to invade and occupy a subcontinent?

              1. You mean well but you’re confused. We want leverage over the govts in Russia and China. It’s not about controlling the lives of the people of Russia or China. Those people are under the control of authoritarian regimes.

                1. “”We want leverage over the govts in Russia and China.””

                  How?

                  1. John said, “Russia depends on oil to keep from starving” … and “China’s entire economy now depends on middle eastern oil” so let them have unfettered influence over that region.

                    1. So . . . you want to take control of the government of Russia by stealing other people’s resources so you can starve the Russian people?

                      What is your end goal with this?

            3. Wouldn’t it nice to have power over something China and Russia depend upon?

              So, you’re going with “Kick Their Ass and Take Their Gas?”

          2. And as long we’re tied up with Israel you deluding yourself if you think we’ve washed our hands of the region.

            1. Israel defends itself just fine. And we can guarantee its security without going to war in Syria.

              Try again only next time without the anti Semitism.

              1. It’s not antisemitic to recognize that we are deeply involved in ensuring Israel is well defended and prosperous. We had a chance to cultivate a similar alliance with the Kurds who are perfect for countering Islamic fundamentalism in the region…

                1. The Kurds are distinctly pro-Iranian.

                  1. They certainly are now.

                  2. The Kurds are distinctly pro-Iranian.

                    No, they’re not. They’ve been resisting Iranian domination for centuries.

                2. The Kurds are *perfect* for countering Islamic fundamentalism? How can you say this with a straight face? The Kurds are splintered but among them are some of the most incessant Islamic fundamentalists in the Middle East, with a touch of cultural supremacy to boot. Ansar al-Islam, for the record, fought *with* ISIS and, before that, affiliated with Al-Qaeda. The Kurdistan Islamic Movement, moreover, is basically an arm of the Iranian regime.

                  Relying on militant Muslims to counter Islamic fundamentalism is a bizarre proposition, to say the least.

                  1. If you have ever been to Kurdish controlled areas, you would know how wrong you are. There are radical splinter movements within them, just as there are radical abortion clinic bombers among American Christians, but Kurdistan is the most liberal area among all their neighbors, Turkey included. Women do not cover their heads, alcohol is prevalent, western music and movies are popular, and Christians are well respected and hold large minorities in Kurdish cities.

                    1. I have not seen John say the Kurds are radical islamists. And if he does say that, then he is lying or mistaken badly.

                    2. A good number of the Kurds are radical Islamists. Some are not but some are. They are not all one thing. A lot of what you hear about Kurds are from military people who dealt with the Iraqi Kurds. They are very western and generally not radical muslims. But even they are guilty of some pretty hideous things in their treatment of Arabs, Turks and Christians.

                      There are no good guys over there. There are just degrees of bad and innocent victims.

                    3. Thanks, John. My experience is limited to Iraqi Kurds professionally, although I met a few Kurds in Turkey too. The Iraqi Kurds are very suspicious (for good reason I think) of Arabs. I did not see mistreatment of Christians, though. I lived for a while in a Christian neighborhood of Erbil. They were quite prosperous, and our Muslim and Christian Kurdish translators seemed to like each other just fine. The Christian interpreter was quite eager to emigrate, though.

                      What brought you to the region?

                    4. Jeff’s geopolitical insight is what he gained on a 1 week vacation where he hired a translator. Hilarious. Fucking hilarious.

                  2. The Kurds are splintered but among them are some of the most incessant Islamic fundamentalists in the Middle East

                    This is true. The weird thing about the Kurds is that it’s a group made up of individual people who have broad differences of opinions about things.

                    In fairness, Pod is doing what most everyone in this country is doing which is identifying the SDF and the YPG with “The Kurds,” because people have heard of “The Kurds” and feel like they’re supposed to be sympathizing with them; but when Pod says “The Kurds,” what he means is the SDF, which does have a pretty good track record of putting their money where their mouths are as far as fighting Islamists.

                3. We had a chance to cultivate a similar alliance with the Kurds who are perfect for countering Islamic fundamentalism in the region…

                  LOL, fucking please. The PKK are commies, so you’d nominally have a point there, but the rest are dedicated Muslims who couldn’t care less about distinctions of “fundamentalism.”

                  Stop parroting shit that you heard on NPR last week.

                  1. I think you should stop parroting shit you read on breitbart.

                    Kurds are the least religious ethnic group in the area. That’s part of ISIS’s beef with them. There are large churches and Christian communities in Kurdish cities. The Christians tend to be better educated and make more money than most Kurds. They are not oppressed by Muslim Kurds. You can get alcohol and cigarettes everywhere, and women do not cover themselves. They are not fundamentalists by any stretch. You claim that they are is rank ignorance.

                    PKK are communist second, nationalists first. In practice, Kurds prefer Rojava anarchism (in N. Syria) or representative republicanism (as in northern Iraq), which is not communism.

                    1. Cite the exact sentence where I said they were fundamentalists. If you knew how to read, I pointed out that they couldn’t give two shits about the distinctions, because that’s a neocons argument.

                      As for your claim that the Kurds were targeted by ISIS because they weren’t Islamic enough, guess what– ISIS targeted everyone whom they thought wasn’t Islamic enough. The Kurds are hardly special in that regard.

                    2. The funniest parts of your argument were the claim that they are the “least religious group” and citing cigarette sales as some indication of resistance against Islam.

                      Someone who claims to have served alongside Kurds ought to know that the vast majority of Kurds are Sunni Muslim, especially in Iraq, and people throughout the ME smoke like chimneys. You seem to equate “religious” with “intolerant,” which is quite a tell all by itself.

                    3. The funniest parts of your argument were the claim that they are the “least religious group” and citing cigarette sales as some indication of resistance against Islam.

                      Well, in the Arab world, “least religious group” is a pretty low bar to clear.

                      What’s distinctive about the SDF is that, contrary to its portrayal in Western media, it does not represent “The Kurds,” and in fact includes Syrian Christian groups.

                    4. What’s distinctive about the SDF is that, contrary to its portrayal in Western media, it does not represent “The Kurds,” and in fact includes Syrian Christian groups.

                      Well, the majority of them are Kurds, but you’re correct, there’s a significant number of Syrian Arabs included in that group as well. The media just says “Kurds” as a catch-all because the American public’s ADD apparently won’t allow them to fathom the complex ethnic/religious/tribal rivalries in that region.

                    5. Religion, especially as practiced that region, is equivalent to intolerance. And yes, the Kurds are the least religious ethnic group in the region. And yes, that is a low bar to clear. There are a lot of Kurdish Christians, too. (They subgroup themselves as “Assyrian” and speak Aramaic as well as Kurdish.)

                    6. The media just says “Kurds” as a catch-all because the American public’s ADD apparently won’t allow them to fathom the complex ethnic/religious/tribal rivalries in that region.

                      Yes – which is annoying, because it leads most people into a conversation about something far removed from what’s actually happening in the real world.

                    7. There are a lot of Kurdish Christians, too. (They subgroup themselves as “Assyrian” and speak Aramaic as well as Kurdish.)

                      The Assyrians are not Kurds. The Assyrians are Assyrians, and have inhabited the region since it was Assyria. The Kurds are a non-Persian Iranian people not so different from Armenians and Azerbaijanis who came into the area many centuries after the fall of the Assyrian Empire. The Assyrians, and the Syriac language, OTOH, are Semitic and are closely related to Arabic and Hebrew.

                    8. “The Assyrians are not Kurds.”

                      Strictly speaking, you’re right. I was simplifying, but I should not underestimate the audience here, it seems.

                      They choose to live among Kurds rather than Arabs, are allowed to travel in Kurdish territory unescorted (Arabs and most foreigners require escort to travel through Kurdish Iraq), and get all the same rights as Kurds in Kurdish territory. Kurds and Assyrians have been almost 100% aligned and 100% allied since 1990’s.

                    9. Religion, especially as practiced that region, is equivalent to intolerance.

                      That’s mighty white of you.

                  2. Oh, and Red Rocks, just wanted to clear up a little point from yesterday: Yes, you did wish for my death. Yes, you are letting your emotions get a hold of you. No, you are not a patriot or even a decent person, it seems.

                    Red Rocks White Privilege
                    October.23.2019 at 5:42 pm
                    Too bad you weren’t actually killed with the Kurds you claimed to have fought alongside, the world’s collective IQ would have skyrocketed a full degree.

                    1. Sorry not sorry.

                      I believe you said this as well.

                    2. I said that about shifting cultural norms, not your death. At least be honest, if only once.

                    3. I said that about shifting cultural norms, not your death. At least be honest, if only once.

                      Funny how you went from “Sorry not sorry” and “U mad, bro?” to damseling like a bitch all of a sudden.

                      Don’t clap along with the Rev’s eliminationist rhetoric and then act all wounded when someone decides to throw that back in your face.

        2. “Getting off Mid East Oil has been the wet dream since the 70’s.”

          Hey remember back during the Obama administration when he was barring fracking/exploration on US public lands while all of his Democrat party cronies & crony kids were cutting lucrative deals with Russian and Ukrainian gas and oil companies?

          I suppose that was a form of ‘getting off mid east oil’ just not so much a means of getting energy independent.

      2. As Instapundit said, the Middle East is in turmoil and oil prices are…stable.

        Thank fracking for that.

        1. Nancy Pelosi is currently on a piece mission to the Middle east.
          She’s trying to get a piece for her old man,
          a piece for her son,
          a piece for her old age
          and for old time sake’s a piece for Hunter Biden.

          1. But when Kushner goes to the ME he’s really doing it for peace, right?
            Not for a piece of debt forgiveness from the Qataris,
            a piece of investment from the Israelis
            etc.

    1. This seems a good satire space to mention a recent Titania Mcgrath tweet. Methinks perhaps “its” best one ever.

      “Misogynists always claim that men are better than women at sports.
      But if that’s the case, how come cyclist Rachel McKinnon only started winning gold medals *after* she transitioned?”

    2. He’s also now saying that, under his health insurance plan, if you like your policy, you can keep your policy.

      Man, that sounds great!

      I wonder why we’ve never heard that before.

  29. So, for these studies, they seem to be working on the opinion that any point of view to the right of “liberal” is extremist, abnormal, and wrong. Wouldn’t that call into question the rest of their research as well?

    1. Also, since when is being exposed to something the same as endorsing it. Reading Mein Kopf doesn’t make you a Nazi. Reading the Communist Manifesto doesn’t make you a communist.

      The underlying assumption of the entire thing seems to be that being exposed to bad ideas is a bad thing. That doesn’t seem like an attitude that is very conducive to freedom.

      1. Also, since when is being exposed to something the same as endorsing it.

        I don’t know how many times I was accused of being anti-American for pointing out that blowing up wedding receptions with missiles launched from drones isn’t a good way to make friends. Looking at things from other points of view is the same as agreeing with those points of view. Other points of view are to be attacked, not understood.

      2. I tried reading Mein Kampf, and just couldn’t. It was too damn tedious. The Communist Manifesto was equally tedious but much more interesting, if only because it made me recognize just how much it has pervaded modern thought. People who are expressed anti-communists often unwittingly spouting Marxist cant.

        1. Mein Kampf is unreadable. Maybe it is snappier in German but in English it is awful. The Communist Manifesto is short and fairly entertaining. Some of the points he makes about money corrupting the trades and professional classes is actually pretty prescient. Everything else Marx and Engles wrote is awful. I refuse to believe anyone who wasn’t insane ever read that stuff.

          1. Sad thing is…Mein Kampf was trimmed down A LOT from the original draft. Which terrifies me because, as a professor said, there isn’t a point that can be made once that Hitler didn’t try to make at least a dozen times.

              1. Rand’s essays are fabulous. Its her novels that are the problem. I think she is the best essayist of the 20th Century, better than Orwell. Her essays on the post war left are the best criticisms of the left I have ever read.

            1. there isn’t a point that can be made once that Hitler didn’t try to make at least a dozen times

              That’s the effect of committing to an ideology and trying to convince yourself that it’s true while batting aside counterpoints and contrary evidence. It’s the same reason Das Kapital is so long and keeps making the same points over and over and over.

              And to echo Juice, I would say the same thing about Atlas Shrugged – she’s trying to reconcile incompatible ideas, which is why she just can’t reach a satisfying “The End.”

    2. Sociological studies are notoriously bad. They aren’t repeatable, mostly, and bias is strong. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis

    3. Methodology is important for every study. They use these labels without definition or examples. I’m still baffled that the media constantly talks about the “far right” without substantiating what makes them far from the center. Meanwhile, Democrats pushing authoritarian socialist policies don’t receive a fringe and dangerous label. Oddly, many proponents of socialism are given the label of “moderate.”
      We need an honest discussion of definitions and Reason intentionally avoids them because they are leftists

  30. For those who’ve been distracted by other issues, President Trump announced yesterday that Turkey had informed him that they were making the U.S. negotiated ceasefire in Syria permanent. Thus, he’s lifting the sanctions he’d imposed–so long as Turkey abides by the agreement.

    As part of that announcement, Trump made a statement that really, really, really needs to be highlighted:

    “When we commit American troops to battle, we must do so only when a vital national interest is at stake, and when we have a clear objective, a plan for victory, and a path out of conflict. That’s what we have to have . . . . The job of our military is not to police the world. Other nations must step up and do their fair share. That hasn’t taken place. “

    —-President Trump

    October 23, 2019

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-situation-northern-syria/

    Take that statement and compare it to Powell’s version of the Powell-Weinberger Doctrine:

    1. Is a vital national security interest threatened?
    2. Do we have a clear attainable objective?
    3. Have the risks and costs been fully and frankly analyzed?
    4. Have all other non-violent policy means been fully exhausted?
    5. Is there a plausible exit strategy to avoid endless entanglement?
    6. Have the consequences of our action been fully considered?
    7. Is the action supported by the American people?
    8. Do we have genuine broad international support?

    Those who say that there are no guiding principles to President Trump’s foreign policy are either ignorant or dishonest. Mistakes have been made in the past, and presidents never lived by the guidelines of the Powell-Weinberger Doctrine absolutely, but these were the operating guidelines of American foreign policy from when Reagan was elected in 1980 right up until George W. Bush was elected.

    The reason we withdrew from Lebanon in 1982 was because staying there and doubling down would have failed the guidelines of the Powell-Weinberger Doctrine.

    The reason we didn’t occupy Iraq and overthrow its government in 1991 was because doing so failed the guidelines of the Powell-Weinberger Doctrine.

    Because it failed the guidelines of the Powell-Weinberger Doctrine was an excellent reason not to invade Rwanda in 1994.

    The reason we occupied Iraq and overthrew its government in 2003 was because the neocons took over–and that meant tearing up the Weinberger Doctrine and throwing it in the trash.

    When you see someone claim that President Trump’s foreign policy has no guiding principles, understand that you’re dealing with someone who simply doesn’t like the guiding principles of Trump’s foreign policy. The neocons have completely different principles. They’d invade foreign countries to project American values and American power for the same reason progressives invade the poor neighborhoods of our cities with police to fight the Drug War. That isn’t Trump’s guiding principle. Trump’s guiding principle is to put American interests over the interests of the Kurds. This is what is actually meant by putting “America First”.

    Right now Trump is negotiating with the Taliban to leave Afghanistan–something the neocons would never do. If it’s in America’s best interests to leave Afghanistan (and honest people can disagree about what’s in our best interests), then we should leave Afghanistan–even if that isn’t in someone else’s best interests.

    1. Contrast that with this piece of lunacy

      http://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/17/opinion/trump-mcraven-syria-military.html

      McRaven sums up the view of the entire defense and foriegn policy establishment. They see the US government’s duty to go out and save the world and protect freedom and establish democracy regardless of whether the American public is interested in that and regardless if doing so is in the country’s interests.

      Read McRaven’s oped and your link and it is easy to see why the establishment hates Trump so much.

      1. McRaven is a hammer. Perpetually in search of nails.

        1. It is remarkable someone that divorced from reality could have risen so to such a position of authority. He actually says people join the military to do good overseas. WTF? How could anyone possibly believe such bullshit?

          1. Military officers tend to take their rank and privileges to heart.

            McRaven is an elite among military officers. He is also a reason why special forces officers probably should never be senior officers.

            This guy thinks special forces operations can solve all America’s problems.

            Special forces have their roles but without air support and bases from which to operate, modern special forces are not as decisive a force multiplier as people think. 5 Americans were killed and 8 wounded during the Tongo Tongo Ambush in Niger. Americans found themselves in a fire-fight with militants with no other support and lost.

            1. Hollywood has given the impression that SOF guys are super-warriors. They are indeed highly skilled, but their success depends a great deal on having robust back-line logistical and fire support.

              The guys in Syria would have been annihilated without carrier sorties and CAS support from nearby bases.

      2. After the Iraq debacle, I argue that if something isn’t worth sending a million troops to deal with, it’s not more worth sending 1 to.

        We get engaged in idiotic conflicts…and then try to fight them on the cheap. That’s the worst possible combination.

        1. I think it is about our willingness to kill and die for something. If a cause isn’t worth dying for, then how is it worth killing for? Our total aversion to casualties has caused us to go to war in half assed ways without a full understanding and willingness to do what is necessary to win.

          If you are not angry enough to take significant casualties in a war, you are unlikely to be angry enough to take the kinds of nasty measures to win a war. For example, consider World War II. There were angry enough to accept 250,000 dead if that is what it took to win. That also meant we were willing to flatten both Japan and Germany and inflict millions of casualties. The more you are willing to suffer, the more you are willing to do what is necessary to win. These half assed “we can just bomb for a while and never take any casualties or make any sacrifice” wars never work out well.

          1. Hell, D-Day invasion “practice” led to hundreds of deaths.

            Only way to win a war is with overwhelming power. Multiples more bodies than the enemy has. We haven’t been involved in an existential war since the 40’s so we have no concept of such a war any longer.

          2. That and moving our military to only high tech weapons is a mistake. At this rate, all the drones and “smart weapons” will destroy all the other “smart weapons” and we will be left with nothing but stick and rocks to hurl at each other.

            After all the drones and vehicles have run out of fuel, you still need reliable weapons to shoot at your enemies.

      3. The irony is that I’m currently reading an Air Force-related article which compares and contrasts our military actions in Kosovo vs. Libya precisely along those lines.

        What’s even more ironic is that the Obama administration didn’t want to get US troops involved in Syria at all. We didn’t do so until the siege of Kobani, and only then after a full-court press by the media to stop a supposed genocide from taking place (never mind that the Kurds were getting reinforcements from their cousins in Iraq that allowed them to stop ISIS cold, even with all the heavy equipment ISIS was deploying). Kerry and his spokesman made it very clear at the time that getting involved their was not in the US’s strategic interest, and it’s clear now precisely why they said it–because they didn’t want to get caught in another tar-baby ME war with no clear baseline for exit.

      4. Quote the McRaven,”Forever War”.

    2. +100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

    3. Those who say that there are no guiding principles to President Trump’s foreign policy are either ignorant or dishonest.

      Or we’re aware that Trump says all kinds of shit he doesn’t mean. How many goddamn times are you going to jerk off over Trump’s “bringing the troops home” bullshit before you figure out that he’s not actually bringing them home? Where’s our vital national interest in Syria and Saudi Arabia and Iraq and Afghanistan? What’s our objective, our plan for victory, our exit plan? Oh, Trump’s “negotiating” with the Taliban to get out of Afghanistan? Why the hell does the Taliban have any say over whether or not we leave? Why are we shifting troops from Syria to Iraq and sending more military to Saudi Arabia? I get it, I’m too ignorant to understand 7D Wizard Chess and too dishonest to admit my ignorance, but it makes it pretty goddamn hard to follow the game when nobody can tell me when we’re supposed to take Trump seriously and when we’re supposed to take him literally and when we’re supposed to laugh at his trolling while he’s stigginit to the libs.

      1. So having troops out of a war zone but not in the US is no better than having them in a war zone? Really?

        Who gives a shit that they are in Saudi Arabia? Are they getting shot at there and coming home in body bags? Not last I looked. If you want them home from there, good for you. But, that doesn’t make getting them out of Syria any less of a good thing.

        You know you would be a lot more persuasive if you didn’t try to die on every possible hill because “Orange Man Bad”. Try being less of a dumb ass. Things will work better for you.

        1. Having troops in Saudi Arabia was the main reason for Al Qaeda to perpetrate 9/11. That’s one good reason to give a shit.

          And those troops in Syria are moving to Iraq where they will continue to engage in combat ops. Trump doesn’t care about the troops; he has demonstrated this repeatedly. https://time.com/5705653/troops-syria-iraq/

          1. So you want to pander to Muslim bigotry?

            1. If you want to do stupid things just to prove to people you’ll do stupid things no matter the cost because you can, instead of getting behind putting American security at risk for no good reason, maybe you should consider taking up skateboarding or something instead.

              If stationing troops within Saudi Arabia is not in our best interests, then we should withdraw them from Saudi Arabia–no matter the reason it isn’t in our best interests. If you have a good argument for why we should keep our troops stationed in Saudi Arabia–until 1.2 billion Muslims stop being Muslims?–then you should share that argument.

              You know arguments. They start with premises, cite facts, and use logic.

          2. I oppose putting troops in Saudi Arabia for that reason, but let’s not run around too far with the goalposts. Even if stationing troops in Saudi Arabia is a bad idea, withdrawing them from a quagmire to a country where the government is happy to have them there is a big improvement. It’s like the difference between invading Iraq or not invading Iraq.

      2. “Where’s our vital national interest in Syria and Saudi Arabia and Iraq and Afghanistan?”

        We’re effectively withdrawing from Syria.

        Our vital national interest in Saudi Arabia is to counter the very real security threat that is Iran.

        I opposed invading Iraq–and Trump has called it a mistake himself. I’m all for a strategic withdrawal from Iraq. I believe Donald Trump is, too. I suspect he’s concerned about the security threat ISIS poses.

        Afghanistan is a strategic threat because the acting government of Afghanistan, the Taliban, coordinated with a terrorist organization to attack our civilians on 9/11.

        That you didn’t know we had any interests these places is amazing. I suspect you’re just feigning ignorance. I’d hate to think you were really so uninformed as to not know that the Taliban was coordinated with Al Qaeda.

        Am I supposed to find your feigned ignorance persuasive? It isn’t persuasive. It just makes people think you’re willfully obtuse.

    4. Ken, I love your comments, so thank you for this. I agree with the content of Trump’s speach you quoted, as well.

      I do not think that the recent decision in Syria was made using doctrine or guiding principles, however. The timing of the decision and the very messy fall out that could have been addressed seem to undermine your thesis.

      1. “The timing of the decision and the very messy fall out that could have been addressed seem to undermine your thesis.”

        The logic Trump cited has been his guiding principles since before he became President. He campaigned on working with Putin in Syria precisely the way he did. That’s why neocons like John McCain hated him.

        And I have no idea what you’re talking about with the timing or messy fallout.

        Messy fallout? South Vietnamese swarming our embassy to try to squeeze onto the last American helicopters leaving Saigon for fear of being massacred by the invading North Vietnamese is messy fall out. Waves of South Vietnamese taking to the seas to brave weather, starvation, and pirates–rather than live in the mess we left behind–that’s messy fallout. If the fallout we’ve seen over our withdrawing troops has already been as bad as it will get, then this is about as good a withdrawal as we could hope for–without messy fallout.

  31. > The president seems to think that Colorado shares a border with Mexico.

    Once again (t)Reason is bashing the president. It’s traitorous. The Colorado River flows to Mexico, or at least it would if the libruhls in California didn’t siphon off the water before it got there. Stop blaming Trump for Colorado when you should be praising him for saving you from the Hillary Gulag.

    1. And Obama thought there were 57 states. It is great fun to ridicule politicians for speaking gaffes. It is one of the fruits of living in a free society. But, gaffes are just that, gaffes and nothing more.

      1. here they’re clickbait

        1. Unless you do not know what Aleppo is.

      2. So now you’re defending Obama? Because I know you can’t possibly be suggesting that Trump made a gaffe.

        1. They both made gaffes. Every politician does. It was fun to torture liberals with his 57 states gaffe but no I don’t think Obama actually thought there were 57 states.

          So, yes I am defending Obama. Why do you have a problem with that? Does the truth bother you that much?

    2. Well, technically Colorado does border Mexico- New Mexico that is.

      I have been throwing that in Lefty’s faces all day.

  32. I honestly wish someone would provide clear definitions of these terms. It’s been how many years and we never get a straight answer. Alt-right, alt-right adjacent, alt-lite. Are they beers or political alliances? Of course, lazy ass journalists will say, “You can look that up.” If we have to look up everything, why do we need you?

    1. ” Alt-right, alt-right adjacent, alt-lite. Are they beers or political alliances?”

      Any time you see such language merely substitute the phrase “not us” and clarity will ensue.

    2. Indeed. I’ve seen Shapiro called “alt right” and he is anything but. Until the researchers provide a good definition of “alt right”, their research is meaningless.

      1. Shapiro is just a Conservative Inc putz. There is nothing alt right about him. The fact that people call him that shows how stupid Libertarians and conservatives who think Progs can be reasoned with are. If Shapiro is alt right, we all are alt right.

        1. Hell, they’ve called Dave Rubin alt right. He’s a fucking leftie.

        2. Well I think the point is you are consuming a non-approved idea ergo you are alt-right. Has nothing to do with Shapiro. That Nazi bastard is just as non-approved as anything else.

          And don’t take “non-approved” to mean that consuming only “approved” ideas puts you in the clear. The status of approval can and does change on a daily basis lest one of you schlubs gets too big for your britches and tries to rub our face in our own hypocrisy.

          —The (liberal) Manage… err… Peopleagememt

    3. You are on an alt-right adjacent site now

      1. I’m assuming you mean the comment section.

        1. nobody knows what anybody means … alt is nothing.

        2. The editors support reducing the size of the federal government so they’re alt-right too. It’s why they mostly talk about how bad Trump is and why borders are useless

    4. It just means “racist”.

      “Racist” just means “shut up”.

  33. On YouTube, “viewership of far-right videos peaked in 2017,” according to Penn State political scientists Kevin Munger and Joseph Phillips, who have been studying YouTube politics and the spread of “extremist” content on the popular video platform.

    I just cannot take someone serious when they say “far-right” and are talking about Neo-Nazis, Nazis, and Socialists. All these groups are Left-wing, as they are the opposite of Conservative. “Far-right” groups would support Monarchs and Theocracies. Many Mormons are “Far-right” and I don’t see many of them causing much trouble.

  34. every fundamental event that has multiple possible outcomes — whether it’s a particle of light hitting Mars or a molecule in the flame bouncing off your teapot — splits the world into alternate realities.

    Wow! Just wait until the 2020 election!

    Seriously, define “fundamental event” and “possible outcome”.

    1. “Alternate reality”, of course, is well-defined.

    2. If a physicist uses that phrase, they mean whenever two or more particles interact. When a balls-tripping hippie masquerading as a physicist uses it, nobody has any real idea what they’re talking about.

    3. Every quantum interaction of fundamental particles that could have multiple outcomes, like the double slit experiment on the behavior of photons.

  35. Clearly this is not a real study and not a portrayal of political trends by metrics (metrics are politics now? I don’t thinks so). The main premise of the study is that no one wants to view leftist media which is disrespectful to their status as higher order beings, “gatekeepers of knowledge,” is a very interesting way to frame themselves, crying about no one following their egocentric notions. And the incessent-echo-spooking of media users about the “far-right,” a term invented by the left for propaganda uses.

  36. wow Jared Polis is an asshole. governors still look up the totem pole dude.

  37. Trump to Tell Federal Agencies to Cut New York Times, Washington Post Subscriptions

    The article is pay-walled but you see just enough crying to make you laugh at Lefties and their propaganda outlets.

  38. Franco’s Remains Are Exhumed and Reburied After Bitter Battle

    I can’t wait to see the stories on how Franco was not a Socialist.

    1. But what everyone wants to know is he still dead?

  39. Hunter Biden’s legal work in Romania raises new questions about his overseas dealings

    That and Burisma Holdings should make for an interesting investigation into Democrats. In April 2014, Devon Archer, a former senior adviser to the John Kerry 2004 presidential campaign, and Hunter Biden, an attorney and the son of then-US vice president Joe Biden, joined the board.Archer left the company in 2018 and Biden left in April 2019, when his term as a director expired.
    -Wikipedia

  40. Greek villagers stone migrant buses

    Greeks count as white racists, right?

    1. Swarthy white racists, but yeah.

  41. Homeless Become More Visible in Austin, Sparking Political Clash

    Just a matter of time that homeless Californians would move out to other states.

  42. So, a kid in a MAGA smirks at some fuckstick banging a drum inches from his face and it’s national news for weeks.

    But a US Representative is cavorting with her staff, husband, and Lord knows who else, and the whole shebang is online in words and pictures yet Reason needs to wait for the preferred narrative from the Central Hive before even mentioning it?

    And lets not forget the Kavanaugh angle…

  43. I wonder where the hand wringing is about young people being radicalized to the far left?

Please to post comments