Politics

Politics Is Seeping Into Our Daily Life and Ruining Everything

Americans are choosing jobs, brands, and friends for partisan reasons, say researchers.

|

Is there anything that politics can't ruin? The answer, it appears, is a resounding "no" as partisan conflict creeps into all areas of American life. Our political affiliations, researchers say, obstruct friendships, influence our purchases, affect the positions we take on seemingly apolitical matters, and limit our job choices. As a result, many people are poorer, lonelier, and less healthy than they would otherwise be.

"Political polarization is having far-reaching impacts on American life, harming consumer welfare and creating challenges for people ranging from elected officials and policymakers to corporate executives and marketers," according to a new paper in the Journal of Public Policy & Marketing by researchers from Arizona State University, the University of Wyoming, and four other U.S. universities.

The researchers find that people's chosen political identities become self-reinforcing through associations with groups with shared beliefs. Our associations can even create a "group-specific shared reality" that makes it harder to relate to those with opposing views.

"[A]s society has become increasingly polarized, politicians' objectives diverge and their animosity toward the opposition grows, thereby reducing opportunity for compromise," the researchers warn. "Partisan incivility is a major reason for failed dialogue: Uncivil exchanges result in disagreement and greater polarization regardless of the evidence presented."

People's partisan identities influence the range of people with whom they are willing to have relationships, the brands they purchase, and the jobs they take. In an era of public health concerns, people often choose positions on matters such as vaccines or mask-wearing not based on a rational assessment of the issues, but on a plug-and-play adoption of their tribe's stances. This sort of politicized decision-making can stand in the way of rational choices and healthy connections.

"With political positions influencing decisions, people may sacrifice wages, lose out on jobs, make suboptimal purchases and disregard opportunities to save," the researchers note. "For example, research has found that employees accept lower wages to work for politically like-minded entities, and people may select higher-priced products or ones that offer less-functional value."

"Polarization has the potential to prevent neighbors or colleagues of opposing parties from developing friendships. This ultimately deprives individuals of intellectual diversity, among other things," they add.

The finding that everything is becoming politicized builds on a growing mountain of data. Even before political tensions hit their current fever pitch, a 2018 survey found that "Nearly two-thirds (64 percent) of consumers around the world will buy or boycott a brand solely because of its position on a social or political issue" (the number for the U.S. was 59 percent). In 2020, a separate survey reported that "83% of Millennials find it important for the companies they buy from to align with their values."

That means that the price and utility of products and services are actually secondary considerations for many people, taking a back seat to companies' public posturing. Many business executives have risen to the challenge, advocating positions on gun control, immigration, and race relations, whether because they sense an opening to promote their opinions, or just a marketing opportunity. 

"These leaders hope that their political activism will help shape public opinion and potentially lead to lasting change, while simultaneously cementing their reputations as moral leaders and change agents," Christine Moorman wrote for Forbes. She noted that, as of 2018, most marketing experts considered this a bad move with the potential for alienating both customers and employees.

Since then, the trend has only intensified — especially after former President Trump's challenge to election results and in the wake of the January 6 riot at the Capitol. Recent events "accelerate a broader movement in business to address social and political issues" according to a January 15 piece in the Wall Street Journal.

This politicization of all things great and small is what another researcher referred to last summer as the "oil spill" model of mass opinion polarization.

"[W]hat if polarization is less like a fence getting taller over time and more like an oil spill that spreads from its source to gradually taint more and more previously 'apolitical' attitudes, opinions, and preferences?" Pennsylvania State University's Daniel DellaPosta asked in a study published in June 2020 in American Sociological Review. "[E]ven many initially apolitical lifestyle characteristics, from musical taste to belief in astrology, can become politicized as signals for deeper beliefs and preferences—a tendency most saliently captured in the popular image of the 'latte liberal'."

Americans, then, are increasingly making decisions along tribal political lines, potentially depriving themselves of rewarding friendships, better-paying jobs, well-reasoned judgments, and optimal goods and services. But by choosing beverages, beans, sports equipment, and employment according to tribal affiliation, they are also losing points of shared interest with people who disagree with them. The people they see in their neighborhoods, at concerts, and in their chosen restaurants likely share their views on hot-button issues, because those who disagree live, party, and shop elsewhere. That further reduces the opportunity for connections across partisan boundaries.

Worse, when the political tribes are so divorced from one another in terms of preferences and lifestyles, it becomes easier to target the "enemy" by going after their ways of life. With conservatives largely living in rural areas and exurbs, and liberals confining themselves to cities and suburbs, and the groupings having shrinking overlap in terms of their interests, it's pretty easy to hurt opponents by targeting pastimes and brands for boycotts, regulatory action, or legal restrictions.

"I think we're all aware of how political polarization has affected our elections and system of government, but the impacts go far beyond the political arena," comments Dave Sprott, dean of the University of Wyoming's College of Business and one of the authors of the Journal of Public Policy & Marketing paper. "Ultimately, polarization harms mental and physical health, financial welfare, relationships and societal interests through its impact on psychology, marketing and public policy outcomes."

There is nothing we can or should do about people's lifestyle choices, but we can give them less reason to fight. Making politics less important through reducing the ability of government to affect our lives has the potential to make us all healthier and happier.

NEXT: Brickbat: Just Keeping Someone Else from Stealing It

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. The politicization of virtually everything – “the personal is political” – was never a problem as long as it was only the Left engaging in it, now that the Right is waking up to how single-minded the Maoists and the Marxists among us are and becoming just as focused on fighting the Left, it’s become a crisis.

    1. What you’re noticing isn’t the Right suddenly finding politics it’s Americans deciding they don’t much like your right wing politics and that’s why you’res sqirmimg. They don’t like your “law and order” bs. They don’t like your discrimination against gay people. They don’t like your fake fiscal conservatism or your corporate tax plans. They don’t like your health insurance plans. They don’t like your cult leaders or your fundamentalist Christianity.

      1. What what a great response from a great libertarian viewpoint. /sarc

        You don’t like my insurance plan. Then buy another one. My fiscal plan is none of you business. You can throw your money away but leave mine alone. You don’t like Christianity then don’t join the church.

        Nobody gives a crap what gay people do. Being gay does not come with any special privileges’ though.

      2. “Law and order” like troops permanently stationed at the Capitol? “Discrimination” like identifying white people as the source of all evils in the country? “Fiscal conservatism” like spending several trillion, as opposed to billions, solving problems the government has created? “Health insurance plans” like the ones that cost an arm and a leg and don’t cover anything? “Cult leaders” and “fundamentalism” like BLM?

        That’s what you like? Fine.

        But try and shove it in people’s faces and they’ll put your brain to sleep real quick.

      3. Great job exemplifying the article; an entirely disingenuous painting of an entire “group” you do not like with specious allegations [“discrimination against gay people,” “fundamentalist Christians”] that supposedly identifies all of them?

        Meanwhile, “your” people think there is no difference between men and women, everyone should be financially equal, speech you do not agree with should be banned, and the world is going to end in, what is it, 10 years now?

        Quite being obtuse.

        1. He gets paid to be obtuse.

          1. ^^^
            Oh so much, this.

      4. They don’t like your “law and order” bs.

        Clearly, based on the spiking crime rates in blue cities this past year.

      5. What the American people are going to discover (but probably not until it’s too late) is that living in a one party socialist state with little to no freedom absolutely fucking sucks.

        Why don’t scumbags like you just move to China or Cuba or Venezuela instead of spending every minute of your pathetic lives trying to ruin what men much better than you created?

        1. “”What the American people are going to discover (but probably not until it’s too late) is that living in a one party socialist state with little to no freedom absolutely fucking sucks.””

          We may go the way of Yugoslavia before that.

        2. Mikey, why don’t you move to Texas? Why are you still living in a blue state?

          1. First of all, you have no idea where I live, faggot. Second of all, there’s way too much of your “global warming” going on in Texas right now, ROFLMAO.

        3. What “socialist” state? You drive on public roads, right? Use public services too, right? All the b.s. about “socialism” is exactly that, b.s. You still have the same freedoms you’ve always had. It’s scumbags like you that are so damned ignorant to reality that it boggles the mind. Pathetic little lives angry at everything.

      6. Everything you said is total bullshit. You are a Marxist, and therefore an evil piece of shit. If you’re not scared, you should be. What Americans are waking up to is that they don’t like your totalitarian shit.

        It will be very good when they turn on you completely. You deserve a horrific end.

        1. Adding this Tulpa sock to my flagging list.

          1. I looove flagging other comments, because then nobody can see them point out how stupid my arguments were.

      7. Note the issue is politics creeping into apolitical areas, so how is politics relevant? It’s revealing when leftists have no relevant response to the topic they misunderstand it in order to make an attack anyway. They’re not just stupid, they’re douchebags as well.

      8. “fiscal conservatism… corporate tax plans… fundamentalist Christianity

        Apparently it’s always 1992 for our resident lefties and the biggest threat to liberty is Newt Gingrich and the Moral Majority.

      9. What you’re noticing isn’t the Right suddenly finding politics it’s Americans deciding they don’t much like your right wing politics and that’s why you’res sqirmimg. They don’t like your “law and order” bs. They don’t like your discrimination against gay people. They don’t like your fake fiscal conservatism or your corporate tax plans. They don’t like your health insurance plans. They don’t like your cult leaders or your fundamentalist Christianity.

        Exactly why we need secession 2.0. It's not "American's deciding" It's "leftard's deciding." And so it's time we pack up and go. And if you guy's don't want to let us go, we can always slaughter you and drink your blood.

        1. So, these will be the comments that get the comments (or the site) shut down…

          1. So, these will be the comments that get the comments (or the site) shut down…

            That's fine. The faster they shut you guys down and piss everyone off with their quest of speech domination, the faster we can get to the blood drinking.

      10. What we (non-leftfucktards, which maybe includes the Right) are “squirming” over is that the old-school, religious-based intolerance from the right has morphed into new-deal, Stalinist/Marxist-based intolerance from the left.

        In the old-old days, we had McCarthyism and real racism (i.e. often supported by the force of law or presidents like FDR)–stances that sought to deny people jobs and livelihoods. We also had conservative dominance of media and community mores, which included discrimination against minorities and people with non-conforming sexual preferences, again often entrenched in the force of law. We used sexist and racist language.

        Today we have “cancel culture,” which seeks to destroy jobs and livelihoods for those not aligned with the current morality, to entrench government policies (e.g. gun control and promoting of abortion for minorities) steeped in racist history, and liberal dominance of media and community mores, which include discrimination against people with non-conforming ideas and obvious intolerance for white males (a form of revenge). We still use sexist, racist and anti-religious language: mansplaining, manspreading, white nationalist, white fragility, etc.

        What the fuck is different? Oh… I see, your assholes are in power.

        Unfortunately, it is worse because of the massive amount of extra-constitutional power that the leftfucks (and rightfucks) have usurped. The 10th amendment has long been destroyed. The lefttards so desperately want to gut the 1st and 2nd amendment, and probably lots others too. We also now have a 4th estate almost completely aligned with that massive central power, a very dangerous thing.

        People are too stupid to notice that this is Animal Farm come reality, and that the new oppressors are even shittier than the old.

        1. If you agree with f**ktards premise it’s Republicans & conservatives, you’re part of the problem. & stupefying ignorant on top of that.

          Retard.

          1. Haha. If you want to have an intellectual dick measuring contest, don’t worry, I’ll pull out enough to win.

      11. You’re full of sh*t – for the last couple of decades the left has made everything political and it’s becoming obnoxious. They’ve taken over entire intellectual properties such as Star Wars and comic book movies and constantly chide people for not watching.

        In addition to that – they routinely find 20 year old tweets or 20 year old campaign contributions of some CEO and declare eating chicken at certain places is now evil. They kick people off FAANG…

        Seriously – just fu*k off out of here – the idea this was setup by Republicans or conservatives is just stupid.

        1. Indeed. We’re seeing strongly ideological “thought reform,” a la China, backed by similar radical left tactics–from the Chinese and other sources like Saul Alinsky. Discredit and destroy individual thought and individualism. Politicize all choices to the point of establishing a clear morality for every decision. There is now only one way to think, and we now try our best to subjugate all subjects to this monoculture. One right, all else wrong.

          The repulsive savaging of historical figures and destroying of people based off of things they did in a different, possibly distant past is where the fervor of this brainwashing movement becomes apparent. It’s also where its disingenuity becomes apparent: They’ve sought to destroy only historical figures whose crimes align with those of their modern political opponents.

          (Specifically: Roosevelt is still celebrated despite his abomination of incarcerating Japanese Americans; Planned Parenthood is still celebrated despite its origin in eugenics and keeping Blacks, mentally challenged and other undesirables down (Hitler probably loved her); the Democratic party is still celebrated despite the vast majority of its history spent controlling and subjugating blacks.)

          This is a religious movement; the zealotry of its supporters is increasing dramatically as folks are emboldened with recent success. Thankfully, the rate of cannibalism is increasing.

          1. You are oh so correct about this being a religious movement. But the people going along with it have been deceived into thinking it is what they want and what is needed. When they wakeup, it is going to be too late.
            It’s already too late.

          2. Yes. I have friends on both sides that are in dire need of an intervention. The internet is their bible and their bible doesn’t nurture anything, it only destroys.
            I spent a few years going to Bosnia after the war. I interviewed dozens of politicians, military leaders, soldiers, civilians and police chiefs on all three sides. Insane rhetoric was the death of their country. Unfortunately for the people that were slaughtered, that insane rhetoric was believed and disseminated by their leaders for political purposes, then fully believed as truth. Many people “never saw it coming”.

      12. Actually, what I’m noticing is that you don’t know anything about ANYTHING. The certainty with which you spout your ignorance is EXACTLY what the right is FINALLY getting tired of. I pray you wake up to reality before it shatters your fantasy like the train wreck that it certainly is.

    2. Politicization of everything is just a leftist thing. The right wants to be left alone. You know libertarianism.

      1. The bullshit is strong with you great Jedi!

        1. I’ll call your BS counter example?

          1. What example have you provided, other than yourself? A bunch of generic insults is not an example of anything but your sorry mind.

            1. How about preferred pronouns? How about FAANG deplatforming conservatives wholesale? How about the dozens of articles written telling normal people if you don’t watch the all female Ghostbusters or watch it and don’t like it you’re a sexist? Same with Captain Marvel.

              How about the guy who wrote the internal Google memo about why so few female employees getting internally blackballed? Other internal memos were released that people like him will be internally blackballed, but they were celebrated by Google employees.

              There’s even been things like someone questioning why there’s zero male homeless shelters, but tons of female ones being blackballed, even though until that point they were considered a darling of the left.

              I can go to on and on and on if you’d like, but that’s enough for now I think.

              F**king retard.

      2. “Now look what you made me do”

        I’ll agree that the left wants to politicize more things, since they believe the government shold be involved in more things. But the right isn’t immune from that impulse either.

    3. I dunno. For a very long time now I’ve made it a policy to not buy products from companies that donate to anti-gun causes, if I find out about it. That’s not very left wing.

      1. 7-Eleven Inc.
        20/20 Vision
        A&M Records
        AOL / Time Warner
        AT&T / Worldcom Corp.
        AMC Theatres
        AARP – American Association of Retired Persons – Switch to: AMAC 888-262-2006
        American Bar Association
        ACLU – American Civil Liberties Union
        American Federation of Labor
        American Federation of Teachers
        AMA – American Medical Association
        Americans for Gun Safety
        AutoZone
        Bank of America – Switch to: Any local credit union
        BATF – Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms
        Burger King
        ABC – American Broadcast Company (liberal propaganda) – Switch to: Fox News
        CBS – Columbia Broadcasting System (liberal propaganda) – Switch to: Fox News
        CNN – Cable News Network (liberal propaganda) – Switch to: Fox News
        NBC – National Broadcast Company (liberal propaganda) – Switch to: Fox News
        MSNBC – This is the (liberal propaganda) merger between Microsoft & General Electric’s NBC. – Switch to: Fox News
        Center to Prevent Handgun Violence
        Comcast
        Compuserve
        Costco
        Dannon Company, Inc.
        Delta Airlines – Switch to: Southwest Airlines whenever possible
        Dick’s Sporting Goods & Field & Stream
        Disney Company
        Ebay
        Enterprise
        Gateway Computers
        Google – Switch to: BING
        GEICO
        Greenpeace
        Hallmark Cards
        Hard Rock Cafe
        HBO – Home Box Office/Cable Network
        League of Women Voters of the United States
        Levi Straus Foundation
        Lucent Technologies Inc.
        MetLife
        Microsoft
        MTV – Music Television/Cable Network
        NCR Corp.
        Netscape
        PETA
        Progressive Insurance – Switch to: State Farm (or) USAA
        Sara Lee
        Showtime Cable Network
        Sierra Club
        Southwestern Bell
        Symantic Corp
        United Airlines
        United Nations
        Walt Disney Company

        1. Burger King? Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

          1. Flame broil your own Whopper. Do it now. Weenie roast.

            1. The local BK closed right after COVID restrictions, so it doesn’t matter. Same with Denny’s. I’m pissed about the latter. Now the nearest one is a hour drive away.

              1. “I’m intercontinental when I eat French toast!”

        2. What’s the source for this list? I use USAA for most of my banking and insurance. Would like to know if I have to find another bank and insurance company.

          1. I also find that one odd in that it’s the *military* insurance company. That seems like it would piss off a *lot* of customers.

          2. Oh! USAA is a line wrap. It’s the “switch to” option for “Progressive”. Which… name checks out.

            1. Thanks, I see it now. Thank God.

        3. 7-11 gets a pass because their employees are working on the business end of guns

        4. Netscape??? WTF?

        5. ‘Google – Switch to Bring…

          Microsoft’

          1. Switch to Duck Duck Go, and go and get the Brave web browser. Started by the guy who invented Javascript and was ousted from Firefox for having an opinion.

      2. Well you now have a reason to ditch your Compuserve account

        1. What about my GEnie account?

    4. You’re right. The divergence of belief and opinion has been wide for years. What has changed is that politics as practiced is becoming more symmetrical. The Left has had a ‘protest wing’ for decades, sometimes engaging in violence. Now that the right has as many activists and will engage in violent public protests, all that polarization has suddenly become a ‘problem’ for many ‘mainstream’ observers.

    5. Everyone knows that disagreements between the left wing and right wing in our country have become increasingly hostile. No one can ignore the symptoms of the left-wing riots and the right-wing assault on the Capitol.

      I say again that this animosity has been caused largely in part because far too many Americans have bought the lie that our Republic is a democracy. http://www.diffen.com/difference/Democracy_vs_Republic All it takes in a de-mob-ocracy is a simple majority for the best organized mob to force everyone to march in lockstep with it. No one wants to be forced into anything, and everyone on both sides is afraid, angry, and belligerent.

      We can descend into a civil war or we can live in peace by reverting to the form of government our brilliant founders mandated in Article 4, Section 4 of our Constitution.

    6. And they woke up too late.

    7. I am of the opinion that once I vote, politics plays about .001% of my life. In this time of people identifying everyone by political views, I realize that we miss the opportunity to become friends with people we may disagree with. So I never tell people what my politics are and just explain that we are so much more than political beings.
      Often they go ahead and tell me their views and I just don’t share mine and I have a new friend. Once friendship forms, they find it hard to judge me regarding what I may say, so the friendship survives.

    8. The politicization of everything has been increasing for a long time. However, it went into overdrive when Trump was surprisingly elected – subsequent to this, the left continuously sought to create anarchy and political division in the country, in an effort to both thwart Trump’s presidency and his chances of being re-elected. Having failed to sufficiently turn enough people against Trump using these tactics, they had to resort to significant voter fraud in several key swing states to steal the election from him.

    9. The Demonrat Party has become the American Communist Party. Most of the kool-aid drinkers don’t even know they’re Maoists. They are also the Stasi now that they’ve installed Commissar Xiden. He should be impeached immediately just based on the mob boss performance he proudly displayed as he withheld $1 billion from the Ukraine unless they dropped the investigation into bagman Hunter. But now we have Prosecutor Harris as a back-up. The Deep State’s 5 year soft coup success has left no good legal options.

  2. Can you blame the Republicans for not wanting to hang out with lizards who eat children? Or homicidal communists? Or abortion loving whores? I don’t blame them. We Democrats are just fortunate that we’re allowed to even live. If we’re lucky we’ll just be deported when the civil war is over.

    1. I don’t blame them.

      You blame them for everything– every real tragedy or injustice, and every one you can imagine as well. Hence the author’s point.

      Why do people bent on class politics and warfare show up at a site ostensibly dedicated to individual rights and responsibility?

      1. Because my politics includes a little libertarianism. It’s as simple as that.

        1. Very, *very* little libertarianism, from your comments.

          1. I’m the libertarian Jesus compared to fascist creeps who post here.

            1. ^ Look at John Lennon over here.

            2. “I’m [a] fascist creep[.]”

              Yes, you are.

            3. No, you’re just an asshole. And like other trolls who visit here, you just want to pick a virtual fight [in which you experience no risk, and can pivot and deflect every time your “arguments” [which do not amount to more than diatribe, and poor diatribe at that] fizzle.

            4. Fascism is just another bastard child of Marx. So that’s you guys. God damn you progs are stupid.

            5. “compared to fascist creeps who post here.”

              “Socialism is the doctrine of liberation for the working class. It promotes the rise of the fourth class and its incorporation in the political organism of our Fatherland, and is inextricably bound to breaking the present slavery and regaining German freedom. Socialism, therefore, is not merely a matter of the oppressed class, but a matter for everyone, for freeing the German people from slavery is the goal of contemporary policy. Socialism gains its true form only through a total fighting brotherhood with the forward striving energies of a newly awakened nationalism” – Josef Goebbels

              1. ““Socialism is the doctrine of liberation for the working class. It promotes the rise of the fourth class and its incorporation in the political organism of our Fatherland, and is inextricably bound to breaking the present slavery and regaining German freedom. Socialism, therefore, is not merely a matter of the oppressed class, but a matter for everyone, for freeing the German people from slavery is the goal of contemporary policy. Socialism gains its true form only through a total fighting brotherhood with the forward striving energies of a newly awakened nationalism” – Josef Goebbels”

                Way to prove their point retard.

                1. That’s exactly what he was doing. Check the handle, carefully.

        2. 99% authoritarian bullshit, and 1% some other brand of bullshit. But the 99% makes it pretty much impossible for the 1% to be libertarian.

        3. LOL. I’m pretty sure viewing forced communism in any sort of positive light has nothing to do with “libertarianism” (whatever that is).

      2. Because they get paid to post here, that’s why.

        1. Not only do they get paid to post here, most of them are actually the Reason staff writers themselves!

          The only places the fugazi libertarians of Reason ever tell the unvarnished truth about what they really think is on Twitter, and here in the comments under sockpuppet pseudonyms like “sarcasmic”, “Lord of Strazele”, etc etc.

      3. “Why do people bent on class politics and warfare show up at a site ostensibly dedicated to individual rights and responsibility?”

        Because libertarians can then be recruited to go to one of the major parties. Most people buy into the two party shell game and the “wasted vote” hypothesis.

        Political warfare benefits both of the two major parties and keeps out any alternatives which may upset the apple cart.

        1. “Because libertarians can then be recruited to go to one of the major parties.”

          Yes, this! But I can’t! I shan’t! I won’t, and I wan’t!

          As far as boycotts go, for meeeee, as a TOTALLY PURE libertarian?!?!

          I boycott EVERYTHING AND EVERYBODY!!! (‘Cause they’re not as libertarianlyishly pure as MEEEE).

          If my family and I can NOT make it, using our bare hands, teeth, rocks, mud, and roadkill… Or tools made with or out of the preceding… Then we just do without! Rather than contaminating ourselves by buying from, or trading with, impure libertarians or non-libertarians!!!

          (Y’all are hereby invited to join me in my pure ways. Also note that I drink nothing other than pure rainwater and grain alcohol. And I do NOT dilute the purity of my essences!)

          1. “rainwater and grain alcohol” – great reference to a great movie of a great director!
            Kubrick’s Dr Strangelove is, I believe an example of an artful, entertaining and successful movie of anti war and anti government sentiments of libertarianism.
            Well done!

        2. Political warfare benefits both of the two major parties and keeps out any alternatives which may upset the apple cart.

          Christ, not the Cola Wars again.

          1. “both of the two major parties”

            Is Echospinner Robby?
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8L1UngfqojI

    2. Why waste good money on deporting your sorry leftist asses?

      1. Executing them would be much simpler, but unlike them, we are humane. So expatriation and permanent exile are acceptable outcomes.

        1. But that’s *horribly* inhumane… to anywhere that might end up with them.

  3. On the contrary, I think it’s great that people are considering the political implications of everyday decisions. It actually works to the advantage of Koch / Reason libertarianism.

    For example years ago many of my progressive friends wanted to boycott any product associated with Charles Koch, the billionaire who funds Reason.com. Now, however, they consciously seek out Mr. Koch’s products because I’ve informed them how hard he fights for unlimited, unrestricted immigration.

    #OpenBorders
    #(EspeciallyDuringAPandemic)

    1. I have been thinking about how much I need 40 tons of asphalt.

    2. Alienating half your customers is always a bad idea.
      Unless you think it will increase the brand loyalty of the other half.

  4. This is not a both sides scenario. “Social Justice Warriors” are to blame. There is no need for social justice.

    I could give a crap what the xyz whatever politics where until they shoved it in my face and then demanded that their voice be the only one heard.

    1. Nobody shoved it in your face, you just chose not to ignore it. Get with the program man!

      1. Right; because those who defy socialist laws never get shot for it. /s

      2. The Rev wants to shove it down your throat. Every. Single. Time.

        The homoerotic rape fantasies that guy has, whew…

  5. Leftist politics is almost singularly focused upon figuring out ways to make the lives of people that disagree with leftists as miserable as possible via government intrusion. Regulate them. Tax them. Take away their rights. Change their behavior.

    Everyone else not in the leftist bubble believes in some variation of “please leave me alone and let me live my life.”

    These two visions of what life in this country ought to be cannot be reconciled. Everything is political because the left has made it that way.

    1. It doesn’t have to be active disagreement, either. Simple indifference is also evil for the left. I honestly couldn’t care less about some random person’s race, ethnicity, gender, or politics. For the left, that’s a crime.

      A year or so ago a guy I assume was trans (bad wig, bad makeup, women’s clothes, but clearly a guy) stopped me as I was walking to my car to ask how to get to the highway. He was in distress and didn’t seem to have a phone or anything to map a route. I gave him directions to the highway. He thanked me and drove away. The “ask me about my pronouns” crowd would, I’m sure, find some problem with how I handled this, and probably something to do with me not asking about or “centering” this person’s identity in some way. But like a lot of people, this person was just trying to get through the day. When real problems intrude, this fake identity shit leaves the room pretty quick.

      1. a few years back I had some business dealing with a person. Over the phone she sounded sexy, as I saw her approach in the parking lot I thought sexy. She was wearing a nice summer dress, she entered my office and sat on my desk kind of sexy, no woman has ever done that in my office, and she is pretty good looking then I noticed her hands. I took second look, shit this isn’t a she its a he. I still conducted business with her/he/it but dam a woman sits on my desk and it turn out to be a man, shit ruined my day but makes for a great story.

        1. The man hands never lie.

          1. Or the man throat.

      2. People are coming around to the idea of ‘leave me alone, or else’. Which is a good thing.

      3. I am one of those who doesn’t care as well. It doesn’t matter to me what other people think of it.

        “If we were dogs we would all be the same breed”
        PJ Oroarke

        Treating all people as individuals is not indifference to me. When I think of indifference it is indifference to evil or injustice. That I am not.

    2. ^THIS – I don’t know where you came from Geiger but keep up the good comments…

  6. That means that the price and utility of products and services are actually secondary considerations for many people, taking a back seat to companies’ public posturing.

    No shit, Sherlock. So much for the theory of the “rational actor”.

    1. they are still rational. they are just including boosting their group identity or saving the planet or stopping the wrongthink crowd in the utility of the product.

  7. Since you have to be woke to be allowed in an NBA game, I expect that the NBA is going to find it harder to pay those huge salaries. Denigrate a big part of your market when what you sell won’t be missed is a bad strategy.

    1. There are two scenarios in which the work purges make sense:

      1. A complete and forcible takeover of the country;

      2. A complete and irreparable divorce and a splitting of the country in two.

      The Left is gearing up for 1, but they will likely have to accept 2.

      1. **Woke** purge, although work purges are going to be a part of it as well

        1. Work purges are pretty common these days.

      2. I’ve actually grown to believe in the possibility of door number 2. House divided etc. But as you say this time it will not be an actual war [in which 625,000 Americans died 1861-5] but a division between the blue cities and the exurbs and hinterlands. In the Biden gun control becomes a reality, I see my area just deciding to sanctuary and simply not enforce it. They wouldn’t have anyone to arrest but those who are otherwise law abiding and tax paying citizens any way.

    2. The NBA salary pool is based on a percentage of league revenues. (Baseball should go that route to better align player and owner goals.) The individual player salary cap is based on the size of the revenue pool. With TV ratings in the tank, the next rights contract is going to be a lot smaller, and salaries are going to decline, for the first time in probably 50 years.

      1. Market correction. The game is lame now. I’m not interested and I see a lot of my generation not bothering with it anymore. The mix of politics aligning with their Superstar Lebron James and his method of designing trophy winning teams is almost millennial in its participation trophy mentality. When he goes I don’t see another star stepping into that spotlight since they all seem to migrate in each other’s shadows rather than reach any personal pinnacle towards stardom. I don’t watch anymore. At all.

        1. Sadly, I cannot boycott the NFL or NBA. Was never watching them in the first place. Sure I might stop and watch 5 minutes of an NFL game if the local team is playing and winning when I flip through the channels. But the same cannot be said for NBA…last NBA game I watched had Michael Jordan still playing for the Bulls. But the NFL and NBA never piqued my interest like the college games.

          So I can’t *not* watch any more than I’ve been *not* watching for the last 20 years or so.

          1. NCAA football may be my next item on the chopping block. My interest in a particular sports team’s games is increasingly being overridden by my disgust for their wokeness.

  8. Hey Tuccille….Not for nothing, but what is YOUR role (and Unreason, for that matter) in making this environment?

    You helped start it. You helped build it. You encouraged it. You enabled it.

    Now you are developing a conscience?!

    GFY

    1. This. Take a look at them defending Amazon breaking a contract with Parler.

      1. Reason ceased being published for the benefit of it’s readers years ago. Now it’s published for flattering the handful of big donors that are keeping this sorry mess afloat. Apparently the invisible hand has given it a very visible finger.

        1. What did we expect when we put a purple haired Yale-y in the editorship?

  9. Just look at the hatred the conservatives on this board have for libertarians and anyone else who disagrees with their politics. They’re worse than the leftists they hate.

    1. Personally, I prefer chicken livers or shad for catching freshwater fish. But what you wrote will probably work too.

      1. I’ve never used chicken livers as bait. I prefer to dredge them in seasoned flour and fry them in duck fat.

      2. (The biggest cry for attention I’ve ever made)

    2. You’re an idiot, and a leftist shill. And broken. And fuck off.

    3. What libertarians? You men the ones who constantly shill for MOAR GOVERNMENT

      Like lets have congress chase a private citizen around on totally BS political impeachment charges. Lets have a 9/11 commission for 1/6that would be considered BLM/ANTIFA light night on the violence scale.

      It’s all OK sarc, because Orange Man Bad

      1. You destroyed some arguments I never made. Well done.

        1. The only arguments you do make are how much of a victim you are and how evil conservatives are with the occasional tepid defense of the left like wITh BLM.

          Example. Every cop story until yesterday you would bash every cop as bad. Then yesterday no disagreement with killing an unarmed 10 year veteran. Not a single bad word. But a defense.

          Youre pathetic

    4. You called everyone you disagree with a cultist for 3 years you retarded drunk fuck.

    5. I miss the days when all we argued about was deep dish pizza and the Civil War and whether human rights started at birth or some time earlier.

    6. BECAUSE……….. Ignoramuses WON’T just LEAVE US ALONE..

      Everything from the left is UN-Constitutional these days. Everything is about Power to Steal from us. The left cannot even figure out what kind of Country we are anymore; and instead spread pure lies about wanting a Revolution to occur giving power to Nazism.

      And when USA patriots start standing up — they (like you are doing) cry about why won’t everyone just hand over their lunch money and stop being mad about it.

      1. Agile Cyborg? Is that you?

    7. They don’t hate disagreement, they hate assholes. You just like to pretend it’s disagreement because you like being an asshole.

      1. Bull. Any minor political disagreement turns into “You voted for Biden! Trump was the best president ever! The election was stolen! Why do you hate America?!?!”

        Civility is dead.

        1. “And I helped”

        2. Who voted for whom has no bearing on this article or premise whatsoever. It’s obvious that a vote is a political decision.

          The question at hand is who has pushed making all other (normally non-political) decisions political? And it’s the left – SJWs – without question.

          So, good job I guess at shifting the goal posts from blaming conservatives for the latter, then when you got push back, falling back by using the former.

          Making you wrong in both cases.

          Retard.

  10. “Is there anything that politics can’t ruin?”

    By politics you mean the left. The left ruins everything it touches.

  11. It’s pretty obvious that the left has tried to push politics into every aspect of life. There is no more “live and let live” as we have found out if you go to a pro trump rally, or say you should wait for evidence before condemning people, or hold your hand out of a car window the wrong way, the left will unleash a mob to attack you and destroy your life. They have no problem doxxing people and showing up at their house to harass them. Its getting to the point were the NAP is no longer applicable, because it’s such an asymmetric fight. The left can rape, murder, riot, bur, and steal, and the people tat oppose them aren’t allowed to talk.

  12. There is no reasoning with the other side when the other side are a bunch of douchebags!

  13. Politics is a pyramid scheme: in any situation involving more than 1 person, there will always be found politics. The only difference is, in situations where the group grows in numbers, the more stupid the politics of the group becomes, regardless of group.

    1. Which is the why two party system is the worst alternative. There is no need to compromise on any issue. Even if the other party controls congress the president just rules by decree.

      1. And there will never be a ‘cure’ until people of the USA start realizing WHAT the USA is. As defined by the U.S. Constitution.

        1. Everyone knows that disagreements between the left wing and right wing in our country have become increasingly hostile. No one can ignore the symptoms of the left-wing riots and the right-wing assault on the Capitol.

          I say again that this animosity has been caused largely in part because far too many Americans have bought the lie that our Republic is a democracy. http://www.diffen.com/difference/Democracy_vs_Republic All it takes in a de-mob-ocracy is a simple majority for the best organized mob to force everyone to march in lockstep with it. No one wants to be forced into anything, and everyone on both sides is afraid, angry, and belligerent.

          We can descend into a civil war or we can live in peace by reverting to the form of government our brilliant founders mandated in Article 4, Section 4 of our Constitution.

  14. It used to be that the left couldn’t be reasoned with because they arrive at their beliefs through emotion, while the right tended to be more thoughtful. But since the Age Of Trump the right has turned into a bunch of emotional twats, just like the leftists they hate. Now neither side can be reasoned with. They’re two sides of the same emotional, hateful, political coin.

    1. And poor faggot here is sandwiched in the middle, just like he likes it.

      1. Some people get off on being abused, amigo. That makes you gay for helping him get off, if’n you’re both dudes.

        1. He’s one of the attention whores I flag without reading.

          1. You clearly read my posts …

        2. Nothing wrong with being gay, and the implication that there is something wrong makes you a bigot racist xenophobe white supremacist insurrectionist science! denier.

          What say you to these charges?

          1. I never implied there was anything wrong with being gay.

            You’re the one getting bent out of shape over hot and delicious dongs. He’s just not that into you.

            1. You’re the one saying dongs are hot and delicious. You two should get a room.

            2. That made my ass wet …. or sitting all day in my chair. It’s one or the other.

        3. Speaking of getting off…

          “sarcasmic
          February.9.2021 at 10:15 am

          And when I say “pleasure” I mean it… Imagine them jerking off while they talk…”

          https://reason.com/2021/02/09/the-not-so-peaceful-transfer-of-power/#comment-8750813

      2. Lulz. I actually laughed out loud

    2. Trump was a symptom of the decline of the Republican Party, not the cause.

        1. …or false. It’s already past lunch so I’m absolutely blotto.
          But you’re being nice and paying attention to me so now you’re my best friend.

      1. ^This. Trump is what you get after decades of the Republican Party rolling over and making bad deals against the interests of their voters.

        1. Agreed.

          Illegal immigration has been talked about for decades and the best the Republicans could do was say “Gosh. Sorry. We tried to do something about it. Better luck next year.”

          Like him or hate him, no one can argue that Trump kept his promise and tried his best to get the border wall built.

          This is one of the major reasons his followers never abandoned him.

          1. Obama kept his campaign promise and did everything he could to fundamentally change (ruin) our country.

    3. Ah, how I long for the good old days when the left ran roughshod over the populace and the right simply looked on and did nothing. Curse those damned right wing bigots for fighting back.

      1. There’s a difference between fighting back with logical arguments, and flinging poo. Right now both sides just fling poo at each other like monkeys.

        1. Please show us what a logical argument looks like.

        2. Ah… “both sides are doing it”.

          You should apply for a job at Reason…

          Assuming you don’t already work there.

          1. It would be a major pay cut. No thanks.

            1. How much do you get paid to be an alcoholic?

              1. Sanitation engineering doesn’t require sobriety unless you’re the one driving the honeywagon.
                And I lost my license again in the summer, so now Alejandro chauffeurs me and it doesn’t matter.

          2. Sometimes both sides are actually doing something. And I’d say right now both sides are flinging poo with great abandon (if you question that, just take a look at the shitshow this comment section has become). That’s not to say they are equivalent by all measures, but both sides are pretty fucking annoying right now.

            1. It’s not enough to not be annoying, we must be actively anti-annoying

              1. I don’t know. Maybe you should be annoying. Sometimes people need to be annoyed. I prefer to think that being the kind of person you would like other people to be is the way to go, but I could be wrong.

    4. You see it only takes a little stroll down the column for you to say something even more dumb. Well done

    5. Lol. You are king emotion here dumbass.

  15. But I was assured that everything would return to normal as soon as the Bad Orange Man was gone!

  16. “Americans are choosing jobs, brands, and friends for partisan reasons, say researchers.”

    Living your life in harmony with your principles isn’t a bad thing. I think the problem is choosing your position on the issue at hand, first, and then, choosing principles on the basis of their support for that position. It’s supposed to be the other way around.

    Whatever your position is on Ashli Babbitt, for instance, if it reflects your principles, that’s great. However, if you go around telling people that shooting unarmed protesters is justified if they’re trespassing on public property–because you’re against Trump–you’re selling a principle short because of your stance on the issues. You’re part of the problem.

    That’s like a scientist who only records data in an experiment if it supports his hypothesis. That’s junk science. It’s even worse when you live your life that way. When principles and the truth only matter to you when they seem to support your immediate political goals, that’s the difference between disagreeing with somebody and being a delusional and partisan piece of shit.

    1. On the Ashli Babbitt thing you get it wrong. It is shooting unarmed protestors is OK if they aren’t protesting the right thing.

      Trespassing public or private has nothing to do with it.

      1. His Her name is Robert Paulson Ashli Babbitt.

        His Her name is Robert Paulson Ashli Babbitt.

        His Her name is Robert Paulson Ashli Babbitt.

      2. I keep looking for someone who both condemns the shooting of Ashli Babbitt and opposed reelecting Trump–and I’m not finding much. In a world where principles were more important than principals, they’d be all over the place.

        1. Must…. Condemn….

          This is becoming religious. Must condemn the shooting or you’re not one of the faithful! Good versus evil! The fate of the world!

          You’ve gone off the deep end, dude. Seriously.

          1. “Must condemn the shooting or you’re not one of the faithful!”

            I didn’t say that.

            I said that’s a great example of people who are selling their principles short because they pick a stance on their issues first and then look for principles to justify them–rather than visa versa.

            We could say the same thing about Section 230. There are people who believe in the principle that we should be free to say what we please so long as we don’t violate anyone’s rights, and there are people who believe that people shouldn’t be held responsible for things that they never said or wrote. Some people hold those principles and evaluate their support for Section 230 in that light.

            Other people oppose Section 230 because they hate Facebook, Google, and the progressives who run them, and they’re hoping that if Section 230 gets pulled, it will hurt Facebook and Google. So they pick a side in that fight, and then they start looking for principles to support it. It’s the same thing.

            1. Other people oppose Section 230 because they hate Facebook, Google, and the progressives who run them, and they’re hoping that if Section 230 gets pulled, it will hurt Facebook and Google. So they pick a side in that fight, and then they start looking for principles to support it.

              Yup. See that a lot on these very here comments. If people were honest they’d say they’ll cheerfully cut off their nose to spite their face, I mean destroy the internet to get back at companies that were mean to Trump.

              It’s stupid. Soooo stupid. Political spite.

              1. Companies that edit should definitely be treated like platforms, but actual publishers shouldn’t get the same rights because reasons.

              2. Yeah, and the principle that trespassing on public property doesn’t justify shooting unarmed protesters is no way diminished by some people’s animosity toward Trump. And everyone who argued that the shooting of an unarmed Ashli Babbitt was justified because she was trespassing on public property should all be ashamed of themselves.

                1. When does an angry mob become a threat, armed or otherwise?

                  1. I won’t say threat to what though because I’d look dumb. Hopefully I can win the argument by merely implying.

                2. You can’t honestly argue that every single BLM march was a riot and there were no protestors just rioters and everyone who didn’t intervene is a criminal and they’re all criminals, and then call the attempt to prevent the certification of the election a simple protest.

                  C’mon.

                  1. Even though almost every single BLM march was a riot, if I quantify with a bunch of absolutes, I could make his argument seem unfair.
                    I’m so sarmt.

                  2. You just destroyed an argument he didn’t make. Well done.

        2. I wasn’t there and at first thought well thats what happens when you break into a building but then from the pictures i saw it looks like he shot through a window in a door to get her now that is bad optics. But then remember it was Biden who said shoot through the door so now i’m all confused (sarc). unfortunately we don’t know what happened and it seems we never will. Maybe Soave can get on this he did well with the Houston shooting

        3. I support Trump’s reelection and don’t condemn the shooting of Ashli Babbitt. Does that count?

          1. You must condemn the killing of the martyr to be accepted by the faithful.

            1. Because shooting unarmed people at protests is totes libertarian.

          2. In order to defy principle in opposition to your most hated candidate, you really need to argue that shooting protesters is justified if they’re trespassing on public property–like so many have done here in comments.

            If the shoe doesn’t fit, don’t wear it. In the meantime, the number of people who wanted Trump to lose and condemn the shooting of Ashli Babbitt seems to be very, very small.

            And, yes, there are generalizations to make about that. In a principled world, the number of people who condemned the shooting of Ashli Babbitt would more or less be evenly distributed among both those who both wanted Trump to win and those who wanted Trump to lose. If that’s not the case, there’s a reason why, and the leading candidate is because they sell their principles short when Trump is involved.

            And the principle that trespassing on public property doesn’t justify shooting unarmed protesters really shouldn’t be controversial.

            The idea that shooting unarmed shoplifters isn’t justified on private property probably isn’t too controversial either, and if I see someone defending the shooting of an unarmed child for stealing candy from a 7-11, it might be entirely appropriate to think that they’re letting their stance on gun issues get in the way of some larger principles.

            1. Well said — “sell their principles short when Trump is involved”.

              It’s ‘gang’ affiliation mentality for the WIN! Inside the lefties tyrannical world it’s a dog-eat-dog world of the national governments steak lines.

              To the right; there’s enough ‘steak’ for everyone to go around and then some just as soon as there is no longer government “steak lines”.

            2. By the way, for the record, I never said the cop was justified in shooting that woman. I said she was a dumbass for defying a cop who was pointing a gun at her. Not the same thing.

              1. Did you see the part where I wrote, “If the shoe doesn’t fit, don’t wear it”?

                There are people who frequent this website who openly argued that shooting unarmed protesters was justified because they were trespassing on public property.

                And not just one.

                1. Well I’m not one of them, despite the arguments that are often attributed to me that I don’t make.

                  1. sarcasmic
                    February.17.2021 at 12:19 pm
                    You must condemn the killing of the martyr to be accepted by the faithful.

                    https://reason.com/2021/02/17/politics-is-seeping-into-our-daily-life-and-ruining-everything/#comment-8767398

    2. “That’s like a scientist who only records data in an experiment if it supports his hypothesis. ”

      So, climate change experts…

      1. They need to choose between doing science or advocacy.

        Advocacy uses science, but it is not science.

  17. Historically, this divide is nothing new. There have always been “whig” and “tory” newspapers, churches, taverns, blacksmiths, lawyers, etc. in towns and cities in colonial America and U.S.A. Political boycotts, shaming, shunning have always been a feature of society. The Mormons weren’t forced to leave Missouri and Illinois because they liked the thought of trekking across the Great Plains, and abolitionists weren’t run out of the South because they dressed differently.

    1. That is true. And the latest topic of riots is treated as if that were something new.

    2. I agree. Something has changed though and I think it is the ability to manipulate the divide.

      Nothing is going to change for the better about our ability to manipulate the divide. Like it or not, we now know more about the human animal and the more we know, the more we realize that whatever we may have thought about what we were way back when is just pretension. Rational argument that is assessed individually in order to provoke thought is – ineffective compared to an argument geared to trigger instinct/emotion in order to provoke action.

      Those who have the ability/knowledge to manipulate us for evil/sociopathic/self-interested ends have had a free rein for over 100 years. It has nothing at all to do with ‘left’ or ‘right’. Those who stick that label on everything are absolutely part of the problem not the solution.

      But I can’t figure out how, in a modern world with the knowledge we do have now, to achieve a completely anti self-interested goal that is at the heart of classical liberalism. The negative liberty to be able to decide for oneself how to live the best possible life. Simply ‘leaving someone alone’ is NOT the solution because it merely means abdicating the manipulation to those who will never have that goal

  18. Reason can’t “BOTH SIDES” this one.

    1. Sure they can. Hold my beer

    2. Why not? The right has degenerated to the same level as the left that they hate. Right now there are more similarities than differences between the two sides.

      1. Provide examples.

        1. People frequently argue right here that the right needs to adopt the shitty tactics of the left and fight dirty like they do.
          There are racists and ethno-nationalists on the right and left. There are violent idiots who believe ludicrous conspiracy theories on the left and right, there are creepy-ass cults of personality on both left and right. It’s not that hard.
          I’m not saying they are identical or equivalent, but let’s not pretend that one side is pure and good and one is pure evil. That’s what the left does. I want to be better than that.

          1. “It’s not that hard.”

            Apparently, it is.

          2. “but let’s not pretend that one side is pure and good and one is pure evil”

            But what if one side is a drunk Huey Long and the other side is pretty much Shub-Niggurath’s incarnation?

            1. I like the image.
              And I certainly see the left as the much greater danger at the moment.

    3. Sure they can. It is one of the benefits of a libertarian perspective. The divide is between libertarian and authoritarian not right and left.

      1. Well said. I’m gonna steal that.

        1. I pretty much stole it from Orwell myself.

          1. This is one of my favorites:

            “Political tags — such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth — are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. The former are idealists acting from highest motives for the greatest good of the greatest number. The latter are surly curmudgeons, suspicious and lacking in altruism. But they are more comfortable neighbors than the other sort.”

            ― Robert A. Heinlein

            But you distilled it. Very pithy. I like pithy.

            1. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. The former are idealists acting from highest motives for the greatest good of the greatest number. The latter are surly curmudgeons, suspicious and lacking in altruism. But they are more comfortable neighbors than the other sort.”

              At core I disagree with the characterization of the latter. It’s more like wishful thinking than any true assessment. Indeed the last sentence pretty much describes the goal of that characterization. It is to create a personality type that the author believes makes for ‘more comfortable neighbors’. To word play with paradox. It’s bullshit.

              1. If you’re one of the former (and we know you are) then I suppose the latter doesn’t compute.

                A comfortable neighbor doesn’t use government to tell you how to use your land or what you can or cannot build. A comfortable neighbor doesn’t call the cops unless there’s a dead body and someone had a damn good excuse. A comfortable neighbor is someone you might not even know, or could be someone who shows up with bbq and beer.

                What they are not is someone who wants to use government force to influence how you live your life.

                1. See this is the point. YOU are the one who insists on narrowly defining what a comfortable neighbor is and is not. You may well be curmudgeonly, suspicious, and lacking in altruism (idk and idc) but at core YOU are the one who is insisting on control of others.

                  1. but at core YOU are the one who is insisting on control of others.

                    Really? Is this Tony logic where wanting less force means using force on those who use force, which makes liberty tyranny?

                    1. You just created an extensive post defining ‘what a comfortable neighbor is’.

                      Maybe you don’t like the idea of controlling stuff via defining what is/isn’t acceptable – but you just did it. You did not create a post about what you like in a neighbor. What you do/don’t do to be a ‘comfortable neighbor’ yourslef. You created a post about what the other needs to do to fit into your definition – your acceptance – of what is a comfortable neighbor.

                    2. Then what is a comfortable neighbor to you?

                    3. On one side of me is a neighbor with whom we have agreed to stop talking politics. An actual leftist who was a govt employee (and in the environmentalist bureaucracy) – not the strawman leftie you commenters here think I am. He knows I’m a big-L Libertarian and don’t like Trump at all – but he can’t help himself and thinks the MSNBC/Maddow/MotherJones agenda is how to define everything and that I am therefore a Fox/R/etc when it comes to talking politics.

                      Once we agreed to stop annoying each other, we are very comfortable neighbors. There’s still plenty of stuff we can talk about. I am certain however that his voting habits haven’t changed.

                    4. I am certain however that his voting habits haven’t changed.

                      Then he’s not a comfortable neighbor because he still supports initiating government force against you even though you haven’t harmed his life, liberty or property.

                    5. As I said – you’re the one who cannot tolerate ‘comfortable neighbor’ outside a pretty narrow pre-definition of what it is.

                      My neighbor hasn’t changed his voting habits – and neither have I. If at some point in future we have to engage in politics and disagree on the particulars, then I’m sure we will. Until that happens, I see no reason to pick scabs. No reason to pick friends based on politics. You apparently do – which is exactly what this article was saying is becoming more common and is being bemoaned as ‘ruining everything’. I’ll have to assume that you don’t actually believe it is ruining anything at all but is in fact the preferred way of selecting friendships.

                    6. You missed the point of the quote. And as I said below I only talk politics here. Conservatives and progressives both hate my dedication to liberty because they want people to be controlled. They only differ in how and what.

                    7. And btw – your definition of ‘comfortable neighbor’ seems to be identical with a different adjective. I agree completely that your definition seems to be about a ‘libertarian neighbor’. That a neighbor who advocates initiating coercion etc is NOT a libertarian neighbor.

                      But of course the initial phrase was ‘comfortable neighbor’. And the article is about NOT using politics as some screening adjective.

                    8. Then shoot Heinlein. I’m just quoting him.

                  2. You should read this.
                    Which neighbor would you be most comfortable with? Real question.

                    https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/the-snowplow-test-trump-liberal-virginia-heffernan/

                    A link to her actual column is in the article as well lest you think me cherry picking.

                    1. At JFree

                    2. To me neither Virginia Heffernan nor Rod Dreher are ‘comfortable neighbors’. Both of them appear far more interested in picking scabs raw and jousting with strawmen to ‘make a point’. Maybe that’s what journalists do. I don’t know any.

                    3. Reason comments is the only place I talk politics. Because my libertarian tendencies are truly offensive to conservatives and progressives alike.

                    4. JFree To me neither Virginia Heffernan nor Rod Dreher are ‘comfortable neighbors’.

                      Rod is not the neighbor. He is commenting on Virginia’s treatment of her neighbor as she moved into a town and immediately went into judgement mode on her new neighbors for their politics. She then couldn’t figure out how to thank them while still maintaining her elitist, judgemental deign towards their politics. All her neighbors did was shovel her drive, as a courtesy, without asking for anything in return.
                      My question is not Rod or Virginia, I would obviously find Virginia an uncomfortable neighbor, but the other? I think that is what a comfortable neighbor might look like. You do you. I do me. We don’t have to discuss the Trump malaise if it is so strong with you. And hey, while I have my truck, let me move that snow out of the way for you. No charge, no expectation of something in return.
                      Is that too conforming to a description for you? real question.

                    5. Is that too conforming to a description for you? real question.

                      Not at all. The behavior of the neighbors in question is exactly what I like re an actual neighborhood of real people.

                      What I dislike about both Heffernan and Dreher description of that is that they feel compelled to weave an essentially political story in their sermonizing about what good neighbors should be about. It stops being about actual neighbors and becomes a stage setting for a medieval morality play

                    6. And the reason I am focusing on Dreher and Heffernan is because in Dreher’s piece he does not mention even ONE neighbor as an actual person. Even though he is lauding them. Ignore that no one is named. I can understand that. But no one is even fleshed out as human. They are mere tropes. Those neighbors may not even exist in real life. They may – you know – be entirely figments created to tell a story

                    7. Those neighbors may not even exist in real life. They may – you know – be entirely figments created to tell a story

                      Hadn’t thought about that. Interesting take and might be true based on the journo’s telling each side. Hmmm.

              2. It’s observation about the world, not a logical proof.

      2. Except the left, and establishment, is totalitarian.
        And you support their narrative in every instance.

  19. How many innocent people has SleepyJoe killed with the China virus this year?

    1. Haven’t you heard? The Harris/Biden administration plans to vaccinate all of the populace for free by the summer. Of course the vaccine is not a guarantee that you are now free to return to normal activity. Mask up, social distance and let’s all head into another fall flu season together! New Science! is the word and gospel.

      1. I recently ran across a history of the flu pandemic in Butte, Montana. Hilariously, a lot of people back then implemented the same “scientific” public health policies and same promotional tactics, and their methods ended up being as useless back then as they are now.

        1. So nothing makes a difference? Nothing at all. There are no adjustments we can make to our interaction with each other that will slow the spread of this virus. Good to know.

          1. “So nothing makes a difference? Nothing at all.”

            Yes, that is exactly what he said.

            You are a genius.

            1. Well that’s pretty fucking stupid. Judging science on politics. “I don’t like the political ramifications of this science so I’m going to reject it and make up my own science that fits into my politics!”

              That’s what the article is about. Stupidity like that.

              1. What you speak of isn’t science it’s opinions of people in fantasy land.

                1. Like I said, you reject science if it conflicts with your politics.

                  1. Science of the left = How to stop global warming in the middle of a arctic freeze threatening people’s ability to keep from freezing to death.

                    No politics about it — REALITY has made it’s mark.

                    1. Disconnect science from policy. C’mon! You can do it!

              2. “We don’t need to read history to see what worked and what didn’t! We just go along with whatever our government overlords tell us because they always have our best interests at heart!”

                1. There’s ample data to cherry pick from to prove either side.

                  Try separating policy from science and looking at the science as science, not some scary thing leftists are going to use an excuse to take away your freedom.

                  1. Yes, pointing out via the historic record that the exact same measures taken 100 years ago were ineffective at preventing 600,000 Americans from dying from the flu is conflating science with politics.

                    Incidentally, Kathleen Fargy at the Army’s Office of Medical History did a study within the military ranks during that period, and found this out:

                    “Despite quarantines, sanitation efforts, and the isolation of patients, influenza and pneumonia affected hundreds of thousands of soldiers.”

                    What these show is that science has actually been ignored during this pandemic, and specifically for political purposes.

                    1. What’s even more hilarious is that there are plenty of articles pointing out that people were far more likely back then to do what the government recommended, and there was very little resistance to business lockdowns and wearing masks. For instance:

                      “As for New Mexicans in 1918, however, there was far less pushback on imposed restrictions, according to University of New Mexico-Valencia professor Richard Melzer.

                      “People generally respected those closings in schools and churches and stores,” Melzer said.
                      Articles from the period seem to support that conclusion.
                      Many expressed a desire for quarantine rules to end once the presence of the flu diminished. But Melzer noted in a 1982 academic article there were no public demonstrations against them.
                      “Many New Mexicans religiously followed these commandments, and no municipality was forced to resort to threats of fines and incarceration,” he wrote, noting other cities in America had such laws.”

                      1,500 people in New Mexico still died out of a population of 351,000.

                    2. Yes, pointing out via the historic record that the exact same measures taken 100 years ago were ineffective at preventing 600,000 Americans from dying from the flu is conflating science with politics.

                      You seem to assume that 600,000 would have died regardless. Therefore, nothing happened. It’s a weird notion you folks have.

                    3. You seem to assume that 600,000 would have died regardless. Therefore, nothing happened. It’s a weird notion you folks have.

                      The right seems to have taken on a great affection for counterfactuals. After all, they can’t be proven either way.

                    4. 600,000 did die regardless. That’s the US mortality count from the pandemic.

                    5. And we’ll never know if the number would have been different had different measures been taken. Your argument is counterfactual bullshit against government policy, not an argument against science.

                    6. And we’ll never know if the number would have been different had different measures been taken.

                      That’s proving a negative. We know what WAS implemented, and it didn’t stop 600,000 people from dying.

                      Your argument is counterfactual bullshit against government policy, not an argument against science.

                      No, my argument is based on empirical fact. Just like today, governments tried closing up businesses, stopping public gatherings, quarantining, and implementing mask mandates. 600,000 people died anyway, just like over 450,000 and counting have died from COVID (assuming those numbers haven’t been fluffed with “died WITH COVID” as opposed to “died FROM COVID”) despite governments doing the EXACT SAME FUCKING THING and hoping “this time it will work, it’s Science!”

                  2. But pretty much every single time leftists embrace science it is done so as an excuse to take away freedom. Like trying to get the CDC to treat guns as a virus. Or climate change. Or COVID. Or transgenderism. Or parenting. Or religion.

                    Hell, even something simple like alternatives to gas taxes get chewed up by leftists in the name of science and technology. Cannot simply provide an odometer reading during annual car inspection and pay a per-mile tax, no…leftists want to force every car to include GPS units that records all travel. And this would never be used for authoritarian purposes, oh no, never, trust us.

                    1. That doesn’t make the science wrong. It means they’re evil for using it as an excuse to increase government involvement in our lives. Rejecting science because of the policy implications is stupid.

                    2. “That doesn’t make the science wrong. It means they’re evil for using it as an excuse to increase government involvement in our lives. Rejecting science because of the policy implications is stupid.

                      The point was that there seems to be no science that the left will not embrace as their reasons for doing evil.

                      I never suggested rejecting the science, just the premise that the left can use science for good. They never have, they always use science to justify their assaults on peoples’ rights.

          2. Slowing the spread just to slow it isn’t a good thing. We want to minimize the time the at-risk must isolate, minimize the lockdowns, etc etc etc.

            1. What is this fantasy protection of the at risk because the virus is still getting through. They are all already doing everything they can. Check your local hospital.

              If you want it go and give a big sloppy kiss to someone with it. Then go home and do the same for your friends and loved ones after a few weeks when you start to feel the symptoms. You will be doing them a favor after all.

              The more virus there is around the more people will get sick or die. There is no way around that.

              1. But somehow locking down EVERYBODY is supposed to work? WTF?

                1. It is pretty weak passive defense. Reducing exposure reduces the viral load in the environment. It also comes at a significant human cost. I am in favor of a voluntary program not a law based one.

                  There are better tools coming in now. There was some promising news from Israel which is basically a giant experiment between them and Pfizer. They found that in those vaccinated who tested positive the viral load was much smaller than the unvaccinated. This should mean less chance of transmission.

          3. Read a book that doesn’t require Imagine Ink to finish, and try making a real, actual argument instead of the gobbledygook you did there.

            1. Try separating science from politics.

              1. Yes, pointing out via the historic record that the exact same measures taken 100 years ago were ineffective at preventing 600,000 Americans from dying from the flu is conflating science with politics.

                1. “Trump didn’t wear a mask and he won the elections and there’s books saying masks don’t do shit and the left likes masks because of a conspiracy to take over the world so masks are bullshit because the left likes them and if you disagree you’re a leftist MAGA 2021!”

                  1. “I don’t like it when real, actual events contradict my virtue-signaling and appeals to Science!, so I’ll pretend that I give a shit about separating science and politics!”

                    1. Except that I’m as opposed to masks as anyone who is opposed to masks. Just not because of politics.

                      But what I say about what I think doesn’t matter. You and JesseAz and the rest will tell me I’m wrong and tell me what I really think.

                    2. You just spent several comments arguing that “somebody should do something, because we can’t do nothing.” What you think about it is pretty clear, which is probably why you got so ass-blasted about it

                    3. You just spent several comments arguing that “somebody should do something, because we can’t do nothing.”

                      Please quote me where I said that, because it seems to me like you’re doing the standard “I can’t argue against what he said so I’ll start arguing against stereotypes and attribute them to him” trope.

                    4. So nothing makes a difference? Nothing at all. There are no adjustments we can make to our interaction with each other that will slow the spread of this virus.

                2. “If it’s not 100% effective then it’s not worth doing at all!”

                  1. “If it makes me feel like it’s effective, let’s do it!”

                    1. More like “let’s force YOU to do it.”

                      Nobody would care if maskers wanted to wear them forever. Or if they wanted to stay home forever.

              2. Try separating science from advocacy dickhead.

        2. But it all comes down to politics. If you’re on the right then you won’t wear a mask because you want to piss off any leftists while virtue signal to your fellow conservatives. Right?

          Would you befriend someone who owns a few cloth masks? I don’t think you would. I think that the fact that they own reusable masks would disgust your conservative sensibilities and you would be unable to be friends with them. You’d probably be an asshole and accuse them of other political crimes as you berate them for voting for Biden, all over masks.

          That’s what this article is all about. And you’re a prime example.

          1. Hitting the sauce early this morning, I see.

            1. If that’s your response then I know I hit my mark.

              1. Drunkenness apparently causes circular reasoning, too.

          2. I think we may make a mistake in trying to make the scientific arguments against masks, lockdowns, etc. The real argument is that lockdowns and other forced NPIs are fucking evil and unacceptably destructive no matter how dangerous the virus is and should never have been tolerated in the first place.

            1. The key word in your sentence is “forced.” Yes I agree the destruction of the economy and our social structures because of government reaction to this virus is beyond evil.

              However that doesn’t mean masks and social distancing are ineffective.

              1. Yeah, it needs to be two arguments. Science doesn’t tell you what policy is preferable. A big problem here is that any science about the current virus problem is in its infancy. Data is all kind of fucked up and still very incomplete. So anyone claiming that the science is settled in any direction is full of shit. It looks to me like the pro-lockdown side is abusing science in a worse way, but I will admit an extreme bias on this. As soon as the mandates started, it became political. This is the greatest general assault on individual liberty that has happening in my lifetime for sure and it has to be stopped.

              2. Masks are pretty fucking ineffective if the wearer isn’t sick.

                1. No, see, they are 100% effective at preventing transmission of a virus from the wearer if the wearer is not infected.

                  1. If the wearer isn’t sick, there is no possibility of transmission.
                    Can’t divide by 0

                    1. Zero is the numerator.

            2. +1. Engaging them on these terms is largely conceding the argument.

              When it intersects with policy, scientific consensus is indistinguishable from science itself. Making an argument with minority views is self-defeating.

        3. I read the book 1491. and it discussed how even Indian tribes would not allow others to visit to avoid the disease spread by the Europeans. they Locked down. it didn’t work then either.

    2. “”How many innocent people has SleepyJoe killed with the China virus this year?””

      Probably less than Cuomo.

      1. Cuomo killed thousands of people for partisan political gain.

  20. Many business executives have risen to the challenge, advocating positions on gun control, immigration, and race relations, whether because they sense an opening to promote their opinions, or just a marketing opportunity.

    The latter reason I can at least respect.

  21. Agree – bad move with the potential for alienating both customers and employees.

    1. Uh oh, are the spambots becoming sentient?

      1. Where’s the link? I want my Gladiator Inflatable.

  22. The Left’s polarization of everything is policy. Most Republicans are happy to let their neighbors do their own thing, but the Left must control all.

    1. We must ALL do the same thing even if the benefit is only to some. And excepting the ruling class.

    2. You say that, but my MAGA cousin went over to his neighbor and started screaming at them for being traitors for letting their kids play with toys built in China.

      Most people are happy to let their neighbors do their own thing. But the True Believers(tm) on both the Left and the Right are not.

      1. Funny I just bought my g kids an educational toy to help them learn Hebrew since the school is closed. Hebrew letters and animals that sort of thing.

        Guess where it was made?

        Sounds like your cousin is going to take it out on the kids by banning them from your house. Too bad. Some people are just nuts.

        1. “Genocide is totes cool as long as it’s not jews!”

          1. What is happening in China is a very serious thing. Unilateral trade wars and tariffs have not helped. You need a multilateral effort to deal with it. That has not happened. In fact the opposite occurred.

            I do not know if the new government has what it takes to do that. I am skeptical.

            1. Trade wars and tariffs weren’t mentioned, your choice of economic support was.

      2. “Most people are happy to let their neighbors do their own thing.”

        Based on my own experience, I’m not so sure such people are the majority anymore.

  23. people often choose positions on matters such as vaccines or mask-wearing not based on a rational assessment of the issues

    Haha, those people who keep pointing out the fact that masks do absolutely nothing are just as stupid as anti-vaxers. Am I right guys?

    1. Whatever one thinks about the effectiveness of masks in preventing transmission what is interesting is the sharp political partisan divide on what is essentially a scientific question.

      1. ” what is interesting is the sharp political partisan divide on what is essentially a scientific question.”

        No, your comment is simply a distinct distillation of the problem. Specifically that some people insist upon dictating personal decisions using whatever tool is at hand.

        Which is not science, but authoritarianism.

        Science is, at best a process for generating knowledge. That such knowledge is created does not automatically dictate what should be be done. There is a categorical difference between what is and what ought to be.

        Individuals choose the ‘ought’ based upon a number of factors, one of which is the ‘is.’ The others often involve value judgements and personal priorities involving all the other ‘isses’ in their own lives.

        To deny either the existence of those other personal factors, or their fundamental right to choose and prioritize is to advocate for a dictatorship of an anointed elite under the guise of ‘science.’

        This has been explained here enough times that you must clearly have taken note. That you persist in avoiding or denying it is your problem.

        1. I never said anything about what people ought to do. I specifically called it a scientific question.

          I am making an observation about partisanship and how that shapes opinion on what are essentially non political issues.

          I fail to see what is authoritarian about that.

          1. Homey please.

            Your calling it a ‘scientific question’ is not remotely the same as saying ‘well, it’s all academic anyway.’

            That you think science, or any sort of empiric knowledge stands apart from politics, is naive at best. Ignorant at worst.

            There simply is no single point from which all things can be so judged. People get to choose their own frame of reference and their own set of values.

            1. That you think science, or any sort of empiric knowledge stands apart from politics, is naive at best. Ignorant at worst.

              Politics has become religion. The faithful can turn 1+1=2 into 1+1=3 if they have enough guns. Kill enough people for saying the sum is 2, and soon people will say it’s 3.

              1. The faithful can turn 1+1=2 into 1+1=3 if they have enough guns. Kill enough people for saying the sum is 2, and soon people will say it’s 3.

                Literally what some of the educators do today. 2+2=5 is acceptable if the student grasps the mathematical concept even though they arrive at the wrong answer. Instead of guns, shaming/cancelling students for not agreeing with the ‘education’ has the same effect.

                1. Math is the domain of white supremacists…

                  ———————————
                  A mathematics guide sent out to Oregon schools tells educators that asking students to show their work in math class is a form of white supremacy.

                  In an email sent out by the Oregon Department of Education, teachers were encouraged to enroll in a course called “A Pathway to Equitable Math Instruction.” The course came with an 82-page instructional guide that lists the ways in which white supremacy is perpetuated in math class.

                  “White supremacy culture infiltrates math classrooms in everyday teacher actions,” the guide reads. “Coupled with the beliefs that underlie these actions, they perpetuate educational harm on Black, Latinx, and multilingual students, denying them full access to the world of mathematics.”

                  The guide offers a year-long framework for “deconstructing racism in mathematics.” It calls for “visibilizing [sic] the toxic characteristics of white supremacy culture with respect to math.”

                  Examples of classroom actions that allegedly perpetuate white supremacy include asking students to show their work, focusing on getting the right answer, tracking student success, and grading students.

                  The guide claims that asking students to show their work is “a crutch” for teachers to understand what students are thinking. This is considered white supremacy because it allegedly reinforces “paternalism” and “worship of the written word.” Worship of the written word is an alleged foundation of white supremacy culture, which reinforces documentation and writing skills.

                  Math classes that focus on helping students get the right answer are also a form of perpetuating white supremacy. The guide claims that calling answers “right and wrong” perpetuates objectivity, which is considered a tenet of white culture.

                  “The concept of mathematics being purely objective is unequivocally false, and teaching it is even much less so,” the guide reads. “Upholding the idea that there are always right and wrong answers perpetuate objectivity.”

                  Tracking students is considered problematic as well. The guide considers tracking students a form of “paternalism and powerhoarding” as it is based on the idea that adults know what is right for students.

                  Certain grading practices are also a form of white supremacy, specifically participation grades. According to the organization “Grading for Equity,” which parrots the idea that grading practices reinforce inequity, grading any form of behavior leads to “inaccurate, confusing and even misleading grading.”

                  Not using “culturally relevant pedagogy” in word problems is considered a form of white supremacy too. According to the guide, it would be a good practice to tell students to “use Ankara fabric to teach mathematical concepts such as tessellations, fractions, area, percentages, etc.” But, if the problem told students to use wood or an object that does not have cultural relevance, this would be considered upholding white supremacy.

                  To be more culturally inclusive, teachers must “adapt homework policies to fit the needs of students of color.” Teachers are also asked to “identify and challenge the ways that math is used to uphold capitalist, imperialist, and racist views.”

                  The instructional material also suggests teachers expose students to examples of people who have used math as a form of “resistance.”

                  1. Please tell me this is a parody. Please.

                    1. No. It is not.

                  2. Could this shit be any more insulting and demeaning to non-white people and cultures?
                    By the same arguments, it seems like the whole idea of formal education is white supremacy. So we’d better stop making non-whites go to school. That will work out well I’m sure.

                    1. Algebra is cultural appropriation from Muslims, right? Didn’t they invent the concept of zero?

                    2. I think the Muslims got it from the Indians. The word algebra comes from Arabic, though. And a few others came up with 0 independently.
                      It’s such an amazingly ignorant and blinkered worldview. And one that weirdly credits white people with inventing almost everything that is useful. And it can only lead to people being less well educated and less capable of competing in the world that actually exists.

                    3. And one that weirdly credits white people with inventing almost everything that is useful.

                      Rut ro. Can’t even express that thought without being accused of being racist. I mean, WHAT ABOUT GEORGE WASHINGTON CARVER!!!1!!one!!11

                      Seriously though, I’m still waiting for the long list of non-white scientists and industrialists who have helped humanity take great strides towards the standard of living we now enjoy.

                    4. Could this shit be any more insulting and demeaning to non-white people and cultures?

                      True. In simpler terms, as a blanket statement these kids are not as smart as the other kids so lets dumb down the whole curriculum, not grade anything, do away with competition, reward mediocrity and punish excellence. Good plan.

                      If we lower the bar low enough, everyone can reach it. Sad. That these MFs actually believe they are doing the righteous thing is scary.

    2. You saw the same thing when the issue of hydroxychloroquine came up. Opinion divided on political lines. It has since been demonstrated to be ineffective.

      https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2772922

      1. I can find studies supporting my view, too.

        So which one is right?
        https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7534595/

        1. I leave it to you to decide for yourself based on the evidence. I can tell you that hardly any US hospitals are using it.

        2. I can also caution that the JAMA study was a double blinded placebo controlled study, the gold standard, in a well known peer reviewed journal.

          The article you linked to was just a review of googled articles of anything the authors, two doctors in a sports medicine clinic could find, published in an open source journal with no review. There is no statistical analysis. So I would take it with a grain of salt. Or zinc.

          1. The JAMA study was limited to severe cases. Isn’t that a potential limiting factor? Does the study indicate whether or not the drug could have benefits in less severe or non-hospitalized cases?

            For someone who claims to rely on ‘the science’ you are sure quick to make blanket statements that cannot be supported by the evidence you provide.

            1. https://spinstrangenesscharm.wordpress.com/2020/08/28/covid19-breaking-news-august-28-2020-new-belgian-large-cohort-study-shows-hydroxychloroquine-significantly-reduces-mortality/

              The fact is that the science is mixed.

              The science was also effectively muddied once the drug got mentioned by Trump and then, rather than leaving the question open, many people began an all too obvious campaign of negativity.

              1. You are agreeing with me. Once the drug was mentioned by Trump it became a partisan issue and people will use confirmation bias to support whatever they have already made their minds up about.

                Which is why politicians should know when to keep their mouths shut about something they do not know anything about.

                1. No, I’m not agreeing with you.

                  I’m especially not agreeing with you about what anyone – politician or otherwise – should or should not opine about.

                  Trump’s early statements about HCQ were extremely equivocal, but also hopeful. That you find that somehow problematic again speaks to the authoritarian current running through your every word.

                  You think science dictates. IT. Does. Not.

                  1. Science doesn’t dictate. True. However politicians use science as an excuse for policy. Rejecting science because of the policy created by opportunistic politicians is stupid.

            2. It doesn’t answer that question. They only looked at hospitalized patients.

              1. “It has since been demonstrated to be ineffective.”

                Then how the fuck do you justify making that statement????

                1. It is ineffective in hospitalized patients which is what I had in mind. That is based on solid evidence.

                  Take whatever you want.

                  1. What you now claim you “had in mind” and what you actually said are not remotely in agreement.

                    Nice correction.

                    Not.

                    1. Oh no! Someone made inconsistent statements! Must harp on that forever! Never let them live it down! All their arguments are moot because they were inconsistent and you have evidence! You win! You got a zinger! You got a point! Yay you!

                    2. He misrepresented the science.

                      Blatantly.

                      The same science he says tells us the answer.

                      Yet he refuses to see the obvious problem with his position.

                      Meanwhile you drop by to defend him from what he cannot defend.

                      Yeah, that’s exactly the support his ‘argument’ needed.

                    3. I didn’t defend anything. I was making fun of you.

      2. HCl became political only after Trump brought it up. Something which was also politicized, but given less attention, was the use of steroid inhalers, specifically budesonide. A doctor in Texas reported success with using this to mitigate symptoms, and was immediately labeled a quack by the mainstream media, in conjunction with a lot of hand-wringing by the Maskthulu cult that it wasn’t a “cure”.

        A few months later, Australia did a study on the same thing, and found that a course of inhaled steroids following symptomatic diagnosis reduced hospitalizations by 90 percent. At that level, they had to cancel the study early and put the placebo group on the same treatment because they couldn’t ethically continue keeping sick people off of a course of treatment with that kind of success rate.

        Same thing with Vitamin D. No, it’s not a cure. But when you have a correlation between severe COVID illnesses and deaths (and the way this virus works, it’s almost designed to hammer people who are Vitamin D-deficient), and D deficiencies, which has been known since at least April, a logical course of action would be to encourage people to take a multivitamin, or at least D supplements. Or, at least encourage the population to get outside, in the sun, on a regular basis and get exercise.

        The medical community, led by that smug piece of shit goblin Fauci, established a specific narrative shortly after this thing went nationwide, and no amount of real, actual science is going to dissuade them or their Squealer media mouthpieces from repeating the mantra ad nauseum.

        1. Meanwhile Dexamethasone 6 mg orally daily has become a standard element of treatment of Covid positive patients.

          1. Also Remdesivir.

            1. Given the limited availability and need to be infused I’d hesitate to call it standard.

              But it is showing good results.

              There is now also a combo with another monoclonal – Etesimab.

        2. You are critical of the medical community. Ok but keep in mind the the pulmonologist generally doesn’t care about all of that. A lot of medicine is empirical. They want to know what works which is easy to see in sick patients. If you find it works use it which has resulted in other treatments and supportive care for this disease.

          1. You are critical of the medical community. Ok but keep in mind the the pulmonologist generally doesn’t care about all of that.

            What the fuck does a pulmonologist have to do with this? I’m pointing out exactly how various treatment methods were marginalized early on specifically because they didn’t conform to an established public health narrative that had been set by the media and dipshits like Fauci. Let’s not forget that PA’s tranny public health director–the one now working for the Biden administration–said it was okay to put COVID patients in nursing homes at the EXACT SAME TIME he pulled his mother out of the one she was staying at. Or the freakout over the supposed lack of ventilators that ended up never being used.

            COVID was politicized from the very beginning. If it hadn’t been, these treatments would have been given more attention, and doctors wouldn’t have been called quacks for promoting ones that showed success in his own patients–especially months after the fact when the same course of treatment was so successful, a study devoted to it had to be cut short so the remaining participants could be put on it. Gotta get that brand-new, annual common cold “vaccine” out, now that we’ve recommended that everyone get a flu vaccine, too!

            1. Because the pulmonologist knows what works and what does not. There is no reluctance to try things politics be damned. At this point they have seen and treated enough patients to have a good idea of how to do that with what is available.

              It is one thing to read what is in the media. It is another to have boots on the ground.

              So a good way to judge something is to see what the pros are doing.You will find some out there prescribing this drug but it has fallen out of favor.

              1. “Because the pulmonologist knows what works and what does not.”

                LOL.

                Look at you. Mr. Trust the Science is now going to tell us all about the art of medicine.

                “It’s empiric.”

                Which is a fancy fucking word for “my best guess at this moment.”

                I thought you were two faced, now I see that you are just in waaaay over your head.

            2. Anyway the point I was trying to make was about the empirical method in medicine. You try things to see what works. That has largely supported the hypothesis that this drug does little or nothing for covid infection. It was tried extensively. If it worked as advertised we would know by now.

              Anyway I really got sidetracked into this which was not the point I was trying to make. The discussion actually demonstrates that point very well. I could bring up a number of similar claims and responses would be predictable and correlate to political orientation.

              1. I could bring up a number of similar claims and responses would be predictable and correlate to political orientation.

                With near 100% predictability.

                Science only matters when it supports your politics. Otherwise it’s junk.

            3. Oh, they’re “tranny”! What the fuck does being a “tranny” have to do with this?

              1. Someone who can’t accept physical reality shouldn’t be in a position to direct the health of millions of people.

    3. Yeah. So frequently people who claim this are trying to say only one position is legitimately and objectively true and anyone holding the other position is brainwashed or partisan.

      And I frequently know exactly which position is regarded as partisan, which is typically the view I hold.

      1. The question is why should it be partisan at all?

        1. Because the elites have a vested interest in making it so, and ensuring their partisan view is the one being used as public policy.

  24. Anyone who frequents a tavern that has CNN (or any other shouty cable news channel) on the teevee above the bar deserves all the bitterness and divisiveness he gets.

    1. frequents a tavern
      Like that happens in today’s world. You’re funny.

  25. People still don’t get that the problem is not between liberals and conservatives, whatever that means today which is not much. The problem is government itself.

    “Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys”
    PJ O’Rourke

    1. Unless the conspiracy is approved by the party leaders.

  26. The drooling brainwashed are conditioned like Pavlov’s dogs to latch onto anything associated with their bigotry.

    Stupid people inspire corruption. We might have a better society if it wasn’t for lazy ignorant people unable and unwilling to make the effort to discern between and choose truth over lies.

    Maintaining a principled stance while ignoring counter arguments is bigotry.

  27. Toosilly had a deadline. Toosilly doesn’t dare address anything specific about what is going on in DC, lest he be ‘mistaken’ for one of those types.

    So instead Toosilly breaks out the boilerplate.

    Toosilly and the Reason Stylebook. Like cookies and milk.

  28. “Politics Is Seeping Into Our Daily Life and Ruining Everything”

    Instead of pointing fingers, Reason editors and writers should reread their hundreds of TDS headlines and articles during the past five years, and then apologize for campaigning to ruin everything.

    In the past several days, both Joe Biden and Kamala Harris have deceitfully claimed that covid vaccines were NOT available to Americans until after Biden was sworn in (even though Biden and Harris received their vaccines in December, when Trump was president).

    But as usual, the Trump hating left wing news media (including Reason) refuses to expose this Big Lie by Biden and Harris.

    1. And in the same town hall he said there were 50 million doses when he took office. He misspoke and it doesn’t even matter

      If you had a good point that was true, you’d be using it. Instead, you’re stuck on things easily debunked…

  29. Either you believe that people make economic choices or you don’t. People aren’t elevating politics and joining activist/conspiracy movements and getting riled up to denounce those who disagree because someone tricked them into it, they are doing it because they want to, because they want the sense of belonging or a sense of fighting for social justice or saving the planet or stopping the socialists or making America great (either again or for the first time).

    It may not end well, but people choose the life they want.

    1. Fighting to maintain a principled stance, while fighting to cancel counter arguments, is bigotry.

      Everyone can cancel, advance their bigotry.

  30. This article ALMOST gets it. Almost. Left and right have fundamentally different world views and values, and they’re irreconcilable at many points. Some principles are not negotiable or subject to compromise, or they’re not really principles. Pro-life conservatives and pro-abortion liberals have a fundamentally different understanding of the problem, and for people committed to those views, it’s not a “compromise” position. Pro-gun and anti-gun Americans have fundamentally conflicting positions on the issue, and they’re not “compromise” positions. Democratic socialists and capitalists have fundamentally different values, and they can’t be reconciled to each other, regardless of the amount of cultural or intellectual exchange happens between the two.

    Personally, prior to 2016, I could live just fine in the company of liberals and progressives. But we now live in a culture where a conservative Trump supporter can’t even plow his neighbor’s driveway, just to be kind, without some leftist asshole writing a condescending article comparing him to a Nazi doing a nice thing for another Nazi. Why anyone want to live in such miserable circumstances if it’s not necessary? Why should anyone live and work in a place where they’re fundamentally different from the people around them, and forced to have strained relationships with the people around them? And with today’s technology, it’s becoming less necessary for people with fundamentally different values to have to inhabit the same space.

    Instead of realizing that people are just following their natural inclination to live where they are the happiest and most comfortable, this article just shits on them for choosing to live their lives how they want.

    1. “Personally, prior to 2016, I could live just fine in the company of liberals and progressives. ”

      Prior to 2016 they were indeed more ‘tolerable.’ But that was largely because they felt things were going according to plan. Anyone who lost their shit on or after 2016 has revealed who they really are and what they really want.

      No matter how they pose and primp by writing articles such as this.

      1. And they think that again now, thanks to the power of unlimited unverified unpostmarked mail ballots. And if they’re allowed to make that scenario permanent, they will actually be right this time, because we’ll never have another honest national level election in this country ever again.

        Do you know that Sleepy Joe is still making trips to places in Georgia and Michigan and Wisconsin to thank all the assholes who stole the election on his behalf? Most people of course have no clue that he is. But I do.

      2. Since 2016, my social circle is definitely smaller, because progressives have become insufferable to be around. You can’t go out for drinks and talk about normal things anymore. EVERY conversation has become an opportunity to inject some kind of anti-Trump or woke bullshit. When I’m with my more conservative or libertarian friends, we talk about the kids, the new car, vacation plans… Normal person things. Nobody brings up AOC or Nancy Pelosi, because we don’t want to be miserable and angry all the time. That’s why I choose to spend my time with those people and not liberals- they’re nice to be around. That’s why I choose to live in a rural area. The other people who live there share my values, and they’re nice to live around. I don’t value what’s available in places where liberals tend to live. That’s my own business.

        I also don’t see a problem with individuals making employment or purchasing decisions based on what they value. If I value a comfortable, non-toxic work environment, with coworkers who are pleasant to work with, that’s my decision as an employee. If I don’t want to support Nike or Disney or whomever, and I’m willing to forego the benefit of their products, that’s my prerogative, the same as it’s the prerogative of progs to go buy David Hogg’s resistance pillow- and it’s zero of my business.

        1. Michelle Obama made it crystal clear years ago. They will not let you rest. They will not leave you in peace.

          Yet the authors and editors here at Reason will not accept their words on their face. They continue in the charade that the crocodile does not exist.

      3. Anyone who lost their shit on or after 2016 has revealed who they really are and what they really want.

        Only partly true. Trump is ‘unclean’ by many people’s standards just because he talks like the palooka at the end of the bar who is half intoxicated. And they don’t want to dirty themselves with him or being associated with him. That’s why they hate him so much. ‘W’ was similarly disliked because he talked ‘regular’ with a bit of a ‘twang’ and these people looked down on him. They want someone to seduce them with a syrupy voice and wispy, empty platitudes, you know, an Obama.

    2. You’ve been living in a delusion if you think people should compromise their inalienable rights. Compromising them isn’t what the constitution is about.

      Maybe you recognize that personal responsibility is missing from society. Well, the solution isn’t compromising someone else’s rights for your irresponsibility.

      The solution is respecting everyone’s rights when they are enjoyed responsibly.

      Don’t cancel me. Respect truth.

      Don’t take my guns. Respect my responsible use.

      Don’t kill baby humans. Be responsible for your body.

      It’s not about compromise.

        1. You are pining for compromise in irreconcilable conflicts, are you not?

          1. No. I am saying people with irreconcilable differences naturally choose not to cohabitate, and that’s fine. Technological advances that have decentralized a lot of modern life make it less necessary to have to cohabitate with people whose world views are diametrically opposed to your own, so people are just choosing to surround themselves with other people who share their values because they shouldn’t have to compromise their deeply held convictions in the interest of “getting along.”

            1. Except people’s inalienable rights are being violated by people with different views.

              That never was and will never be tolerated. We are past slavery.

              “Why should anyone live and work in a place where they’re fundamentally different from the people around them, and forced to have strained relationships with the people around them?“

              Because if you don’t respect the inalienable rights guaranteed everyone in the constitution, you are the problem living in the wrong nation.

    3. What pro-lifers (and Trump was NOT a pro-lifer prior to 2016) fail to understand is that there are fewer abortions today than when Roe-v-Wade was being heard in the supreme court. Despite a much larger population.

      How is this possible? Because the solution was not government and laws and police and guns. The solution is to reduce and eliminate the causes of abortion. And legality does not cause abortion which have been happening for thousands of years. Desperate mothers seek out abortion. Poverty leads to it, and we have less now because we have less actual poverty. Social shame leads to it, but we have next to no shame over single mothers anymore, expect for those pro-lifers continuing to spread it around. Desperation and shame. Get rid of that and you get rid of 90% of abortion. Most of the rest can be whittled down without government proscriptions as well.

      It’s crazy that most pro-lifers are devoutly religious, most are Christians. But nowhere in the New Testament does it say “Thou shalt solicit Caesar.

      I’m pro-life. I’ve marched in pro-life marches. But as a libertarian I realize that Caesar is not the answer.

      1. Making murder illegal doesn’t stop it altogether, but it slows it down the best we can.

        1. Yes, but was murder less common when it was legal?

          My point is that abortion is less common now that it is legal. That’s nothing to shake your single-issue partisan stick out.

          Moreover, most abortion is NOT murder. The idea that a gamete is a legal person is a fiction. You would defend the functioning of a gamete, yet praise it when Trump and Biden put children in cages because they have brown skin, and couldn’t bother to lift your tongue to protest the surge of executions at the end of Trump’s term. You don’t care about life, you care about partisan signal waving.

          p.s. Third trimester abortions should be illegal because the fetuses are viable and have ‘quickened’, which is the traditional definition of life. A mother who waits until the third trimester is not desperate.

          1. Bullshit!

            There are 750,000 abortion murders per year in the US alone.

            It’s currently ongoing and the greatest genocide in earth’s history.

            1. Rob, I’m surprised you are worried about this. You know very well that blacks and hispanics have the highest incidence of abortion. Guys like you should be funding abortion clinics to get rid of the people you regard as scum.

              1. Don’t let reality interfere with your bigotry.

              2. Racist or not at least he is opposed to the murder of innocent human lives.

                In that sense anyone can credibly claim moral superiority over the pro abortion crowd.

                1. At any point does the fact that you have seen zero evidence of my bigotry influence your bigoted perspective?

                  I make valid points with the evidence of logic and science. They only offend your untenable bigoted position.

                  You can’t refute an argument you won’t consider.

      2. K. But what does that have to do with people choosing not to live around people with irreconcilable differences in world view?

    4. I keep politics to myself in company. If it does come up I just say “oh I’m a Libertarian” they look at me like I just said that I was from Mars and that stops the conversation.

      1. “I’m getting way way too much attention at this party. Let me mention that I’m a libertarian and they’ll leave me alone.”

        1. “Leave me alone” is a personal credo, not just a political one.

        2. It’s like the word is an incantation that achieves the desired effect in social situations. Maybe all we need now is a PA system that reaches every ear.

  31. I will boycott a company because of politics. But only if they make politics their guiding principle.

    So I could care less if the owners of Chik-fil-a donate to causes I disapprove. The purpose of Chik-fil-a is to make tasty chikken sammiches. But stupid pillows from both the left and the right whose guiding principles are explicitly partisan politics? Fuck that, I’m buying for foreign owned IKEA. Joanne or Hobby Lobby? Depends on which is closer at the time. I could care less what the owners voted for.

    Most big companies do donate to campaigns. But they tend to donate to both sides fairly equally. It’s a necessary business practice. And it starts at the small town level where the local councilmen gets to pick and choose which shops get to compete with his cousin’s shop. Microsoft never had lobbyists. Then they got sued for antitrust. Now they have their own building on K Street. Greasing political palms is how business survives in the Obama/Trump era. Cronyism has won, free markets have lost.

    And friends? If they yammer on and on and on about their candidate or party, screw them. I won’t hang out with them. Life’s too short for that level of hatred in one’s life. Because politics is all about hatred. It about dividing the world in the the Us and the hated Other. It tells you who to hate and when. I could care less who my friends vote for, I just detach myself from them what that’s all they can talk about.

    1. You will cancel for a political agenda.

  32. https://summit.news/2021/02/16/report-national-guard-to-stay-in-dc-through-fall-2021/

    The email was written by Robert Salesses who is covering the duties of Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Global Security.

    It states:

    “If it’s not possible to sustain at the current level with NG personnel, we need to establish the number of NG personnel (DCNG and out-of-state) we can sustain for an extended period – at least through Fall 2021 – and understand additional options for providing DoD support, to include use of reserve personnel, as well as active component.”

    1. Strike a pose.

      It’s all they got.

  33. “people often choose positions on matters such as vaccines or mask-wearing not based on a rational assessment of the issues, but on a plug-and-play adoption of their tribe’s stances”

    No, I chose to not wear a mask wherever I am not absolutely forced to because the data (from the CDC mind you, not fox news) shows covid is not statistically dangerous to anybody who isn’t fairly close to death as is whether by very old age or already having serious health issues.

  34. I choose to not patronize leftist businesses especially silicon valley big tech giants because by purchasing their products and making them richer I empower them and aid them in their pro tyranny, pro communism, anti freedom political agenda. Their agenda makes my life significantly worse the more it’s enacted. Why would any sane person feed the beast that wants to destroy him?
    In an era of unlimited government power and the US constitution not remotely being enforced, politics isn’t some abstract, insignificant personal preference. After a year of completely off the rails, tyrannical government coming to the US, it is crystal clear that unfortunately there is nothing that affects life more than the policies enacted by government. I sincerely wish it wasn’t the case, but it is.

  35. The problem is the “Democratic” ‘Revolutionary Plans’ for Nazism of the left.

    Nazism = National Socialism. ‘National’ is the biggest part.
    The USA is defined by the U.S. Constitution (PERIOD)…
    It is a Constitutional Union of Republican States (PERIOD)…

    That is the basis of every ‘National’ partisan debate and is also being ‘hidden’ from the narrative. Frankly; I don’t care if liberal cities pass UN-Constitutional law within their own ‘cities’ but it because a massive ‘Nazi’ scale issue when done in the National Government.

  36. Interesting angle. I thought this might be about how everything is political these days. From the size of your soda to how much water your shower can use. From where your sugar comes from to how you can heat your home. What does the gas mileage on your car need to be? How is your food labeled, who are you forced to make cakes for, blah blah blah, on and on and on.

  37. It was around 1963 that the Federal Budget “official outlays” went over 100 billiion dollars. A recent article on NBC about fraud in connection with the first huge COVID payout mentions the huge amounts that were siphoned off due to holes in the States’ Unemployment Benefits programs. The total amount was said to be “well over 100 billion dollars.”

    This is an example of a bipartisan issue that we need to work together on.

    1. It’s somewhat bi-partisan. Neither side takes waste, debts, deficits or any other financial matter seriously. The left are economically ignorant enough to truly believe money is a made up concept and doesn’t represent anything in the physical world or is a motivating factor for people. The right talks about fiscal conservatism, but doesn’t walk the walk at all these days and are only slightly less enamored with money growing on trees, modern monetary theory garbage than the left.

      1. …And NONE of it is done Constitutionally. There is NO federal authority for redistribution.

        1. True, but if you take the 10th amendment as it’s written (instead of completely ignoring it) there’s no federal authority in the constitution whatsoever either for social security, medicare/medicaid/obamacare, dept of education and every alphabet soup department from the FAA to the FCC to the FDA to the DEA. The constitution at this point is a meaningless piece of paper unfortunately which is exactly how the statist left like it.

          1. The Constitution says what 9 old codgers in DC say it says. My hope against hope is that Thomas, Barrett, and Gorsuch will form a nucleus that will start overthrowing lots of that BS socialism that is without Constitutional support.

            This is the saddest thing about Trump’s loss and tantrum that cost Georgia. Biden and cronies can put in any old Leninist they want when the next Justice falls.

            1. I hope you’re right. I think a constitutional convention, secession of half the states and/or civil war is more likely when things get even nastier is more likely.
              The left have completely lifted off the mask as being total pro-tyranny, anti-freedom, pro-centrally planned economy communists. Unfortunately most of the citizenry has also shown themselves to be too uncourageous to do anything about it or are stupid enough to actually support it.
              The left will continue to push until we have mass civil unrest and an economic collapse that’ll make the great depression look like a walk in the park. With the left controlling the presidency, house and senate as well as just getting away with massive voter fraud, they simply will not stop. Only when things get so bad and people don’t have much to lose anymore will the leftists be put in their place. The question is when that will happen, in what form and what will be built from the ashes.

  38. RIP Rush Limbaugh

    1. Now watch the party of tolerance celebrate his death.

      1. Yes, this should be a display of class, or lack thereof.

      2. Huffpo:

        Rush Limbaugh, Bigoted King Of Talk Radio, Dies At 70
        Limbaugh saturated America’s airwaves with cruelty and conspiracies, amassing millions of listeners and transforming the Republican Party.

        Prophecy fulfilled.

    2. Sorry to hear that. Agree or disagree, he was the one who popularized and
      made talk radio the phenomenon we know of today. And agree or disagree with the victim, cancer is a damnable monster that cannot be slayed quickly enough!

      1. I used to listen to him on the car radio years ago. Not for the content but he was really very good at talk radio. I think him, the late Art Bell and Howard Stern in the early days were the best at it.

  39. Politics Is Seeping Into Our Daily Life and Ruining Everything

    Soo…Is 2Chilli proposing we use Ramjack and Flex Seal to hold together our divided house?

    Like Phil Swift says in his battle armor made entirely of Flex Seal:

    “Yeehaw! Liberty Or Death!”

    1. Flex seal is awesome.

      1. Flex Products–Flex Seal, Flex Shot, Flex Tape, Flex Paint–are among the few “As Seen On TV” products that actually live up to their claims!

        Mighty Putty will hold together the house divided too. I held a landlord’s window in from falling to the ground after it was rotted through from a window air conditioner unit’s moisture…all using Mighty Putty! I don’t know if it’s still around, but it was the real deal!

        Sham-Wow is legitimate, but you can buy cloth bolts of the same material for far less and make your own cloths and masks…without watching that commercial with the dude who acts like he dissolved Vivarin in Monster Energy Drink!

        The Atomic Beam Flashlight is absolute crap! The one part of it you need the most–the switch–is the part that breaks first! Contrary to the commercial, The Atomic Beam Flashlight will not be what to have if the U.S. has a Tiananmen Square! Use a pocket LED flashlight and don’t let it get run over by a tank instead!

        1. I’ve been pleased with my atomic beam flashlight. Maybe it’s the model – I have a smaller one, like 6 inches, that came in a 3 pack.
          Works well, though eats batteries pretty quick.
          Have not yet put it through the tank test though.

          1. I didn’t even run mine over and the switch broke. Buyer beware o this one. The big multi-D-Cell Aluminum or Steel flashlights used by Ossifer Friendly might be better.

  40. anyone else notice Rush has died. I won’t cry but it is a sad day and the left is ecstatic.

    1. Just heard this. Rush was an articulate, funny, and cheerful voice for conservative views. I listened to him a lot in the 90’s, but much less since then. His take on almost every issue was worth hearing, even when I disagreed with him (see war on drugs). He had a unique way of finding the hypocrisy of the media, leftists, and celebrities. And, of course, he made leftist heads explode.

      RIP Rush.

      1. Rush was an articulate, funny, and cheerful voice for conservative views in the 90s. He’s been a not so funny or cheerful shill for the Republican Party since.

    2. Rush died a year ago when Neil Peart kicked it.

      1. I said the same thing when a friend told me the news a few minutes ago.

        1. It wasn’t until a few years ago that Rush Limbaugh or his Producer actually got the idea to play “The Spirit of Radio” as a music bumper.

          Perhaps that is for the best so that Neil and Geddy wouldn’t be doing like Tom Petty with (Fill in the blank politician) who plays “I Won’t Back Down.”

  41. Making politics less important through reducing the ability of government to affect our lives has the potential to make us all healthier and happier.

    Tuccille, you and your fellow idiots at Reason can “both sides” this conflict all you want, but the fact is that everyone to the left of Rand Paul, including neo-con Republicans, wants precisely the opposite. It’s about power and control, and the Establishment means to out-China the Chi-coms.

    Maybe you didn’t hear, but “libertarians” were included on the egregious John Brennan’s list of domestic terrorists in his latest unhinged rant. The Democrats and their leftist shock troops are your enemy, and they want to marginalize and destroy individual liberty and self-reliance, not foster it. And whether you admit it or not, if you are a libertarian, they have declared you to be their enemy. Unless, that is, you’re not really the libertarians you claim to be.

    Wake up and make a decision, you dumbshits.

    1. Actually it would not be a surprise at all if some self identified libertarians were potential terrorists. People pick up the label and don’t really understand or care what it means.

      1. Surrending to the systematic aggressions of the left is not libertarian.

        The NAP is not pacifist.

    2. Sounds like you are saying we need to do the same thing as the asshole leftists and assume that anyone to the left is an evil, dangerous political enemy.
      If you are working at making the right more like the left by adopting their tactics and black and white thinking, then your complaint about “both sides” arguments sound a little hollow.

      I absolutely do think that the left is the far bigger danger at the moment. But I don’t think that joining them in the mud is going to lead to any good results. Winning isn’t so great if you have to destroy what you value to win.

      1. Boycotts of companies by the left are not new at all. When I was a kid in the 70s early 80s my mom would not buy from companies that did not allow their workers to unionize or allegedly used child labor. What didn’t exist yet was that you would then virtue signal about your buying habits on social media, and the DerP parties are themselves nothing but products trying to sell the choices to their consumers, which is protection from the other party.

      2. If you are working at making the right more like the left by adopting their tactics

        I don’t know, the impeachment and disqualification of James Comey, John Brennan, James Clapper, and/or any of their ilk seems like it’s worth any precedential trade-off.

        “Fuck you guys. Go away, forever.”

        1. I could possibly get behind that. I was thinking more about the street level tactics and general cultural trends than the internal government functions and procedures.

      3. But this is also a problem because there are clearly 2 sets of rules for each side to play by. It’s what trump alluded to in his statement about McConnell yesterday. The establishment republicans feign sanctimony for playing by the rules and following “norms” and they’ve got their asses handed to them by democrats who altered voting laws, redrew districts, and used every tool of social and legacy media to maintain a narrative crafted by the likes of Obama, the legacy Intel community, and ground operatives like Stacy Abrams.

        So it’s a catch 22. You either play a rigged game and lose with dignity or you get pulled into the mud and win by fighting back. Much like trump.

        Why trump won, and was able to pull so many libertarians, minorities, and independants is because he was pragmatic. People had more faith in him to do what he said and fight the battles he did more than any other candidate. And that pragmatism is a requirement that 1.) isn’t going away for a republican candidate anytime soon, and 2.) scares the shit out of the status quo establishment folks like McConnell n Romney.

        1. “So it’s a catch 22. You either play a rigged game and lose with dignity or you get pulled into the mud and win by fighting back. Much like trump.”

          If you can win, how is it rigged?
          (And that is nothing like Catch-22)

        2. I don’t buy it. Nixon, Reagan,Bush, and Trump did not in any sense play by the rules and were no better than the democrats.

          There is nothing special about a change in leadership from one party to the other. What would be abnormal would be one party rule indefinitely.

      4. The left today is every bit and more the threat the nazis were in the early 30s

    3. Besides what are they gonna do, put the other half of the country in concentration camps? I don’t see any shock troops around here.

      Government itself scares me. Too much power. Too much government altogether.

      1. Government itself scares me. Too much power. Too much government altogether.

        Indeed, but when the Heffalumps are on top they increase the power of gov, just as the Donkeys do. Each group appears to believe that it will never be turned on them. And the SCOTUS just follows along. Sad.

  42. I just think “reason” needs to be honest and come out of the closet as a center-left publication. Libertarians should look elsewhere for rational, calm analysis based on libertarian principles.

    1. Try “Unherd” or “Quillette” or “Spiked” or, of course, “Babylon Bee”

      1. Babylon Bee is problematic, because good satire is so often prophecy.

        (Especially when the left is involved)

  43. One thing I’ve noticed among some armed Militia types like Boogbois, Oath Keepers, 3 Percenters, etc. is that at least some of them carry AK-47s or Chinese SKSs.

    Is there some cognitive dissonance going on there that ostensibly patriotic, professedly pro-freedom people will own, keep, and bear arms created by Authoritarian/Totalitarian regimes like Russia and Red China?

    1. Only if they’re sourcing the guns and ammo directly from those states.

      1. So would it be alright if a non-Authoritarian/Totalitarian manufacturer made a duplicate of the design? I could see that. Still, I’m inclined to think bigger calibered rifles would be better.

    2. Hey, a good design is a good design.

    3. It’s a free market baby!

      1. It’s not part of a genuine free market if it’s made by slave labor, but, of course, you wouldn’t know about that.

    4. China isn’t oppressing Americans. BTW ak’s are good guns

      1. What matters for a libertarian should be that Red China oppresses anybody. And is an AK better than a M-1 Garand or a Remington .30-30? In terms of what features?

    5. “Is there some cognitive dissonance going on there that ostensibly patriotic, professedly pro-freedom people will own, keep, and bear arms created by Authoritarian/Totalitarian regimes like Russia and Red China?”

      Buying American is no solution. The country has an incarceration rate that puts China and Russia, and the rest of the world, to shame.

      1. I doubt the U.S. matches Red China after the building of concentration camps for the Uighur population. Even so, AFAIK, the U.S. also doesn’t use prison labor to build armaments.

        Freedom-lovers don’t necessarily have to only “Buy American.” What matters from a stance of consistency is whether we buy from sources where labor is un-enslaved.

  44. The article is a big duh. When the government wants to control everything and one political party has made it clear they are ready to go full fascist/socialist then of course everything is political.

    The Democrat slave owners in the south thought essentially the same thing: why are the slaves making everything politica?

  45. Yeah, I don’t find it all that surprising that people don’t want to befriend those that are racist, or bigoted, etc. or those that support bigots and racists.

    It’s only a problem now because Rs have wrapped up their low taxes (but hey, keep spending!) bs into a bigoted, racist worldview where immigrants and anyone looking “different” is to blame for all their troubles. When they’re rightfully called out for supporting bigots and racists, oh no, it’s “the politicization of everything” that is the problem- not their back assward views.

    1. Racist? Wow the most racist folks I know these days are progressives who label anyone of European (and Christian) ansestry as carriers of original sin…(“white priv”). I mean seriously the left blames any American of say Irish or Italian background as “evil” demons these days…the real bigots are on the left and there are plenty of them…infecting academia, journalism, entertainment and now even wall street and big tech…

      1. Interesting exercise (someone please do this):

        Replace all proper nouns in the literature with pronouns, then quiz people on correctly
        identifying selected excerpts as either Mein Kampf or Critical Race Theory

    2. Years ago decades before this current mess we’re in I dated a young beautiful woman. Had a nice time that night together and we were talking and in that discussion abortion came up. She had mentioned she supported it, I was very much against it and that was that. Even though we were compatible on much, we were not on a very significant point and that was enough to pull it apart. Today, there is myriad reasons to disagree and not be able to come together. The differences in world view is so significant I’m not sure there can be a coming together as it involves the direction of this Country. It’s more than simply despising or liking Trump, something of which has taken on a ethereal life of its own. It is real world differences and viewpoints that will find a hard time agreeing to share the same space with, especially when one side pushes the other into a corner and expects them to stay there.

  46. This all started with the cultural marxists who constantly attacked a made up boggieman (“white males”) in the 1960s which led to the “Hey hey ho ho Western Civ has got to go”…in the 1980s to “Diversity” in the 90s to now “equal results” and claiming anyone to the right of Troytsky is a “racist.”

    I actually think if this continues to accelerate we can self-segregate into like minded States which is something all libertarians can support. While we all should be focused on individual liberty we don’t have to celebrate political views, ideologies, and lifestyles we disagree with.
    This is a good thing..

  47. You can pin the division on the Marxist media and the kabuki theater of Network news. They thrive on political division. The 6 o’clock dinner bell has been replace by the six o’clock network news bell. Two bells, the same slobbering pavlovian results.

  48. The most painful part for me was the music we collectively shared becoming SO politicized. I remember time it bothered me, it was Tom Petty who hated George Bush. Petty demanded BUSH “cease and desist” playing his music. (HOW DARE HE!) Many, many others followed suit. While music has always had it’s place capturing a moment, or political issues – we Gen Xr’s starting feeling “Hey, Tom Petty is basically telling ME, a loyal FAN, I’m not really welcome” and we started saying “OK then, I won’t spend my hard earned money, on a rock star who has such distain for me.” Then the Obama years were upon us and the left hit the gas pedal and never let up. The gay marriage debacle was long fought – Prop 8 passed *in California* (which really was a miracle at the time) – only to be destroyed by one federal judge and that states Constitution was chucked out the window with the will of the voters. The rush to “include” the new couples in all advertising that was so forced and ridiculous. Tiffany Jewelers put out commercial of a man giving an engagement ring – to another man. PBS hired to gay male actors, posing as “Dads” to their enlightened 7 year old son, it was to promote “different families” you see – A PSA during the day, while kids were waiting for Sesame Street to start. Honey Made Graham crackers aired warmly lit, cozy kitchens of same sex partners cooking, KOHLS, Starbucks, Macy’s Target, American Airlines all jumped on the bandwagon with both feet and catered to 1.7% of the population (like Tom Petty) throwing 98.3% of their loyal customers under to bus so they could appear “inclusive.” Who cares if you offend the Christians in the midwest? Let’s DO THIS the shouted! Shopping for bed sheets at Target, turned into “boycotting them for the kicking out the Salvation Army.” Starbucks couldn’t justify their Advent calendars or any indication of Christmas in their stores – the “Red Cup” became “non inclusive” and Christmas is now secular snowflakes and carefully selected images of snow men, and holly. I could go on and on – but what all of this has done is keep the finger on the chest of CONSERVATIVES and to FORCE them into a corner. “Sit over there and color, while WE redesign the new society.” Problem is…that’s never going to happen as we find a side door to escape – and head over to companies that leave us alone. I suppose life was better when we all stayed in our own lanes – but the left has made this virtually impossible to do.

    1. You put the problem out quite well. Much of what you said is exactly how we Conservatives have felt. Though much much larger in size than the gay population, everything is catering to them. This in turns puts us in a corner and ready to fight. What happened in Washington is just the tip of a very angry iceberg. If this blows, and if the left continues pushing it will, it will not be something easily stopped.

      1. There is a very large percentage of that 98.3% (or whatever) that don’t care if they see a same sex supportive commercial. These people, for whatever reason be it secure in their sexuality, non-judgemental of others, realize it doesn’t affect them in any way, or other reasons, could care less and won’t be fighting a cultural war because some Americans got pushed a little further towards being treated equally by their shared government.

    2. People have generally discovered that emotion persuades better than facts which actually undermine narcissistic agendas.

      This is a precarious position as emotion is generally irrational and is easily overcome by reason. So fact based reasoning must be discouraged.

      First it was through political correctness that steered us away from inconvenient facts. Now we have the cancel culture which deplatforms , censors, erases and persecutes those who merely utter unwanted truth.

      Our inalienable right to free speech is supposed to prevent this oppression. Why isn’t it?

  49. I appreciate this article and it details much of the problem today. I’ve even been swept up by it and I never used to care much for politics. Now, it’s pick a side and fight fight fight! I’ve lost friends over it, old friends. I don’t know that it can be stopped and will probably come to a inevitable end at some point, perhaps when we’re finally tired of fighting one another. I’m on a sports board and even there there’s a politics thread and we spend countless hours bashing one another, repeatedly, over the same thing and it never stops. It’s as if it cannot stop. I don’t have a clue what can or will stop it…..

    1. I post here. I don’t know why really but I do try to set boundaries for myself. I don’t do any social media stuff.

      Politics can become an obsession and those can ruin an otherwise normal decent existence.

      Think about it. How much do the goof balls in DC really impact your daily life? The traffic problem on Rt 8, the services you need like water and electricity do and those are really local issues. You live from one president to the next and not much really changes.

      It is certainly not worth losing friends or family for. Besides I think it is rude to discuss politics in social situations.

      1. In California, they kicked my ass. 15 months of unemployment under the Obama years. NO “mortgage relief” for me – no checks from D.C. to “get us by” nope – 140 failed resumes sent out. Despite have a masters in math/physics and a security clearance. White guys over 45 were/are “out of fashion” so yes! I’d say taking a mans paycheck – then unable to be hired at Trader Joe’s – was truly a kick in the nuts. I don’t think I’ll EVER get over the feeling of hopelessness and pain – and it scares the heck out of me it may happen again due to “budget cuts.”

  50. “Left Wing Politics Is Taking Over Our Daily Life and Ruining Everything”

    This headline correction brought to you by the Ministry of Truth.

  51. While boycotts and buying only from “my team” happen on both sides, the left seems to have raised it to an art form. I can’t remember the last time conservatives organized a boycott. Their response has more typically been a ‘buycot’ like when they actively supported companies like Chik-fil-a and Goya after they were targeted by the left. It’s is not the left who is being kicked off Twitter, censored on Facebook, demonetized by You Tube, or deplatformed by Amazon Web Services. One of my wife’s friends actually quit talking to her recently widowed, elderly father for committing the unforgivable sin of voting for Trump. I have been called ‘redneck’ and ‘white trash’ by liberal neighbors for supporting Trump but I never called them names for supporting Biden. Under these conditions who can blame conservatives for seeking social interaction with people who share their views or joining alternate social media platforms out of necessity. Who wants to hang around with people who treat you poorly and think you’re a Nazi if you don’t share their world view?

    1. Target, Nike, NFL, Disney, CNN, anything made in China, there have been many boycotts supported by conservatives.

      It goes both ways. Look at the hatred toward lefties comes out here. It doesn’t excuse what happens from the lefties.

      I think boycotts are ridiculous. They never end up hurting the company they are targeting. If anything they just impact the workers there.

      The whole China policy is wrong and both lefties and righties support it. It hasn’t changed Chinese policy one bit and the economy there is chugging right along. Apple and Tesla are building new plants there. Boycotts and tariffs don’t affect the Chinese government but the might affect the guy trying to get a decent paying job in the Tesla plant. We do have legitimate issues but what we are doing now isn’t working.

      What happened to common decency and courtesy? Why do we have to demonize whoever “they” are?

      As a libertarian of course I realize nobody likes us so there you have it.

  52. As a conservative, I would gladly leave politics out of daily activities. I find, however, that the brainwashed liberals I know are obsessed with politics, and bring it into every discussion. It’s literally impossible these days for these people to interact with others without mentioning politics, so I have to avoid them.

    1. Tossed two friends on 11/3/21 who were TWO FACED and talked out of each side of their mouth. I had hope they’d “come around” under TRUMP – they took EVERY DIME he handed the and posted about it daily – only to vote for JoJo then preach on their facebook feeds as to “how above it all” they were. They’re liberals and have A LOT on the line with their ideology which IS THEIR RELIGION since they have rejected God for the secular world and they constantly post about conservatives “pushing their ideas on them.”

      1. You’re babbling on like a complete uninformed, uneducated, biased idiot. Fortunately, I won’t have to read your ignorant screeds anymore. There is no place for stupid on these forums.

  53. Meanwhile OT Ted Cruz just popped off to party in Cancun while his state is in a major catastrophe.

    Good going Ted!

    I have a family member there. She is OK because she lives close to a hospital and apparently the grid is more protected there.

    Which reminds me. I need to get some things like propane heaters and a camp stove since the new house does not have gas appliances.

    1. Nancy Pelsoi – not another WORD SAID – THANKS.

    2. That last paragraph makes you a prepper.
      Being a prepper makes you an alt-right bigoted insurrectionist.

      Welcome to the revolution.

  54. Hate sells. The media promotes hate and division because they sell. Hate for profit, basically. Check out the New York Times, hate central.

  55. I don’t understand why corporations choose to become political. I agree with Michael Jordan’s philosophy when he decided to not get involved in the Jesse Helms / Harvey Gantt election. He purportedly said “Republicans buy sneakers too”. This is not a one sided issue. If most corporations and spotlight celebrities adopted Jordan’s philosophy the world would be a more peaceful place, and Ayn Rand would be resting a little better.

  56. Reading these comments reveals how utterly brainwashed the majority of people now are. Unable to even discuss relevant topics or stick to the subject at hand, more interested in flinging their schizzle sticks at everyone else to score useless political points.

    The entire country, including our leaders, have forgotten that we are all Americans and we SHARE this country as we always have (and always will). Intolerance and hatred have replaced acceptance and compromise, each “side” constantly blames the other, there is no more acceptance or even attempts at understanding.

    Bad information is a big part of the problem. Having facts withheld and distorted, fabricated “truths” and endless lies abound. What people are so “certain” about is often just their confirmation bias (and overall ignorance). The entire country needs to be sent back to school and educated on civil discourse and how to determine truth from fiction. A strong emphasis on education is desperately needed.

    Partisanship, along with “nationalism” are outdated, ill-conceived and ultimately useless techniques that will never solve or even address the real problems facing the country, including the fabricated “divisions” being promoted.

  57. The real reason for this is because the Right has completely different media streams now that aren’t even based on truth. Ever since the fairness doctrine and Rush Limbaugh -> Fox News -> and so on.

    Now the Right doesn’t even talk about the same things or have the same set of “facts.” They’re completely untethered from reality and they can profess that not all of them are Q, but when they buy into the same conspiracies as Q, what is the difference?

    1. Oh you poor baby, dissenting voices, sheeple refusing to sing from the sheet music. The Nazis hated dissention too, are you suggesting a quick ride to camp in the boxcars and we can shower up when we get there? You’ll have HEIL to pay trying.

      1. I’m so sorry this has happened to you. The grievance and the fear your leaders are pumping into you so they can get reelected again and again… All those terrible feelings have got to be rotting you from the inside.

  58. “plug-and-play adoption of their tribe’s stances”

    Also known as Political Correctness, a concept created by the left. The bolshevists started this, we must reply in kind. It is a fight to the death.

    Or, let us partition the country.

    1. They have surrounded themselves like frightened communists, I prefer CWII, this time it’s winner take all. It’s not worth living in a banana republic with phony elections.

  59. Ah the ever thoughtful libtardians, after 4 years of denying an election, rioting, burning cities, looting, murder and general bed wetting, now you want unity. Oh you’re going to get it. See the bird finger on my left hand? See the bird finger on my right hand? Now they’re touching, there’s your unity. You’re going to eat the theft, you’re going to own every morsel of fail Hoe Xiden will bring.

      1. Nobody hurts me but stupidity offends me. Your apology is accepted.

  60. Sure sounds like your painting people as victims. I like all the changes I’ve made. No Twitter or Facebook has been the best free time creator for me. If it wasn’t for the free shipping on Amazon Prime that would be gone too. It’s like I’m shedding a bunch of mindless bad habits. This purging according to beliefs will only give more options to the market to chose from.

  61. I could not agree more, JD. My life used to be so simple. Just me, my dog, my balcony, hockey games and the occasional appliance repair but now my life is all political and I can’t step outside without being criticized for my old fashioned ways. I really hope these young justice warriors grow up fast before they do something too stupid.

Please to post comments