Screen Shot 2018-12-16 at 12.31.37 PM
PM Carpenter, your host. Email: pmcarp at mchsi dot com.
Screenshot 2024-05-27 at 11.05.06 AM


  • ***


« From a failed removal to prosecuting the virtuous | Main | The distortions of ideology - in feminism (or politics) »

October 26, 2019


Peter G

Given the large number of popular policies perceived as progressive you really have to wonder why any sane candidate would insist on running on the equally large numbers of policies that aren’t. I can only conclude that these candidates simply don’t know how to distinguish the two despite extensive polling that tells you what is what. Perhaps they believe they can persuade the public to endorse these less than popular policies? Perhaps they are looking no farther ahead than the first state primaries? To me this is straightforward political malpractice and illustrates the rank amateurism of so many of these Democratic candidate’s campaigns. But we know where they are going, by and large, and it isn’t on to victory or even a VP slot.

Frankly the only person who seems to be doing this sensibly is Joe Biden. And even he has his blind spots. Endorsing the federal decriminalization of marijuana is a complete no brainer. That is even popular on the right. But Joe has otherwise avoided adopting detailed policy proposals that lose more votes than they get. If he were ten years younger he would be sailing to victory simply by not being an idiot.

Peter G

The bulk of your post required some reading and thought. And I wound up pretty much where I have long been. Barry’s Quilette piece was fascinating. He gets much right from an academic point of view with regard to the debate about the degree to which societal norms or gender differences account for real or perceived discrimination in career choices or advancement. This is a debate that will never end since it is merely a sub argument of the endless nature vs nurture argument. But it will sort itself out. That is happening now.

I beg to point this much out: gender differences are real. But much more importantly is the truth that evolution never errs. Those differences are there because they confer survival advantage both to individuals and as a species. That these differences confer different survival advantages should not be unexpected and they would not exist if they did not make us stronger as a species.

The comments to this entry are closed.