Big Talk

***

Sigh. Yet another slight variant on a previous post (Hopefully the final variant): 

my current way of looking at the current political conflict: 

1. the pro-democracy coalition versus the sad coalition

acronym for SAD: Servility & Democracy-Erosion 

The sad coalition can also be called de Sade coalition. 

The pro-democracy coalition wants a politics based on solidarity, a system where everybody counts and everybody has to account. The sad coalition does not need to have a coherent agenda, and can merely take credit for anything good, and avoid blame for anything bad. It also merely needs to point out that the pro-democracy people are hypocrites, who made a mess of things when they were in charge. 

The sad coalition, like the pro-democracy coalition, is diverse, but two things that sad politicians tend to have in common:

1. They are willing to perform a bit of servility, perhaps in the hope of acquiring the secret handshake. 

2. They are willing to tolerate a bit of democracy-erosion, a crossing of lines that their younger selves never thought they would cross. 

The Week magazine sent me a copy of their June 26, 2026 issue (Volume 26 Issue 1293). In the Editor's letter Susan Caskie writes, "We've got an entrance ban on people from 19 countries, and up until a week ago we had a pause on visa processing for those from another 20." This seems me to me a betrayal of the civil rights principle that people should not be discriminated against on the basis of national origin. We are perhaps afraid of speaking up in case our own visas, and our own citizenship rights, get put under threat. We are also perhaps afraid of gaining reputations as trouble-makers. But we should speak up. 

The attitude of sad politicians towards servility is perhaps a bit similar to the attitude of the "senior Republican official" in the Washington Post article: “What is the downside for humoring him for this little bit of time?" 

https://daringfireball.net/2021/02/whats_the_downside 

The attitude of sad politicians towards democracy-erosion is perhaps a bit similar to the attitude of tall, tanned, tony Russell Line in the Kermit Vandivier article: "I learned a long time ago not to worry about things over which I had no control. I have no control over this . . . Look, I just told you I have no control over this thing. Why should my conscience bother me?" 

https://www.kellogg.northwestern.edu/faculty/uzzi/ftp/restricted/Why%20should%20my%20conscience%20bother%20me.pdf 

https://www.penguinrandomhouse.ca/books/77954/in-the-name-of-profit-by-robert-l-heilbroner/9780804152686 

How much servility are they willing to perform? How much democracy-erosion are they willing to tolerate? Will they fold like cheap accordions? Will they lie like cheap rugs? Will they find their freedom to say that two plus two make four? Well, that's for them to know, and you to find out. 

My opinion is that most people want to be good, and want to support pro-democracy politics. But over time, pro-democracy politics can perhaps become a bit stale, and a bit hard to defend. In addition, once sad politics has gotten a foothold, people find it increasingly easy to manufacture reasons why they have "no choice" but to defect from pro-democracy politics, and add one more tear to the world's ocean of sadness. 

How does sad politics get a foothold? Perhaps it starts with skepticism: skepticism of equality, skepticism of fairness, skepticism of halfhearted, semi-sincere attempts to force equality and fairness on an unequal, unfair world. Under very bad or very bored conditions, the skepticism can perhaps become resentment: positive dislike of liberals, leftists, democrats, equality or even fairness. Under even worse or even more bored conditions, the resentment can perhaps become nihilism, a trolling, taunting, terrifying commitment to the bit: no self-evident truths; no created equal; no unalienable rights; no lives matter. 

The more respectable members of the sad coalition do not approve of resentment or nihilism, but they do tend to agree that left-liberals have become too uppity, too self-righteous, too arrogant, and have not earned the right to criticize them. Therefore, left-liberals need to be encouraged to keep eating the mournful oatmeal, and reflect on the possibility that they are not as good, or as smart, as they think they are. Also, that any attempts at reform will almost certainly backfire, and only make things worse.

https://lakewobegon.fandom.com/wiki/Mournful_Oatmeal/2001-03-10 

Politicians like Trump and Netanyahu are, perhaps, useful placeholder politicians, useful to prevent left-liberals from getting their way, partly out of strategy, partly out of spite. 

Trump is best thought of as a way to demonstrate elite impunity, a way to teach the sad lesson that you can't beat them, so you might as well not try. So secure is their hold on power, in fact, that they can afford to get away with outrageous behavior, such as racist gerrymandering, bombing defenseless fisher folk, or propping up Trump. Trump, himself, is not important. What is important are the grey eminences behind Trump, who are propping him up, making excuses for him, and covering up and overlooking his crimes. 

https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/newsletter-black-voting-rights/

https://www.thebulwark.com/p/no-guns-no-drugs-why-did-we-blow-these-boats-up-caribbean-pacific-military-trump-hegseth-rubio

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/may/15/us-military-airstrikes-caribbean-pacific-victim-identities 

There is a Krugman NYT column I think about every so often, called "The Outrage Constraint":

https://www.nytimes.com/2002/08/23/opinion/the-outrage-constraint.html

The grey eminences behind Trump, who are propping him up, are perhaps using Trump to dissipate people's outrage into nihilism, rather than channeling people's outrage into meaningful, pro-democracy reforms. They want a system where everything is concentrated in dear leader, and dear leader is sufficiently silly and out of it so that they don't have to face accountability at any level.

The besetting sin of the pro-democracy coalition is gas-guzzling hypocrisy, flashing the peace sign while saying "my bad, my bad". The besetting sin of the sad coalition is greater-fool nihilism, peddling pogroms, pyramid schemes, patriarchy and a police state, while saying "stop resisting! stop resisting!" 

pogroms - unlimited revenge 

pyramid schemes - unlimited wealth 

patriarchy - unlimited deference inside the home 

police state - unlimited deference outside the home 

One other trait of sad politics which contributes to the nihilism is the cry-bullying, the attempt to combine ruthless cruelty with shameless chutzpah. On the one hand, they want to cackle about "toxic empathy" or "weaponized compassion". On the other hand, they are genuinely offended and even bewildered by the idea that there should be consequences for their cackling. They are, perhaps, a bit like Milos after getting aced by Jerry. Hey, what are you doing? Why so serious? Can't you take a joke? 

One of the great essays of our time, certainly, is Aleksandar Hemon's piece on his friend Zoka's descent into political madness. I do not think Hemon's essay had the answers. But it certainly had the question. 

https://lithub.com/fascism-is-not-an-idea-to-be-debated-its-a-set-of-actions-to-fight/ 

What is required of us, perhaps, is not to point the finger, nor to wag the finger, nor to give the finger, nor to shake our fist, nor to shrug our shoulders, nor even to flash the peace sign, but simply, to roll up our sleeves.  

What preventive measures can be taken against sad politics? How can we prevent sad politics from causing more affliction and more sorrow? I do think pro-democracy people should be willing to engage with their critics, even embittered and resentful critics, critics who enjoy dissecting their manners, morals, intellect, general physique, and method of eating asparagus. But they should not be willing to throw their own people under the bus. They should not be willing to bad-mouth their own values and principles, either in an attempt to look cool, or because some consultant has convinced them that "vice-signaling" is good politics. 

Perhaps most difficult, pro-democracy people must start to develop an awareness of when rude criticism and skepticism has developed into nihilism, and trolling. I don't believe nihilists and trolls should be pilloried, dehumanized, used as a scapegoat for all of our own problems. But it is necessary to set limits, and to not allow bad-faith trolling to endlessly lead you down the garden path. 

But enough about sad politics! We have been talking too much about it. We need to find time to talk about better things. 

Victory for the pro-democracy coalition requires: 

1. An exciting pro-democracy agenda, which gives people energy, inspiration, enthusiasm, and incentives to organize. 

2. Assuaging people's anxieties about liberal or leftist overreach. 

3. Assuaging people's anxieties about the dangers of calling out injustice, and the dangers of actively seeking alternatives to injustice. 

4. Perhaps, a certain . . . je ne sais quoi. 

What do I mean by liberal or left? Liberal means having a value for freedom. Left means having a value for equality. Left-liberals are people who have a value for both equality and freedom. 

***

Little Talk

***

How Much Vacation Does A Man Require?

My current answer: 

By vacation I mean the more shameless, flaunting, ding-ding-ding kind of vacation, rather than the more reputable, respectable, "you'll have a great story" kind. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HehuRPYa6MY 

1. 3 LPP (Long Periods o' Productivity) 

2. New Year's - mid spring (3 1/2 months)

3. late spring - mid summer (4 months)

4. late summer - New Year's (4 1/2 months)

5. vacation 1: between mid April and June (beginning of summer, maybe)

6. vacation 2: between June and mid August (end of mid summer, maybe)

7. New Year's reset: between late December and early January 

8. rule for New Year's reset: Stay up if you can. If you can't, make sure to say "See you next year!" before falling asleep. 

There is perhaps a distinction between taking a vacation and taking a trip. It is perhaps never not a good time to take a trip. The same is not quite true of vacation. 

mildly relevant Orwell essay:

https://www.telelib.com/authors/O/OrwellGeorge/essay/tribune/AsIPlease19461220.html 

***

Next post: September 29, 2026