A conservative is someone who stands athwart history, yelling Stop, at a time when no one is inclined to do so, or to have much patience with those who so urge it. ― William F.
Robin, as someone who’s known you for 20 years or so — I think what makes you irreplaceable is precisely how you reason things out for yourself, reach “crazy” conclusions that no one else does (sometimes, as with prediction markets or the Great Filter, crazy enough to change the intellectual landscape), and refuse to hitch yourself to any tribe. Please don’t change that! Please just continue to talk to all the more independent-minded people from any tribe or no tribe. Certainly be wary of the (formerly) right-wing tribe, which is quickly degenerating into a pure cult of personality, excommunicating heretics with a ruthlessness that would make even the woke tribe blush at the height of its power.
This. Which means practically that Robin should present himself as neutral, but his thesis as aligning with conservativism. But only a well defined conservatism, ie the principles not the (ever-changing) people.
Agreed. A significant part of your credibility comes from the fact that you're clearly motivated by independent, first principles thinking. Unless that's actually changed, and it doesn't seem like it has, it would only cost you credibility to attach yourself to one political side or the other.
Strongly seconded. Your strength comes from your steadfast adherence to an un-aligned perspective. The conservative movement has been co-opted by low human capital, and you would be shooting yourself in the foot to publicly align yourself with them.
"Certainly be wary of the (formerly) right-wing tribe, which is quickly degenerating into a pure cult of personality, excommunicating heretics with a ruthlessness that would make even the woke tribe blush at the height of its power." What an odd thing to say at a time when there is a more populist movement precisely because of formerly left wing people diluting what is right wing and with say Latinos becoming more Republican
Being wary of right-wingers is quite sensible, even for people who are temperamentally or ideologically right-wing, and talking to various groups is sensible as well. I don't find it clear that one should for that reason avoid making "right-wing" style arguments, including in this book.
This is a bad time to ask this question. William Buckley’s “Conservative” movement is all but dead, and the term is being applied to various would-be successor ideologies vying for influence. You could probably make the same claim for “liberalism.” I think you should be clear about the policy implications of your new way of thinking, but you may need to be careful and descriptive about how you describe the ideological alignment.
Capitalism has never been more internationally intrenched, Inequality is basically not addressable and we lack basic consumer protections most countries have.
It seems to me that clear alignment tends to hurt credibility, even among the audience to which you are aligned.
Christians, for example, are always interested in non-Christians whose arguments align with Christianity. I’m not sure public conversion adds anything to their popularity. It may actually take away.
Your analysis seems Burkean; modern day "conservatives" are anything but. To claim you are a conservative would sound deluded. I'm not sure what conservatives would side with your positions; but you would try to side with theirs? People who are drawn to people like you, Tyler Cowen, Scott Alexander etc are often sick of left vs right, liberal vs conservative, and want something new and rational.
The research tends to show that signaling partisan allegiances undermines expert credibility, even on the side you align with. So that's one point against doing so.
I'd also say that given your perspective and methods, it's probably better to stick to talking your analysis from an objective point of view.
While your conclusions do largely align with conservative conclusions, your starting point and methodology to reach those conclusions aren't themselves particularly conservative to me. You make interesting and rather persuasive arguments, but if I may borrow a phrase from the Left, you're currently something of a "fellow traveler" rather than a convert to conservatism, sort of like how sociologists and psychologists can intellectually recognize that genuinely devout religion has benefits for both the community and individuals, yet that insight doesn't necessarily make most of the ists ever themselves become devout believers.
I don't mean to venture into "No True Scotsman" Fallacy, you can call yourself a conservative if you decide that it actually fits you, but it sounds to me more like you're only considering it because OTHER people are suggesting that it fits you on the basis of some shared conclusions. I happen to think that's a rather shallow basis for deciding such a thing.
I doubt anyone would mind you pointing out the reality that this is a more conservative aligned position, but you don't have to say you are strongly aligned. Doing so would alienate left leaning readers, but also I don't even think it would be true. When I think of typical conservatives, they don't really seem to fit in the same group as you.
You should position yourself a one that seeks truth based on your principles. Let your readers come to their conclusions based on your writing. Your writing without being hitched to one side causes the rest of us to examine what we believe.
Do even the populists consider Buckley to be very conservative? What people think of as right wing is whatever the left code as right wing from Andrew Tate to incels to addressing the extreme unaddressed cost of crime. They think what's right wing is the opposite of what they think and that their enemies all think the same thing
If you want to maximize personal profits, probably becoming conservative and grifting a bit is best. If you want your ideas to spread as much as possible, I think trying to be neutral and then appearing on every podcast/youtube/tiktok channel you can would be your best bet. If you want your ideas to be implemented, I think trying to target a specific political or perhaps corporate elite who have power and convincing them to implement your ideas is the best bet.
You could try to come up with some sort of measurable outcome that you're hoping to achieve with your book (copies sold, reviews in mainstream publications, etc.), and then set up markets on Manifold for these outcomes conditioned on the style of argument used in the book.
An analysis favoring conservatism and too-fertility will be viewed as being right aligned. The left demands ideological purity. You may as well go full conservative. There is no middle ground.
I dont think the right has made a good argument yet as to why we should view fertility rates as a societal level issue as opposed to a personal choice.
Were it not for these I would agree that TFR might not be all that big a deal.
Because of them it is a HUGE issue.
Admittedly, one which will impact the U.S. less directly and less quickly than almost all other countries because of our unique ability to attract and assimilate immigrants.
That said, if you identify as a conservative it might help (if you are inclined to want to bridge the gap) to give a candid assessment of where you stand relative to Donald Trump. As someone who leans left but wants and tries to hear the 'other side', I'm immediately turned away from folks who defend Trump's actions while lambasting the left.
Robin, as someone who’s known you for 20 years or so — I think what makes you irreplaceable is precisely how you reason things out for yourself, reach “crazy” conclusions that no one else does (sometimes, as with prediction markets or the Great Filter, crazy enough to change the intellectual landscape), and refuse to hitch yourself to any tribe. Please don’t change that! Please just continue to talk to all the more independent-minded people from any tribe or no tribe. Certainly be wary of the (formerly) right-wing tribe, which is quickly degenerating into a pure cult of personality, excommunicating heretics with a ruthlessness that would make even the woke tribe blush at the height of its power.
This. Which means practically that Robin should present himself as neutral, but his thesis as aligning with conservativism. But only a well defined conservatism, ie the principles not the (ever-changing) people.
"excommunicating heretics with a ruthlessness that would make even the woke tribe blush at the height of its power."
What are you referring to?
Agreed. A significant part of your credibility comes from the fact that you're clearly motivated by independent, first principles thinking. Unless that's actually changed, and it doesn't seem like it has, it would only cost you credibility to attach yourself to one political side or the other.
Strongly seconded. Your strength comes from your steadfast adherence to an un-aligned perspective. The conservative movement has been co-opted by low human capital, and you would be shooting yourself in the foot to publicly align yourself with them.
"Certainly be wary of the (formerly) right-wing tribe, which is quickly degenerating into a pure cult of personality, excommunicating heretics with a ruthlessness that would make even the woke tribe blush at the height of its power." What an odd thing to say at a time when there is a more populist movement precisely because of formerly left wing people diluting what is right wing and with say Latinos becoming more Republican
Being wary of right-wingers is quite sensible, even for people who are temperamentally or ideologically right-wing, and talking to various groups is sensible as well. I don't find it clear that one should for that reason avoid making "right-wing" style arguments, including in this book.
This is a bad time to ask this question. William Buckley’s “Conservative” movement is all but dead, and the term is being applied to various would-be successor ideologies vying for influence. You could probably make the same claim for “liberalism.” I think you should be clear about the policy implications of your new way of thinking, but you may need to be careful and descriptive about how you describe the ideological alignment.
>William Buckley’s “Conservative” movement is all but dead
a victim of its overwhelming success
It might be helpful to list the specific things Buckley advocated and whether each was successful.
Capitalism has never been more internationally intrenched, Inequality is basically not addressable and we lack basic consumer protections most countries have.
That's not a list of specific things Buckley advocated.
No, please continue to pull the rope sideways.
I’ve been reading you for 15 years and this is my first time commenting.
I strongly feel you should include this post in the preface of your book.
It seems to me that clear alignment tends to hurt credibility, even among the audience to which you are aligned.
Christians, for example, are always interested in non-Christians whose arguments align with Christianity. I’m not sure public conversion adds anything to their popularity. It may actually take away.
good arguments on cultural concerns dont make god real or not. The theology and the ethics are tied together
Your analysis seems Burkean; modern day "conservatives" are anything but. To claim you are a conservative would sound deluded. I'm not sure what conservatives would side with your positions; but you would try to side with theirs? People who are drawn to people like you, Tyler Cowen, Scott Alexander etc are often sick of left vs right, liberal vs conservative, and want something new and rational.
The research tends to show that signaling partisan allegiances undermines expert credibility, even on the side you align with. So that's one point against doing so.
I'd also say that given your perspective and methods, it's probably better to stick to talking your analysis from an objective point of view.
While your conclusions do largely align with conservative conclusions, your starting point and methodology to reach those conclusions aren't themselves particularly conservative to me. You make interesting and rather persuasive arguments, but if I may borrow a phrase from the Left, you're currently something of a "fellow traveler" rather than a convert to conservatism, sort of like how sociologists and psychologists can intellectually recognize that genuinely devout religion has benefits for both the community and individuals, yet that insight doesn't necessarily make most of the ists ever themselves become devout believers.
I don't mean to venture into "No True Scotsman" Fallacy, you can call yourself a conservative if you decide that it actually fits you, but it sounds to me more like you're only considering it because OTHER people are suggesting that it fits you on the basis of some shared conclusions. I happen to think that's a rather shallow basis for deciding such a thing.
I doubt anyone would mind you pointing out the reality that this is a more conservative aligned position, but you don't have to say you are strongly aligned. Doing so would alienate left leaning readers, but also I don't even think it would be true. When I think of typical conservatives, they don't really seem to fit in the same group as you.
You should position yourself a one that seeks truth based on your principles. Let your readers come to their conclusions based on your writing. Your writing without being hitched to one side causes the rest of us to examine what we believe.
Please don’t conform to either side (or for that matter to any group). Thoughtful people will want to read what you write no matter your affiliations.
Do even the populists consider Buckley to be very conservative? What people think of as right wing is whatever the left code as right wing from Andrew Tate to incels to addressing the extreme unaddressed cost of crime. They think what's right wing is the opposite of what they think and that their enemies all think the same thing
If you want to maximize personal profits, probably becoming conservative and grifting a bit is best. If you want your ideas to spread as much as possible, I think trying to be neutral and then appearing on every podcast/youtube/tiktok channel you can would be your best bet. If you want your ideas to be implemented, I think trying to target a specific political or perhaps corporate elite who have power and convincing them to implement your ideas is the best bet.
You could try to come up with some sort of measurable outcome that you're hoping to achieve with your book (copies sold, reviews in mainstream publications, etc.), and then set up markets on Manifold for these outcomes conditioned on the style of argument used in the book.
Lean into the cultural diversity angle and outflank left on that front, or at least call their bluff on that being one of their values
The left does *not* believe in cultural diversity.
The left believes in identity diversity (skin color, sexual orientation, gender identity, etc.).
These are not at all the same things.
That’s why said call their bluff
Ok, then you are just saying be openly right of center.
Because you don't appeal to leftists by "calling their bluff."
To them it's not a bluff.
They don't believe in ideological diversity, period.
An analysis favoring conservatism and too-fertility will be viewed as being right aligned. The left demands ideological purity. You may as well go full conservative. There is no middle ground.
I dont think the right has made a good argument yet as to why we should view fertility rates as a societal level issue as opposed to a personal choice.
Ponzi-scheme old age benefits and national debt.
Were it not for these I would agree that TFR might not be all that big a deal.
Because of them it is a HUGE issue.
Admittedly, one which will impact the U.S. less directly and less quickly than almost all other countries because of our unique ability to attract and assimilate immigrants.
You should be who you are.
That said, if you identify as a conservative it might help (if you are inclined to want to bridge the gap) to give a candid assessment of where you stand relative to Donald Trump. As someone who leans left but wants and tries to hear the 'other side', I'm immediately turned away from folks who defend Trump's actions while lambasting the left.
Also a plainly stated explanation of whay "conservatism" means to you.