Glad we finally got that cleared up. Anyway, movements like a Ron Paul cult, or a bitcoin cult, or an Elon Musk or Andrew Yang cult (I'm guessing there may be some overlap between those last two) can make more sense if one stops thinking about them in terms of clear ideological or policy positions, and sees them more in terms of group identity They all represent different forms of "me and my internet friends are visionaries with unique insight into how the world works." As long as that condition's met, a movement can form, and the actual policy or ideological posture seems pretty negotiable. Why is Yang able to call for massive government intervention and redistribution, and still get a Ron Paul-esque following? Maybe because he bases his idea on the claim that robots and AI will change everything - which then becomes another variation on the obligatory "tech nerds understand everything better than everyone else does" perspective. Not implying anything derogatory against nerds in general; I am one, by about any accepted definition of the term. And they've done a decent job coming up with an idol this time - Yang seems thoughtful, has some interesting and innovative positions and is at the very least more suited for the presidency than the current occupant. I don't buy into UBI as a good solution for the socioeconomic challenges of automation, though. And having your would-be presidential standard-bearer publically debating Ben Shapiro about his stance on circumcision is not ideal.
Because UBI is a Milton Friedman idea.Thats how he connects with the Ron Paul set. It's been around since the 70's As for talking to Shapiro, he should talk with everyone who will listen. Adjacency is a weak form of implication.
I started reading that on vacation a few years ago, did not have time to finish it, and have yet to get back to it. Fascinating stuff, as far as I got. Probably won't get around to picking it back up (and likely starting over) until this pesky dissertation is off my plate.
It's sometimes pretty stunning that smart people choose to ignore these sorts of things. On the other hand, some form of UBI has been adopted by any number of populists of several stripes, as well (implementation and details obviously differing). It's no secret that a number of righty populists in this country thought that libertarianism was their bag for their own reasons, never really grokking the bigger, more foundational ideas. It's those who have largely migrated. Yep.
You're not looking forward to "Ben Shapiro Destroys [X] With FACTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" ? You must be against free speech and honest inquiry. The internet is academia for people who know everything and understand nothing. And yes, I'm on social media too so I'm guilty of helping skew the noise-to-signal ratio a little bit closer to peak cacophony myself.
I'll start preparing my "ACTUALLY, we're a republic not a democracy" lecture so you have some content.
$12,000...c'mon dude. I'd only get outta bed and to the liquor store for $100K. And as Republicans have taught us - deficits don't matter. Charge!
But seriously, what kind of intelligent designer would design us with foreskin and then command that we cut it off? Sounds sadistic to me.
Personally, anybody who debates or considers Ben Shapiro a serious person at this point should not run for any public office. I can't take them seriously. Ben Shapiro is smarter than this and he chooses to be a grifter. It's why he is hawking nutritional supplements and it's why his "debates" are more about winning the debate than actually debating an issue. While he complains that the other side does not debate issues. He chooses money over substance, while acting like he cares about the substance. The point where I said he can't be redeemed is after the Montreal domestic terror incident. The Canadian court was presented with the list of the times the criminal went on twitter and who he looked up. The list was basically a smorgasboard of far right, KKK, alt-right, infowars, breitbart, etc. The person who he looked up the most by a pretty significant margin was Shapiro. I can understand Shapiro choosing not to take blame or apologizing or taking some responsibility just because of self preservation (it's a human response). The part that really bothered me was that he chose not to reflect and maybe make a slight pivot away, he decided to double down. He should be smart enough to do a little soul searching.
I'm not sure how seriously he takes his audience. His supplements cost three times the most expensive, comparable item at GNC. That suggests he's in it primarily for the grift, and that he's more than willing to rip off his fans.
You have given policies. I am asking how they would get implemented - how his political ability would lead to success. Btw, are you okay with Yang being anti-circumcision? That is a recognized health issue.
Then I was right to say that this is an unanswerable question. Obama thought he would do it with beer summits. Trump thought he would use bully force. Clinton thought he would use charm. It didn't exactly work out for any of them. I don't care. He's not going to ban them.
I do. https://www.who.int/hiv/topics/malecircumcision/en/ There is compelling evidence that male circumcision reduces the risk of heterosexually acquired HIV infection in men by approximately 60%. Three randomized controlled trials have shown that male circumcision provided by well trained health professionals in properly equipped settings is safe. WHO/UNAIDS recommendations emphasize that male circumcision should be considered an efficacious intervention for HIV prevention in countries and regions with heterosexual epidemics, high HIV and low male circumcision prevalence.
You are for torturing babies for some partial protection against something that few people are at risk for when there are much better preventatives available? If you want a circumcision, get one when you are an adult.
I'm confused. You're saying "doing nothing" is a "practice", and you're also suggesting compelling a modification of the body because said "practice" is unhealthy?