It is not inconsistent with the free market to observe that while you often cannot change people, you can (ex)change people. Like with those that are eager to become citizens. Surely conservatives would not argue against free markets!
Sent from my iPhone On Nov 6, 2016, at 9:37 PM, Nick Thompson <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Dave, I think you are dead on concerning our attitude toward “the deplorables” . We need to know more about them and be prepared to find common ground. Without taking anything away from that agreement, I want to question your last sentences about the “elites.” As a term of contempt, it’s a little like “the deplorables”. Who exactly are these Folks. Do I know any of them? But let’s stipulate to the existence of such elites. Let’s assume for the moment that that the people arrayed against trump are the most experienced, well trained, members of our society. Would it be wrong for them to have undo influence on the train of events? What IS your position on expertise? Do you value it? How do we non-experts tell when an expert is making a mistake? Or, do you think that elites have their place, but they are making decisions beyond their competence. The elites might tell us the consequences of our folly, but it is not their role to manipulate us into avoiding. Perhaps we are all dionysians. Perhaps we want to go down in a fiery (nuclear war) or watery (global warming) end. Don’t we get to choose our own fate? All the best, Nick Nicholas S. Thompson Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology Clark University http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/ From: Friam [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Prof David West Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2016 6:15 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Trump Is Just A Normal Polling Error Behind Clinton | FiveThirtyEight If Trump were to win this election, the number one reason is the insistence of democrats and liberals to demonize and marginalize the populace supporting Trump. If the only people that support him are "angry" racist" "xenophobic" "out-of-work-white-men" "could-not-graduate-from-college-because-of-low-IQ" etc. etc. he could not possibly command more than 10% of the vote. Trump is a terrible person — but NOT atypical of the population in general. Projecting his worst qualities onto the masses that support him is a huge, hopefully fatal, strategic mistake on the part of the Clinton campaign. But it would be simply a continuation of a fifty year trend: a small elite that firmly believe they are the only ones capable of and deserving of running the government and that anyone that opposes them is ignorant and dangerous. davew On Sat, Nov 5, 2016, at 12:12 PM, Frank Wimberly wrote: My opinion: scorn is a very powerful position; you can be scornful of God. People who feel powerless and left out find Trump appealing because they identify with the power implied by his scorn of the elite, the establishment, etc. Remember Spiro Agnew calling the educated "pointy headed intellectuals"? In the meantime I'm very concerned with who's going to win the election. Frank Frank Wimberly Phone (505) 670-9918 On Nov 5, 2016 12:59 PM, "Owen Densmore" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: A quote from the article is pretty telling: In America today, compared with 50 years ago, three times as many working-age men are completely outside the work force. This pattern is occurring throughout the developed world — and the consequences are not merely economic. Feeling superfluous is a blow to the human spirit. It leads to social isolation and emotional pain, and creates the conditions for negative emotions to take root. If I were one of them, I'd surely vote Trump. We do need to get over "who's going to win?" and ask "why has Trump got such a *huge* following?" -- Owen On Sat, Nov 5, 2016 at 11:58 AM, Owen Densmore <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: On Fri, Nov 4, 2016 at 2:51 PM, Marcus Daniels <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: I found the article from the Dalai Lama in the NYT today fairly plausible explanation of why we have the current problem. But, I would say, no, there will be no brotherhood with the Bundy's. The redistributionist approach (that Brooks -- libertarian -- objects to elsewhere) arises in order to give the possibility of free enterprise, not to preserve it for those that haven't realized they've simply failed to be sufficiently enterprising. I just took a look at the article, and it certainly is interesting and puts into perspective why wealthy countries have a "The Sky Is Falling" syndrome. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/04/opinion/dalai-lama-behind-our-anxiety-the-fear-of-being-unneeded.html ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
