* Progressive activists
* Traditional liberals
* Passive liberals
* Politically disengaged
* Moderates
* Traditional conservatives
* Devoted conservatives
https://t.co/PDuSeVNTyu
In the common imagination, the deep cultural divide in the United States pits Team Woke (young, female, POC) against Team Resentful (old, male, white).
This is almost entirely
* Progressive activists
* Traditional liberals
* Passive liberals
* Politically disengaged
* Moderates
* Traditional conservatives
* Devoted conservatives
https://t.co/PDuSeVNTyu
The rest has a lot in common. They form an “exhausted majority.”
80% of Americans—four in five!—now believe that “political correctness is a problem in our country.”
Even among 24 - 29 year olds, the group most receptive to political correctness, 74% think it’s a problem.
And among the youngest, those below 24, the number goes back up to 79%!
* Whites are more open to political correctness than average Americans
* The groups most likely to say PC is a problem are Asians (82%), Hispanics (87%) and Native-Americans (88%)
But three quarters of them—only 4% less than whites and 5% less than the American average—still say that PC is a problem.
What does this tribe look like?
* Make up 8% of the population
* Are twice as likely as average Americans to make >$100k a year
* Are three times as likely to have a graduate degree
* Only 3% of them are black
* Except for devoted conservatives, this is least racially diverse group.
The poll didn’t define PC. But the in-depth interviews and focus groups done by @MiCGlobal give us some idea. Here’s a 40 year old Native-American man in OK describing his concerns:
But this is even more fundamental a misunderstanding of Americans' attitudes towads PC than that which is prevalent on the left.
Most Americans—and most people who dislike PC—abhor racial hatred; they just don’t think current PC practices are the right way to fight it.
First, it made me worry that speech norms serve as a marker of social distinction. What the vast majority of our fellow citizens see in PC is not genuine concern for social justice; it’s the preening display of cultural superiority.
(Oh, and they like PC.) https://t.co/dkzIovf93u
Final poll:
— Yascha Mounk (@Yascha_Mounk) October 9, 2018
Do you personally agree with the following statement: "Political correctness is a problem in our country."
(Friendly reminder that Twitter polls are fully anonymous.)
Over half of my followers thought that more than half of Americans like PC.
Only 6% got the right answer.
https://t.co/GADwb5DAZC
Writing about a fascinating new study and would love to see how the perceptions of my Twitter followers jive with it.
— Yascha Mounk (@Yascha_Mounk) October 7, 2018
So, tweeps: In your best estimate, what percentage of Americans would agree with the following statement: "Political correctness is a problem in our country."
Over half thought that less than 25% of PoCs dislike it.
Only 3% got the right answer.
https://t.co/MQeUSjlzpE
Follow-up poll:
— Yascha Mounk (@Yascha_Mounk) October 8, 2018
In your best estimate, what percentage of people of color in the United States would agree with the following statement: "Political correctness is a problem in our country."
It matters because a publication whose editors think they represent the views of the majority when they actually speak to a small minority may eventually see its influence wane and its readership decline.
It matters because a political candidate who believes she is speaking for half of the population when she's actually voicing the opinions of one fifth is likely to lose the next election.
It matters because it’s difficult to win your fellow citizens over to your side—or remedy injustices that remain all too real—when you fundamentally misunderstand how your fellow citizens see the world.
https://t.co/JYrFqnLlyy
It’s one of the few things that’s made me feel optimistic over the past month, so it’s definitely worth your time.
https://t.co/jE9p6cIk89
[The End.]
More from All
@franciscodeasis https://t.co/OuQaBRFPu7
Unfortunately the "This work includes the identification of viral sequences in bat samples, and has resulted in the isolation of three bat SARS-related coronaviruses that are now used as reagents to test therapeutics and vaccines." were BEFORE the
chimeric infectious clone grants were there.https://t.co/DAArwFkz6v is in 2017, Rs4231.
https://t.co/UgXygDjYbW is in 2016, RsSHC014 and RsWIV16.
https://t.co/krO69CsJ94 is in 2013, RsWIV1. notice that this is before the beginning of the project
starting in 2016. Also remember that they told about only 3 isolates/live viruses. RsSHC014 is a live infectious clone that is just as alive as those other "Isolates".
P.D. somehow is able to use funds that he have yet recieved yet, and send results and sequences from late 2019 back in time into 2015,2013 and 2016!
https://t.co/4wC7k1Lh54 Ref 3: Why ALL your pangolin samples were PCR negative? to avoid deep sequencing and accidentally reveal Paguma Larvata and Oryctolagus Cuniculus?
Unfortunately the "This work includes the identification of viral sequences in bat samples, and has resulted in the isolation of three bat SARS-related coronaviruses that are now used as reagents to test therapeutics and vaccines." were BEFORE the
chimeric infectious clone grants were there.https://t.co/DAArwFkz6v is in 2017, Rs4231.
https://t.co/UgXygDjYbW is in 2016, RsSHC014 and RsWIV16.
https://t.co/krO69CsJ94 is in 2013, RsWIV1. notice that this is before the beginning of the project
starting in 2016. Also remember that they told about only 3 isolates/live viruses. RsSHC014 is a live infectious clone that is just as alive as those other "Isolates".
P.D. somehow is able to use funds that he have yet recieved yet, and send results and sequences from late 2019 back in time into 2015,2013 and 2016!
https://t.co/4wC7k1Lh54 Ref 3: Why ALL your pangolin samples were PCR negative? to avoid deep sequencing and accidentally reveal Paguma Larvata and Oryctolagus Cuniculus?
You May Also Like
Funny, before the election I recall lefties muttering the caravan must have been a Trump setup because it made the open borders crowd look so bad. Why would the pro-migrant crowd engineer a crisis that played into Trump's hands? THIS is why. THESE are the "optics" they wanted.
This media manipulation effort was inspired by the success of the "kids in cages" freakout, a 100% Stalinist propaganda drive that required people to forget about Obama putting migrant children in cells. It worked, so now they want pics of Trump "gassing children on the border."
There's a heavy air of Pallywood around the whole thing as well. If the Palestinians can stage huge theatrical performances of victimhood with the willing cooperation of Western media, why shouldn't the migrant caravan organizers expect the same?
It's business as usual for Anarchy, Inc. - the worldwide shredding of national sovereignty to increase the power of transnational organizations and left-wing ideology. Many in the media are true believers. Others just cannot resist the narrative of "change" and "social justice."
The product sold by Anarchy, Inc. is victimhood. It always boils down to the same formula: once the existing order can be painted as oppressors and children as their victims, chaos wins and order loses. Look at the lefties shrieking in unison about "Trump gassing children" today.
Funny there are those who think these migrant caravans were a FANTASTIC idea that's going to take the immigration issue away from you.
— Brian Cates (@drawandstrike) November 26, 2018
Like several weeks watching a rampaging horde storm the fences & throw rocks at our border patrol agents & getting gassed = great optics!
This media manipulation effort was inspired by the success of the "kids in cages" freakout, a 100% Stalinist propaganda drive that required people to forget about Obama putting migrant children in cells. It worked, so now they want pics of Trump "gassing children on the border."
There's a heavy air of Pallywood around the whole thing as well. If the Palestinians can stage huge theatrical performances of victimhood with the willing cooperation of Western media, why shouldn't the migrant caravan organizers expect the same?
It's business as usual for Anarchy, Inc. - the worldwide shredding of national sovereignty to increase the power of transnational organizations and left-wing ideology. Many in the media are true believers. Others just cannot resist the narrative of "change" and "social justice."
The product sold by Anarchy, Inc. is victimhood. It always boils down to the same formula: once the existing order can be painted as oppressors and children as their victims, chaos wins and order loses. Look at the lefties shrieking in unison about "Trump gassing children" today.
1/ Some initial thoughts on personal moats:
Like company moats, your personal moat should be a competitive advantage that is not only durable—it should also compound over time.
Characteristics of a personal moat below:
2/ Like a company moat, you want to build career capital while you sleep.
As Andrew Chen noted:
3/ You don’t want to build a competitive advantage that is fleeting or that will get commoditized
Things that might get commoditized over time (some longer than
4/ Before the arrival of recorded music, what used to be scarce was the actual music itself — required an in-person artist.
After recorded music, the music itself became abundant and what became scarce was curation, distribution, and self space.
5/ Similarly, in careers, what used to be (more) scarce were things like ideas, money, and exclusive relationships.
In the internet economy, what has become scarce are things like specific knowledge, rare & valuable skills, and great reputations.
Like company moats, your personal moat should be a competitive advantage that is not only durable—it should also compound over time.
Characteristics of a personal moat below:
I'm increasingly interested in the idea of "personal moats" in the context of careers.
— Erik Torenberg (@eriktorenberg) November 22, 2018
Moats should be:
- Hard to learn and hard to do (but perhaps easier for you)
- Skills that are rare and valuable
- Legible
- Compounding over time
- Unique to your own talents & interests https://t.co/bB3k1YcH5b
2/ Like a company moat, you want to build career capital while you sleep.
As Andrew Chen noted:
People talk about \u201cpassive income\u201d a lot but not about \u201cpassive social capital\u201d or \u201cpassive networking\u201d or \u201cpassive knowledge gaining\u201d but that\u2019s what you can architect if you have a thing and it grows over time without intensive constant effort to sustain it
— Andrew Chen (@andrewchen) November 22, 2018
3/ You don’t want to build a competitive advantage that is fleeting or that will get commoditized
Things that might get commoditized over time (some longer than
Things that look like moats but likely aren\u2019t or may fade:
— Erik Torenberg (@eriktorenberg) November 22, 2018
- Proprietary networks
- Being something other than one of the best at any tournament style-game
- Many "awards"
- Twitter followers or general reach without "respect"
- Anything that depends on information asymmetry https://t.co/abjxesVIh9
4/ Before the arrival of recorded music, what used to be scarce was the actual music itself — required an in-person artist.
After recorded music, the music itself became abundant and what became scarce was curation, distribution, and self space.
5/ Similarly, in careers, what used to be (more) scarce were things like ideas, money, and exclusive relationships.
In the internet economy, what has become scarce are things like specific knowledge, rare & valuable skills, and great reputations.