LA resident here to contribute to the “every city is a nightmare” point--I work in a research lab on the medical campus, and at any given time my building has 2-3 homeless people living in it. About 5 times since February we’ve come in to find remnants of a meal and cigarettes next to the computers, along with a several hour search history of seriously debased pornography. They eventually found the guy living in an empty lab two floors below me--he just likes to pop in after dark for some computer time. I finally spoke to a police officer about it last Monday (his most recent visit) and it’s just funny because we all know the guy’s name, what he looks like, another lab has video evidence of him wandering around naked in their space, but because trespassing is only a misdemeanor we basically just have to deal with it. I work long hours often into the night, often by myself, and I’m not looking forward to happening upon him when he’s at it!
So wait, the guy gets free reign and yet can't erase search history or at least locate a trash can? Maybe those are the least of the troubles waiting to happen, but shit, a little decency might be nice.
For real! And it would be in his favor too because we really only noticed something was off when he started leaving ketchup packets and burger wrappers around
If I were a psychopath I’d murder these types of people. Unfortunately I’m only autistic and consequently confine myself to reading 20th century history, working in the garden and hanging out with cats
I dont think he was drunk at all. This was one of his better episodes of the past few months. Recently I've been losing patience with him and was pretty close to cancelling my subscription but this episode is encouraging.
I don't believe the storming of the Bastille was planned either but because it was successful it served as the fulcrum point of a revolution which would see the complete annihilation of not just a state but a society and its way of life. The conditions were different, the French were starving and had the momentum behind them of having already successfully raided other royal armories, I am not trying to tie any substantial parallels between that and the Capitol Hill riot merely use it make a point.
Like it or not the intent was there on January 6th. Poorly directed and without orchestration, granted, but that isn't what is important. What is important is that for many of the individuals there rule of law was abandoned without reservation or regret in favor of embracing force to pursue their fancies. This sort of thing simply can not be tolerated.
I agree, let them burn. But also let those burn who were razing down cities in 2020. They got mostly a free pass from what I can discern, and as the boys alluded to in this episode
So if, for the sake of argument, we accept the premise that "for many individuals there rule of law was abandoned without reservation" and they embraced force with intent to topple the government it seems very odd and contradictory that they also decided to respect the DC laws prohibiting them from bearing weapons. Weapons which would have lent their supposedly planned "insurrection" the force required to succeed.
To abandon something one must first possess it, I chose my words with some thoughtfulness. I doubt anyone went there with any real ambition to do more than demonstrate their verve and the zeal of their cause. This bears out in light of their conduct, once they successfully breached security few of them knew what to do next. Like cows that have successfully fucked up a fence, they just sort of wandered around for the most part. My argument isn't that they went there the intent to do anything of consequence but that at a certain point their behavior transcended acceptable civil disobedience and crossed a line into something else. Mutinies can be spontaneous and by the same logic insurrections might as well, the difference between the two is only a matter of place and scale.
Knowing what we do of the types of individuals that had showed up, by their own statements, we can be certain that most fully bought into the bullshit that the system had failed and the individuals in power were usurpers and illegitimately appointed. They weren't there beating the shit out of cops and security because they had confidence in democratic processes to correct things. They had, through their words and actions, abandoned all confidence in rule of law and instead turned to rule by mob. There is no defense for them outside of incompetence and failure which are far from exonerating factors. Ultimately it is their conduct which damns them.
I like your cow analogy much better than that tenuous French Revolution comparison but while we seem to agree on what happened, none of the evidence offered in these cases made a strong point for an armed or even coordinated insurrection. It was a riot - riots are by definition not law abiding. Of course the men responsible for violent and illegal acts should be held accountable for their conduct - they deserved to be convicted for destruction of property, trespassing, assault of police officers, etc. but the introduction of hyperbolic charges of "seditious conspiracy" and "terrorism" makes the prosecution a show trial rather than an act of justice. And perhaps you enjoy this show trial because the people who are convicted are unsympathetic. I too find them contemptible but am far more concerned with the implications of those convictions than with the individuals involved. Because once political rioters are convicted of "seditious conspiracy" and accused of "terrorism" with such threadbare evidence, we're no longer talking about the rule of law as much as we're talking about its contortion in order to make examples of those who express political dissent. And that can be used by the "other" side too.
There seems to be some confusion so lets sort it out.
First, I didn't compare the Capitol Hill riot to the sacking of the Bastille, in fact I went out of my way to say that the two events were dissimilar and that I was only referencing it to make a singular point -namely that overthrowing order does not require premeditation or direction. That insurrections can be spontaneous, successful, and have wide ranging effects therefore should not be lightly dismissed. Second, I never suggested what occurred on January 6th was armed or coordinated, nor are either inherent aspect of an insurrection (although perhaps instrumental for a successful one). Insurrections should not be be confused with coups or juntas, they are about destroying seats of power and are not ultimately concerned over supplanting or replacing them or even what might follow. Lastly I am not talking about the trials, all of my comments were directed at the event itself, the individuals involved, and were to contend with the assertion made by the hosts that these events didn't meet the criteria to be considered an insurrection. Intent and violence are the only necessary ingredients in this particular recipe. That is what I took issue with and that alone.
Anyway, judging by all the shit you are dragging into this that has nothing to do with my remarks I can only assume you really want to fight about this. Hopefully someone else will climb into the ring with you. Severity of the offense and justification of the sentencing are peripheral matters to my point and neither interest me enough to argue about. I haven't followed these cases, I know nothing about the specifics which supported the findings so I cannot speak intelligently as to their legitimacy or lack thereof and I try not to have serious discussions about things over which I don't feel sufficiently informed. Sorry man.
I stayed in Midtown last year in November. It was very strange: Loud and aggressive homeless people shouting but being ignored by everyone, rattling whatever chains they had like so many poltergeists in broad daylight. Kept a careful distance, but felt safe enough. Didn't take the trains.
It's fantastic to hear the Really Good People far north of the border are getting such visceral feedback on their magical thinking.
Maybe we could satisfy both the city government _and_ local landlords by keeping the AirBnbs open, but only to intrepid travellers from Afghanistan or the Central African Republic?
New York schools, public and private, have been wastefully underused these last years: You see "Dalton cafeteria," I see "halfway house for drug-murder bandidos, fleeing Bukele's El Salvador" - an asset to the school's Spanish Immersion program!
Texas should be buying these New Americans memberships at Soul Cycle, spare keys to the summer homes of congresspeople, slingshots and crossbows for hunting game and unleashed dogs in Central Park!
10,000 per month from Texas to New York also falls far short of the 230,000 per month that apparently crossed the border in 2022: I'd petition Governor Abbott to ditch buses, maybe put together a fleet of cruise ships and take migrants direct up the coasts to New York, Portland, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Seattle in batches of 6-7000.
Why shouldn't the centres of the country's national wealth share more heartily in the benefits of their proposed policies? If they pose short-term costs, they're also the best placed to bear them. If they pose intercommunal challenges, these are the places in the US that pride themselves on surmounting them, relative to their apparently odious hinterlands.
Unironically, given the premises of The New Yorker or New York Times, I don't see how you could argue these aren't the right places for these migrants.
Loved the discussion comparing prosecutions of January 6th rioters to the BLM rioters. I distinctly remember getting into an argument (probably on January 7th 2021) with the girlfriend of my brother-in-law, who confidently asserted something to the effect of "These rioters won't get any jail time because they're white guys." An absolutely bonkers prognostication, but certainly of the zeitgeist among New York City progressives in January of 2021. My question: Has there been any good comparative accounting of prosecutions of BLM rioters vs. Jan 6th rioters? I'd love to see a breakdown to the effect of "X amount of protesters from Such-and-Such City were arrested and collectively sentenced to Z years, while X amount of protesters from January 6 were arrested and collectively sentenced to Z years".
Moynihan’s post-Comedy Cellar story reminded me of an old Mike Birbiglia bit when he said that at any moment in NYC you could turn your head in one direction and see the most beautiful woman you’d ever seen; then you could turn your head the opposite direction and see the craziest, drunkest man you’d ever seen. This experiment replicates with a high degree of test/re-test reliability.
It’s the gerontocracy for me. We need term limits. I think it would really help mitigate all of the corporate interests in Washington. I hate being so ageist too. I think if the election were held today, I’d probably just vote locally and for the state of WI only! Lifelong Dem here too
I am generally not one for placing rules on what anyone can do, but I do really find it odd that we consider 65 to be the maximum age you're capable of doing most jobs, but we have had dozens, maybe hundreds, of people who have continued running the country when they are literally an entire generation or two past that age.
LA resident here to contribute to the “every city is a nightmare” point--I work in a research lab on the medical campus, and at any given time my building has 2-3 homeless people living in it. About 5 times since February we’ve come in to find remnants of a meal and cigarettes next to the computers, along with a several hour search history of seriously debased pornography. They eventually found the guy living in an empty lab two floors below me--he just likes to pop in after dark for some computer time. I finally spoke to a police officer about it last Monday (his most recent visit) and it’s just funny because we all know the guy’s name, what he looks like, another lab has video evidence of him wandering around naked in their space, but because trespassing is only a misdemeanor we basically just have to deal with it. I work long hours often into the night, often by myself, and I’m not looking forward to happening upon him when he’s at it!
So wait, the guy gets free reign and yet can't erase search history or at least locate a trash can? Maybe those are the least of the troubles waiting to happen, but shit, a little decency might be nice.
For real! And it would be in his favor too because we really only noticed something was off when he started leaving ketchup packets and burger wrappers around
Couldn’t they have a bit more of a look through the criminal code? Can’t they get a bit of indecent exposure and property damage thrown in?
Apparently not!
If I were a psychopath I’d murder these types of people. Unfortunately I’m only autistic and consequently confine myself to reading 20th century history, working in the garden and hanging out with cats
Spark the bowl -- it’s the 420 episode!
A homeless man tried to grab my ass a few weeks ago. This occurred in broad daylight outside my office in downtown Chicago.
In 2021, a random dude slapped me in the face as I was walking down the street in Bushwick. So yeah, all cities suck now.
The Reason Roundtable had a great analysis of the judicial problems with the Proud Boys sentencings.
As the last surviving New Yorker, Matt needs put on an eyepatch and embrace his inner Snake Plissken.
Eric Adams naming countries and I lost it 🤣 I love that man. Don’t care what anyone says.
Jesus. How drunk is Moynihan?
I didn't notice anything the least bit unusual. Does that say something about me or Moynihan or both?
Because it's him, I just assume the answer is always, "shitfaced."
I dont think he was drunk at all. This was one of his better episodes of the past few months. Recently I've been losing patience with him and was pretty close to cancelling my subscription but this episode is encouraging.
I don't believe the storming of the Bastille was planned either but because it was successful it served as the fulcrum point of a revolution which would see the complete annihilation of not just a state but a society and its way of life. The conditions were different, the French were starving and had the momentum behind them of having already successfully raided other royal armories, I am not trying to tie any substantial parallels between that and the Capitol Hill riot merely use it make a point.
Like it or not the intent was there on January 6th. Poorly directed and without orchestration, granted, but that isn't what is important. What is important is that for many of the individuals there rule of law was abandoned without reservation or regret in favor of embracing force to pursue their fancies. This sort of thing simply can not be tolerated.
To hell with all them as far as I am concerned.
I agree, let them burn. But also let those burn who were razing down cities in 2020. They got mostly a free pass from what I can discern, and as the boys alluded to in this episode
So if, for the sake of argument, we accept the premise that "for many individuals there rule of law was abandoned without reservation" and they embraced force with intent to topple the government it seems very odd and contradictory that they also decided to respect the DC laws prohibiting them from bearing weapons. Weapons which would have lent their supposedly planned "insurrection" the force required to succeed.
To abandon something one must first possess it, I chose my words with some thoughtfulness. I doubt anyone went there with any real ambition to do more than demonstrate their verve and the zeal of their cause. This bears out in light of their conduct, once they successfully breached security few of them knew what to do next. Like cows that have successfully fucked up a fence, they just sort of wandered around for the most part. My argument isn't that they went there the intent to do anything of consequence but that at a certain point their behavior transcended acceptable civil disobedience and crossed a line into something else. Mutinies can be spontaneous and by the same logic insurrections might as well, the difference between the two is only a matter of place and scale.
Knowing what we do of the types of individuals that had showed up, by their own statements, we can be certain that most fully bought into the bullshit that the system had failed and the individuals in power were usurpers and illegitimately appointed. They weren't there beating the shit out of cops and security because they had confidence in democratic processes to correct things. They had, through their words and actions, abandoned all confidence in rule of law and instead turned to rule by mob. There is no defense for them outside of incompetence and failure which are far from exonerating factors. Ultimately it is their conduct which damns them.
I like your cow analogy much better than that tenuous French Revolution comparison but while we seem to agree on what happened, none of the evidence offered in these cases made a strong point for an armed or even coordinated insurrection. It was a riot - riots are by definition not law abiding. Of course the men responsible for violent and illegal acts should be held accountable for their conduct - they deserved to be convicted for destruction of property, trespassing, assault of police officers, etc. but the introduction of hyperbolic charges of "seditious conspiracy" and "terrorism" makes the prosecution a show trial rather than an act of justice. And perhaps you enjoy this show trial because the people who are convicted are unsympathetic. I too find them contemptible but am far more concerned with the implications of those convictions than with the individuals involved. Because once political rioters are convicted of "seditious conspiracy" and accused of "terrorism" with such threadbare evidence, we're no longer talking about the rule of law as much as we're talking about its contortion in order to make examples of those who express political dissent. And that can be used by the "other" side too.
There seems to be some confusion so lets sort it out.
First, I didn't compare the Capitol Hill riot to the sacking of the Bastille, in fact I went out of my way to say that the two events were dissimilar and that I was only referencing it to make a singular point -namely that overthrowing order does not require premeditation or direction. That insurrections can be spontaneous, successful, and have wide ranging effects therefore should not be lightly dismissed. Second, I never suggested what occurred on January 6th was armed or coordinated, nor are either inherent aspect of an insurrection (although perhaps instrumental for a successful one). Insurrections should not be be confused with coups or juntas, they are about destroying seats of power and are not ultimately concerned over supplanting or replacing them or even what might follow. Lastly I am not talking about the trials, all of my comments were directed at the event itself, the individuals involved, and were to contend with the assertion made by the hosts that these events didn't meet the criteria to be considered an insurrection. Intent and violence are the only necessary ingredients in this particular recipe. That is what I took issue with and that alone.
Anyway, judging by all the shit you are dragging into this that has nothing to do with my remarks I can only assume you really want to fight about this. Hopefully someone else will climb into the ring with you. Severity of the offense and justification of the sentencing are peripheral matters to my point and neither interest me enough to argue about. I haven't followed these cases, I know nothing about the specifics which supported the findings so I cannot speak intelligently as to their legitimacy or lack thereof and I try not to have serious discussions about things over which I don't feel sufficiently informed. Sorry man.
You guys are getting me really excited for my visit to New York this November.
Don’t stay in midtown
😬
I stayed in Midtown last year in November. It was very strange: Loud and aggressive homeless people shouting but being ignored by everyone, rattling whatever chains they had like so many poltergeists in broad daylight. Kept a careful distance, but felt safe enough. Didn't take the trains.
We should be within walking distance of the couple shows we’re seeing. I’m definitely going to try to convince my wife to taxi to LGA.
Let me know if you need some suggestions or if you’ll have time for a random night out. We’ve got a whole fifdom gang here.
Thanks! I’ll keep you posted!
It's fantastic to hear the Really Good People far north of the border are getting such visceral feedback on their magical thinking.
Maybe we could satisfy both the city government _and_ local landlords by keeping the AirBnbs open, but only to intrepid travellers from Afghanistan or the Central African Republic?
New York schools, public and private, have been wastefully underused these last years: You see "Dalton cafeteria," I see "halfway house for drug-murder bandidos, fleeing Bukele's El Salvador" - an asset to the school's Spanish Immersion program!
Texas should be buying these New Americans memberships at Soul Cycle, spare keys to the summer homes of congresspeople, slingshots and crossbows for hunting game and unleashed dogs in Central Park!
10,000 per month from Texas to New York also falls far short of the 230,000 per month that apparently crossed the border in 2022: I'd petition Governor Abbott to ditch buses, maybe put together a fleet of cruise ships and take migrants direct up the coasts to New York, Portland, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Seattle in batches of 6-7000.
Why shouldn't the centres of the country's national wealth share more heartily in the benefits of their proposed policies? If they pose short-term costs, they're also the best placed to bear them. If they pose intercommunal challenges, these are the places in the US that pride themselves on surmounting them, relative to their apparently odious hinterlands.
Unironically, given the premises of The New Yorker or New York Times, I don't see how you could argue these aren't the right places for these migrants.
I cannot believe you guys missed the opportunity to give us the long awaited 420 episode.
Loved the discussion comparing prosecutions of January 6th rioters to the BLM rioters. I distinctly remember getting into an argument (probably on January 7th 2021) with the girlfriend of my brother-in-law, who confidently asserted something to the effect of "These rioters won't get any jail time because they're white guys." An absolutely bonkers prognostication, but certainly of the zeitgeist among New York City progressives in January of 2021. My question: Has there been any good comparative accounting of prosecutions of BLM rioters vs. Jan 6th rioters? I'd love to see a breakdown to the effect of "X amount of protesters from Such-and-Such City were arrested and collectively sentenced to Z years, while X amount of protesters from January 6 were arrested and collectively sentenced to Z years".
Moynihan’s post-Comedy Cellar story reminded me of an old Mike Birbiglia bit when he said that at any moment in NYC you could turn your head in one direction and see the most beautiful woman you’d ever seen; then you could turn your head the opposite direction and see the craziest, drunkest man you’d ever seen. This experiment replicates with a high degree of test/re-test reliability.
It’s the gerontocracy for me. We need term limits. I think it would really help mitigate all of the corporate interests in Washington. I hate being so ageist too. I think if the election were held today, I’d probably just vote locally and for the state of WI only! Lifelong Dem here too
I am generally not one for placing rules on what anyone can do, but I do really find it odd that we consider 65 to be the maximum age you're capable of doing most jobs, but we have had dozens, maybe hundreds, of people who have continued running the country when they are literally an entire generation or two past that age.
Speaking as an actual doctor who recently stayed in an Airbnb in New York and went to the U.S. Open...
We do not normally carry syringes of stuff that “knocks people out” on our person.
No musical outro 😱
Not on a regular 'cast.