EZRA KLEIN v MATT YGLESIAS

Klein meanwhile is a duller writer but his steady crunching of numbers is ultimately educational.

yglesiases willingness to be ambitious and wrong is imo what makes him compelling - like i understand theres danger in utopian thinking but still reimagining the world and its institutions is def one of my hobbies

who has better trolls?

― goole, Monday, January 3, 2011 11:51 AM (1 hour ago) Bookmark

to answer my own q, i don't really know. klein's comments are pretty boring but i have noticed yglesias' "community" to be especially vicious and repetitive. neither of them seem to really care much but i think both have made gestures to get more involved. terrible drudgery, sounds like, to me.

as far as blogger gossip goes, can anyone verify that there are, in fact, paid trolls out there? i'd hate to think it was mere dedication causing the same people to say the same things in the same place every day

theres only one blog i can think of that has good comments, really feel like 'comments off' should be the default

TNC i assume?

your bløg has good comments joe

yah tnc and lol of course goes w/o saying my blog

btw how much does this trolling gig pay, who do i contact

i know, right

i saw an interview w/yglesias where he was like all my readers really hate me i have no idea why they come to my blog

he was k funny tbh

eh i've watched a few of his bloggingheads's and he comes off like a jerk imo, interrupting, going on and on

ha yeah ive never been able to bring myself to watch a blogginghead and in general id much rather read than watch any news type thing but for some reason i saw this it was a friendly interview at a like blogg convention where they we just joking around

anyway my head says klein but my heart goes yglesias, not sure what to do, prob follow my heart

yglesias is good on urban issues - not that he says anything new, but at least he's talking to relatively wide audience. but still...super annoying on a personal level. I like klein.

Yglesias is a philosophy major in every word he writes and this is awesome about him.

ugh this is gonna be like that week i read glenn greenwald isnt it

neither of these guys is much like glenn greenwald

unless you have some sort of distaste for american journalists, then yes it'll be like that lol

these guys are on the sensible/technocratic side of the great progressive blogger divide - greenwald exists on the polemic/activist shore - which is not to say hes any more or less otm, just that hes harder to take

nah, that was what i liked abt greenwald its just that in the end i was like "wtf this is not my country i dont care"

haha

yeah but usa is in charge of the rest of the countries iirc

when krugman is updating regularly i don't have much of a reason to follow klein too closely - i don't hate him or anything though

[Yglesias is] a shitty writer imo

Actually, typos aside, he's not. He's remarkably concise and clear even if he liberally sprinkles his posts with "negative externalities" this and "regulatory capture" that jargon.

yglesias is embarrassed about having been a socialist and will occasionally mix in some right wing tinted bullshit to try and build a bit of center cred. i have grown to hate him. klein is kind of a young dinner party blogger but i keep the feed there to flick thru. i enjoy greenwald's secular fire and brimstone and i get angry about the same things as him. his biases are so transparent that is is v easy to think critically about what he writes.

maybe ill face the winner of this one off w/greenwald

can't wait

feel like klein is getting sold short here - he was hands down the best all around guy on health care reform

his coverage was comprehensive but his opinions were so milquetoast it was like reading a blog by that dude on gawker

feel like his opinions were pretty otm especially compared w/almost everyone elses which basically added up to OMG PUBLIC OPTION

they both kind of remind me of how a lot of people move to dc and get kind of absorbed into the weird political networky culture here at a pretty young age. dc is so conservative.

would love to run into these guys at a bbq and get into a drunken political argument

since the democratic primaries, even when drunk i try to sidestep political arguments. i ran into weigel at a bar one time but did not pick a fight. he is a good dude imo. that's actually one of the few blogs i regularly read - don't have time/energy to slog through a lot of content anymore.

yeah ive had v little exposure to it but dc political culture seen close up seems v strange

seems so unbearable. lotta people wearing new balances on the weekend and shit.

they r not sexy rip

never trust a libertarian

or a journalist

lol i own 2 pair of new balances

just sayin if u cannot figure how to dress how are u gonna run the country

daria i seen the shoes youre buying, you know what youre doing

new balance are great sneakers, just dont wear them on the weekend or max will shun u

you pride yourself on living in the mouth of the dragon but being fireproof, and then one day you realize it is saturday and you are in whole foods buying ingredients for a cool mac n cheese with a twist recipe you found online, wearing new balance sneakers

^^ gets it

i mean tbh i would rather live in boston than dc, at least some people there have accents

where would ilx end up siding on a boston vs dc poll?

it would turn into an argument about pizza

harDCore

whole foods, new balance sneakers, check. i don't really care about recipes

boston sucks, accents there are horrible. i hate boston

in that case the poll would require a 'neither' option xp

i am in boston with an accent. thx daria.

i think i got that backward anyway in the american vernacular suck my dick is actually sentiment of aggression not sexuality which i know is kinda weird if youre not familiar with it

lol sorry if my post struck a nerve.. but the idea that financial incentives of writing for the nyt audience are constraining *ezra klein* to be more of a centrist and less critical of power just seems to be based on an outdated model of how this stuff works. it’s not like big legacy media is just shifting around pundits like pawns. klein is an independent and highly successful vector of technocratic centrism. he’s one of the main conduits by which libertarian policy ideas are re-packaged and sold to liberals—that’s why people like tyler cowen love him. from blogging to founding vox, that’s been his ideology for decades, he doesn’t need dean baquet to tell him to write that stuff. and if yglesias is a good counterfactual for what klein would be writing if he were unconstrained by establishment media, klein would be writing much more centrist and aggressive left-punching stuff. you can even see it in the way this thread’s got bumped over the last few years; whenever it’s bumped about yglesias it’s someone mad that he’s written a substack called like “Why Joe Biden Should Moderate On Abortion” or “Now Is A Wonderful Time For Fiscal Austerity”, whereas when it’s bumped about klein it’s k3v or jaymc being like “this podcast where klein interviews michael pollan about the psychic benefits of microdosing lsd and mushrooms is highly elucidating.” nyt refashioning klein into a new ira glass means he’s doing much *less* of the centrist policy writing he used to do. if he weren’t at the nyt most likely he’d be doing more of that stuff

instead of writing snippy media explainers you couldve considered my post in the context of the conversation we were having which was only two posts long and was not that complicated, kevins claim the klein is contemplative and curious doesnt square with his perfect technocrats career is all, thats why his current ideas man phase seems very schticky imho, because if youre truly curious and introspective you will eventually arrive at least a single inconvenient conclusion

it's funny that contemplative and curious people seem to always arrive at the conclusion that supports their preconceived notions and ideology

bunch of wasted effort, inefficient

always important to appear convincingly as something other than what you are though, crucial part of ideology

im not really ideological more of a common sense guy

Let's dig into the data

No, let's never look at data at all because that's too wonky and boring and something something neoliberalism technocracy ideology. The recent episode on drug policy, just for example, was excellent, and gets into the details of what is and isn't working in trying to achieve the very goals I'm guessing posters itt would share, but let's ignore it because neither EK nor his guest called for the end of capitalism and that stuff is boring.

you gotta laugh you know thats just life

https://i.imgur.com/Qf703B0.png

Reading the drug policy transcript, it does in fact seem pretty technocratic wonk-y and doesn't share the right goals IMO.

ie

If what you care about the most was a drop in drug arrests and involvement of people who use drugs and deal drugs in the criminal justice system, then it was a success clearly because there was very little contact anymore between law enforcement and people who sell and deal drugs.

But on the health side, no, I don’t think that. And those statistics on treatment I believe count a lot of one time consultations. I think what most people, particularly people who love someone who has an addiction, are looking for is evidence on people getting better, people getting into recovery, not just at some point having some transitory contact with the system.

Yeah, I don't think that addiction/recovery and 'people who love an addict' (shades of victims' rights ideology) should be a key part of drug policy given the state of law enforcement in the US. They go on to overdoses and fent and such but IMO that just highlights the fundamental flaw of (libertarian) decriminalization over legalization (and regulation). If heroin/coke users had regulated, legal avenues of obtaining their drug of choice fentanyl contamination from powder being cut on the wrong surface is minimized if not eliminated, same with overdoses related to unexpected strength of the product.

Matt Yglesias deleted this heinous tweet so I volunteer to archive it for him pic.twitter.com/BZmLOb7jtF

— Kate Willett (@katewillett) May 12, 2024

Matty revised

US bombing of Vietnam was destructive and morally wrong. But when I tried to look up the long-term impact on economic development, I found this paper arguing that it was smaller than you might think. pic.twitter.com/5Mhc1ebz7i

— Matthew Yglesias (@mattyglesias) May 12, 2024

"But"

bombing him wouldnt have much long term impact either

Yeah, I don't think that addiction/recovery and 'people who love an addict' (shades of victims' rights ideology) should be a key part of drug policy given the state of law enforcement in the US. They go on to overdoses and fent and such but IMO that just highlights the fundamental flaw of (libertarian) decriminalization over legalization (and regulation). If heroin/coke users had regulated, legal avenues of obtaining their drug of choice fentanyl contamination from powder being cut on the wrong surface is minimized if not eliminated, same with overdoses related to unexpected strength of the product.

― papal hotwife (milo z), Saturday, May 11, 2024 5:16 PM (three hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

The guest is very pro legalization with regulation and very critical of libertarian decriminalization. That’s what a lot of the episode is about.

I’m also straining to see the victims rights comparison you are drawing tbh.

A third party's feelings (victims of crime, families of addicts) being used to determine public policy is a poor idea in general.

The guest's references to legalization and regulation consist of weed and the need to regulate dispensaries - his other positive examples are all individual criminalization (if lighter than the mass incarceration regime) but that's okay because they also added more money for rehab. And he's explicitly critical of regulated, legal supply.

One of his statements on that - "But the problem with that reasoning is we did flood communities with legally made, consistent quality, clearly labeled opioids for years. And the net effect was millions of people getting addicted and hundreds of thousands of people dying." - ignores that overdose rates increased when that legally made, consistent supply was withdrawn. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2023/09/12/us-overdose-deaths-opioid-crisis/) Never mind that actively pushing opioid use (via pill mills) (differs greatly from the existence of regulated supply.)

Matty had the wrong continuation, so I fixed it.

US bombing of Vietnam was destructive and morally wrong. But... it killed hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese, Cambodians and Laotians, continuing decades after the US lost the war, through unexploded bombs and mines peppered across all three of those nations, with many of them killing children, all of... which had a smaller economic impact than you might think.

xp which is simply to note that when you say that if one just had an open mind toward the Ezraverse one might actually have a lot in common with the former Obama staff wonk of the week, I’m not sure that’s true.

(And that’s ignoring the dumb throwaway line about destroying capitalism.)

Ezraverse

you lost me

Center-Man: Across the Ezraverse