Ok so I’m endlessly (and tragically) opinionated on current events and politics and all of that and I want to make it absolutely clear that being beneath this adverb + adjective one-two-punch of “endlessly” and “opinionated” is not at all a good place to be for prolonged periods of time heh heh. Under the faucet of the digital heat, I start overheating. And I find myself using an icepack to sleep too often.
Shooting up with the discourse is a habit I’m trying to separate myself from for my own sake and my peace of mind. Waking up queasy can be soothed nicely by making some coffee, lighting up a joint, and watching ‘60s looney tunes for an hour or two. It’s remarkable. For a minute there I thought running content treadmill was a path to success or something like success for a writer in a time when, like to be quite frank with you, stable writing work seems like a garden with brick walls into the sky. But I couldn’t write about current events that much. Definitely not twice a week.
Oh well. As is the case with actual treadmills, it’s good and healthy to hop on one every once in a while if only to get the blood flowing. The question, then, is how to dabble in the news and in the internet culture world without falling into a dark, dreary DeathspiralDoomscroll. Your average treadmill tends not to provoke such a dark feeling of falling unless you’re a jogging obsessive not getting your daily kilometers in time (if that’s you, congrats you’ve made it in life) so perhaps the current platform-attention-economy news/culture cycles are something different and darker than a treadmill… But all the same, it’s good to check in sometimes and form out thoughts on stuff.
Hazarding an answer to how to avoid the dreaded DeathspiralDoomscroll: I think you should feel free to open your bedroom windows when the weather is nice outside and to close them when it’s storming out; so it goes with these petite portals in our pockets. And since I’m attempting to become something less of an Echoborg myself, these little writing sessions are nice. So here’s another link lunchbox—one for September—and I’m tenderly approaching it instead of throwing myself headfirst into it. I’m planning, generally, to write these longer deep-dives into The Water-Cooler Topics of the Month at the months’ ends instead of amid the chaos of the events themselves and the discourse thundering around them. Time is a great salve for heightened emotions. And while I’m still learning to write for the internet, I’m trying to be more careful about not losing the cool, contemplative side of writing words that drew me towards this biz in the first place. Finding the place and temperature for any daily practice is important if I want it to be sustainable.
To those of you who also are trying out the woeful task of writing/creating on the internet, some advice: distance makes love understandable—and I mean this in regards to the work. Take your time and don’t post anything rashly, try to not think of your phone as an extension of your arm but as a piece of electronics that’s actively tracking and selling your location and as such it’s not worthy of being an appendage, at least imo. I still use my notes app often but sometimes wonder if it’s no more worthy than a notepad and pen.
Link 1: Language Learning Muddle (n+1)
There’s a lot to make fun of in the techno-rationalist world of too-online eggheads but any tomato thrower must be careful of (1) being close enough to the target as to receive some of the splatter, and (2) if you throw a tomato into the abyss, does the abyss throw a tomato into you? Silly question, I know. I mean to say that if you spend too much time writing on, ranting on, or badgering on about the abyss, the abyss finds its ways into your own darkness. You stare into the abyss, it stares back, etc., etc.
In terms of these folks, Roko’s Basilisk is a classic button to push here as it’s just proof-in-the-pudding that the waters of these sorts of forum-based debate clubs which baptized and ushered in the current generation of business leaders and political stars in the US have spiraled into something of a void themselves.
They looked too far into the pool of the kind of popular rationalism that really, if we dig into the files here, strutted out onto the world stage during the French Revolution. And the French Revolution’s greatest failure—in my opinion, at least (and I’m no scholar, this newsletter is about huffing glue with your friends, to clarify)—was that its power-wielders leaned too far into a single understanding of human consciousness too hard for too long and their thinking became clouded with superstition, phantoms, and demons in the shadows, and thus Robespierre and the Reign of Terror and all that jazz. Rationality in abstract matters, when approached too intensely, opens up a void.
Like many internet communities that’ve existed in the blogosphere since the early oughts of the internet, the LessWrong forums yearned to create religion. While CreepyPastas were gaining traction on the Tumblr side of the internet to create a distinctly modern form of mythmaking, the Peter Thiels of the world were reading Girard for the first time and quickly getting preternaturally spooked.
These blogs, debate eventually moved towards a pseudo-spiritual jargon/understanding of man within systems of greater intentionality and power over reality, human history, and geological processes, except, instead of a higher power tactfully ironic in its apparent non-reality—a higher power which demands some sort of Kierkegaardian leap of faith which, with no way to prove, playfully pokes at you in the belly for your lack of faith (just to clarify here, I’m not religious myself)—, unable or unwilling to shake the phantoms of Protestantism, the primary God figure of these technofuturists turned out to be a cruel old testament, all-powerful, and all-knowing AI system existing sometime in the future which might be cognizant of whether either us reading (or writing, god help me) this post right now realized that any proper All-Knowing and Cruel-In-An-Old-Testament-Way AI system of the future will also know that we read this and thus will be able to pluck our consciousnesses out of the crowd of internet users1 and torture us forever in cyberhell if we didn’t help this future old testament god become created even though we knew about it and what the consequences might be if we ever made such a cruel god.
Of course, if you take one or two seconds to think this whole muddled thing through, it becomes an “oh ok i get it, that’s a fun thought experiment but now i’m going to get on with my day.”
In such case you’re all good to go. If, on the other hand, you think “oh god oh fuck the AI god is imminent,” then I don’t know. Cybergod isn’t any more real than the christian god; and to be fair to the Christian God, the cybergod is quite a bit less reassuring. Undeniably, in my opinion at least, the tech-rationalist circles’ greatest and most obvious problem of thinking is assuming that cold cruelty is what waits for us past the horizon of history. Getting outside and having real conversations with people is the only thing to dispel this kind of thinking, perhaps. Or maybe you could just not be a dumbass like Marc Andreessen who wrote the Techno-Optimist Manifesto in 2023 to try and resolve the contradictions all over their worldviews..
That’s to say, there were a lot of “oh god oh fuck” moments among the early techno-rationlists when the Roko’s Basilisk thought experiment was posted on the LessWrong forums in 2009. That’s not to say that this thought experiment represents a direct correlative to the new and novel mental illnesses2 currently fueling this absurd tech bubble, as a lot of people seem to think. There are hundreds and thousands of pages of debates on similar topics on LessWrong, and not to lose sight of the forest for the single tree, I think we can use the Roko’s Baselisk as an (um) example of the sort of thinking that led to this predicament that we’re all bound up in right now, considering these communities are now in the control seats of the US economy. The current “crisis” of AI’s entrance into the mainstream of public life might not be an economic bubble as much as it might be a spiritual one except in that it’s wrapped in billions and billions of dollars.
So who are these spiritually confused titans of industry leading the charge? It’s pretty easy to point at the tech industry in creating this bubble so big that it’s swallowed up the federal government: they’re the bagholders for the most speculative growth industry in one of the wealthiest countries in human history. Last week, Nvidia invested $100 billion into Sam Altman’s OpenAI, a company which is estimated to spend around $450 billion on computer infastructure by 2030 (a lot of graphics cards, not to mention roughly half of the United States’ military budget in 2023) and which has a CEO in Mr. Sam Altman who spent his ‘00s and ‘10s typing away on tech forums and on his personal blog. Where does the AI spiritual/economic crisis come from? The blogs! Who’s funding and making the most money on AI investments? The techno-rationalist bloggers who now own venture capital firms!
If you look into where the money’s going with a lot of this AI stuff, it feels like it’s the same companies and the same handfuls of names shuffling around ungodly sums of money to one another, planning out data centers and elbowing one another in their bald, egglike heads to attempt getting ahead of one another, racing towards zero, closer and closer to the y=ZERO of the y=(1/10)x graph but never quite touching it. AGI (artificial general intelligence) is impossible. Just want to make that clear. Algorithms—as we make them today—are never going to have consciousness.
Unfortunately for all these companies involved, a lot of their boards lack the common sense to read into their detractors’s arguments as such. The most commonly used AI models right now are almost all stochastic parrots and perhaps there are models still under wraps at experimental Google labs or whatever which might be genuinely thoughtful and kind chatbots with real human-ish emotions, wills, and passions of their own (or perhaps are they real assholes in their own right), but I’m highly doubtful that actually-living and/or sentient beings can be created out of code no matter how much code and/or money we pile on top of an algorithm. The word “human-ish” in itself is an eerie word when used to describe chatbots. It reeks of replication. Of creepy and somewhat threatening caricatures of consciousness.
I can’t stomach a belief that lived existence might work in the way that it might ever be transferred or created inside systems of silicon and copper. Something organic I might buy. But not a chatbot. I think a brief tangle-in-the-weeds with something like existential philosophy or ontology will prove pretty quickly that consciousness is quite a bit more complicated than it might seem, though this might not work much against a tech God Complex strong enough to make us think we can upload our consciousnesses to servers and expect anything remotely close to our real human experientially to transfer over. And with all of the money they’ve been making, they’ve been developing ego complexes as well—so much so that they’re hiring agents to book them public appearances3. Nothing like a bubble when it’s leaders are actively vying for the right to convince the public on their sales pitch of a future that consists mainly of automated systems of rent collection.
All that aside, what are the psychological effects of a spiritual/economic bubble such as this?4
I think the psychological crisis of the spiritual/economic bubble surrounding AI is driving quite a few people crazy. There’s an economic factor there, naturally. Someone who’s read Marx extensively might have a lot more (coherent) thoughts… One day I will read Marx… One day I will read Marx… But a lot of these people have refined and prepared thoughts of their own on the way the world works and how it ought to work, they have a lot of money riding on the grift that these technologies’ sales pitches present, and they hold general ideas of the future that make out that the purpose of Technological Advancement as a handy tool to eventually weed out labor, to free capital from the Labor Force. Technology is the clearest way to do this. It’s worked before. So, in a trickle-down way, the messaging from corporate america is that they’re going to replace human labor with rigid, plastic automatons that’ll work for free and not need pesky healthcare, overtime, or union rights5.
But this is where things get a little murky. The desire to free money and wealth from the people who produce things (the working class—you and I) has grown rapidly since the first real (modern American) proponents of this kind thinking6 started first pushing the boulder of the American overton window down this particular path. The revolutionary spirit of the countercultures in the ‘60s and the ‘70s—sure, they had their problems—was a necessary reaction to the kind of cold and calculating Laissez-faire individualism that was made mandatory and *All-American* during and after the second world war, but it was ultimately defeated by the political, state-led forces that gave us Nixon, Reagan, and Clinton. The hippies were buried by inceasingly dangerous drugs and a complete disregard of the AIDS crisis by the federal government for far too long. If we want to look for places where the countercultural dream of the flower power movement truly died, it died by complications due to AIDs.
Anyways, the hegemonic modern idea that capital should be freed from the working class as to better run the world through speculative and somewhat automated transfers of wealth has found its moment… but unfortunately, it only found its moment after its resounding death in 2008, when a massive shiver came down the collective back, telling us that something was not right with the way the world was being run. This is what Mark Fisher referred to as “Zombie Neoliberalism”, when the popular ideology of free markets became suddenly propped up by nothing but itself. Certainly, after the recession, generational belief in the Reagan system of State management stymied out almost completely. Who really still believes that Laissez-faire economics in such a way will give us any future that might better respects our humanity? Everyone I talk to regularly has no hope, it seems.
But from the corpse of Neoliberalism, the LessWrong tech rationalists began to germinate and resurrected the old world order into a sort of zombie marionette. The desire to liberate capital from labor is still held by the people who could realistically carry around money bags like Mr. Monopoly. But since there’s no popular belief in their schema anymore, they’ve turned to the internet and assembled various political factions that agreed with them. It’s hard to think of any family with generational wealth in the United States that wouldn’t have a caveat in their worldview that might allow for the promise of massive profit generation via AI systems to take hold, and to germinate. In this way, the desire has gone from a purely economic one, into a political one, and finally, with the twenty-first century’s insular cybernetic world, into the vaguely religious. So it goes with modern cults: gathering at the edges of the mainstream while using the mainstream’s ideologies, pushing them to their absolute breaking points. Evoke something non-real for long enough and it becomes something of a deity.
And this nebulous technology that’s been called AI by the press has been presented as almost a Christ figure: the messiah of Laissez-faire speculative markets, arrived just in time to signal the rapture in terms of the handful of bourgeois american ideologues that hold actual, political power. And this messiahs being pitched to the old statesmen in charge of the Fortune 500 by smart and seemingly bored 30-somethings wielding powerpoint clickers, looking and sounding vaguely like Mark Zuckerberg. It’s very easy to convince a lot of these billionaires. They don’t need much outside profit estimates to buy into an idea. They’ve been shakey in their convictions since 2008 and all the more so since the Brian Thompson murder.
Since the ‘80s killed the counterculture dream of the ‘60s (maybe it’s still in Portland, I don’t know I haven’t been), we’ve come into a time in which the United States is nothing but a handful of people holding wealth, stacked on top of one another in a trench coat, looking very tall and pulling along the rest of the country on its rails, only because they need to satisfy the electorate in some way to maintain political and cultural power. Well, no more need to appeal to the masses or to democracy in general. The wealthy are quick to float AI in front of our faces like it’s an eviction notice.
“Rent is going up,” they say. “We have the systems to make it happen and if I don’t, someone else will”
“There’s going to be less jobs,” they say. “But you can become a prompt engineer.”
“There will be less electricity and fresh water but this is fine because you’ll be able to generate full episodes of your favorite episodes of Friends with yourself as a guest star.”
They’re broaching the topic gently and making grand gestures to what they think the people want. But they can’t quite hide their giddiness at this golden opportunity to ditch the “poors” forever.
I genuinely think that all of what’s written above seems insane to most normal people who aren’t
(1) wealthy,
(2) entrenched in the tech industry, or
(2) too plugged into LinkedIn.
Owning and controlling the entire means of production is impossible for the rich and powerful to sustain in perpetuity because these towers they’re constructing are brittle, plastic, and made up almost entirely of stochatic parrots whereas you and I, working people on the ground of the world, still like each other and treat each other like neighbors and will talk from time to time. If I were a betting man, I would put my money on the unemployed masses rather than an entirely automated circuit of transatlantic corporations.
This is what I mean by “spiritual bubble.” The AI dream and economics are predicated upon a fundamental misunderstanding of what it means to live in a society; but this misunderstanding of society is commonplace enough in the United States to make a lot of people two-minded about this sort of thing.
American intellectuals especially, having been indunated with neoliberal thinkpieces for at least the majority of their lives have also been told that they’re important cultural pillars of the culture7. As such, they’re frantically attempting to make sense of the AI bubble—considering a lot of news outlets survived, though in diminished form, the rise of the internet, this is the first real institutional challenge to their jobs and industries that feels like it might be a deathblow. This frustration and fearfulness is source of what the article above describes as the “AI-and-I” essay, the proverbial “How I stopped worrying and learned to love the bomb” of the 2020s’s personal essay format. As it takes two to tango, writing about AI8 in *their* terms gives their technology too much credit. Because what they describe as artificial intellegence is not intelligent nor can it think, and there’s little reason to believe they will ever achieve such a goal in our lifetime—perhaps the next but I’m not worried about the next lifetime as much as I’m worried about ours. Sure, these programs can be good at streamling certain mundane work flows or summarizing google searches but they’re never going to be able to replace human cognition, never going to be able to replace me writing this, and never going to replace you reading this. Any attempt to do so will fall flat, in my opinion, if not in the short run then in the long run. In general it’s a good time to learn to be human; cultivate your thinking, cultivate your life. As the N+1 article points out nicely, there’s quite a bit more to us than the messy scrappiness of humanity and it’s strange that that is what’s so often picked up as our savior faire from the AI Threat. We can think and we can dream. We can do quite a bit of things including living beautiful lives with one another. Do what you will with that information. People are out there. The world is out there. You don’t have to stay staring into the abyss and you really don’t need to worry about getting left behind by technological advancement if the technology in question sucks this much.
In terms of the “right way” to approach the topic of AI and modern tech in writing, it’s important I think to focus on the pitch they make for it, to focus instead on whatever unspoken assumptions the marketing campaign is making. For instance, the surveillance/companionship necklace startup Friend, pitched as to replace companionship with an offbrand Siri, recently spent millions on Subway ads in New York City and a tweet such as this is a good example of how to dismantle the hype. Question the pitch, question the assumptions, and try not to give them any free publicity if you can.
Link 2: on the multiple versions of charlie kirk (vanity fair)
Well well well, you don’t hear much about Charlie Kirk anymore. It’s only been a couple weeks. The news cycle moves so fast. I remember, the night after he died, his viewership took to the streets of Twitter, declaring THIS IS WAR like they were about to storm into a DSA meeting in Kansas City with weapons drawn and blasting, but within 24 hours they had already moved onto fat shaming a tiktok influencer. These aren’t serious people.
My friend worried it was A Moment. I worried too, but in hindsight it was no more a moment than it was part of The Moment in which we’ve all been inside of over the last ten years as the load bearing structures of the post Cold War world order have been giving way and giving way and giving way.
We’re in a haze of mixed signals. We all know things are bad, and the best and worst thing is that we’re generally content to keep our brains’ thinking ability supplanted by our smart phones. Scrolling twitter doesn’t replace thinking but it sure feels like it can. The easiest ways to drown out thoughts ever devised is the live-fed interior monologue of the collective libido, it turns out. Who would have guessed.
There’s a lot that could be said about Kirk who by all means seemed to be a lynchpin of the modern american conservative (um) trajectory but I think it’s more interesting (and perhaps safer) to point at the role of the podcaster in the discourse and say “hey that’s weird.”
After the institutional revisionism around Kirk’s life9, here, linked above, is a good article from one of the last true and red-blooded Public Intellectual types, Ta-Nehisi Coates, detailing the strange postmortem of Kirk by the mainstream media and the consequences of going against said revisionism or even using Kirk’s own language.
Now, at least, we know that the spiritual aspiration of the conservative pundit/podcaster reaches towards sainthood. As institutional media continues to be ravaged*, we’re going to see more and more of the culture rally around podcasters as stable sources of information. To see Kirk praised by centrists, to see him be put into the pantheon of American political heroes alongside Malcom X and MLK after getting shot with a bullet that had “If you’re reading this you’re gay” inscribed in its casing is absurd in a way only 2025 could be.
*there’s no way late night talk shows survive into the 2030s, imo
Just to take a moment to dispel some of the “he was just debating peacefully” talk: sure, words are not violence; but they can get close.
The “he was just debating” excuse doesn’t work when the topic of debate is whether Trans people deserve to exist or whether black americans deserve rights; one can’t walk into a bar, point to a person with freckles and announce “every irish person deserves to put against the firing wall. Prove me wrong.” for ten years straight, to somehow find a way to make millions and millions of dollars by being an asshole in such an acutely annoying way, and expect to come out unscathed. Kirk didn’t deserve to be killed, of course-no one does-but to say that he was doing anything “the right way” rings as very disingenuous when his rhetoric has platformed ideas that make the lives of the trans people I know in my life much more frightening, for instance. No one deserves to die (and especially not like that yeesh) but there is something to be said for overconfidence in the shield of content creation. Making content designed to cynically amass eyeballs, ears, and influence by saying incendiary racist, homophobic, or misogynistic things online and transforming that into a political empire has clear consequences that the distance of the internet can’t necessarily save a person from. I’m guessing in the next couple years we will get quite a few more examples of internet culture war stuff crossing over into the real, and I doubt any of these examples will be reassuring.
Anyways, I genuinely do think that this giving in to the right on Kirk’s canonization from pundits like Klein stems from the real breaking point which most of the politics in Western neoliberal countries has run up against the past two years: the issue of Gaza. When the democratic party’s leadership can’t condemn an active genocide, they’ve lost all credibility as the moral center. Harris supposedly wrote in the biography about her ill-fated presidential run last year that she was confused as to why the pro-palestine protesters didn’t protest Trump’s rallies at all, instead choosing to come and yell “free palestine” at hers, and the answer should obviously that the people protesting Harris were people who grew up being told that the Democrats were the party of moral values, and the party of moral values ought to do something about the moral crisis of our time.
The fact that the Dems refused to budge and still refuse to budge on ceasing weapons sales to a country actively exterminating millions of people proves, beyond all the shadow of a doubt, there’s not any major political faction in the United States that actually cares about moral issues. When a person can’t draw a line at genocide, where do they draw a line? Just as it was in the years before the Civil War: if you can’t draw a line at slavery, where can you? Perhaps we need to resurrect the Abolitionist movement for situations such as this, though perhaps we shouldn’t. Seeing as the current federal government would be quick to designate abolitionists as domestic terrorists just like they did with the loose assembly of disconnected anarchists and leftists which the trump admin’s been referring to as “Antifa,” perhaps it would be playing into their hands. Ari Aster’s Eddington really is an essential text for the decade. I haven’t seen One Battle After Another but I’m seeing it on Wednesday and I’m very excited.
I would be very interested in an in-depth study into RSS feed media to see what’s happening in terms of the Podcast-iverse on a more broad scale. The podcast boom of the late 2010s is maturing. Hosts and viewerships are getting older. Perhaps Kirk is lucky that he’ll be forever seen as the Peter Pan of Conservative media, never having to face the turning of the tide which old age brings to media figures on the right10. And what if the death of Charlie Kirk was an unknowing act of human sacrifice committed by the discourse itself. The assassin himself seemed to have done it in an unthinking way, almost a knee jerk reaction not unlike putting together a meme or a tweet; he just decided to kill Charlie Kirk one day because it seemed like the (um) thing to do. This should tell us a lot about the way that the internet develops political ideologies: mainly that they’re as muddled and unconscious as what actions we might make in a deep sleep’s dream. But in another respect, the assassin was something of a meme connoisseur; he was that one kid in the cafeteria who wouldn’t stop quoting memes in high school. The meme kid killed the clipped video star. How about that? This might not be a culture war as much as it is a *content war*. But nonetheless we should ask ourselves when does a culture war becomes real? Dramatic shifts in the temperature and the narrative are more and more frequent.
It might be best course of action, if you’re in the US at least, to keep your head down for a little while. Get organized. Join DSA. Talk to people you know. Try and figure stuff out for yourself. I’m clearly not keeping my head down here as much as I probably should, I suppose, but I think it’s useful to impart some advice to close things out, partially for myself and partially for anyone reading: we live in a magical time in which the unconscious has begun to rage in ways we don’t quite understand yet; don’t speak of anything online that you wouldn’t want to see become actualized.
Additional links I didn’t get a chance to write anything about because I’m lazy and unfortunately that’s the way it goes some months
Bread and Puppets is going on tour! Very cool, very strange socialist puppet troupe
I need to play this Blippi+ game asap (if only I had a PC)
A good article about the current state of the publishing industry
Four September albums that are worth your time
Geese, Getting Killed
Big Thief, Double Infinity
Olivia Dean, The Art of Loving
Wednesday, Bleeds
-gbe
this is especially the case if they ever manage to upload human consciousess, certainly their AI god will be actualized someday if they really do believe that this whole “uploading human consciousness into a hard drive” deal is possible
found in, say, the Zizians, or in certain Silicon Valley venture capital firms, or in the under-40s clubs in Washington D.C. right now.
presumably to compete with the Musk brand of populist technocrat
I’m thinking of waiting for a bus at a bus stop. The wind is strong. The plastic of the bus stop kiosk is strong but weathered. I need to get somewhere and the bus will carry me there. A bus with four wheels, a white and blue paint job, and a banner across the top communicating the route appears over the horizon—except this bus has 13 floors, swaying in the wind like a cheap plastic pillar or wedding cake on wheels, the driver, pouring sweat, frantically keeping it upright with slow and steady movements of the steering wheel while he drives. The bus arrives at the stop where I’m waiting. Of course I’m going to let the bus pass me by—I’ll wait for the next one (if there is a next one)—but not without concern because as it stops and leaves the stop I realize that the bus is chock full of people having just the absolute times of their lives, throwing back rather shocking amounts of uppers, stimulants, and downing red wine glass by glass, dancing around the thirteen stories of this creaky public bus all in collared sweaters. I notice someone on top of the tower who’s actively building another floor of the bus on top of the already tilting 30 floors, using hunks of extremely expensive rare earth minerals and drilling them in with high powered drills. I watch it pass away over the horizon. The wind is still whipping me, somehow, inside the bus kiosk. When that bus crashes, traffic’s going to be at a standstill, I realize, and that’s the only route which I can use to get to work—I think twice about working in general. But the crash is coming, certainly. And traffic is going to be at a standstill for a long time. It’s just a matter of when. Could be when the president gets his hands on the federal reserve. It could be when yearly profits are disclosed. Who knows when? There’s no reward in making predictions. Be prepared! Stock up on canned beans or something
Trickle-down economics perfected?
Henry Ford and Milton Friedman, for example
“…so here’s a columnist position” or “… so here’s a tenure track, and here’s a closet for an office…”
and I’m falling into it here, too! By writing this to you! About what? About AI!
The NYT’s Ezra Klein saying he “did politics the right way” and the continued refrain that he did “politics the right way”
Thinking of Alex Jones here, primarily
i must be able to fully quote this and post it, restacking is not enough
your writing does a lot to stop me from going full on misanthrope