iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Nate O @nateo.bsky.social · 30/06/2026

I think it's a moral abomination for Ezra Klein to have Chris Rufo on his podcast and then get a transcript of it published in The New York Times as if this is a conversation between equals and not a radical centrist and a fascist telling each other 'exaaaaactlyyyy'

Another argument you make in that piece is: “The popular slogan that ‘facts don’t care about your feelings’ betrays similar problems” — the slogan being Ben Shapiro’s.
In reality, feelings almost always overpower facts. Reason is a slave of the passions.

Yes, that’s true, and we’ll caveat — we love Ben Shapiro. We’re Ben Shapiro fans, of course. But I think that he’s very wrong on that, and I think conservatives have made a fundamental error in latching on to that.

And really, what it is — it’s a rationalization for losing. It’s like: Yes, we may have lost the great political question that operates on emotions or passions, but we have the facts on our side, and if only people would read our white paper, our regression analysis or our rigorous logical argumentation, then we would be vindicated.

But look, while we should have the facts on our side, and while we should use logic, by itself, it’s insufficient. And, in fact, politics operates on a deeper level, an emotional level. And politics occurs on the field of sentiment and public opinion — much more on the field of abstract argumentation at the top.

Then you go on in the same piece to make an argument for “agitprop” — an old Soviet Union term for agitation and propaganda mashed up together.

It doesn’t have a great reputation — “agitprop” is usually not a term of endearment. But you say: “Agitprop doesn’t mean sacrificing the truth but, rather, channeling the truth toward victory.”

672136468

AloeJoe @aloejoe.bsky.social · 30/06/2026

Ezra Klein looks at Chotiner and thought "I could do that," but then ends up Chotinering himself

2257