The Atlantic article seemed incontrovertible and helpful, but I was shaken by this afterword:
This article is part of "The Speech Wars," a project supported by the Charles Koch Foundation, the Reporters Committee for the Freedom of the Press, and the Fetzer Institute.
Possibly OT and apologies if so: I've had for years, apparently consistent with the OP, the second-hand impression that US law is in need of a massive Napoleonic codification. True? False? Does Napoleon deserve his reputation there anyway?
Unless we give Richard Spenser a prominent speaking role at every university graduation and on every op-ed page in America, we will slide down a slippery slope to a future dystopia in which judges use bad law to harass Black Lives Matter organizers. It could happen, liberals!
1: It's possible they are afraid of the backlash against what they've been doing otherwise. I'm sure they haven't changed their mind on anything, but it could be possible that they have realized they have empowered forces that threaten capital from the right.
I've had the same experience as 1 I think twice. It's disequilibriating.
It's amazing that The Atlantic, a magazine that is ostensibly of the left, lets Conor Friedersdorf just natter away about how terrible undergraduates are as his fucking beat while pulling in Koch money to do so.
7: I don't think the Atlantic sees itself as being "of the left".
In Politics, The Atlantic will be the organ of no party or clique, but will honestly endeavor to be the exponent of what its conductors believe to be the American idea.
2: US law is plenty codified, it's just that the judicial system is very complicated and decentralized (and slow-moving), so ambiguities in the statutes can lead to differing interpretations by courts that take a long time to resolve. The Supreme Court eventually resolves the ones that are considered important enough for it to bother with them.
Early in my career, I worked on a couple of cases out of Louisiana. I'm not convinced about the efficacy of going Code.
(MC, this may not have been your experience, but here most law is state law. Even in the application: I would not be surprised if our state district courts (not even counting the city and county courts of limited jurisdiction) got 20 times more cases a year than the federal courts. Maybe 30 times?)
7: I'm willing to overlook some things because they run articles with headlines like "The Boomers Ruined Everything."
I am assuming the evidence is just so strong that they can't help but see it.
12, 14: I don't know how I feel about this, because I still haven't been able to determine what Generation I am.
Obviously, it's "present company excluded".
Maybe there are always cohorts that fall right in the middle between two generations and so are doomed to spend their whole lives being hopelessly wishy-washy.
9: It's not that I think you're wrong there, but I think the not-unintended-effect is to shut down view points for somebody like Mckesson. I'm hoping Mckesson has financial backing. Maybe I should look.
The Atlantic article seemed incontrovertible and helpful, but I was shaken by this afterword:
Just keep in mind the Koch's are hardcore libertarians rather than conservatives. What they do tends to make sense once you consider it from an economic libertarian view. It's why they're also big proponents of open borders. They're not humanitarians, they just think we're under utilizing an ocean of cheap labor.
The Boomers really are to blame for everything bad. I bet it was a Boomer who hired the AEI prick to write about how bad the Boomers are.
Self loathing is the best loathing.
Certainly the most well-informed loathing.
I don't know about that: the barriers to self-knowledge are higher than the barriers to most other sorts
27: I have this notion that self-hatred is always based on truth while self-love is almost always based on delusion.
Maybe I'm just generalizing from myself.
A Republican representative just introduced a "YIMBY Act". It's absolutely horrible; the most charitable interpretation is that it's meant to further divide the left internally, but it's so bad it probably won't even do that.
What is it? A bounty program, like they had for bald eagles?
Tying Community Development Block Grants (only major for lower-income cities) to zoning reform - ineffectual even if you thought that was where the problem lay, as the only requirement it imposes is for cities to "detail their rationale" for not opening up zoning.