A rather incoherent article that seems to attribute a lot more influence amongst the activist left on the Democratic Party than actually exists. Most of his arguments don’t refute abundance proposals but mock how toothless any policy’s would be after going through a legislative committee. And surprise, surprise he’s saying that only a ‘Great Man’ type personality like Robert Moses or FDR would be able to push through such a far fetched agenda.
Nate10000 on
The lowest-effort 4000 word article I have ever seen in a major publication
Mddcat04 on
Damn, I don’t know if I’ve ever seen an article so totally poison the well right off the bat. This article barely had anything to do with abundance as a set of policy positions and is just a lot of whining about the supposed violence of the far left.
worldruler086 on
It’s like a goddamn parody. Everything I don’t like is Abundance.
GaDoomer on
Solana’s argument against Abundance is that it requires the socialist left, who will never agree to it. And then he complains a lot about the socialist left. I disagree with his premise, and the rest is just complaining rather than make a convincing argument that trying to appeal to the left is the only tent that you can make to vote in Abundance.
So in honor of his low-effort opinion piece, here is a quote from the article with a very low-effort (and very ungenerous) ellipsis:
>Abundance is not a democratic project. Abundance inherently requires … the Holodomor.
hypsignathus on
I was deluded to think that this article had anything at all to say about Abundance.
solonofathens on
this article is atrocious in so many ways but one of the funnier parts is the author thinking robert moses only became controversial very recently lmao
CornstockOfNewJersey on
“In this moment, I am euphoric. Not because of any phony lib’s abundance. But because, I am enlightened by subsidizing demand.” -Nimbchard Dawkins, author of “The Abundance Delusion”
(I know that’s not what the article is about but I don’t contribute substantively to discussions, not really my thing)
kohatsootsich on
It’s always hilarious when wordcels talk about how useless liberals are at building anything.
At least Yarvin tried and failed to code something meaningful.
erasmus_phillo on
A lot of incoherent noise here but if there is one particular criticism that does ring true to me, it’s the idea that many Democratic elected officials think of building infrastructure as, first and foremost, a jobs program… which is why Newsom keeps touting the number of jobs that the HSR program has created even though it’s projected to take decades to build (which should be considered a policy failure)
this btw is the only good point the guy makes throughout this article imo
mrchristmastime on
It’s like they’re mad that their opponents might change their minds and/or their approach.
pcarlen on
It’s so interesting when someone who is solely known for their tweets tries to write an actual article. Back when I used twitter, I always fucking hated Mike Solana’s tweets for being insipid and bad-faith. It’s somewhat refreshing to see that he’s a dogshit writer who evinces the same brainworms in the long-form.
Some-Rice4196 on
The abundance delusion is thinking that the abundance of opinions on the book are worth publishing.
Naudious on
I really hate how every ‘rebuttal’ these days is just “this isn’t literally happening right this very moment and is therefore too unrealistic to even consider.”
If that’s your take DONT CONSIDER IT AND STOP WRITING YOUR ARTICLE.
(And that’s a charitable take on this garbage piece.)
AnywhereOk1153 on
lol I wonder why you don’t see Mike Solana talk about how MAGA has the most violent far right extremists as well as
ice_cold_postum on
I’m coining a new term called “substack-itis”, where the article title promises a grand synthesis of a big problem, and then the article content is just a frantic attempt by the author to digest their own custom social media feed.
CelsiusOne on
Well I’ve been on the fence about keeping my Atlantic subscription but if it’s going to be more and more slop like this I’ll take my money elsewhere. How do people like The New Yorker?
Maximilianne on
Guys we are winning because ultimately abundance is setting grammar of public policy discussion however memeable the opposition to it is
badusername35 on
TLDR: Nimwits on Reddit are bad therefore anything to the left of center is bad therefore abundance and all DEMONRATS are bad.
Zaiush on
“left libs can’t build!”
Judging by this article the lolbert right can’t write
OgreMcGee on
These people are so pathetic. I never cease to be amazed for what passes for a conservative “intellectual” nowadays. Increasingly often it seems incompatible.
I think Ben Shapiro is almost certainly intelligent, but its in spite of his conservatism, and when he goes to bat it certainly doesn’t help him come across any better.
calcioepepe on
I try to take in info from a variety of viewpoints to better inform/defend/steel my own beliefs, but I saw “Thiel associate” here and said fuck giving that a click.
Katie888333 on
“Mike Solana, a Peter Thiel protégé, has made his Pirate Wires newsletter a must-read among the anti-woke investor class—and a window into what the most powerful people in tech really think.”
This explains why this awful article is so nihilist and ridiculous.
turb0_encapsulator on
why the fuck did The Atlantic publish this? It just seems like bait and they should be above that.
blu13god on
I thought Atlantic was supposed to be a reputable journal
Syards-Forcus on
>Now the most recent incarnation of “techno-utopianism” as imagined by Abundance libs is explicitly a Democratic project. The notion of Thompson and Klein is something like, *Well, we believe the government is broken, but it could and should be used for great things, while Republicans don’t seem to believe in the* concept *of government at all. So we’re appealing to libs rather than right-wingers.* Fair enough. Or, it would be fair enough if we pretended Donald Trump did not exist, and these past eight years of right-wing evolution were just an especially embarrassing daydream. But what I’m saying is, I hear you. I get it. We’re banking on the openly violent left over MAGA moms who voted for Trump because their preschool teacher told little Sally she might be a man. Also, the eggs were *really* expensive.
I think it’s less “republicans don’t believe in government” and more “Republicans can’t be let in 300 feet of a functioning government”
The guy’s one understandable point is “the socialists don’t want to cooperate on abundance”, and yet by constantly slinging culture-war feces he inadvertently shows why nobody wants to work with Republicans
26 Comments
A rather incoherent article that seems to attribute a lot more influence amongst the activist left on the Democratic Party than actually exists. Most of his arguments don’t refute abundance proposals but mock how toothless any policy’s would be after going through a legislative committee. And surprise, surprise he’s saying that only a ‘Great Man’ type personality like Robert Moses or FDR would be able to push through such a far fetched agenda.
The lowest-effort 4000 word article I have ever seen in a major publication
Damn, I don’t know if I’ve ever seen an article so totally poison the well right off the bat. This article barely had anything to do with abundance as a set of policy positions and is just a lot of whining about the supposed violence of the far left.
It’s like a goddamn parody. Everything I don’t like is Abundance.
Solana’s argument against Abundance is that it requires the socialist left, who will never agree to it. And then he complains a lot about the socialist left. I disagree with his premise, and the rest is just complaining rather than make a convincing argument that trying to appeal to the left is the only tent that you can make to vote in Abundance.
So in honor of his low-effort opinion piece, here is a quote from the article with a very low-effort (and very ungenerous) ellipsis:
>Abundance is not a democratic project. Abundance inherently requires … the Holodomor.
I was deluded to think that this article had anything at all to say about Abundance.
this article is atrocious in so many ways but one of the funnier parts is the author thinking robert moses only became controversial very recently lmao
“In this moment, I am euphoric. Not because of any phony lib’s abundance. But because, I am enlightened by subsidizing demand.” -Nimbchard Dawkins, author of “The Abundance Delusion”
(I know that’s not what the article is about but I don’t contribute substantively to discussions, not really my thing)
It’s always hilarious when wordcels talk about how useless liberals are at building anything.
At least Yarvin tried and failed to code something meaningful.
A lot of incoherent noise here but if there is one particular criticism that does ring true to me, it’s the idea that many Democratic elected officials think of building infrastructure as, first and foremost, a jobs program… which is why Newsom keeps touting the number of jobs that the HSR program has created even though it’s projected to take decades to build (which should be considered a policy failure)
this btw is the only good point the guy makes throughout this article imo
It’s like they’re mad that their opponents might change their minds and/or their approach.
It’s so interesting when someone who is solely known for their tweets tries to write an actual article. Back when I used twitter, I always fucking hated Mike Solana’s tweets for being insipid and bad-faith. It’s somewhat refreshing to see that he’s a dogshit writer who evinces the same brainworms in the long-form.
The abundance delusion is thinking that the abundance of opinions on the book are worth publishing.
I really hate how every ‘rebuttal’ these days is just “this isn’t literally happening right this very moment and is therefore too unrealistic to even consider.”
If that’s your take DONT CONSIDER IT AND STOP WRITING YOUR ARTICLE.
(And that’s a charitable take on this garbage piece.)
lol I wonder why you don’t see Mike Solana talk about how MAGA has the most violent far right extremists as well as
I’m coining a new term called “substack-itis”, where the article title promises a grand synthesis of a big problem, and then the article content is just a frantic attempt by the author to digest their own custom social media feed.
Well I’ve been on the fence about keeping my Atlantic subscription but if it’s going to be more and more slop like this I’ll take my money elsewhere. How do people like The New Yorker?
Guys we are winning because ultimately abundance is setting grammar of public policy discussion however memeable the opposition to it is
TLDR: Nimwits on Reddit are bad therefore anything to the left of center is bad therefore abundance and all DEMONRATS are bad.
“left libs can’t build!”
Judging by this article the lolbert right can’t write
These people are so pathetic. I never cease to be amazed for what passes for a conservative “intellectual” nowadays. Increasingly often it seems incompatible.
I think Ben Shapiro is almost certainly intelligent, but its in spite of his conservatism, and when he goes to bat it certainly doesn’t help him come across any better.
I try to take in info from a variety of viewpoints to better inform/defend/steel my own beliefs, but I saw “Thiel associate” here and said fuck giving that a click.
“Mike Solana, a Peter Thiel protégé, has made his Pirate Wires newsletter a must-read among the anti-woke investor class—and a window into what the most powerful people in tech really think.”
[https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/10/mike-solana-pirate-wires/680355/](https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/10/mike-solana-pirate-wires/680355/)
This explains why this awful article is so nihilist and ridiculous.
why the fuck did The Atlantic publish this? It just seems like bait and they should be above that.
I thought Atlantic was supposed to be a reputable journal
>Now the most recent incarnation of “techno-utopianism” as imagined by Abundance libs is explicitly a Democratic project. The notion of Thompson and Klein is something like, *Well, we believe the government is broken, but it could and should be used for great things, while Republicans don’t seem to believe in the* concept *of government at all. So we’re appealing to libs rather than right-wingers.* Fair enough. Or, it would be fair enough if we pretended Donald Trump did not exist, and these past eight years of right-wing evolution were just an especially embarrassing daydream. But what I’m saying is, I hear you. I get it. We’re banking on the openly violent left over MAGA moms who voted for Trump because their preschool teacher told little Sally she might be a man. Also, the eggs were *really* expensive.
I think it’s less “republicans don’t believe in government” and more “Republicans can’t be let in 300 feet of a functioning government”
The guy’s one understandable point is “the socialists don’t want to cooperate on abundance”, and yet by constantly slinging culture-war feces he inadvertently shows why nobody wants to work with Republicans