THE REAL FHTAGN: Actual Positions, Actual Answers

[Associate Justice PiT]

Yes dear, I really don't see how this makes her "uber left wing" you can see the clear shift that has happened over time and you can even see that I was able to convince her on some things back in January, by the way she voted for Stein because she didn't like Hillary, Donald, or Johnson....so......

     While she was clearly left-wing in the past, the examples here seem to point much more to a hardcore social libertarian and decently leftist in other respects than anything like what Griffin has alleged elsewhere.

     It's not like she changed between an-cap and communist overnight (something that I have, by the way, legitimately seen happen on the forum). This narrative that her ideological transformation was too quick or too drastic to be real is a strange one when you consider what has gone down in the history of Atlas. Argument from incredulity is a much stronger case to make when the proposition you are responding to actually is not credible.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Putting this here where it's most relevant:

Well, if y'all get your way, you're basically about to elect another one - with an endorsement to boot!

     This is based on your supposition that President fhtagn does not properly instantiate the values of the party in office. Given that she has a track record as an officeholder since joining the party, you're welcome to try that.

     Protip: be sure to actually articulate the differences between her actions and the values enumerated in our platform. I know you'll just try to treat the Federalist Party as a sort of "right-wing analogue to Labor", which is not the correct route. The mere act of being a true conservative, though highly useful, is neither necessary nor sufficient to properly represent the Federalist Party as an officeholder.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Literally the only viable defense (in my own opinion, of course) that the Feds can mount for the nomination of fhtagn is "well she may be a raging left-winger, but she's willing to play something different on TV (maybe)!".

Which may work - who am I to say these days? - but I arguably find the most distressing part of this to be the fact that people like Yankee and PiT have completely abdicated their once-conservative principles and are just willing to chase whatever ideology or lack thereof in the pursuit of victory. I was never willing to cross the ideological hemispheres to elect a President who blatantly didn't agree with me on most core issues, but maybe I'm just old fashioned (and "irrelevant"!).

If anything PiT has gotten more Conservative not less. I remember when he was a raging libertarian with yellow avatar.

     Which I think is a big part of why I see nothing all that incredible about fhtagn's trajectory. Other than that I started on the right in economics and she started on the left, it's very similar to my own; we have proceeded by discarding previously inviolable dogmas and gradually opening up to conservative ideas on what constitutes good government. Neither one of us is exactly described by the word "conservative", but the line of influence is there (much more strongly in my case as it happens).

[Associate Justice PiT]

Literally the only viable defense (in my own opinion, of course) that the Feds can mount for the nomination of fhtagn is "well she may be a raging left-winger, but she's willing to play something different on TV (maybe)!".

Which may work - who am I to say these days? - but I arguably find the most distressing part of this to be the fact that people like Yankee and PiT have completely abdicated their once-conservative principles and are just willing to chase whatever ideology or lack thereof in the pursuit of victory. I was never willing to cross the ideological hemispheres to elect a President who blatantly didn't agree with me on most core issues, but maybe I'm just old fashioned (and "irrelevant"!).

If anything PiT has gotten more Conservative not less. I remember when he was a raging libertarian with yellow avatar.

     Which I think is a big part of why I see nothing all that incredible about fhtagn's trajectory. Other than that I started on the right in economics and she started on the left, it's very similar to my own; we have proceeded by discarding previously inviolable dogmas and gradually opening up to conservative ideas on what constitutes good government. Neither one of us is exactly described by the word "conservative", but the line of influence is there (much more strongly in my case as it happens).

PiT, if you or anybody else had went from flaming leftist to Confederate apologizer in a matter of weeks after switching parties - all the while continuing to post very left-wing commentary on the forum - I'd be asking the same questions (unless you were like 14 years old or something).

Again, I - really more than anybody else! - understand the natural progression of people changing ideology. How many of your old voters found their way to Labor over the years? A lot! FFS, Hagrid just registered as Labor the other day!

I probably saw more defections from one hemisphere to the other that benefited me at the time than anybody else in the game ever. But they didn't abruptly switch from Fed to Lab (though plenty back in the day did switch from Lab to Fed out of spite - but at least they were honest about it) and then pretend to be conservative, and even if there was one or two who did, they didn't get the Labor Party's endorsement in the next election.

     Tell me, have you ever considered why you have seen so many defections to your camp? It should be easy for you to understand that since you know the natural progression of people changing ideology so well. Puzzle me that and I can tell you why this instance flows the other way. (BTW, if your answer is going to be something hackish like "the left is the path of truth and justice!", then spare me it.)

[Associate Justice PiT]

Literally the only viable defense (in my own opinion, of course) that the Feds can mount for the nomination of fhtagn is "well she may be a raging left-winger, but she's willing to play something different on TV (maybe)!".

Which may work - who am I to say these days? - but I arguably find the most distressing part of this to be the fact that people like Yankee and PiT have completely abdicated their once-conservative principles and are just willing to chase whatever ideology or lack thereof in the pursuit of victory. I was never willing to cross the ideological hemispheres to elect a President who blatantly didn't agree with me on most core issues, but maybe I'm just old fashioned (and "irrelevant"!).

If anything PiT has gotten more Conservative not less. I remember when he was a raging libertarian with yellow avatar.

     Which I think is a big part of why I see nothing all that incredible about fhtagn's trajectory. Other than that I started on the right in economics and she started on the left, it's very similar to my own; we have proceeded by discarding previously inviolable dogmas and gradually opening up to conservative ideas on what constitutes good government. Neither one of us is exactly described by the word "conservative", but the line of influence is there (much more strongly in my case as it happens).

PiT, if you or anybody else had went from flaming leftist to Confederate apologizer in a matter of weeks after switching parties - all the while continuing to post very left-wing commentary on the forum - I'd be asking the same questions (unless you were like 14 years old or something).

Again, I - really more than anybody else! - understand the natural progression of people changing ideology. How many of your old voters found their way to Labor over the years? A lot! FFS, Hagrid just registered as Labor the other day!

I probably saw more defections from one hemisphere to the other that benefited me at the time than anybody else in the game ever. But they didn't abruptly switch from Fed to Lab (though plenty back in the day did switch from Lab to Fed out of spite - but at least they were honest about it) and then pretend to be conservative, and even if there was one or two who did, they didn't get the Labor Party's endorsement in the next election.

     Tell me, have you ever considered why you have seen so many defections to your camp? It should be easy for you to understand that since you know the natural progression of people changing ideology so well. Puzzle me that and I can tell you why this instance flows the other way. (BTW, if your answer is going to be something hackish like "the left is the path of truth and justice!", then spare me it.)

The forum is left leaning and young. That means these teenagers, who dont have a 100% developed ideology, are influenced by the other posters who are most of them really left leaning, so this has a big impact on their political views, so that explains their leftwing shift.

     That is exactly what I was going for, much appreciated. Quite a few people change quickly within weeks of joining the forum. Consider that 1) fhtagn started dealing substantially with right-wingers on the forum when she had previously avoided such things and that 2) she is an INTJ and we are emotional late-bloomers such that substantial ideological shifts in our 20s is not an unlikely occurrence. I include myself; I became an anarcho-capitalist and then swore it off well past the age that most of these teens do this. Once again there is a clear parallel in development here; the person in question started off with an extremist ideology and transitioned away from it in favor of a more practical and more moderate ideology.

     Of course I don't know for sure what anyone else is thinking, but my point is that this isn't nearly as improbable a feat as Griffin implies, and it rings true with my own real experience of ideological development (an experience that differs greatly from the norm on account of me differing greatly from the norm).

[Associate Justice PiT]

Literally the only viable defense (in my own opinion, of course) that the Feds can mount for the nomination of fhtagn is "well she may be a raging left-winger, but she's willing to play something different on TV (maybe)!".

Which may work - who am I to say these days? - but I arguably find the most distressing part of this to be the fact that people like Yankee and PiT have completely abdicated their once-conservative principles and are just willing to chase whatever ideology or lack thereof in the pursuit of victory. I was never willing to cross the ideological hemispheres to elect a President who blatantly didn't agree with me on most core issues, but maybe I'm just old fashioned (and "irrelevant"!).

If anything PiT has gotten more Conservative not less. I remember when he was a raging libertarian with yellow avatar.

     Which I think is a big part of why I see nothing all that incredible about fhtagn's trajectory. Other than that I started on the right in economics and she started on the left, it's very similar to my own; we have proceeded by discarding previously inviolable dogmas and gradually opening up to conservative ideas on what constitutes good government. Neither one of us is exactly described by the word "conservative", but the line of influence is there (much more strongly in my case as it happens).

PiT, if you or anybody else had went from flaming leftist to Confederate apologizer in a matter of weeks after switching parties - all the while continuing to post very left-wing commentary on the forum - I'd be asking the same questions (unless you were like 14 years old or something).

Again, I - really more than anybody else! - understand the natural progression of people changing ideology. How many of your old voters found their way to Labor over the years? A lot! FFS, Hagrid just registered as Labor the other day!

I probably saw more defections from one hemisphere to the other that benefited me at the time than anybody else in the game ever. But they didn't abruptly switch from Fed to Lab (though plenty back in the day did switch from Lab to Fed out of spite - but at least they were honest about it) and then pretend to be conservative, and even if there was one or two who did, they didn't get the Labor Party's endorsement in the next election.

     Tell me, have you ever considered why you have seen so many defections to your camp? It should be easy for you to understand that since you know the natural progression of people changing ideology so well. Puzzle me that and I can tell you why this instance flows the other way. (BTW, if your answer is going to be something hackish like "the left is the path of truth and justice!", then spare me it.)

The forum is left leaning and young. That means these teenagers, who dont have a 100% developed ideology, are influenced by the other posters who are most of them really left leaning, so this has a big impact on their political views, so that explains their leftwing shift.

     That is exactly what I was going for, much appreciated. Quite a few people change quickly within weeks of joining the forum. Consider that 1) fhtagn started dealing substantially with right-wingers on the forum when she had previously avoided such things and that 2) she is an INTJ and we are emotional late-bloomers such that substantial ideological shifts in our 20s is not an unlikely occurrence. I include myself; I became an anarcho-capitalist and then swore it off well past the age that most of these teens do this. Once again there is a clear parallel in development here; the person in question started off with an extremist ideology and transitioned away from it in favor of a more practical and more moderate ideology.

     Of course I don't know for sure what anyone else is thinking, but my point is that this isn't nearly as improbable a feat as Griffin implies, and it rings true with my own real experience of ideological development (an experience that differs greatly from the norm on account of me differing greatly from the norm).

Also being surrounded by lefties can have the opposite effect. You can come to view them as arrogant, self-righteous and intolerant of dissent. Once you do that, you can explore ideas from a different lens and come to a completely different conclusion.

     There is risk to viewing people through a deterministic lens; different people react differently to influences. Many folks cleave to the opinions of those surrounding them, but some dissent. I knew quite a few classmates at UC Berkeley who professed to me that their experience at the university had caused them to become more conservative.

     Cleaving to the normal opinion does tend to be the more common phenomenon though, owing largely to herd mentality and groupthink. When people are part of a group, they naturally internalize its ideology. When you leave that group there comes a point where you start to question that ideology, and that is a particularly fertile time for ideological evolution.