The CW has *already* metastasized into all those things you seem to agree are bad. Around the world. It shares features with entertainment, but unlike video games or TV, both direct and metastasized damage NPV is not speculative.
Conversation
CW inspired/shaped policy on all sides both domestically and internationally has been systematically destructive and degenerative. Negative sum, not even zero sum. Nothing generative ever seems to come if it.
1
5
I can think of examples supporting that but again I don’t know if it’s a significant effect? Have you seen any good analysis of this?
1
1
Nope. Almost all the intelligence is in backchannel conversations among people who track this stuff. Significant effect is a statistician’s way of thinking about this. It’s a poor frame because the impact is much more direct and causal-narrative.
2
2
I’m not understanding something here. The President’s twitter account is exhibit 1, I would think? And it is the most consequential force in contemporary politics?
2
1
It’s the most visible but not the most impactful. The most significant pathway is veterans/graduates of CW actually landing positions of policy making influence as the next steps in their careers (in politicians’ staffs, media orgs, as advisors to moneyed interests etc).
2
1
3
Ah, that totally happens, I see examples of that a lot. Btw what do you think of when you think of a “moneyed interest”?
1
1
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more
Yep, Adam is right. In my IoB post I had the reverse problem of many of my more abstract posts: too many examples rather than too few, to illustrate my points. But dissecting any actual case in detail would have brought hell raining down on me.
So it has the odd feel of a post that reads like empty abstractions to people who don’t follow the CW, but a template for 100s of CW skirmishes/battles for people who do. Almost a blog-length subtweet of 100s of actual cases.
1


