joshwriting | Reading

I think it can be as dangerous to overestimate your enemies as to underestimate them. It's more dangerous to slightly underestimate than to slightly overestimate, so you want your margin for error on the overestimation side, but if you overestimate them dramatically it tends to lead to a feeling of hopelessness, of not acting when you really should.

What I'm actually trying to figure out here is why this essay rubs me the wrong way in a way people's frequent comparisons to the Weimar Republic don't. Because they're both predictions, and not even that dissimilar, and both contain warnings that the assumption that democratic norms will prevail is a problem, is hindering the appropriate reaction. And I would agree that much is true, even; there is an assumption that democratic norms will prevail that really isn't warranted and is making it more likely that they won't.

I think it comes down to the assumption of competence. Because she seems to think that there is a coalition of tech bros controlling the situation in a man-behind-the-man way, who are actively pushing things to go the way they're going in order to pick up the pieces out of the resultant crashed society, and that these people are sufficiently competent to stage assassinations once we get far enough along the path that a staged assassination would be politically useful to them. And, like, I don't think that. I don't think anyone here is engaging in any kind of long-term planning. (Among other things, competent people would not be trying to downsize the intelligence apparatus. They might change who we're allied with, but they wouldn't downsize. Being aware of who outside the country wants to destroy it at any given moment is important to every government, including autocracies.)

The rhetorical trap here, I think, is the assumption that they must know what they're doing--that if they're acting in these visibly incredibly stupid ways, there must be a reason for it. That's the root of all conspiracy theories, left and right. The belief that there has to be an explanation beyond the fact that the world is chaos and some people are incompetent. I mean, there's always an explanation in the sense that everyone has motives and no one is the villain in their own story, and I do believe that it's important to try to understand your enemy, but sometimes people are incompetent. Sometimes they manage to rise to powerful positions despite being incompetent. Sometimes they were at one point at least somewhat competent and then got their brains fried by ketamine.

The thing is, them not knowing what they're doing doesn't actually make them less dangerous. It makes it more possible to fight it, in that it makes it possible at all to hope that resistance will accomplish something. But people can be staggeringly incompetent, have no idea what they're doing, and still succeed at taking over the country and building concentration camps and killing people. All you need to do to realize that is look at Operation Paperclip; we imported all these war-crime scientists in order to get science out of them and we got very little science out of them despite forgiving all the war crimes, because the majority of the Nazi scientists weren't actually very good at science. There's this myth of Nazi competence that seems to extend to the neo-Nazis. There's this myth of Soviet excellence that also still exists among a certain breed of leftist. It's easier than going "yup, they totally are this incompetent but also you need to react to them like they're actually good at stuff because you can get surprisingly far by being evil and incompetent if you get high enough in the bureaucracy."

(Also there's a logical flaw in this argument: either the MAGA people are old and dying off and the vast majority of young people aren't Republicans, or the MAGA coalition is now being economically controlled by hiring them for ICE to such a degree that they no longer need Trump's cult of personality. These two things are mutually exclusive.)

Current Mood: tired
Current Location: The Kitchen
Current Music: "Questions, Chaos, and Faith" by Joy Oladokun

siderea

I finally got around to pursuing a replacement of what we in the Bostoniensis Household refer to as the Lorem Ipsum card, which was itself a fiasco.

(Recap: PayPal, an organization full of people who are not as smart as they think they are and blessed with perhaps the deepest marketing reach in the US into the small business market for financial services, decided to offer to its business customers the greatest credit card deal of their lifetimes, unlimited 2% cash back on all purchases, and the market responded with all the decorous restraint of a river full of pirhana given a whole cow. Apparently we collectively took PayPal for all they were worth – I heard of small tech companies running their cloud services bills to the tune of five figures a month across on the card – until sometime in Sept 2024, when the grown-ups at PayPal discovered they were hemorrhaging money, and very abruptly shut the party down and exit the business credit card market all together. The hard inquiry on my credit report lasted longer than the actual card did. At the time, it was pretty upsetting, but now it's just hilarious.)

A couple weeks ago I decided to apply for an American Express Blue Business Cash card, which has no fees and has a cash back offer. I have to say, absolutely all the customer service agents – five now – I've spoken to have been exemplary. Yeah, alas, that's foreshadowing.

Unfortunately their IT services are demented. First there was the fact they sent me a notification saying my application had been, and I quote, "DENIED", with a link to find out why, and when I followed the link, I discovered my application hadn't been denied: it said that they couldn't run a credit check on me because my credit reports were locked (true), so I need to go unlock the specified credit report and let them know so they could continue processing my application. So I called in and did it in real time with an agent on the line and was approved on the spot. Fabulous. "Okay, you will be getting your card at your home address in three to five business days." "Uh, it's a business card, could you send it to my business address?" "Oh, no, it won't let me send your initial card to any other than your home address." "*sigh* Very well."

My new Amex card arived at my home on like the 30th or 31st, while I had my nose to the grindstone writing. Friday the 1st, I opened the envelope to find my new card, and then to activate it at the website.

I couldn't get it off the paper.

Or rather: in attempting to get the card off the paper, I wound up with a layer of glue and paper stuck on the back of the card, such that I could not read any but the first five digits of the card number, and the CVV was completely covered. It was like the paper was superglued on. It was annealed.

So I called Amex, and discovered that you can't get through the phone tree to a a customer service agent about an extant account unless you can prove you're the owner of the account with, yes, the CVV. Which I can't read. Because there's a half thickness of paper glued across it.

Also, you can't set up an account on their website without the full card number, which I also couldn't read, because there was a half thickness of paper glued across it.

So I called the number for applying for a card in the first place, and threw myself on the mercy of the sales agent, explaining why I was calling them instead of regular customer service: I can't get to customer service without knowing the CVV, and the problem I need help with is that I can't read the CVV. "I know I shouldn't be laughing," he said, "But this is kind of hilarious." He kindly set up a three-way call with customer service so I didn't wind up wandering unattended in a phone tree maze, and once I was talking to the nice people who could replace my card, he ducked out.

The customer service agent and I then discovered that Amex doesn't let you replace a card, for some reason, until an account is 10 days old. My account was, as of that moment, nine days old. She gave me a direct number to business card services in the hopes I could avoid the phone tree of doom; the agent also gave me some pointers about pressing zero to get through it, which trick I had tried on the other phone tree and it hadn't worked.

Saturday I was busy sleeping. Today, I called the phone number I had been given for business card services, and despite the phone tree trying to authenticate with the CVV, I managed to confuse the robot enough it finally found me a human. I got to explain all over again about the disfigured card, and they transferred me again to card replacement, who put the order right in.

I observed to the agent that the issue with the glue and the card might have something to do with them sending it to my home, where I have a black mailbox on a south-facing side of the building, and we had been having a heatwave, and maybe they would like to send my replacement card to my business address, where the mailboxes are indoors in air conditioned comfort? She agreed that would be a much better plan.

So now I await my new Amex. It's a 2% cash back on purchases offer, but only up to the first $50k of purchases, so companies can't use their AWS bill to bleed them dry, so maybe it will stick around a little longer than PayPal's Lorem Ipsum card.

Speaking of credit card offers possibly too good to last, for any of you sad you missed out on getting your own bite of the cow:

I recently discovered that AAA – yeah, the American Automotive Association, the roadside assistance people – has a really great credit card offer. (This may be region specific – I'm in their "Northeast" region.) Their Daily Advantage Visa Signature card has 5% cash back on groceries, no annual fee. Only the first $10k of grocery purchases per year, and then 1% thereafter – which is good, actually: it has a chance of sticking around. But that does mean up to $500/year in cash back on grocery purchases. Given what's happening to the price of food and paper goods, having a permanent 5% discount on groceries is freaking fantastic. It also has a bunch of other features (3% cash back on gasoline or electric car charging stations, e.g.) and 1% cash back on everything else (no limit).

The interest rate is usurious, so under no circumstances do you ever want to carry a balance on it. But if you are the sort of person who can reliably always pay off their balance every month on time: permanent 5% off groceries!

And, no, apparently you do not need to be a AAA member to get the card. (Though we are.)

We got one and I just finished reading the fine print. Seems reasonable. We don't know that our grocery delivery service will be recognized by the card company (it's Comenity Capital Bank under the hood) as a grocery store, but the service is run by a grocery store, and the charges have appeared on the previous card under the name of the grocery store, so here's hoping. We'll know later this week – our next grocery order is for Wednesday, and the charge typically shows up a day or two after that.

Also, we've never had a card with Comenity, so we don't really know how their IT and customer service are. The web interface for account management is very nice. We'll report back as we know more.

I'm not generally in the practice of recommending credit cards, and I can't wholly recommend this one, having not really exercised it yet to discover its landmines. But what's going on here in the Bostoniensis household is that we're cashing in on our good credit scores to take advantage of financial offers that pinch our pennies for us, as a form of hardening our household financially against inflation and other future economic vicissitudes. This has generally meant getting credit with better terms (either lower rates or higher rewards), and opening High-Yield Savings Accounts for our nest egg and my estimated tax payments as a self-employed person.

Given that eating food is a pretty universal custom and groceries are getting scary-expensive, I thought I would mention for anyone who wants to do likewise, and is in a position to do so.

Edit: Oh, yes, it worked with our grocery delivery order just fine. We're delighted.

siderea

Canonical link: https://siderea.dreamwidth.org/1879923.html

Americans, if you are not already onboard with the Epstein files scandal, I suggest you get onboard. Non-Americans, feel free to pitch in.

For about nine years now, our side – meaning everyone who thinks fascism is bad and has been voting accordingly – has been ardently wishing any of Trump's excesses would be regarded as a scandal that would take down his presidency, and been bewildered why that wasn't happening. Well, it is finally, finally happening, so get out of the bus and come push.

But before you do, there's some things you should know.

1.

Over on Pod Save America (2025 July 25, "EXPLOSIVE REVELATION in Trump’s Epstein Files Scandal") Dan Pfeifer had some things to say about how our side responds to the Epstein files which I think are incredibly important for us to all hear:

[3:15] [Jon Favreau:] Dan, how does this explosive revelation – that we all saw coming – change the nature of this almost 3-week old scandal?

[Dan Pfeiffer:] I would hope that this changes how everyone, ourselves included, talks and thinks about this scandal.

Because we've had a lot of fun about with this. We're going to have fun about it on this podcast, I hope. It is... There's something amusing about it.

But I feel like everyone has been treating this kind of from a perspective of...bemusement? Like, "Ah, look at these conspiracy pushing grifters who've been hoisted on their own petard!" right? Where the real crime here is hypocrisy and deception. Right? That they they say they released the Epstein files but they didn't do it. Trump's breaking a campaign promise, ha! Take that! The dog that caught the car, and all of that.

But I think we do really have to to take a step back, and I know this is going to sound like hyperbole, and I know it will, but I truly believe it: that this scandal, now with this revelation, this scandal, now, should be treated like Iran-Contra, Watergate, other major political scandals.

Because what we have here is the president of the United States, the attorney general, the intelligence community, the FBI director, and the Republican Congress, all part of a conspiracy to cover up information about the President of the United States' relationship with America's most notorious child sex trafficker.

[Jon Favreau, profoundly missing Pfeiffer's point:] And lying about it, right?

[Dan Pfeiffer:] And he lied– he lied to the American people. Whether– either by direct order or by implicit request, the intelligence community! We have intelligence professionals, like, the most– what's theoretically supposed to be the most, one of the most apolitical parts of the government, concocting a bullshit report we're going to talk about to try to distract people from the political fallout of this. You have the Republican Congress shutting down and going home, for a month because they are so afraid to vote on a measure that could shed light – once again – on the President of the United States' relationship with America's most notorious child sex trafficker.

Like this really is a giant deal. Like, we need to know what is that hearsay Trump's worried about, in the files? What is in there? What do we not know about Trump's relationship? Like, what, what other steps have been taken to try to cover this up? Have there been efforts to alter or destroy the records? Right? What what other government officials have hid it? Who else has been lied to? Like, this is a big deal and it should be treated as a big deal, in my view.

[...]

[...] this is one of the clues that [5:44] you and I took as evidence that Trump knew his name, or at least suspected his name, was in the Epstein files, was he kept saying, "How are we going to know they're real? Maybe Comey and Biden and whoever else doctored them?" To put his name in there, right?

[...]

I mean the, the chain of events here is they were planning to release the files; they were on Pam Bondi's desk; they released that first tranche that had his name in it, that did not– that at that point they did not say We're not going to release more, because after that went out Pam Bondie said These are on my desk for review; she reviewed them, found something that she thought would be quite embarrassing to the president, and they changed their plan. And they've continued to believe that the massive amount of political fallout they've been getting now for almost 3 weeks is preferable to whatever they believe is in the files.

And:

[Jon Favreau:] How do you think Dems should [17:09] handle this issue over the next few months?

[Dan Pfeiffer:] I think our goal should be to keep the issue in the news as much as possible without putting too much spin on the ball. Right? I've seen other testing which shows that the most effective online posts are not Democrats talking about it. It is clips of Republicans or people who previously supported Trump – you know, podcasters, influencers – criticizing Trump for this. That's the most effective medium.

When we think about how we, like, if we are messaging– if you're an elected official and you're thinking about how to use your platforms, that's one way to do it. If we're thinking about it in the context of how all of us are messengers, and people in our lives, and you're sharing things in your group chat, the better thing to share is the clip of Andrew Schultz talking about this on Flagrant, than it is, you know, some Democrat ranting about this on MSNBC. Or Pod Save America, or anywhere else, right? It's like the... Think about someone who is– who's motivations are not automatically questioned even in an issue on this one where they're, they're quite sincere.

Commentary follows, below.

( Please try not to forget... [4,570 words] )

This post brought to you by the 220 readers who funded my writing it – thank you all so much! You can see who they are at my Patreon page. If you're not one of them, and would be willing to chip in so I can write more things like this, please do so there.

Please leave comments on the Comment Catcher comment, instead of the main body of the post – unless you are commenting to get a copy of the post sent to you in email through the notification system, then go ahead and comment on it directly. Thanks!