I would question two things about the article. First, is 're-entering the conservative mainstream' the proper term? I don't remember Sailer being a mainstream conservative talking head at any point in his journalistic career. More importantly, I seriously doubt that being a part of the 'conservative mainstream' is a desirable situation for any serious intellectual, which I take Sailer to be.
> "is 're-entering the conservative mainstream' the proper term?"
Right. The confusion may be a result of the journalist not getting to choose her own headline. The text of Laurel Duggan's article concludes that what is actually happening is that "a major shift in the Overton window is underway." So she seems to understand that it is the mainstream that is streaming back towards Steve rather than vice versa. What Duggan may or may not realize is that Steve is also one of the main people shifting the Overton Window.
Recall that the Shift's spectacular beginning was Trump's surprise election victory in 2016 *using the Sailer Strategy*. Indeed, it may not be too much to say that while Trump is the public/exoteric face of the recent Overton Shift, Steve is the private/esoteric figure working sub rosa to limn the parameters of this new political reality.
Those who know, know. And they are becoming increasingly public about knowing.
To a semi-somnolent headline writer, this may look like Steve is merely "re-entering the conservative mainstream", but the initiated know the full story.
Is Steve really a conservative? I asked ChatGPT to give me the three main policy positions of a conservative in the US. I rate Steve against them:
Low tax, Low Spend: Steve seems pretty indifferent about this. He tends to like Nice Public Infrastructure like city halls and efficient waterworks. He is civic minded and would fit in just fine in northern Europe where you pay high tax but get a lot of free things from government.
Social conservatism: from what I can tell Steve has a socially conservative private life. He does tend to tut tut at the excesses of the gay scene and definitely dislikes drugs. But I suspect he is pretty non-judgemental at a personal level.
Strong national defence: Steve doesn’t seem to have a preference for the size of the military. He is quite sceptical on its use it however. He is very much of the Good Fences Make Good Neighbours school.
Conservatives are not low tax, low spend. Conservatives since Reagan have been borrow and spend while driving up the national debt. Conservatives seem to be unaware that tax cuts made using debt are really just tax postponements as the $900 billion spent on debt service in FY24 clearly demonstrates.
ChatGPT is confusing "conservative" with "right wing" or possibly "republican". 'Conservative' should mean skeptical of change/respectful of old institutions, the opposite of 'progressive'. 'right wing' and 'republican' especially are welcome to change with the times. I think Steve is pretty conservative but not right wing by the standards of the 1970s and 1980s.
wasn't criticizing you. LLMs will write based on the feelings of the internet. I just think most people use these terms imprecisely. Just like since the 1980s at least most people use "pro business" and "pro free market" as if they were interchangeable. They often are, but sometimes are very relevantly in opposition
The fact that Steve doesn't seem to be a typical conservative is what I like about him.
I definitely don't fit in with liberals. I've been annoyed about media dishonesty, Blank Slate ideology, and crazy white guilt for a long time, even before things went completely insane in 2014-2020. (And the immigration issue, where I think white guilt is the main reason for the lack of sensible policy).
But I don't feel like I fit in with mainstream conservatives either, for the reasons you/ChatGPT mentioned.
The Western European variety of "socialism" doesn't seem so unreasonable to me. I think we've been too eager to go to war in the Middle East and other places. On social issues I'm not in favor of outlawing abortion (I support some restrictions, and I think overturning Roe v. Wade was a good thing from a judicial standpoint). And I always supported social acceptance of gays and lesbians (when the establishment got to the T and Q they started to lose me).
I don't find online interactions very satisfying and would love to find real-world kindred spirits. I'm curious if other readers have found any. Maybe I'll go to one of Steve's events.
Steve has been a constant observer. His observations are often telling the conservative story of reality but are not of themselves conservative or liberal, just factual. He’s making a return because more people, mostly young men perhaps, are seeing what he’s been talking about for a long time and want to hear more. Keep it up Steve.
I heard Michael Shellenberger bring up the Ferguson Effect on Joe Rogan's podcast the other day. I think the smarter fraction of the conservative and even "classical liberal" commentariat already essentially accepts your work.
However, we're still stuck in the right/left nature/nurture dichotomy that is really what causes all the high emotion around these issues.
Personally, I think nature and nurture are just two sides of the same coin. How is nurture not also nature? Some characterize nurture as "environment," but genes and environment are both entirely natural (as is IQ).
So what you have here is two factions of philosophical naturalists. Naturalism, which is basically another word for materialism, is a bottom-up philosophy. In other words matter has ontological priority (https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/dependence-ontological/), and thereby becomes in some sense divine (e.g. black bodies as "holy vessels").
If, on the other hand, one takes a top-down approach, as in idealism, then stuff like genes, environment and IQ are much less important in the grand scheme of things and no longer have so much quasi-theological significance, and one can speak openly about them without violating taboos and thus causing hysterical denunciations.
I doubt if Steve Sailer or John Derbyshire will soon be listed on the masthead of National Review, despite having more talent and courage than the names currently there.
Congrats on the large numbers noticing “Noticing”.
In the 1980s The Grateful Dead had a hit song and were accused of selling out. In response to the accusation one of them (Jerry Garcia is the only name from the Dead I can recall so let's say it was he) said something to the effect of 'we've been trying to sell out our whole career!'
Maybe call it a selling up, not a selling out.
Selling is not synonymous with selling out. Congratulations.
I would question two things about the article. First, is 're-entering the conservative mainstream' the proper term? I don't remember Sailer being a mainstream conservative talking head at any point in his journalistic career. More importantly, I seriously doubt that being a part of the 'conservative mainstream' is a desirable situation for any serious intellectual, which I take Sailer to be.
Steve used to be a regular contributor to National Review, along with infrequent submissions to other conservative organs.
> "is 're-entering the conservative mainstream' the proper term?"
Right. The confusion may be a result of the journalist not getting to choose her own headline. The text of Laurel Duggan's article concludes that what is actually happening is that "a major shift in the Overton window is underway." So she seems to understand that it is the mainstream that is streaming back towards Steve rather than vice versa. What Duggan may or may not realize is that Steve is also one of the main people shifting the Overton Window.
Recall that the Shift's spectacular beginning was Trump's surprise election victory in 2016 *using the Sailer Strategy*. Indeed, it may not be too much to say that while Trump is the public/exoteric face of the recent Overton Shift, Steve is the private/esoteric figure working sub rosa to limn the parameters of this new political reality.
Those who know, know. And they are becoming increasingly public about knowing.
To a semi-somnolent headline writer, this may look like Steve is merely "re-entering the conservative mainstream", but the initiated know the full story.
Once you hit 62 or so, I would think it is called cashing in, not selling out. You are three years past that, so you are good to go in my book.
The young men were all there for Wax--she' so hot!
"his long journey back toward the conservative mainstream."
Note "toward," not "into."
Congratulations Steve. Your recent success is long overdue and well deserved.
My favorite Sailerism:
"Invade the world, invite the world."
Don't forget "in hock tuah world."
That made me LOL
That's a lovely venue, Steve. Congrats, and hope you had a great time speaking there.
Is Steve really a conservative? I asked ChatGPT to give me the three main policy positions of a conservative in the US. I rate Steve against them:
Low tax, Low Spend: Steve seems pretty indifferent about this. He tends to like Nice Public Infrastructure like city halls and efficient waterworks. He is civic minded and would fit in just fine in northern Europe where you pay high tax but get a lot of free things from government.
Social conservatism: from what I can tell Steve has a socially conservative private life. He does tend to tut tut at the excesses of the gay scene and definitely dislikes drugs. But I suspect he is pretty non-judgemental at a personal level.
Strong national defence: Steve doesn’t seem to have a preference for the size of the military. He is quite sceptical on its use it however. He is very much of the Good Fences Make Good Neighbours school.
Conservatives are not low tax, low spend. Conservatives since Reagan have been borrow and spend while driving up the national debt. Conservatives seem to be unaware that tax cuts made using debt are really just tax postponements as the $900 billion spent on debt service in FY24 clearly demonstrates.
I used an LLM to come up with the criteria specifically to avoid your definitional kind of complaint.
ChatGPT is confusing "conservative" with "right wing" or possibly "republican". 'Conservative' should mean skeptical of change/respectful of old institutions, the opposite of 'progressive'. 'right wing' and 'republican' especially are welcome to change with the times. I think Steve is pretty conservative but not right wing by the standards of the 1970s and 1980s.
Go and code your own LLM then!
wasn't criticizing you. LLMs will write based on the feelings of the internet. I just think most people use these terms imprecisely. Just like since the 1980s at least most people use "pro business" and "pro free market" as if they were interchangeable. They often are, but sometimes are very relevantly in opposition
The fact that Steve doesn't seem to be a typical conservative is what I like about him.
I definitely don't fit in with liberals. I've been annoyed about media dishonesty, Blank Slate ideology, and crazy white guilt for a long time, even before things went completely insane in 2014-2020. (And the immigration issue, where I think white guilt is the main reason for the lack of sensible policy).
But I don't feel like I fit in with mainstream conservatives either, for the reasons you/ChatGPT mentioned.
The Western European variety of "socialism" doesn't seem so unreasonable to me. I think we've been too eager to go to war in the Middle East and other places. On social issues I'm not in favor of outlawing abortion (I support some restrictions, and I think overturning Roe v. Wade was a good thing from a judicial standpoint). And I always supported social acceptance of gays and lesbians (when the establishment got to the T and Q they started to lose me).
I don't find online interactions very satisfying and would love to find real-world kindred spirits. I'm curious if other readers have found any. Maybe I'll go to one of Steve's events.
I find liberals much more fun to be around even though I’m probably more of a conservative, even adjusted for age.
I live in Europe though where politics doesn’t really intrude that much into social relations. I really hope we don’t adopt US culture in this regard.
Steve has been a constant observer. His observations are often telling the conservative story of reality but are not of themselves conservative or liberal, just factual. He’s making a return because more people, mostly young men perhaps, are seeing what he’s been talking about for a long time and want to hear more. Keep it up Steve.
I heard Michael Shellenberger bring up the Ferguson Effect on Joe Rogan's podcast the other day. I think the smarter fraction of the conservative and even "classical liberal" commentariat already essentially accepts your work.
However, we're still stuck in the right/left nature/nurture dichotomy that is really what causes all the high emotion around these issues.
Personally, I think nature and nurture are just two sides of the same coin. How is nurture not also nature? Some characterize nurture as "environment," but genes and environment are both entirely natural (as is IQ).
So what you have here is two factions of philosophical naturalists. Naturalism, which is basically another word for materialism, is a bottom-up philosophy. In other words matter has ontological priority (https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/dependence-ontological/), and thereby becomes in some sense divine (e.g. black bodies as "holy vessels").
If, on the other hand, one takes a top-down approach, as in idealism, then stuff like genes, environment and IQ are much less important in the grand scheme of things and no longer have so much quasi-theological significance, and one can speak openly about them without violating taboos and thus causing hysterical denunciations.
I doubt if Steve Sailer or John Derbyshire will soon be listed on the masthead of National Review, despite having more talent and courage than the names currently there.
Congrats on the large numbers noticing “Noticing”.
Come to Maine…I know some secret venues.
He's already seen Tucker Carlson, who is based in Maine now.
"I'm not selling out, I'm buying in."
You're not selling out, Steve. It's just that mainstream conservatism is reluctantly beginning to recognize some inconvenient truths.
In the 1980s The Grateful Dead had a hit song and were accused of selling out. In response to the accusation one of them (Jerry Garcia is the only name from the Dead I can recall so let's say it was he) said something to the effect of 'we've been trying to sell out our whole career!'
Perhaps the conservative mainstream is is re-entering Steve
I would love to think conservatism is becoming less of an ideological, idealistic movement and more about reality and practical politics.
Isn't it pretty to think so?