Richard Hanania Profile picture
Feb 12 3 tweets 3 min read Read on X
You know the story of El Salvador, but watch what's happening in Ecuador.

After violence erupted in January, President Daniel Noboa has declared a state of internal armed conflict and sent in the troops. The new way of doing things has been called "the Noboa way."

Murder in the effected areas is already plummeting, and Noboa's approval rating is at 76%.

But the human rights lobby is very concerned.

This story probably sounds very similar to you. The government and regular people on one side, criminals and the international left on the other.

If other countries are able to replicate Bukele's success, it will be devastating for the leftist worldview. What if all this time crime was a choice? That you can eliminate it pretty easily, as long as you focus on and take out criminals without paying attention to so-called civil libertarians and those who talk about "root causes"?

In a just world there would be accountability for those who have been lying to us for so long and caused so much damage. But they sit in offices in DC or Brussels, or the Ivy Tower, divorced from the consequences of their beliefs. Meanwhile, leaders in Latin America are finally starting to ignore them so they can fix their problems.

Let's all wish President Noboa and the people of Ecuador the best of luck.Image
"In Guayaquil, soldiers and police officers destroy camera systems installed by gangs to watch over entire neighborhoods, storm into areas once largely off-limits to the police and knock down doors to uncover caches of guns and explosives." The gangs were allowed to have their own camera surveillance systems of neighborhoods! Why?Image
Even the NYT admits the Noboa way is working. The story on this is full of regular people talking about how happy they are that this is finally happening. Of course there are complaints from professional activists, but they feel halfhearted at this point. The pro-crime lobby is losing.…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Richard Hanania

Richard Hanania Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @RichardHanania

Feb 12
You know social science is fake. But it's actually much worse than you think. Many of the problems aren't even solvable in theory.

I wrote about why that is, and how one can develop healthy epistemological habits and a reasonable worldview anyway.…
The typical qualitative paper find a statistical relationship and sees if it holds after "controlling" for potential confounders.

This pretends to do away with selection effects. In fact it does no such thing. See the cases of out of wedlock births and breastfeeding. Image
One 2022 study demonstrates how bad this methodology is. They gave 73 research teams the exact same data, and asked what effect immigration had on support for redistribution. 58% said none, 25% negative, and 17% positive. With the same numbers, and temporal and geographic focus!
Read 11 tweets
Feb 7
Which side believes in more misinformation?

I used to think that the question was unanswerable because it depends on the questions you ask. People can come up with questions that conservatives get wrong ("Was the 2020 election stolen?") or that liberals get wrong ("Were 2016 vote totals changed by Russia?") Many studies do this, and they should be rejected as biased.

But a 2021 paper has convinced me that liberals are the side that is overwhelmingly closer to the truth on most factual matters.

This article found an objective way to get at the misinformation question. Researchers decided to track 20 viral stories each two week period over 6 months in 2019. Every two weeks, they grabbed the 10 most viral true stories and 10 most viral fake stories over that period.

They then recruited conservatives and liberals to see who believed in more false information, in 12 different waves. This is an unbiased method because the researchers aren't themselves deciding which questions to ask. They're looking at what articles go viral, and then asking people about them. If one side tends to see more fake stories go viral, that will show up in the data.

First finding: more conservative false stories go viral.

"Fully two-thirds (65.0%) of the high engagement true statements were characterized as benefiting the political left, compared to only 10.0% that were described as benefiting the right. The pattern among falsehoods was reversed, although the relationship was attenuated: 45.8% benefited the political right versus about a quarter (23.3%) the left."

Both sides share unflattering things about their enemies. But when liberals do it, the information they share on social media is more likely to be true.

Moreover, it could be that people at the extremes are more likely to believe false information. In fact, the more conservative you are, the more false statements you're likely to believe. "Very liberal" people do the best at this measure, and "very conservative" the worst.

Even more shockingly, the researchers controlled for the fact that more conservative misinformation goes viral. Yes, both sides were biased and more likely to believe what they wanted. But liberals were more likely to admit things against their ideological interests. They were just better informed or less biased across the board.

In sum, this is absolutely damning for conservatives

1) Conservatives share a terrible epistemological ecosystem, where false claims go viral much more often. This is not a small difference. Liberals dominate the real news industry, while conservatives are the leaders in fake news
2) Conservatives as a result believe more false information
3) One could try to argue that a few conservative "bad apples" spread misinformation, and that biases the results, because among the general public each side just endorses what makes them feel good. But conservatives believe more false information even when that is accounted for.

One might have suspected these results just from observing different kinds of news media. But this is the strongest piece of confirmatory evidence I've seen for the idea that one side is in an epistemologically superior position. The right-wing echo chamber is a major problem, and in many ways worse than the liberal establishment it criticizes.

Part of this is probably just IQ. Liberals are smarter, and smart people are more likely to believe in true things on average. Also, when tribes with slightly different means form, they can have radically different cultures. To compare conservatives to liberals, it's not enough to just ask what the average IQ or level of tribal instinct is for each group. One must understand that a group that is low intelligence and high on tribalism will form a fundamentally different culture than one with the opposite traits. This is why cultural differences are often more radical than individual differences between communities. A community is not simply the sum of its parts, but includes feedback loops.

Social science can often be very biased, but we shouldn't reject findings when the methodology being used is sound.

The simple truth is liberals are more connected to reality than conservatives.Image
Some examples of the false statements. You can quibble here or there with what's actually false or what the slant of a story is in a few cases, but I don't think reasonable people will find much to disagree with here.
You can find the study here, along with the actual news stories in the supplemental material.…
Read 4 tweets
Feb 6
We know that Republicans have recently been nominating bad candidates and losing elections. I don't think most understand how bad things have gotten at the state party level, especially in swing states.

Consider the kind of people the GOP now attracts.

A 🧵 of the dysfunction.
In Michigan, an important swing state, Republicans chose single mother Kristina Karamo to head the party last year.

She was just voted out, but claims that it was done improperly, so has refused to resign. Last week, the Michigan GOP had an event where both Karamo and the other supposed leader showed up, like the two popes, but neither was recognized as the head of the party.

Kamaro previously ran for Secretary of State in Michigan in 2022. She lost by 14 points and refused to concede. Now she refuses to leave the RNC!Image
In Arizona, yet another swing state, the last chair resigned after being caught on tape trying to bribe Kari Lake not to run for office again. Image
Read 5 tweets
Feb 3
DC had a program that randomly gave poor parents $10,800, taken as a lump sum or 12 monthly payments. What did they do with the money?

Washington Post profiles some winners. First, Canethia Miller, who took a $6K trip to Miami and bought her kids new outfits every day. Image
By taking her kids on an expensive vacation they couldn't afford to look at rich people's houses and yachts, she says she motivated them to succeed. Image
Saleemia Quigley regrets that she splurged, wishes she took the monthly payments instead. Penn professor says that giving them money is part of a larger system of oppression when they behave irresponsibly.
Read 5 tweets
Jan 30
Why can Republicans no longer win?

Taylor Swift Democrats.

These are people who are comfortable with their biological sex and want normal lives and relationships.

They'd usually vote against the left. Except Republicans have become even bigger weirdos.…
As my friend @mualphaxi points out, everything about Swift's aesthetics and role in the culture is implicitly conservative. But normalcy is no longer the conservative brand, nor success. Instead you get theories about the Super Bowl being an op to get people vaxxed or whatever. Image
Taylor Swift Democrats don't want to change their sex or cheer on urban mobs, and don't suffer much white guilt. They want to buy makeup or watch football.

Give them a semblance of normalcy, they'll be anti-leftist. Trump and Dobbs, however, make that impossible. Image
Read 9 tweets
Jan 29
Political and intellectual movements rely on narratives that try to explain the world and provide solutions to problems.

I make the case for Critical Age Theory, the idea that many of our biggest problems can be traced to society privileging the old. 🧵…
Critical Race Theory says that even if people aren't consciously intending to be racist, our systems are set up to favor whites over blacks in ways large and small. I believe this is true with regards to age. We can have a gerontocracy without gerontocrats. Image
There are at least four broad areas of public policy in which we favor the old over the young: government spending, credentialism, employment law, and housing.

In each case, the pro-youth position is also the pro-growth position, so it's good to do these things anyway.
Read 16 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!


0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy


3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!