Instead of pursuing stable ideological goals, left and right increasingly select messages, aesthetics, and tactics that most irritate the other side—especially its moderates—while keeping plausible deniability. This dynamic mirrors historical anonymous pamphleteering, the 'respectable leader + attack dog' pairing, and the psychology of bickering rivals who poke to trigger outsized reactions.
— It reframes partisan conflict as a strategic provocation game, explaining why policies and culture-war choices often seem designed to elicit backlash rather than solve problems.
Rob Henderson
2025.10.09
65% relevant
Henderson’s discussion of audiences 'testing boundaries,' charisma as a morally neutral technology, and taboo figures gaining popularity maps onto a politics that rewards calculated provocation and boundary‑pushing to build coalitions and attention.
Robin Hanson
2025.09.28
100% relevant
Hanson’s use of MLK/Malcolm X, Gandhi/Tilak, and Nixon/Agnew to illustrate the respectable‑leader/attack‑dog split, plus the 'backseat kids' provocation analogy.
← Back to All Ideas