NY Times: Death to the Meritocracy With Andrew Yang

New York Times:

“Andrew Yang is an Ivy League-educated tech entrepreneur who’s never held political office. So why is he running for president — and what would he do if he won? This week on “The Argument,” Ross Douthat sits down with Yang to discuss the future of work, universal basic income and the costs of college.

Then, Michelle Goldberg and David Leonhardt join Ross to debate Yang’s long-shot candidacy. Michelle sees promise in his universal basic income proposal — with some caveats. Ross thinks Yang embodies meritocratic elites’ rebellion against the system that produced them. And David says Yang’s policy-heavy approach to the campaign should serve as a lesson to his 2020 rivals.

And finally, Michelle offers a recommendation that’s sure to rub you the right way. …”

In the podcast, Ross Douthat asked Andrew Yang about the support he has received from “certain segments of the Alt-Right” meaning this website.

I love how Yang is asked about this issue in like every single interview he does (he was also asked about it in a recent interview at The Intercept), but the people who ask the question who are clearly reading our sites never bother to ask him about any of the answers we have given.

The single most important reason Yang has gained some traction in our circles is the moron who is currently our president. After our experience with Blompf, some of us are in the market for a president who is highly intelligent, well educated and has much stronger character.

We want someone who isn’t going to sell out to the donor class and staff the government with neocons and hacks. Of the candidates who are running on the Democratic side, the only plausible and somewhat palatable alternatives to Blompf are Yang and Tulsi. Neither Yang or Tulsi are White but the government we have now is run by Jews anyway so what does it matter?

The second most important reason is that Yang has the potential to be a solution to a problem that has long vexed us. The problem is the stranglehold that Conservatism, Inc. has on the Right. We voted for Blompf in 2016 and won that election, but it didn’t matter in the slightest because a handful of wealthy donors were able to buy the policy agenda. As long as rich people are able to harvest our votes and marginalize us, there is no point to participating in electoral politics.

In my judgment, it is more important to kill off this parasite and break up the Right as it is currently constituted than to win the 2020 presidential election. I can’t think of a better way to do that either than a Yang vs. Trump race. Millions of normies who aren’t really political would vote for Yang to receive $1,000 a month. Similarly, if Yang won the Democratic nomination, it would maximize the number of populist defections from the GOP because he is an inoffensive Asian guy who wants to give everyone $1,000 a month. We want Yang to win the nomination to dissolve the populist-conservative coalition.