Scott examines how American political discourse absorbs European narratives that don't fit the US context, particularly around immigration and crime statistics.

Scott Alexander critiques the claim that 'America has two X-wing parties' as meaningless or misleading, urging for more precise political comparisons.

Scott Alexander argues against harshly criticizing various groups often mocked by both left and right, emphasizing nuanced thinking and engagement with evidence.

Scott Alexander argues that accusations of Trump being an 'openly white supremacist' candidate are exaggerated and harmful, and calls for more measured criticism of Trump's actual flaws.

Scott Alexander criticizes media tendencies to label politicians as racist or sexist based on ambiguous statements, arguing we should focus more on their stated positions and actions.

Scott Alexander examines how 'fnords' and similar psychological techniques may influence political discourse and polarization through unconscious associations.

Scott argues that social psychology is often misused in political discourse, presenting counterintuitive claims to demonstrate how easily it can be manipulated to support various agendas.

Scott Alexander criticizes 'bravery debates' as toxic and unproductive, explaining psychological factors that lead to their persistence and recommending against engaging in them.