Sticking to just the topic of chaos, let’s attempt to quantify it. At 91%, the turnover in his “A” team is the highest among the last 7 president. At 100%, the turnover of cabinet posts is 20% higher than the next highest, HW Bush’s, which itself 20% higher than Reagan’s which is itself 20% higher than Clinton’s. Bush had the lowest at 20%. [0]

I curious about other documented quantitative measurements of presidential entropy.

As a side note: I disagree with most of what you wrote, but I respect the thought you put into it and your effort and remaining civil.

0 - https://www.brookings.edu/research/tracking-turnover-in-the-...

So since google employees have an median tenure of 1.1 year then that means google is even more chaotic organization than the US government. Should laws be "engineered" to prevent organizations like google because there is some sort of ephemeral "chaos" problem with it? Or is it that you are politically predisposed to wanting and needing a strong, lets call it, central committee, to centrally plan things and worker turnover doesn't count towards "chaos"

Wouldn't you want to look at the Google executive, rather than the full set of employees?

Would you invest in a company that changed CEOs every month week?

Please note that I didn’t make a value judgement of the chaos. I simply observed it.

Edit: I suppose chaos could have a negative connotation. I used the term in the sense GP used it, i.e. chaos engineering.

As for the inference that because I don’t agree with you I am a communist then I am a Communist, I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are just having a bad day.

Most would argue that what the right saw as flawed was not based in reality. For example, most terror attacks in the US are conducted by white supremacists[1].

The point is not about trying to prevent other viewpoints, which is obviously bad, but to preserve the rule of law and patch holes in the laws and other customs where they exist. Trump showed where the holes are. I don't think you would be happy if Biden and Democrats started using the same loopholes that Trump and Republicans have been using. By the way, research has shown that conservatives are less likely to be able emphatize with other viewpoints compared to liberals[1].

I want to point out that Trump and the Republican party has taken dishonesty to completely new level in America. The party even came up with a new term to call lies: "alternative fact". Trump has lied more than 20,000 times since taking office.

The issue with the modern Republican party is that they are not going to compromise on anything. It is either their way, or no way. That is not the right way to govern a country. Well, I guess that is the way it is in dictatorships, but I would like to think that most Americans do not want to live in a dictatorship.

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/24/us/domestic-terrorist-gro...

[2] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/339568853_Empathy_a...

It's not the left that is doing the censoring, it is companies, and they're doing it to both left and right wing ideas.

For engineering the government to prevent other view points, that's the whole point of the constitution. Certain view points are disallowed

What was the chaos in the Obama administration? Those seemed like pretty boring years. By contrast, the trump adminstration had the constant leaks, tell all books, and high profile firings/resignations.

What terror attacks happened in the US due to immigration during the Obama years? Acquiescing to foreign powers yeah, Obama should have gone to war with Russia over Crimea, but the trump years are no better. He's pushed Iranians that want peace out of power, given legitimacy to Russia's conquests, and both legitimacy and nuclear weapons to North Korea, while strengthening China's ties to other countries (eg. Brazil is now China's friend due to soy trade)

> Obama should have gone to war with Russia over Crimea

Say goodbye to Indo-Pacific then, land war with Russia (a nuclear major power mind you) will be multiple times more difficult than Iraq and people say that America focus with Iraq allows China ascendency.

10 years after U.S-Russian war, you might face China with probably 50% bigger GDP than America, while America national debt might approach 200% GDP and ultra disillusioned Americans years for isolationism. The entire Indo-Pacific then might be finlandized by China.

> acquiescing to foreign powers, allowing immigration that lead to terror attacks

Things not based in reality. And there in lies the difference.

> Another thing on the left is that censorship has been fully embraced by the left

If the government isn't doing it, it isn't censorship

Your reality. How many have been beheaded in France in recent weeks by immigrants? Do you even read about those kinds of things or stay in your bubble.

About 4 orders of magnitude fewer than have died from COVID this year.

How does allowing immigration in America lead to people being beheaded in France.

Censorship is not defined as something just a government does. And free speech is more fundamental than the US’s first amendment. Censorship is still censorship when big tech does it and the left’s embrace of it is scary and despicable.

Free speech isn't the ability to force somebody else to repeat your statement though

As long as the string is being loaded from somebody else's servers, it's really them doing the speaking

Maybe instead of "failing to conceptualise" they just have a different viewpoint. Why overcomplicate things? And the same is true of the whole censorship issue. People on the left just have different values and that is reflected in policy. That doesn't equate to a conspiracy to destroy freedom of speech.

That's just your viewpoint