h a l f b a k e r yRenovating the wheel
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
The executive office would be filled by an assembly of
experts on that person from history who the voters
choose
to run the country for the next four years.
Decisions would be made by consensus of that board as
to
what that person would do in any given situation.
My choice for instance
would be my favorite, President
Dwight D Eisenhower. He was the leader of the military
campaign against the Nazis, stood up to the Soviet Union
during the cold war, built the highway system, forced
de-
segregation, balanced the budget and despite being a
vaunted military leader, warned against the rise of the
military
industrial complex.
Enough is known about this man, and other leaders in
history, that it would be fairly easy to assume correctly
what they would do in any given situation.
The board would convene daily and issue decree by best
guess of how that person would handle the issues posed
for that day. Frankly, you could
probably have a computer do it better than a bunch of
scholars.
Watch in horror as Genghis Khan roars ahead in the polls.
AIEisenhower for President!
(That line created by 2 fries shy of a happy meal)
Fantasy Historical Cabinet
Fantasy_20Historical_20Cabinet
Prior Art ... [8th of 7, Jan 17 2018]
Eh, what?
https://www.nytimes...ain-loneliness.html
[theircompetitor, Jan 17 2018]
France's nuclear power plans
https://www.reuters...ister-idUSKBN1CX0KP
[doctorremulac3, Jan 18 2018]
CO2 and vulcanism
http://www.skeptica...ng-intermediate.htm
I don't know whether this is right, but ... [pertinax, Jan 19 2018]
List of anti nuclear advocates in the U.S.
https://en.wikipedi...n_the_United_States
It's a left wing movement, this is un-deniable. [doctorremulac3, Jan 19 2018]
Stop Steam Now!
https://en.wikipedi.../File:Nirs_logo.gif
Water in its gas phase makes makes mother Earth cry! [doctorremulac3, Jan 19 2018]
(?) Artists united against science and logic
https://thumbs.drea...strial-81556728.jpg
This is one of my favorites. Leftists really hate those cooling towers. [doctorremulac3, Jan 19 2018]
Then again, maybe we're doomed.
https://www.google....160k1.0.smgpijGKmtQ
If this is true, it's very depressing. [doctorremulac3, Jan 19 2018]
Synthgod module for the 3rd world.
http://geekologie.c...0/08/tech-cross.jpg
"To activate, "pray" into the microphone." [doctorremulac3, Jan 20 2018]
As long as the conversation has deteriorated to this point.
https://www.youtube...watch?v=f2L47_W2mFs
Might as well go with it. [doctorremulac3, Jan 21 2018]
The Gods of the Copybook Headings
http://www.kiplings.../poems_copybook.htm
You Have Been Warned ... [8th of 7, Jan 23 2018]
China: The world's biggest greenhouse gas producer by far.
https://www.google....eid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
It's not even close. [doctorremulac3, Jan 24 2018]
And biggest consumer of coal.
https://www.statist...t-coal-consumption/
Out paces the US in coal consumption by over 5 to 1. [doctorremulac3, Jan 24 2018]
When us prols are given a vote on the matter.
https://www.youtube...watch?v=AX0XDHF3M60
The elites might not like what they get. [doctorremulac3, Jan 25 2018]
Rapists, murderers and muggers...
https://www.huffing...82ce4b03deac08ab6d6
...great voter base for the Dems. [doctorremulac3, Jan 25 2018]
Et dona ferentes --Kipling
https://www.kipling...em/poems_etdona.htm
Beware my Country, when my Country grows polite! [Voice, Apr 21 2022]
If you can't remember
https://www.youtube...watch?v=qFA_t2DVrMo
what it's like to have a German leader [4and20, Apr 24 2022]
When you're big in Japan
https://www.rerf.or...general_research_e/
[4and20, Apr 24 2022]
Was hoping your link would be to this.
https://www.youtube...watch?v=NM60iVDu79Y
Song by another hero of mine, Tom Waits. [doctorremulac3, Apr 25 2022]
Give Peace A Chance
https://www.youtube...watch?v=C3_0GqPvr4U
Classic song from a historic musical genius and humanitarian. But still having Neville Chamberlain in the room would have been kind of funny. [doctorremulac3, Apr 25 2022]
Does vodka cause barbarism?
https://www.economi...alcohol_consumption
Just a theory. [doctorremulac3, Apr 26 2022]
You tell me you'd live here and not get drunk on a regular basis?
https://www.agefoto...a-russia/X8H-935929
I'd be having vodka for breakfast if I lived in this "government supplied housing for the people" shit-hole. [doctorremulac3, Apr 26 2022]
How Alcohol Conquered Russia
https://www.theatla...ered-russia/279965/
A history of the country’s struggle with alcoholism, and why the government has done so little about it. [doctorremulac3, Apr 26 2022]
Countries by cleverness index
https://www.forbes....ld/?sh=59232fd2163f
[doctorremulac3, Apr 26 2022]
Brain scans of
https://www.thesun....-aggressive-reason/
vodka aggression [4and20, Apr 27 2022]
Russian apartments
http://gellersworld...nt-floor-plans.html
I'd probably be hitting the vodka every night too. [doctorremulac3, May 01 2022]
World map of ongoing armed conflicts.
https://en.wikipedi...ing_armed_conflicts
[doctorremulac3, May 01 2022]
World map of IQs by country.
https://public.tabl...10314730/IQworldmap
[doctorremulac3, May 01 2022]
How to make all the citizens happy.
https://www.youtube...watch?v=o0LUUFQ4MNM
The happiness act. [doctorremulac3, May 01 2022]
The most important room in Russia
https://www.rbth.co...n-apartment-kitchen
The kitchen [doctorremulac3, May 01 2022]
Eisenhower, the good and bad
https://www.nps.gov...ranger/5accompx.htm
Really good summary. You decide. [doctorremulac3, May 03 2022]
[link]
|
| |
The strange thing is that Flynn effect (see your nearest Wikipedia outlet for details) suggests that average IQ in western nations has increased steadily over the last century. In contrast, that of American (and for that matter English) political leaders has declined over the same period. |
|
| |
Perhaps the two effects are related. We are all electing dumber and dumber people to positions of power, and those people are then too busy and important to take IQ tests, and so the average IQ of the sampled population increases. |
|
| |
// Watch in horror as Genghis Khan roars ahead in the polls. // |
|
| |
Or if you're from a Central Asian nation, "Applaud in glee as
Genghis Khan roars ahead in the polls ..." |
|
| |
It's not strange at all, [MB]. It's a direct consequence of
having more people vote and (at least in the US) the
elimination of smoke filled rooms in favor of primaries. |
|
| |
//Applaud in glee// sp. ghee. |
|
| |
//a direct consequence of having more people vote// Wait - they've handed voting over to the people?? In which case, what have I been paying for all these years? This is devolution gone a step too bally far. |
|
| |
Regarding link: "U.K. Appoints a Minister for Loneliness" |
|
| |
The strides government has made in creating cushy
bullshit jobs for themselves is truly incredible. |
|
| |
I'm going propose and apply for the position of "Minister
of Troubled Minds". Our goal: |
|
| |
1) To be on the lookout for those citizens who might
question the validity of the post position "Minister Of
Troubled Minds" which is clearly a symptom of advanced
psychosis. |
|
| |
2) Me and my staff will spend 1 out of every 3 months in
Hawaii having meetings at our private beach on how
these troubled souls might be "helped". |
|
| |
3) Obviously we'll need to have advanced surveillance of
all government personnel to weed out "Troubled Minds"
who might pose a threat to themselves and the country. |
|
| |
4) Treatment facilities will need to be created in every
town. Former drive in movie theater locations might be
cheaply transformed by surrounding them with
"motivation wire" to sooth the envious mind and the
troubled spirit. |
|
| |
Of course you might not support me at first, but you will.
Believe me, you will. And you will thank me. |
|
| |
Daily, at 8:00 every morning in front of your televiewer. |
|
| |
Will there be a Two Minutes Hate, too ? |
|
| |
Assistants are currently on their way to help you. |
|
| |
No need to tell us your location. |
|
| |
// Assistants are currently on their way to help you. // |
|
| |
Sorry, did you say "Assimilants" ? |
|
| |
No matter ... we will Assimilate them regardless. We look forward to their arrival. |
|
| |
//Wait - they've handed voting over to the people??// |
|
| |
Representation without taxation is a paradox of modern
democracy |
|
| |
//No matter ... we will Assimilate them regardless. We
look forward to their arrival.// |
|
| |
Sounds like a sci-fi plot that hasn't been explored yet. Could
be interesting. |
|
| |
I'd be rooting for the Borg. |
|
| |
//we will Assimilate// Sp.: ass-emulate |
|
| |
//In contrast, that of American (and for that matter
English) political leaders has declined over the same
period.// |
|
| |
I've wondered about this. My refusal to vote for the
obviously dim, has narrowed the options very effectively.
The first hypothesis was that the politicians were just as
clever, but were appealing to a low common
denominator. I met a couple, that was discarded. Then I
considered that we were only getting the real bright
sparks through the filter of time. There's some credibility
to that, but not enough to throw up the calibre of morons
we have suffered for decades. My conclusion is that it's
not a very good job. Why take a position that will turf you
out on the swing of fickle public opinion or dreadful
judgement of party seniors? Why spend 50% of your life
gladhanding and fundraising, why commute to London an
irritating amount of times? The salary looks like that of a
London plumber, but with less opportunity for freelance
accounting irregularities. |
|
| |
indeed. Look at the quality of leadership in Singapore. |
|
| |
Well, I've said it before, I'll say it again, stupidity is a
commodity that's cultivated for profit. |
|
| |
Whether you're selling breakfast food or a political party,
you want your consumers dumb and controllable.* It's only
a
matter of time before a dumb voter base wants one of
their
own to represent them. |
|
| |
* You want your sugar blasted, triple frosted Sugar-Berry
Puffs fortified with eight essential vitamins and iron and
your politicians ready to sent a message to those fat cats
in Washington! |
|
| |
// ready to sent a message to those fat cats in Washington // |
|
| |
Presumably, "Like cats, we are lazy, vicious, selfish and
untrustworthy. We care nothing for others, seeking only our own
ease and comfort. What do we do to join you ?" + |
|
| |
Periodically I threaten to run myself for election as the
"Don't Vote For Me Party". Success is guaranteed regardless
of the outcome. |
|
| |
I see [Ian] there going for Godwin's Law fairly early
in the discussion... |
|
| |
Actually, just mentioning Adolf isn't enough to allow a Godwin call. There has to be a comparison between a previous poster and Hitler, or an accusation that they are, or are like, Nazis. |
|
| |
I love this idea, but here is what would happen if it
were enacted: |
|
| |
1- The average good Democrat voter would say
"Winston who? Oh, is that the guy on the oatmeal
box?" |
|
| |
2- There would be 24/7 coverage of the newly
discovered scandals uncovered proving Winston
was a fat, racist Hitler supporter. |
|
| |
Those pointing out he went to war with Hitler
would be greeted by a group of panelists on CNN
pointing out that Winston Churchill 1) Never
actually punched Hitler in the face and 2) Never
technically said "God! That Hitler guy is such a
like, jerk and stuff!" The segment would be titled:
"Churchill: Hitler Foe or Hitler Fan? |
|
| |
Adolf is like a Nazi. Do I win something? |
|
| |
While conservative, I suspect Churchill would not
have been a Republican voter in our current state
of
affairs. And the average Republican would simply
pray for deliverance from Hitler while trying to
scare him away with their NRA-lobbied AR-15's. |
|
| |
I suspect the real libertarian perspective might've
sided with Ireland, as in 'Eh, what's the use,
they're
just badgering our neighbors, not us...' |
|
| |
<expecting usual political diatribes in 3...2...> |
|
| |
//Actually, just mentioning Adolf isn't enough to
allow a Godwin call// - Godwin's Law Nazi! |
|
| |
what's needed is the Godwin's Law Police. Presumably they will be dressed in black uniforms, with silver SS* runes on the collar and shiny black jackboots ... |
|
| |
*"Situational Scrutiny", before you ask ... |
|
| |
Is there a Trump's law to take over from Godwin? There's
bound to be since Trump is so totally moronic and
universally hated that even Hitler now pales in comparison. |
|
| |
//<expecting usual political diatribes in 3...2...>
— RayfordSteele, Jan 18 2018// |
|
| |
Correction: That would be T+ 1...2...3... |
|
| |
//Trump is so totally moronic and universally
hated that even Hitler now pales in comparison.// |
|
| |
So the whole killing six million Jews thing pales in
comparison to which of Trump's actions? |
|
| |
I think citing Hitler comparisons is a great way of
saying "I have nothing interesting to offer in this
conversation." |
|
| |
Which one is the banana again? |
|
| |
Trump's deliberate destruction of the climate will result in
considerably more than 6 million deaths, and if he succeeds
in starting a nuclear war, how many of us will be dead
when the fall out settles as he cringes in safety in his gold
lined bunker? - that's something else he can share with
Hitler. |
|
| |
[xen], you need to take one of the green ones. UN DES COMPRIMÉS VERT. |
|
| |
//start a nuclear war...kill everybody with global
warming/cooling// |
|
| |
So he isn't worse than Hitler YET, but will be with
your predicted future actions he WILL take, got it.
So in three to seven years if none of this has
happened we know he'll still be worse than Hitler
in
your eyes, but what will your reasoning be then? |
|
| |
There are two reasons to have a conversation, one
is to share views from other perspectives, and one
is to mindlessly trigger a dopamine rush. This is
the latter. |
|
| |
I've had enough for one day thanks. |
|
| |
He's far worse than Hitler already. Millions are dying and
entire eco systems are being destroyed due to Trump's
global warming. |
|
| |
Trump started global warming. |
|
| |
If I find myself arguing with a Scientologist about the
existance or non existence of Xenu, I'm the one being
an idiot. |
|
| |
//Millions are dying and entire eco systems are being destroyed due to Trump's global warming.// |
|
| |
Right. Those millions are where, exactly? And they've all died as a result of Trump's tweets over the last, what, six months? |
|
| |
Hey, I think the guy is a jerk too, but I doubt he has the powers you ascribe to him, mon amie. I'm with [doc]. |
|
| |
And for whatever it's worth, I contend that the guy didn't
really want to get elected, it was an accident. |
|
| |
Now THAT'S a contention I'll put on record for review in
later years and if it proves to be false I'll accept it and
admit I was wrong, but that really appears to me to be
the case. Does that mean anything? Yea, I think somebody
getting elected to the highest office by accident is pretty
interesting. |
|
| |
So to use the banana comparison, I think either Trump or a
banana would have won running against Hillary. |
|
| |
If the pen is mightier than the sword, then Trump's
swipe at journalistic freedom is an endangerment to
at least six million of the most vulnerable. |
|
| |
How many people live in North Korea / Iran /
Myanmar / Congo / Sudan / Yemen again? |
|
| |
If Trump threatened to block out the sun I’m sure the
media would report that we’re all in grave peril. |
|
| |
I'm always amazed at how easy it is to smoke out the secret
members of the extended family of humourless Trump
worshiping minions. Do you all enjoy
sleeping in freshly urineated bed sheets and mashing
burgers
into the carpets, as you repeat your favourite mantra: "I'm
tremendous, I'm tremendous, I'm tremendous" |
|
| |
Make it two, [Xen]. Deux. |
|
| |
// He's far worse than Hitler already. Millions are dying and entire eco systems are being destroyed due to Trump's global warming. // |
|
| |
But on the plus side, almost all this is happening in far-away hot countries with very low per-capita GDP and lots of low-lying terrain that they can't afford to revet; so it's win-win, really. |
|
| |
Where is the scientific proof that climate change is anthropogenic ? |
|
| |
Not "opinion"; not "extrapolating from current trends"; not "the balance of probabilities". Proof; actual numeric proof, which will stand up to rigorous scientific scrutiny, that the effect is ANTHROPOGENIC. The climate is chaotic and changes continuously - this is indisputable. |
|
| |
A mere 10k years ago there was an ice age with glaciation. Now, it's warmer. Did humans cause the ice age to end ? |
|
| |
//Do you all enjoy sleeping in freshly peed bed sheets and
mashing burgers into the carpets?// |
|
| |
Hmm, let me think. Define “freshly”. |
|
| |
You know, thanks to [xen]'s input, I like Trump more now. |
|
| |
// I like Trump more now // |
|
| |
Wow, didn't see that one coming... |
|
| |
Noticeably above ambient temperature. |
|
| |
Apparently it doesn't matter what leaders say, which
then quite invalidates this entire idea. |
|
| |
It didn't matter to the history of the world what Lenin
wrote, or that Churchill told everyone to buck up and
fight, or that Ghandi taught MLK nonviolent protest,
or that Jesus said to love our enemies. |
|
| |
This is an odd hypothesis that you present. |
|
| |
Oh, the Trump thing, we're back to that. |
|
| |
If there's a converestion about Trump that isn't
totally fascinating, I have yet to hear it. I like the
parts with the peeing and stuff. |
|
| |
Its my reply to your note above which I took as
meaning that it doesn't matter what Trump says,
reality will continue on unaffected. The sticks and
stones school of thought. |
|
| |
On climate change, the facts are still rather
concisely presented by Randall Munroe in the xkcd
link we all have seen time and again. Dispute it. |
|
| |
What does Randal Monroe rather concisely present
about using nuclear power instead of wealth re-
distribution scams to stop polluting the atmosphere? |
|
| |
You are aware that the current plan is to let
anybody spew as much crap into the
air as they want as long as the socialists get their
cut of the profits right? |
|
| |
Or didn't Randy mention that? |
|
| |
I don't think that was the topic at hand. And even the
socialists are using nukes, or haven't you been to
France in awhile? |
|
| |
France gets the majority of their power from nukes
but plans on drastically reducing their dependance
on
this Godzilla creating technology. |
|
| |
Quite obviously you haven't been to France in a
while, although it's not necessary to actually go
there to know what's going on. |
|
| |
France aims to cut the share of atomic energy in
power generation to 50 percent by 2025 from 75
percent now. (see link) |
|
| |
Yes, I'm aware of their desire for reduction. Knees
jerk in all parties and nations, after all. They'll not be
going back to carbon, at any rate, so the entire
point is rather secondary. |
|
| |
Point is, we have a solution, we've had a proven
solution for decades, but that proven solution
doesn't
expand the socialist's power base and line their
pockets. |
|
| |
Which is frustrating for people like me and others
like the guy who started Greenpeace, (You know,
that right wing Nazi organization?) who would like
to take care of this planet by using the best
technology to do so. |
|
| |
No matter what the figures are on Climate Change
(tm, all rights reserved) we would benefit from
moving away from a carbon fueled society as much
as possible if for no other reason that to preserve
this limited resource. But no, we're going to talk
about
peeing on sheets and poorly applied orange face
makeup. |
|
| |
1. The direct data set is on a human, not a geologic timescale. It
is far too small to be meaningful. |
|
| |
2. The indirect data from ice cores, marine sediments and
dendrochronology has huge error bands and the results are
inferential. |
|
| |
3. Human activity is totally dwarfed by vulcanism; one average to
large
eruption releases in a few days as much CO2 and SO2 as
humans
release in years. This can be directly measured from eruption
plume size, velocity and composition. Both Huaynaputina and
Pinatubo are relevant examples. |
|
| |
Has anybody ever measured how much carbon
emission we get from the oceans? I was going to
measure it last week but I forgot. NFL playoffs and
everything. Slipped my mind. |
|
| |
Oceanic CO2 equilibrates with the atmosphere by gas exchange,
as does oxygen. Temperature and pressure directly affect
solubility. Again, the system is huge and chaotic, and the data set
extremely sparse. |
|
| |
Has anyone noticed the similarity between the NFL and Nazis ? |
|
| |
Which stands in both cases for..... "National". |
|
| |
Might be on to something there. |
|
| |
NATIONAL socialist party. (22 letters) |
|
| |
NATIONAL football league. (22 letters) |
|
| |
[xen] would call it "proof" ... |
|
| |
// we would benefit from moving away from a carbon fueled
society as much as possible if for no other reason that to
preserve this limited resource. // |
|
| |
It's limited only over a very short (human) timescale. |
|
| |
Plenty of systems exist to recapture carbon, usually biologically. If
energy is freely available from fusion generators, this can be
catalytically reformed into any hydrocarbon you want. It's not
rocket science. |
|
| |
What happens when a practical, cost-effective fusion powerplant
is developed ? The whole game changes ...because the energy
density of the fuel system is orders of magnitude higher. |
|
| |
The most obvious effect is that, because helium is a free, plentiful
by-product, everyone can have a free balloon ... |
|
| |
I don’t see a lot of effort on either side of the aisle to
move the nuclear option along. Blaming the socialists for
its stalling seems like a convenient and arbitrary scape-
goat. |
|
| |
The error bands have been reviewed and re-reviewed. You
can make a case that they didn’t pick a good line along
them, but you’ll be pretty lonely in that judgement. |
|
| |
Fusion is only a decade away, don’t you know? Been that
way for at least two decades now... |
|
| |
// they didn’t pick a good line along them // |
|
| |
The very fact that "picking a line" yields different answers throws
doubt on the method. |
|
| |
After 5 seconds, your speed is 25 km/h. |
|
| |
After 10 seconds, you speed is 50 km/h. |
|
| |
After 15 seconds, your speed is 75 km/h. |
|
| |
After 20 seconds, your speed is 100km/h. |
|
| |
All perfectly reasonable so far? |
|
| |
... and after 3 minutes 20 seconds your car will achieve
supersonic speed. Obviously ... |
|
| |
// I don’t see a lot of effort on either side of the aisle to move
the nuclear option along. // |
|
| |
The original impulse for fission energy was military. A civil power
programme that produced plutonium as well was too good to
pass
up from a PR point of view. |
|
| |
Having set off down that path, the sensible technology of
Thorium fission has been studiously ignored, because it doesn't
make weapons. |
|
| |
// Fusion is only a decade away, don’t you know? Been that way
for at least two decades now... // |
|
| |
It's just a funding issue, not a technical one. When the chips were
down ,it only took ten years to go from Meitner's and Hahn's and
Szillard's theory to a workable gadget. |
|
| |
If your species really needed fusion , it could be done in a
decade or less. |
|
| |
If all the money poured into, for example, international sport
(Olympics, golf, football, tennis, baseball, conkers and
tiddlywinks) were put into fusion energy research, it could be
done in months. |
|
| |
It's all about motivation ... you know it's possible, you just don't
want (need) it badly enough. |
|
| |
//Human activity is totally dwarfed by vulcanism// |
|
| |
I claim no expertise in this field myself, but would you care to
rebut the points against it in <link>, [8th]? |
|
| |
1. The rebuttal makes no mention of the emissions from deep-
sea hydrothermal vents. These are much more common than
previously thought and the fluids are supersaturated due to the
immense pressure. They support entire ecosystems. They are a
significant contributor. These are not necessarily the much vaunted "black smokers" - along every marine spreading fault, sea water penetrates the fractured crust and is then expelled again, loaded with gases and minerals. |
|
| |
2. The graph shows the spikes from "headline" eruptions but fails
to mention the steady "background" emissions from innumerable
other vents. These large magmatic eruptions are not the ones
that release the most gas. |
|
| |
The volcanos most closely studied are the ones with the greatest
impact on humans in specific ways. The data set is incomplete,
and admitted by the authors to be liable to be an underestimate
due to limitations in methodology.More recent work on
continuously erupting vents such as Stromboli has produced new
data. Vesuvius, although quiescent, emits huge amounts of gases
through the porous tufa of the Monte Somma cone, causing life-
threatening local concentrations.
The same is true of the Great Rift Valley.No need for a full on
eruption for there to be huge gas emissions. |
|
| |
3. Sulphur aerosols can not in themselves reduce CO2 levels; this
is an attempt to infer a parameter from a change in a secondary
effect that has more than one cause. |
|
| |
4. No mention is made of the release of methane from
clathrates. Methane is a potent greenhouse gas and much harder
to quantify. |
|
| |
It is significant that the papers quoted are around two decades
old. They represent the state of knowledge as it was, not as it is. |
|
| |
//I like Trump more now//Max. Excellent. A cum stain
quote. |
|
| |
Lot of weird kinky sexual stuff in your "arguments".
Frustration perhaps? |
|
| |
//Blaming the socialists for its stalling seems like a
convenient and arbitrary scape- goat.// |
|
| |
See link "List of anti-nuclear advocates in the
United States". |
|
| |
I skipped through to the names I recognized: Ed
Azner, Alec Baldwin, Ralph Nader, Matt Damon,
Susan Sarandon, Jane Fonda, Woopie Goldberg and
Martin Sheen. All proud warriors against the
cooling towers poisoning the atmosphere with
steam as is shown in all their posters and
propaganda. |
|
| |
The one Republican I saw was Henry Kissinger who
I believe is suffering from "Need to be liked by the
left after working for Nixonitus." |
|
| |
In risk / reward ratio evaluation we need to look at
both choices. We can learn a bit about the various
sources of power we have to keep our civilization
running or just hand the controls over to the
"progressives" to do whatever they want. |
|
| |
Keep in mind, these guys have had to change their
name twice after the whole bad publicity thing of
world wide genocide against innocent people
caused by the communists. Then they were the
socialists. That got some bad publicity after
enough countries had to stand in line for toilet
paper and food, so now they're the "progressives". |
|
| |
Can't trust any product that's continually re-
branded despite being the same old thing. Most
"progressives"
don't like being called communists though they
support communism. Even they know they have an
image issue and I would argue it's well deserved. |
|
| |
Just to detour the good communist vs the bad
capitalist argument, I support some socialist
institutions as long as they're paid for by a sensible
free market economy and not taken advantage of
those in government who would seek to expand
dependence on these institutions to the detriment
of the society for their own aggrandizement. |
|
| |
[doc], you're almost reasonable enough to be English at times. |
|
| |
Spoken like a true Trumpeter. Yeeee-haaaaaa! Git some! |
|
| |
I'll take that as a compliment Max, but at the risk of
ruining my image in your eyes, my lineage is Scottish. I
was told for years that all indications were my people
were descendants of the William Wallace clan and that
was somehow cool, something that I didn't agree with
until the movie came out. |
|
| |
My cousin traveled to your island to research our family
legend but didn't come back with much more than what
we already knew. |
|
| |
So although I've only been there a couple of times, I love
it over there and as I've
mentioned before, yours is my ancestral homeland. |
|
| |
Of course lumping the English and Scottish together is
probably a
rookie mistake since there seems to be a rift between the
two peoples, but sounds to me like more of a sibling
rivalry
than anything else. I just know both make very good
engineers and inventors and that's good enough for me. |
|
| |
//Spoken like a true Trumpeter. Yeeee-haaaaaa! Git
some!// |
|
| |
Hmm. well Xenzag, you've got a good point there. Maybe a
new
hairstyle could cover it up. |
|
| |
Where would the world be if people discussed, say, building design, in
the same way they discuss politics? |
|
| |
Would the brickists and the glassists both vehemently deny that the
other material could possibly have any merits? |
|
| |
That being said, how can a virtuous, intellectually
superior brickists be expected to work with those fascist
pig glassists? They're worse than Hitler, fat, ugly and hide
squirrels in their pants. |
|
| |
They all need to be put in internment camps. Kill some
sense into them I say! |
|
| |
(So how's that building coming along?) |
|
| |
Did I mention that glassists are worse than Hitler? Maybe
you're one of them eh? And not to mention the kinky sex
they all get up to. It's disgusting! I can't get those visions
out of my head! 24/7, I picture them! Thrusting, peeing,
grunting, it's DISGUSTING! WHY WON'T THOSE KINKY
GLASSISTS GET OUT OF MY HEAD!!!!! |
|
| |
Back to grownup talk for a second, regarding this nuclear
energy thing. There are people on both sides who support
nuclear power but I believe they are cowed by the vitriol
of the leftists. |
|
| |
I would love to see a bi-partisan group get together to
fight the "nuclear power horror" image cultivated over the
years by the Luddites. It appears to me this anti nuclear
movement is powered simply by inertia at this point
anyway. |
|
| |
Except for France quietly dismantling the most successful
nuclear power grid the world has ever seen, I don't see a
lot of people marching in the streets with pictures of
exploding steam condenser towers these days. Maybe the
time has come for a bi-partisan group to fight back? I
mean, the opposition just isn't very bright, how hard
could it be? (see link) |
|
| |
If me and Ray agree on something, and we don't agree on
ANYTHING, there may be a spark of hope there. |
|
| |
Then again, maybe we're doomed as the idiocracy
ascends. (see last link) |
|
| |
There's no "maybe". You are definitely, irretrievably doomed. |
|
| |
Communism =/= Socialism =/= Democrat. |
|
| |
With respect, [doctor], they're not the same. There's a kind of
cognitive bias which, in the current thread, seems to affect both
you and [xenzag] (and, in the wider world, affects a lot of other
people both on the Left and on the Right, so there's no shame in
it). |
|
| |
This bias is best summed up as "all your enemies look the same". |
|
| |
During the course of the twentieth century, there was a huge pivot
in progressive thought away from marxism and towards
psychoanalysis. This was somewhat obscured by a tendency of
people in the psychoanalytic tradition to use marxist words
(notably "bourgeois") in a rather disingenuous way. |
|
| |
Then, as the intellectual credibility of Freud declined, it was found
in the academic world that you could perpetuate the kind of
power structures favoured by psychoanalysis - based on
unaccountable, informal cliques - by taking particular positions in
semiotics. So, those positions duly became the orthodoxy. |
|
| |
With hindsight, they're both flawed ideas, but in completely
different ways. The original marxist vision was an egalitarian
one, involving workers' control of the means of production. The
psychoanalytic vision, on the other hand, has always involved a
stark division between an aristocracy of cool, sexy, well-
connected people and, on the other hand, a sub-human
underclass of "inadequates" who must shut up and serve them.
It's all there in a stark way in D H Lawrence, and in a slightly
subtler way in Abraham Maslow, David Riesman and Somerset
Maugham. |
|
| |
It makes for a complicated landscape. |
|
| |
For example, about the only mainstream author in the twentieth
century who had anything nice to say about Ayn Rand was
Maslow - but Maslow's economics were tax-and-spend social
democratic. |
|
| |
Tl;dr - what [Rayford] said. |
|
| |
// a stark division between an aristocracy of cool, sexy, well-
connected people and, on the other hand, a sub-human
underclass of "inadequates" who must shut up and serve them // |
|
| |
That world view is hardly the exclusive result of "psychoanalytic"
thinking ; numerous societies, from the Roman republic with its
Patricians and Plebeians to the (fictional yet credible)
Orwellian socialist dystopia of 1984 offer similar models. |
|
| |
Ho hum, off to the Moloko now for some Milk Plus and then
maybe a bit of the old ultra-violence ... |
|
| |
I think the current state of nuclear inertia has more
to do with cheap natural gas and NIMBY politics and
Fukushima than any particular scare group. |
|
| |
Churchill would not be a Trump Republican, Ray -- of that
I'm more than certain. But he would certainly not be a
Democrat, and he would certainly not be a Libertarian. |
|
| |
[pertinax] wow. eh, what? |
|
| |
[xenzag] a trolling ass, as usual. |
|
| |
//hardly the exclusive result of "psychoanalytic" thinking// |
|
| |
True - but the psychoanalysts were unusually ingenious in
disguising it as progress. Enjoy your moloko. |
|
| |
I see Churchill squarely in Eisenhower's camp of old-
school east coast/Rockefeller Republicans, or as we
now call
them, moderate Democrats, but perhaps with a soft
spot for the Tea Party and no love of unions. |
|
| |
Who knows, maybe someday we'll even invoke
Churchill's vision of socialized medicine. |
|
| |
I'm sure it beats medicinalised socialism. |
|
| |
//wow// Sorry. As I said, it's complicated. |
|
| |
//medicinalized socialism//
Is that what they were calling it in the 60's? |
|
| |
Well, that was certainly *a* key change - but it applies mostly to
those analysts who were in clinical practice. However, as will
become clear if you read Freud "on the question of lay analysis",
the clinical practice was always intended to be part of a much
broader movement. It was that broader movement (including
artists, critics, miscellaneous caring professionals and "experts"
in various fields of public policy) that did most of the harm. |
|
| |
One can compare the way that, in times of civil disorder, one is
much more likely to be murdered by a part-timer, excited to have
a gun, than by a long-service professional soldier. |
|
| |
hello anybody, you know how there is meant to be a scroll
bar on the side of the screen, I think mine got
infinitesimally small and I may never get to the bottom of
this |
|
| |
And not even a visit from Vernon to be seen. What have we
become? |
|
| |
Ray, the $850,000 cure for genetic blindness is ultimately
information. Once
a significant portion of medicine is via genetic correction
costs will shift out
of the sector. |
|
| |
In the meantime, I'd rather someone developed immortality
trying to
become a trillionaire than slow everything down to make
the US healthcare
system like the VA. |
|
| |
As to nuclear I must admit I've somewhat shifted my stance
on it. I used to be all for it, more so because I had assumed
peak oil is at least possible (though I was a skeptic). |
|
| |
Now that we know peak oil is not a real possibility, I would
say it makes more sense to wait for working solar/working
fusion than to build reactors which clearly cannot be
perfectly safe. |
|
| |
The equation appears to be real simple to me -- the Ukraine
conflict -- as a for instance -- or for that matter even our
recent politics -- tells me that one cannot assume that any
state cannot become a failed state. Building things that
pose a risk for 10,000 years seems to be a bad idea. |
|
| |
Of course part of my calculation here is that I dismiss any
meaningful risk from global warming. If you believe that
things are as dire on that front as the most ardent
believers, then you should think nuclear may be worth it
regardless. |
|
| |
// What have we become? // |
|
| |
A self-perpetuating, unaccountable, autocratic arrogant elite, apparently ... |
|
| |
I should probably read more than one book of this Ayn
Rand gal I'm supposedly a fan of. |
|
| |
I think when the tribalism is turned down a notch (and
tribalism is a natural and therefore useful human trait)
we can have some productive activity. I'm seeing points
of agreement from those who are most decidedly in a
different political camp than I am. (But then again, I
think there's only one member of my political camp.) |
|
| |
However, when both sides of our government get on the
same page that's not necessarily progress. Often times it's
just to agree to make government bigger. Just as an
aside, since this is a political discussion, I'll hoist my
banner for what it's worth. If I had to join a club, I guess
it would be the libertarians who I'd proceed to disagree
with at every turn, but we've already established I'm not
very good at going with the flow. My views on our current
political system is this: Democrat or Republican, evil or
stupid. Take your pick. |
|
| |
//always involved a stark division between an aristocracy
of cool, sexy, well- connected people and, on the other
hand, a sub-human underclass of "inadequates" who must
shut up and serve them.// |
|
| |
I'm not sure if you're referring to the world Marx sought to
change or the modern leftist PC world of today, fed to a
great extend the way the ancient empires were: Ruling
class at the top, cheap imported slave labor at the
bottom. |
|
| |
What used to be called "slaves" are now called
"dreamers". The current debate turns on the opposing
assertions that, on one side, altruistic humanitarians are
lifting up the disadvantaged while on the other hand,
they're just importing an army of voters for their cause
that will have the double benefit of driving down wages
for the wealthy and offering the rich cheap labor to
further line their coffers. |
|
| |
My proposal is that we put efforts into improving these
countries that are so horrible people want to move to this
shithole. If we absolutely must save the world (I vote no
on that one as well.) I'd rather go out and save it rather
than moving it here. |
|
| |
By the way, libertarians don't believe in borders. See
what I mean? All the political clubs available and me
agree: I don't like them, they don't like me. |
|
| |
As for immigration, I say let the Native Americans decide
who gets in. What better way to say "Sorry about the
whole taking your homeland." thing than to put them
back in charge of it? |
|
| |
// My proposal is that we put efforts into improving these
countries that are so horrible// |
|
| |
More realistically, in the immortal words of Sam Kinison,
people will move to where the food is. |
|
| |
Feed them then give them my "missionary
modules".
Synthogodesque smart devices that walk them
through the
process of not having any more famines and
building a
successful society. |
|
| |
Don't bring God, bring "Synthogod". (tm,
registered, all
rights reserved.) |
|
| |
I just had a great idea, make these in the form of
crosses just to piss the other religions off. (see
link) |
|
| |
As the Sahara expands, moving to where the food is
becomes increasingly more difficult, especially when
the trend of the day is against immigration and more
walls. |
|
| |
Libertarians don't believe in borders, but they also
don't seem to believe in societies or causes. It is
this perpetual negativity in the face of what should
be some sense of inspiration that keeps folks like
me repelled. I've seen A Christmas Carol far too
often. |
|
| |
//they also don't seem to believe in societies or causes// |
|
| |
I'm pretty much lined up towards the libertarians and I
believe in society and causes, but
rather than just hoisting the generic placard from some
political party, religion or other stupid group, I address
issues on a case by case basis. I suppose this gets too
complicated for some people, hence the whole generic
team play "we're all good, they're all bad" method of
approaching the world. Guess people just need a nice,
simple bogyman to give their life meaning. |
|
| |
I don't have a team, I don't want a team, but that doesn't
mean I won't stand up to the best of my ability to all the
retarded teams out there. Will it make any difference?
No. Do I care? No. Will I ask questions and then answer
them myself? Most certainly. |
|
| |
Actually, scratch that. My team is the family that I
support and protect. Beyond that, not interested in
membership in any other clubs. |
|
| |
I don't want accolades, recognition or even respect. I'm
going to do this job I've been tasked with to the best of
my abilities and then I'll die. This works for me. I'll treat
criticisms of my path in life like the dog at the side of the
road barking at the passing caravan. As long as it's not in
my way, let it bark. |
|
| |
I think it's a bit unfair to say that not believing in
government doing things is the same as not believing in
doing things, especially, as amply demonstrated by the
food industry, for profit is feeding people while govt control
tend to make them starve. |
|
| |
Because of their belief in things like Bitcoin (nonwithstanding
recent gyrations), lots of run of the mill libertarians have
become quite wealthy. Wonder how that's going to play out |
|
| |
I used to go to the libertarian's website "Reason" but
stopped after finding that I agreed with less than half of
what they posted. |
|
| |
I like the idea of people being allowed to keep their
money and relying on taxpayer help only if physically
unable to work due to infirmity or age. If they can't find a
job they should be given one by the
government for their welfare payments. This is not
punitive, this is treating them like fellow humans, not
chattel. I say this knowing that the government would
probably
fuck this up as well unfortunately. Probably end up with
team of workers that break windows at night and another
team that replaces them during the day. Anybody
criticizing this would be called a racist Nazi. |
|
| |
This concept of "workfare" by the way, is right from the
old Democrat brochure.
The new brochure says basically: "To question anything
we do is a crime." The Republican brochure on the other
hand says "We're
pretty good. We offer much of the same awesomeness as
the Democrats, so why not consider voting for us if you're
not doing anything that day?" |
|
| |
No worries, the window replacement crew will be here at
their regular time. Remember our motto: |
|
| |
"Making Up Jobs As We Go Along" by the people who brought
you the slogan "More Free Stuff For Better Goodness". |
|
| |
"Communism is a race in which everyone comes in first, with no prizes" (Lord Inchcape) |
|
| |
It may or may not be relevant that "Eisenhower" is an anagram of "woes herein". |
|
| |
Sometimes it takes clubs to get anything really
significant done, like the club that revolted against
King George. |
|
| |
The Libertarians in my immediate circle prattle on
about waste, ineptitude, and corruption as if they are
the only ones uniquely aware of them in the public
sector. More dopamine in their case I think is
needed. |
|
| |
... or maybe just clubs. Big, heavy wooden clubs, with iron spikes
driven through them. |
|
| |
Excellent for re-educating ideallists in the reality of being smacked
very hard on the head with a big, heavy lump of wood with a nail
through it. Not a lesson that the few survivors easily forget. |
|
| |
Well Ian, that's probably the nastiest, most hateful thing
anybody has ever written on the Halfbakery. You're
obviously in a lot of pain so I won't take the bait. |
|
| |
Hope you find peace, but please take your quest
someplace
else. |
|
| |
Ray, I'm not going to defend libertarians or any other
group. Getting together to get a specific job done, like
freeing a country from oppression or building helicopters
is a wonderful thing, but being in an ideology club just
isn't my bag. It's especially silly when two groups might be
at odds just for the sake of being at odds. |
|
| |
Take the nuclear power thing for instance, I'm not sure if
it were put to a vote, changing to a nuclear economy
wouldn't win by a landslide, but it won't happen because
it wouldn't do anything to hurt that horrible bunch of
bastards across the aisle, which becomes the main job
when two factions start fighting. |
|
| |
Of course, technically, he's right. |
|
| |
Max, I'll assume that's that dry British humor that so often
soars majestically over my head. |
|
| |
I just lose interest when there's a conversation going on at a
cocktail party and somebody craps in the bean-dip. |
|
| |
So would I, although so far that hasn't happened at any of the parties I've been to. |
|
| |
Wait - maybe there was no bean-dip. |
|
| |
So where are people supposed to crap at your cocktail parties? |
|
| |
Good point. Maybe that wasn't bean dip in the first place. |
|
| |
OK, you got to write some words, please go away now. |
|
| |
I've always wondered, exactly how does one "fuck off"? |
|
| |
Do I leave while I'm fucking, carrying the woman with me
while I go? If you look at it that way seems like kind of a
nice thing to say. |
|
| |
"Leave, but while you're walking, why not enjoy some
passionate sex? You seem like you're a robust enough
fellow to pull this off and as a very attractive man,
certainly would have no problem finding a willing woman
seconds after I make this suggestion to you." |
|
| |
So, thank you for the nice suggestion but I'm quite happy
to just sit here and not fuck right now. Maybe later. Can't
promise I'll be in the mood for the walking around part
though. |
|
| |
But seriously Ian, lighten up. My guess is you're going to
sober up tomorrow, read all this and be very
embarrassed. So why not quit while you're ahead so you'll
have less stuff to erase in the morning eh? There's a good
chap. |
|
| |
So, that was a weird string. Did the UK pass some
liberal new experimental drug law or something?
Ian, are you hearing voices or something? |
|
| |
//being in an ideology club just isn't my bag// |
|
| |
Now you're sounding eerily like me. That's why I
remain a pragmatic, mostly boring centrist. |
|
| |
"I'm off to see the Wizard" and strings like "and
they're off" seem to have the same etymology base. |
|
| |
If all of you rational people I've always considered to be rational could go back to being rational again that'd be great m'kay... |
|
| |
Goodness me, what a busy thread ... |
|
| |
//Of course, technically, he's right.// ([Ian Tindale], that is, about family, etc.) |
|
| |
Right or not, I think he has George Orwell on his side (though I admit Orwell didn't put the case quite so aggressively). Would anyone vote for a virtual George Orwell? Also, he has on side certain passages of scripture, and a large part of the argument for priestly celibacy. Again, you may or may not feel that this helps his case. |
|
| |
//I wonder why it isn’t “Fuck Away” // |
|
| |
I suspect that the precursor phrase is "Push off" - possibly a metaphor from handling boats. |
|
| |
The purpose of "fuck" is simply to add aggression and/or demand more attention. Compare "Thank Fuck for that". |
|
| |
Now, you may be wondering why "fuck" adds aggression. That would be because "fuck" itself is a metaphor, as most sexual words are. Different cultures refer to sex with metaphors from different aspects of sexual behaviour. For example, both Greek and Hebrew tend to emphasise metaphors of intimacy ("be with", "go with", "have knowledge of"). Japanese tends to emphasise sensuality ("pillow"). Anglo-Saxon, like Latin, emphasises power and violence in the choice of sexual metaphor. Hence, the original meaning of "fuck" seems to have been "hit" or "beat". That is why "you're fucked" doesn't mean "someone is making sweet love to you". It means "you're beaten". |
|
| |
//I'm not sure if you're referring to [...]// |
|
| |
Strictly speaking, neither; I was referring to *intended* futures described or implied by writers in the psychoanalytic tradition. However, the status quo nowadays does incorporate certain aspects of those intended futures. If all this sounds like a rather wild allegation, I could start boring you with detailed references to the writers in question - you know, "in 1922, Somerset Maugham wrote *this*", etc. But this thread is already quite long, and not *entirely* on-topic. |
|
| |
Regarding pre-enlightenment society, you might like to read Foucault's "Madness and Civilisation". His value-judgements are abhorrent and his causal model is back to front, but he crams in lots of striking facts, some of which might interest you. |
|
| |
I heard about a party in a North Korean concentration
camp, where the shit WAS the bean dip. The 2 phrases
were synonymous. If someone shat in it they just patted
you on the back, and they said i’m Definitely booking this
catering service for the next party |
|
| |
// a citation for the ‘fucked // |
|
| |
I'm afraid it was something I heard on the radio. One piece of evidence quoted, though, was the old dialect name of a certain small bird of prey in the North of England - "wind-fucker", assumed to mean "wind-beater". |
|
| |
Also, in Latin, there's a word "superare" whose primary meaning is "overcome", but which is often used in a sexual sense. Hence, according to ... Aulus Gellius, I think it was, legionaries called out "Caesar fucked the Gauls, he gets a triumph; Nicomedes fucked Caesar, he doesn't get a triumph". |
|
| |
////Of course, technically, he's right.// ([Ian Tindale],
that is, about family, etc.)// |
|
| |
I believe Max was making a joke. |
|
| |
//I think he has George Orwell on his side// |
|
| |
Don't remember George Orwell proposing any kind of final
solution against men who love and care for their families. |
|
| |
Thank you for taking the trouble to respond about those volcanoes. Your points are plausible, if not necessarily compelling. However, if I understand them correctly, your drift seems to be "never mind the big bangs - the continuous leakage is what matters". |
|
| |
Does this mean you're retreating from your earlier claim that //one average to large eruption releases in a few days as much CO2 and SO2 as humans release in years.// ? |
|
| |
//Then I made a nice cup of tea.// |
|
| |
Psst - [2 fries] - I think you can come out now. The screaming has stopped and we're having tea. We can sweep up the broken bits later. |
|
| |
//Don't remember George Orwell proposing any kind of final solution [...]// |
|
| |
No, but he did observe somewhere that the people who pointed and laughed at newsreel footage of Jews being herded towards the gas chambers tended to be the same people who were most loudly sentimental about motherhood. |
|
| |
//No, but he did observe somewhere that the
people who pointed and laughed at newsreel
footage of
Jews being herded towards the gas chambers
tended to
be the same people who were most loudly
sentimental
about motherhood.// |
|
| |
I'd be surprised if
George Orwell ever said that. You can post the
quote to
prove me wrong, but I doubt he ever made the link
between love of children and family and love of
genocide.
He was a great humanitarian and one of my top
ten
heroes incidentally. One problem with that story is, how
did he do his research? Did he note who laughed at
newsreel footage in a darkened theater, presumably using
infrared glasses then question each of these people about
their beliefs in motherhood as they left the theater?
Gotta call complete and total BS on that little factoid. |
|
| |
There is however, a most definite link between anti-
family
philosophies and genocide.. The communists
decried the classical family unit when they weren't
busy
murdering tens of millions of innocent people. |
|
| |
I think some people just get triggered knowing that
others
have love, children, wives and family and dream of
some
world where they get love, purpose and
companionship from
somewhere else. The state perhaps? The whole, "It
takes
a village" thing? I know sex robots are becoming a
big
thing, something I find pretty disgusting and wish I
had
never heard about. Anyway, don't know, don't
really care.
They do
their thing, I do mine. |
|
| |
Back to the grownup talk again for a second, hopefully to
stay there for a bit this time, |
|
| |
I understand the same camp who stands against nuclear
power often promotes dietary reform, that is, a non
animal based diet for among other things, reducing the
amount of carbon dioxide released by farm animal flatus. |
|
| |
Has anybody run the numbers on that? Not saying I have,
but if you remove the planet's 1.5 billion cows and
replace the calories they supply to the planet's 7.5 billion
people with plant based foods, the same foods the cows
ate, isn't there some un-accounted for additional fart gas
from that equation? |
|
| |
8, you seem to be the resident expert on atmospheric
science. Isn't the "eliminate all 1.5 billion cows and their
farts and instead feed 7.5 billion people beans to keep
the planet fart free" plan flawed? Should be easy to find
out the volume of gas from each animal on a vegetarian
diet and do the math on that one. |
|
| |
more accurately, the same crowd who always wants to have
a reason to control the means of production spreads its
tentacles wider and wider. A larger than usual number of
people is not going hungry -- must be a planet ending
problem. |
|
| |
skipping through Ian's fugue, [Ray] people that always
complain about corruption or deficits are certainly boring,
but not nearly as much as people that announce 2017 as one
of the hottest years on record a couple of weeks after the
Arctic Circle migrated to Manhattan. Let's face it,
Cassandra is never popular regardless of the subject matter
of her peeves or prophesies. |
|
| |
//Now you're sounding eerily like me. That's why I remain
a pragmatic, mostly boring centrist.// |
|
| |
No shame in not joining either side in the right/left
political
paradigm. (hate that word) I've used the aircraft
metaphor previously, here's a finer point on it. |
|
| |
An airplane has two pilots, the left wing pilot and the
right wing pilot. Each pilot asserts, CORRECTLY that if
that guy in the other seat has his way, turning the control
yoke totally to the right/left, the plane will spin out of
control in that direction and explode in a fireball when it
hits the ground. The passengers in the back are
told the facts by both pilots that both leave out one
crucial
point: the best way for this plane to fly is to have balance
between control surfaces. This is looked at as some as not
being exciting, but I'm in the back of the plane (looking
for a parachute) hoping to god that neither one of these
idiot pilots gets his way. |
|
| |
So if you're feel that being a centrist may appear boring
or undecided, look at it this way: being a centrist is the
most radical and revolutionary of all. You're standing up
and fighting everybody. |
|
| |
// Isn't the "eliminate all 1.5 billion cows and their farts and
instead feed 7.5 billion people beans to keep the planet fart free"
plan flawed? // |
|
| |
Food production is a zero-sum system. |
|
| |
Growing 20 billion tonnes of beans takes x amount of CO2 from the ecosphere. |
|
| |
(a) Feed the human population entirely on beans. This releases x amount of CO2 back into the ecosphere, either as expired CO2, or fart methane. What goes around, comes around. |
|
| |
(b) Feed 1.5 billion domestic animals on beans. This releases n% of x as expired CO2, and farts. Feed the humans on meat, plus beans. This releases (100 - n)% of x in the same way, but because of low energy conversion efficiency in producing meat, there aren't enough beans, and some humans starve (releasing carbon through decay, but ultimately requiring less food). |
|
| |
Whichever way you go, x goes in, x goes out. However, ruminants produce more methane, a "greenhouse" gas. |
|
| |
The wider discussion is about "extra" carbon in the ecosystem, from (1) fossil fuels, (2) deforestation, and (3) vulcanism. |
|
| |
We contend that, firstly, (3) is a poorly-understood, unquantfied, and potentially very large (comparable with human activity) input, and secondly, the countervailing mechanisms for environmental CO2 self-management (plankton, jellyfish blooms etc.) are also poorly understood and unquantified. |
|
| |
Ammonites, ammonites, ammonites ... warm, CO2-rich seas, full of ammonites ... |
|
| |
Were they good to eat ? There must have been predators ... maybe it's time for ammonites to make a comeback ... |
|
| |
What are the particulars, percentages etc. of those three
again with regard to their effect on the climate? I know you
talked
about it earlier but I don’t want to have to go back and
comb
through all the insane tantrum crap that’s polluted this
thread to find the interesting stuff. |
|
| |
link #4, posted by [pert]. But the papers quoted are 20 years old, and better data are now available, which indicate that the quoted figures are low by a whole order of magnitude - putting vulcanism, particularly deep-ocean hydrothermal emissions- on a par with human activity. |
|
| |
There's a sort of "dark matter" parallel for environmental carbon. Physicists came up with Dark Matter because there's "too much gravity" |
|
| |
In the same way - call it Dark Carbon, if you will - understanding is growing that there are huge amounts of "extra" carbon in play that are geologic in origin, but that there are also carbon-capturing geologic mechanisms that are understood poorly, if at all (i.e. sediment entrainment at subduction boundaries). |
|
| |
When looking at any complicated system, I like to
consider the reference point of the person or persons
evaluating it. Ernst (I think was his first name) Mach was
the man on
this one. Your vantage point determines what you
perceive. If you sell ice cream, you're likely to propose
selling more ice cream as the solution to any problem
you're reviewing. |
|
| |
Government is in the business of selling governing so
when they tell me the solution to poverty, demonic
possession, killer clowns or global warming is giving them
more money, I take that into consideration when
reviewing their solution to any problem. |
|
| |
And there's a false narrative I often hear that I don't
accept. You can only have one of two views on this: 1)
Global warming or climate change can never happen or 2)
Increased government taxation is the only solution to any
problem, this one included. |
|
| |
Huh... I always thought the word fuck came from For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge which was the charge for prostitution back in the day. |
|
| |
As for cattle and methane production, you'd need to factor in the thirty to one hundred million bison which used to roam free for centuries before their genocide.
There is a fascinating TED talk from a fellow who was given the task of trying to stop desertification of an elephant preserve.
His final recommendation was that twenty elephants needed to be put down so that there would be enough food for the rest without stripping the land bare. |
|
| |
Not only did this not work it had the opposite effect and it was later determined that the lack of "roaming" herds is actually causing the desertification spreading in North America, Africa, and elsewhere for the simple reason that moving herds don't eat what they shit on.
This means that large patches of grassland remain un-trampled and merely bent over casting shade beneath them while the fertilizer from the beasts slowly permeates the area around them creating little insect-opias allowing the grasslands to thrive in a natural cycle. |
|
| |
Removing the herds kills the plants which are binding up carbon and releasing oxygen. |
|
| |
I would probably vote for AIEisenhower. |
|
| |
// 1) Global warming or climate change can never happen // |
|
| |
We disagree. Climate change is a continuous, dynamic, chaotic process. |
|
| |
Climate change can be immediate and local (microclimate), seasonal, or global and on a geologic timescale (ice ages). But the point is that climate change is an absolutely fundamental part of the ecosystem. |
|
| |
Global warming happens. Global cooling happens. The factors and variables are numerous and - currently - not well understood. |
|
| |
Accumulation of observational evidence is not proof. It is necessary to demonstrate a causal relationship with a model or models that predicts future behavior. |
|
| |
Plate tectonics is a relevant example. It describes in general terms what causes volcanos and earthquakes. It predicted the existence of marine slip-strike faults at spreading plate margins, which were subsequently found by exploration. It predicted the "zebra-stripe" magnetic anomalies in the Pacific. |
|
| |
Plate tectonic theory does not predict that there will be a magnitude 5.8 earthquake 21 km NW of Parkfield on 21 May at 03:48 ... it's a "broad brush" theory. But it does predict some things very well - where faulting will cause volcanos, and that where there are earthquakes, faults will be found. |
|
| |
Building on this, and knowing the underlying processes, seismometry, deep gas analysis, surface sensing radar and DGPS surveying work towards providing a steadily improving understanding of how, where and importantly when earthquakes will happen. |
|
| |
When climatology theory is as good or better than tectonic theory, it will be worth paying attention.... facts, facts, facts, what are the facts ? Where are the numbers ? ALL the numbers, not just the ones that fit someone's pet theory ... |
|
| |
"The planet appears to be warming" - yes. |
|
| |
"Human activity releases fossil carbon" - yes. |
|
| |
"Human activity in releasing carbon is the primary cause of planetary warming" - is it ? What other factors are involved ? |
|
| |
//Huh... I always thought the word fuck came from For
Unlawful Carnal Knowledge// |
|
| |
German for "strike" according to Monty Python. (See link) |
|
| |
//Removing the herds kills the plants which are
binding up carbon and releasing oxygen.// |
|
| |
Whether we kill all the cows or cover the planet with
yummy, delicious cows, just give me my nukes. |
|
| |
With your permission I'm putting that in the idea
description. |
|
| |
I'll give you full credit. |
|
| |
// 1) Global warming or climate change can never
happen // We disagree. Climate change is a continuous,
dynamic, chaotic process.// |
|
| |
Right, that's why I'm saying it's a Hobson's choice. Believe
that climate has never and will never change or agree that
government taxation and wealth distribution plans are the
only way to effect positive changes should they become
necessary. |
|
| |
No. Believe nothing. Trust no-one. Question everything. Belief is something that is characteristic of religions, which require faith - compliance in the absence of facts or proof. |
|
| |
Science is not a religion. The scientific method requires that theory is supported by repeatable, demonstrable experiment. Anywhere, anyone can stick a piece of copper and a piece of zinc in a lemon, and measure a voltage. |
|
| |
The voltage will vary depending on the ambient temperature, the purity of the metals, and the freshness of the lemon- but importantly, all those factors can be calibrated for and those calibrations are universally valid. |
|
| |
Anyone who "belives" in anything is suspect. |
|
| |
Note that belief if very different from opinion. |
|
| |
Opinion is a result of prior experience, aquired knowledge, and reasoned analysis. The process of deriving an opinion is explicable. "The car engine does not start. The starter motor turns the engine quickly; the fuel gauge indicates fuel in the tank; there is a smell of unburned fuel at the exhaust outlet. Opinion - there is likely to be a problem either with the air filter, or more likely the ignition system." |
|
| |
It's possible - but unlikely - that an evil clown has cut the wires to the ECU, but the ignition fault is much, much more likely. |
|
| |
This is not belief. The process of arriving at the opinion is amenable to systematic, rational deconstruction. |
|
| |
Well that's all just your opinion. Ha |
|
| |
Yes, it is, and we can demonstrate step by step the process by which the conclusion is reached. |
|
| |
Can you do the same ? If you can, please do. We'll pay close attention. You should expect rigorous analysis and criticism (in the academic sense), and be prepared to support your argument (in the academic sense) with facts and hypotheses. |
|
| |
We will provide, if possible, a reasoned rebuttal, and will not descend to name-calling, ad-hominem arguments, or abuse. |
|
| |
Fake, or false, logic is inevitably vulnerable to correctly-applied analytical techniques, as codified by Bertrand Russell. |
|
| |
In your opinion. You'll dream a different reality, if you alter
how your mind works. i.e. Think differently and you'll
experience different thoughts. |
|
| |
// In your opinion. You'll dream a different reality, if you alter how your mind works. i.e. Think differently and you'll experience different thoughts. // |
|
| |
No, because codified formal logic does not admit of opinion or belief. There is only ever one possible solution. The whole point is to exclude any component of subjective perception or interpretation. |
|
| |
Formal logic is a mathematical entity of itself, detached from and independent of humans. It can be validated by computational systems built up from fundamental arithmetic elements, each of which can be verified in isolation. |
|
| |
There is no "thinking differently". That's a human thing. |
|
| |
So, [8th], about chocolate... |
|
| |
//post the quote to prove me wrong// |
|
| |
Gah! Now I go to look for it, I can't find it. Maybe I dreamed it. ;-) |
|
| |
... which seems to be very much a Betazoid thing. |
|
| |
Don't take this wrong, [doc], but in our history, I never
saw you as
much of a centrist. You seemed to care very little for
the left pilot
from my vantage. |
|
| |
Incidentally, my car engine starts roughly. It smells
like fuel. It's
fault is actually leaky injectors. |
|
| |
Regarding the herds and plants and their
codependence, the quick
and dirty answer is that changing the system
dynamic faster than
evolution wants to go is very likely going to end up
being very bad
for all parties involved, save for the lucky few that
somehow find a
quick benefit and become invasive / pervasive. |
|
| |
Well, in brief, the rest of nature has been doing the
same sorts of things for several thousand years or
much longer, with little change here and there, even
factoring in the occasional volcano. Humans have
not been doing the same sorts of things for that
long. During that time period during which we have
added some substantial changes to the earth, its
been getting warmer at a much faster rate than
previously observed. |
|
| |
If you are hypothesizing that the scientists simply
extrapolated data well beyond the point of
believability, I'd submit that that is a childish error
not likely to be committed by a large number of
climate scientists in today's world. They'd lose their
credence quickly for something so basic. I find your
theory to be beyond my bounds of credibility. |
|
| |
[tc], the cold you are now experiencing and the
overall warm climate are related. Read up on the
oceans and what drives the currents and what
happens when they slow down. |
|
| |
//You seemed to care very little for the left pilot from
my vantage.// |
|
| |
I'll put it this way. I despise the people currently
occupying the left pilot's seat for too many reasons to list
but I support the idea that this seat is necessary for
balance. I support Social Security, helping the
underprivileged in such a way that lifts them up without
creating a permanent dependent class and caring for the
elderly and infirmed. I also support the checks and
balances that keeping evil government types holding each
other's dreams of conquest in check represents. |
|
| |
But don't take the conciliatory tone of my statement as a
white flag. Progressives are my enemy. Many of the
causes their brochure espouses, I support, but I don't
believe the modern leftist cares about anything but
power, elitism, classism, racism, nihilism and dividing
people
for fun and profit. I believe their whole premise is a lie.
Their causes are equivalent to the 8 essential vitamins
and iron that poisonous sugar based breakfast cerials
print
on the side of the box to sucker people in. |
|
| |
Take one issue, this immigration thing. If immigrants
voted largely for Republicans the Democrats would have
put a wall on the southern border of the U.S. a long time
ago. And here's the deal, you know that's true, whether
you
admit it or not. Think about that for a second and be
honest with yourself. Picture Chuck Schumer saying "We
understand these immigrants spell the death of the
Democrat party, but we need to look at this from a
humanitarian angle." As you very well know, that would
never happen. |
|
| |
That's why I hate these guys. Lying elitist scumbags. And
from a personal perspective, you can agree with them on
99% of the issues, but disagree on that last 1% and you're
immediately a googleplex times worse than Hitler. They
argue like children.* |
|
| |
The Republicans are just morons so they can be forgiven a
little bit more. I guess. |
|
| |
* Not all of them, this is a generality because typing "Of
course not all Democrats are this way. There are friends
and relatives of mine who I respect and even love who
are Democrats." would be almost impossible to read due
to the extreme, mind numbing boredom it would
generate. |
|
| |
One more thing, if I think somebody is completely not
worth talking to because there's just nothing there, I
don't waste my time. So if you want to take some kind of
olive branch out of this, you're
welcome to it. |
|
| |
Just remember, olive branches can quickly be converted
to clubs |
|
| |
[Ray], I have no doubt as the earnestness of the belief of most believers in global
warming. I'm also not one of those that says "so <evolution, relativity....> is just a
theory?" |
|
| |
But the statistical distribution of scientists does not argue as to the validity of the
theory especially when the political cost for disagreement is so high. |
|
| |
More importantly, presuming the theory is correct, it's not at all clear what the
practical effects would net out to be, and that's holding many variables equal. It
doesn't come close to estimating net effects versus, for instance, deliberately
reducing economic growth, or on a longer scale, the value of gaining Greenland or
imagine, a whole continent in Antarctica versus losing Miami or even New York. |
|
| |
It doesn't know that in 10 years the car fleet may turn largely electric and in 50
years the fleet will be a 10th or 100th of its size because of a combination of
telecommuting, reduction in work and automated vehicles, not to mention Tesla
roofs and in-house thorium reactors. Have they even modeled that as it gets warmer you have to spend less on heating? :) |
|
| |
It doesn't know that Pinatubo may grant you another 10 years, or Krakatoa another
50 years or 100 years, it doesn't know if birthrates throughout the world will
plummet to Western levels, or even lower with longer lifetimes, it doesn't know
your descendant may have a gene-engineered mutation that lets zer directly
metabolize sunlight. |
|
| |
The theory comes down to a nonsense prediction over what would happen in a
future that is often predicted but is beyond the singularity, and acts primarily as an
organizing principle for those that would seek to control the means of production. |
|
| |
By all means, have governments fund any kind of energy research that's viable, and
even some that are not. By all means have taxing authorities tax what they want
to reduce, they already have a right to do so. By all means reduce pollution, why
would we want to have pollution. |
|
| |
But using energy is an existential threat to humanity or the planet? Nonsense. |
|
| |
//But using energy is an existential threat to humanity or
the planet? Nonsense.// |
|
| |
Can't control the people without these threats and the "If
you don't vote for us, you'll all die!" message. |
|
| |
That's really what this is all about. |
|
| |
see what happens when there's no woman in charge. |
|
| |
Agreed. Put the virtual Maggie Thatcher on the
ballot. She'd get my vote. |
|
| |
[tc], here’s what I know: if you screw up the weather too
badly too quickly you screw up agriculture, and you start to
eat canned goods for as long as you have them. And it’s
not
so easy as simply moving further north or south, there are
things like soil types and water resources to worry about,
as well as pollination, species balancing, disease transfer,
etc. |
|
| |
The politics of opposing climate science aren’t as big a
concern as the risk of getting it wrong unprepared, for that
reason alone, (and there are a great many others). |
|
| |
[doc], say what you will about the progressives, but I don’t
see Bernie for starters being that motivated by wealth or
even power. He seemed like the real deal to me, if a bit
left of center. |
|
| |
For me, he needs to answer for all the communist,
not socialist, communist nations he's supported. He
repeats the stuff from the brochure, free healthcare,
free education, free everything but doesn't want to
talk about countries where these utopian ideas have
crashed and burned. |
|
| |
Sell me on free healthcare, free food, free
everything. Hell, sell me on magic carpets for
everyone but I'm gonna have to see all those things
actually fly successfully. |
|
| |
Keep in mind, we do have some socialist institutions
here that I support but he's gotta show me how it's
getting paid for, and I'd trust his numbers a bit more
if he ever ran a business or balanced a ledger in his
life. |
|
| |
But this is where it gets boring. Who wants to discuss
the best way to do things when Trump is running
around the world pissing on everybody's sheets? |
|
| |
Now THAT'S what gets people engaged apparently. |
|
| |
By the way, if you think Trump is the last reality star
president, just replace "last" with "first of many". The
media has never raked in so much cash following this
guy's every move, to the last imaginary, alleged drop. |
|
| |
Had to do that, we went several days without
mentioning Trump or Hitler. Gotta stick to the rules
here. |
|
| |
// Well, in brief, the rest of nature has been doing the same sorts of things for several thousand years or much longer, // |
|
| |
Millions of years. Millions and millions. |
|
| |
// with little change here and there, even factoring in the occasional volcano. // |
|
| |
... apart from the last few ice ages ... |
|
| |
// Humans have not been doing the same sorts of things for that long. During that time period during which we have added some substantial changes to the earth, its been getting warmer at a much faster rate than previously observed. // |
|
| |
Not directly observed; inferred from indirect historical data. Direct observations start in the mid-18th century; accurate, calibrated observations start in the late 19th century. |
|
| |
// If you are hypothesizing that the scientists simply extrapolated data well beyond the point of believability, I'd submit that that is a childish error not likely to be committed by a large number of climate scientists in today's world. // |
|
| |
The fault lies not with the scientists, but with the paucity of data. The conclusions may be entirely reasonable based on the data set. But the data set is compiled over a meaninglessly short (in geologic terms) timescale. |
|
| |
You would be foolish indeed to bet on the outcome of a two hour sporting event based on the last thirty seconds and without knowing the previous score. |
|
| |
// They'd lose their credence quickly for something so basic. // |
|
| |
No, because given the same data and theory, any reasonable scientist would draw the same conclusion. |
|
| |
// I find your theory to be beyond my bounds of credibility. // |
|
| |
We are not proposing a hypothesis. We are asking that the existing hypotheses be rigorously justified. |
|
| |
Possit: in the last 200 years there has been a (say) 3 C average temperature spike. |
|
| |
Question: Are any of the available techniques which derive their data from a geologic record capable of accurately resolving a 3 C temperature spike over a 200 year window ? |
|
| |
Are you seriously speaking out against distrust and skepticism ? |
|
| |
The simple truth is that we don't understand nearly enough about the climate to make any predictions as subtle as a few degrees warmer or cooler. For instance, we don't really know what determines the cycle of ice ages - and something like that would be quite important, wouldn't it? I mean, we DON'T KNOW why global climate has swung around by 10s of degrees in the past. Atmospheric CO2 is a small player in the climate, and to predict the effects of changing it - even doubling it - is way beyond what we can do at the moment. |
|
| |
Not a single quantitative prediction about climate change has been correct to within a factor of 2. Does anyone remember the quantitative climate predictions from 20 years ago? No? That's because there are new and better predictions, and unfortunately the ones from 20 years ago proved to be incorrect. Lather, rinse, repeat. |
|
| |
Qualititatively, adding CO2 to the atmosphere will probably favour warming. But qualitatively, a snowflake and a bullet are both projectiles. |
|
| |
Max, 8, you can cite all the science and logic you
want, but I fail to see what this has to do with Trump
urinating on everybody's sheets. |
|
| |
That, [doc], is a very good point. |
|
| |
//but I don’t see Bernie for starters being that motivated
by
wealth or even power.// |
|
| |
Not that there's anything wrong with that. |
|
| |
Strange that people worry so much about right-wing
populism, but can't quite worry enough about left-wing
populism,
which demonstrably causes as much, if not more damage |
|
| |
Some initial assumptions: |
|
| |
Mr. Trump consumes a diet rich in asparagus, and plenty of Screwdrivers (Orange juice/vodka cocktails), resulting in a urinary output of 3 l per day of smelly urine. |
|
| |
The average human's sleeping area is 2m x 1m. |
|
| |
How much smelly urine at ambient temperature is needed, evenly distributed per human sleeping area, to be noticeable - either by odour, or enhanced moistness ? |
|
| |
Assume 1 ml over a 2 m2 area is sufficient for effectiveness (tests will be necessary), and clean, indeed pristine sheets (mattress, and other bedlinen) and a recent shower or bath, plus an absence of olfactory deficiency caused by allergies and/or a cold. |
|
| |
Therefore, The Don can *noticeably* piss on the sheets of 3000 persons per day. |
|
| |
There are more than 300 million inhabitants of the U.S.A. alone at this time. |
|
| |
This means that each day, 0.001% of the U.S. population can have their sheets pissed on; a little over 1 million people per year. |
|
| |
So, if Donald is blessed with immortality, it will be 2317 before everyone's had their sheets pissed on, and that's just the U.S. - what about all the billions - literally billions - of humans who will die, miserable and deprived, long before their vial of Holy Wee comes by ? |
|
| |
What about population growth ? |
|
| |
Perhaps extra kidneys could be transplanted, to guarantee and indeed enhance supply ? |
|
| |
There are so many practical problems to overcome ... |
|
| |
See? Now we're getting to the important issues. |
|
| |
I think that Bernie's been around long enough to
realize that his really far-left proposals would never
get implemented. In order to pull the conversation
back to the middle, he's had to yank very hard to the
left. Or put another way, in order to reach the moon,
you have to aim for the stars. That yank is precisely
what I was looking for. |
|
| |
I simply didn't want to type out hypothesis again, it
seemed like bad writing form. |
|
| |
I don't know Ray, that sounds awful close to excusing
rhetorical means for the end -- a Bernie version of seriously
but not literally :) |
|
| |
// in order to reach the moon, you have to aim for the stars. // |
|
| |
Actually, in order to reach the moon, you need to aim just to one side of it by a very carefully calculated amount. There may indeed be a specific star that corresponds with the aiming point, but "the stars" is far too general. |
|
| |
//in order to reach the moon, you have to aim for the
stars.// |
|
| |
To achieve moderate socialism you need to espouse the
benefits of genocidal communism? |
|
| |
My favorite Bernie clip is when the interviewer asked him
to
explain why Venezuela is a failed hellhole of a state and
he completely melts down and starts yelling that he
doesn't want to
talk about it. |
|
| |
If you guys want socialism, elect an FDR clone, not some
Che Guevara fan who thinks keeping one's hair combed is
an artifact of bourgeois oppression. |
|
| |
At least he's honest about his idiology I guess. Hillary is a
pure corruptocrat who wears here Che Guevara shirt on
her way to those backroom deals that here and hubby
specialize in. "Hey! I will never take millions of dollars
from corporations to do their bidding!" said no Clinton
ever. |
|
| |
Or should I say, HIllary WAS a pure corruptocrat. One can
only hope. |
|
| |
//Not directly observed; inferred from indirect historical
data. Direct observations start in the mid-18th century;
accurate, calibrated observations start in the late 19th
century.// |
|
| |
Herein lies a major issue. Both the coverage, in terms of
sampling locations, and the sampling frequency have
changed over time. Dramatically. If you take temperature
readings more often in more places you have a better
idea of the real picture but you will drastically increase
your chances of a very high (or low) reading. It's
interesting that many studies show changes in the number
of temperature ANOMALIES. |
|
| |
Something as simple as temperature is actually pretty
tough to measure. It's quite obvious that it is a series of
nested oscillations, yet there's no talk of Nyquist sampling
frequencies or use of appropriate techniques to account
for problems. |
|
| |
Even the "raw" data (I'm thinking of those 2011 met office
files I remember having a look at) for surface
temperature is lumped together as monthly "averages" +/-
SD. Is that appropriate? Without the real raw data, I have
no idea. But I know how a couple of 20C days like we had
in december 2015 produces skewed data and a misleading
average to the point where you'd definitely want to get
serious about your data handling. There are other really
scary techniques in play, the metoffice data substitutes
missing data with "-99". A tired grad student is definitely
going to include the odd one of those once in a while, I've
watched it happen. The correct thing is to represent
missing data with something that can't influence the
result, NaN for example. This is going to be important
when there is a clear trend for more missing data the
further back you go. |
|
| |
//Assume 1 ml over a 2 m2 area// |
|
| |
I think the "California King" will mess this right up |
|
| |
You say 'communism' like its some sort of a bad
thing... ;-) |
|
| |
Bernie proposes radical ideas in order to get
people thinking differently or at least thinking.
He's my honorary political halfbaker. There have
to be some benefits to doing that somewhere... if
I stick around here long enough I might discover
them... just around the next corner... |
|
| |
FDR was sloppy and disorganized in his
management of organizations. He had all sorts of
competing agencies stomping all over eachother,
and the military brass hated him for it. |
|
| |
That sounds just like the sort of "multiply, divide, and conquer"
that Hitler used within the administration of the Third Reich … |
|
| |
I don't see how saying free healthcare or free college is
revolutionary other than in the communist sense of the
word :) |
|
| |
It's just the other side of the enticing, but fundamentally
flawed populist coin |
|
| |
// free healthcare or free college is revolutionary // |
|
| |
But they aren't "free", nor can they ever be so. |
|
| |
They require resources. Those resources have to be provided
through human activity. Doctors and teachers need food; either
they are provided with it, or they stop teaching and doctoring
and grow or hunt their own - otherwise they die. |
|
| |
Nothing is ever "free". A state only has money because it takes it
from the citizens - or it borrows it. |
|
| |
There is no free healthcare. There is no free college. There is no
free lunch … |
|
| |
Everything costs. Maybe not in monetary terms, but everythinbg
costs. Get over it. |
|
| |
//other than in the communist sense// No it's not. It's the
central, "I care about my nation,
therefore I care about the future of my nation (and by
extension am willing to pay tax)" position. |
|
| |
If you want communism, you need to make the state
responsible for a great deal more than that - like
infrastructure (roads and bridges, as well as walls)
deciding what's real or fake news, declaring which
countries you're happy accepting people from or not,
encouraging organised gangs of nationalist thugs - you
know, all that authoritarian stuff. |
|
| |
Establishing communism (or any other kind of
totalitarianism) without some degree of violent
authoritarianism as a precursor is next to impossible. |
|
| |
In contrast, the Open Democracy certainly annoys a great
deal of people, nearly all the time - (often only because
it's so damnably confusing having frivolous stuff like deciding which
toilets some people can go into, or how to spell Kwanza, or how exactly to
rename each European institution such that it doesn't contain the word
"Europe" in it any more, at massive public cost, because "sovereignty" come
up all the time) and apart from
the very obvious prop of overwhelming military
dominance over the rest of the world, it rarely does any
of its own citizens any actual harm. |
|
| |
… apart from unarmed black teenagers, where it seems to be
open season with no bag limit … |
|
| |
//Nothing is ever "free". A state only has money
because it takes it from the citizens - or it
borrows it.
There is no free healthcare. There is no free
college. There is no free lunch …
Everything costs. Maybe not in monetary
terms, but everything costs. Get over it.// |
|
| |
With all due respect sir, this is third-grade
material. Everybody gets it. Maybe not everyone
in the current Administration as their third grade
graduation papers seem to be of questionable
origin, but do try talking to your audience at their
level. |
|
| |
//unarmed black teenagers, where it seems to be open
season// Hmm yes, I think I'm going to have to play my
American Exceptionalism Joker on that one. Left or Right,
Authoritarian or Liberal, some historical things are so
broken, they're going to take some serious actual non-
partisan fixing. |
|
| |
if everybody got it, they wouldn't be getting so slim in
Venezuela. |
|
| |
There's a lot to be said for free college -- if I'm going to have
my kids indoctrinated in hating capitalism, I might as well
save some money rather than spend $240K paying communist
professors for whom other people's money is no object :) |
|
| |
Let's all take a break from all the politics and have a little
musical interlude. |
|
| |
(Sung to the tune of YMCA by the Village People) |
|
| |
Comrade, pick up your shovel and hoe,
I said, comrade, go harvest potatoes,
I said, comrade, I don’t care if there’s snow
we will build, for, glo-ry of motherland. |
|
| |
Comrade, you must do as you’re told
I said, comrade, or you’re going to be cold.
You must stay here, besides I'm sure you will find
many ways to have you a good time. |
|
| |
It's fun to stay at the U.S.S.R.
It's fun to stay at the U.S.S.R. |
|
| |
And if you complain, not enough to do,
there's a gulag waiting for you. |
|
| |
It's fun to stay at the U.S.S.R.
It's fun to stay at the U.S.S.R. |
|
| |
We give you things to clean, you eat your bear meat,
but don’t do whatever you feel... |
|
| |
Comrade, steel production is down.
I said comrade, wait in bread line in town
and dear comrade.
Don't you dare complain or you'll end..up...six... feet
under the ground. |
|
| |
(BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG! BANG!) |
|
| |
It's fun to live in the USSR |
|
| |
// this is third-grade material. Everybody gets it. // |
|
| |
Not everybody. We are assuming that, here and there among the illuminati, there are Democratic voters, socialists, senior managers, and [xenzag]. |
|
| |
So it has to be pitched at a very, very basic level ... |
|
| |
//pitched at a very, very basic level// |
|
| |
a good length medium seamer just outside off would
probably be the most basic. |
|
| |
Even that would defeat [xen], since (amongst their innumerable other deficiencies) the french are notorious for being completely unable to play cricket. |
|
| |
This partially accounts for their deplorably poor showing in most* contests with the English since 1415. |
|
| |
*Apart from the loss of Calais, which was the fault of Mary Tudor, who was not only a catholic but a woman** too, so no surprise she mucked it up. |
|
| |
**Elizabeth Tudor was mostly a woman, but fortunately had the heart and stomach of a King (presumably some form of early organ transplant) and more importantly was a Protestant. |
|
| |
Like the ones in China, and the former USSR ? |
|
| |
The opportunity to vote, and democracy, are not the same thing. |
|
| |
After all, how often does an election - even in a western populist democracy - deliver what the electorate actually want ? |
|
| |
They have "elections" in North Korea too. |
|
| |
“Ankh-Morpork had dallied with many forms of government and had ended up with that form of democracy known as One Man, One Vote. The Patrician was the Man; he had the Vote.” - Terry Pratchett, Mort. |
|
| |
Kim's election is bigger than Dorald's. |
|
| |
It's not how big it is, it's what you do with it (allegedly). |
|
| |
We have "elections" here too. Maybe someday the
popular vote and the ruling party will align,
gerrymandering will be a thing of the past, and my
voice will matter as much as Rebekah Mercer's.
Maybe. |
|
| |
There was a lot of talk after this last election about
getting
rid of the electoral college. Problem with that, why
would
citizens of say, Wyoming, want to remain in a country
where
their citizens have no representation? Just trust highly
populated California
and New York to do everything in the best interest of
citizens of Wyoming? |
|
| |
"In other news, New York and California have solved the
garbage crisis. Wyoming will now be designated "The
Garbage State". Representatives of both the ruling states
celebrated the compromise between California dealing
with its own garbage and New York dealing with its own
garbage." Representatives of Wyoming couldn't be
reached because there aren't any." |
|
| |
But fine, as a supporter of state's rights, I like the idea of
the rest of the states telling California and New York
"Good
luck with your retarded new president, just don't come
around telling us what to do." |
|
| |
But let's face it, if the electoral college were eliminated,
the first time the Democrats lost an election they would
have won with the old system they'd be rioting in the
streets to get it back. |
|
| |
Gotta love those adorable little imps. |
|
| |
You can substitute many a word for your use of "Democrats" - choose any that is used to describe a group. |
|
| |
I briefly pondered inviting all the people in Wyoming to join us in California - probably wouldn't be noticed in the crowd. But that's how the parking problem began, and there's all those big trucks. |
|
| |
//You can substitute many a word for your use of
"Democrats" - choose any that is used to describe a
group.// |
|
| |
Rather than just doing what the humor manual says and
listing a bunch of plural pejoratives, I'll just say that I'm
probably jealous of these guys. It must be comforting for
them to
have a group to belong to that they think is 100% pure
virtue, right about everything all the time without fail
and has a comic book style nemesis in the Republicans
that are 100% wrong about everything all the time and
are pure evil. |
|
| |
I would love that. Simple, comforting, even kind of fun.
But then again, I'd love to believe in a guy in the clouds
with a beard and sandals who loves me and will
eventually punish people who piss me off if I put a buck
in the collection plate and say the right incantations. |
|
| |
So I don't have religion or the flip side of that coin, belief
in Karl Marx's people's revolution which are basically the
same salves with slightly different ingredients. I don't get
to pick what I believe, but since I have no choice in the
matter anyway, I think I kind of like it
out here in the cold reality of the non-believer. Keeps me
on my toes. |
|
| |
And as you point out, yes, they're not the first, only or
last group to have these traits. This has been a big part of
the
human story for a long time. |
|
| |
//Formal logic is a mathematical entity of itself, detached from and independent of humans.// [8th of 7].... ha - invented by humans or did aliens come and carve it into the rocks? People used to operate perfect logic to prove that the earth was flat and the sun revolved around it. All explanations of everything are in the minds of the people who generate them, and in the minds of the people who believe them. Change your mind and think it a different way and your thoughts will also change, and somehow the entire universe will be seen as working in a different way to that which it previously did. See Einstein as an example. (until one of my fellow countrymen proved even he was wrong) |
|
| |
//People used to operate perfect logic to prove that the earth was
flat// |
|
| |
No they didn't. See Koestler's The Sleepwalkers for a better
summary of what people used to believe about this sort of thing,
and why. |
|
| |
//invented by humans//
I think deduced would be a
better word in the circumstances |
|
| |
gerrymandering is bad, very glad the Court has been at least
chipping away at it. |
|
| |
Electoral college is necessary for the US (and the
disproportionate Senate, as well). As is we're barely held
together now, make every election about NY and California
and the centripetal forces might overwhelm. |
|
| |
It's like a house built in an earthquake zone, it has to have
all sorts of gives along all sorts of axis to maintain structural
integrity. |
|
| |
In any case, all the mechanisms put in by the founders to
slow down the rate of change are on balance a blessing. |
|
| |
//I think deduced would be a better word in the circumstances// That the sun revolved around the earth was equally once deduced by human thought, based on what was their prevailing logic at that time. The point I am making is that there are simply no absolutes, as everything arises from human thought and that constantly evolves. New ways of thinking brings new thoughts. Absolutes create Hitlers, Trumps, and Popes. |
|
| |
the truth is almost exactly the opposite -- it's fungibility and
relativism that allowed for Nazism, for Eugenics, and for many
of the evils of the 20th century. |
|
| |
Religion thrives on absolutes to be sure, but Religion lacks the
proof structures of science, so it's evils (e.g. the burning of
heretics) really arrive out of reliance on faith rather than
logic. |
|
| |
// People used to operate perfect logic to prove that the earth was flat and the sun revolved around it // |
|
| |
No. That is not formal mathematical logic. That is deductive reasoning, which is subjective. |
|
| |
The critical part is to exclude any subjective (human) influence from the process. Formal mathematical logic, for a given set of inputs, can only ever arrive at one output. |
|
| |
// The point I am making is that there are simply no absolutes, as everything arises from human thought and that constantly evolves. // |
|
| |
Once codified, formal logic does not evolve or change. A NAND gate is always a NAND gate. |
|
| |
The interpretation of the meaning of the result, by humans, can change, but the logic of the system is invariant. |
|
| |
There are lots of absolutes; humans often choose to ignore such "inconvenient truths". |
|
| |
Nazism and Trump's version of fascism has a defendable
'logic' based on what is described as factual information.
Trump simply has a set of alternative facts, that include
(inter alia) denial of global warming. Plenty of posters here
(like Max and 8th of 7) have openly declared their belief in
what Trump says about global warming, regardless of
scientific evidence to the opposite. This all confirms my
assertion that changing the way you think will change that
which you think about, and each will construct their
version of reality around their beliefs, and these beliefs
arise from their thoughts. Think differently and you'll have
different beliefs accordingly. |
|
| |
I'm fairly comfortable MB and the Borg's views on global
warming (as do mine) predate Trump's entry into the political
arena |
|
| |
alternative facts are surely not absolutes though. |
|
| |
I thought Trump's opinion was that it's all a Chinese hoax? |
|
| |
I don't see anyone claiming that in this thread. |
|
| |
//Nazism and Trump's version of fascism// |
|
| |
It just occurred to me, these Trump / Hitler comparisons
are the Most Special Generation's attempt to play tough
like their predecessors, the generation that actually stood
up to the actual Hitler and defeated him. |
|
| |
Xen, you and your group of progressives would have
folded under Hitler's attacks at the drop of the first
leaflet. Not bomb, leaflet. The first time an HE111
dropped printed propaganda over London demanding
capitulation
you and your kind would be in the streets demanding that
Parliament
comply. |
|
| |
By saying Trump is Hitler or worse, you're playing
"defender of the Earth" for the exciting feeling it
generates when most of you can't manage
your own lives much less the planet. |
|
| |
So, despite overwhelming scientific evidence, you choose to agree with Trump, Max and 8th of 7, that global man made global warming is a hoax. This totally proves my point that ultimately human beings will choose to believe exactly what they want, and will use systems they describe as establishing and embracing absolutes to support those beliefs. Alternative facts are now in the driving seat, just as they are with all religions and extreme organisations like Trump, ISIS, Taliban, Sinn Fein, etc. |
|
| |
Bush was Hitler. Romney came close, until it turned out he
was the guy that inconveniently figured out Russia while
Obama was flexing his flexibility. |
|
| |
Were there people that were saying Obama was worse than
Stalin? I missed that. |
|
| |
The inconvenient truth is that presuming the predictions are
correct the proposed fixes don't make sense and don't make
a difference. The refusal to hear that is just one of the
aspects that makes Climate Change a religion |
|
| |
I think people who compare Trump to Hitler are foaming
at
the mouth morons with inadequate facilities to weigh the
complexities of the modern world and assimilate and
process the information necessary to come up with the
best
course of action on any given situation facing civilization. |
|
| |
How come you're anti nuclear power, something that
would do more than anything else to reduce carbon
emissions? Because you've been told to be anti nuclear
power. |
|
| |
//Xen, you and your group of progressives would have folded under Hitler's attacks at the drop of the first leaflet.// You know nothing about me or what my family did to face down Hitler and the likes of Sinn Fein terrorists. What I can assure you is that I will join many millions of others in the UK in protesting at any visit of the Trump Fascist, and he will know very clearly that his rotten politics of hatred, racism and abuse of women are not welcome here. |
|
| |
//You know nothing about me or what my family did to
face down Hitler// |
|
| |
Not your family. You. I'm sure you will bravely pretend
you're some kind of warrior by walking around holding a
stupid sign pretending to be as brave as the men who
stormed the beaches of Normandy. |
|
| |
I'll give you time to check with your thought-masters
about why you're anti nuclear power. |
|
| |
Or you can just avoid the question and get back to Trump
breaking into your house and peeing on your sheets,
which
I think is the level of debate you're most comfortable
with. |
|
| |
no it's not just hive mind and ignorance. It's obscenity -- to
verify that, just walk into the shoes room at Yad Vashem. |
|
| |
// you choose to agree with Trump, Max and 8th of 7, that global man made global warming is a hoax // |
|
| |
We did not state that global warming is a hoax; indeed, we have repeatedly stated that global warming is a reality -but so is global cooling. Both have happened on a massive scale - we presume you do not dispute the fact of the last Ice Age, or the current measurable crustal rebound ? This has occurred while modern man has been extant. |
|
| |
Both are observed phenomena. |
|
| |
Is the current warming trend anthropogenic ? |
|
| |
Possibly. What are the facts ? Where is the data ? How is it validated ? What are the models ? What assumptions are involved ? |
|
| |
We are not swayed by opinion, or emotive arguments. Only by reliable, validated data, and a resilient predictive model. |
|
| |
Please supply a link to same, if you have one. |
|
| |
[doctorremulac3] Stop using the Halfbakery to make personal attacks, and learn to stick to the actual issues, or you'll find yourself with a smaller and smaller audience. It's very boring and indicative of underlying unhappiness and a lack of creativity. I can give anyone who wants some exercises to help with both of these conditions if they ask politely. Smile please is the first one :-) |
|
| |
//no it's not just hive mind and ignorance. It's
obscenity -- to verify that, just walk into the shoes room
at Yad Vashem.// |
|
| |
You know, I've very glad you mentioned that. |
|
| |
For anybody to take this, the human tragedy of human
tragedies and make sport of it is disgusting. |
|
| |
Trump had an affair with a porn star. = Separating the
weak from the strong as they got off the box cars so the
strong would be worked before being murdered. |
|
| |
Trump tweeted "Covfefe" = Separating young children
from their parents so both could be murdered more
efficiently. |
|
| |
I was going to go on but thinking about this stuff is pretty
depressing. I'll do my best to make sure it doesn't happen
again in whatever way I can in my limited capacity to
stop such things, but today I'll just tell those who
downplay
this horror by using it for some lame comparison to
somebody they disagree with is truly disgusting. |
|
| |
//Stop using the Halfbakery to make personal attacks// |
|
| |
Like accusing people of rolling around in "freshly peed
sheets"? Like accusing those who disagree with you of
being unhappy and un-creative? |
|
| |
Still no thoughts on the concept of using nuclear power to
help clean up the environment eh? We'll call that strike
three. I've asked you 3 times and you have no clue
because your handlers haven't instructed you in the duck
speak answer you're supposed to repeat. |
|
| |
I'm surprised anyone's still engaging [xen] at this
point. |
|
| |
I for one don't believe in the equality of Trump to
Hitler, but I do believe in the slippery slope. It
goes something like this: Presidency >> Trump >>
Hitler. |
|
| |
The Presidency under Trump has been disgraced
to the point of absurdity, and trust in our country
eroded to a degree in which it will be difficult to
recover from soon. |
|
| |
Ultimately your credibility is just about all you
have, and he has severely maimed ours. |
|
| |
I agree that Trump has a lot of pretty bad traits, but if I
was on the side of the Democrats, I'd be looking at the
underlying problem that brought him to office which is
how horrible Hillary Clinton was. |
|
| |
I'd go back, regroup and say "What was wrong with our
candidate that a reality tv star who has never held public
office, a total amateur politician, destroyed her in the
election?" Trump's campaign slogan could have simply
been "I'm Not Hillary". |
|
| |
Wasting time trying to throw him out of office is still
going to
leave the Dems with a gaping hole in their roster for
upcoming elections. Go back, regroup and think this out.
The revolution isn't going to happen. Get over it and try
something else. |
|
| |
That's what I'd do anyway. I don't have a problem with
having a Dem president as long as he does a good job. Bill
did a lot of good stuff, worked with the Republican
congress to balance the budget, ran on a welfare reform
platform etc. but now he'd be considered a racist that's
worse than Hitler. Might want to analyze that for a sec. |
|
| |
That's a good thing; the more representative democracy is ridiculed and undermined, the closer society moves to starting to want continuous semi-direct democracy. |
|
| |
Soon, the point will be reached where no-one can sustain a career in "public life" because they cannot withstand the constant unremitting scrutiny. |
|
| |
// I'm surprised anyone's still engaging [xen] at this point. // |
|
| |
By predicted fire at the moment, but we are closing the range and intend to go to fire-for-effect over open sights quite soon. |
|
| |
If America didn't have the capacity to destroy the whole planet either through starting a nuclear war, or with its unstoppable pollution, no one would care what kind of fascist lunatic they elected as a leader. Unfortunately the entire world is beholding to the tantrums and ill-informed baby mode of a total moron as the leader of what is currently its strongest power, at least until China overtakes them, which is in the very near future, assisted and accelerated ironically by Trump's own idiocy. |
|
| |
Meanwhile, this whole idea is based on the election of wiser heads to replace the current fruit-cake, and I would have no problem replacing "pee on my bed ladies" Trump (MI5 spy info) by voting for Donald Duck, or any other lovable cartoon character. Those who define themselves with arrogance, intolerance, ignorance, hatred, racism, misogyny, and lack of empathy are to be feared and loathed. And so mr [doctorremulac3] I award you this croissant for having an idea with which I agree. Why vote for Donald Trump when you could choose to vote for Donald Duck? ha [+] |
|
| |
I'd vote for that Donald over Hillary too. |
|
| |
Ok, Xen, we disagree but I don't hate you. Have a nice
day
and we'll all hope that things work out for the best. |
|
| |
Now I've got to get some work done today. |
|
| |
Tell you what. You give me a candidate that'll pay me
just for sitting
here and looking pretty and they'll have my vote. |
|
| |
[Ray] the slippery slope argument is appropriate. The
singular
non-stop attacks -- which in part (and please -- I do not at
all
excuse it) have driven Trump's responses -- are something
quite
concerning though. |
|
| |
The press absolutely has a role, but questioning mental
fitness --
of someone who is by no means up to the presidency -- but
is also
certainly not certifiable -- is absolutely out of the Soviet
playbook. |
|
| |
The Russia is the enemy narrative (which I tend to agree
with) --
is so out of character to how the Democratic party
positioned
itself previously -- is so convenient as to become completely
unbelievable. I mean Romney should have been President if
properly handling Russia was the country's largest concern --
CNN practically handles no other topic since the election.
Imagine that Trump is blackmailed by Russia -- really bad.
An
agent of Russia? Even worse. |
|
| |
Now, imagine a political party accusing an opponent of
being an
agent of a foreign government simply because they want to
make
their program less effective? Plenty disturbing, and I think
still
plenty possible. |
|
| |
And [xenzag] that prediction will almost certainly fail if the US grows at 4%, even if China
keeps building cities that no one lives in. Ultimately you cannot substitute state control for
animal spirits, and if Trump has done one thing, he has unleashed animal spirits to a level
not observed in a generation. |
|
| |
"According to a PwC study, the Chinese economy will overtake the U.S. economy by 2030 by about $26.5 trillion to $23.5 trillion.
But on the measure of "purchasing power," China has already surpassed the U.S., Blankfein said." |
|
| |
China has 1.5 billion citizens, and is totally unstoppable in terms of aggressive growth in every sphere of industry and production. All global leaders eventually go into decline. Under Trump America's decline is accelerating and China is taking the initiative in new progressive industries, like renewables and sustainable energy production. America will be stuck with The Trump Moron's "clean coal", as the rest of the world are buying smart Chinese solar panels. |
|
| |
I declare this thread has covered everything and with your
agreement I’m printing and binding it for my local sixth
form college library, to replace all other reference
materials |
|
| |
// smart Chinese solar panels. // |
|
| |
Are these the 2% efficient photovoltaics that require huge semiconductor fab plants consuming huge amounts of energy and producing vast quantities of toxic waste products, plus a huge petrochemical industry to provide the plastics for packaging and the feedstocks for the fab plants ? |
|
| |
And lots of copper, of course, electrolytically refined ... very environmentally-friendly. |
|
| |
So the US declines, and China ascends. Is this a bad thing ? China, a self-perpetuating autocracy, is outperforming a populist representative democracy. In 1945, China was backward, bankrupt, desperately poor and undeveloped. Now it is a technological powerhouse (allegedly). |
|
| |
What's wrong with that ? Why not ? Is there some problem with rapid economic growth ? |
|
| |
[xenzag] plz be a troll as long as you'd like, but don't be an
idiot. The American economy is growing at a faster rate
since the election, and that trend does not show any
stopping. Trump's solar panel action is a pimple on a dog's
ass as compared to the rate of growth for American
companies overall. And we haven't even fully internalized
the tax cuts. |
|
| |
You can safely assume I'm more attuned to economic
forecasts including the one you mentioned than anyone else
here. |
|
| |
China is certainly giving the Us a run for its money, which
was enabled to a large extent by the anemic recovery of the
previous administration, but the Chinese are buying
everything they can to hold their money outside of China,
from real estate to cryptocurrency. Ultimately, China would
be a threat when they are able to fully liberalize their
economy -- which the Communist Party is not prepared to
do -- AND when people like me are interested in living in
China, as opposed to Chinese people being interested to live
in Palo Alto. While there's more of that now than ever,
there's simply no comparison, all immigration bogeymen
non-withstanding. |
|
| |
My father would sit me down and read Kipling to me when I
was a kid. He'd then "translate" it for me and prompt me to
give my thoughts and ask questions about the subject of the
piece. |
|
| |
... and the little Blue Devil replied ... |
|
| |
You're asking a lot, you know .... |
|
| |
I ask from each according to their abilities, and give to each
according to their needs :) |
|
| |
In that case, you need to seriously lower your expectations when asking for stuff. |
|
| |
Q; What's the difference between a chickpea and a lentil?
A: Trump would never pay two hundred bucks to have a lentil on his bed. |
|
| |
You know, something interesting about the chick peeing
on a bed for money story, that did come out of
somebody's imagination, that is an undeniable fact. |
|
| |
I believe the story was Trump found out Obama slept in a
particular bed and being the stupidest billionaire in
history decided it would be a good idea to pay prostitutes
to urinate on an inanimate object for some reason. The
story's been pretty
well debunked but that doesn't mean it didn't some out of
somebody's sick imagination. |
|
| |
I hope we get to meet that person someday. |
|
| |
//The Russia is the enemy narrative (which I tend to
agree with) -- is so out of character to how the
Democratic party positioned itself previously -- is so
convenient as to become completely unbelievable.
// |
|
| |
How so? Putin is running a known kleptocracy who
is looking to grab whatever he can, and I can't think
of a credible Democrat in office that thinks
otherwise. |
|
| |
Trump is not an agent, he's an easily-manipulated
fool in the hands of any leader who can push his
buttons. Still dangerous. And yes, I doubt his sanity
would pass a
more stringent test consisting of something to the
effect of "do you believe x nutty conspiracy theory." |
|
| |
//he's an easily-manipulated fool in the hands of any
leader who can push his buttons// |
|
| |
Don't know if you've been keeping up with the news, but
they've abandoned the Trump collusion lie. The
investigation is entirely about obstruction at this point
hinging on him firing Comey. That's not going anywhere
yet either. When the progressive media even mentions
the collusion farce, they refer to "Whitehouse collusion"
since there's clearly no evidence of Trump doing anything
so they're quietly trying to make it look like it was his
associates being investigated all along. But even that's
faded into the sunset as they were now investigating
obstruction all along. Next will be his taxes, and they will
have been investigating THAT all along. |
|
| |
But worse for the Democrats is what's coming to light
about a possible the conspiracy within the FBI to overturn
the election. Secret meetings the day after the elections
to figure out how to pull some kind of coup d'etat, more
emails being scrubbed, lots of very serious criminal stuff
going on. Real banana republic nonsense. "We don't like
the election so we're going to install our own guy." |
|
| |
Here's my attitude about serious accusations like the one
against Trump and now the FBI. A grave injustice has
occurred, either due to criminal activity by the accused
OR by criminally false accusations from the accusers. |
|
| |
I think we can all hope that the truth comes to light in all
these cases and the perpetrators get punished, whoever
they may be. |
|
| |
//based on what was their prevailing logic at that time// |
|
| |
No, based on the available *data* at the time. It took a long time
to accumulate enough data, of sufficient quality, to make it
obvious that a heliocentric model fitted that data much better
than a geocentric one. Flat earth was abandoned long before
geocentric cosmos, because it was much easier to get the
relevant data. The *logic* applied to that data barely changed
from Aristotle's time, until you get to Hegel. |
|
| |
Of course, familiar narratives and starting assumptions changed
a lot. But narratives aren't logic, and assumptions aren't logic. |
|
| |
// I'm more attuned to economic forecasts // |
|
| |
OK, [their] - how would you account for the recent fall in the USD?
I'm not being snarky - the fall took me by surprise - I'm just
wondering whether (a) you were expecting it and/or (b) you have
a theory about it? |
|
| |
It's been an unspoken truth that to improve the balance of
trade, the strong dollar policy is a fig leaf, and, for the first
time in a generation, mnuchin has admitted as much in
that interview. |
|
| |
What they want is a weaker than it's been, but steady
dollar. Any talk of moving off the dollar as a reserve is not
serious |
|
| |
As to momentary shifts regardless of tax policy or
economic performance, it's useful to remember that the
market can remain irrational longer than you can remain
liquid :) |
|
| |
Any talk of war in 1925 wasn’t really serious, either. |
|
| |
You don't have to convince me that there are tons of
similarities to pre WWI situation, more so than 2. |
|
| |
Trump is more of a symptom than a cause though. Can
blame him for lots of things, but not for the breakdowns
that caused him to emerge |
|
| |
Well, to answer the question "How did this guy get
into office?", something that surprised the hell out
of me, there's one thing all sides can, or at least
should
agree on. His election wasn't just a slap in
the face of the Democrats, it was a protest vote
against the "go along to get along" Republican
establishment. |
|
| |
There are those of us out there that don't like
either party in their present forms. His getting
elected
was a revolution. People were very angry, and not
all
angry
people riot in the streets. Some riot at the polls. |
|
| |
Voting for Trump was a protest against the
ruling
elites. Remember the scene in Life Of Brian? Reminds me
of that a little bit. (see link) |
|
| |
Maybe its just reaction but I get a little sideways at
the phrase 'ruling elites.' 'Elite' is what people
ascribe to be if they're any good. If they're not then
that's their own fault. Trying to upset the billionaire
class by voting for a billionaire, even a classless
ousted one like Trump seems a little too silly and
convenient. But then again, convincing idiots to vote
against their own self-interest is what Republicans
do best. |
|
| |
Odds are there Dems will loose if they position the next
election cycle on the are you better off question. Explain
how open borders is for self interest in the case of blue
collar workers |
|
| |
//But then again, convincing idiots to vote against their
own self-interest is what Republicans do best.// |
|
| |
Any numbers to back up your assertion that Republican
voters are not as smart as Democrat voters?
I know Democrats are very into giving felons the right to
vote because felons overwhelmingly vote Democrat. (see
link) |
|
| |
But hey, if it's true that you guys are smarter than the
Republicans, love to see the numbers. I know there are
certainly a lot of dummies on both sides. |
|
| |
//Explain how open borders is for self interest in the case
of blue collar workers// |
|
| |
It's not. Dems work off identity politics. If you're a person
of color, blue collar union worker etc, your vote is
considered a forgone conclusion so you're supposed shut
up and do as you're told. |
|
| |
The importation of cheap labor to suppress wages is
something the millionaire and billionaire Democrat ruling
elites have on their three point plan for America: 1)
Eliminate the two party system and establish one party
rule. 2) Get more money and more power. 3) Destroy the
middle class and establish a two tiered society, ruling
elites at the top. obedient ruled class at the bottom with
a nice comfortable gulf in between. |
|
| |
And getting idiots to vote for this is their specialty. |
|
| |
That was not my assertion. |
|
| |
My assertion was that Republicans convince voters to vote
against their own interests. This is why they cling to
“values voters.” |
|
| |
Eliminating deductions for the working class, making
retirement savings harder, eliminating consumer
protections, defending the redefinition of the estate tax to
a “death tax,” etc. |
|
| |
Isn’t it about time for another ‘two-minutes hate Clinton
speech’ again? |
|
| |
Well, we can't all be as tolerant and kind towards those we
disagree with as those who disagree with Trump. |
|
| |
The two minute hate was a mandatory profession of
allegiance towards Big Brother as indicated by one's
participation in the ceremonial expression of hatred towards
the enemy. I just think Hillary is a scumbag. |
|
| |
There is a place for tolerance, and there is a place
for hardnosed action. You're just now seeing it as a
backlash against the nonsense promoted by the tea
party and the Republicans who have spewed less-
than-civil breitbart b.s.for years. |
|
| |
Don't try and tell me there's no parallel between the
continual focus on Hillary over a year after the
election by certain media outlets and 1984. I don’t
buy it. |
|
| |
And Republicans also work off of identity politics.
They just target a different market. Hence their
success at gerrymandering North Carolina and
Pennsylvania into absurdity. I was their target
market for a long time. |
|
| |
Oh, good. Well, let me know how your little revolution
works out. |
|
| |
(At least I didn’t use the “Who’s we? You got a turd in your
pocket?” line. I’m getting better.) ;) |
|
| |
But seriously, I’m not gonna defend the Republicans. I hate
them too. Individual issues that I care about? I’m yu
huckleberry. The battle to see which political party is pure
good and which is pure evil? Fun sometimes, but does get a
little dull. |
|
| |
//Not your family. You. // |
|
| |
Err, [DrRem], I think you overlooked the decades-long conflict that
played out where [xen] lives during his lifetime. Low-intensity, but
quite dirty. I think much of what [xen] said in this thread is wrong,
but I don't share your belief that he's a coward, and I think you
owe him an apology on that score. |
|
| |
//I think you overlooked the decades-long conflict that
played out where [xen] lives during his lifetime// |
|
| |
If by "overlooked" you mean "I have no idea what you're
talking about." well, yes. Most definitely. |
|
| |
I grew up in the ghetto, East Palo Alto, murder capital of
the world 1992. Had to have balls just to walk home from
school. Where's my medal? |
|
| |
Hmm. Wonder if that had any affect on my sparkling
personality. :) |
|
| |
Anyway, wadda ya say folks, I think this thread is pretty
well played out. Everybody take our bows and go home? |
|
| |
Who's in the mood for smores! |
|
| |
I like mine just browned enough to peel. |
|
| |
Here's your medal. Eat it before it melts. ;-) |
|
| |
I know I've been trying to let this thread die because it
was getting a bit redundant, so at the risk of opening
another Hillary vs Trump supporter tennis match: |
|
| |
I just realized that a hero of mine, George Orwell, may
be
the only philosopher cited as an inspiration by both left
wing and right wing folks. So to put a bow on this one,
here's a quote from the one
guy we all agree is awesome: |
|
| |
"To admit that an opponent might be both honest and
intelligent is felt to be intolerable. It is more immediately
satisfying to shout that he is a fool or a scoundrel, or
both, than to find out what he is really like." |
|
| |
I read this and had to let it sink in a little bit. |
|
| |
Heavy stuff George, you da man. Respect. |
|
| |
However you might have come up with an interesting title
for a follow up tome to Animal Farm. Talk about how
governments are trying to raise increasingly
ignorant, vegetable like voters that are easily manipulated
and controlled. |
|
| |
Interesting title for that concept. |
|
| |
Rumours leeked out that it was expected to be corny, and the publishers dropped it like a hot potato. In fact, it was barley intelligible to most readers, though the ones who knew their onions stuck with it, and in thyme the sages came to appreciate its greatness. |
|
| |
// than to find out what he is really like. // |
|
| |
The paradox is that it's quite difficult to really hate someone or something unless you know a lot about it. Having a "War on Terror" is easy enough, because most people have a vague feeling that terror is a bad thing, but it's hard to get enthused about - for exampe - "militant islamists", whereas it's much easier to hate Kassim who works in the local convenience store because you see him several times a week. |
|
| |
That's why civil wars are almost* invariably far more cruel, vicious and merciless than conflicts betweem nation-states. |
|
| |
*The exception being, of course, the Swedish Civil War of 1977-78, but since the Swedes are a generally peaceable and nonviolent** people, the conflict took the form of not saying "Good Morning !" quite as cheerfully as usual, sometimes failing to wipe one's shoes on the doormat when entering a building, and occasionally dropping very small amounts of biodegradable litter, such as orange peel.
No-one outside Sweden actually noticed it was happening until it was all over. |
|
| |
**Except for ice hockey, which is recognized not as a sport but as a form of warfare, though lacking the benefit of the Geneva and Hague Conventions, or any human emotion other than an overwhelming, primitive impulse to beat the filthy vermin of the opposing team into humanberry jam, using whatever implements are to hand. |
|
| |
//the conflict took the form of not saying "Good Morning
!"// |
|
| |
There was at least one recorded atrocity where one of
the combatants, after a particularly heated engagement,
said: "Good DAY sir!" and turned to leave. When the other
gentleman tried to reply he turned back and said: "I said
GOOD DAY!" and walked away without even hearing the
second gentleman out. |
|
| |
All civilizations have episodes in their past they're not
proud of. |
|
| |
//All civilizations have episodes in their past they're not proud of.// Doubtless you're thinking of the Loganberry Uprising in Cruichmuir - your tact in not mentioning it does you credit. |
|
| |
Yes, inevitably one side decided to employ the Nuclear Option. The fallout is still causing damage and injury. |
|
| |
Update: Slogan would be "I like A-Ike!" |
|
| |
Not sure if it's been mentioned, but at least one book claims that Ike had a habit of threatening to use nuclear weapons, quite often, so much so that (I claim) he may have instantiated the arms race. |
|
| |
//Ike had a habit of threatening to use nuclear weapons,// |
|
| |
It's easy to forget how quickly the world was changing at
this point in history. Post WW2, a lot of military brass
considered nukes as big versions of conventional weapons,
or a way to flatten a city with 1 rather than 1000 bombers.
There were all sorts of plans that seem nuts by today's
standards, Operation Ploughshare for example: Don't have a
harbor? Use a line of bombs to nuke one into your coastline. |
|
| |
The number & power of nuclear weapons grew fast. Faster
than all the ancillary knowledge and experience. We didn't
really understand fallout until Kodak started getting
mysterious dots on film straight of the manufacturing line. |
|
| |
Then H-bombs arrived with ~1000x the power. Meanwhile
delivery options multiplied Mach 2 jet bombers, missiles,
missiles on submarines, missiles on nuclear submarines. It
took a further decade before Sagan and pals posited the
whole "Nuclear Winter" doom scenario*. From the
perspective of Ike, nukes were just a really fast & clean
way of ending a war. |
|
| |
*It's well motivated, clearly, but when your theory starts
with "Assuming a homogenous distribution of..." You're
model is likely crap. |
|
| |
I think it absolutely was a very different time,
"Why risk the lives of hundreds of airmen when we
can just take out a city in a few minutes with one
plane?" and
considering that, Ike did pretty good. Here's a bit
from that link that a1 put up: |
|
| |
"AND EISENHOWER'S NO.1 ACCOMPLISHMENT AS
PRESIDENT: |
|
| |
1. He Kept America at Peace. |
|
| |
Eisenhower was confronted with major Cold
War crises every year he was in office: Korea,
Vietnam, Formosa, Suez, Hungary, Berlin, and the
U-2. While more than once America seemed on the
brink of war and those around him clamored to
drop the Bomb, Eisenhower always kept a level
head. He dealt calmly and rationally with each
situation, always finding a solution that avoided
war without diminishing America's prestige." |
|
| |
Sounds like everybody around him was excited
about using this new weapon. Remember, this is
the man who coined the phrase "Military industrial
complex" and warned the citizens about it in his
farewell speech leaving office. I think he was a
pretty strong anti-war
warrior. Understood that the best way to use a
military is deterrence. It could be argued that
nukes have kept WW3 at the 5 minute mark on
that countdown clock for 3/4ths of a century. |
|
| |
I'll put the rest of the article here: |
|
| |
"5. He Sponsored and Signed the Civil Rights
Bill of 1957. |
|
| |
This was the first civil rights bill since
Reconstruction. Much to Eisenhower's dismay,
Congress amended the bill and critically weakened
its effectiveness. |
|
| |
4. He Sponsored and Signed the Federal Aid
Highway Act of 1956. |
|
| |
This gave birth to America's interstate
highway system. Eisenhower worked hard to get
the bill passed and it was his favorite piece of
legislation. |
|
| |
3. He Balanced the Budget, Not Just Once,
But Three Times. |
|
| |
Despite much pressure to do otherwise, he
also refused to cut taxes and raise defense
spending. His fiscal policy contributed to the
prosperity of the 1950's. |
|
| |
2. He Ended the Korean War. |
|
| |
He alone had the prestige to persuade
Americans to accept a negotiated peace and
convince the Chinese that failure to reach an
agreement would lead to dire consequences.
Eisenhower considered this to be his greatest
presidential accomplishment." |
|
| |
//This gave birth to America's interstate highway system.// |
|
| |
And got it built FAST. Meanwhile, Philadelphia is on it's second
decade of trying to sort out a small section of highway heading
north out of the city. |
|
| |
I wonder how we can start electing leaders with actual leadership again instead of the guy on Our Team.(tm) |
|
| |
We're basically tribal. In this example, it's a guy
both the
Democrats and Republicans wanted to be their
presidential candidate. I get the idea that since he
chose Republican, modern Democrats demonize
him. And maybe I'm wrong, but if he did the exact
same things as a Democrat, as the Democrats
wanted him to, he'd be hailed as a hero by them. |
|
| |
Lots of the stuff he did was very pro-union, tax the
rich, stand up to the military industrial complex
after being the one who called it out, all stuff that
the Democrats at one point considered hallmark
Democrat party positions. |
|
| |
I'm sure we're all guilty of it. |
|
| |
To be respectful to the memory of a1, I'll post the
other part of the link he provided: |
|
| |
"IKE'S TOP
5
PRESIDENTIAL FAILURES
(debatedly) |
|
| |
5. He Failed to Improve the Plight of the American
Farmer.
The goal of his farm policy was to get government
out of agriculture and strengthen the family
farmer. He failed at both. |
|
| |
4. He Failed to Moderate the Republican Party.
This was a personal goal of Eisenhower's. He
wanted to reenergize and modernize the
Republican Party, making it less conservative and
more acceptable to mainstream America. His
failure became evident when Republicans
nominated the conservative Barry Goldwater as
their presidential candidate in 1964. |
|
| |
3. He Failed to Provide Leadership in Civil Rights.
One could argue this, and many do. It’s fair to say
Eisenhower was not considered a champion of civil
rights at the beginning of his first term. His
response to the Supreme Court’s 1954 Brown
decision to abolish segregation in public schools
was less than enthusiastic and he failed at first to
speak out against racial violence in the South. But
he went on to desegregate Washington DC, send
the Army into Little Rock to desegregate Central
High School, and sign the 1957 Civil Rights Act.
Perhaps most importantly, he appointed liberal
judges to the southern federal courts who would
be instrumental in upholding the civil rights
legislation of the 60s. Although he certainly failed
at times to demonstrate leadership on civil rights
issues, he grew more supportive of civil rights as
his presidency progressed. |
|
| |
2. He Failed to Denounce Senator Joseph McCarthy.
Had he publicly condemned McCarthy and his
investigations, there would have been much less
damage inflicted on innocent lives and the
country's morale. But Eisenhower believed that to
personally confront McCarthy would demean the
Presidency and give McCarthy exactly what he
craved: more publicity. |
|
| |
AND EISENHOWER'S NO.1 FAILURE AS PRESIDENT: |
|
| |
1. He Failed to Defuse the Cold War.
He certainly tried. And he seemed to be on the
verge of success when the Premier of the Soviet
Union, Nikita Khrushchev, visited the U.S. in 1959
and agreed to a Paris Peace Conference for the
following spring. But then the Soviets shot down
the U-2 spy plane, Khrushchev scuttled the peace
conference, and all hope of deflating the Cold War
ended. When Eisenhower left office, the Cold War
was even more threatening than when he
embarked upon the presidency eight years before." |
|
| |
Thank you a1. Great info, a balanced review of the
subject. I like that. |
|
| |
He should have invented a new type of "floating on an air cushion vehicle" instead of becoming president, then he could have called it the Eisenhovercraft. Alternatively he could have gone for a new vacuum cleaner, in which case we would now have the Eisenhoover. I could add in Eisenhomer Simpson but that's clearly going too far. |
|
| |
I'd vote for Eisenhoover just out of principal. "His
position on things? Who cares? His name is
Eisenhoover." |
|
| |
//But then the Soviets shot down the U-2 spy plane,// |
|
| |
I sympathize with this whole situation. You can see that the
foreign policy of the time hinged on where the Soviets were
in terms of military technology. The Soviets were making
leaps and bounds but it was crucial to get a
clearer idea of the strategic resources in play inside a
secretive regime. Initially Ike worked around the problem
of the US gathering strategic reconnaissance by making the
British do it.
I can't work out why that changed, but Ike was
hankering for another look in the run-up to the Paris
summit and gambled on a couple of US-operated U2 flights.
Getting one knocked out of the sky by a lucky shot from a
brand new SAM was bad luck. |
|
| |
That set back relations. Ike could have resisted and the
situation could have been different in the short term, but
was the situation defusable? At that point I don't think so.
There would have been another incident. Ultimately the
Cold War ended because of decades of obvious economic
failure, in the late 50's/early 60's that situation looked very
different. |
|
| |
I wonder to what extent the CIA pushed for the flights?
They had a clear hunger for information, the U2s were their
toys. They probably hated letting the RAF play with them
and the intel given their knowledge of ongoing Soviet
infiltration into British intelligence. Was this a CIA screw
up? Their screwing-up form was phenomenal at that time,
the Bay of Pigs was around the corner, JFK was livid about
that and even less happy about the intelligence screw-ups
that led to the Cuban missile crisis. JFK probably used some
choice language in the direction of the CIA after that, and
look where that got him. |
|
| |
//gone for a new vacuum cleaner,// |
|
| |
Eisendyson, the bagless president looking for a clean sweep in
the mid-terms! |
|
| |
//I sympathize with this whole situation. You
can see that the foreign policy of the time hinged
on where the Soviets were in terms of military
technology.// |
|
| |
Agreed. I think one of the most interesting things
you can do when looking back at history is ask
yourself "What would I have done GIVEN THE SAME
INFO THEY HAD?". Easy to do the 20/20 hindsight
thing, but they didn't have a crystal ball. |
|
| |
In being honest, I probably would have: |
|
| |
1- Sent troops to Vietnam. It worked in Korea, the
South Koreans live in freedom and prosperity
because of the United Nations actions to expel the
invading North. The North Vietnamese looked like
a carbon copy situation. |
|
| |
2- Invaded Iraq to get rid of Saddam after expelling
him from Kuwait. |
|
| |
3- Probably listened to the CIA's advice on a lot of
other stuff. Bay of Pigs comes to mind. |
|
| |
4- Supported spreading "freedom and democracy"
throughout the Middle East. Sure looked good on
paper. |
|
| |
So did I learn my lesson? That's how I'd like to
apply
having made mistakes in the past. That's one
reason I'm a fan of Ike. Tough but not a warmonger,
smart guy, good balance of diplomacy and
deterrence. As citizens ostensibly in charge of our
government, military and foreign affairs, my
opinion is we all
need to think about this stuff and not expect
politicians to make good decisions on our
behalf. |
|
| |
I'm largely an isolationist now. I support NATO and
strong mutual defense agreements, but civilizing
the world? Not through war. Trade and diplomacy
from a position of strength but I don't trust the
military industrial complex to do anything but
make matter worse anymore. Been burned
too many times. |
|
| |
One last thing, I also would have done the exact
same thing Kennedy did in the Cuban missile crisis
which could quite possibly have resulted in the
death of millions of people through nuclear war. It
didn't, but it very well could have. We were a
hair's breadth away from armageddon. Was that
the right move? Yea, unless it wasn't. |
|
| |
Ya have to admit: if it's true that Eisenhower had a habit of waving nuclear weapons hither and yon, U2 flyovers could take on a particularly pernicious fright-factor. |
|
| |
JFK stated on camera that ICBMs made the Cuban Missile crisis a mere "face-saving device." It's like Putin's claims that any real difference exists between Ukraine and Poland being being in NATO. Provided that Fidel Castro wasn't a complete maniac or Kruschev kept the launch codes... |
|
| |
//1. Sent troops to Vietnam.// |
|
| |
Maybe, probably. But the escalation, and the continuation
once the losses started piling up and studies were
suggesting it was unwinnable? I hope I wouldn't fall into
that. |
|
| |
I hope I'd have learned that fighting a conventional jungle
war with a military set up for a strategic nuclear war wasn't
working out too well. The way to go was to either get out,
or draw down and hold. Develop an increasingly
professional fighting force, use lessons to develop more
appropriate equipment & doctrine. It can last a long time,
but you can't be shipping bodies & flying dumb bomb runs
into SAM traps forever. |
|
| |
//2- Invaded Iraq to get rid of Saddam after expelling him
from Kuwait.// |
|
| |
In '91? We got the best outcome as it was. On paper, it was
already ambitious. Force projecting to the other side of the
world, fighting the 4th biggest military with recent combat
experience, on home soil, with modern kit & training as
well as a coordinated command/control & air defense
system. It should have been difficult, so planning the
limited objective of just kicking them out of Kuwait was
probably wise. Politically, kicking them out of Kuwait
works, but going further requires sensitivity to the times -
this was a Soviet-aligned nation state. Obviously we know
now that it was a basket-case USSR ready to topple, but the
people making the decisions had been factoring the USSR
into their thinking for decades. |
|
| |
Looking back, I'm sure there were stretch-goals coming out
of best-case scenarios to go into Iraq, but you'd have had to
get buy-in from the British, French, Saudis & Egyptians.
That would have taken ages, and the momentum would
have been lost. Had we tried it, I think it would have gone
worse than in 2003, possibly a lot worse. We learned
quickly in Iraq II/Afghanistan that a lot of the kit wasn't
appropriate - again, like Vietnam, we had a lot of kit for
fighting the Soviets in Germany that was vulnerable to the
conditions, be that ambush/insurgency tactics or just sand.
Iraq degraded between '91 & '03 in terms of political
control, military readiness and a bunch of intangibles as a
result of the loss and sanctions etc. I think we might have
had a tougher time. |
|
| |
//3- Probably listened to the CIA's advice on a lot of other
stuff. Bay of Pigs comes to mind.// |
|
| |
Looking over the CIA at this time, they were nuts. It's like
someone formed an agency, gave them practically infinite
budget and let them do unaccountable weird stuff in
secret.. oh. Maybe I'm biased, but MI6's analysis suggested
that Castro was extremely popular. If you have a plan that
relies heavily on a neutral/cooperative populace, that's a
fatal flaw. At this point, MI6 had been around the block a
few times compared to the CIA, there was a lot of
embedded experience, particularly behind the scenes
handling of ex colonial states etc. I think I might have
listened. Although I get the thorn-in-the side type irritation
it must have been. |
|
| |
//4- Supported spreading "freedom and democracy"
throughout the Middle East. Sure looked good on paper.// |
|
| |
Again. Lessons from running an empire. Britain ran India
with 5 guys, a bicycle and a selection of hats. You can't do
that without sensitivity to the local conditions and culture.
Or even better, inserting yourself into the cultural
situation. |
|
| |
Blundering into a country with a hail of guided munitions,
wraparound sunglasses and wrappers from the on-base
McDonalds and declaring "you know what you're doing
wrong? everything, you poor morons. We'll install an
election and be home for Thanksgiving". The way to do it
was how it was going in Afghanistan, until we ruined it.
Once you establish you have god-like military dominance
and establish yourself as a permanent feature, you can
hang around in statistically insignificant numbers acting as
a garrenteur. Give it a couple of generations and the
population will be speaking your language... literally if you
do a reasonable job. |
|
| |
//Looking over the CIA at this time, they were nuts.// |
|
| |
Just kidding, really love those guys. They do an amazing
job.
Really terrific, absolutely fabulous. |
|
| |
//Britain ran India with 5 guys, a bicycle and a selection of
hats.// |
|
| |
And I'm glad somebody besides me sees that social strata,
dominion over others, over groups, over individuals is
largely signified and defined by hats, and no, I'm not
making a joke. |
|
| |
I think the original rulers of tribes were the strongest, best
hunters, most aggressive, then one day somebody, probably
a lesser male put a bear skull on his head and declared
himself the tribal boss simply by nature of him having this
big intimidating "hat". Got the idea looking at a picture of
the Pope. |
|
| |
I posted a "Tall Hat Social Ranking / Testosterone Study -
Does wearing a tall had affect your testosterone level or do
people with hight testosterone levels just wear big hats?"
Didn't catch on. |
|
| |
// They do an amazing job. Really terrific, absolutely fabulous// |
|
| |
We'll let you live this time. |
|
| |
You have a great study group available. I imagine the
British army has plenty of blood samples, you could just do
a before-during-after study on the small group who do
tours as Queen's guards. That's an all time big hat, 18", 4-
6lb and made of bear. |
|
| |
Terry Pratchett has a lot to say about the social effects of
hats. The whole concept is very well explored if I
remember correctly. |
|
| |
Whoa, really? That's cool. Any links maybe? I find the subject
fascinating as well as a little comical. |
|
| |
From a British point of view, I propose an amalgam of
Stanley Baldwin (Conservative) with Clement Attlee
(Labour). Baldwin de-radicalised British politics in the
1920s, keeping out the Communists with one hand and the
Fascists with the other. Attlee ended the British Empire*
and began the National Health Service. |
|
| |
What they had in common was that they were both
completely uncharismatic, and could not have stormed a
barn if their lives had depended on it. Their hats were
modest. |
|
| |
*The winding-up process took a few decades, but once
Attlee's government had granted independence to India,
there was no way back. |
|
| |
Excuse my ignorance of British history, but Atlee took over
from Churchill after WW2 right? Then didn't Churchill get
another term after that? And from what I understand, the
British people still loved
Churchill, but just wanted to go in a different direction. |
|
| |
I like that. I always used the analogy of left/right politics as
keeping a plane flying straight and level. You turn too far
left
you go into a spiral and crash into flames. Same if you turn
too far to the right. Another analogy I've used is a
suspension bridge. The anchor cables on either side are
directly pulling against each other, fighting each other if
you will, but their equal but opposite exertion of force
keeps the suspension span between them structurally
sound. Now if one side "wins" and gets rid of the opposition
party, the whole thing comes crashing down. |
|
| |
That's why, although I don't agree with people like Bernie
Sanders on many issues, (but agree with him in principal on
some) I don't want him silenced, I don't want anybody
silenced. I want all sides to get their say, let the court of
public opinion sort it out. And I know that if any side gets
unchecked power they're going to abuse it, it's human
nature. |
|
| |
Sorry, we were talking about hats. Got a little off subject
there. |
|
| |
If we're not careful, this thread will become a tedious
bubble of civilised consensus. |
|
| |
// We didn't really understand fallout until Kodak started getting mysterious dots on film straight of the manufacturing line. // |
|
| |
Radiation and mortality studies began within a year of dropping the bombs on Japan. [link] The U.S. had a very clear idea of the consequences of nuclear weapons. It's a bit like the claim that Nagasaki was dropped because no one had any idea about the bomb's power. Forgetting that pre-Hiroshima testing amply demonstrated the scale of potential destruction, Nagasaki was dropped (2 days later) to keep Stalin from attacking the Japanese mainland, as had been agreed with Roosevelt. |
|
| |
//Britain ran India with 5 guys, a bicycle and a selection of
hats// |
|
| |
The number usually quoted is 30 000 and a bicycle, but that's
still a very small number for somewhere the size of India. |
|
| |
I sound a quote, so at least a good book to start with: |
|
| |
“It wasn’t the wearing of the hats that counted so much as
having one to wear. Every trade, every craft had its hat.
That’s why kings had hats. Take the crown off a king and all
you had was someone good at having a weak chin and
waving to people. Hats had power. Hats were important.” |
|
| |
- Terry Pratchett - Witches Abroad |
|
| |
//Atlee took over from Churchill after WW2 right?// |
|
| |
There were a few things playing into Churchill's loss in
1945. Churchill never liked campaigning, he rubbed a lot of
people the wrong way. It was said he was only allowed to
be in the Conservative party because it was preferable have
him inside the tent pissing out. Churchill was running as a
Conservative MP (and obvious choice for PM if the party
won) rather than the leader of a Coalition government that
he had been throughout the war. |
|
| |
The Labour party played pretty heavily on the fact that
Churchill wasn't who you were voting for, it was the
Conservative party, and they were seen as being culpable
for the appeasement and other failures in the run up to
WW2. Some of Churchill's policies from the inter-war years
would seem eye-wateringly progressive today, e.g. double
income tax rate on un-earned income, rent/investment
returns etc. |
|
| |
//didn't Churchill get another term after that?// |
|
| |
He was unfortunately, somewhat past it by then. |
|
| |
//Radiation and mortality studies began within a year of
dropping the bombs on Japan. [link] The U.S. had a very
clear idea of the consequences of nuclear weapons.// |
|
| |
Well, the behavior of the nuclear powers suggested they
didn't think they knew very much. Even after 14 extra
bombs in the 40's, they still kept testing with
buildings/trees/vehicles and live troop maneuvers in the
50's. Remember, the two bombs on Japan were nuclear
bombs #2 & 3. In the 60's, after the Kodak issue, they
collected more than 300,000 baby teeth to gain more
understanding about the spread from tests. We knew very
little about how all of the various nuclides would be
generated, spread and then how they would move through
the environment/biome. |
|
| |
//It's a bit like the claim that Nagasaki was dropped
because no one had any idea about the bomb's power.
Forgetting that pre-Hiroshima testing amply demonstrated
the scale of potential destruction// |
|
| |
Pre-hiroshima testing was just one device at Trinity. Lot's
of bombs in the Early days did weird things, there were
more than a few "fizzles" where the device severely
underperforms and then there was Castle Brave in '54, that
was 250% bigger than expected. |
|
| |
//to keep Stalin from attacking the Japanese mainland// |
|
| |
It's a theory I'm aware, of. The other component was
demonstrating to Stalin so that they didn't feel like taking
their large capable army and rolling West in Europe given
that the remaining US troops were so eager to get home
that there was a real discipline problem. I think the
conventional narrative of "they didn't surrender after the
first, try another" is a simple and likely most correct
interpretation. |
|
| |
Consider me less than shocked that U.S. leaders ignored horrific real-world data in making subsequent testing policies. Stalin already had 500k soldiers fighting the Japanese in Manchuria. Japan's post-Hiroshima nonsurrender would have been a nonissue if Russians were slated to do all the fighting. Stalin did formally declare war on Japan AFTER Hiroshima. Truman didn't want Japan to be Russian for whatever reason, even if the additional fighting would have weakened Russia in the process. |
|
| |
//(The Labour party) were seen as being culpable
for the appeasement and other failures in the run
up to WW2.// |
|
| |
Glad you mentioned that, that's another mistake in
history that if I'm being honest I would have
absolutely made given I had the same information
everybody else had at the time. I would have
signed that peace treaty with "Herr Hitler" bragged
about peace in our time and waved that little
piece of paper around like an idiot. I'd like to say I
would have jumped over the bargaining table and
crushed Hitler's skull with a roundhouse kick to the
head, but I absolutely would have tried to give
peace a chance just like John Lennon said had I
not known what was going to transpire. |
|
| |
By the way, the video of that song should feature a
cameo
appearance by Neville Chamberlain in the crowd
clapping his hands and singing along. (link) |
|
| |
John Lennon is one of my heroes, I'm sure he'd
take that as the good natured joke it's meant to
be. He had a great sense of humor. Now Yoko... |
|
| |
// that's another mistake in history that if I'm being honest
I would have absolutely made// |
|
| |
It's hard to comprehend the decision making landscape,
especially mental for those people. WW1 was an
unimaginable spectre in all their minds. Many had lost sons,
all knew the numbers of maimed. Every town, village & city
had memorials. The country had gone from the most
powerful in the world to broke. And it looked like it was
going to happen AGAIN... |
|
| |
It just makes Churchill more remarkable, although I suspect
he was a contrarian by nature, so would just be firmly
against whatever it was other people were for. That and he
seemed to rather enjoy war. Screwing up the Dardanelles,
and going from 1st sea lord to posting himself to the
trenches was not a move of a war-shy chap. |
|
| |
And you know, it occurs to me, not a lot of fame
and fortune for people who win a war by AVOIDING
it. For instance, look what I just said, best way to
win a war is to get what you want without getting
people killed. What kind of weirdo peacenik crap is
that eh? |
|
| |
I had suggested putting up statues of people who
avoided wars, one being a Russian fellow by the
name of Boris Yeltsin was sober enough (at the
time anyway) to not push
the nuclear suitcase button labeled "Push here to
end civilization" when some geniuses launched a
sounding rocket over the Russian Federation but
forgot to tell the radar technicians manning the
Russian defenses. |
|
| |
I'm sure it would have gotten toppled in one riot or
another by now though. And who cares about
peacemakers? They make for boring movies. |
|
| |
One thing that gives me hope for humanity is the fair number of times Russia had every reason to think they had been launched at and did not retaliate, in multiple cases by people who had every reason to know it would end their careers, or even their lives. |
|
| |
Agreed. I think it's important in times of war to try
to keep a level head and not dehumanize your
enemy. "Are there ANY good Russians? If so can we
reach
out to them and try to work towards peace?" Are
there Russians that have done evil but are willing
to work towards stopping this war?
Anybody wonder what might have happened if we
worked with Rommel in his attempt to assassinate
Hitler? Maybe nothing, but sure might have been
worth a try. |
|
| |
And I'm no fan of many aspects of the Russian
culture. Being half Ukrainian I have obvious
historical
grievances, (how many relatives of mine were
murdered by Stalin?) and after learning of the
many disgusting
atrocities Russian soldiers have committed through
the years I've even asked myself "What the hell is
wrong with these people?" and came up with a
theory: they're drunk. More about that later, but
where do we go now? My solution is try to do
what's kept the peace in the past, work towards
detent. President remulac3 would end any speech
talking about the war in Ukraine and new
developments with NATO expansion in adding
Sweden and Finland with: |
|
| |
“And of course, I look
forward to the day when these sort of defensive
alliances aren’t necessary and the people of
Europe and Russia can pursue peace and prosperity
together. We’ve done it in the past and I’m
confident that when current circumstances fade
into history, (Putin) we can do it again." Carrot and
a stick, this isn't complicated. |
|
| |
Speaking of how Sweden and Finland are joining
NATO, I think that's great, but why are they
broadcasting their intentions to Putin the same
way the Ukraine did? Basically saying "If you're
going to attack us, better do it before we join
NATO." I think they should just do it in the dead of
night, don't broadcast their timelines to the enemy
and give them the open window to preemptively
attack. |
|
| |
But back to the point, I think this war with this
madman could have been avoided by putting effort
into negotiation from a position of military
strategic and tactical strength, not just taunting
him from a position of weakness and vague
allusions to someday, maybe, possibly forming an
alliance to stand up to him which sent the crystal
clear message that his window of opportunity was
closing. |
|
| |
So negotiate for peace from a position of strength.
An olive branch can be turned into a club easier
than that club can be turned back
into an olive branch. |
|
| |
The problem with Nordic-style leadership is that it's the same as Nordic-style parenting -- very little encouragement, but (maybe) punishment (from the environment) if you get it wrong. So, though the west had a window of opportunity to aid and change post-Soviet Russia, laissez-faire parenting took over. True, Yeltsin was nominally the west's (drunken) boy, but when laissez-faire economics tanked and he tried to dissolve parliament illegally, parliamentarians refused to leave. So Yeltsin just aimed his tanks at the parliament building and killed over 100 people. Mommies and daddies who are not engaged have very little idea what is happening to their babies. |
|
| |
Although I'm pretty familiar with how the Soviet
Union fell, I'm pretty clueless as to how the
promising Russian Federation came under control
of what's now become our era's Hitler. (I say that
knowing full it's the most over used and
inappropriate comparison to find its way into
practically every political discussion.) |
|
| |
There's my theory that the core Russian "thing to
do" is getting drunk. Always has been. Came up
with that theory before looking at the evidence.
(link) |
|
| |
One of my favorite documentaries, Michael Palin's
"Pole To Pole" he spends time in Russia and pretty
much all they do is drink. I noticed that they drink
in the kitchen and when I brought it up to a
coworker who had actually lived in Moscow before
the fall of the Soviet Union he said "That's because
they don't have living rooms which are considered
a decadent waste of space." Think about it, what's
the biggest room in your house? The living room.
Get rid of those and you can probably add 20 to
30% more units or more to your miserable, dreary
towers of bleak, grey government housing. |
|
| |
If I lived in one of those I'd be getting drunk in the
kitchen too. |
|
| |
I've spent a horrifying amount of years in ex-Soviet countries, and although I can't certify the build dates on outwardly semi-decrepit housing, many or most of them are practically palatial (because housing is so cheap?). In fact, the stereotypical Soviet block apartment seems to revolve around a large central living room. You're probably right about the drinking, but it seems to be basically a matter of vodka versus Margarita climate. |
|
| |
//they should just (join NATO) in the dead of night, don't broadcast their timelines to the enemy and give them the open window to preemptively attack. // |
|
| |
Can't be done. Joining NATO involves a massive effort. Military exercises, adjacent treaties, economic debate, adjustment of military spending, it goes on and on. You may as well say "let's throw around some grenades, and do it quick before the neighbor notices." |
|
| |
To be pedantic Russia isn't the enemy of NATO. NATO officially has no enemies unless and until someone attacks a NATO country. |
|
| |
//In fact, the stereotypical Soviet block apartment
seems to revolve around a large central living
room// |
|
| |
Just relaying what a guy who lived there said. No
living rooms in his complex. |
|
| |
//Can't be done. Joining NATO involves a
massive effort. Military exercises, adjacent
treaties, economic debate, adjustment of military
spending, it goes on and on.// |
|
| |
The thing that can be done in a few minutes is to
send out instructions to NATO command: "Defend
these countries starting immediately if they're
invaded." |
|
| |
Presumably the NATO forces learned their lessons
from every other war in history and can react to
invasions anywhere within their area that might
occur. If they say "Sorry, we need to fill out the
proper forms before we can react that invasion,
environmental impact, financial considerations
etc" when there's an invasion from a military with
no such compunctions about acting quickly, guess
who's gonna win. |
|
| |
//I'm pretty clueless as to how the promising Russian Federation came under control of what's now become our era's Hitler.// |
|
| |
So am I, but I'm going to talk about it anyway. It's a combination of nationalism, poverty, a powerful spy state, and a government strong enough to stay in power but not strong enough to also provide actual democracy. Some threats are too strong to handle with kid gloves and the collapse of the USSR left good Russians with some very, very bad choices. They danced with the devil and the devil never let the party quite end. Far too many people just say "communism bad", one of many thought-terminating cliches. |
|
| |
//It's a combination of nationalism, poverty, a
powerful spy state, and a government strong
enough to stay in power but not strong enough to
also provide actual democracy// |
|
| |
I think it might be possible for a society to have a
massive psychological problem bases on substance
abuse. Like I said, dehumanizing the enemy is a
bad course of action, but nothing wrong with
asking why this country has repeatedly committed
these horrific war crimes throughout their history. |
|
| |
Whoa, just read this: "According to Brown, by the
1850s, vodka sales made up nearly half the Russian
government's tax revenues. Following the Russian
Revolution in 1917, Lenin banned vodka. After his
death, however, Stalin used vodka sales to help
pay for the socialist industrialization of the Soviet
Union." |
|
| |
See link: "How Alcohol Conquered Russia" |
|
| |
Per the article, it would be entertaining if the best way to defeat the Russian military is to leave stacks of vodka behind. |
|
| |
//"Are there ANY good Russians?// |
|
| |
I hear you can find thousands of them - in Helsinki, in
Istanbul, in prison and in early graves. And I hear that
*someone* has been fire- bombing recruiting offices in
Russia (though it's hard to be sure about such stories). |
|
| |
I read that there's been a spate of suspicious deaths of
oligarchs, as if they had previously been assumed to be
satisfactorily corrupt and spineless, but had recently fallen
under suspicion of thinking good thoughts. |
|
| |
It's not easy being a good Russian. My heart goes out to
them. |
|
| |
Yea, heard about that. Two guys in one day and
their families murdered as well. |
|
| |
Maybe that's the approach, look at this as a
diseased society. Yea, it's a madman who's behind
this stuff but why did he so easily take over this
country? And it's a repeat of past murderous
dictators like Stalin. |
|
| |
I'm hoping Germany was a one off thing triggered
to a large extent by the ruination of the country in
WW1. I think Japan is a good country now too but
they did things during the war that were every bit
as bad as the Nazis. But Russia is at it again. Why? |
|
| |
My theory is rampant alcoholism, but it that's not
it I have absolutely no clue. |
|
| |
//"If you're going to attack us, better do it before we join
NATO."// |
|
| |
Well, that might have held water before we had a thorough
demonstration of the paper-tiger in a basket case that is
Russia's military capability. They're in absolutely no position
to be launching a second front against Finland or Sweden. |
|
| |
Both countries are tough nuts to crack, but we can rule out
Sweden, it's either sneak around the top or an amphibious
assault. Sweden has a capable navy and air force which has
been built specifically for defending against Soviet/Russian
attack. It's not happening. |
|
| |
Finland is similar, but a long land border makes it more
realistic. But again, super capable for a small nation. The
population are up for it, they already have conscription and
that means a huge pool of civilians with basic military
experience. The active military exchanges/trains with
other militaries in the EU/NATO. |
|
| |
They have modern equipment set up for a defensive war in
their conditions, essentially a lot of artillery to pound
advancing tanks that have to concentrate on/near roads
because of the endless lakes/forrest. The conditions are a
defensive dream/attack nightmare, as we saw in 1940. |
|
| |
If it did kick off, Finland is already a customer of high
quality kit and has the finances to buy more. Sweden would
quickly become involved since it's in their interests to stop
Russia making it through Finland and in spite of what the
Swedes/Fins say about each other after a few beers, their
international relations are close. |
|
| |
Finland and Sweden have YEARS to sort out a NATO
membership before Russia can pose any serious threat after
what we've seen so far. |
|
| |
//How Alcohol Conquered Russia// |
|
| |
Some say the introduction of caffeine from tea/coffee vs
all day beer kicked off the enlightenment/industrial
revolution. |
|
| |
//paper tiger// I disagree. IMO Russia is capable of absolutely crushing Finland or Sweden, or would be if they could muster the will. Now occupying either country or actually winning in the long term is a different matter. The reason Russia is losing in Ukraine is they lack the will to actually go to war there. They invaded with less than half of their available active military and didn't activate ANY reserves. It's like they want to lose. |
|
| |
I agree that the smart thing for Putin to do would
be
to study history and look at how successful
previous
two front wars were. However we're assuming
Putin
isn't out of his mind. |
|
| |
If we're gonna pull a gun out to deter a crazed
lunatic, let's pull the gun, not describe to him how
we're going to do it. |
|
| |
We need to learn from the Hitler on speed lesson
and not assume that our foes are necessarily sane. |
|
| |
By the way, one of the greatest history studying
moments of my career as a history nerd was
finding it wasn't just Hitler that was on speed, it
was the whole 3rd Reich and a lot of our allies too. |
|
| |
WW2 should be called "The Meth Wars". |
|
| |
//let's pull the gun, not describe to him how we're going to do
it.// |
|
| |
Oh god this happens so much with the US & UK government.
"We have an important foreign policy matter to take care of
how should we deal with it?" "How about a whole load of
media-covered internal politicking about precisely how far we
are/aren't willing to go before we approach the foreign
government?" "Yes, that usually gets the best deal". |
|
| |
Yup. And a certain president, I forget his name (so
does he) said if they invade just a little bit we won't
do anything. |
|
| |
I'm beginning to think politicians are probably the
worst people to be in charge of politics. |
|
| |
Your sentence is too long:
"politicians are ... the worst people" |
|
| |
When somebody asks you what political party you
support a fun way to answer is "You know, I have a
hard time deciding, they're both so DAMN good." |
|
| |
They'll get that expression on their face like when
you hide a ball from a dog by putting it behind your
back. |
|
| |
At least two things spring to mind. |
|
| |
One is geographic isolation. If you live a thousand miles
from the nearest foreigner, it's easier to develop implausible
ideas about your own country's role in the world. A similar
phenomenon may exist in parts of the American interior. |
|
| |
The other is collective learned helplessness. If, over many
generations, you'd been ruled by paranoid monsters, it
would be hard to develop the habits of democratic
optimism. See the Russian folk tale, "The Cat who Became
Head Forester" |
|
| |
How much does climate have to do with it you
think? Harsh climate, long winters, isolation.
Throw booze into the mix sounds like a recipe for
not fun. |
|
| |
Does average IQ enter into it? Touchy subject I
know, but quick peek I'm seeing: |
|
| |
Top 10 Countries with the Highest Average IQ -
Ulster Institute 2019:* |
|
| |
Japan - 106.49
Taiwan - 106.47
Singapore - 105.89
Hong Kong (China) - 105.37
China - 104.10
South Korea - 102.35
Belarus - 101.60
Finland - 101.20
Liechtenstein - 101.07
Netherlands & Germany (tie) - 100.74
|
|
| |
Top 10 Countries with the Highest Intelligence
Capital Index - 2017: |
|
| |
United States - 74.88 (A+)
United Kingdom - 64.19 (A)
Germany - 64.18 (A)
Australia - 63.96 (A)
Singapore - 63.60 (A)
Sweden - 61.58 (A)
Switzerland - 61.57 (A)
Canada - 61.15 (A)
Finland - 60.45 (A)
Denmark - 60.25 (A)
|
|
| |
Ranking Country Number of Nobel prizes
1 USA 368
2 UK 132
3 Germany 107
4 France 62
5 Sweden 30
6 Japan 26
6 Switzerland 26
8 Russia 23
8 Canada 23
10 Austria 21
|
|
| |
Then there's a "clever index" (link) that takes into
account IQ, Nobel prizes and school test scores.
Russia ranks very high on that one. |
|
| |
There are obviously smart people there, but are
they outnumbered by isolated depressed drunks?
I know I'd be depressed as hell if I lived there. |
|
| |
Not meaning to sound xenophobic here, on the
contrary, maybe this culture needs help. Hey, they
put the first satellite into orbit and the first man
in space, they're capable of doing incredible things
as a culture, just makes me wonder, how did they
get so lost? |
|
| |
Dunno. I've seen incredible people ruined by
booze. Could an entire society basically suffer
from alcoholism? |
|
| |
Well, I am neither Russian nor Ukrainian, but this situation has been escalating too far on all sides. I've met an idiot Russian or two of late, but as someone who mentioned ethnic stereotypes once on HB mentioned, it's possible the Russians are more intelligent than Ukrainians, if only because Western Ukraine was ruled by Germanic simpletons, or because so many Ukrainian intellectuals lost their lives in Russian purges and genocides. |
|
| |
Anyway, there are some serious assholes in Ukraine, and that includes members of their government. Not only are many people in Ukraine (in the west) greedy, grasping, and surly, but their governments have misallocated (defence) funds so consistently that even the U.S. refused to give them money directly. An article in a U.S. policy magazine before the war described how money taken from Ukrainians for the defence forces had simply evaporated, according to the Ukrainian administrator. |
|
| |
It is a colossal mistake to risk billions of dollars and people on Ukraine's so-called democracy. Zelensky and, especially, leaders before him, are careless with Ukrainian lives. They didn't deserve to lose Crimea, but it's gone, and they needed to find a political not military solution to ethnic differences in the east. WWIII over Ukraine would be dumber than WWII over Poland. |
|
| |
Well, we’re in agreement that WW3 isn’t on the
table as a logical possible solution to this disaster.
Hope it’s not underway already. Short of that,
corrupt government or not, we should do everything
we can to help the people defend themselves from
this horrific invasion. |
|
| |
// There are obviously smart people there, but are they outnumbered by isolated depressed drunks?// There can exist smart, isolated, depressed drunks. |
|
| |
// it's possible the Russians are more intelligent than Ukrainians// |
|
| |
Some genetic attributes in populations which have undergone drastic reduction (as in Stalin's genocide) must be enhanced or reduced. If it's related to food perhaps a genetic propensity to be willing to lie to protect one's family, or the ability to foresee the event and escape, or, obviously, the ability to live longer on less food. It's not politically correct but a person would have to blind himself to not see the likelihood of natural selection working this way. |
|
| |
Well, the argument against IQ being the main
cause (that I admittedly brought up) could be
refuted by the fact that Germany and Japan
caused WW2, both very high IQ countries. |
|
| |
I'm sticking with my alcoholic society theory until
something better comes up. (or that's disproved
somehow) Is it the total cause? Probably not, but I
would be
surprised if it doesn't figure into Russia's behavior
problems to some extent. |
|
| |
//Some say the introduction of caffeine from
tea/coffee vs all day beer kicked off the
enlightenment/industrial revolution.// |
|
| |
I'd like to hear more about that. Any links? That
sounds incredibly plausible. |
|
| |
And wow, revelation, I heard drinking alcohol was
a
good
way to keep from dying due to one of ancient
history's biggest killers, water borne diseases. The
alcohol killed the bacteria. Was
coffee and tea similarly free from cholera due to
the water being boiled before being poured over
the coffee grinds / tea leaves? In other words, did
cholera steer society's evolution? |
|
| |
// Well, the argument against IQ being the main cause (that I admittedly brought up) could be refuted by the fact that Germany and Japan caused WW2, both very high IQ countries. // |
|
| |
How do you figure there's a positive or negative correlation between IQ and peacefulness, aside from smarter people probably being able to get what they want without having to resort to violence? |
|
| |
I already refuted that concept. There are also probably plenty
of
lower IQ areas that are warlike or peaceful. |
|
| |
It's okay to look under a rock and say "Hmm, nothing here.". |
|
| |
And that's while you're on the stuff. What about that hangover
the next day eh? |
|
| |
Regarding the war/IQ link, threw a couple of maps
up, but note that smarty pants Japan and Germany
started WW2
and if China invades Taiwan they'll have started
WW3. |
|
| |
Point is, geopolitical, social, even biological areas
of
study into what causes people to go to war are too
complicated for me to come up with a simplistic
Hallmark card platitude to explain it. I personally
find the
world
to be an incredibly complicated place. |
|
| |
But I'll stick with my vodka theory regarding
Russia. If somebody proves it wrong I owe them a
Coke. |
|
| |
I have never been to Russia itself, but I'll take a stab at it. |
|
| |
I think it all comes down to a people inclined to follow strong leaders regardless. Yes, I say that despite the Russian Revolution. Remember that the people had all been serfs more recently than the rest of Europe. |
|
| |
The alcohol abuse and the respect for strong leaders may have similar climatic origins. Cold, sunless climates, indoors, ok, often in cramped conditions makes people dwell on mere sequencing, mere processing of (critical) day-to-day-decisions. This is a frontal lobe process. |
|
| |
Per the link, Vodka shuts down the frontal lobe and grants a relief from all the internal processing and dwelling. So, probably, does anger and a strong leader who gives one a respite from all the dithering. |
|
| |
A majority of Russian leaders have been German, Norman, or Nordic-influenced. The Romanovs were first cousins of King George. Russia's longest-serving leader was Catherine, a German. Peter the Great and Lenin were both copying Prussian thinkers. In fact, the Rus, who founded Russia, were actually Vikings. Germany's and Russia's climate are not so different. Putin was Stasi in East Germany for many years. |
|
| |
The one unknown is (Russian) people who claim that Russia is partly Asian. This may mean the ethnic mix, or 200 years of leadership by "The Golden Horde" |
|
| |
That all sounds plausible, but now the hard part. |
|
| |
Is there any way to deal with this aggressiveness
(wherever it came from)
other than an old fashioned ass kicking? Worked
amazingly well in WW2 with Germany and Japan,
but we were the only ones with nukes then. When
both sides have nukes is war even a
possibility any more? We've done fine over the
decades getting our war fix with proxy wars, but is
direct all out warfare worth it for anybody now? |
|
| |
That would be great, but at some point doesn't
some power decide it IS worth it? Some dictator
who's either insane or 100% sure god wants them to
nuke a country of infidels because the nuclear
response will just send the good guys to paradise
and the bad guys to hell? |
|
| |
My dad always said power is the most addictive
drug. Might a powerful addict looking at loosing his
regular fix feel they'd rather die and take the
threat to their power with them rather than lose
that power? Like that line in Melville's Moby Dick.
"From Hell's...
(something or another, I forget the line) I stab at
thee." |
|
| |
Well, that's the depressing thought for the day. |
|
| |
There's one more factor that can't be dismissed:
evolution. |
|
| |
In a country where guys like me are turned into
the authorities for my political views and
gulagged, death camped etc (in case anybody
hasn't figured it out yet, I hate big government and
the sheep that obediently bow down to it) are the
controllable, mindless citizen drones
the only ones who remain? |
|
| |
Then the beloved leader says "The time of the
great war for peace is now good sheep! What do
we all say about the evil people of Oceania?
They're baaahahahahahahahhad!" |
|
| |
How many brave people who stood up to Stalin just
got stood up in front of a firing squad? |
|
| |
I was very struck by a situation where a kid my age
who was an immigrant from a very tyrannical
country, the country's not important, total fascism,
fascist to this day, the kid was getting his lunch
money stolen from him by bullies. I'd always been
a bully puncher myself being raised in an area
where being a pussy wasn't an option. But this guy
told his dad and his dad just said "I'll give you extra
money, just give it to them to keep them from
beating you up." I tell this story and can't believe it
actually happened but it did. By the way, I told
him if it ever happened again to tell me and I'd
show him how to handle it and we'd do it together,
but his dad's reaction disgusted me to this day. |
|
| |
Anyway, at some point does a government cull the
strong
and leave the easy to manage weak and docile? |
|
| |
And fascism's like any toxic product, it'll always
come
out with a shiny new packaging. The next Nazi
party won't have a swastika, it might
have a smily face, but the message to the sheep
will be the same. "Turn in bad frowners like
your non compliant next door neighbor! Show
you're a good citizen of
Happylandia!" |
|
| |
Also, (on a lighter note) see link for Russians and the
kitchen being the
center of their world. Evidently what's deemed a
"living room" in Russia is a bedroom with a couch and
a TV which we in the west refer to as "a bedroom
with a couch and TV." |
|
| |
Alcohol and violence: see also Ireland |
|
| |
//at some point does a government cull the strong and leave the easy to manage weak and docile? // |
|
| |
It has happened by intent. But strength and docility are not mutually exclusive. |
|
| |
//Alcohol and violence: see also Ireland// |
|
| |
Yea, but that's small scale stuff, bar fights and the like. |
|
| |
There's the IRA I guess, but that's a single beef with England.
They haven't invaded any countries. Even stayed out of WW2. |
|
| |
//Even stayed out of WW2.// |
|
| |
They'd rather forget the embarrassing flirtation their
leadership engaged in with the Nazis. They were never going
to side with Britain and taking the other option meant
immediate invasion. So that's how that went. As a result, a
HUGE amount of the shipping lost crossing the Atlantic was
lost a few miles from Ireland as the convoys inevitably
concentrated rounding Ireland as they headed for the major
British ports. |
|
| |
The whole debacle was assumed to be a model as to how the
Republic of Ireland might behave with the USSR. Britain
could have their equivalent of Cuba off the coast. For that
(among other) reason, the military brass were keen on a
strong presence in Northern Ireland. The whole thing could
have been a handled a lot better. Certainly after the US was
in the war, they could have allowed a US anti-submarine air
base onto some godforsaken western isle - after all, Ireland
was just as dependent on transatlantic food supplies. |
|
| |
// It has happened by intent // |
|
| |
Yes, but not very often; more successful elites find a way to
co-opt the strong. |
|
| |
Well I'm using the term "strong" subjectively.
Strong in my view is standing up to the bad guys.
Tyrants, totalitarians, world domination types. |
|
| |
I think you're referring to powerful people that
have a lot of pull in society. By my view these can
be some of the weakest people judging by their
value to the human condition. Which granted is
just my subjective view of what's good and bad. |
|
| |
B, I don't know much about Ireland's position in
WW2 other than them being neutral, I had
assumed it was like Switzerland but I guess you're
saying they had some anti England motivation that
swayed them towards the Nazis to some extent? |
|
| |
//anti England motivation that swayed them towards the
Nazis to some extent?// |
|
| |
It was a complex situation, when has it not been!? Ireland
was a Dominion of the British Empire, but as ever, the Irish
population ran the gamut of social & political positions.
There were plenty of disputes in the interwar period
including a trade war with Britain & like most countries,
fascism had taken hold amongst a portion of the
population, that portion overlapped entirely with the
staunch anti-British contingent. |
|
| |
In the run up to the war, head of government deValera was
making overtures to Germany's "great achievements" and in
1940 sent a staunch anti-British envoy to Germany to say
even nicer things. It's possible that this was all anti-British
rather than pro-Nazi, after all, the British had arrested and
sentenced de Valera to death as a component of a carefully
timed uprising in 1916. however, deValera was the only
major European leader to sign Hitler's book of condolence
in 1945, and instructed his various ambassadors to make
visits to German counterparts in the same vein. He also
dismissed the reports of the concentration camp atrocities
as propaganda. |
|
| |
A good portion of the Irish public behaved differently
however, >45,000 served in the British armed services and
>200,000 went to work. |
|
| |
Britain's role was dominated in 1940 by the fear that
Germany would find Ireland an easy invasion target. As a
counter to that Plan W, a plan that called for invasion to
secure southern ireland, principally the coastlines was
developed. Legally,
Ireland was still our dominion and militarily it was trivial.
Once
the invasion hysteria had passed, particularly in the wake
of Pearl Harbor, Britain came a long way toward Ireland,
Churchill said "I will meet you wherever you wish" in order
to abandon neutrality. |
|
| |
Was Ireland actually neutral? Progressively less so. Once the
writing was on the wall, Britain was getting all it's downed
aviators/sailors back, Germany was not. Britain was getting
intelligence & weather reports (which often included
careful aircraft observations). |
|
| |
But overall, I think the information was available at the
time, and certainly by Pearl Harbor, that throwing your hat
in with the Axis was wrong. Pearl Harbor was an excellent
opportunity, it would have been politically easy to throw in
as a partner with the US, it would have been an economic
boon to serve as a US staging post/supply hub. The losses in
the Atlantic would have been MUCH lower, we were looking
for extra plausibility to cover the codebreaking and
air/naval bases on the Irish coast would have been very
useful. |
|
| |
Wow B you know your history stuff! I'm impressed! |
|
| |
This is why I come to this site, when it works like this I come
away learning something which is one of the great gifts life
gives us. |
|
| |
//you know your history// |
|
| |
meh, getting better. As my science learning curve
flattened, there was a compensatory increase in non-
science knowledge absorption. I was always resistant to
that whole side of the university as a pathologically keen
young chap, since they never seemed to be doing any work.
Even when they did do some work, it seemed sloppy: |
|
| |
"We're here with some period armor and an Agincourt-
replica bow to answer some questions about the role of
English archers in that battle. Now, Steve here is a modern
archer and can't reliably knock the full war bow, so we're
using a lower powered.... Ooh, that one went through, but
this one looks to have glanced, possibly because of..." Build
an arrow-firing rig you amateurs, do a distance/penetration
curve, do a strike angle curve. FIND SOMETHING OUT! |
|
| |
More modern history can be much more amenable to a
rigorous approach, since there's a lot more data,
photographs, film, recordings, accounts etc. It's a great
time to be interested in the Cold War right now, since so
much is being declassified & the veterans are much less
worried about talking. I was talking to an old RAF Phantom
pilot at a bar a few years back, he mentioned that at 24, he
was "In charge of letting the genie out of the lamp", with a
glint in his eye. I took that to mean the RAF Phantoms were
at some point armed with US Genie nuclear anti-aircraft
missiles, something never officially acknowledged. Cool. |
|
| |
Ultimately, it's all about people making decisions on the
information at hand. Nowadays, either because I'm getting
sentimental, or because I realize that science too is just
people making decisions based on information, I'm getting
interested in what drives good decision making. Or perhaps,
what drives crappy decision making, since there's so much
more of that. |
|
| |
// I was talking to an old RAF Phantom pilot at a bar a few
years back, he mentioned that at 24, he was "In charge of
letting the genie out of the lamp", with a glint in his eye. I
took that to mean the RAF Phantoms were at some point
armed with US Genie nuclear anti-aircraft missiles,
something never officially acknowledged. Cool.// |
|
| |
Whoa! I've relayed my "running into a person who had his
finger on the button" story half a dozen times, but I'll go for
7. My step uncle (if that's a thing, second husband of my
aunt) guess that's just an uncle, was the navigator on the
Nautilus on its trip under the North Pole, made the joke
that it was easy, just steered north. He was a captain on
boomers after that and when I asked how many nukes they
carried he said with a smile "I cannot confirm or deny the
presence of nuclear weapons onboard any of the subs I
served on." which I always thought was clever because it's
not a lie, that's true. He can't, it's a rule. He didn't say he
didn't know, just can't tell me. |
|
| |
I'd be interested if anybody else here's met a person with
the power to destroy civilization. From these two
anecdotes it seems like the people tasked with that
responsibility are pretty good natured and light hearted
about it. I think that's probably by design. |
|
| |
Wait a second! LOL, how can I forget my Grand Uncle? He
flew with the Strategic Air Command! Okay, that's two for
me. I don't have any knowledge of him referring to the
actual weapons, just the aircraft he flew. B-52s, and B-47s
(his favorite). Flew B-29s that might have carried them for
a bit. |
|
| |
We have an election coming up in Australia. Of the two
leading candidates, one is an ignorant jackass who's rude
to the neighbours and useless in a crisis, the other is a
careerist cypher, whose personality was coloured in by a
small team of spin-doctors with a painting-by- numbers kit,
except they ran out of paint half- way through and lost
interest. |
|
| |
Does that sound familiar? It seems as if it might be a
pattern. |
|
| |
//flew with the Strategic Air Command!// |
|
| |
Fascinating era of history, even if just for the planes: |
|
| |
"Well done passing your check ride on the B-36, but I'm
afraid after 3 months in service it's obsolete, so it's off to B-
47... Sorry, obsolete.... B-58 school for you" |
|
| |
At some point I'll get around to building a SAC-themed
Fender Stratocaster in Strata blue, only I suspect I don't
actually like the Strata blue color, I like the Strata blue
color with a touch of sun fade then the color balance of the
film they were using at the time, which is trickier. |
|
| |
Jets and rock and roll, the two things that make
life beautiful. |
|
| |