The unimportant news thread

[Florestan]

He was involved in burying the scandal while a cardinals believe.

I concede you might have a point with this. At least you didn't accuse him of being leftist/Marxist/Communist. I am relieved.

NB: I'm neither Catholic nor leftist/Marxist/Communist.

[Jo498]

I actually read somewhere that the rate of pedophilic occurrences in the Catholic church is NOT extraordinarily high. It's only that for several reasons (among others the coverup strategies) it is deemed particularly outrageous. While stats comparing the Catholic church with other churches, educational institutions, sports clubs etc. wrt abuse are hard to come by, the argument as I recall it was that since such institutions have actually insurances for such legal and compensational costs and that the Cath. church does not pay a higher insurance premium than comparable large institutions.

https://www.newsweek.com/priests-commit-no-more-abuse-other-males-70625
https://ethicsdaily.com/insurance-companies-shed-light-on-extent-of-sex-abuse-in-protestant-churches-cms-9149/

Obviously, men with pedophilic tendencies will tend to look for jobs around children and this includes priests. This should not be used as a defence for these horrible crimes and the frequent coverups etc. by the church are scandalous. But it seems that the claim that the particular structures and conditions of the church (hierarchy, celibacy etc.) do not by themselves lead to a higher rate of abuse than occurs in sports or schools.

[Ghost of Baron Scarpia]

The issue is that a generally person accused of abuse is arrested, convicted and imprisoned. A priest accused of abuse was moved to another diocese and the full weight of the church was used to discourage the victim from bringing charges. This facilitates recidivism. The church may experience a high rate of abuse even with a normal fraction of abusers.

[Jo498]

This is possible but not a necessary consequence. Because generally an abuser is not arrested quickly. Many coaches and teachers (or that british DJ) practiced their abuse for years or decades before or without ever being arrested and convicted.
Anyway, around here (Germany) the abuse scandal is used as an obvious argument against celibate priest and I think this is simply not based on the actual facts.

[Ken B]

I concede you might have a point with this. At least you didn't accuse him of being leftist/Marxist/Communist. I am relieved.

NB: I'm neither Catholic nor leftist/Marxist/Communist.

He's that too.

Clear out your mail box!

[drogulus]

It apears the WP has closed the private browsing loophole.

     I didn't even know about that. I think I must be a subscriber.

[Ghost of Baron Scarpia]

     I didn't even know about that. I think I must be a subscriber.

Seems to be browser dependent. I was turned away using Chrome (private mode not allowed unless logged in) but not Safari. Maybe they have a flaky way of detecting private browsing.

[Florestan]

He's that too.

A leftist who opposes abortion and gay marriages.

A Marxist who stated that Marxism is wrong.

A communist who came to Romania with the specific purpose of beatifying seven bishops of the Romanian Greek Catholic Church, who died either in communist prisons or as a result of the maltreatments suffered there.

[Ken B]

YouTube cracks down on Romanian hate monger!

Actually not, they just called him a hate monger because his course includes clips of Hitler.

https://mobile.twitter.com/Timcast/status/1136392008795398145?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1136392008795398145&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitchy.com%2Fbrettt-3136%2F2019%2F06%2F05%2Fgreat-job-history-teacher-who-posted-nazi-propaganda-videos-banned-by-youtube-for-hate-speech%2F

[Florestan]

YouTube cracks down on Romanian hate monger!

Actually not, they just called him a hate monger because his course includes clips of Hitler.

https://mobile.twitter.com/Timcast/status/1136392008795398145?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1136392008795398145&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitchy.com%2Fbrettt-3136%2F2019%2F06%2F05%2Fgreat-job-history-teacher-who-posted-nazi-propaganda-videos-banned-by-youtube-for-hate-speech%2F

Why Romanian?

[North Star]

Why Romanian?

That's where he's set his location on Twitter.

https://mobile.twitter.com/MrAllsopHistory

YouTube cracks down on Romanian hate monger!

Actually not, they just called him a hate monger because his course includes clips of Hitler.

https://mobile.twitter.com/Timcast/status/1136392008795398145?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1136392008795398145&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitchy.com%2Fbrettt-3136%2F2019%2F06%2F05%2Fgreat-job-history-teacher-who-posted-nazi-propaganda-videos-banned-by-youtube-for-hate-speech%2F

Don't you mean: actually they didn't call him a hate monger (or anything else), their algorithm was just designed without considering educational aspects, and the problem was largely fixed in a few hours. But yeah, it's pretty dumb that they didn't realize they need to refine the algorithm beforehand. Reminds me of when artworks with nudity were removed from Facebook.

[Ken B]

Why Romanian?

As Florestan click-bait. But it says Romanian.

[Ken B]

That's where he's set his location on Twitter.

https://mobile.twitter.com/MrAllsopHistory
Don't you mean: actually they didn't call him a hate monger (or anything else), their algorithm was just designed without considering educational aspects, and the problem was largely fixed in a few hours. But yeah, it's pretty dumb that they didn't realize they need to refine the algorithm beforehand. Reminds me of when artworks with nudity were removed from Facebook.

I don't think it was necessarily the algorithm, because it has been done to other such site with a comments about knowing the clips are sources. Example
https://mobile.twitter.com/FordFischer/status/1136334778670518273

Scroll down to the note from youtube

Update. Now they have pulled "Triumph of the Will".

How many of you have seen it? Fascists!

[Ghost of Baron Scarpia]

I just read that the international space station will be open to paying tourists. Trump must be defeated before he manages to get it transformed into a Trump branded hotel.

[Ken B]

Burger King as been selling meat whoppers as vegetarian burgers. People order and pay for a veggie burger, get a meat one. Charming.

[drogulus]

     Physicists Debate Hawking's Idea That the Universe Had No Beginning

     Ordinarily I'm a consensus guy on science. They know, I don't, that's the conservative assumption. I draw the line on the Big Bang, though. It's too philosophically extravagant.

[Ken B]

[greg]

Today I learned:
-There is an attempt to move "Grid girls" for Formula One races, since they are now considered inappropriate... so empowering to fire a bunch of women that love their jobs. Wait?...

-The whole Vox vs. Steven Crowder thing. So if you are in a powerful enough platform, you can get the people with a similar ideology (aka youtube) to strip the livelihood (monetization) of another person, along with, I believe it was 1,000 other smaller channels. Because Carlos Maza can't handle being joked about. And still complaining that isn't enough. 

Missing from headline, maybe?: in a sex dungeon, while both participants on bath salts and meth 
(maybe i shouldn't go back home  )

[greg]

White man explains why he identifies as a Filipino

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWPRATTYnYk


Was expecting to this guy, who is part of the "transracial" movement to be a complete idiot, but instead it seems like he's actually really cool and very self-aware, and I agree with literally everything that he says.

Most importantly, it makes sense that some other demographic or culture might resonate much more with someone... as long as people don't have to change the facts and literally only recognize him as Asian, for example, it's all good IMO.

[Todd]

Some local news:

Oregon Republicans go missing to avoid climate change vote; governor sends police to find them

Current Democrat Governor Kate Brown advocated a boycott strategy in 2001, thus demonstrating - again - that if Democrats didn't have double standards, they wouldn't have any standards at all.

[Ken B]

Some local news:

Oregon Republicans go missing to avoid climate change vote; governor sends police to find them

Current Democrat Governor Kate Brown advocated a boycott strategy in 2001, thus demonstrating - again - that if Democrats didn't have double standards, they wouldn't have any standards at all.

Democrats fled to avoid a quorum call in Wisconsin just a few years ago, and bragged about it.

[amw]

I hope a future rules change also permits Democrats to do this in the US Senate. Definitely look forward to Patrick Leahy or whoever threatening to engage in fisticuffs with any Capitol Police officers sent to retrieve him.

[Ken B]

I hope a future rules change also permits Democrats to do this in the US Senate. Definitely look forward to Patrick Leahy or whoever threatening to engage in fisticuffs with any Capitol Police officers sent to retrieve him.

Future rule changes? You need to do some research. Such quorum calls happened numerous times in the civil rights era.

[amw]

As far as I know quorum in the US Senate is 51 members, so the minority can't bring all activity to a halt by leaving. If I'm wrong I have no idea why the minority hasn't been regularly using this tactic since at least 2009.

[Ken B]

As far as I know quorum in the US Senate is 51 members, so the minority can't bring all activity to a halt by leaving. If I'm wrong I have no idea why the minority hasn't been regularly using this tactic since at least 2009.

There have been cases of senators dragged back.
Curious as to the details I googled.
Standing Rule 6 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_Rules_of_the_United_States_Senate

[Ken B]

Anyone remember John C Calhoun?  He argued that blacks, due to their alleged incapacity, were better off enslaved, despite their objections. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/23/world/europe/abortion-mentally-disabled-uk.html

[JBS]

Anyone remember John C Calhoun?  He argued that blacks, due to their alleged incapacity, were better off enslaved, despite their objections. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/23/world/europe/abortion-mentally-disabled-uk.html

Reversed, rather quickly
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/06/24/court-appeal-blocks-mentally-womans-abortion/

[Ken B]

Reversed, rather quickly
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/06/24/court-appeal-blocks-mentally-womans-abortion/

Calhoun was reversed too, a it more slowly. I wonder though what lesser infringements against her, and others with similar conditions, would pass muster.

[greg]

More shenanigans by Antifa.

https://dailycaller.com/2019/06/30/andy-ngo-journalist-rally-injured/

[drogulus]

Some local news:

Oregon Republicans go missing to avoid climate change vote; governor sends police to find them

Current Democrat Governor Kate Brown advocated a boycott strategy in 2001, thus demonstrating - again - that if Democrats didn't have double standards, they wouldn't have any standards at all.

     That's an odd point of view. Double standards are better than none, which is why we respect hypocrites. They have standards they violate. They can be shamed, as they will be the next time they pull the same stunt. Repubs can't be shamed, it's not in them. They are cynics. How could an action be OK because it was bad when Dems did it? I think this is called "concern trolling", is it not?

[Ken B]

     That's an odd point of view. Double standards are better than none, which is why we respect hypocrites. They have standards they violate. They can be shamed, as they will be the next time they pull the same stunt. Repubs can't be shamed, it's not in them. They are cynics. How could an action be OK because it was bad when Dems did it? I think this is called "concern trolling", is it not?

You might admire hypocrisy but it seems excessive to aspire to it.

[drogulus]

You might admire hypocrisy but it seems excessive to aspire to it.

     I respect the acknowledgement of standards even in the breach. For the cynic I have slight regard. Standards are just a weapon for them.

[JBS]

This happened about a mile from where I work, although I wasn't there when it happened. 
https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/07/06/us/florida-plantation-explosion/index.html/

[greg]

This happened about a mile from where I work, although I wasn't there when it happened. 
https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/07/06/us/florida-plantation-explosion/index.html/

Did you hear it?
When I was living back home in Lake County, FL, there was a propane factory that exploded a couple miles away, and we could hear what sounded like faint explosions for quite a while.

[JBS]

Did you hear it?
When I was living back home in Lake County, FL, there was a propane factory that exploded a couple miles away, and we could hear what sounded like faint explosions for quite a while.

I was at home at the time, about ten miles away,  If I did hear something, I would have thought it was thunder. 
The shockwave was enough to make the upper floor of the store in which I work shake enough to unnerve everyone up there at the time.

[Karl Henning]

This happened about a mile from where I work, although I wasn't there when it happened. 
https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/07/06/us/florida-plantation-explosion/index.html/

Very glad you're safe!

[JBS]

Antifa activist attacks a migrant detention center, is killed by police
https://www.foxnews.com/us/washington-man-killed-at-ice-detention-center-manifesto

I suspect the man, and his antifa admirers, did not think his plan through very well.  Since if he had succeeded in burning it down,  he would have killed mostly migrants.

[greg]

I suspect the man, and his antifa admirers, did not think his plan through very well.

Which describes one of the biggest root problems they have- either they don't understand implications of their actions or they really are suicidal.

Of course i already saw an article from a mainstream site downplaying it.

[drogulus]

Which describes one of the biggest root problems they have- either they don't understand implications of their actions or they really are suicidal.

Of course i already saw an article from a mainstream site downplaying it.

     The Unibomber wrote a manifesto, too. I don't know whether it was downplayed or not, or even who the "they" is for either one.

     I see an antifa group says this guy is a martyr. I didn't know any such group endorsed suicide by cop.

     

[greg]

By "they" I mean Antifa and all the extremists who want to use mob rule to take away free speech.

[drogulus]

By "they" I mean Antifa and all the extremists who want to use mob rule to take away free speech.

     You'll lose freedom of the press first. That's how it's done. The mob in power is the dangerous one, because they will do it if they can.

[greg]

     You'll lose freedom of the press first. That's how it's done. The mob in power is the dangerous one, because they will do it if they can.

You mean like the big tech companies that are trying their best to censor centrists and conservatives?

[SimonNZ]

Antifa activist attacks a migrant detention center, is killed by police
https://www.foxnews.com/us/washington-man-killed-at-ice-detention-center-manifesto

I suspect the man, and his antifa admirers, did not think his plan through very well.  Since if he had succeeded in burning it down,  he would have killed mostly migrants.

I personally wouldn't be surprised to learn that the current version of "Antifa" is a click-bait invention of Fox with paid agents provocateurs. Oh how they love to love them and drum up the fear, even though as far as I can tell their numbers are at best in double digits. But more importantly I've never read anyone on the left in any forum I visit who knows anyone who knows anyone who knows any one of them. More importantly still they are utterly unsupported by any of the supposedly "extreme" Democrats.

I'm sorry this person was able to find some crazy use for this nonsense in planning his suicide.

[Muzio]

Trump for the win!

[Ken B]

I personally wouldn't be surprised to learn that the current version of "Antifa" is a click-bait invention of Fox with paid agents provocateurs. Oh how they love to love them and drum up the fear, even though as far as I can tell their numbers are at best in double digits. But more importantly I've never read anyone on the left in any forum I visit who knows anyone who knows anyone who knows any one of them. More importantly still they are utterly unsupported by any of the supposedly "extreme" Democrats.

I'm sorry this person was able to find some crazy use for this nonsense in planning his suicide.

Check out Keith Ellison and antifa.

[SimonNZ]

Trump for the win!

Er, no. The Dems were arguing among themselves, but now they have something they all agree on and are united. And Trump looks like the racist prick he is and the Rs look spineless.

Is this "winning"?

[Ken B]

Er, no. The Dems were arguing among themselves, but now they have something they all agree on and are united. And Trump looks like the racist prick he is and the Rs look spineless.

Is this "winning"?

Er, not so fast.

The unity hurts the Dems. AOC is the most recognized dem amongst the undecided, and her popularity there is very low. I saw one poll showing her at 22% in that group. If she or Omar become the face of the party the Democrats will be in real trouble. Pelosi was trying to avert that before this, and now it will be harder. So this "unity" — not ideological unity justhomogenization of the message — really is a gain for Trump.

Trump looks like an asshole? Is this new? Has he ceded any of the high respect previously widely held for him? I don't think so. A slice off a cut loaf. Now maybe these particular tweets will resonate more with moderates over time, and hurt him. I have seen a lot of commentary to that effect. But I doubt it, because the umbrage I have seen so far is based on misrepresentations of the tweets. Such as the one I implicitly relied on above, that AOC was referred to. Plainly the words of the tweets exclude her.

So I think Adams is premature. He might be wrong. But he is not obviously wrong. He is certainly not "Er, no" wrong.

[SimonNZ]

Well.. I don't understand the local hostility to AOC but do see that its there, but I don't see unity against racism as hurting them. And I don't see this as making her or the four "the face of the party".

Also: what the hell happened to Scott Adams? Trump's chaos makes Dilbert's boss look just slightly inefficient. He also can't be a chess player: those aren't Trump's "pawns".

[Ken B]

Well.. I don't understand the local hostility to AOC but do see that its there, but I don't see unity against racism as hurting them. And I don't see this as making her or the four "the face of the party".

Also: what the hell happened to Scott Adams? Trump's chaos makes Dilbert's boss look just slightly inefficient. He also can't be a chess player: those aren't Trump's "pawns".

Well this is one of the things that amuses me, people who like Trump/AOC are unable to see why others dislike AOC/Trump. But the single politician most like trump is AOC, and the single politician most like AOC is Trump. Two of our greatest attention-whores.

Adams is worth paying attention to, at least once in a while. He is one of the few commenters who often makes original points that I hadn't thought of. A useful hypothesis generator. Sometimes he is convincing, and sometimes I am sure he is punking me.

[SimonNZ]

Well this is one of the things that amuses me, people who like Trump/AOC are unable to see why others dislike AOC/Trump. But the single politician most like trump is AOC, and the single politician most like AOC is Trump. Two of our greatest attention-whores.

Oy. I certainly can't agree with you there. Alike in terns of provocative Twitter presence perhaps but couldn't be more unalike in every other respect . I can see why many might disagree with her positions but the animosity that Trump generates by being just his disgusting self seems to come to her by being yet another Fox bogeyman and all the disinformation that comes with that.

[SimonNZ]

So I think Adams is premature. He might be wrong. But he is not obviously wrong. He is certainly not "Er, no" wrong.

I should probably add that my "Er, no" was to Muzio. Though I'm also happy to give it to Adams' use of "Checkmate!", whatever other point he is trying to make (which you articulate better than he does).

[greg]

I personally wouldn't be surprised to learn that the current version of "Antifa" is a click-bait invention of Fox with paid agents provocateurs.

Maybe you should watch videos where people go to the streets and (try to) interview them...

if they are paid agents, that would technically be a conspiracy, so while not impossible, I seriously doubt it.

Technically they are just anarcho-communists (I'm not an expert on that, so will stop there).

I happened to stumble on a facebook page of someone saying they are part of Antifa... what stuck out was she wrote (worded different, but this was the message): "You people claim you aren't alt-right when you are criticizing us... so you are alt-right." This is the problem here. No logic and all tribalism. And anyone who doesn't see what is is wrong with that statement might also be part of the problem. Anyone who disagrees with them is going to be dehumanized by being called a "Nazi."

[drogulus]

You mean like the big tech companies that are trying their best to censor centrists and conservatives?

     I find this terribly naive. People throw out the word censorship a lot for things that aren't that. Does GMG censor me? I hope it does what weak thinkers would call censorship. I've seen them do it.

     As for censorship of conservatives, if it's part of conservatism today to say vile things that are not allowed on private platforms, that is not censoring conservatism. That's having standards people who call themselves conservatives wish to violate.

     

Maybe you should watch videos where people go to the streets and (try to) interview them...

if they are paid agents, that would technically be a conspiracy, so while not impossible, I seriously doubt it.

Technically they are just anarcho-communists (I'm not an expert on that, so will stop there).

Anyone who disagrees with them is going to be dehumanized by being called a "Nazi."

    The people they fight are NAZIs, the people they disagree with are all kinds. Anyway they aren't in the government, Trump is.

[JBS]

I personally wouldn't be surprised to learn that the current version of "Antifa" is a click-bait invention of Fox with paid agents provocateurs. Oh how they love to love them and drum up the fear, even though as far as I can tell their numbers are at best in double digits. But more importantly I've never read anyone on the left in any forum I visit who knows anyone who knows anyone who knows any one of them. More importantly still they are utterly unsupported by any of the supposedly "extreme" Democrats.

I'm sorry this person was able to find some crazy use for this nonsense in planning his suicide.

I think our own amw has mentioned knowing people who know them. *But there are various degrees of Antifa, the most noxious and violent seem to be on the West Coast, specifically this Portland group and another that seems to be connected to Berkeley.

The antiNazi demonstrators in Charlottesville iirc called themselves antifa. They certainly were not violent.

And you are very correct about how no Democrar supports them. Of course that does not keep Fox and the GOP from claiming they do.

*eta: in this post
http://www.good-music-guide.com/community/index.php/topic,26377.msg1221967.html#msg1221967

[Karl Henning]

Trump for the win

Sweet pom poms you wave

[greg]

I find this terribly naive. People throw out the word censorship a lot for things that aren't that. Does GMG censor me? I hope it does what weak thinkers would call censorship. I've seen them do it. 

I mean, maybe you have a different definition of the word? Moderators here can censor others on GMG, it's just not as big of a deal as other platforms because it's small and no one makes a living by posting.

Problem is that everyone uses the big social media platforms- youtube, facebook, twitter, etc. and it's a big part how individuals can make money and spread their thoughts. So being banned just for expressing opinions really is a big deal if it's lopsided on whatever ideology it is.

As for censorship of conservatives, if it's part of conservatism today to say vile things that are not allowed on private platforms, that is not censoring conservatism. That's having standards people who call themselves conservatives wish to violate.

Two things here:
1) "Vile" is a completely subjective term. You can't just censor someone because what they say is "vile." Anything can be "vile." Often, simple facts and logic are thought of as "vile." Truth is being drowned out because the far left is obsessed with "shutting them down."

I can't think of anyone on the right that wants to "shut down" the opposition. They are rather more open to debate. 



2) As for the real examples of people online who I've followed which happen to be anywhere between moderate liberal to moderate conservative stance, none of the instances of them being banned or demonitized or whatever is justified.

The people they fight are NAZIs, the people they disagree with are all kinds. Anyway they aren't in the government, Trump is.

Who are the Nazis?
And it's more like the people they fight are all kinds... of people who simply disagree with them. Like Andy Ngo, the gay asian journalist that they ganged up on and put in the hospital.

And you are very correct about how no Democrar supports them. Of course that does not keep Fox and the GOP from claiming they do.

It's probably suspected because they share a lot of similar values, just that they may be more extreme. And that's where the line is drawn.

Just like a lot of people who see normal conservatives as Nazis... both are wrong, people just need to make a distinction between moderate and extremists.

[amw]

I think our own amw has mentioned knowing people who know them. *But there are various degrees of Antifa, the most noxious and violent seem to be on the West Coast, specifically this Portland group and another that seems to be connected to Berkeley.

I follow Portland antifascists on twitter yes. They are anarchists and adhere to the three "antis" of anti monarchism, anti fascism and anti communism. (Anti monarchism obviously a weird concern for american antifa groups & has likely been imported from British antifascists.) They're not particularly violent in and of themselves, but they get into a lot of street fights with the Proud Boys, a white supremacist group in Portland of a similar size. (I.e. both have 30-60 regular "members" although neither is truly organised, and antifa recruits local liberals and socialists for left wing demonstrations whereas the proud boys bring in III%ers and Aryan Brotherhood from the eastern part of the state for right wing demonstrations.)

The guy in Tacoma was trying to destroy ice vehicles, not the detention center itself. Like all US anarchists, a fairly typical example of adventurism with no broader plan of execution. I'm against that kind of thing if that wasn't clear. Armed resistance against ICE is a good idea but needs to be carried out by well organised cadres with the ability to break people out of detention and protect them from the US government à la the partisans in nazi occupied Eastern Europe. There aren't currently any parties or organisations in the US capable of doing that.

There are some "good" antifa groups but this kind of adventurism is almost always a result of infiltration by the FBI or local police forces, who once they've become embedded in these orgs will try to encourage the members to engage in violent acts so that they can then be arrested and the group broken up. So that's likely to happen soon with tacoma antifa as well.

[SimonNZ]

I can't think of anyone on the right that wants to "shut down" the opposition. They are rather more open to debate. 

Laughing. Out. Loud.

I can think of one.

[Jo498]

The research by Haidt and others seems to point into the direction that broadly speaking the "left" has more trouble understanding the position of "right" than vice versa. But this seems to be mostly true of moderate positions on these sides, not towards extremists. Many extremists of any stripe want to shut down the opposition.
And as far as openness to debate is concerned: It is obviously rather easy to be open to debate if one a) does not care much either way and/or b) is not in any way personally involved (i.e. if I am filthy rich or in a secure government job with great benefits I might have the luxury to not care how healthcare is organized because it does not concern me very much).

I don't know about the US where some extremes are more extreme and free speech is more free (or sometimes it is not) than in most European countries. But in Europe there seems to me a clear tendency to paint positions that either used to be mainstream until fairly recently or that were at least perfectly admissible to enter into reasonable debate with as extremist (sometimes as right, sometimes as left) and try to exclude them from even being articulated.
Look at how some people on the center left have to retcon their position towards something like gay marriage. 25 years ago this was a fringe issue and it was perfectly reasonable to hold the opinion that while there might be some kind of recognized partnership among gay people, marriage in the usual sense was only between a man and woman. Or demanding fairly strong assimilation of immigrants. Nowadays even considering such things often makes one a despicable bigot. And on the other side: marginal tax rates that were accepted by mainstream conservatives in many countries until the mid/late 1980s are now considered far left pipedreams that would immediately kill entrepreneurship and the whole economy. And so on.

[SimonNZ]

Which Haidt research is that?

[drogulus]

I mean, maybe you have a different definition of the word? Moderators here can censor others on GMG, it's just not as big of a deal as other platforms because it's small and no one makes a living by posting.

Problem is that everyone uses the big social media platforms- youtube, facebook, twitter, etc. and it's a big part how individuals can make money and spread their thoughts. So being banned just for expressing opinions really is a big deal if it's lopsided on whatever ideology it is.

Two things here:
1) "Vile" is a completely subjective term. You can't just censor someone because what they say is "vile." Anything can be "vile." Often, simple facts and logic are thought of as "vile." Truth is being drowned out because the far left is obsessed with "shutting them down."

I can't think of anyone on the right that wants to "shut down" the opposition. They are rather more open to debate. 



2) As for the real examples of people online who I've followed which happen to be anywhere between moderate liberal to moderate conservative stance, none of the instances of them being banned or demonitized or whatever is justified.

Who are the Nazis?
And it's more like the people they fight are all kinds... of people who simply disagree with them. Like Andy Ngo, the gay asian journalist that they ganged up on and put in the hospital.



It's probably suspected because they share a lot of similar values, just that they may be more extreme. And that's where the line is drawn.

Just like a lot of people who see normal conservatives as Nazis... both are wrong, people just need to make a distinction between moderate and extremists.

     Censorship is when the government imposes bans. GMG doesn't censor me even if it bans me.

     As for the lopsidedness of private bans, behavior is asymmetrical, no one is banned for advocating a smaller government or the gold standard.

     I agree that "vile" is subjective, widely shared though and people are unlikely to give up on something they agree on.

     Perhaps you haven't noticed that what was once called normal conservatism has now been taken over by Trumpist vileness.

     I think you share more values with antifa than you let on. The difference is that antifa wants to fight fascists now, while most of us are hoping it won't come to that.

     

[Ken B]

     Censorship is when the government imposes bans. GMG doesn't censor me even if it bans me.

     As for the lopsidedness of private bans, behavior is asymmetrical, no one is banned for advocating a smaller government or the gold standard.

     I agree that "vile" is subjective, widely shared though and people are unlikely to give up on something they agree on.

     Perhaps you haven't noticed that what was once called normal conservatism has now been taken over by Trumpist vileness.

     I think you share more values with antifa than you let on. The difference is that antifa wants to fight fascists now, while most of us are hoping it won't come to that.

   

Not quite so simple.

What if a monopoly that exists as a monopoly only due to government action or enforcement restricts you? For example, an established church forbids Islam. Or a regulated monopoly like ATT used to be bans socialists? Or a broadcaster who "owns" the rights to a part of the fully regulated spectrum? These seem like censorship to me. Not to you?

Plus, "access" is the key concept. It's not the same as speech but it shows the principle that my civil rights can trump the property rights of businesses. There is the notion of a common carrier, and they may not discriminate at will. Lunch counters cannot ban Turks or Muslims or gays or blacks . But being Muslim is a matter of belief and speech. So there is some blur.

Google is a near monopoly in large part because of patents which are enforced by the government, and regulation of connectivity which is enforced by the government. So again, some blur.

[greg]

Laughing. Out. Loud.

I can think of one.

Okay, one? I wouldn't doubt they exist.

But clearly it's the overwhelmingly the left that has the "shut it down" mentality. There is no debate here, anyone not living on another planet can see that from so many real examples.

[JBS]

Okay, one? I wouldn't doubt they exist.

But clearly it's the overwhelmingly the left that has the "shut it down" mentality. There is no debate here, anyone not living on another planet can see that from so many real examples.

No, the right has many with the same mentality.  Especially rife among those who want everyone to believe that Mexicans are all criminals, Democrats are all Communists, etc.

[greg]

the Proud Boys, a white supremacist group in Portland of a similar size.

Now hold up here.

Are they really? I know only a little about them, have seen a video about them once and they definitely accept non-white dudes into their club. The same can't be said for a true white supremacist group, like the KKK.

Have you acquired more info than me about them? From non-biased sources?

That's a rather serious accusation, you will have to convince me or change the definition entirely.

[greg]

No, the right has many with the same mentality.  Especially rife among those who want everyone to believe that Mexicans are all criminals, Democrats are all Communists, etc.

Never heard about anyone dumb enough to think they are all criminals, only ones that recognize there are criminal gangs and such among them. If you gave me a name, I will gladly point and laugh at them.

Also, not once have i heard of any protest coming from the right to shut down anything. Any examples i don't know of?

[drogulus]

Not quite so simple.

What if a monopoly that exists as a monopoly only due to government action or enforcement restricts you? For example, an established church forbids Islam. Or a regulated monopoly like ATT used to be bans socialists? Or a broadcaster who "owns" the rights to a part of the fully regulated spectrum? These seem like censorship to me. Not to you?

Plus, "access" is the key concept. It's not the same as speech but it shows the principle that my civil rights can trump the property rights of businesses. There is the notion of a common carrier, and they may not discriminate at will. Lunch counters cannot ban Turks or Muslims or gays or blacks . But being Muslim is a matter of belief and speech. So there is some blur.

Google is a near monopoly in large part because of patents which are enforced by the government, and regulation of connectivity which is enforced by the government. So again, some blur.

     A government can extend the power of private corporations to manage our lives, or it can act to restrict these powers for the public good. Only a government can guarantee a liberty. It has no separate meaning. It's why it matters what the Constitution and the laws are.

     Private entities can have censorship power if the government wants them to have it.

     I note that none of the invitees to the Trump free speech orgy were victims of private bans, so none of the privately banned were invited. That would draw attention to why they were banned. Hint: it was not because they were conservatives.

[drogulus]

     The people who burned the flag recently were members of the "Revolutionary Communist Party". I remember the huge Vietnam war protests where a similar group climbed a stature in Central Park for the purpose of waving a North Vietnamese flag. I knew, most people knew what they were doing, calling down oppressive measures on everyone to get people on their side. The provocation and overreaction is the point.

     This didn't really work then. Even antifa as a movement is not in favor of revolutionary suicide. They want to brawl with Proud Boys and anyone who wants to brawl with them. They want to meet violence with violence. If they commit crimes they should be arrested and tried, just like anyone else.

     

     

[SimonNZ]

Okay, one? I wouldn't doubt they exist.

You're choosing mot to recognize the one I'm referring to?

But it's.not just him, it's also his supporters and enablers who hear his anti press rhetoric and don't push back but normalize it.

There's nothing like this on the left.

[greg]

     Perhaps you haven't noticed that what was once called normal conservatism has now been taken over by Trumpist vileness.

     I think you share more values with antifa than you let on. The difference is that antifa wants to fight fascists now, while most of us are hoping it won't come to that.

It's more likely that things have shifted much more left that perspective has changed. There was a graph out there showing this but i won't be able to find it probably.
If anything, moderate conservatives have shifted slightly left over the last 20 years or not moved much.

I share the values of anti-fascism. But most people do. They advocate violence against people saying stuff they disagree with. First thing that comes to mind when i think of fascism.

[greg]

You're choosing mot to recognize the one I'm referring to?

But it's.not just him, it's also his supporters and enablers who hear his anti press rhetoric and don't push back but normalize it.

There's nothing like this on the left.

You mean the president?

I can understand his frustration, though. Who likes that type of misrepresentation and lies? But it happens to every president.

Regardless, is he doing censorship? All the censoring is coming from big leftist tech companies and mobs of leftist extremists.

Any groups of rednecks joining together at a communist speaker's conference or whatever and chanting "Shut 'er down!" I think not. 😝

[SimonNZ]

You mean the president?

I can understand his frustration, though. Who likes that type of misrepresentation and lies? But it happens to every president.

Regardless, is he doing censorship? All the censoring is coming from big leftist tech companies and mobs of leftist extremists.

Any groups of rednecks joining together at a communist speaker's conference or whatever and chanting "Shut 'er down!" I think not. 😝

Misrepresentation and lies?

Your position is bizarre. Are you not aware that he calls the press "the enemy of the people", wants to jail his political oponents, has called for anchors and shows he doesn't like to be cancelled, jokes with his dictator press-killing buddies about adopting their methods...

...and that every one of his rallies includes a part where he asks his fanatics to turn to the press area and vent their hostility at them - it usually includes spitting, always screaming death threats.

What is it you think the left does? Calls out Fox for being the hysterical propagandists they so manifestly are?

As for the "leftist tech companies" - they're are big part of what got him the presidency.

[greg]

I would say being constantly compared to Hitler is misrepresentation.

Fox being hysterical propaganda... I don't know, they are also part of the media and that's kind of how they all are. But I am familiar with Tucker Carlson, i like him since he seems very rational.

Trump calls for stuff, but how much is actually succesful? You can't really compare yelling at journalists to actually successfully deplatforming them. Just because one is a president doesn't mean one has ultimate power.

[SimonNZ]

They're all unsuccessful until the moment they become successful.

But your Tucker Carlson comment suggests you're just trolling me so I won't bother going on.

[North Star]

I would say being constantly compared to Hitler is misrepresentation.

Fox being hysterical propaganda... I don't know, they are also part of the media and that's kind of how they all are. But I am familiar with Tucker Carlson, i like him since he seems very rational.

Trump calls for stuff, but how much is actually succesful? You can't really compare yelling at journalists to actually successfully deplatforming them. Just because one is a president doesn't mean one has ultimate power.

I guess you missed that the White House Press Secretary posted a manipulated video of a White House aide trying to take the microphone away from Jim Acosta because Trump didn't want to answer his questions, in order to justify the revoking of Acosta's press pass.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/laurenaratani/2018/11/08/altered-video-of-cnn-reporter-jim-acosta-heralds-a-future-filled-with-deep-fakes/#774b46543f6c

I would say being constantly compared to Hitler is misrepresentation.

Fox being hysterical propaganda... I don't know, they are also part of the media and that's kind of how they all are. But I am familiar with Tucker Carlson, i like him since he seems very rational.

Trump calls for stuff, but how much is actually succesful? You can't really compare yelling at journalists to actually successfully deplatforming them. Just because one is a president doesn't mean one has ultimate power.

It's a shame that this wasn't aired on Fox, apparently. Can't imagine why..
https://www.youtube.com/v/6_nFI2Zb7qE

[greg]

They're all unsuccessful until the moment they become successful.

Ok. Sure. And i wouldn't support his efforts to censor, either.

But it's still undeniably clear that the leftist have been much more aggressive at censoring and shutting down, so far.

I guess you missed that the White House Press Secretary posted a manipulated video of a White House aide trying to take the microphone away from Jim Acosta because Trump didn't want to answer his questions, in order to justify the revoking of Acosta's press pass.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/laurenaratani/2018/11/08/altered-video-of-cnn-reporter-jim-acosta-heralds-a-future-filled-with-deep-fakes/#774b46543f6c



It's a shame that this wasn't aired on Fox, apparently. Can't imagine why..
https://www.youtube.com/v/6_nFI2Zb7qE

Yeah, i know about that story. Remember that the press attacked first by slandering him, so that's why he is angry at them.

Doesn't mean much other than his personality sucks.

And this one case is not comparable to big tech censorship the last few years.

I'll watch the video when i get home.

[North Star]

But it's still undeniably clear that the leftist have been much more aggressive at censoring and shutting down, so far.

What kind of censoring and shutting down is the left doing? Genuinely asking because I don't know what kind of things you are thinking about here. I'm sure that Youtube, Facebook, etc are removing content that violates the US Civil Rights Act of 1968, for example, but I wouldn't call that leftist.

[greg]

I watched the video. I mean, I don't see anything I would disagree with that the guests said. And Tucker totally lost his cool.

Some of the clips I have seen him in, the stuff he's saying makes rational sense. Whether he's a "good guy" or not? No idea!

What kind of censoring and shutting down is the left doing? Genuinely asking because I don't know what kind of things you are thinking about here. I'm sure that Youtube, Facebook, etc are removing content that violates the US Civil Rights Act of 1968, for example, but I wouldn't call that leftist.

You asked the right question, my friend.

I bet I can't remember everything in one sitting, and there's just too much in general to include, but...
(these are mainly the people I follow off-and-on)

-Steven Crowder- demonetized from youtube because Carlos Maza finds a joke offensive, even though it's the same thing he calls himself (minus the "lispy" part)

-Any youtube video with MGTOW label is demonetized now (only because it is critical of feminism- it is also critical of traditional conservatism, but that's not significant)

-Jordan Peterson's book banned from New Zealand (he's not even conservative and the book is supposedly not even political... but somehow he's lumped into "alt-right" because of his mostly centrist views)

-Carl Benjamin getting banned from Patreon (he's not even conservative, but is critical of the far left)

-Paul Joseph Watson banned from Facebook- supposedly he didn't even have much on there, just pictures?

-Alex Jones banned from Facebook and youtube and Instagram (no, i don't take him seriously or follow him, but he shouldn't be banned)

-Milo Yiannopoulis banned from Facebook (actually I don't follow him, either)

-Gavin McInnes banned from Facebook and Twitter, I believe (don't remember much about it)


And then the cases where banks are involved, here's one from an Afro-Cuban Proud Boy member:
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/04/chase-bank-conservative-customers/

Tarrio warns of the speech-squelching pattern emerging across Silicon Valley and on Wall Street: "First we get silenced on social media, then Paypal, then I get debanked. It's a very dangerous trend."

And then there's all of the instances where feminists try to shut down MRA events. And then there's Antifa trying to intimidate Jordan Peterson during his speeches to shut it down.

It's almost always the left trying to shut down all who disagree, rather than the right.

The key summary is this: both conservative voices and liberal voices deserve to be heard, right? Not just one side. You have the media being overwhelmingly liberal as it is. But then you have the internet, where everyone can post their political opinions to an audience. It shouldn't be such a toxic environment for people to voice their opinions if they disagree with liberal political correctness.

Also, to back up my point earlier, ALL of these people are up for debating and open discussions (think of Crowder's Change My Mind, for example). The president might be questionable about this since he is a nutjob, but just because he is, doesn't mean that conservatives in general are for "shutting down" their opponents.

[greg]

Meanwhile, as for now, Shaun King, who is quite a popular liberal, is openly praising that guy that raided the detention facility and has said to stop it "by any means necessary" (implying violence is acceptable).


At the same time, Lindsay Shepherd (not familiar with her tbh) was banned for saying something mean to some transgender person and misgendering them. Sure, it's mean, but does it deserve a ban?
https://www.vice.com/en_ca/article/xwnbxd/free-speech-activist-lindsay-shepherd-was-banned-from-twitter-and-its-very-sad


I won't hold my breath for Shaun King to be banned from Twitter.

[SimonNZ]

William Buckley Jr must be turning in his grave now that idiots like Milo Yinnopoulis and Alex Jones are what's considered "conservative voices".

If so many of the people getting banned on Youtube and Facebook for offensive posting are on the right - then that's something the right need to ask themselves about keeping their own house in order and the face and values they want to present. It doesn't automatically make YT and FB "the left" - which they are not by any stretch.

And the NZ baiting was really lame. One specific chain temporarily removing a book does not equal censorship. If they had then stopped people from obtaining it elsewhere in all forms of media then that would be censorship.

[North Star]

-Steven Crowder- demonetized from youtube because Carlos Maza finds a joke offensive, even though it's the same thing he calls himself (minus the "lispy" part)

https://www.youtube.com/v/h_HOytoOfdg

-Any youtube video with MGTOW label is demonetized now (only because it is critical of feminism- it is also critical of traditional conservatism, but that's not significant)

Based on what Wikipedia says about MGTOW, "MGTOWs advocate male separatism[3][15][19] and believe society has been corrupted by feminism,[3], a view shared with the alt-right.[15] MGTOWs posit that legal and romantic relationships with women fail a cost–benefit analysis,[11][22] that feminism has made women dangerous to men, and that male self-preservation requires dissociating completely from women.", it doesn't seem so much that it's critical of women, but that it's misogyny with a sprinkle of homophobia.

-Jordan Peterson's book banned from New Zealand (he's not even conservative and the book is supposedly not even political... but somehow he's lumped into "alt-right" because of his mostly centrist views)

The book was never banned from New Zealand, but a national bookstore chain stopped carrying it for 12 days or so, because the Christchurch mass murderer mentioned it in his manifesto. I'm sure anyone in New Zealand could order a copy from Book Depository, or perhaps get one from another local bookstore.

-Carl Benjamin getting banned from Patreon (he's not even conservative, but is critical of the far left)

So a direct violation of Patreon community guidelines by someone who isn't conservative, led to Patreon dropping them? Terrible!
https://patreonhq.com/hate-speech-on-patreon-a9026e52c2cf

-Paul Joseph Watson banned from Facebook- supposedly he didn't even have much on there, just pictures?

-Alex Jones banned from Facebook and youtube and Instagram (no, i don't take him seriously or follow him, but he shouldn't be banned)

-Milo Yiannopoulis banned from Facebook (actually I don't follow him, either)

It appears that Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan's Facebook account was closed at the same time, because Facebook considered them "dangerous." "We've always banned individuals or organizations that promote or engage in violence and hate, regardless of ideology," a Facebook spokesperson said. "The process for evaluating potential violators is extensive and it is what led us to our decision to remove these accounts today."

From Wikipedia: "Watson's career emerged through his work for conspiracy theorist and radio host Alex Jones. As editor-at-large of Jones' website InfoWars he helped promote fake news[11] and conspiracy theories such as the claim that 9/11 was an inside job, the chemtrail conspiracy theory, the New World Order and the Illuminati."
Isn't it terrible that Facebook has been forced to look more closely at InfoWars employees who spread fake news and influence US presidential elections?

You missed that Yiannopoulos was also banned from Twitter:

In July 2016, Yiannopoulos panned the Ghostbusters reboot as "a movie to help lonely middle-aged women feel better about being left on the shelf." After the film's release, Twitter trolls attacked African-American actress Leslie Jones with racist slurs and bigoted commentary. Yiannopoulos wrote three public tweets about Jones, saying "Ghostbusters is doing so badly they've deployed [Leslie Jones] to play the victim on Twitter," before describing her reply to him as "Barely literate" and then calling her a "black dude". Multiple media outlets have described Yiannopoulos' tweets as encouraging the abuse directed at Jones. Yiannopoulos was then permanently banned by Twitter for what the company cited as "inciting or engaging in the targeted abuse or harassment of others". He later stated that he was banned because of his conservative beliefs.

It's so difficult to be a pedophilia-supporting islamophobic Nazi spreading fake news these days.

-Gavin McInnes banned from Facebook and Twitter, I believe (don't remember much about it)

Again, such a shame that inciting violence, racism, defending Holocaust deniers, accusing the Jews of being responsible for the Holodomor and the Treaty of Versailles, Islamophobia, "Nazis are not a thing. Islam is a thing", general misogynia, white supremacy, starting a far-right neo-fascist group of political violence can lead to such an extreme leftist reaction.

And then the cases where banks are involved, here's one from an Afro-Cuban Proud Boy member:
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/04/chase-bank-conservative-customers/


And then there's all of the instances where feminists try to shut down MRA events. And then there's Antifa trying to intimidate Jordan Peterson during his speeches to shut it down.

It's almost always the left trying to shut down all who disagree, rather than the right.

The key summary is this: both conservative voices and liberal voices deserve to be heard, right? Not just one side. You have the media being overwhelmingly liberal as it is. But then you have the internet, where everyone can post their political opinions to an audience. It shouldn't be such a toxic environment for people to voice their opinions if they disagree with liberal political correctness.

Also, to back up my point earlier, ALL of these people are up for debating and open discussions (think of Crowder's Change My Mind, for example). The president might be questionable about this since he is a nutjob, but just because he is, doesn't mean that conservatives in general are for "shutting down" their opponents.

Nobody is claiming all 'conservatives are for "shutting down" their opponents'. But even if you can make an excuse for calling support for universal health care 'far-leftist' in the US because in the current political climate, the Republicans are against it, and even some Democrat voters, too, it doesn't mean that there's somehow a very large and dangerous far left comparable to the far right.
Otherwise there would obviously be leftist terrorism on the same level that there is right wing terrorism in the US.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/01/homegrown-terrorists-2018-were-almost-all-right-wing/581284/

Most of these things seem to be about Republicans/Conservatives/right-wing extremists trying to violate the rights of others, and whining about the response. Or about election fraud.

[Florestan]

male self-preservation requires dissociating completely from women

In other words, in order to preserve males, they should be cut off completely from any chance of reproducing themselves. Brilliant, just brilliant. 

[drogulus]

     It's Darwinism at work, as males who are unsuited to reproduce take themselves out of the game. Of course they have reasons, there are always reasons in retrospect.

     Take the Middle East, please. In many countries the economy doesn't generate enough jobs to make marriage a real prospect. Ideologies fill the void. Bog wants the infidels dead dead dead. Americans are experimenting with a No Bog version and not killing the scapegoats, just hating them a little.

     No one could accuse me of liking people but I don't hate them. They are funny and really into believing stuff.

[greg]

If so many of the people getting banned on Youtube and Facebook for offensive posting are on the right - then that's something the right need to ask themselves about keeping their own house in order and the face and values they want to present. It doesn't automatically make YT and FB "the left" - which they are not by any stretch.

I see you like victim blaming, comrade.
Do you still not see that "offensive" is a subjective term? They are being banned based on others' subjective feelings. What if you were banned for no good reason because someone didn't like what you said? Maybe you should take a good hard look at yourself and make sure to conform next time.

[greg]

As for the Mgtow comments, none of you even know a thing about it. Very telling that you immediately resort to ridicule after simply reading a wikipedia page about it.
"And a sprinkle of homophobia." That's what I'm talking about, do you not see what you are doing? Immediately resorting to shame tactics to shut down anyone calling out truth. That's the sole tactic of the far left. Tech companies and mobs are just the extension of that.

Perhaps you could actually listen to what they have to say first? No? Yeah, i thought so.

I might comment on the other stuff later but that's it for now.

[greg]

One more thing real quick: Facebook and Youtube have CEOs that are leftists. While it doesn't influence everything, you can control a company much more directly than a country. Their influence over their companies are going to be stronger than Trumps influence over the US.

[drogulus]

Do you still not see that "offensive" is a subjective term? They are being banned based on others' subjective feelings.

     Laws are passed for subjective feelings. I note also that businesses of all kinds have standards about abusive speech that can get you fired. Curiously, they resemble each other in a way that suggests subjective commonalities are not strictly tied to ideological preference. Trump gleefully uses abusive language that would get him fired almost anywhere else. The fact that he offends people his base doesn't like is immaterial. Further, I don't see abuse as being proof of conservatism. If conservatives choose to apply Trumpist standards to their own conduct is it "conservative conduct"? If that's how they want it to be we all should take note of what it means to be conservative in the new era. Far from being a judgment that is imposed on them they are clearly making a choice about how they want to be judged.

[SimonNZ]

In what alternate reality is Mark Zuckerberg a "leftist"?

Don't know who runs YT.

[amw]

Sergey Brin & Larry Page.

[North Star]

As for the Mgtow comments, none of you even know a thing about it. Very telling that you immediately resort to ridicule after simply reading a wikipedia page about it.
"And a sprinkle of homophobia." That's what I'm talking about, do you not see what you are doing? Immediately resorting to shame tactics to shut down anyone calling out truth. That's the sole tactic of the far left. Tech companies and mobs are just the extension of that.

Perhaps you could actually listen to what they have to say first? No? Yeah, i thought so.

I might comment on the other stuff later but that's it for now.

From https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/love-sex/reddit-mgtow-men-sex-sleep-women-manosphere-meninist-a7330276.html:

"I want sex and company, but I don't want/can't put in the effort to get it," wrote another user on the MGTOW.com forum.

The MGTOW community has a pretty clear set of expectations for themselves and the wider world that are based in meninism: a counteraction to feminism which sees women's rights directly disadvantage men.

While feminists might argue that their movement aims to help both men and women break free of harmful gender stereotypes, meninists disagree.

To them, men are the victims of heterosexual relationships, comparable to a horse with a cart strapped it its back. MGTOWs borrow heavily from pop-culture to explain their beliefs, particularly the film the Matrix where the Chosen One chooses to reject his blinkered "blue pill" life in favour of the awareness offered by the "red pill".

The ultimate goal for MGTOWs is total freedom from societal constraints - known as Level 4.

"Level 0" involves "taking the red pill" and recognising gender equality is a sham. Level one sees a man rejecting long-term relationships but engaging in sexual encounters, which he will reject in level two.

As the MGTOW movement is entangled with alt-right and libertarian politics, the third step sees the man focusing on earning money in order to sustain himself.

In this quest, obstacles include feminists; white knights (men who are "chivalrous" towards women); social justice warriors; those who are pro-LGBT rights and support safe spaces, amongst other things.

Their heroes? The so-called herbivore men of Japan who have no interest in finding long-term female partners, a label with which half of men in their 20s and 30s identify.
sh
The origins of MGTOW are unclear. The MGTOW website loftily suggests their ideals hark back to "Schopenhauer, Tesla, Beethoven, Galileo, or even Jesus Christ", and equates it to "fire".

"MGTOW is not as old as fire, but it's as old as a man's first discovery of it. If MTGOW is fire, then perhaps feminism is gasoline," reads the MGTOW.com history page. A more concrete theory is that MGTOW was created by online aliases Solaris and Ragnar in the 2000s, when they penned a manifesto calling for men and women to adhere to traditional gender roles and to fight for pared back govermment.

And while their communities may be virtual, their determination seems very real indeed.

And here's the kind of discussion MGTOW's forum has on the LGBT community:
https://www.mgtow.com/forums/topic/the-lgbt-community/
"My take is they're full of s~~~ and dangerous and shouldn't be allowed to roam the streets amongst our elders and children.
"I don't hate them, I just pretend they don't exist."
"And I also hate the fact that when you don't want to hear that s~~~ from gay people, "you're automatically a bigot."
"I also agree that they're worse than feminists some cases"
"However, I can't stand the LGBT community that are activists. They're full of s~~~. As far as I can tell, they're the same as feminists."
"All females do is complain. Gays are feminine in nature."
"Every time I talk with gay people, they're also feminists and have the same level of "victimhood" as feminists do."

This from a community of men who have fallen victim to women and minorities having some rights as well.

[greg]

Don't know who runs YT.

Susan Wojcicki.

[greg]

From https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/love-sex/reddit-mgtow-men-sex-sleep-women-manosphere-meninist-a7330276.html:


And here's the kind of discussion MGTOW's forum has on the LGBT community:
https://www.mgtow.com/forums/topic/the-lgbt-community/
"My take is they're full of s~~~ and dangerous and shouldn't be allowed to roam the streets amongst our elders and children.
"I don't hate them, I just pretend they don't exist."
"And I also hate the fact that when you don't want to hear that s~~~ from gay people, "you're automatically a bigot."
"I also agree that they're worse than feminists some cases"
"However, I can't stand the LGBT community that are activists. They're full of s~~~. As far as I can tell, they're the same as feminists."
"All females do is complain. Gays are feminine in nature."
"Every time I talk with gay people, they're also feminists and have the same level of "victimhood" as feminists do."

This from a community of men who have fallen victim to women and minorities having some rights as well.

Not going to read while at work, but the Independent article is probably just a smear piece.

As for the random comments, there is no unified anti-LGBT sentiment, Mgtow is not really even an organized movement. So you will have people with various opinions, same as the general public. But instead they are labeled as homophobic and racist just as a shaming tactic.

To make it simple, there are really two main categories: those that just engage in hookups/dating but not marriage, and the "monks" who completely disengage. The main common theme is just to avoid marriage because of the very extreme risk that it brings to men.

[Karl Henning]

So a direct violation of Patreon community guidelines by someone who isn't conservative, led to Patreon dropping them? Terrible!

Not fair !

[greg]

     Laws are passed for subjective feelings. I note also that businesses of all kinds have standards about abusive speech that can get you fired. Curiously, they resemble each other in a way that suggests subjective commonalities are not strictly tied to ideological preference. Trump gleefully uses abusive language that would get him fired almost anywhere else. The fact that he offends people his base doesn't like is immaterial. Further, I don't see abuse as being proof of conservatism. If conservatives choose to apply Trumpist standards to their own conduct is it "conservative conduct"? If that's how they want it to be we all should take note of what it means to be conservative in the new era. Far from being a judgment that is imposed on them they are clearly making a choice about how they want to be judged.

As for the second half of your post, I'm not sure what to say because I don't think I'm even conservative, and I don't like Trump, so not going to defend that.

The first part: this is really specific and basic, actually. It alludes to the problem of whether these companies should abide by public or private rules. That's a debate entirely itself that is currently ongoing. I can accept censorship if they are honest with the bias.

For the public space, the limits of free speech end at calls of violence. Not hurting someone else's feelings. And should stay that way.

[drogulus]

     

The first part: this is really specific and basic, actually. It alludes to the problem of whether these companies should abide by public or private rules.

     I would say yes, abide by public rules have have their own. The private rules will be quite similar to the rules that govern public employees, and should be the absolute minimum standard for political leaders who should obey an even higher standard.

     Once again, and as many times as necessary, rules against behavior hit those who violate them, and if it should happen that a conservative violates the rule, it does not make the rule anti-conservative, unless it is a necessary condition of being a conservative that one violates the rule.

     

[greg]

And the NZ baiting was really lame. One specific chain temporarily removing a book does not equal censorship. If they had then stopped people from obtaining it elsewhere in all forms of media then that would be censorship.

Ok. Maybe not the best example since it was somewhat small scale and not really impactful.

https://www.youtube.com/v/h_HOytoOfdg

Wow, you have some massive balls to send me a video with 6.4k likes to 18k dislikes as a reply.

The Young Turks are extremely biased. After watching them literally laugh about that one publicized case  about a man being raped, I stopped watching their videos. So won't give them 10 more minutes.

(the problem with this is not the joking, but the fact that if a woman were tied up and raped, they would definitely would not be laughing).

It appears that Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan's Facebook account was closed at the same time, because Facebook considered them "dangerous." "We've always banned individuals or organizations that promote or engage in violence and hate, regardless of ideology," a Facebook spokesperson said. "The process for evaluating potential violators is extensive and it is what led us to our decision to remove these accounts today."

They are not 100% liberal. Doesn't mean there isn't a strong bias. They've banned people literally over "misgendering" someone. What type of conservative, or even moderate, company would do that?

Louis Farrakhan was blatantly anti-Semitic. I don't remember what Alex Jones was banned for specifically.

Again, such a shame that inciting violence, racism, defending Holocaust deniers, accusing the Jews of being responsible for the Holodomor and the Treaty of Versailles, Islamophobia, "Nazis are not a thing. Islam is a thing", general misogynia, white supremacy, starting a far-right neo-fascist group of political violence can lead to such an extreme leftist reaction.

Any non-leftist sources that confirm all of this? I'm not an expert on him. Direct sources?

Nobody is claiming all 'conservatives are for "shutting down" their opponents'. But even if you can make an excuse for calling support for universal health care 'far-leftist' in the US because in the current political climate, the Republicans are against it, and even some Democrat voters, too, it doesn't mean that there's somehow a very large and dangerous far left comparable to the far right.
Otherwise there would obviously be leftist terrorism on the same level that there is right wing terrorism in the US.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/01/homegrown-terrorists-2018-were-almost-all-right-wing/581284/

Most of these things seem to be about Republicans/Conservatives/right-wing extremists trying to violate the rights of others, and whining about the response. Or about election fraud.

No idea why you brought up health care. Also not sure how they are determining those numbers, or how they are determining they are liberal or conservative.

Leftist terrorism nowadays is Antifa. I'm not sure what the equivalent of is of right-wing terrorism that is openly forming mobs in black clothes and masks, attacking people, and refusing to converse with anyone. Surely the KKK is still around, but they are hidden in secrecy.




It's hard for people to see when they are in an echo chamber. It's like trying to look at one's self without a mirror.

[SimonNZ]

Ok. Maybe not the best example since it was somewhat small scale and not really impactful.

Not the best example of censorship because not censorship.

[greg]

Not the best example of censorship because not censorship.

Not if you have a different definition.

You can self-censor. Or a bookstore can plan to sell books but later decide not to in order to censor what they are willing to sell (what they approve, basically). If you are stuck to defining censorship in only much more extreme cases (like only legal scenarios), then right, it isn't censorship.

[greg]

Demoted by University for Views on Gender, Professor Sues

https://www.theepochtimes.com/demoted-by-university-for-views-on-gender-professor-sues_3005176.html



No room for debate. Just enforcement and financial loss, I guess.

[Ken B]

https://www.redstate.com/alexparker/2019/07/18/women-vancouver-lose-businesses-man-tries-legally-force-waxing-ladyscrotum/

[greg]

https://www.cnn.com/style/article/kyoto-animation-studio-cultural-impact-and-loss-opinion/index.html

Wondering how many people have heard about what happened to Kyoto Animation studios. Apparently it has been on the news channels, being the worst mass murder in Japan in the last 20 years.

A really bad target to pick, in so many ways. They've made several shows that I watched 10 years ago that I think about nearly every day. And they are typically known for being second best only to Studio Ghibli when it comes to animation quality and also are known for being one of the few studios that pays its animators fair salaries.


Anyone who wants to donate (they got $1.7 million in donations in just three days, going way past their original goal):
https://www.gofundme.com/f/help-kyoani-heal

[drogulus]

     In India's Assam State, Residents Of River Islands Face Uncertainty Over Citizenship

Residents of Assam must submit paperwork — birth certificates, high school diplomas and other documents — to prove their citizenship. But literacy rates are low, and poverty runs high. Many people find it difficult to provide those documents.

Last year, the state government issued a draft NRC list, and some 4 million people living in Assam who thought they were Indian citizens were left off. This comes against a backdrop of efforts by India's central government to pass a bill that would effectively grant citizenship to many other undocumented immigrants, except if they are Muslim.

     See, there's more than one way to do "it". You can "you're not a citizen, get out" or you can "You're a Muslim, you're not a citizen". In this case being poor and illiterate isn't enough to de-citizen you, you have to be Muslim, too.

[Florestan]

     In India's Assam State, Residents Of River Islands Face Uncertainty Over Citizenship

Residents of Assam must submit paperwork — birth certificates, high school diplomas and other documents — to prove their citizenship. But literacy rates are low, and poverty runs high. Many people find it difficult to provide those documents.

Last year, the state government issued a draft NRC list, and some 4 million people living in Assam who thought they were Indian citizens were left off. This comes against a backdrop of efforts by India's central government to pass a bill that would effectively grant citizenship to many other undocumented immigrants, except if they are Muslim.

     See, there's more than one way to do "it". You can "you're not a citizen, get out" or you can "You're a Muslim, you're not a citizen". In this case being poor and illiterate isn't enough to de-citizen you, you have to be Muslim, too.

Once upon a time, there were no IDs, no citizenship, no nothing. Once upon a time, one could have lived one's entire life, from the craddle to the grave, without ever meeting a state official. Buf we've come a long way from those dark times. In our modern, enlightened, progressive era we are watched, inspected, spied upon, directed, law-driven, numbered, regulated, enrolled, indoctrinated, preached at, controlled, checked, estimated, valued, censured, commanded, by creatures who have neither the right nor the wisdom nor the virtue to do so. To be GOVERNED is to be at every operation, at every transaction noted, registered, counted, taxed, stamped, measured, numbered, assessed, licensed, authorized, admonished, prevented, forbidden, reformed, corrected, punished. It is, under pretext of public utility, and in the name of the general interest, to be place under contribution, drilled, fleeced, exploited, monopolized, extorted from, squeezed, hoaxed, robbed; then, at the slightest resistance, the first word of complaint, to be repressed, fined, vilified, harassed, hunted down, abused, clubbed, disarmed, bound, choked, imprisoned, judged, condemned, shot, deported, sacrificed, sold, betrayed; and to crown all, mocked, ridiculed, derided, outraged, dishonored. 

Sieg heil, Progress! Sieg heil, Liberalism! Sieg heil, Democracy!

[drogulus]

Once upon a time, there were no IDs, no citizenship, no nothing. Once upon a time, one could have lived one's entire life, from the craddle to the grave, without ever meeting a state official. Buf we've come a long way from those dark times. In our modern, enlightened, progressive era we are watched, inspected, spied upon, directed, law-driven, numbered, regulated, enrolled, indoctrinated, preached at, controlled, checked, estimated, valued, censured, commanded, by creatures who have neither the right nor the wisdom nor the virtue to do so. To be GOVERNED is to be at every operation, at every transaction noted, registered, counted, taxed, stamped, measured, numbered, assessed, licensed, authorized, admonished, prevented, forbidden, reformed, corrected, punished. It is, under pretext of public utility, and in the name of the general interest, to be place under contribution, drilled, fleeced, exploited, monopolized, extorted from, squeezed, hoaxed, robbed; then, at the slightest resistance, the first word of complaint, to be repressed, fined, vilified, harassed, hunted down, abused, clubbed, disarmed, bound, choked, imprisoned, judged, condemned, shot, deported, sacrificed, sold, betrayed; and to crown all, mocked, ridiculed, derided, outraged, dishonored. 

Sieg heil, Progress! Sieg heil, Liberalism! Sieg heil, Democracy!

     I never met a state official except going in and out of the country, or the post office. But then I live in a liberal country and I'm not a farmer.

     Now, come to think of it, I went to an IRS office last year. It had something to do with an inheritance. I went with my brother and we were yukking it up about something and the tax guy, who was used to dealing with normal consciousness of guilt people was acting puzzled and then got it. Incidentally, he was Chinese-American and after we did our business we said we were looking for a restaurant and he said something about how people often asked him if he knew a good Chinese restaurant and we laughed about that and as we were leaving I said "So, do you know any good Chinese restaurants?"

     It was just another day in liberal hell.

[Ken B]

     I never met a state official except going in and out of the country, or the post office. But then I live in a liberal country and I'm not a farmer.

     Now, come to think of it, I went to an IRS office last year. It had something to do with an inheritance. I went with my brother and we were yukking it up about something and the tax guy, who was used to dealing with normal consciousness of guilt people was acting puzzled and then got it. Incidentally, he was Chinese-American and after we did our business we said we were looking for a restaurant and he said something about how people often asked him if he knew a good Chinese restaurant and we laughed about that and as we were leaving I said "So, do you know any good Chinese restaurants?"

     It was just another day in liberal hell.

Such a sheltered  life. Never taking a driver's test, never meeting a school teacher, a health inspector, or a cop. Rude of you to ignore the trash collectors though, they work hard and a polite nod isn't so hard.

[drogulus]

Such a sheltered  life. Never taking a driver's test, never meeting a school teacher, a health inspector, or a cop. Rude of you to ignore the trash collectors though, they work hard and a polite nod isn't so hard.

     Oh, those guys. I have met some of them. I don't find them particularly oppressive or threatening, or features of liberalism, or hell.

[Karl Henning]

https://www.cnn.com/style/article/kyoto-animation-studio-cultural-impact-and-loss-opinion/index.html

Wondering how many people have heard about what happened to Kyoto Animation studios. Apparently it has been on the news channels, being the worst mass murder in Japan in the last 20 years.

I heard, although I have not followed the story closely.

[Todd]

Mush-brained lefties (ie, lefties) have a new form of imperialism to root for: Do the Brazil Amazon fires justify environmental interventionism?

[Jo498]

That's "White Man's Burden", 2nd (or 4th) edition, isn't it?

(I am not saying that it is wrong, just that one should openly admit what it is.)

[Todd]

That's "White Man's Burden", 2nd (or 4th) edition, isn't it?

4th. 

One would think if environmental degradation were truly a serious problem, then taxes (including tariffs, as it happens) that reduce consumption, along with massive wealth redistribution to less developed countries to enhance economic growth and equality in said countries would be vigorously pursued and advocated, with full throated vigor, by self-styled green types.  I think it's more likely that the intelligentsia will end up embracing an approach more in line with the esteemed Mr Douglas.  Since I live in the US, it won't directly impact me, so it's all good.  Now if you'll excuse me, I need to start shopping for a new 75 inch QLED TV.

[drogulus]

     The Pats just signed Antonio Brown. How is this not an evil plot by the Hooded One?

[greg]

"Islam is right about women"

https://www.boston25news.com/news/-islam-is-right-about-women-odd-signs-spark-confusion-in-local-town/987837653

[Todd]

Islam is right about women

Perhaps, but it's definitely wrong about bacon.

[greg]

Perhaps, but it's definitely wrong about bacon.

Absolutely.   

[amw]

One would think if environmental degradation were truly a serious problem, then taxes (including tariffs, as it happens) that reduce consumption, along with massive wealth redistribution to less developed countries to enhance economic growth and equality in said countries would be vigorously pursued and advocated, with full throated vigor, by self-styled green types.

That is indeed the position of almost all actual left parties (as opposed to liberals masquerading as leftists such as the DSA). Along with eg eliminating the US military, which is the world's largest individual polluter, and nationalizing or breaking up companies like Apple and Microsoft that chew through the world's stocks of rare earth minerals in order to produce electronic devices that fail within three years.

think it's more likely that the intelligentsia will end up embracing an approach more in line with the esteemed Mr Douglas.  Since I live in the US, it won't directly impact me, so it's all good.  Now if you'll excuse me, I need to start shopping for a new 75 inch QLED TV.

Thought experiment: why do almost all media outlets in the USA devote so much more attention to the Green New Deal and Greta Thunberg than, say, any proposal to redistribute wealth to the global south? (For that matter, why does the USA maintain strict sanctions on a number of oil producing countries that prevent them from diversifying their energy outputs?)

Also, this is probably obvious to all non-conservatives, but the Bolsonaro administration itself only exists because of imperialism, specifically the collaboration between members of the Brazilian judiciary and American corporate interests to overthrow and imprison any presidential candidate who posed a threat to Bolsonaro (and his right-wing party more generally). I generally disagree with him politically but Glenn Greenwald's work uncovering this has for once been unimpeachable. The role played by American evangelical missionaries to convert vast numbers of Brazilians (and people throughout the global south more generally) with the explicit support and funding of the US government also cannot be overlooked. Lawrence Douglas's article represents just another facet of this ongoing imperialist assault on Brazil and its natural resources, which as far as he and Trump alike are concerned, exist for the benefit of first world countries. The only actual way to "save the amazon" is to kick the USA, Canada, Europe and all their corporate interests out of it. But anyway.

[André]

There's truth in what you say.

[Todd]

or breaking up companies like Apple and Microsoft

This is conflating things a bit.  Apple produces products that die after three years but are largely replaced in less than two, while Microsoft is not a particularly large player in consumer electronics.  To Microsoft's great good credit, it has largely escaped ire in the current bout of pseudo-/quasi-populist awkwardness and, ultimately, ineptitude.  Some die hard types may want to break it up, but the US government couldn't do it at the turn of the century, and it can't and won't now.  (If Yurpean doofuses try, the US should engage in all out economic warfare against the Old World and actively pursue a policy to destroy the EU.  It should do the latter anyway.) 

For that matter, why does the USA maintain strict sanctions on a number of oil producing countries that prevent them from diversifying their energy outputs?

This one is fairly simple.  It is an exercise in old-fashioned great power politics with an eye toward maintaining dominance over the dollar-denominated hydrocarbon market and putting economic pressure on the two other great powers that actually matter.

[Jo498]

"Islam is right about women"

https://www.boston25news.com/news/-islam-is-right-about-women-odd-signs-spark-confusion-in-local-town/987837653

Maybe also wrong about booze (a thing in common with some brands of American Puritans)

http://archive.fo/mgEXF

[greg]

Maybe also wrong about booze (a thing in common with some brands of American Puritans)

http://archive.fo/mgEXF

I'm not going to read the whole article, but title question is actually very good.

Just going to guess that it concludes that it gives down-and-out people something to live for so they don't cause mayhem by murdering people/committing crimes.

Which I've never understood why people love booze so much, but just that that's the attitude about it, what I hear all the time...

[Jo498]

I haven't read all of it either. I thought that the main thesis was that moderate alcohol consumption worked as social lubricant, especially facilitating flirting situations and thus a relation of the sexes not dominated by how many camels your or her father has.

[Florestan]

"If wine were to disappear from human production, I believe it would cause an absence, a failure in health and intellect, a void much more terrifying than all the recesses and the deviations for which wine is regarded as responsible." - Charles Baudelaire

[drogulus]

     Dept Of Franco-Italian Hoax

     Italy and France Prepare for Imminent Collapse of Mont Blanc Glacier

The crisis backs up another warning issued this week by the World Meteorological Organization, which released their new report to coincide with the climate summit in New York. In it they warn that if temperatures continue to rise at current levels, the ice on the Eastern and Central Alps could disappear completely within two or three decades. They say the only ice that would remain only in the Western Alps, where the crumbling Mont Blanc glacier is about to break down.


     
     

     

[Ken B]

Caught faking.
https://reason.com/2019/09/26/canadian-green-party-edits-image-of-party-leader-to-show-her-using-a-metal-straw/

Note her response is to lie about always using a reusable cup.

[Ken B]

Justin Trudeau in blackface again and an Afro with his crotch stuffed.

https://mobile.twitter.com/heckyessica/status/1178051702785806341

Don't try this at home unless your father was Prime Minister.

[Jo498]

The worst thing is not the faking of photographs or the ridiculous mummery but that someone bothers to fake a picture with a straw and that it is actually considered "important news" what kind of straw someone uses. (I am all for environmental protection but the banning of plastic straws is maybe the worst fig leaf in this field ever.)

[greg]

"Women are struggling to find men who make as much money as they do" (NY Post)

It should be obvious why I facepalmed myself into next year from reading this.

I predicted this years ago. With the gender pay gap argument and the general attitude that women should be making as much money as men, of course women will struggle to be satisfied in relationships because usually they want a guy who makes more money than them.

So either one of two will have to happen:
1) female nature will change according to society's new customs (good luck with that, since this is an evolutionary thing)
2) women will settle for guys that make less money than them.


Or 3) just admit that you want population stagnation. Which I don't necessarily oppose, just be logically consistent, please! 



(also notice how it's framed as a women's issue, never mentioned that dudes are struggling, it's only that women who want to be with guys with more money than them are struggling.)

[drogulus]

"Women are struggling to find men who make as much money as they do" (NY Post)

It should be obvious why I facepalmed myself into next year from reading this.

I predicted this years ago. With the gender pay gap argument and the general attitude that women should be making as much money as men, of course women will struggle to be satisfied in relationships because usually they want a guy who makes more money than them.


(also notice how it's framed as a women's issue, never mentioned that dudes are struggling, it's only that women who want to be with guys with more money than them are struggling.)

     Most times I read about the struggles of dudes in the industrial belt and the rural and small town Red Wastelands. I think you might be cherry picking a little. because though I've seen such articles for years, the ratio favors struggling dudes, at least in the Fake News Media I read.

So either one of two will have to happen:
1) female nature will change according to society's new customs (good luck with that, since this is an evolutionary thing)
2) women will settle for guys that make less money than them.

      You aren't even trying, are you?

      Both the economy and the social arrangements will change together, and not only to make you feel shitty about them, that's a bonus, but consider how such dinosaurs as us must have felt when they figured out that their little feathery cousins would survive the asteroid. Where I have the most sympathy for you (though not for me because I wouldn't know what to do with it) is how the economy is arranged sort of on purpose so that harm is felt among dudes particularly, and where I'm least sympathetic is how you search for goats to scape without any sign of embarrassment.

[SimonNZ]

apropos of nothing - just caught my eye:

Missouri man charged 'set 13 wildfires on way to high school reunion'

"A suspected arsonist traveled from Missouri to northern California to set more than a dozen wildfires before attending his 50th high school reunion, it was reported on Saturday.

A former classmate told the San Jose Mercury News Freddie Owen Graham appeared happy at the party on 21 September. Graham, a native of Milpitas, California who has lived in the Kansas City area for three decades, didn't seem troubled or upset, Rich Santoro said.

"He was excited to come. I talked to him five or six times during the night. He was happy he was there. He told me, 'I didn't expect to have this much fun."' Santoro said.

"It turns out he had already set the fires."

State fire investigators said Graham gave them a different impression. After he was arrested at the airport in San Jose, Graham told them he was in an "emotional" state over the loss of his wife in 2018 when he tossed flaming pieces of paper on to the side of a road.

"Because she passed away and could not be with him, it made him emotional, starting the fires," the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection report said.

Santoro recalled Graham being sad about attending the reunion without his wife.

Graham is being held on $2m bail on 13 counts of arson. He also faces two special counts of arson during a state of emergency, which was declared by Governor Gavin Newsom in March, ahead of the wildfire season.

Prosecutors said Graham drove through a foothill area north-east of San Jose and set 13 fires over the course of two days.

Although the fires caused no injuries or structural damage, they took dozens of firefighters using aircraft, bulldozers and other equipment hours to extinguish.

Graham was identified as the suspect after someone saw him, wrote down his rental car's license plate number and notified firefighters.

He was arrested when he was returning a rental car at the airport – his second of the weekend, after reportedly swapping out the one seen by a witness at the fire."

[greg]

     Most times I read about the struggles of dudes in the industrial belt and the rural and small town Red Wastelands. I think you might be cherry picking a little. because though I've seen such articles for years, the ratio favors struggling dudes, at least in the Fake News Media I read.

The stories you are hearing about is probably more about physical blue collar workers... which just happen to be mostly dudes. And probably not framed as a "men's issue" but a blue collar issue that just happens to overwhelmingly affect men. (Just a guess- no idea which articles you have in mind).

Both the economy and the social arrangements will change together, and not only to make you feel shitty about them, that's a bonus, but consider how such dinosaurs as us must have felt when they figured out that their little feathery cousins will survive the asteroid. Where I have the most sympathy for you (though not for me because I wouldn't know what to do with it) is how the economy is arranged sort of on purpose so that harm is felt among dudes particularly, and where I'm least sympathetic is how you search for goats to scape without any sign of embarrassment.

Social arrangements will change, and it's good to be aware of what effect it will have and be openly honest about it.

Not sure you need to feel any sympathy for me personally, since my income is more or less 50% above what's average, so that's not the issue.

It's the slight frustration at seeing people completely lack the ability to actually understand the consequences and trade-offs of how they would like things to be and then complaining later and framing it so it's not a result of their own choices. 


Just to reinforce my point:

From the same site, an article with a tone about how obvious the pay gap is super, super real, guys:
https://nypost.com/2019/04/02/many-men-think-the-gender-pay-gap-is-fake-news-poll/

And it mentions in there they suggest a quota for hiring women, etc.

And then writes an article 5 months later about how not enough men are economically attractive to women. I mean, whatever floats their boat. 

[Jo498]

There is another "side effect": We all know the dime novel stories from the bad old days: lordling marries governess, tycoon marries secretary, surgeon marries nurse etc. This led to some socio-economic mixing by all these women "marrying up" and men "marrying down". Nowadays people pair up more closely within their socioeconomic strata, leading to more stratification (aka inequality). But because identity politics (despite lip service to "intersectionality") overall blinds people to economic inequality (that's why it serves as a divide and conquer tool for the 0.1%) this is not so often talked about.

[drogulus]

The stories you are hearing about is probably more about physical blue collar workers... which just happen to be mostly dudes. And probably not framed as a "men's issue" but a blue collar issue that just happens to overwhelmingly affect men. (Just a guess- no idea which articles you have in mind).

     What I have noticed is that many articles are about how men in particular are hurt by being insufficiently educated in an economy that is more stratified. Articles like that are sometimes given a "men's issue" cast. In most cases I translate men/women issue articles into Drogulese about what the underlying problem is, if there is one, or what other problem might be more worthy of attention.

     I know I don't need to be sympathetic. But you do seem to take it personally the way society is changing, and I recognize how people are hurt by it, and the fact that history is all about rising and falling classes doesn't make anyone hurt by change feel better.

     Since I'm retired I feel less connected to how difficult the economy is for young people. This is at an emotional level, while on the Droguloid level my interest is if anything greater. For me everything that happens is history in the making, so for a history buff maximum fun.

[Ken B]

Brownshirts where I live. Masked thugs yelling at an old lady with a walker
https://mobile.twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1178498843597344768
Three miles from where I am sitting.

[SimonNZ]

That link didn't give the wider story. Is it this?"

Violent clashes break out at Maxime Bernier event in Hamilton

do supporters of the Canadian People's Party really wear Make America Great Again caps?

[Ken B]

That link didn't give the wider story. Is it this?"

Violent clashes break out at Maxime Bernier event in Hamilton

do supporters of the Canadian People's Party really wear Make America Great Again caps?

I don't know much about the CPP. The election is in full blight swing and I have seen one lawn sign for them. I don't think their sartorial choices justify what we see on the tape in any case, but I doubt MAGA caps are a common choice. I did see one in one of the videos, probably intended to be an in your face thing. I saw none in other photos of the event. I have never personally seen one in Canada . 🤷‍♂️
I think the remark in the CBC article about "some" wearing them is unevidenced and sounds motivated.

Here is another link.
https://www.rt.com/news/469904-antifa-protest-bernier-canada/

Sadly the RT report seems less tendentious than the CBC report.

[SimonNZ]

Well speaking as a lefty I don't get what these x-dozen so-called Antifascists  game is. Because whatever it is they're terrible at it. So bad at messaging and controlling their image that I speculated once they must be an invention of Fox, so effectively do they play into the Fox narrative.

At the time of Charlottesville it seemed like their idea was to protect lefty protesters from actual self describing Nazis and their violence - a sort of dont-start-nothing-wont-be-nothing stand. I could get behind that. But even then they need to lose the silly masks and acting like they want to start a fight rather than end one. And stop yelling at grannies.

But still the amount of right wing attention and anxiety they generate is vastly out of proportion to any threat. And they're not brownshirts if they're not supported by or affiliated with ANF political party. And if they're ostensibly fighting fascism - however misguidedly.

[Ken B]

Well speaking as a lefty I don't get what these x-dozen so-called Antifascists  game is. Because whatever it is they're terrible at it. So bad at messaging and controlling their image that I speculated once they must be an invention of Fox, so effectively do they play into the Fox narrative.

At the time of Charlottesberg it seemed like their idea was to protect lefty protesters from actual self describing Nazis and their violence - a sort of dont-start-nothing-wont-be-nothing stand. I could get behind that. But even then they need to lose the silly masks and acting like they want to start a fight rather than end one. And stop yelling at grannies.

But still the amount of right wing attention and anxiety they generate is vastly out of proportion to any threat. And they're not brownshirts if they're not supported by or affiliated with ANF political party. And if they're ostensibly fighting fascism - however misguidedly.

Nonsense. You can be a fringe brownshirt as well as a mainstream one. Thuggery is thuggery, it doesn't need an electoral platform.

So prolife means prolife, the Moral Majority are the moral ones, Trump is a stable genius, and you take all self applied labels at face value?  If you are dressed in black with a mask assaulting people in the streets then you are the fascist no matter what you call yourself.

[Ken B]

OSLO, NORWAY—The Norwegian Nobel Committee was reportedly considering President Trump as a recipient of its prestigious Nobel Peace Prize, as the president had submitted his name for consideration to them over 67 times. But after reviewing his credentials, the committee concluded that he had not launched enough drone strikes against foreigners to qualify.

This is satire of course but well aimed satire.

[SimonNZ]

Nonsense. You can be a fringe brownshirt as well as a mainstream one. Thuggery is thuggery, it doesn't need an electoral platform.

So prolife means prolife, the Moral Majority are the moral ones, Trump is a stable genius, and you take all self applied labels at face value?  If you are dressed in black with a mask assaulting people in the streets then you are the fascist no matter what you call yourself.

No, I think they're terrible at being "anti-fascists",and am quite happy calling them "thugs" and a number of other pejoratives, mostly synonyms of "idiot" . But "fascist" has a meaning more specific than the one you're suggesting, and "brownshirt" a specific set of historical analogies. And I'm not in any way defending them, though I don't think they're the threat Fox et al makes them out to be.

At what level would you place their threat?

[Ken B]

No, I think they're terrible at being "anti-fascists",and am quite happy calling them "thugs" and a number of other pejoratives, mostly synonyms of "idiot" . But "fascist" has a meaning more specific than the one you're suggesting, and "brownshirt" a specific set of historical analogies. And I'm not in any way defending them, though I don't think they're the threat Fox et al makes them out to be.

At what level would you place their threat?

Threat level? An irrelevant question. The behaviour is before us, I don't need a theory of the organization,s reach.

I do FWIW think there is a threat of general escalation of political violence. (I suspect that is a motivator for some of the people we see on both sides.) I do believe it is contagious and can spread unpredictability. So I favour a quick hard stomp on such stuff.

We don't always get it. Google Jordan Hunt kick video Toronto. He got a suspended sentence eventually for that assault. (I think he aimed for her head in fact. )

[SimonNZ]

Threat level? An irrelevant question. The behaviour is before us, I don't need a theory of the organization,s reach.

I do FWIW think there is a threat of general escalation of political violence. (I suspect that is a motivator for some of the people we see on both sides.) I do believe it is contagious and can spread unpredictability. So I favour a quick hard stomp on such stuff.

We don't always get it. Google Jordan Hunt kick video Toronto. He got a suspended sentence eventually for that assault. (I think he aimed for her head in fact. )

I think it is relevant in considering the context of the current climate of political violence - specifically from where and from who the calls for violence are coming from, who is condoning or whitewashing it, how the statistics of violence stand among specific groups, and which groups are likely to be increasingly popular and more violent in the future.

Again: I'm not supporting this group in any way - if they're being violent they should be arrested and charged, and that seems to be what's happening. But they are not the boogeymen they're painted on Fox. Nor are they the imminent threat of mobilized political violence.

[Florestan]

If you are dressed in black with a mask assaulting people in the streets then you are the fascist no matter what you call yourself.

Actually, the real fascists were not masked.

And I'm curious: these only too brave antifas, so good at scaring impotent elders, have they ever had a real fight with a real right-wing gang, which is their supposed raison d'être? If yes, who were the victors?

This is satire of course but well aimed satire.

Hah! Very good.

[Florestan]

At what level would you place their threat?

Threat of changing the political statu quo, nonexistent level.

Threat to peaceful citizens happening to cross their way, very high level. Supposed that old lady had a heart attack, which given the circumstances I'm surprised, and glad, it didn't happen.

These hooligans should be treated with the utmost legal severity.

[Florestan]

Brownshirts where I live. Masked thugs yelling at an old lady with a walker
https://mobile.twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1178498843597344768
Three miles from where I am sitting.

The comments by David and Stephanie Blake made my day.

Alos worth noting, the passive attitude of three guys who just indifferently filmed or photographed the incident without trying to make the thugs come to their senses. And a big bravo for the bearded guy who helped the lady.

[SimonNZ]

These hooligans should be treated with the utmost legal severity.

They should be treated with the legal severity matching legal guidelines and legal standards for any crimes they commit.

[SimonNZ]

And I'm curious: these only too brave antifas, so good at scaring impotent elders, have they ever had a real fight with a real right-wing gang, which is their supposed raison d'être? If yes, who were the victors?

At Charlottesville, though its hard to get a clear sense of how exactly  that went down.

At the time there were people here posting photos of guys wearing swastikas with bruises, who took this to prove that Antifa and the anti-Nazis protesters were the real villains (aww...did the poor widdle Nazi get a boo-boo?).

[Florestan]

They should be treated with the legal severity matching legal guidelines and legal standards for any crimes they commit.

Exactly what I said. I'm sure that disrupting public order and harrassing people in the streets are crimes in the US just as they are in Romania.

[SimonNZ]

Exactly what I said. I'm sure that disrupting public order and harrassing people in the streets are crimes in the US just as they are in Romania.

Okay, but then they'll have to do the same to the harassers outside abortion clinics etc.

[Florestan]

Okay, but then they'll have to do the same to the harassers outside abortion clinics.

If they behave as aggressively, they should be punished the same. A just cause is not made juster by violence, on the contrary, it is harmed.

[ritter]

If they behave as aggressively, they should be punished the same. A just cause is not made juster by violence, on the contrary, it is harmed.

Unfortunately, the diabolical idea that "violence committed by us on them is somehow justifiable, while violence committed by them on us is completely intolerable" is getting an ever stronger grip in many circles (and in many countries). 

[Florestan]

Unfortunately, the diabolical idea that "violence committed by us on them is somehow justifiable, while violence committed by them on us is completely intolerable" is getting an ever stronger grip in many circles (and in many countries). 

Well, it might very well be that the period in which this idea seemed to have subsided was just a (too short) interlude...

[Ken B]

Unfortunately, the diabolical idea that "violence committed by us on them is somehow justifiable, while violence committed by them on us is completely intolerable" is getting an ever stronger grip in many circles (and in many countries). 

Exactly right. And why it cannot be tolerated: if it is it will spread.

And in that light let me remark on Simon's repeated reference to Charlottesville and Fox. We don't have Fox in Canada and this story does not involve Fox. Nor did we have swastikas and burning torches.  We had elderly people crossing the road with a walker.

[Ken B]

Oddly enough I was
Just rereading a book on the origins of wwI   
The authorities knew about Princip. What do you think was their assessment of the threat level ?

 

More seriously how many people remember that Canada was under martial law in peacetime, in my lifetime? Or know that our non murder violent crime rate is a bit higher than in the USA? The potential for violence here is greater than the "polite Canadian" stereotype suggests.

ADDED
And two years ago also in Hamilton we had "anti capitalist" rioters, also masked, rampage downtown. They caused millions in damages and destroyed a couple places including a small donut shop that had just opened. The reaction here was encouraging. We had campaigns to raise money to pay for damages, and a week long festival of shopping in the affected area, with traffic closed off. The donut shop had long lines for over 6 months (in a city with oodles of Tim Horton stores). The police worked for months and arrested the ring leader, who is in jail. A massive and thrilling "fuck you".

[Ken B]

Update from one of the local papers https://www.hamiltonnews.com/opinion-story/9622448-apparently-i-m-nazi-scum-/#.XZNtLGvfAON.twitter

And more details, also from the local paper
https://www.hamiltonnews.com/news-story/9621255-hamilton-police-arrest-four-individuals-after-protest-against-ppc-leader-maxime-bernier-s-mohawk-college-event-turns-violent/

I want to highlight one detail. The red caps a few people were apparently wearing (I only ever saw one) said "Make Canada Great Again". This is much more plausible than the CBC claim about MAGA and is a nice example of why I distrust the CBC. They are sloppy and tendentious. They didn't bother to check.

For several years whenever I heard on CBC some factual matter I had first hand knowledge of they were wrong. My favorite example was calling Guelph a "long time bellwether riding" This couldn't be more wrong. At the federal and provincial level the riding had members, of opposing parties, who served decades, winning by large amounts, even in the face of landslides. After they retired Guelph still usually bucked the trend, and last election elected only the second Green Party member in the country. Bellwether my ass.

[SimonNZ]

What do they mean by Make Canada Great Again? Hasn't Canada had a pretty consistent level of goodness?

[greg]

But because identity politics (despite lip service to "intersectionality") overall blinds people to economic inequality (that's why it serves as a divide and conquer tool for the 0.1%) this is not so often talked about.

That's exactly what my observation has been.

Maybe my perception is wrong about this, but it just seems like identity politics exploded after Occupy Wall Street died down. If it's no coincidence, than it may be intentional as a divide and conquer tactic by whoever decides what media stories would be about. But it also could be a million other things, so personally I don't stick to conclusion, really, because we will never have that sort of information even if it were the case.


(put another way, the super rich may have gotten pissed that people were protesting them so they manipulated the masses to argue amongst themselves about divisive things such as gender, racial violence by cops, etc. to divert their attention and stay in control)

[JBS]

What do they mean by Make Canada Great Again? Hasn't Canada had a pretty consistent level of goodness?

I read the PPC platform earlier tonight.  To me it sounds like a straight adaptation into Canadian of Trump's program.

[SimonNZ]

So..."Make Canada Great Again" is code for "keep Canada white"?

[Ken B]

So..."Make Canada Great Again" is code for "keep Canada white"?

https://www.salimmansur.ca/

He look white to you?

UPDATE. I have decided your comment is both ignorant and bigoted. This after your quasi apologia of thuggery on my streets. So I am putting you on my ignore list.

[Ken B]

I read the PPC platform earlier tonight.  To me it sounds like a straight adaptation into Canadian of Trump's program.

Not quite. Trump's program is "Trump can fix it". I don't think the PPL leader is quite that megalomaniacal.

I assume you mean mostly immigration policy. Canada already has a much more restrictive and selective immigration policy than the US. It is based on points. It's actually more like Trump is adopting Canadian policy ...

[JBS]

https://www.salimmansur.ca/

He look white to you?

His party thinks there are too many people like him in Canada.

Not quite. Trump's program is "Trump can fix it". I don't think the PPL leader is quite that megalomaniacal.

I assume you mean mostly immigration policy. Canada already has a much more restrictive and selective immigration policy than the US. It is based on points. It's actually more like Trump is adopting Canadian policy ...

The PPC seems to think it's not restrictive and selective enough.

The website says that  where no policy position is given, it can be assumed the party position is whatever position Maxime held during his time with the Conservatives. Not megalomania, but the Maxime-centric attitude does emulate the GOP with Trump.

[Ken B]

His party thinks there are too many people like him in Canada.

The PPC seems to think it's not restrictive and selective enough.

The website says that  where no policy position is given, it can be assumed the party position is whatever position Maxime held during his time with the Conservatives. Not megalomania, but the Maxime-centric attitude does emulate the GOP with Trump.

Sigh.
First Mansur is a smart man. I think him a better judge of his own party than you. It's insulting to tell him you know better, Pujo.

As for the other point. So far the party has one member, him.

As far as I can tell the focus of his revolt was official multiculturalism. There are for example courts in Canada using sharia under the policy. That is why Mansur has attracted seculsr Muslim support.

[SimonNZ]

https://www.salimmansur.ca/

He look white to you?

UPDATE. I have decided your comment is both ignorant and bigoted. This after your quasi apologia of thuggery on my streets. So I am putting you on my ignore list.

I think that's an extreme and unnecessary reaction. I thought we were disagreeing respectfully and without raised voices, and I was pleased our differing politics didn't stop more agreeable exchanges elsewhere.

I am ignorant of most of Canadian politics, am more than happy - indeed hope - to be set straight, and will give a heartfelt mea culpa if I'm way off base.But MAGA caps and appeals to Trumpism raise my suspicions.

I was offering no apology for Antifa, was speculating of the type of organisation they could have been but for some reason are not. I think their danger is largely a right-wing media construction, that's my opinion you're welcome to disagree with, but again thats not an apology for any wrongdoing they may be involved in.

[pjme]

 ..... Is this still ....The unimportant news thread....?

so:

https://www.youtube.com/v/bmjNIq49398

[drogulus]

     Earth to be reduced to burned out cinder

     

     Sanders: "Charred remnants of the wealthy will pay higher taxes"
     

[JBS]

Sigh.
First Mansur is a smart man. I think him a better judge of his own party than you. It's insulting to tell him you know better, Pujo.

As for the other point. So far the party has one member, him.

As far as I can tell the focus of his revolt was official multiculturalism. There are for example courts in Canada using sharia under the policy. That is why Mansur has attracted seculsr Muslim support.

I was stating the PPC's policy proposals. They want an immigration system that is more restrictive than it is now.  They also want to discourage Muslims from living in Canada.  I was stating facts, not judging the party or Mr. Mansur.  If he thinks there are too many Muslims in Canada, and too many immigrants in general, then it's perfectly logical for him to be a PPC member.

[Ken B]

I was stating the PPC's policy proposals. They want an immigration system that is more restrictive than it is now.  They also want to discourage Muslims from living in Canada.  I was stating facts, not judging the party or Mr. Mansur.  If he thinks there are too many Muslims in Canada, and too many immigrants in general, then it's perfectly logical for him to be a PPC member.

Actually while they want to reduce refugees in total one of the few groups they call out for giving a higher priority are persecuted Muslims, especially gay ones.

https://www.peoplespartyofcanada.ca/refugees_ending_open_borders_policies_and_prioritizing_persecuted_groups

You are not stating facts. You are stating opinion and conjecture as if it were fact. And you should know the difference.

Everyone who disagrees with your politics is racist?

[Ken B]

How will I vote? For the candidate most likely to defeat the incumbent Liberal member. She is a cabinet minister (and was opposed to abortion rights, though she agreed to support the party pro choice position; she has no stated position on blackface).  It seems that is the Conservative candidate, accordingly to the results of the 2015 election, but I will vote for the NDP candidate if he appears to be closer in the polls. There is a PPC and a Green and a Rhino as well. The Animal party has no candidate.

[JBS]

Actually while they want to reduce refugees in total one of the few groups they call out for giving a higher priority are persecuted Muslims, especially gay ones.

https://www.peoplespartyofcanada.ca/refugees_ending_open_borders_policies_and_prioritizing_persecuted_groups

You are not stating facts. You are stating opinion and conjecture as if it were fact. And you should know the difference.

Everyone who disagrees with your politics is racist?

Actually, they want to accept people who are persecuted by Muslims. Western oriented Muslims happening  to be one of them.
I was summarizing the PPC platform. The more I read it, the more it sounds to me like a Trump staffer wrote it.  It certainly calls for a restrictive immigration system, and implies that there are too many Muslim immigrants, so I think it's fair to say I was stating facts.

[drogulus]

     Platform says:

The Liberal government is deliberately attempting to erase our borders. Over the past three years, it has done nothing to stop the flow of tens of thousands of asylum seekers illegally crossing our borders. Accepting all these refugees will cost Canadian taxpayers billions of dollars.

Moreover, in 2018, Canada welcomed more resettled refugees than any other Western country; more than the United States, a country with ten times our population, and as many as all of the European Union.

     Apparently some Canadians feel like some Americans do, that more people costs more money on a net per capita basis. You can "run out of dollars" there, too.

[Ken B]

Actually, they want to accept people who are persecuted by Muslims. Western oriented Muslims happening  to be one of them.
I was summarizing the PPC platform. The more I read it, the more it sounds to me like a Trump staffer wrote it.  It certainly calls for a restrictive immigration system, and implies that there are too many Muslim immigrants, so I think it's fair to say I was stating facts.

No. For just one egregious You implied Mansur thinks there are too many Muslims living in Canada. But just because I want to buy less Beethoven this year does not mean I think I have to much Beethoven or want to expel any.

Let me play the game. I will "simply state a fact". You single out one candidate to question his intelligence and his motives and *surprise* he has dark skin.

(NB I do not really think you are being bigoted against dark skin, I am illustrating why your claim is a crock)

[JBS]

No. For just one egregious You implied Mansur thinks there are too many Muslims living in Canada. But just because I want to buy less Beethoven this year does not mean I think I have to much Beethoven or want to expel any.

Let me play the game. I will "simply state a fact". You single out one candidate to question his intelligence and his motives and *surprise* he has dark skin.

(NB I do not really think you are being bigoted against dark skin, I am illustrating why your claim is a crock)

Mr Mansur is a candidate for a party whose platform is explicitly anti-immigrant and implicitly anti-Moslem.  One usually expects a candidate  to agree with the public positions of his party. Hence it is fair and logical to think that Mr Mansur is anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim.  It is fair and logical to think that every PPC candidate is anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim, unless they have explicitly disassociated themselves from that part of the PPC platform. 

You after all offered Mr. Mansur as an example of a Muslim who supports PPC.  But being a Muslim does not mean a person does not think there are too many of his fellow Muslims in Canada.

[Todd]

Purely local, but a lesson in what happens when Democrats rule in a single party state:

Real ID: What's the hold-up in Oregon?

If you want to fly in 2020, get a passport now and avoid DMV lines during Real ID rollout, state says

I mean, state leaders have only known about the coming changes for fourteen years.  Of course, Oregon, led by Dems and nothing but Dems, rolled out a multi-hundred-million dollar website for Obamacare that was able to enroll zero (0) people, and spent tens of millions of dollars planning a bridge, only to see the plans nixed by the Coast Guard and Army Corp of Engineers because the Democrat Big Brains forgot to consult those two entities to get their requirements.  At least we have choo-choos that have less than 50% the originally forecast utilization rates.

My tax dollars hard at work.

[JBS]

Purely local, but a lesson in what happens when Democrats rule in a single party state:

Real ID: What's the hold-up in Oregon?

If you want to fly in 2020, get a passport now and avoid DMV lines during Real ID rollout, state says

I mean, state leaders have only known about the coming changes for fourteen years.  Of course, Oregon, led by Dems and nothing but Dems, rolled out a multi-hundred-million dollar website for Obamacare that was able to enroll zero (0) people, and spent tens of millions of dollars planning a bridge, only to see the plans nixed by the Coast Guard and Army Corp of Engineers because the Democrat Big Brains forgot to consult those two entities to get their requirements.  At least we have choo-choos that have less than 50% the originally forecast utilization rates.

My tax dollars hard at work.

I live in a state whose government is completely dominated by the GOP. The DMV lines have been a thing to avoid whenever possible for years, even without Real ID deadlines.  I renewed my passport while Democrats were in control of the Department of State, and it was a breeze.

[Todd]

The DMV lines have been a thing to avoid whenever possible for years, even without Real ID deadlines.

That's true everywhere, all the time.  But because of the special incompetence and stupidity of Dems, in Oregon, people will have less than three months to get a Real ID if they want to fly.  Again, Democrat leaders in the state have known about the requirement for fourteen years.

[Todd]

So, Netflix has dropped a documentary series about the lives of illegal immigrants.  Apparently, if review summaries are to be believed, it's empathetic, etc.  It also demonstrates a willful disregard for the law.  The producers had every chance to turn in illegal immigrants, people who are knowingly violating the laws of the United States, but instead, said producers opted to aid and abet criminality.  Shameful.

[SimonNZ]

That's not how reporting works, Einstein. And without breaking a sweat I'm sure I could link to dozens of investigative pieces about the lives of undocumented immigrants...that didn't, it hardly needs adding, end with them being turned in. And I hope you're enjoying that avocado while you type that hate,

and now here's some actual unimportant news:

Helena Bonham Carter sought Princess Margaret's blessing through psychic

"Some actors avoid excessive research, but for Helena Bonham Carter to play Princess Margaret in The Crown meant reading all the biographies, talking to friends, ladies-in-waiting and relatives, and consulting an astrologer, a graphologist and a psychic.

The last meeting meant she could talk to the princess herself, the actor told Cheltenham literature festival.

"She said, apparently, she was glad it was me. My main thing when you play someone who is real, you kind of want their blessing because you have a responsibility.

"So I asked her: 'Are you OK with me playing you?' and she said: 'You're better than the other actress' ... that they were thinking of. They will not admit who it was. It was me and somebody else.

"That made me think maybe she is here, because that is a classic Margaret thing to say. She was really good at complimenting you and putting you down at the same time.

"Then she said: 'But you're going to have to brush up and be more groomed and neater.' Then she said: 'Get the smoking right. I smoked in a very particular way. Remember that – this is a big note – the cigarette holder was as much a weapon for expression as it was for smoking.'"

[Todd]

That's not how reporting works, Einstein.

Einstein: Powerful.  Avacado: Even more so. 

It's good to know that a bona fide GMG Big Brain hath decreed that Netflix and Selena Gomez are now part of the journalistic establishment.  That means it is so. 

[SimonNZ]

Christ I hate people who can't hold their drink.

[Todd]

Christ I hate people who can't hold their drink.

Ah, yes, the whole drinking thing.  You've resorted to that before.  Typically, I'd attribute that to intellectual laziness, but I know in your case it's as good as you can do.

[SimonNZ]

Its that or you post like a drunk when you're sober. My version is the more charitable,

[greg]

So, Netflix has dropped a documentary series about the lives of illegal immigrants.  Apparently, if review summaries are to be believed, it's empathetic, etc.  It also demonstrates a willful disregard for the law.  The producers had every chance to turn in illegal immigrants, people who are knowingly violating the laws of the United States, but instead, said producers opted to aid and abet criminality.  Shameful.

Maybe the sequel can be people overstaying their trips to other countries? Maybe next time I visit Japan I'll just stay there longer than legally acceptable.

And the producers will be empathetic about how I want a longer vacation, and how I'm bored of the US from living here over 30 years. And call the people in Japan who object to the documentary racists.

That'll all work fine. 

[Todd]

Its that or you post like a drunk when you're sober. My version is the more charitable,

I have to say, judging by the obviously emotional, knee-jerk response and attendant shit punctuation, it is you who are drinking.  (I'm guessing you also don't know about international time zones.) 

I also have to say that your virtue signaling is one of the funniest things I encounter on the web.

[greg]

Simon... since you seem to be very liberal-leaning, do you buy into the idea that the US should not have closed borders? Since that idea seems to have spread a lot recently.

The justification is that it is stolen land, therefore at this point it should be open for everyone.

If you don't believe that, ignore the following. If you do...


So New Zealand is in the same situation, being stolen land and all. So that means that, since I'm visiting in a few months, I should be allowed to overstay my trip and stay indefinitely, right?

And what if there was the scenario where I wanted to stay long-term and vote? I might have political opinions different than what you would want for your country, and maybe I should be able to vote, too?...

[SimonNZ]

Simon... since you seem to be very liberal-leaning, do you buy into the idea that the US should not have closed borders? Since that idea seems to have spread a lot recently.

The justification is that it is stolen land, therefore at this point it should be open for everyone.

If you don't believe that, ignore the following. If you do...


So New Zealand is in the same situation, being stolen land and all. So that means that, since I'm visiting in a few months, I should be allowed to overstay my trip and stay indefinitely, right?

And what if there was the scenario where I wanted to stay long-term and vote? I might have political opinions different than what you would want for your country, and maybe I should be able to vote, too?...

No. I don't "buy into" that idea, nor have I heard anyone suggest it, least of all for the reason you stated. Where are you getting that idea from?

Re NZ: its a little more complex than that. You should start by reading about the Treaty of Waitangi and the history of Maori claims against the treaty. NZ was lucky in being settled so late that the worst aspects of treatments of indigenous peoples elsewhere were learned from and avoided. And that a couple of early governors were instrumental in curbing the greed of land-grabbers and sellers, most notably Robert FitzRoy (more famous as Darwin's captain on The Beagle).

I don't know what the process is once you overstay your trip, but I'm pretty sure your kids wont be put in cages and you wont be immediately labelled a rapist gang member. If you get citizenship you'll be allowed to vote as you wish, and there's no reason to expect you'll vote as I do. Furthermore I wont be expecting you to dress as I do or to speak English around me unless we're trying to communicate with each other or share my spiritual beliefs. Fwiw my little neighbourhood has a large Indian community - including two of the four flats in my block.

[JBS]

It should be noted that what the American Right calls "open borders" is what most people would call humane treatment of migrants and immigration rules that keep out only actual criminals and jihadis.

It is a curious fact that some of the most zealous advocates of restrictive immigration are in fact themselves immigrants, white Christians from Europe or various portions of the British Commonwealth.  Apparently these blokes think only people like themnselves should be allowed in.

[SimonNZ]

White people are "ex-pats", brown people are "immigrants".

Apparently.

[JBS]

White people are "ex-pats", brown people are "immigrants".

Apparently.

If you are Breitbart, that is exactly the case.

[greg]

No. I don't "buy into" that idea, nor have I heard anyone suggest it, least of all for the reason you stated. Where are you getting that idea from?

Ah ok, no problem then. Just ignore what I wrote.

Not remembering the exact source, but have seen some articles mentioning that and also some people I know with the same attitude, like borders shouldn't exist. 

Re NZ: its a little more complex than that. You should start by reading about the Treaty of Waitangi and the history of Maori claims against the treaty. NZ was lucky in being settled so late that the worst aspects of treatments of indigenous peoples elsewhere were learned from and avoided. And that a couple of early governors were instrumental in curbing the greed of land-grabbers and sellers, most notably Robert FitzRoy (more famous as Darwin's captain on The Beagle).

Sure, I've not even scratched the surface of the history. I'm only aware that there were some conflicts in the past between the two groups, so for some time the Europeans were not wanted there.

I don't know what the process is once you overstay your trip, but I'm pretty sure your kids wont be put in cages and you wont be immediately labelled a rapist gang member.

No one thinks that some random person is a necessarily a rapist just because they crossed the border.

But of course there are some that are, or part of gangs, and they come here illegally. I live only about 5 hours from the border, so that type of attitude is not helpful at all. Better safe than sorry.


If I overstayed my trip, and I had kids, they would be put somewhere. And I would be put somewhere- probably somewhere not to great to stay in. And surely the situation would be worse if there were waves of hundreds, or thousands, of people doing the same thing as me at the same time. Not saying the officers at the detention centers are perfect angels that always make the best decisions. Just saying that it's a burden that shouldn't be happening in the first place.

Fwiw my little neighbourhood has a large Indian community - including two of the four flats in my block.

That's cool, nowadays I would actually feel at home because of that. 

[Moonfish]

This thread is aptly named.....

0:)

[greg]

So South Park is banned in China now.

I hope Xi Jinping dies a slow, slow, painful, torturous death.

[JBS]

https://www.newsweek.com/florida-man-arrested-after-allegedly-forcing-alligator-drink-beer-1463693

[Todd]

Full-on ecopropaganda on display: Oil firms to pour extra 7m barrels per day into markets, data shows

Sub-headline: Projected production surge in next 12 years to be led by Shell despite climate crisis

Other propagandistic elements include placing the article in a grouping or section called "The Polluters" and word choice like: pour, surge, flood, catastrophic, acceleration, "gold standard", "social license" (a particularly nice piece of irrelevant slop sure to be gobbled up by mush-brained lefties).  I especially like how 8% output growth over 12 years constitutes a "surge".

Evil oil companies, providing the market and consumers with the products they need to live their everyday lives.  I know, I know, if we wish - real hard - that wind and solar can produce the type of energy contemporary economic activity requires, said energy will simply materialize. 

Future litigation against private companies - which will of course shift even more market control to state run firms - will be very, very lucrative.  So many billable hours.

[Ken B]

As it turns out, the word "lickspittle" is not just an old-timey anachronism.

https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/344834/

https://mobile.twitter.com/JonSchweppe/status/1182076217123586048

[SimonNZ]

"Major earthquakes in California cause Rams to fumble. More sports news at ten."

I'm reminded of this news presenters line from The Kentucky Fried Movie as local coverage of Typhoon Hagibis fixates on what it means for the All Blacks.

[Todd]

Local Democrat dipshits in action again:

Fuck up the first: Portland makes speed bump design error, costing taxpayers $75,000

Fuck up the second: Portland Developer Schnitzer says Wapato Jail will be torn down  (For non-locals, Wapato is a jail completed in 2004, at a cost of tens of millions of dollars, that was never used.  Born to wealth Jordan Schnitzer bought it with plans to house the homeless.  Thankfully, he'll get some generous write-offs, the good man.)

[drogulus]

Simon... since you seem to be very liberal-leaning, do you buy into the idea that the US should not have closed borders? Since that idea seems to have spread a lot recently.

The justification is that it is stolen land, therefore at this point it should be open for everyone.

If you don't believe that, ignore the following. If you do...


So New Zealand is in the same situation, being stolen land and all. So that means that, since I'm visiting in a few months, I should be allowed to overstay my trip and stay indefinitely, right?

And what if there was the scenario where I wanted to stay long-term and vote? I might have political opinions different than what you would want for your country, and maybe I should be able to vote, too?...

     Greg, do you have a favorite immigration restriction? Go back and look at them. Evaluate each one and please report back.

     

[greg]

     Greg, do you have a favorite immigration restriction? Go back and look at them. Evaluate each one and please report back.

   

That might be something to check out.

I may be wrong on this, but I suspect that if there were way less illegal immigration then legal immigration would be much easier.

The point is (at least to me) to control population. So less illegals means that legals would have better odds of being selected to come here. And those legal people include friends and coworkers. So yeah, if a wall helps, then great.

[Karl Henning]

Caught faking.
https://reason.com/2019/09/26/canadian-green-party-edits-image-of-party-leader-to-show-her-using-a-metal-straw/

Note her response is to lie about always using a reusable cup.

Oof!

[drogulus]

The point is (at least to me) to control population. So less illegals means that legals would have better odds of being selected to come here. And those legal people include friends and coworkers. So yeah, if a wall helps, then great.

     It is to control populations on both sides. There is still the question of the justification in each case.

     

[Ken B]

Mr Mansur is a candidate for a party whose platform is explicitly anti-immigrant and implicitly anti-Moslem.  One usually expects a candidate  to agree with the public positions of his party. Hence it is fair and logical to think that Mr Mansur is anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim.  It is fair and logical to think that every PPC candidate is anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim, unless they have explicitly disassociated themselves from that part of the PPC platform. 

You after all offered Mr. Mansur as an example of a Muslim who supports PPC.  But being a Muslim does not mean a person does not think there are too many of his fellow Muslims in Canada.

This is just name calling. nowhere do you provide evidence of your claim that Mansur wants to reduce the number of muslims in Canada. That for one thing would require removing those already here, so even if your claim that he wants fewer Muslim immigrants were true it would still obviously not support your smear. Even if he wanted zero immigration that would not reduce the number of Canadians of any sort who are already here.

What Mansur actually wants, and has argued for for decades, is Immigrants who reject sharia. He is opposed to the official multicultural policy of Canada (which btw is also expressly overridden in Quebec because it discourages learning French). His writings are available online.

[JBS]

This is just name calling. nowhere do you provide evidence of your claim that Mansur wants to reduce the number of muslims in Canada. That for one thing would require removing those already here, so even if your claim that he wants fewer Muslim immigrants were true it would still obviously not support your smear. Even if he wanted zero immigration that would not reduce the number of Canadians of any sort who are already here.

What Mansur actually wants, and has argued for for decades, is Immigrants who reject sharia. He is opposed to the official multicultural policy of Canada (which btw is also expressly overridden in Quebec because it discourages learning French). His writings are available online.

My evidence is the platform of his party, and your statement that I bolded. Rejecting sharia is rejecting Islam. Therefore ipso facto he doesn't want Muslims. (Of course, what anti-Muslim ideologues usually mean by sharia is actually just a caricature of sharia.)

[drogulus]

My evidence is the platform of his party, and your statement that I bolded. Rejecting sharia is rejecting Islam. Therefore ipso facto he doesn't want Muslims. (Of course, what anti-Muslim ideologues usually mean by sharia is actually just a caricature of sharia.)

     Isn't sharia in open societies a means of dispute resolution between consenting parties? Not that I buy that no coercion exists, I'm just asking.

[JBS]

     Isn't sharia in open societies a means of dispute resolution between consenting parties? Not that I buy that no coercion exists, I'm just asking.

It is. But that's not what antiMuslim advocates mean by it. For at least some of them it's just a code word.

[Ken B]

     Isn't sharia in open societies a means of dispute resolution between consenting parties? Not that I buy that no coercion exists, I'm just asking.

It is.

Rejecting sharia is rejecting Islam

These are contradictory statements.  Either that or you missed drogulus's point, which is that in open societies we have already ipso facto rejected sharia and what people call sharia is just a wee part of the real thing. Deathfor homosexuals or apostates isn't part of voluntary dispute resolution.


Your argument is this. I announce I will buy fewer CDs, and the only Mozart I will buy is HIP. Your conclusion is that I want to reduce my CD collection, and especially have less Mozart. Actually it's worse than that.

[JBS]

These are contradictory statements.  Either that or you missed drogulus's point, which is that in open societies we have already ipso facto rejected sharia and what people call sharia is just a wee part of the real thing. Deathfor homosexuals or apostates isn't part of voluntary dispute resolution.


Your argument is this. I announce I will buy fewer CDs, and the only Mozart I will buy is HIP. Your conclusion is that I want to reduce my CD collection, and especially have less Mozart. Actually it's worse than that.

Islamaphobes misrepresent what Sharia is. But Sharia is integral to Islam. And you can be for sharia without being for executing apostates.

You are so wrong about my argument concerning Mr. Mansur. It's actually a simple one: that he supports the platform of the party for which he is a candidate. That platform is explicitly anti-immigrant  and implicitly anti-Moslem. He supports the platform, therefore he is anti-immigrant and anti-Moslem.

[Florestan]

     Isn't sharia in open societies a means of dispute resolution between consenting parties? Not that I buy that no coercion exists, I'm just asking.

Sharia and open societies are mutually exclusive, and so are Sharia and consenting parties. Heck, you are a bloody effing atheist (please excuse my Arab French). Would you ever consent to being put to death for not believing in Allah?

[Florestan]

Islamaphobes misrepresent what Sharia is. But Sharia is integral to Islam. And you can be for sharia without being for executing apostates.

With all due respect, Jeffrey --- this is bull.

[JBS]

Sharia and open societies are mutually exclusive, and so are Sharia and consenting parties. Heck, you are a bloody effing atheist (please excuse my Arab French). Would you ever consent to being put to death for not believing in Allah?

Sharia (and halacha in Judaism) includes all areas of life, including marriage, business and  real estate deals. As well as what to eat, how to dress, etc etc. And I can adhere to them witnout thinking I have the right to kill all blasphemers and adulterers.

With all due respect, Jeffrey --- this is bull.

As an Orthodox Christian, you adhere to Church canon law, correct?
But you seem to think heretics should not be put to death.

[Florestan]

Sharia (and halacha in Judaism) includes all areas of life, including marriage, business and  real estate deals. As well as what to eat, how to dress, etc etc. And I can adhere to them witnout thinking I have the right to kill all blasphemers and adulterers.

Does halacha view atheism as a crime punishable by death? If yes, your adhering to it is explicit and implicit support for the killing of people who think differently than you.

As an Orthodox Christian, you adhere to Church canon law, correct?
But you seem to think heretics should not be put to death.

Please cite the Orthodox Church's canon law, chapter and verse, regarding atheism.

[SimonNZ]

Are these same people demanding that Christian immigrants explicitly reject the  stoning laws in Leviticus or the anti-this and anti-that prejudices found elsewhere?

[Florestan]

Are these same people demanding that Christian immigrants explicitly reject the  stoning laws in Leviticus

The stoning laws in Leviticus have been implicitly yet strongly rejected by Jesus Christ Himself.

Plus: neither Jews nor Christians have been noted for stoning people in the last millenium, while stoning people is common practice right now as I'm typing this in any number of Islamic states.

[JBS]

Does halacha view atheism as a crime punishable by death? If yes, your adhering to it is explicit and implicit support for the killing of people who think differently than you.

Please cite the Orthodox Church's canon law, chapter and verse, regarding atheism.

You seem to have the standard Christian ignorance of how Sharia in Islam and Halacha in Judaism work...in which case no conversation on the subject is worthwhile (and the required explanations would be far to long for a thread here).

I'll just point out that while halacha and sharia both impose the death penalty for homosexual sex, even the most Orthodox Jews and Muslims don't call for America to allow them to kill gays.

[JBS]

The stoning laws in Leviticus have been implicitly yet strongly rejected by Jesus Christ Himself.

Plus: neither Jews nor Christians have been noted for stoning people in the last millenium, while stoning people is common practice right now as I'm typing this in any number of Islamic states.

Jesus seems to have questioned the right to impose penalties by anyone who was themself not free of sin. The incident involved a potential stoning, but the logic applies to almost all sin. But he didn't really questiin the idea that stoning was an appropriate penalty.  He gave the woman forgiveness, not innocence.

And if Jesus did reject the death penalty, later Christians did not
From Wikipedia

United Kingdom   Edit
From 1533 the capital felony for any person to "commit the detestable and abominable vice of buggery with mankind or beast", was repealed and re-enacted several times, until it was reinstated in 1563 remaining unchanged until 1861.[26] The last execution took place on 27 November 1835 when James Pratt and John Smith were hanged at Newgate.

One source claims the last execution for sodomy in the British Empire happened in the Colony of Tasmania (now part of Australia) in 1867.[27]

United States and colonial America   Edit
See also: Sodomy laws in the United States
Colonial America had the laws of the United Kingdom, and the revolutionary states took many of those laws as the basis of their own, in some cases verbatim.[26] The last law where the death penalty was on the statute books was South Carolina, the old British law was not repealed until 1873, twelve years after the mother country.[26]

The number of times the penalty was carried out is unknown. Records support two executions, and a number of more uncertain convictions, such as "crimes against nature".[26]

The same page says that a man was arrested in 1984 for sodomy in Tasmania.

[Todd]

More ecopropaganda, again in "The Polluters" sections of The Graun: World's top three asset managers oversee $300bn fossil fuel investments

Just how ignorant are lefties?  (That's a rhetorical question: lefties are profoundly ignorant.)  The largest index investment firms manage the most assets in every publicly traded sector.  Assets managed passively on behalf of shareholders should be focused on returns to those shareholders, not the whims of activist investors.  Larger shareholders would and should rightly take legal action if asset managers abrogated their fiduciary duty.

[Florestan]

You seem to have the standard Christian ignorance of how Sharia in Islam and Halacha in Judaism work...in which case no conversation on the subject is worthwhile (and the required explanations would be far to long for a thread here).

Blah blah blah, aka evading the topic.

halacha and sharia both impose the death penalty for homosexual sex

Which means that both halacha and sharia are at odds with, and have no place in, any Western society (Israel included).

even the most Orthodox Jews and Muslims don't call for America to allow them to kill gays.

The most Orthodox Jews are impotent in this respect in Israel proper, as opposed to the most Orthodox Muslims in Iran or Saudi Arabia, which have their way alright. Israel 1- Iran/Saudi Arabia 0.

[JBS]

Blah blah blah, aka evading the topic.


Which means that both halacha and sharia are at odds with, and have no place in, any Western society (Israel included).

So you've upgraded from ignorance to bigotry, since you are saying that both Islam and Judaism "have no place in" Western society.

You remain my friend, but please understand that you seem to know a lot less on this topic than you think you do.

[Ken B]

Islamaphobes misrepresent what Sharia is. But Sharia is integral to Islam. And you can be for sharia without being for executing apostates.

You are so wrong about my argument concerning Mr. Mansur. It's actually a simple one: that he supports the platform of the party for which he is a candidate. That platform is explicitly anti-immigrant  and implicitly anti-Moslem. He supports the platform, therefore he is anti-immigrant and anti-Moslem.

That is NOT what you said a few posts ago. This new claim is also wrong but I will simply repeat that you are interpreting now, not simply stating facts as you claimed. I mean just as a simple example being anti immigration is not the same as being anti immigrant. It's like saying a choir director is anti chorister just because he doesn't accept new auditions.

[Florestan]

Jesus seems to have questioned the right to impose penalties by anyone who was themself not free of sin.

What does halacha say in this respect? Who is really free of sin?

He gave the woman forgiveness, not innocence.

Of course. He was God, so He forgave the woman. She was a grown up woman and a whore, therefore not innocent.

And if Jesus did reject the death penalty, later Christians did not

If you call Christians people who by their deeds and teachings implicitly rejected Jesus Christ's own deeds and teachings as recorded, then what do you call people who by their deeds explicitly followed in the footsteps of Muhammad's own deeds and teachings as recorded? Muhammadians?

[SimonNZ]

The stoning laws in Leviticus have been implicitly yet strongly rejected by Jesus Christ Himself.

Plus: neither Jews nor Christians have been noted for stoning people in the last millenium, while stoning people is common practice right now as I'm typing this in any number of Islamic states.

Is it common? It seems less used than the death sentences elsewhere and also widely decried by Muslims in those countries.

But my point was that the laws of the countries of immigration already have laws forbidding it just as they do with Christian faith motivated gay beatings or abortion clinic pipe bombings.

[JBS]

That is NOT what you said a few posts ago. This new claim is also wrong but I will simply repeat that you are interpreting now, not simply stating facts as you claimed. I mean just as a simple example being anti immigration is not the same as being anti immigrant. It's like saying a choir director is anti chorister just because he doesn't accept new auditions.

You are being mendacious. Mansur is a candidate for a party that is, to use your terms, both anti-immigrant and anti-immigration.
I am not saying anything different. Your claims of what I said are not accurate.
Or are you so cynical that the idea that a politician supports his own party's platform just doesn't register with you?

[SimonNZ]

If you call Christians people who by their deeds and teachings implicitly rejected Jesus Christ's own deeds and teachings as recorded, then what do you call people who by their deeds explicitly followed in the footsteps of Muhammad's own deeds and teachings as recorded? Muhammadians?

Do you reject all of old testament law and the acts of its prophets then?

[Florestan]

So you've upgraded from ignorance to bigotry, since you are saying that both Islam and Judaism "have no place in" Western society.

I'm saying nothing of the sort. What I am indeed saying, and maintaining, is that insofar as both halach and sharia impose the death penalty on homosexuals they have no place in the legal framework of any Western society. And I really want to believe that Islam and Judaism are not limited to sharia and halacha --- yet you do your best to prove me wrong

You remain my friend,

So do you.

but please understand that you seem to know a lot less on this topic than you think you do.

but please understand that so long as you'll sweep under the carpet any discussion, under pretext of my being ignorant and bigotted, or the discussion being too long, you run the risk of losing credibility in my eyes.

[Florestan]

Do you reject all of old testament law and the acts of its prophets then?

I reject all that Jesus Christ rejected implictly or explicitly.

[Ken B]

You are being mendacious. Mansur is a candidate for a party that is, to use your terms, both anti-immigrant and anti-immigration.
I am not saying anything different. Your claims of what I said are not accurate.
Or are you so cynical that the idea that a politician supports his own party's platform just doesn't register with you?

I do not accept your characterization of the party. I was working ad arguendo. You are the one making hostile characterizations.
I reject the charge of mendacity.

[SimonNZ]

I reject all that Jesus Christ rejected implictly or explicitly.

And how does that align with the leaders of your faith? Are you responsible if they still advocate laws you personally reject?

[Florestan]

And how does that align with the leaders of your faith? Are you responsible if they still advocate laws you personally reject?

The leader of my faith is Jesus Christ. If the Patriarch of the Romanian Orthodox Church, who is no Pope anyway, would ever advocate laws contrary to Jesus Christ's own teachings and deeds, let him be anathema! (cf. Galatians 1:8 ) As of today, he's in no such danger.

[Ken B]

The leader of my faith is Jesus Christ. If the Patriarch of the Romanian Orthodox Church, who is no Pope anyway, would ever advocate laws contrary to Jesus Christ's own teachings and deeds, let him be anathema! (cf. Galatians 1:8 ) As of today, he's in no such danger.

Lucky you're not an Anglican!

[JBS]

The Rabbis have made the imposition of capital punishment by a beis din practically impossible because of the standard of proof: Two reliable witnesses who independently saw the violation first-hand.  This is almost never able to be found.  Also there is a quote in the Talmud to the effect it is better to allow [some large number] of guilty men go free (due to a lack of sufficient proof) than to convict/kill one innocent man.

The Rabbis decided it was best to leave to G-d matters of putting sinners to death.

I don't know if Sharia law has the same restraint.

More complicated than that.

Actually, the same source requires murderers who could not be convicted because of those rules, but whose guilt was clear, to be imprisoned and a given a diet that was meant to result in their death soon after. And kings had a residual right to impose death sentences despite verdicts if not guilty.

[Florestan]

Lucky you're not an Anglican!

[Florestan]

Actually, the same source requires murderers who could not be convicted because of those rules, but whose guilt was clear, to be imprisoned and a given a diet that was meant to result in their death soon after. And kings had a residual right to impose death sentences despite verdicts if not guilty.

Do you support those requirements and rights?

[drogulus]

Do you support those requirements and rights?

     Nothing is made wrong by someone telling you. The point was made by Plato in the mouth of Socrates. I kind of hate those guys but it was the greatest statement in human ethics ever so I have to swallow my pride.

     Socrates: Do the gods love good action because it is good, or is good action good because it is loved by the gods?

     Me: Right, it's on me, thanks a lot, asshole.

[Florestan]

   asshole.

Nice signature.

(Sorry, couldn't resist.)

[JBS]

Do you support those requirements and rights?

Of course I do.  But the halachic process is actually a good deal more flexible than you seem to think
https://morethodoxy.org/2012/01/11/homosexuals-in-the-orthodox-community-by-rabbi-zev-farber/

[JBS]

I do not accept your characterization of the party. I was working ad arguendo. You are the one making hostile characterizations.
I reject the charge of mendacity.

The party platform calls for heavy restrictions on immigration, and an end to multiculturalism. It mimics the anti immigration and anti immigrant rhetoric of Trump's supporters.
If you think that is not proof that it is anti-immigrant and anti-immigration, then you have a weird definition of anti-immigration  and anti-immigrant.

[Florestan]

Of course I do.  But the halachic process is actually a good deal more flexible than you seem to think
https://morethodoxy.org/2012/01/11/homosexuals-in-the-orthodox-community-by-rabbi-zev-farber/

It doesn't matter how flexible or not it is. What matters is that you support a doctrine which, given enough flexibility, and more importantly, enough political power, would result in death for homosexuals.

Now, I am opposed to gay marriage, gay adoptions and so forth, but killing homosexuals is just that: killing.

[JBS]

It doesn't matter how flexible or not it is. What matters is that you support a doctrine which, given enough flexibility, and more importantly, enough political power, would result in death for homosexuals.

Now, I am opposed to gay marriage, gay adoptions and so forth, but killing homosexuals is just that: killing.

And you support a doctrine which, given enough flexibility, and more importantly, enough political power, would result in death for homosexuals.

In fact, has resulted in death for homosexuals and plenty of others.

[Ken B]

It doesn't matter how flexible or not it is. What matters is that you support a doctrine which, given enough flexibility, and more importantly, enough political power, would result in death for homosexuals.

Now, I am opposed to gay marriage, gay adoptions and so forth, but killing homosexuals is just that: killing.

By the "Mansur standard" I think we must conclude Jeffrey is anti homosexual and is in favor of killing them.
I think that suggests this whole ratchet games is bogus but what's pudding for the goose ....

[Florestan]

And you support a doctrine which, given enough flexibility, and more importantly, enough political power, would result in death for homosexuals.

Again: please cite chapter and verse the Orthodox Church's canon law regarding homosexuals.

[JBS]

By the "Mansur standard" I think we must conclude Jeffrey is anti homosexual and is in favor of killing them.
I think that suggests this whole ratchet games is bogus but what's pudding for the goose ....

Explain to me how a party whose platform is explicitly anti immigration and anti immigrant is not anti immigration and anti immigrant, and I will concede you are right about Mansur.

[Ken B]

Explain to me how a party whose platform is explicitly anti immigration and anti immigrant is not anti immigration and anti immigrant, and I will concede you are right about Mansur.

An argument for X is not an argument for more X. Nor is an argument for more X an argument for Y.
I don't want any more wives, but I am not anti wife nor anti my wife. My wife and I recently decided not to adopt another cat, but we still like the ones we have. It certainly doesn't mean we want to expel one.
I also don't think anyone who describes himself as Jewish necessarily wants to kill me for wearing cotton polyester shirts. Your mileage may vary.

[JBS]

An argument for X is not an argument for more X. Nor is an argument for more X an argument for Y.
I don't want any more wives, but I am not anti wife nor anti my wife. My wife and I recently decided not to adopt another cat, but we still like the ones we have. It certainly doesn't mean we want to expel one.
I also don't think anyone who describes himself as Jewish necessarily wants to kill me for wearing cotton polyester shirts. Your mileage may vary.

The party platform calls for less immigration. The party platform calls for ending multiculturalism, which is the same as calling for fewer immigrants. The accurate parallel would be to say you decided you didn't like cats, and are arguing with your wife about sending some of the ones you have now to the shelter.

[Ken B]

The party platform calls for less immigration. The party platform calls for ending multiculturalism, which is the same as calling for fewer immigrants. The accurate parallel would be to say you decided you didn't like cats, and are arguing with your wife about sending some of the ones you have now to the shelter.

This is too ridiculous for words. Less immigration still means adding more people. It does not mean reducing the number here.

You are also simply misinformed about what "multiculturalism" means in this, Canadian, context. It refers to a long standing official policy of the Canadian government. It means a lot less now than it did in the 70s where there was discussion of schools in Polish or Pashtun etc. These days it's usually pork barrel funding for things. It does not mean either more or fewer Canadians. 

[JBS]

This is too ridiculous for words. Less immigration still means adding more people. It does not mean reducing the number here.

You are also simply misinformed about what "multiculturalism" means in this, Canadian, context. It refers to a long standing official policy of the Canadian government. It does not mean either more or fewer Canadians.

You are arguing that A is not A.

[Ken B]

You are arguing that A is not A.

I conclude you don't know what "immigration" means.

[JBS]

I conclude you don't know what "immigration" means.

I know what it means. The platform calls for admitting fewer immigrants and using more restrictive criteria in admitting those who are allowed to come.  In the real world (as opposed to KenWorld) that's being anti-immigration.

As I said before, it reads like a Trump underling wrote it.

[Wanderer]

As an Orthodox Christian, you adhere to Church canon law, correct?
But you seem to think heretics should not be put to death.

I have not read nor am I interested in reading the ongoing discussion, but in skimming the thread this caught my attention. The claim that in Orthodox canon law the penalty for heresy is death is false. You are either being deliberately mendacious or plain ignorant. If it's the latter, be informed by an LL.M. in Ecclesiastical Law that in Orthodoxy the only penalty for heresy is excommunication, which merely means expulsion from church life. I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt that you did not just write that claim in order to conflate Orthodoxy with existing murderous faiths, which explicitly forbid apostasy and heresy under penalty of death, because that kind of libel would be equivalent to hate speech.

[Florestan]

in Orthodoxy the only penalty for heresy is excommunication, which merely means expulsion from church life.

It must be stressed that this is actually the most severe penalty that the Orthodox canon laws prescribe for any trespassing (and it has two forms, epitemia, which is temporarily limited, and anathema, which is permanent unless and until the trespasser repents; but anathema is not any form of final damnation, only God can and will judge an unrepentant anathematized person). Death penalty is completely alien to Orthodoxy.

[Ken B]

I voted today. There was no fuss or hassle. There were
- paper ballots
- an ID check

Registration is easy, and there is a system for registration at the polling booth (the ballots are sequestered).

And for some reason we in Canada seem to never have the kind of issues that the Americans have.

(My favorite "issue" in 2016 was Jill Stein claiming she wuz robbed by voting machines in Michigan. Michigan uses paper ballots. )

I am not hopeful in my riding, but with luck we will have a new prime minister tomorrow.

[Ken B]

The Akagi has been found https://apnews.com/f026d20d928143ddadfc3df0f3d36f77

[Ken B]

It's official: you can dress up in costume to mock black people and be elected Prime minister of Canada. You can also lean on the solicitor general to get special treatment for big party donors.

[drogulus]

     The Vaping Overreaction

     I use e-cigs, and I've been waiting patiently for the "Satanic Day Care abuse" phase to burn itself out.

The relative safety of e-cigarettes has been recognized abroad. Public Health England, the British equivalent of the CDC, has estimated that e-cigarettes are at least 95 percent less hazardous than conventional cigarettes. Some British hospitals house vape shops, and the month-long national anti-smoking campaign, Stoptober, encourages people to vape instead.

     Are there no Satanist day care centers in the U.K.? Do they not even have basements?

     It will take time to de-panic a population prone to it.

Unfortunately, the misconceptions surrounding vaping may be too well entrenched. A Kaiser poll conducted this month revealed that 49 percent of respondents support banning all e-cigarettes, not just flavored ones. That would be a deadly mistake. "If we lose this opportunity," David S. Abrams, a professor at the New York University College of Global Public Health, told CBS Morning News last month, "we will have blown the single biggest public-health opportunity ever to get rid of cigarettes and replace them with a much safer form of nicotine for everybody." With 35 million Americans still smoking, the stakes are high.

     This is just what we need, another drug war. This one could kill a million people.

[Ken B]

     The Vaping Overreaction

     I use e-cigs, and I've been waiting patiently for the "Satanic Day Care abuse" phase to burn itself out.

The relative safety of e-cigarettes has been recognized abroad. Public Health England, the British equivalent of the CDC, has estimated that e-cigarettes are at least 95 percent less hazardous than conventional cigarettes. Some British hospitals house vape shops, and the month-long national anti-smoking campaign, Stoptober, encourages people to vape instead.

     Are there no Satanist day care centers in the U.K.? Do they not even have basements?

     It will take time to de-panic a population prone to it.

Unfortunately, the misconceptions surrounding vaping may be too well entrenched. A Kaiser poll conducted this month revealed that 49 percent of respondents support banning all e-cigarettes, not just flavored ones. That would be a deadly mistake. "If we lose this opportunity," David S. Abrams, a professor at the New York University College of Global Public Health, told CBS Morning News last month, "we will have blown the single biggest public-health opportunity ever to get rid of cigarettes and replace them with a much safer form of nicotine for everybody." With 35 million Americans still smoking, the stakes are high.

     This is just what we need, another drug war. This one could kill a million people.

The war on vaping is in full swing here in Canada.

[drogulus]

The war on vaping is in full swing here in Canada.

     What I find a little surprising is how little has been written about it on the nonpanic side. It took me almost no effort at all to figure out that after about 10 years on the market e-cigs could not possibly generate a sudden epidemic of catastrophic lung disease.

[Ken B]

     What I find a little surprising is how little has been written about it on the nonpanic side. It took me almost no effort at all to figure out that after about 10 years on the market e-cigs could not possibly generate a sudden epidemic of catastrophic lung disease.

Of course to the banners that is irrelevant. It's not about harm, it's about compliance. The Catholic Church objects to any particular sex act more strongly if a condom is used.

[drogulus]

The Akagi has been found https://apnews.com/f026d20d928143ddadfc3df0f3d36f77

    A new movie about Midway is coming out. The clip I saw had awful looking CGI and now I see it's directed by Roland Emmerich.

[Ken B]

Women cannot be forced to wax your balls in Canada.

https://nationalpost.com/news/trans-activist-jessica-yaniv-filed-genital-wax-complaints-as-means-of-extortion-rights-tribunal-rules

Or at least not in one province of Canada.

[Todd]

From The Graun: Pentagon awards $10bn cloud computing deal to Microsoft, snubbing Amazon

Poor William Randolph Bezos; how will he get by now?

I like how the Feds came up with a profoundly witty acronym: Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure, or JEDI. 

[Florestan]

Women cannot be forced to wax your balls in Canada.

https://nationalpost.com/news/trans-activist-jessica-yaniv-filed-genital-wax-complaints-as-means-of-extortion-rights-tribunal-rules

Or at least not in one province of Canada.

British Columbia 1 - Texas 0

[Todd]

Women cannot be forced to wax your balls in Canada.

https://nationalpost.com/news/trans-activist-jessica-yaniv-filed-genital-wax-complaints-as-means-of-extortion-rights-tribunal-rules

Or at least not in one province of Canada.

Here's a sentence I can honestly say I never thought I would read: "...the tribunal found the respondents did not offer scrotum waxing to anyone..."

Perhaps there's a burgeoning market for home scrotum waxing kits.

[Florestan]

Perhaps there's a burgeoning market for home scrotum waxing kits.

[Ken B]

Here's a sentence I can honestly say I never thought I would read: "...the tribunal found the respondents did not offer scrotum waxing to anyone..."

Perhaps there's a burgeoning market for home scrotum waxing kits.

So I looked at Amazon ... https://www.amazon.com/Fresh-Balls-Lotion-Solution-3-4oz/dp/B0725Y1K2L/ref=sr_1_4?keywords=Scrotum+waxing&qid=1572117991&sr=8-4

And ...  https://www.amazon.com/LionGothic-Grabber-Piercing-Stainless-Steel/dp/B07B7QMK17/ref=sr_1_7?crid=62I024YUWZJ9&dchild=1&keywords=prince+albert+piercing&psc=1&qid=1572118215&sprefix=Prince+alber%2Caps%2C198&sr=8-7

[Todd]

So I looked at Amazon ... https://www.amazon.com/Fresh-Balls-Lotion-Solution-3-4oz/dp/B0725Y1K2L/ref=sr_1_4?keywords=Scrotum+waxing&qid=1572117991&sr=8-4

And ...  https://www.amazon.com/LionGothic-Grabber-Piercing-Stainless-Steel/dp/B07B7QMK17/ref=sr_1_7?crid=62I024YUWZJ9&dchild=1&keywords=prince+albert+piercing&psc=1&qid=1572118215&sprefix=Prince+alber%2Caps%2C198&sr=8-7

Both helpful, but not for waxing.  I can vouch for the lotion.

[Andante]

Seen on a notice board in Sydney Airport :

New Zealand sucks

Next day underneath was the message

Australia Nil 

[Todd]

Bill to ban the B-word heard at State House

Massachusetts Democrats are especially stupid.  Thank goodness one isn't running for president, or anything.

[Ken B]

Bill to ban the B-word heard at State House

Massachusetts Democrats are especially stupid.  Thank goodness one isn't running for president, or anything.

Massachusetts got 99 problems ...

[Florestan]

When words lose their meaning, people lose their freedom - Confucius

It might very well be apocryphal, but then again:

Se non è vero, è ben trovato.

[Todd]

When words lose their meaning, people lose their freedom - Confucius

It depends upon what the meaning of the word "is" is.

[Florestan]

Quote from: President William Jefferson Clinton

    It depends upon what the meaning of the word "is" is.

"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less."

[drogulus]

     In Massachusetts a legislator will file a bill from a constituent. This Boston guy filed such a bill and stupid legislators won't vote for it, or will knowing it will fail.

     Massachusetts laws are for the most part just like the laws in other states. In one import respect they differ, and that is the noncompete clauses in employment contracts are legal here, and illegal in California. By divine right Silicon Valley should be in Boston/Cambridge.

     

[Florestan]

     In Massachusetts a legislator will file a bill from a constituent. This Boston guy filed such a bill and stupid legislators won't vote for it, or will knowing it will fail.

     Massachusetts laws are for the most part just like the laws in other states. In one import respect they differ, and that is the noncompete clauses in employment contracts are legal here, and illegal in California. By divine right Silicon Valley should be in Boston/Cambridge.

   

Although English is not my mother tongue, I concur with Todd: your syntax is completely unintelligible, especially so for a non-English mother tongue speaker (pun!).

[drogulus]

Although English is not my mother tongue, I concur with Todd: your syntax is completely unintelligible, especially so for a non-English mother tongue speaker (pun!).

      It's a skill I practice assiduously. I'm too impatient to order my thoughts into long paragraphs, which I don't like anyway, so I use extreme compression and only correct obvious grammar mistakes. Also, I don't speak trollese, a limiting factor.

      Is there anything in particular you find unclear?

[Florestan]

           Is there anything in particular you find unclear?

I find most of your posts particularly unclear.

[Florestan]

      I'm too impatient to order my thoughts into long paragraphs, which I don't like anyway

Oh, no, you're wrong. Your "thoughts" are usually long-winded, unintelligible paragraphs.

[drogulus]

     Well, that's all right then. You had me worried a little.

Oh, no, you're wrong. Your "thoughts" are usually long-winded, unintelligible paragraphs.

     In Massachusetts a legislator will file a bill from a constituent. This Boston guy filed such a bill and stupid legislators won't vote for it, or will knowing it will fail.

     Massachusetts laws are for the most part just like the laws in other states. In one import respect they differ, and that is the noncompete clauses in employment contracts are legal here, and illegal in California. By divine right Silicon Valley should be in Boston/Cambridge.

     

     This is the example you gave.

[drogulus]

     I went back a ways past some typical short comments to find this one:

     The problem with ethnic states is there's no universalist argument for them, and no universalist argument to destroy them. All of the arguments must presuppose the possibility of agreement, the recognition of a form of superseding principle such as those governing open societies with rights that don't depend on ethnic or religious identity. If that is deemed unsuitable it's a matter of might makes right. The possibility of settlement by common values is rejected in favor of non-negotiable claims.

     One hopes people decide on pragmatic grounds to adopt identities flexible enough for government work, keeping religious and ethnic identities under control. Jews and Muslims do that in the U.S. and elsewhere without abandoning their identities. So do Christians. It's common for people to have multiple identities running at once. I'm only an atheist when I want to discuss it, the rest of the time I maintain recognizably human form. Sometimes I'm an American in the English language philosophical tradition. I live a few miles from where the American branch was born.

   

     That's long for me. I like it, I don't think it needs revision.

[JBS]

Let me step in to clarify.
Massachusetts's method of honoring the right to petition for redress of grievances is to allow induviduals to draft a proposed law and give it to their representative in the state legislature, who must file it for them as a proper bill in the state House, no matter what the legislator thinks about the bill.
The legislature is not obliged to actually do anything further, not even hold hearings, vote to table the bill, or anything else.

The b banning bill is one such bill.

[drogulus]

Let me step in to clarify.
Massachusetts's method of honoring the right to petition for redress of grievances is to allow induviduals to draft a proposed law and give it to their representative in the state legislature, who must file it for them as a proper bill in the state House, no matter what the legislator thinks about the bill.
The legislature is not obliged to actually do anything further, not even hold hearings, vote to table the bill, or anything else.

The b banning bill is one such bill.

     That leaves no role for Massachusetts stupidity and is therefore an invalid and unintelligible response. Please reformulate it into trollese.

[Ken B]

I find most of your posts particularly unclear.

The word you are seeking my friend is "pudding". His posts are pudding.

[Todd]

     That leaves no role for Massachusetts stupidity

Apparently Massachusetts Democrats have difficulty reading: I never claimed all people of the Commonwealth are stupid.  Just Dems.

[drogulus]

The word you are seeking my friend is "pudding". His posts are pudding.

      Butterscotch pudding most closely realizes the Platonic Form of it.

      Reformulations into trollese are best left to experts.

Apparently Massachusetts Democrats have difficulty reading: I never claimed all people of the Commonwealth are stupid.  Just Dems.

     It's more subtle than it looks.

[Todd]

Dirty Dem down: Democratic Rep. Katie Hill resigns amid allegations of improper relationship with staffer

Her Iron Cross bikini line tat was so cute, though.

[drogulus]

I find most of your posts particularly unclear.

     I noticed that, yet you react with hostility, which is often the correct response. Might it be a form of subliminal understanding?

    There is a phenomenon known as blindsight, where people respond to visual stimulation without consciously seeing the stimulus. You can hold up fingers in front of the subject who will say he can't see them, then you can ask how many fingers there are and the subject will "guess" the correct number repeatedly.

     I wonder how that works.

[Ken B]

     I noticed that, yet you react with hostility, which is often the correct response. Might it be a form of subliminal understanding?

    There is a phenomenon known as blindsight, where people respond to visual stimulation without consciously seeing the stimulus. You can hold up fingers in front of the subject who will say he can't see them, then you can ask how many fingers there are and the subject will "guess" the correct number repeatedly.

     I wonder how that works.

It works better when you hold up one finger.

[drogulus]

It works better when you hold up one finger.

     See, you understand me perfectly. I don't think it's on my end at all.

[zamyrabyrd]

It's official: you can dress up in costume to mock black people and be elected Prime minister of Canada. You can also lean on the solicitor general to get special treatment for big party donors.

Well, some men dress up as women for misogynistic reasons which can also be cultural appropriation and insulting.

[Florestan]

     I noticed that, yet you react with hostility, which is often the correct response.

Here are the latest posts of yours that I find completelty unintelligible.

     To be progressive is to shoulder more responsibility for values construction, it's not an escape clause when you extinguish values absolutism.

     You are the caretaker. It isn't even possible for you to not be the caretaker.

   

     Values universalism allows people to transcend absolutist claims. That's why we have such ideas.

     What things are is what they do.

But nevermind. You are right, I should perhaps stop tryng to figure it out and not respond to them anymore. Yep, that's definitely the best option (if only I could stick to it...  ).

[greg]

Here are the latest posts of yours that I find completelty unintelligible.

But nevermind. You are right, I should perhaps stop tryng to figure it out and not respond to them anymore. Yep, that's definitely the best option (if only I could stick to it...  ).

Good to know I'm not the only one who finds his posts to be like a puzzle.

But it's more often that the difficulty is having to guess what the point is as a response to one's own post. Not that I can't understand, but it just takes way more effort (like actually having to think a minute) than for anyone else.

[Ken B]

It's like that Churchill quote about Russia (the new version): Russia is a pudding wrapped in a custard inside a junket.

[greg]

It's like that Churchill quote about Russia (the new version): Russia is a pudding wrapped in a custard inside a junket.

Hm, I've always thought it was more robotic, never really thought of pudding before.

But not like a robot that is preprogrammed, but like one that comes up with its own ideas while at the same time never saying anything extreme or offensive.

Which IMO is not a problem at all, just a sort of unique style.

[drogulus]

     To be progressive is to shoulder more responsibility for values construction, it's not an escape clause when you extinguish values absolutism.

     You are the caretaker. It isn't even possible for you to not be the caretaker.

     It means you can't escape responsibility for the choices you make by by putting them on a very high shelf and hiding the ladder you used to reach it.

     I probably meant modern more than progressive in a political sense, though that's in there, too.

[drogulus]

     Values universalism allows people to transcend absolutist claims. That's why we have such ideas.

     What things are is what they do.

     Ideas have use value. The use value is the sum of what the idea means. That's straight out of Hume and Peirce.

     You have to have an idea to adjudicate irreconcilable claims by absolutists, like a universal declaration of human rights, obviously hateful to true believers, yet necessary to stop them from killing each other and many others. What are we of stout hearts supposed to do, wait for the idea to show up? Are we not men, or possibly women? Don't we teach children right and wrong no matter what stupid metaphysics we inherit?

     

     

[LKB]

    A new movie about Midway is coming out. The clip I saw had awful looking CGI and now I see it's directed by Roland Emmerich.

https://www.amazon.com/Shattered-Sword-Untold-Battle-Midway/dp/1574889249/ref=asc_df_1574889249/?tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=312090128763&hvpos=1o1&hvnetw=g&hvrand=10543714179573811452&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=m&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9031914&hvtargid=pla-451142347916&psc=1

Recommended for those interested in the Battle of Midway.

As far as the film is concerned, as long as Michael Bay is not involved, I'm willing to reserve judgement.

I do wish someone would create a film or miniseries that could do justice to the Guadalcanal campaign, which has seen decades of cinematic neglect.

Condition One,

LKB

[drogulus]

I do wish someone would create a film or miniseries that could do justice to the Guadalcanal campaign, which has seen decades of cinematic neglect.

Condition One,

LKB

     Did you see The Pacific, the Spielberg/Hanks miniseries about Guadalcanal and then the campaigns all the way to Iwo Jima?
     

[SimonNZ]

Seconding the recommendation of The Pacific.

Also Terrence Malick's film The Thin Red Line is about the fight for Guadalcanal.

[LKB]

I remember hearing about The Pacific when it was first presented. At that time my interest in Guadalcanal still lay in the future, to be ignited by James Hornfischer's excellent Neptune's Inferno. So l haven't seen any of it, which has apparently resulted in my not knowing what l didn't know. 

Thanks for bringing it to my attention!

Pacified,

LKB

[Karl Henning]

At times, I post a reply to in the wrong thread.

[Ken B]

At times, I post a reply to in the wrong thread.

Think of it as raising the tone of some thread chosen at random.

[drogulus]

I remember hearing about The Pacific when it was first presented. At that time my interest in Guadalcanal still lay in the future, to be ignited by James Hornfischer's excellent Neptune's Inferno. So l haven't seen any of it, which has apparently resulted in my not knowing what l didn't know. 

Thanks for bringing it to my attention!

Pacified,

LKB

     If you have Amazon Prime, it's free. I have the BDs.

[drogulus]

Think of it as raising the tone of some thread chosen at random.

     I know tone. Marshall's are buzzy.

[Andante]

At times, I post a reply to in the wrong thread.

U2.   Either too much red wine or you are getting old and decrepit   

[Karl Henning]

U2.   Either too much red wine or you are getting old and decrepit   

Alas for me! I have quaffed no red wine!

[LKB]

My wine-quaffing days are pretty much over. I now enjoy wine/ whiskey/ whatever at a measured, leisurely pace.

Certain foods though, l quaff like hell...

Sipping,

LKB

[JBS]

Alas for me! I have quaffed no red wine!

White wine works just as well.

[Andante]

Alas for me! I have quaffed no red wine!

Aha so you must be old and decrepit... Join the club 

[Ken B]

This might be of interest,since we seem to be the target of DDOS attacks recently.
Notepad++ is a good text editor. https://www.theverge.com/2019/10/30/20940651/text-editor-notepad-free-uyghur-edition-china-spam

I doubt LeBron James has the coding skills, but ...

[Ken B]

Huh. I didn't know she was GMGer.
https://www.breitbart.com/environment/2019/10/31/greta-thunberg-calls-on-facebook-to-censor-her-critics/

[SimonNZ]

Huh. I didn't know she was GMGer.
https://www.breitbart.com/environment/2019/10/31/greta-thunberg-calls-on-facebook-to-censor-her-critics/

What is this supposed to mean?

[greg]

Huh. I didn't know she was GMGer.
https://www.breitbart.com/environment/2019/10/31/greta-thunberg-calls-on-facebook-to-censor-her-critics/

Awww, what a stunning and brave authoritarian.

[SimonNZ]

Death threats =/= "her critics"

But that's Breitbart for you.

Pick a different source and see how this story is being reported.

[drogulus]

     Facebook isn't a government that can take away a Constitutional right by upholding a standard of conduct.

     This is what she said:



     I don't see censorship.

[Florestan]

     Facebook isn't a government that can take away a Constitutional right by upholding a standard of conduct.

     This is what she said:



     I don't see censorship.

To see Greta Thunberg denouncing hate and threats is highly entertaining.

[Todd]

To see Greta Thunberg denouncing hate and threats is highly entertaining.

Ms Thunberg's prominence among mush-brained lefties and other gullible fools is the very embodiment of Mr Bernays' ideas.  The more things change, and all that. 

[drogulus]

To see Greta Thunberg denouncing hate and threats is highly entertaining.

     I'm sure it is. Her approach to climate activism is that of a young person who inspires other young people. Old people think there are flaws in how she does it. Even I, an old person, think so.

     The left has not gone far from what the science says. On the problem side, they stick to the facts as known. My old person criticism is on the solution side. The left thinks solutions will impose high net costs on the economy. I think solutions will confer net benefits. The left thinks it wants a poorer but cleaner and more equal world. I think a cleaner world will be richer by design.

     

[Ken B]

Street thug gets prison https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/2019/11/baton-attack-during-june-protests-in-downtown-portland-lands-man-in-jail-for-nearly-6-years.html

Bien.

[greg]

Every time someone questions whether an authority should "allow" "hate speech," you just ask them to define what it is. It's far to subjective to be something that can be used to limit freedom of speech, period.

Also reminds me of the Carlos Maza incident. It's just the same trend of leftists trying to leverage the "compassion" of large corporations in order to attain power (what it really is is that they are scared of the backlash of doing nothing, which is provoked by the other leftist mobs, such as online journalists writing angry articles, fear of losing money, etc.).

The same can be seen with large corporations and their fear of losing money from China. Problem is large American corporations have no moral compass, except they fake whatever sense of morality will prevent them from losing money.

Also, literally everyone with a large following nowadays gets death threats, even if they don't do anything wrong. It's not even worth mentioning unless someone shows up to your house or something extreme.

[Todd]

Street thug gets prison https://www.oregonlive.com/portland/2019/11/baton-attack-during-june-protests-in-downtown-portland-lands-man-in-jail-for-nearly-6-years.html

Bien.

The real crime there was that the ruckus prevented polite customers from accessing Urban Farmer for a brief period.

[drogulus]

Every time someone questions whether an authority should "allow" "hate speech," you just ask them to define what it is. It's far to subjective to be something that can be used to limit freedom of speech, period.

     It really isn't as a practical matter. The company where you work will enforce the same standards as other companies do, give or take. Do you have a theory of "shared subjectivity"?

[SimonNZ]

Theres nothing "subjective" about death threats. And if you're supporting them as as a freedom of speech issue...

[Ken B]

Ricky Gervais in the news! https://althouse.blogspot.com/2019/11/ricky-laughs-at-newsnews-of-huge.html

[greg]

Theres nothing "subjective" about death threats. And if you're supporting them as as a freedom of speech issue...

That was a side note, so nope. The people who go on about protecting freedom of speech as well can separate that as the limits, recognizing that threats to violence shouldn't be protected.

I was just pointing out that death threats are par for the course when you become internet-famous. They're not even worth of being mentioned unless it ends up affecting you IRL.

[SimonNZ]

Its a bit late if it "ends up affecting you IRL". And are you really happy living in a world where death threats are considered just "par for the course"? (Apparently you are).

All the platforms should have a policy of banning any member who makes even one.

Also: part of that Greta kids complaint was that they were also making death threats to her sister. Still okay?

[greg]

Its a bit late if it "ends up affecting you IRL". And are you really happy living in a world where death threats are considered just "par for the course"? (Apparently you are).

All the platforms should have a policy of banning any member who makes even one.

Also: part of that Greta kids complaint was that they were also making death threats to her sister. Still okay?

How are you even interpreting that I'm happy about people making death threats?

And no, did I ever say they shouldn't be banned? I'm only saying that is very normal for people to get death threats with so much exposure. It would be like the president (any president) complaining about getting death threats. Regular people that talk about video games on youtube get death threats. 

She's the one intermingling death threats (objective threats) with hate speech (subjective) in the same sentence, which is dangerous. Equate the two together and you are creating a road where people accept their own speech to be restricted, leading to something that won't be good. Which I shouldn't have to explain, it should be obvious.

(though about the death threats, she's still a kid I think (not sure of her age), so it could be a shock still, so I will give her that)

[zamyrabyrd]

Who carries around a bow and arrow to shoot cows with?

https://freedomheadlines.com/the-latest/watch-as-they-slaughter-a-cow-in-a-home-depot-parking-lot-after-escaping-halal-market-video/

A young cow escaped slaughter at a Connecticut meat market — only to have its throat slit in public in Home Depot parking lot, according to a new report. The gory scene prompted the closure of the Saba meat store in Bloomfield, which kept livestock on its premises to be prepared in accordance with Islamic law, NBC Connecticut reported.

The cow dashed out of Saba on Saturday and ran across the street to the hardware store — with employee Badr Musaed and a contractor Andy Morrison hot on its trail. Morrison, who was doing renovation work at the meat store and was armed with a bow and arrow, tried to help Musaed corral the cow while the local police also responded.

Dash camera footage obtained by NBC shows the officer trying to box the bovine in with his cruiser — and Morrison attempting to shoot it with his weapon.

"As the cow ran towards the employees, Morrison shot at the cow, however he missed and the arrow struck the wall of the Home Depot," the police report said.

Suddenly, Musaed whipped out a foot-long knife and slit the cow's throat as other Saba employees wrangled the animal.

[drogulus]

How are you even interpreting that I'm happy about people making death threats?

And no, did I ever say they shouldn't be banned? I'm only saying that is very normal for people to get death threats with so much exposure. It would be like the president (any president) complaining about getting death threats. Regular people that talk about video games on youtube get death threats. 

She's the one intermingling death threats (objective threats) with hate speech (subjective) in the same sentence, which is dangerous. Equate the two together and you are creating a road where people accept their own speech to be restricted, leading to something that won't be good. Which I shouldn't have to explain, it should be obvious.

(though about the death threats, she's still a kid I think (not sure of her age), so it could be a shock still, so I will give her that)

     I don't accept death threats and I'm happy to apply an incitement to violence standard. I'm not bothered by the fact that the arbitrariness of legal or policy distinctions is unavoidable. It's a practical problem, not solved by a resort to an objective externality. That's an infinite regression. Whose subjective impression of an external objective standard is the right one?

[Ken B]

     I don't accept death threats and I'm happy to apply an incitement to violence standard. I'm not bothered by the fact that the arbitrariness of legal or policy distinctions is unavoidable. It's a practical problem, not solved by a resort to an objective externality. That's an infinite regression. Whose subjective impression of an external objective standard is the right one?

Word salad.
Thunberg isn't actually asking that Facebook remove death threats. Facebook already does. She is complaining about criticism that she asserts "result" in death threats. She is asking rather for the squelching of other things that she calls "conspiracy theories" and "lies" including those about "countless others".

[drogulus]

Word salad.
Thunberg isn't actually asking that Facebook remove death threats. Facebook already does. She is complaining about criticism that she asserts "result" in death threats. She is asking rather for the squelching of other things that she calls "conspiracy theories" and "lies" including those about "countless others".

     If that's the case she'll lose, and that's what should happen. That's the way I deal with all the excesses of the left and right, no acceptable balance will satisfy true believers. That's exactly as my word non-salad says. I'm arguing against Greg and his "subjective" stance. Thunberg is wrong because her standard is poorly reasoned, as it assumes a kind of objective standard that miraculously agrees with her. Can you imagine a teenager thinking like that?

[greg]

     I'm arguing against Greg and his "subjective" stance.

She mentions allowing hate speech and I said that it is subjective. Unless you can define it.

[SimonNZ]

Word salad.
Thunberg isn't actually asking that Facebook remove death threats. Facebook already does. She is complaining about criticism that she asserts "result" in death threats. She is asking rather for the squelching of other things that she calls "conspiracy theories" and "lies" including those about "countless others".

This is all in response to Zuckerberg  lifting the ban of misinformation and blatant falsehoods in political advertising on Facebook, which I believe AOC also grilled him about recently, and which they should be policing and stopping. Attacks and conspiracy theories from these sources are more potentially dangerous as seemingly sanctioned and legitimized by authority figures, rather than those by your average wingnut punters.

Again: I don't think this is covered or excused by a simple "freedom of speech".

[drogulus]

She mentions allowing hate speech and I said that it is subjective. Unless you can define it.

      It will remain only loosely defined in policies, and it's up to negotiation when it comes to particulars. It's like pornography, also restricted. Something can be a little bit hateful or pornful and not get banned. It's not a definition problem. A general definition is the starting point and then you decide what comes under it in practice in a world where people disagree.

[greg]

      and it's up to negotiation when it comes to particulars.
...then you decide...

Well, there's the problem it will end up leading to. You won't decide. Negotiation to authorities inevitably will end up to submission to the authorities. Especially if the government gets more authoritarian.

Something can be a little bit hateful or pornful and not get banned.

But illegal porn is very easily identifiable. That's because it is clearly defined. There should be a clearly defined version of hate speech, but no one has defined it yet.

Literally anything can be porn, that's why it's hard to define. There's people that literally get off on buildings and cars.

Imagine a world where all porn becomes illegal and you are raided because you say something against the government and then they confiscate your car and throw you in jail because some people get off to cars. All because porn doesn't have a clear definition, therefore it can be anything.

A solution is, if people want to make hate speech illegal (or a reason to ban people from facebook or whatever), actually narrow down to what type of hate speech, and from there you can get really specific and define it. That way people at least know if they are breaking the rules/law.

[SimonNZ]

But where do you stand on the issue of Zuckerberg lifting the ban of misinformation and blatant falsehoods in political advertising on Facebook?

[Ken B]

No more free books! End the oppression! https://www.popville.com/2019/10/as-if-my-hangover-wasnt-bad-enough-now-i-need-to-smash-my-head-into-a-wall/

[drogulus]

Well, there's the problem it will end up leading to. You won't decide. Negotiation to authorities inevitably will end up to submission to the authorities. Especially if the government gets more authoritarian.


But illegal porn is very easily identifiable. That's because it is clearly defined. There should be a clearly defined version of hate speech, but no one has defined it yet.

Literally anything can be porn, that's why it's hard to define. There's people that literally get off on buildings and cars.

Imagine a world where all porn becomes illegal and you are raided because you say something against the government and then they confiscate your car and throw you in jail because some people get off to cars. All because porn doesn't have a clear definition, therefore it can be anything.

A solution is, if people want to make hate speech illegal (or a reason to ban people from facebook or whatever), actually narrow down to what type of hate speech, and from there you can get really specific and define it. That way people at least know if they are breaking the rules/law.

     People don't need to be told how to negotiate what counts as hate speech. All they do is argue about what it is until they can agree on something they can live with. Usually nobody is completely satisfied, especially people who think there's an objective standard "out there", like the Forms of Plato.

[JBS]

No, the problem is people who try to suppress opposing view points with the claim that expressing them is hate speech.

Example.  If I say the Bible says homosexual sex is sinful, that in my eyes is expressing a fact. For some people it's not merely a fact, but doctrine handed out by God. But for others, saying it is indulging in hate speech.

[drogulus]

No, the problem is people who try to suppress opposing view points with the claim that expressing them is hate speech.

     Holy books are full of hate speech, and people are clever enough to disown their own viewpoint by saying a book is responsible. It's not possible to not know this, almost everyone has been on the receiving end of this, whether it's ones religion or lack of one.

[JBS]

     Holy books are full of hate speech, and people are clever enough to disown their own viewpoint by saying a book is responsible. It's not possible to not know this, almost everyone has been on the receiving end of this, whether it's ones religion or lack of one.

There, that's hate speech: a broad generalization belied by actual facts. But I think no one in GMG would declare you have no right to express that idea, however untethered to fact it might be.

[drogulus]

There, that's hate speech: a broad generalization belied by actual facts.

     I doubt it. Holy books I'm aware of gleefully support the extermination of sinners and unbelievers, with fantasies about past occurrences and future ones authorized by divine power. I hate the way these systems pervert human decency and justify cruelty. As far as religious people go, for the most part they are OK, and they are as much victims as victimizers. I would prefer to end all religious inspired cruelty because I want to end all organized cruelty.

[Ken B]

     I doubt it. Holy books I'm aware of gleefully support the extermination of sinners and unbelievers, with fantasies about past occurrences and future ones authorized by divine power. I hate the way these systems pervert human decency and justify cruelty. As far as religious people go, for the most part they are OK, and they are as much victims as victimizers. I would prefer to end all religious inspired cruelty because I want to end all organized cruelty.

This is hate speech. It is of course hatred directed at practitioners of organized cruelty. To the stocks!
I am being facetious but there are places where that post could get you arrested.

[drogulus]

This is hate speech. It is of course hatred directed at practitioners of organized cruelty. To the stocks!
I am being facetious but there are places where that post could get you arrested.

     I'm too good for this world.

[Florestan]

There, that's hate speech: a broad generalization belied by actual facts. But I think no one in GMG would declare you have no right to express that idea, however untethered to fact it might be.

Amen, brother!

[SimonNZ]

There, that's hate speech: a broad generalization belied by actual facts. But I think no one in GMG would declare you have no right to express that idea, however untethered to fact it might be.

Belied by which actual facts?

[drogulus]

Belied by which actual facts?

     It works like this. A holy book says an awful thing, someone thinks it can't be awful because it's holy, someone else says it's awful anyway, and that's hate speech.

     Do the gods love what is good or is the good what the gods love?

[Ken B]

Belshazzar's Feast might need a rewrite.

Bible Scholars Now Believe Writing On The Wall Actually Said 'Epstein Didn't Kill Himself'
Bible Scholars Now Believe Writing On The Wall Actually Said 'Epstein Didn't Kill Himself'

[JBS]

Correct link.
https://babylonbee.com/news/hidden-bible-code-reveals-epstein-didnt-kill-himself

Tangential
Rabbinic tradition asserts that the reason Belshazzar's wise men couldn't read the Writing on the wall was because it used a completely new alphabet, the so called Assyrian script now used for Hebrew and Aramaic, in place of the Canaanite script used in Biblical times.  On a very basic level, they could not read the Writing. This is completely unhistorical of course....

[zamyrabyrd]

Belshazzar's Feast might need a rewrite.

Bible Scholars Now Believe Writing On The Wall Actually Said 'Epstein Didn't Kill Himself'
Bible Scholars Now Believe Writing On The Wall Actually Said 'Epstein Didn't Kill Himself'

If Epstein didn't kill himself, maybe he is still alive?

[Florestan]

Correct link.
https://babylonbee.com/news/hidden-bible-code-reveals-epstein-didnt-kill-himself

This is a joke, I hope.

[Ken B]

This is a joke, I hope.

As Stalin said, humor is like food, not everyone gets it.

[JBS]

This is a joke, I hope.

Babylon Bee is a religion oriented (Catholic, I think, but not sure) version of the Onion.

[Ken B]

Babylon Bee is a religion oriented (Catholic, I think, but not sure) version of the Onion.

Evangelical.

Justin Trudeau can regularly wear blackface and get re elected, but a black man cannot wear Justin Trudeau-face. https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=13953

[greg]

But where do you stand on the issue of Zuckerberg lifting the ban of misinformation and blatant falsehoods in political advertising on Facebook?

I'm not sure, haven't thought about it enough yet to have an opinion.


Anyways, in regards to hate speech, it is basically a crime against the new religion of social justice. Since we don't rule by religion any more, people still need to increase their position in the social hierarchy somehow, and what easier way but to shame others into lowering their position so that the righteous people appear above the non-believers.

[greg]

     People don't need to be told how to negotiate what counts as hate speech. All they do is argue about what it is until they can agree on something they can live with. Usually nobody is completely satisfied, especially people who think there's an objective standard "out there", like the Forms of Plato.

That would be the way to do it but I could imagine it would be hard to settle on any compromise at all in this current political climate.

[drogulus]

I'm not sure, haven't thought about it enough yet to have an opinion.


Anyways, in regards to hate speech, it is basically a crime against the new religion of social justice. Since we don't rule by religion any more, people still need to increase their position in the social hierarchy somehow, and what easier way but to shame others into lowering their position so that the righteous people appear above the non-believers.

     Is this a backhanded way of acknowledging that the old religion of social justice had hate speech in it?

     What do you think was good about the old rules? Was it allowing more room for people to be disparaged?

     I don't entirely embrace the new rules, partly because I'm old and partly because I'm DIY on ethics. Though I'm in a social system, it's not all me and I'm not all it.

That would be the way to do it but I could imagine it would be hard to settle on any compromise at all in this current political climate.

     Do it for yourself and the people you interact with. I don't attack people for being X-ists in the real world I occasionally visit.

[greg]

     Is this a backhanded way of acknowledging that the old religion of social justice had hate speech in it?

     What do you think was good about the old rules? Was it allowing more room for people to be disparaged?

     I don't entirely embrace the new rules, partly because I'm old and partly because I'm DIY on ethics. Though I'm in a social system, it's not all me and I'm not all it.

     Do it for yourself and the people you interact with. I don't attack people for being X-ists in the real world I occasionally visit.

The old version of hate speech would be disrespecting God, while the new version is disrespecting whoever is viewed as oppressed.

I don't think anything is necessarily good about the "old rules"...

I don't normally attack people for saying bad stuff... although it's rare to hear it said seriously. (jokes i probably wouldn't attack).

[Ken B]

First Roy Moore nearly gets elected to the US senate ... now a convicted child sex offender wins a state senate seat. https://wjla.com/news/local/virginia-lawmaker-jailed-for-teen-sex-scandal-wins-senate-seat

[drogulus]

I don't normally attack people for saying bad stuff... although it's rare to hear it said seriously. (jokes i probably wouldn't attack).

     Some fish can change sex when it suits them. They don't have a religion so it's OK.

[SimonNZ]

T.I. Said He Goes To The Gynecologist With His Daughter Every Year To "Check Her Hymen"
The rapper added, "I will say, as of her 18th birthday, her hymen is still intact."

Seriously.

[...]"T.I. also noted that he was informed the hymen can be broken in ways other than through sexual penetration. "And so then they come and say, 'Well, I just want you to know that there are other ways besides sex that the hymen can be broken like bike riding, athletics, horseback riding, and just other forms of athletic physical activity,'" he said. "So I say, 'Look, Doc, she don't ride no horses, she don't ride no bike, she don't play no sports. Just check the hymen, please, and give me back my results expeditiously.'"[...]

[Ken B]

Yo, Florestan!

https://www.thecollegefix.com/columbia-professor-who-fled-communism-resigns-says-university-is-becoming-communist/

Plus, empty your mailbox...

[Florestan]

Yo, Florestan!

https://www.thecollegefix.com/columbia-professor-who-fled-communism-resigns-says-university-is-becoming-communist/

I've read about that already. He's an excellent theatre and opera director.

Plus, empty your mailbox...

Done.

[SimonNZ]

By what definition is that "communist"?.

It might be time to break out that humpty dumpty quote again.

[drogulus]

By what definition is that "communist"?.

It might be time to break out that humpty dumpty quote again.

     I recall Ayn Rand used to think everything she didn't like was Communist. She liked atheism, though. I guess she didn't like any form of thought control that didn't have her at the center.

[Florestan]

By what definition is that "communist"?.

The ideological diktat fits in the bill quite nicely. Just substitute "bourgeois" for "white, heterosexual, married-with-kids male" and "proletarian" for "woman, minority or gay" and you get exactly the discourse of the Party Secretary of the National Theater in Bucharest, any time between 1948 and 1989.

It might be time to break out that humpty dumpty quote again.

Actually, his choice of words is careful and accurate.

I felt like I was living under communism again.

Spot on, Mr. Șerban, spot on.

[SimonNZ]

The ideological diktat fits in the bill quite nicely.

Okay...now imagine the school was "dictating" creationist history and obligatory prayer and placed hiring practices on this preference over experience and talent. "Communism"?

I'm not arguing that the story as reported (though it seems to have been reported in a way to maximize anti-"PC" knee-jerk reaction which makes me suspicious of many of the details) makes the administration sound stupid. But "unbending authority from above" does not on its own equal "communism". Its a sloppy use of language.

[Ken B]

"his choice of words is careful and accurate "

Indeed.  "I felt like I was living under communism again" is not an assertion about an economic system. He is referring to the kind of political interference and mind control that he had previously experienced under communism. A man who had lived under Pinochet could likewise have said "I felt like I was living under fascism again".

[Florestan]

"his choice of words is careful and accurate "

Indeed.  "I felt like I was living under communism again" is not an assertion about an economic system. He is referring to the kind of political interference and mind control that he had previously experienced under communism. A man who had lived under Pinochet could likewise have said "I felt like I was living under fascism again".

Good point.

[SimonNZ]

No, that's not what he's saying:

" "on its way toward full blown communism," is a quote in the text.

"...says university is becoming communist" is right there in the title.


"careful and accurate"...?

[drogulus]

No, that's not what he's saying:

" "on its way toward full blown communism," is a quote in the text.

"...says university is becoming communist" is right there in the title.


"careful and accurate"...?

   

     Part of the left revolted against the post modernists in the '90s. They thought they were fighting extreme relativism and debased French philosophy.

     Sokal affair

     I loved the Sokal Hoax. I took Sokal to be entirely correct that there was nothing progressive about the implicit intolerance, obscurantism and complete divorcement from rigor of academic postmodernese. Now that the right has adopted "alternative facts" and the assault on objectivity we upholders of standards get it from both sides.

[SimonNZ]

the reason I'm being a bit touchy about this here is that there is a lot of loose talk flying around from the right just now that:

left equals socialism equals communism

and:

progressive equals socialism equals communism

and:

green equals socialism equals communism

and etc on specific policies where x equals socialism equals communism

[Ken B]

   

     Part of the left revolted against the post modernists in the '90s. They thought they were fighting extreme relativism and debased French philosophy.

     Sokal affair

     I loved the Sokal Hoax. I took Sokal to be entirely correct that there was nothing progressive about the implicit intolerance, obscurantism and complete divorcement from rigor of academic postmodernese. Now that the right has adopted "alternative facts" and the assault on objectivity we upholders of standards get it from both sides.

There were a couple good books out of that too. I read the one about Impostures; I forget the title but it is mentioned in the wiki.

I fear you have fallen for spin about "alternative facts". The way she used it and talked about it was actually quite right, there usually are alternative, that is *other* facts which are relevant to any complex issue. If you only look at 5he facts supporting one side of an argument you aren't doing it right. Example. Is Trump doing a good job on the economy? Fact 1, high employment, fact 2 astounding deficit. Both facts are relevant.

Coyne on his sire why evolution is true often has good stuff on the Pomo craziness. And Helen Pluckrose has a site; she is really good. She was part of 5he team that perpetrated the Grievance Studies hoax, aka Sokal Ii

[drogulus]

I fear you have fallen for spin about "alternative facts". The way she used it and talked about it was actually quite right, there usually are alternative, that is *other* facts which are relevant to any complex issue. If you only look at 5he facts supporting one side of an argument you aren't doing it right. Example. Is Trump doing a good job on the economy? Fact 1, high employment, fact 2 astounding deficit. Both facts are relevant.

     There were not alternative crowd sizes at the Trump Inauguration, and alternative falsehoods are not facts.

     The example you give of other facts to be considered is a different thing. No facts are alternatives to each other, there are alternative arguments that use different facts.

[Ken B]

     There were not alternative crowd sizes at the Trump Inauguration, and alternative falsehoods are not facts.

     The example you give of other facts to be considered is a different thing. No facts are alternatives to each other, there are alternative arguments that use different facts.

You can look only at one set of facts, but in that case there are alternative facts you might consider. That is perfectly correct. Her perfectly coherent remark was distorted by partisans. Playing dumb and pretending words cannot properly be used in multiple senses.

Indeed falsehoods are not facts. That is a clue that "alternative facts" really refers to other facts I could have considered. That's how the word works. If I listen to Karajan's Beethoven, and you tell me there are alternative recordings, I think you mean there are other recordings I could have listened to.

Actually this reminds me of the twaddle about Rumsfeld 15 years ago. I heard people who claim to be intelligent ridiculing his talk about known knowns, known unknowns, and unknown unknowns, which is actually perfectly sensible. But the allure of mockery was too strong.

[drogulus]

You can look only at one set of facts, but in that case there are alternative facts you might consider. That is perfectly correct. Her perfectly coherent remark was distorted by partisans.

     She had no business suggesting that a set of facts existed that Shawn Spicer had to show that visible facts were wrong. She deserved the ridicule. The Trumpists use lies as alternative facts. They are not just using different facts to make alternative arguments. They are not saying "on the other hand, these facts show...".

     

"his choice of words is careful and accurate "

Indeed.  "I felt like I was living under communism again" is not an assertion about an economic system. He is referring to the kind of political interference and mind control that he had previously experienced under communism. A man who had lived under Pinochet could likewise have said "I felt like I was living under fascism again".

     I find this argument unpersuasive. Too much is excluded that we know is true about how social systems in open societies evolve. The older you are, the less you're willing to accommodate it, or the harder you find doing it. It's especially hard for people to admit the equal human worth of people who assumed to be by their very nature objects of ridicule and scorn.

     How do I handle it? It's easier for me since I'm not expected to be an authority figure that sets a good example I don't believe in. It's also easier because I don't have any rigid counterdogma to get pissed off by a different one. They all piss me off. When I recently visited a "men's room" with women in it I thought it was a novelty and mused that this was the future. It didn't seem Communist or fascist or even postmodern.

[drogulus]

     Rumsfeld is awesome! He had a conversation with Warren Mosler that helped him develop MMT.

[SimonNZ]

If anyone needs a reminder:

[...]

CHUCK TODD:

--excuse and you did not answer the question.

KELLYANNE CONWAY:

I did answer--

CHUCK TODD:

No you did not.

KELLYANNE CONWAY:

--your question.

CHUCK TODD:

You did not--

KELLYANNE CONWAY:

Yes I did.

CHUCK TODD:

--answer the question of why the president asked the White House press secretary to come out in front of the podium for the first time and utter a falsehood? Why did he do that? It undermines the credibility of the entire White House press office--

KELLYANNE CONWAY:

No it doesn't.

CHUCK TODD:

--on day one.

KELLYANNE CONWAY:

Don't be so overly dramatic about it, Chuck. What-- You're saying it's a falsehood. And they're giving Sean Spicer, our press secretary, gave alternative facts to that. But the point remains--

CHUCK TODD:

Wait a minute-- Alternative facts?

KELLYANNE CONWAY:

--that there's--

CHUCK TODD:

Alternative facts? Four of the five facts he uttered, the one thing he got right--

KELLYANNE CONWAY:

--hey, Chuck, why-- Hey Chuck--

CHUCK TODD:

--was Zeke Miller. Four of the five facts he uttered were just not true. Look, alternative facts are not facts. They're falsehoods.

KELLYANNE CONWAY:

Chuck, do you think it's a fact or not that millions of people have lost their plans or health insurance and their doctors under President Obama? Do you think it's a fact that everything we heard from these women yesterday happened on the watch of President Obama? He was president for eight years. Donald Trump's been here for about eight hours.

Do you think it's a fact that millions of women, 16.1 million women, as I stand here before you today, are in poverty along with their kids? Do you think it's a fact that millions don't have health care? Do you think it's a fact that we spent billions of dollars on education in the last eight years only to have millions of kids still stuck in schools that fail them every single day? These are the facts that I want the press corps to cover--

CHUCK TODD:

I--

KELLYANNE CONWAY:

--and these are-- this is why I'm here at the White House--

CHUCK TODD:

--but I understand this.

KELLYANNE CONWAY:

--to change awful--

CHUCK TODD:

What I don't understand is--

KELLYANNE CONWAY:

--numbers like that.

CHUCK TODD:

--that is not what yesterday was about. So you--

KELLYANNE CONWAY:

Yes it is.

CHUCK TODD:

--have not answered the qu-- you did not answer the question the--

KELLYANNE CONWAY:

It's what this presidency's going to be about.

CHUCK TODD:

--you sent the press secretary out there to utter a falsehood on the smallest, pettiest thing.

KELLYANNE CONWAY:

I don't think that anybody can prove the--

CHUCK TODD:

And I don't understand why you did it.

KELLYANNE CONWAY:

--look, I actually don't think that-- maybe this is me as a pollster, Chuck. And you know data well. I don't think you can prove those numbers one way or the other. There's no way to really quantify crowds. We all know that. You can laugh at me all you want. But I'm very glad--

CHUCK TODD:

I'm not laughing. I'm just--

KELLYANNE CONWAY:

--look, Chuck, I'm--

CHUCK TODD:

--befuddled.[...]

https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/meet-press-01-22-17-n710491

[Ken B]

     She had no business suggesting that a set of facts existed that Shawn Spicer had to show that visible facts were wrong. She deserved the ridicule. The Trumpists use lies as alternative facts. They are not just using different facts to make alternative arguments. They are not saying "on the other hand, these facts show...".

     
     I find this argument unpersuasive. Too much is excluded that we know is true about how social systems in open societies evolve. The older you are, the less you're willing to accommodate it, or the harder you find doing it. It's especially hard for people to admit the equal human worth of people who assumed to be by their very nature objects of ridicule and scorn.

     How do I handle it? It's easier for me since I'm not expected to be an authority figure that sets a good example I don't believe in. It's also easier because I don't have any rigid counterdogma to get pissed off by a different one. They all piss me off. When I recently visited a "men's room" with women in it I thought it was a novelty and mused that this was the future. It didn't seem Communist or fascist or even postmodern.

"I find this argument unpersuasive"
So a man who lived under Pinochet could NOT say something reminded him of life under fascism?

What does your being or not being an authority figure have to do with how a man felt? It like saying "I have blue eyes and therefore he is lying when he said it felt to him like ..."

[drogulus]

"I find this argument unpersuasive"
So a man who lived under Pinochet could NOT say something reminded him of life under fascism?

What does your being or not being an authority figure have to do with how a man felt? It like saying "I have blue eyes and therefore he is lying when he said it felt to him like ..."

     I'm not denying feelings. I'm denying that his feelings are useful in determining fascism if the case is like the one in the article about Serban quitting.

     When I was young not only did I walk a thousand miles to school in blinding snowstorms, I also watched William Buckley on TV. He used to have refugees from Communist countries on (Ayn Rand included) and I got the idea that America was supposed to be going Communist. I didn't believe it, for good reason as I look back.

      Buckley was opposing Communism as much from a rival dogmatism as he was from the standpoint of an open society, which he disliked. I picked up on it.

      The other reason is that people who are experienced about Communism get that part right and open societies wrong. I never thought it was possible for my country to go Communist by being overenthusiastic about social change. I look at the countries that had gone Communist and they don't look at all like democracies in evolution.

[Florestan]

         I find this argument unpersuasive. Too much is excluded that we know is true about how social systems in open societies evolve. The older you are, the less you're willing to accommodate it, or the harder you find doing it. It's especially hard for people to admit the equal human worth of people who assumed to be by their very nature objects of ridicule and scorn.

     How do I handle it? It's easier for me since I'm not expected to be an authority figure that sets a good example I don't believe in. It's also easier because I don't have any rigid counterdogma to get pissed off by a different one. They all piss me off. When I recently visited a "men's room" with women in it I thought it was a novelty and mused that this was the future. It didn't seem Communist or fascist or even postmodern.

     I'm not denying feelings. I'm denying that his feelings are useful in determining fascism if the case is like the one in the article about Serban quitting.

     When I was young not only did I walk a thousand miles to school in blinding snowstorms, I also watched William Buckley on TV. He used to have refugees from Communist countries on (Ayn Rand included) and I got the idea that America was supposed to be going Communist. I didn't believe it, for good reason as I look back.

      Buckley was opposing Communism as much from a rival dogmatism as he was from the standpoint of an open society, which he disliked. I picked up on it.

      The other reason is that people who are experienced about Communism get that part right and open societies wrong. I never thought it was possible for my country to go Communist by being overenthusiastic about social change. I look at the countries that had gone Communist and they don't look at all like democracies in evolution.

You're clueless. Utterly clueless. I'm not surprised, though.

[Florestan]

left equals socialism equals communism

and:

progressive equals socialism equals communism

and:

green equals socialism equals communism

For somoeone who has direct experience with communism (say, someone born and raised in the Socialist Republic of Romania) the similarities are indeed striking and shocking.

[Florestan]

" "on its way toward full blown communism," is a quote in the text.

"...says university is becoming communist" is right there in the title.

Below is the relevant part of Mr. Şerban's interview (video, in Romanian). The English translations above of what he said are not accurate. The "I felt like was living under Communism again" is accurate, though. For context, just before that he said "I was forced to take a decision which was contrary to my conscience, I was ordered what to do".

I don't have time to translate the whole thing but now that I watched it in full I can only reiterate what I said before: his choice of words is careful and accurate. Btw, he begins by saying that during Trump's mandate the right has become increasingly radical.

https://www.facebook.com/100010459937800/videos/969446060080716/

[drogulus]

You're clueless. Utterly clueless. I'm not surprised, though.

     Dogmatists hate their rivals. An open system is not admired for its openness, but opportunistically as a safe place to snipe at enemies. Solzhenitsyn won't embrace freedom, he will use what it offers him while despising how people live when they can freely choose how that is.

     I like my open society for itself, not so I can choose the means to undermine it.

For somoeone who has direct experience with communism (say, someone born and raised in the Socialist Republic of Romania) the similarities are indeed striking and shocking.

     That's the problem. That's the basis of your comparison. Therefore it doesn't occur to you how open societies grapple with coercive social movements, either the old ones or new ones as they fight with each other.

     Though I lack the experience of Communist dictatorship (or its rivals) I do have experience with social strife in the complex framework of the U.S. So even as a youngster I grasped how dogmatic people like Buckley and his anti-Communist guests interpreted freedom as room to impose a different dogma. I got the agenda, understanding openness as purely instrumental. I knew that wasn't how I understood it.

[drogulus]

     I'll try one more time. I think there is something more deeply wrong about a dictatorship than choosing the wrong god.

[greg]

According to Rolling Stone, No Nut November is alt-right now. Also, "Coomer" looks Jewish to them, so it must be proof that bad people exist and are highly influential.

Hmm, sounds legit. Not fake news at all.

(Also not providing a link because they don't deserve clicks).



...Perhaps we should make participation in this illegal. Make sure a government agent is assigned to watch every male in the US to do his business several times each November while being held gunpoint, even if he is crying. That should stop anti-semitism. 

[SimonNZ]

Well...I couldn't work out what your post meant, so I had to give them some clicks:

How a New Meme Exposes the Far-Right Roots of #NoNutNovember
A month-long masturbation-abstinence challenge has a new "coomer" meme, mocking men who masturbate

"If you spend a lot of time in certain Extremely Online corners of the internet ecosystem, you've likely stumbled onto #NoNutNovember, or just #NNN for short. An annual challenge encouraging men to refrain from masturbating (or even, for many, having any sex) for the month, No Nut November was initially created as a parody of internet-borne phenomena such as the Ice Bucket Challenge or Movember, skewering the silliness of viral internet challenges along with the more extreme claims made by proponents of NoFap, an anti-porn subreddit with half a million members. (No Nut November has no connection to NoFap, though the two are often conflated and NoFap will sometimes post #NNN memes on its social media pages, says Matthew Plummer, a community manager for NoFap.)

For most participants, the challenge is essentially an excuse to shitpost, as well as tweet memes skewering some of the more exaggerated purported benefits of abstaining from masturbation. But there are many who take it seriously, with at least 52,000 people as of this writing diligently documenting their day-by-day progress (and setbacks) on the subreddit r/NoNutNovember. r/NoNutNovember moderator /u/yeeval estimates that approximately 90% of the posts are from people "actively participating, and also there's the occasional fallen member who stays on the subreddit for the community and laughs."

[JBS]

Can we blame Seinfeld?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Contest

[greg]

If you spend a lot of time in certain Extremely Online corners of the internet ecosystem

I've heard about it from ordinary subreddits and youtube video comments, no idea what they are talking about.

Anyways, for some, it is a way to have control over one's self or something.

Can we blame Seinfeld?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Contest

That one came to mind before. Wouldn't be surprised if that was where the idea originated.

[Florestan]

     Dogmatists hate their rivals. An open system is not admired for its openness, but opportunistically as a safe place to snipe at enemies. Solzhenitsyn won't embrace freedom, he will use what it offers him while despising how people live when they can freely choose how that is.

I'll let Solzhenitsyn himself answer.

a leading [Canadian] television commentator lectured me that I presumed to judge the experience of the world from the viewpoint of my own limited Soviet and prison-camp experience. Indeed, how true! Life and death, imprisonment and hunger, the cultivation of the soul despite the captivity of the body: how very limited that is compared to the bright world of political parties, yesterday's numbers on the stock exchange, amusements without end, and exotic foreign travel!

   

[drogulus]

     

I'll let Solzhenitsyn himself answer.

a leading [Canadian] television commentator lectured me that I presumed to judge the experience of the world from the viewpoint of my own limited Soviet and prison-camp experience. Indeed, how true! Life and death, imprisonment and hunger, the cultivation of the soul despite the captivity of the body: how very limited that is compared to the bright world of political parties, yesterday's numbers on the stock exchange, amusements without end, and exotic foreign travel!

     Yes, that's exactly what I mean.  He doesn't see merely free people as worthy like himself.

     Saints and mad monks don't impress me. They are not models. They can't take a joke or tell a joke. They are not fun!!

[JBS]

Drogulus is right. The quote merely demonstrates that AS thought that his years in the Gulag made him superior to those who had not suffered like him, and gave him the right to sneer at people who led normal lives...as if suffering in and of itself gives an extra level of virtue and knowledge. Amfortas should have healed Parsifal, not vice versa.

[SimonNZ]

I've read quite a lot, if not most, of Solzhenitsyn's writing and I've never seen him come across like that.

[JBS]

I've read quite a lot, if not most, of Solzhenitsyn's writing and I've never seen him come across like that.

Read the section subtitled "Criticism of the West"
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleksandr_Solzhenitsyn

His censure of Western materialism is certainly in the vein of what that quote says. To me it reads like the words of a man who despised the West.

(And he managed to say the Vietnam War was a genocide by the Americans, but the Holodomor was not a genocide.)

What I have read of his fiction supports your comment, but apparently expulsion from Russia and then the fall of the Soviets  allowed his basic conservatism to express itself in an attempt  to absolve Russians of the sins of the Soviets.

[SimonNZ]

I'm not at all familiar with his interviews or later utterances as a public intellectual. I don't doubt he said the things in that section (they also don't seem groundless or especially crazy). I was saying the arrogant tone of the earlier quote is nowhere in his remarkable Soviet-era body of writing, not just the novels but also in the three volumes of the Gulag Archipelago and the two volumes of literary memoir The Oak And The Calf and Invisible Allies. There's no hint anywhere that he sees prison survivors as somehow "superior". It would be a pity if anyone unfamiliar thought that was representative.

[JBS]

I'm not at all familiar with his interviews or later utterances as a public intellectual. I don't doubt he said the things in that section (they also don't seem groundless or especially crazy). I was saying the arrogant tone of the earlier quote is nowhere in his remarkable Soviet-era body of writing, not just the novels but also in the three volumes of the Gulag Archipelago and the two volumes of literary memoir The Oak And The Calf and Invisible Allies. There's no hint anywhere that he sees prison survivors as somehow "superior". It would be a pity if anyone unfamiliar thought that was representative.

Fair enough.

[Florestan]

He's actually spot on. People who have lived all theiir life in comfort and security will never be able to understand fully what it means to live under a totalitarian regime. The reactions here --- which are based on a complete misunderstanding of his point --- are proof enough.

As someone who risked his life and liberty in order to fight communism he is clearly morally superior to some Westerners ---- not to the common people of the West as you wrongly infer, but to all those who, while Solzhenitsyn and hundreds of thousands of others suffered in the Gulag, preached about how wonderful communism is and what a blessing it would be for the West to have it, all the while enjoying the political, social and material comfort and security made possible by the very society they so much despised and wanted to see overthrown. And while Solzhenitsyn, who was never a threat to the West anyway, is dead, the number of people like those I described above is probably larger than it was during his lifetime, and their ideas and actions do pose a threat to the Western civilization.

[SimonNZ]

He's actually spot on. People who have lived all theiir life in comfort and security will never be able to understand fully what it means to live under a totalitarian regime. The reactions here --- which are based on a complete misunderstanding of his point --- are proof enough.

But that quote you found was about "prison camp experience". Do you have this? Will you be happy being told that without it you understand nothing?

What was the source and context of that quote, btw?

[Florestan]

But that quote you found was about "prison camp experience". Do you have this? Will you be happy being told that without it you understand nothing?

Fortunately, I don't have such experience but I'll tell you something. After 1989 it was discovered that some of the former political prisoners had become informers of the secret police in exchange for a better treatment or even release. Shock and outrage ensued but I was neither shocked nor outraged. Not a single one of those who condemned these people had experienced life in communist political prisons and the psychological and physical distress inflicted therein and therefore not a single one of them could have been able to state "I would certainly not have done that". So you see, I don't need to be told that without prison experience I don't understand ulterior behavior --- I know it myself.

What was the source and context of that quote, btw?

https://www.the-tls.co.uk/articles/public/solzhenitsyn-as-he-saw-himself/

The whole article is the context; the quote is found in the very last paragraph.

[Florestan]

Entirely unrelated to Solzhenitsyn.

https://quillette.com/2019/09/17/i-basically-just-made-it-up-confessions-of-a-social-constructionist/

[drogulus]

     

He's actually spot on. People who have lived all theiir life in comfort and security will never be able to understand fully what it means to live under a totalitarian regime. The reactions here --- which are based on a complete misunderstanding of his point --- are proof enough.

     I would prefer not to live in a prison society so I know what it means. The point of an open society is that you can read In The First Circle, not live it.

[Ken B]

And yet I remember Frederick Douglass thinking his experience as a slave gave him some standing on the issue of slavery.

[drogulus]

And yet I remember Frederick Douglass thinking his experience as a slave gave him some standing on the issue of slavery.

     He didn't think slavery was something people should experience in order to understand the meaning of life. Slavery did give him great understanding of the meaning of freedom, no one doubts that. The contrast with Solzhenitsyn is stark, I would say.

[Florestan]

     He didn't think slavery was something people should experience in order to understand the meaning of life. Slavery did give him great understanding of the meaning of freedom, no one doubts that. The contrast with Solzhenitsyn is stark, I would say.

I strongly suspect that you have not read one single paragraph written by Solzhenitsyn, let alone a whole book --- and this would actually be in your advantage, because if you have indeed read him and came to the conclusion that he promoted the idea that people should experience Gulag in order to understand the meaning of life or freedom then your reading comprehension skills are way below those of a newborn.

[drogulus]

I strongly suspect that you have not read one single paragraph written by Solzhenitsyn, let alone a whole book --- and this would actually be in your advantage, because if you have indeed read him and came to the conclusion that he promoted the idea that people should experience Gulag in order to understand the meaning of life or freedom then your reading comprehension skills are way below those of a newborn.

     I'll bet you do. I read One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich and In The First Circle, both many years ago. There's nothing in the books that would indicate how he would turn against free people when he had the opportunity to live among them. I was surprised when I learned of his diatribes against the West. Perhaps I thought he would understand freedom as well as he understood imprisonment. He did not.

[JBS]

I strongly suspect that you have not read one single paragraph written by Solzhenitsyn, let alone a whole book --- and this would actually be in your advantage, because if you have indeed read him and came to the conclusion that he promoted the idea that people should experience Gulag in order to understand the meaning of life or freedom then your reading comprehension skills are way below those of a newborn.

Go back and look at the quote.  He was not condemning his Canadian interlocutor for being sympathetic to Communism. He gives no indication what the man's opinions are.  He was condemning him for enjoying the comforts of Western capitalist society, and claiming that his suffering in the camps in and of itself made him superior to the other man.

It is at the least consistent with his criticism of EuroAmerican materialism.

[Florestan]

     I'll bet you do. I read One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich and In The First Circle, both many years ago. There's nothing in the books that would indicate how he would turn against free people when he had the opportunity to live among them. I was surprised when I learned of his diatribes against the West. Perhaps I thought he would understand freedom as well as he understood imprisonment. He did not.

This is wrong on so many levels that I don't even know where to begin. I'd better not begin at all, you're obviously clueless.

[drogulus]

     Trivially pursuing ones own conception of the good life is one of the virtues of freedom. It's not all there is to it, certainly not for me it isn't. I would rather people not be forced to live on the edge of an existential crisis every day to enhance their moral worth.

[JBS]

This is wrong on so many levels that I don't even know where to begin. I'd better not begin at all, you're obviously clueless.

Drogulus is right.  His books were mercilessly accurate depictions of life in Soviet Russia, and displayed everything that was wrong with life under totalitarianism.  One would assume from them he was a supporter of liberal freedom.

Yet when he lived in the West, he hated the society he saw around him, and took refuge in classic Russian nationalism. He ended his life as a supporter of Putin.

[Florestan]

Go back and look at the quote.  He was not condemning his Canadian interlocutor for being sympathetic to Communism. He gives no indication what the man's opinions are. He was condemning him for enjoying the comforts of Western capitalist society, and claiming that his suffering in the camps in and of itself made him superior to the other man.

This interpretation is far off the mark and frankly I'm surprised that you obstinately cling to it. But nevermind, go ahead, think what you want. I'm not going to get into a polemic with you, or anyone else, about that. I will make one last point, though: I'm greatly puzzled by your (plural) accepting left-wing ciritiques of the West as an expression of freedom in an open society while at the same time denouncing right-wing critiques of the self-same West as an expression of hatred and contempt for freedom in an open society. And taking into account that, as I said previously, while Solzhenitsyn is dead and he never thought of turning the West upside down anyway, the number of those who want precisely that is legion, the puzzlement is even greater.

And this is going to be my last post on the issue.

[Florestan]

Drogulus is right.  His books were mercilessly accurate depictions of life in Soviet Russia, and displayed everything that was wrong with life under totalitarianism.  One would assume from them he was a supporter of liberal freedom.

Yet when he lived in the West, he hated the society he saw around him,

No, he did not. I'm sorry to say it but you're as clueless as drogulus. Don't bother to reply, see my post above this one.

[drogulus]

     I want to tinker with a free society just like other people on the left and right do., by trimming a little here and adding a little there. It's worth arguing about from a common perspective of supporting a free society that remains open to such debates about how a free society can evolve.

     Personally my conception is neo-Darwinian, that the future comes out of course correction with no fixed end state like heaven or hell or Atlantic City. There's lots of improvisation within a capacious rule set.

clueless as drogulus

As if....!!

[Ken B]

The vaping threat was bogus.

https://reason.org/commentary/cdc-started-a-vaping-panic-now-its-admitting-vitamin-e-acetate-in-illegal-products-is-to-blame/

This is actually pretty big. The CDC screwed up badly. Vaping is an important form of harm reduction.

[drogulus]

The vaping threat was bogus.

https://reason.org/commentary/cdc-started-a-vaping-panic-now-its-admitting-vitamin-e-acetate-in-illegal-products-is-to-blame/

This is actually pretty big. The CDC screwed up badly. Vaping is an important form of harm reduction.

     In Massachusetts we have a ban in effect on all nicotine e-cigs. Undoubtedly some damage is being done as smokers relapse.

[Ken B]

The return of proof texting. Take JBS's comment about the Ukraine. AS did deny the Holomodor was genocide, because he didn't think the reason for it was genocidal. But to proof text like that is misleading. He never minimized or excused it in any way.
"It was a system which, in time of peace, artificially created a famine, causing 6 million people to die in the Ukraine in 1932 and 1933. .... they died on the very edge of Europe. And Europe didn't even notice it. The world didn't even notice it—6 million people!"
AS was calling attention to it at a time when most leftists denied it ever happened.
There can be other reasons for mass murder than genocide. Mao starved 30 million.

AS hated a lot of what he saw in the west. (Raise your hands those who hate Trump being president, or hated Jim Crow) But he also valued and praised its liberty and freedom.

[JBS]

The return of proof texting. Take JBS's comment about the Ukraine. AS did deny the Holomodor was genocide, because he didn't think the reason for it was genocidal. But to proof text like that is misleading. He never minimized or excused it in any way.
"It was a system which, in time of peace, artificially created a famine, causing 6 million people to die in the Ukraine in 1932 and 1933. .... they died on the very edge of Europe. And Europe didn't even notice it. The world didn't even notice it—6 million people!"
AS was calling attention to it at a time when most leftists denied it ever happened.
There can be other reasons for mass murder than genocide. Mao starved 30 million.

AS hated a lot of what he saw in the west. (Raise your hands those who hate Trump being president, or hated Jim Crow) But he also valued and praised its liberty and freedom.

The full quote refers to the famine that happened during the Russian Civil War as being equal in scope and equally caused by the Bolsheviks. It was part of his  premise that Russia was not the same as the Soviet Union, and that the Russian people were as much a victim of Communism as any other group.

But you managed to omit the context of my criticism, which was that while he didn't want to call the Holomodor genocide, he happily slapped the label of "genocide" on America's involvement in the Vietnam war.

[Ken B]

The full quote refers to the famine that happened during the Russian Civil War as being equal in scope and equally caused by the Bolsheviks. It was part of his  premise that Russia was not the same as the Soviet Union, and that the Russian people were as much a victim of Communism as any other group.

But you managed to omit the context of my criticism, which was that while he didn't want to call the Holomodor genocide, he happily slapped the label of "genocide" on America's involvement in the Vietnam war.

But I am not arguing we should accept his judgment. I am refuting the false claim he simply hated the west, tout court. 

I don't know enough about 1921 to judge his claim.

[SimonNZ]

Learning just now that The First Circle was at some point made into a miniseries with Christopher Plummer and F Murray Abraham:



The First Circle was probably my favorite book when I was in my late teens, so it surprises me that I never picked up on that.

[drogulus]

Learning just now that The First Circle was at some point made into a miniseries with Christopher Plummer and F Murray Abraham:



The First Circle was probably my favorite book when I was in my late teens, so it surprises me that I never picked up on that.

     I just ordered the DVD.

     I'm not aware of any balancing AS did that would indicate he hated some things about the West but appreciated others, unless you count the fact that he lived in Vermont for 20 years without protest against his neighbors. He wrote a letter thanking them. Maybe he liked some Americans as individuals. He didn't bite their hands at least.

[Ken B]

     I just ordered the DVD.

     I'm not aware of any balancing AS did that would indicate he hated some things about the West but appreciated others, unless you count the fact that he lived in Vermont for 20 years without protest against his neighbors. He wrote a letter thanking them. Maybe he liked some Americans as individuals. He didn't bite their hands at least.

You read one book, right? His shortest one?
Just checking.

[SimonNZ]

You read one book, right? His shortest one?
Just checking.

     I'll bet you do. I read One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich and In The First Circle, both many years ago. There's nothing in the books that would indicate how he would turn against free people when he had the opportunity to live among them. I was surprised when I learned of his diatribes against the West. Perhaps I thought he would understand freedom as well as he understood imprisonment. He did not.

[drogulus]

You read one book, right? His shortest one?
Just checking.

     I don't know which one was the shortest. But as I said before I didn't read anything that would lead me to believe he would be as hostile to the West as he turned out to be.

     It also doesn't matter if he secretly liked some things about a free godless materialistic society, does it? He kept his praise secret or there was no secret to keep. It's all the same to me.

[JBS]

https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/11/10/americas/bolivia-new-election-audit/index.html

[Florestan]

^^^ At last! Excellent news. And: the fact that he didn't cling to power at all costs is to Morales' credit. He's obviously from a different stock than Maduro.

[milk]

^^^ At last! Excellent news. And: the fact that he didn't cling to power at all costs is to Morales' credit. He's obviously from a different stock than Maduro.

My socialist friends think it's a western conspiracy. By all accounts his policies lifted Bolivia. Yet, why did he not help the next generation to assume leadership in this service of his goals? Instead, he hung on in a bad way. Power corrupts.

[Florestan]

My socialist friends think it's a western conspiracy. By all accounts his policies lifted Bolivia.

My paternal aunt's Spanish husband is a card-carrying Socialist. He has visited Bolivia several times during the last decade and each time was aghast at the level of poverty and corruption he saw.

why did he not help the next generation to assume leadership in this service of his goals? Instead, he hung on in a bad way. Power corrupts.

Maybe because the next generation opposed his goals and policies which generated what my Socialist friend witnessed first-hand?

[Ken B]

Denmark is temporarily closing its border with Sweden.
It is news to me that European countries have borders; I have been repeatedly told borders are immoral.
Copenhagen has had 13 bombings this year!
https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2019/11/11/as-bombings-spread-denmark-closes-border-with-sweden/

[drogulus]

     Checking IDs at the border doesn't seem that immoral. I'd settle for that.

[Ken B]

     Checking IDs at the border doesn't seem that immoral. I'd settle for that.

Canada is so backward we actually do that at polling stations!

[drogulus]

Canada is so backward we actually do that at polling stations!

     Do you have violent gangs of voters?

[Ken B]

     Do you have violent gangs of voters?

We do in fact have street thugs who intimidate voters and get violent. I posted about it on this thread. The thugs found an apologist for their thuggery here too.

[SimonNZ]

We do in fact have street thugs who intimidate voters and get violent. I posted about it on this thread. The thugs found an apologist for their thuggery here too.

I could explain how that misrepresents the discussion we had. But now you've apparently got me on ignore and can make cheap shots like that without having to bother yourself about what the response might be.

[drogulus]

     I'm glad I live where I do. If we had voter intimidation gangs we'd ask for their IDs. There's no need to bother the voters.

     

[zamyrabyrd]

Denmark is temporarily closing its border with Sweden.
It is news to me that European countries have borders; I have been repeatedly told borders are immoral.
Copenhagen has had 13 bombings this year!
https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2019/11/11/as-bombings-spread-denmark-closes-border-with-sweden/

No need to shut the borders, just do background profiling on who wants to come in!

[Ken B]

No need to shut the borders, just do background profiling on who wants to come in!

Sweden is a very bomby place.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-50339977?

Didn't use to be.

[zamyrabyrd]

Sweden is a very bomby place.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-50339977?
Didn't use to be.

Gosh, wonder why? Could it be the M word? Migrants who never had any intention of assimilating to Scandinavian society? The thought is ridiculous anyway... All cultures are supposed to be equal and therefore mixable.

[Florestan]

Gosh, wonder why? Could it be the M word?

The M word (actually words) and the I word (actually words). They could all be safely lumped under the P or the L word.

[zamyrabyrd]

The M word (actually words) and the I word (actually words). They could all be safely lumped under the P or the L word.

Do you mean Poor and Lovable?
How about the C word, Criminal?

[zamyrabyrd]

Sweden is a very bomby place.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-50339977?
Didn't use to be.

Sweden's 100 explosions this year: What's going on?

"This category of crime was not even logged prior to 2017. Then, in 2018, there were 162 explosions and in the past two months alone the bomb squad have been called to almost 30. 'Bangers, improvised explosives and hand grenades are behind most of the blasts', says Linda H Straaf, head of intelligence at Sweden's National Operations Department."

Words of wisdom so as not to scare the people, much less revealing it on CCN and the rest of the big media:

"This is a serious situation, but most people shouldn't be worried, because they are not going to be affected."

Gee, thanks! can you put this guarantee in writing?

Wow, you have to go half way through the article to find this which is pretty good for the BBC seeing they have similar problems of their own in explaining away local "gang violence":

"Swedish police do not record or release the ethnicity of suspects or convicted criminals, but intelligence chief Linda H Straaf says many do share a similar profile. "They have grown up in Sweden and they are from socio-economically weak groups, socio-economically weak areas, and many are perhaps second- or third-generation immigrants," she says.

Ideological debates about immigration have intensified since Sweden took in the highest number of asylum seekers per capita in the EU during the migrant crisis of 2015.

For many on the political right the explosions add fuel to their argument that Sweden has struggled to integrate migrants over the past two decades.
"In the future the situation might grow even bigger and even more problematic," says Mira Aksoy, who describes herself as a national conservative writer.
'Since they are in the same area, they are in the same mindset. It's easy for them to connect to each other. They don't feel like they should become a part of Sweden and they stay in their segregated communities and start doing crimes.'"

[Florestan]

Do you mean Poor and Lovable?
How about the C word, Criminal?

Islamism. Imams. Mosques.

Multiculturalism. Immigration. Insanity. Inanity.

Progressive. Left.

[Ken B]

Rod Stewart spent 23 years making an astounding model city. Yes, that Rod Stewart.
https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-50403561

[JBS]

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/indiana-judges-suspended-after-drunken-white-castle-fight

[Ken B]

I guess there is no such thing as bad publicity...

A comic is suing Netflix for offering her less than they paid Ellen DeGeneres or Chris Rock ...

https://www.thewrap.com/monique-sues-netflix-over-discriminatory-pay-offer-for-stand-up-special/

In Canada, frivolous lawsuits can be punished, by the award of legal fees, or in some cases barring you from further litigation.

Here is an example of the latter. It's really pretty funny except that her abuse causes people a lot of trouble.
https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2017/07/04/judge-tells-ontario-woman-who-has-sued-dozens-she-is-no-longer-welcome-in-court.html

[greg]

I guess there is no such thing as bad publicity...

A comic is suing Netflix for offering her less than they paid Ellen DeGeneres or Chris Rock ...

https://www.thewrap.com/monique-sues-netflix-over-discriminatory-pay-offer-for-stand-up-special/

In Canada, frivolous lawsuits can be punished, by the award of legal fees, or in some cases barring you from further litigation.

Here is an example of the latter. It's really pretty funny except that her abuse causes people a lot of trouble.
https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2017/07/04/judge-tells-ontario-woman-who-has-sued-dozens-she-is-no-longer-welcome-in-court.html

Or compared to Dave Chapelle.

He's the only comedian who can announce he's going to my city in the short notice of like 2 days and the shows sell out, and have people at work talking about going.

If she came here, I guarantee that no one would be talking about it at work. That's why she's making less.

[Todd]

Colin Kaepernick throws passes for 40 minutes at workout, urges NFL to 'stop running'

I fancy The Onion's take on the naughty QB's possible comeback:

Colin Kaepernick's Agents Assure Teams His CTE Has Progressed Just As Much As Other Players Over 3-Year Hiatus

[Ken B]

Twitter is not yet all of the world.
https://www.al.com/life/2019/11/covered-waffle-house-customers-step-in-to-fill-gap-at-birmingham-restaurant.html

[Ken B]

Secret Labour Party group

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7693489/amp/Labour-Election-candidate-ran-secret-Facebook-group-advises-party-Holocaust-deniers.html?__twitter_impression=true

This is my shocked face: 

[Ken B]

"I hate it here!"

Sound familiar?

https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=14003

It would take a heart of stone not to laugh. But the invocation of the spirit of George Wallace And Lester Maddox  is worth noting.

[Ken B]

Stanley Milgram, fraud. https://www.psypost.org/2019/11/unpublished-data-from-stanley-milgrams-experiments-casts-doubts-on-his-claims-about-obedience-54921

[Ken B]

Chinese camps for Uighurs https://www.businessinsider.com/china-uighur-prison-camp-suspected-locations-maps-2019-11

[Florestan]

Chinese camps for Uighurs https://www.businessinsider.com/china-uighur-prison-camp-suspected-locations-maps-2019-11

Quote: China has tried to prevent journalists from reporting on what goes on inside those camps. It has formally acknowledged the existence of some of these camps, but euphemistically calls them "re-education camps," or says they offer "free vocational training."

That nice euphemism for forced labor looks as taken straight from some posts here on GMG. 

[Ken B]

Quote: China has tried to prevent journalists from reporting on what goes on inside those camps. It has formally acknowledged the existence of some of these camps, but euphemistically calls them "re-education camps," or says they offer "free vocational training."

That nice euphemism for forced labor looks as taken straight from some posts here on GMG. 

They are looking at Christians too. https://churchleaders.com/news/366396-chinese-government-scanning-churchgoers-faces-fingers.html

[JBS]

https://www.timesofisrael.com/ag-announces-netanyahu-to-stand-trial-for-bribery-fraud-and-breach-of-trust/

[Ken B]

https://www.timesofisrael.com/ag-announces-netanyahu-to-stand-trial-for-bribery-fraud-and-breach-of-trust/

The AG is known as a straight shooter and is a member of Likud so this does not look like just politics.

Bibi should dress in blackface. Worked for our Prime Minstrel.

[Florestan]

They are looking at Christians too. https://churchleaders.com/news/366396-chinese-government-scanning-churchgoers-faces-fingers.html

I'm not surprised in the least.

[Ken B]

This article could be clearer, but the headline is borne out: the university tribunal really did say threesomes were outrageous and no rational woman would consent to one.

https://www.thecollegefix.com/judge-approves-title-ix-suit-against-university-for-saying-women-cant-consent-to-threesomes/

The new Puritans.

[Todd]

This article could be clearer, but the headline is borne out: the university tribunal really did say threesomes were outrageous and no rational woman would consent to one.

What if the threesome involved three Women and Gender Studies majors?

[Ken B]

What if the threesome involved three Women and Gender Studies majors?

Ah well, I think I answered that 

[Todd]

Ruth Bader Ginsburg admitted to hospital after chills and a fever

It's CNN, so it's fake news.

[Todd]

Borat embraces censorship.

The bit about people he deems publishers being sent to jail is surreal.  One is forced to conclude his speech was really an act.

[Ken B]

Borat embraces censorship.

The bit about people he deems publishers being sent to jail is surreal.  One is forced to conclude his speech was really an act.

So, playing along for a moment, he wants Zuckerberg et al to exert more power doesn't he? After he complains about the Super Six having so much power, he then complains they don't exercise it.

Perhaps most revealing is his remark about Goebbels and Facebook. Goebbels succeed precisely by using the force of law to restrict information and argument. You can read about China's Uighur camps on Facebook right now. Well, you can here. You cannot in China; they practice Baron-Cohenism in re Facebook.

[Ken B]

An excellent post by Jerry Coyne on a recent bit of academic mau-mauing. https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2019/11/24/uc-davis-math-professor-demonized-for-criticizing-required-diversity-statements-for-academic-jobs/

[Florestan]

Today we had presidential elections in Romania.

Klaus Iohannis, the incumbent center-right president mopped the floor with his competitor, the former Social-Democratic prime-minister Viorica Dăncilă, winning 65% of the votes.

In a single year, the Social-Democratic Party lost the elections for the European Parliament, lost the government following a no-confidence vote and today lost the presidential elections too (actually, the last time they won a presidential election was in 2000). They are groggy. And I am extrermely pleased.

Yay!

[dissily Mordentroge]

An excellent post by Jerry Coyne on a recent bit of academic mau-mauing. https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2019/11/24/uc-davis-math-professor-demonized-for-criticizing-required-diversity-statements-for-academic-jobs/

"We should continue to do all we can to reduce barriers to participation in this most beautiful of fields." Well she did open a can of worms with that assertion.
Has it ever occurred to mathematicians, nuclear physicists et al that the underlying reality of the space we find ourselves in could be very ugly?

[drogulus]

"We should continue to do all we can to reduce barriers to participation in this most beautiful of fields." Well she did open a can of worms with that assertion.
Has it ever occurred to mathematicians, nuclear physicists et al that the underlying reality of the space we find ourselves in could be very ugly?

     I'm with Coyne on this.

     As a dedicated Sokal-ist I know how the war is fought. It's kind of like this. An Evil Crab wants to attack the bastion of liberal thought, higher education, with a right claw and a left claw. Sometimes the right one is bigger, sometimes the left one. From the Crab perspective anything that can kill liberalism in favor of overmighty ideology (rightist/theist/leftist) is good, victory for belief over discovery.

     Those of us in the liberal center rely on the discovery processes to counter self authorizing belief. We want education to be about how to think and not only what to think. We resist being pure "sideists".

     You know what they say about liberals, that they are the people who won't take their own side in an argument. That's not exactly right, I think liberals don't want to live in a world that's all claw.

[JBS]

     Those of us in the liberal center rely on the discovery processes to counter self authorizing belief. We want education to be about how to think and not only what to think. We resist being pure "sideists".

Which is itself an ideology.  Rejecting the claws requires using them. You may not like the Claw, but you can't live without it. 

[Ken B]

Which is itself an ideology.  Rejecting the claws requires using them. You may not like the Claw, but you can't live without it.

No. Having the mental discipline to insist on evidence is not the same thing "the party, right or wrong ". Nor is respecting the rights of all others comparable to insisting that only our side has rights.

[drogulus]

Which is itself an ideology.  Rejecting the claws requires using them. You may not like the Claw, but you can't live without it. 

     The use value of an ideology of discovery is clear. It does work of high value. Students should learn the tools of thought that allow them to escape from belief systems. They need a belief system that allows for the possibility, one that is highly self-critical. Crab claws are all about disabling this powerful tool.

     We all have beliefs. You can't do anything without a minimum set of them. Even that set, though, must be subject to critical scrutiny that allows for falsification at a future time. This is central to the liberal concept of education, why it is at bottom a liberal enterprise.

[Ken B]

Bloomberg News, so called, will no longer investigate Democrats, only Trump.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-bloomberg-news/bloomberg-news-will-not-investigate-michael-bloomberg-or-democratic-rivals-idUSKBN1XY0MP

[drogulus]

     Charles Schwab to buy TD Ameritrade in a $26 billion all-stock deal

     Oh boy, now we get to watch horrible commercials for Schwabamerica. As long as they get rid of that guy with a beard it's a plus.

     

     To my delight I find that everyone hates this guy.

     The TD Ameritrade website is pretty good. I've used it since the TD Waterhouse days in the '90s. I still get calls from time to time to get me to, you know, do stuff. I hope the new company will not inundate me with "offers".

[JBS]

No. Having the mental discipline to insist on evidence is not the same thing "the party, right or wrong ". Nor is respecting the rights of all others comparable to insisting that only our side has rights.

Mental discipline is an ideology. Respecting the rights of all is (part of) an ideology. Ideologies are not limited to politics.

Communism is an ideology, but so is the scientific method.

[JBS]

     Charles Schwab to buy TD Ameritrade in a $26 billion all-stock deal

     Oh boy, now we get to watch horrible commercials for Schwabamerica. As long as they get rid of that guy with a beard it's a plus.

     

     To my delight I find that everyone hates this guy.

     The TD Ameritrade website is pretty good. I've used it since the TD Waterhouse days in the '90s. I still get calls from time to time to get me to, you know, do stuff. I hope the new company will not inundate me with "offers".

I don't hate him. But that's because I don't pay attention to brokerage commercials and the like, so I have to the best of my memory never seen him.

[Ken B]

Mental discipline is an ideology. Respecting the rights of all is (part of) an ideology. Ideologies are not limited to politics.

Communism is an ideology, but so is the scientific method.

Well that is wrong in general, but it is especially wrong in the context of this discussion since the original claim referred to a political ideology. It's like if we were debating the proposition "in politics all parties are bad" and you said "what about karaoke?"

[JBS]

Well that is wrong in general, but it is especially wrong in the context of this discussion since the original claim referred to a political ideology. It's like if we were debating the proposition "in politics all parties are bad" and you said "what about karaoke?"

I should call you Humpty Dumpty. You like to claim words mean what you say they mean even when they don't mean what you say they mean.

The comment by Drogulus I was responding to was not limited to political ideas.

[drogulus]

Which is itself an ideology.  Rejecting the claws requires using them. You may not like the Claw, but you can't live without it. 

     Ideas in favor of freedom and against freedom are ideas about freedom. The claws are absolutist claims for truth, and relativist claims against the truth of anything, in favor of the Will (to believe, for power). The open society and the freedom of inquiry do have a supporting ideology, liberalism.

     Calling the advocates of freedom and the destruction of it ideologues is true in a trivial way. No one has to use absolutism to fight relativism, or vice versa. It's better to reject both and it's an ideology to reject both. What's wrong with that?
   

[drogulus]

I don't hate him. But that's because I don't pay attention to brokerage commercials and the like, so I have to the best of my memory never seen him.

     It's not just this guy, it's also what the commercials say about how investors are viewed, as simpletons. You have the one with two marks sitting with "advisors" hovering over them. One is unhappy with the bad advisor and scuttles over towards the benign supervision of the good one. It's one of the most merciless depictions of financial predation you'll ever see.
     
     https://www.youtube.com/v/G3b5U_zNQXY

     I know people like the ones sitting meekly in the chairs. I was trying to pound sense into one last night. She wants someone to help plan her retirement. I keep telling her she can do it all herself with some research into how to make the most of what she has. She's way too smart to be as passive as she is. I've has some effect, but not as much as I should.

[Ken B]

I should call you Humpty Dumpty. You like to claim words mean what you say they mean even when they don't mean what you say they mean.

Well we were discussing what sort of thing leads people to commit murders by the tens of thousands. Suggestions included communism and nazism. You know, dogmatic ideologies about society should be organized that confer upon their adherents special rights. If you want to add the scientific method to that list go right ahead.

I don't think even Edwin Everett Horton ever fractured a fairy tale quite so badly as your Humpty in Wonderland
!

[amw]

I'm sure the millions of enslaved Africans, Native Americans/First Nations, Aboriginal Australians, etc (it's a long list) who were killed in order for liberalism to exist are glad to hear about how non-dogmatic and self-critical it is.

[Ken B]

I'm sure the millions of enslaved Africans, Native Americans/First Nations, Aboriginal Australians, etc (it's a long list) who were killed in order for liberalism to exist are glad to hear about how non-dogmatic and self-critical it is.

Dodgy and dishonest wording. Liberalism rejects imperialism. 
Perhaps it might not have existed in a world without imperialism but that does not make it the cause of imperialism.

[amw]

I'm sure George Washington would have agreed with you as soon as he was done throwing smallpox-infected blankets into Native American villages.

[Florestan]

I'm sure George Washington would have agreed with you as soon as he was done throwing smallpox-infected blankets into Native American villages.

George Washington did nothing of the sort.

https://www.history.com/news/colonists-native-americans-smallpox-blankets

https://www.historynet.com/smallpox-in-the-blankets.htm

[amw]

You should consider getting some better history books. Start here:

[asin]080700040X[/asin]

edit: never mind.... trolling you guys honestly isn't even fun, just boring. I have no idea why Todd bothers.

[Florestan]

Dodgy and dishonest wording. Liberalism rejects imperialism. 
Perhaps it might not have existed in a world without imperialism but that does not make it the cause of imperialism.

The problem with liberalism is that it is a powerful tool for fighting authoritarian regimes but a weak one for establishing liberal regmies, because it's very easy to proclaim in abstracto freedom and equality for all but very difficult* to establish them in practice.

*Downright impossible, actually, because freedom and equality are often in conflict and sometimes even mutually exclusive.

We should distinguish between opposition liberalism, which is always liberal, and governing liberalism, which is often authoritarian.

[drogulus]

I'm sure the millions of enslaved Africans, Native Americans/First Nations, Aboriginal Australians, etc (it's a long list) who were killed in order for liberalism to exist are glad to hear about how non-dogmatic and self-critical it is.

     Yes, they are. They are not fond of their dictatorships and seek to have open societies. They have seen the results of Big Man regimes of the left and right.

     People all over the world want to live in free societies despite the crimes that these societies committed. How is that? There must be something of great value in self government and the rule of law, possibly the ability to change the government, to protest, to speak freely. I'm impressed that people outside open societies value them the way people inside them do.

[Florestan]

     Yes, they are. They are not fond of their dictatorships and seek to have open societies. They have seen the results of Big Man regimes of the left and right.

     People all over the world want to live in free societies despite the crimes that these societies committed. How is that? There must be something of great value in self government and the rule of law, possibly the ability to change the government, to protest, to speak freely.

I have never thought that a day would come when I would agree with every word in a post of yours. I was wrong. That day is today.

I'm impressed that people outside open societies value them the way people inside them do.

And even more than not a few insiders, actually.

[drogulus]

I have never thought that a day would come when I would agree with every word in a post of yours. I was wrong. That day is today.

     I'm not deterred at all. Life is full of accidents.

[Ken B]

I have never thought that a day would come when I would agree with every word in a post of yours[drogulus]. I was wrong. That day is today.

You shouldn't be really. Drogulus has some cracked ideas and an impaired prose style, but he is one of the actual classical liberals on this site, and you are another one.

[Florestan]

You shouldn't be really. Drogulus has some cracked ideas and an impaired prose style, but he is one of the actual classical liberals on this site, and you are another one.

That's true.

[drogulus]

You shouldn't be really. Drogulus has some cracked ideas and an impaired prose style, but he is one of the actual classical liberals on this site, and you are another one.

     I pay my people extra to crack my ideas.

     Pragmatism endures

     This article is remarkably good at exploring the cracks (Peirce vs James, logical empiricists vs American pragmatists). What I read made me feel a little better about being influenced in a way that doesn't take sides.

[Ken B]

     I pay my people extra to crack my ideas.

     Pragmatism endures

     This article is remarkably good at exploring the cracks (Peirce vs James, logical empiricists vs American pragmatists). What I read made me feel a little better about being influenced in a way that doesn't take sides.

Dontcha know, not taking sides is taking sides. 

[drogulus]

Dontcha know, not taking sides is taking sides. 

     I do that, too.

[JBS]

I'm sure the millions of enslaved Africans, Native Americans/First Nations, Aboriginal Australians, etc (it's a long list) who were killed in order for liberalism to exist are glad to hear about how non-dogmatic and self-critical it is.

The fact that the world now recognizes how evil those enslavements and genocides were is due solely to liberalism. They were committed by the forces that liberalism rose in opposition to, not by liberalism. That those evils have in large measure stopped (even if their after effects continue on) is due to liberalism. The recognition that there are after effects that still continue is due to liberalism's ability to self criticize.

[Ken B]

The fact that the world now recognizes how evil those enslavements and genocides were is due solely to liberalism. They were committed by the forces that liberalism rose in opposition to, not by liberalism. That those evils have in large measure stopped (even if their after effects continue on) is due to liberalism. The recognition that there are after effects that still continue is due to liberalism's ability to self criticize.

Exactly.

Up until a few hundred years ago pretty much everyone in the world believed that if you had a stable position of power over someone you were entitled to exercise it. You could rape captives, beat slaves, wipe out rival tribes, demand tribute from subjects. You might be seen as admirably merciful or excessively harsh (or the reverse sometimes too) but no-one really disputed your right to be either or the morality of your behavior, or even the morality of that power. Power just was — and it was to be exercised.

[Ken B]

In other news a man really can have a 10 minute orgasm. I did, watching the first 10 minutes of this interviewer dismantle Jeremy Corbyn over Labour's anti semitism.

https://m.facebook.com/conservatives/videos/1022243018135007/

I have never heard of this interviewer before.

[pjme]

https://www.bbc.com/news/election-2019-50564965

The interviewer, Andrew Neill,  is very famous in GB.

And this
https://mondediplo.com/2019/06/09corbyn

[Ken B]

The greatest human Go player of the past 25 years is packing it in, because he cannot beat the computer.

https://news.yahoo.com/grandmaster-says-computers-cannot-defeated-104015667.html

When I first studied AI 35 years ago Go was *the* example of a game no one had the faintest idea about how to teach a computer.

I understand Lee Se-Dol's reaction. On the other hand it's been years since even the fittest human male can match The Rabbit.

[steve ridgway]

UK Government Minister Nicky Morgan being asked on TV to explain the Conservative Party election promise to increase the number of nurses in the NHS by 50,000. The mathematical reasoning is beyond belief . I am now going to try to persuade the dogs that if we buy 2 sausages and they don't eat one, that extra one will mean they now have 3 . You can skip to 3:15 in the video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CpcY6HsGmAM

[Papy Oli]

The greatest human Go player of the past 25 years is packing it in, because he cannot beat the computer.

https://news.yahoo.com/grandmaster-says-computers-cannot-defeated-104015667.html

When I first studied AI 35 years ago Go was *the* example of a game no one had the faintest idea about how to teach a computer.

I understand Lee Se-Dol's reaction. On the other hand it's been years since even the fittest human male can match The Rabbit.

Netflix has a fascinating documentary called Alpha Go about Se-Dol's games against that computer.

Another Netflix documentary called "the surrounding game" was about the philosophy behind Go, following players through their training, tournaments, etc.

Both a great watch.

[greg]

The greatest human Go player of the past 25 years is packing it in, because he cannot beat the computer.

https://news.yahoo.com/grandmaster-says-computers-cannot-defeated-104015667.html

When I first studied AI 35 years ago Go was *the* example of a game no one had the faintest idea about how to teach a computer.

I understand Lee Se-Dol's reaction. On the other hand it's been years since even the fittest human male can match The Rabbit.

Not surprising. It's far too complex of a game for a human to beat a computer.

Even worse is a MOBA game, like League of Legends or DOTA 2. The human mind can't run through a hundred scenarios every few seconds like a computer can. Imagine having to play Go against a computer that can do this, and you only get three seconds per turn. 

[Ken B]

Not surprising. It's far too complex of a game for a human to beat a computer.

Even worse is a MOBA game, like League of Legends or DOTA 2. The human mind can't run through a hundred scenarios every few seconds like a computer can. Imagine having to play Go against a computer that can do this, and you only get three seconds per turn. 

No, that's wrong Greg. Go was the last holdout, the last bastion of human superiority. Even 5 or 6 years ago it was still dominated by humans. Chess fell to the computer 20 years ago. It's an incredible achievement for the developers and the underlying technology — neural nets — to have so thoroughly conquered Go.

[Ken B]

This one is for  Florestan https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/11/why-is-there-more-intellectual-freedom-in-bucharest-than-cambridge/

[steve ridgway]

This one is for  Florestan https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/11/why-is-there-more-intellectual-freedom-in-bucharest-than-cambridge/

Interesting. I certainly don't feel free to speak about many subjects in public nowadays and with the amount of equality, diversity and inclusivity rules at work I hardly talk to anyone. In fact I'm no doubt in violation of the inclusivity regulations by chatting a lot to a couple of team members on Skype but not the others .

[Florestan]

This one is for  Florestan https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/11/why-is-there-more-intellectual-freedom-in-bucharest-than-cambridge/

I told you that long time ago.

[Ken B]

I told you that long time ago.

Indeed.

[Todd]

It's the end of the World Trade Organisation as we know it