The Wednesday Wellness threads are meant to encourage users to ask for and provide advice and motivation to improve their lives. It isn't intended as a 'containment thread' and any content which could go here could instead be posted in its own thread. You could post:
-
Requests for advice and / or encouragement. On basically any topic and for any scale of problem.
-
Updates to let us know how you are doing. This provides valuable feedback on past advice / encouragement and will hopefully make people feel a little more motivated to follow through. If you want to be reminded to post your update, see the post titled 'update reminders', below.
-
Advice. This can be in response to a request for advice or just something that you think could be generally useful for many people here.
-
Encouragement. Probably best directed at specific users, but if you feel like just encouraging people in general I don't think anyone is going to object. I don't think I really need to say this, but just to be clear; encouragement should have a generally positive tone and not shame people (if people feel that shame might be an effective tool for motivating people, please discuss this so we can form a group consensus on how to use it rather than just trying it).
This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?
This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.
Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.
Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.
My essay for Jesse Singal's newsletter on my illustrious background as a DJ is now unlocked for everyone. In case you were ever curious as to why Vibecamp's music/dancing was coordinated by a public defender, here's your answer.
This is a weekly thread for people to talk about foreign policy, current international relations events, or chat about IR history. Generally I start with a series of updates on different countries but the format here should be pretty free form / whatever people are interested in. To demonstrate that I want to have a special thread on less-remembered wars. Feel free to share your own (no need for it to be this long), or to talk about something completely else!
The Libyan-Turkic War
It’s pretty easy to understand why the 1911 Libyan invasion isn’t on anyone’s radar, being dwarfed by the size and devastation of World War 1, but I think it gets short shrift. After all, for Turkey and Libya this conflict might as well have been the start of World War 1. From Libya onwards Turkey is in constant war up until the conclusion of the Greco-Turkish war in 1922. For Italy the vast sums they spent on this war had significant repercussions for their performance in the war of 1914 and their political situation afterwards. Beyond putting World War 1 into a broader context, this is also a unique and interesting war in its own right. One historian, Sean McMeekin, described it as the last of the nineteenth century style wars on colonial conquest as well as the first of the twentieth century style anti-colonial guerilla wars. It also featured some of the first instances of modern technology, including the first use of a plane in a battle, and the first instance of a plane getting shot down in a battle.
The Italian Position
So what drove Italy towards this war? Basically a desire to join the ranks of the imperial powers. Italy had only been formed in 1861 and fully consolidated in 1871. Like Germany, they were late to the ranks of European nation states aspiring towards empire, and felt the need to catch up for prestige by snatching Somaliland and Eritrea. When I say the Libyan invasion was mostly about prestige, I feel like it sounds odd because nowadays it’s obvious why Libya is important to control. But oil wasn’t discovered until 1959 – back then it’s basically a patch of desert with a few slums. It mostly remained as part of the Ottoman Empire because the other, more powerful European colonizers didn't think it was worth conquering as they snatched up the other North African provinces.
At the 1878 Congress of Berlin France took Tunisia and Britain took Cyprus; to get Italy to sign off they soft promised them Libya. This was further cemented by a secret deal between France and Italy in 1902 for the French to respect an Italian invasion, and another deal in 1909 for Russian recognition of Italian Libyan in exchange for Italian recognition of Russian Bosporus.
In 1908 this started to build into a huge sort of nationalist movement centered around Libya, with articles in the press, wonderful propaganda posters, politicians drumming up support and so forth. The main opposition to the war effort was the Italian Socialist Party. In fact, socialists had been tenuously supportive of centrist Prime Minister Giovanni Giolitti at the time, who had been courting them by expanding the right to vote and cinducting nationalizations, but the Libyan War was a major cleavage that drove them away from the coalition. The divide between the right and the left in Italy would never fully heal and only grow more violent in the buildup towards fascism. Itonically, one of the loudest voices against the invasion at the time was the young Benito Mussolini, back when he was still a leading luminary in the anti-war socialist movement and before he had decided that war and imperialism were actually hella sick. This is just one of the countless fascinating ways this conflict acts as a hinge between completely different eras.
The Ottoman Position
Meanwhile, on the other side, well, people debate on exactly where Turkey’s fall begin, but suffice it to say they had been taking Ls for a very long time. From the Crimean War onwards they had been giving successively more privileges to the European powers, giving up more of their control of their own finances, and watching as their provinces softly secede themselves away, like Egypt, or get gobbled up by Europe, like Tunisia and Morocco.
This instability, coupled with the repressive absolutism of Abdul Hamid II, had led to the famous Young Turks revolution, bringing forth the government that would famously later cause the brutal Armenian genocide. After their revolution in 1908, this conflict three years later will be their first major test – in fact they literally hold their first congress at the exact same time the invasion is launched.
Things Go Down
On September 26 the Italians extend an ultimatum to the Ottoman Empire to hand over Libya in a trustee-style relationship like Britain had for Egypt, where the Ottomans were technically in charge on paper but the Europeans called all the shots. Indignity of indignities, the Ottomans said no. The game is on.
The Italians were less prepared than they had hoped due to socialist opposition, but they still started rallying an army of 34,000 to go against the under 5000 Ottoman regulars in Libya. The Ottoman Empire was in a particularly difficult position for shoring up their own position because they had no direct land access to Libya – British Egypt was in between Turkey and Libya and the Anglos refused to allow the Ottomans to move their troops over land. This meant they had to pass through disguised as Arab civilians or advance over sea, but the Italians had significant sea dominance. Mustafa Kemal, the future future leader of the republic of Turkey, has to sneak in on a Russian ship disguised as a journalist. In time the Turkish forces would also grow to includes thousands of Bedouin guerilla fighters.
In the initial phase of the war the Italians basically just sailed up and 1500 sailors took Tripoli in a handful of days. Another 20,000 troops and a few more days and Italy soon had all the other major cities as well: Benghazi, Derna and Tobruk.
On November 5, only a month later, the Italians declare conquest over Libya. They technically only control the coast but it’s not like there’s much inland anyway.
...One Year Later
But things swiftly moved from a more standard war to one of guerilla resistance. Despite holding the population centers, the Italians couldn’t penetrate even a few kilometers in land. Arab cavalry encircled the cities and attacked any soldier who strayed too far, Libyan civilian volunteers attacked troops digging trenches, Bedouins stage sporadic attacks from the desert. It only took a month for Libya to assert control over the major cities but the guerilla resistance proved fierce, a whole year later Italy was still nowhere near pacifying these sporadic attacks. The Italian troops have increased from 34,000 to 140,000.
The other European Empires had greenlit this specifically because they thought it was gonna take, like, a day, and here we are a year later at stalemate. Feeling a little frantic Italy asks for and receives permission from them to expand the naval fight – in August 1912 they begin attacking the Turkish Dodecanese islands. They begin shelling the forts on the Dardanelles themselves, making to slip on through the straits to the Sea of Marmara and attack Constantinople itself. This leads to the panicked Ottomans to close off the straits entirely, stretch steel chains across the opening, and fill the water with mines.
The Balkan Bananza
Suddenly this pointless colonial war has become an existential threat for the Russian Empire. Half of Russian export trade moved through the Dardanelle Straits and promptly dropped by a third; the straights were also their imports access to the components they needed for their heavy industry, which “nearly ground to a halt.” Their balance of payments felt to zero and they began to convene emergency meetings.
Now, while Russia was the protector and sometimes co-agressor of the Balkan states, it didn’t necessarily want them growing too strong or independently sweeping Tsargard Constantinople Istanbul without Russians there. The current Russian position had been that a weak Ottoman Empire could be preferable to none, but suddenly the dangers of a weak Ottoman empire became extremely real. The Balkan nations had been chomping at the bit to attack the Ottomans while they were distracted in Libya, and Russia would hold them back no longer.
In September Bulgaria, Serbia, and Greece declare war on the Ottoman Empire and the first Balkan War has begun. All of the difficulties of the Libyan War, such as carefully and secretly moving their troops though Egypt or the Mediterranean, is now doubly difficult for getting those troops back to the Balkans. Stuck on the other side of Egypt Mustafa Kemal is powerless to help as the Balkans raid his hometown. His rage goes stronger.
Unable to fight both fronts simultaneously, In October, the Ottomans ultimately establish an armistice with the Italians and Libya is signed over.
Italian Aftermath
Italy had established themselves as a serious colonial power and had restored Rome’s rule across the mediterranean, but at what cost? Quite a high one actually, with expenses running in 500% of what was estimated, and lasting way longer than expected. In fact, it didn’t end when the Ottomans signed the Treaty– guerrilla resistance continued and was put down brutally over what we politely call the “punitive pacification campaigns,” which lasted all the way til 1931, a full 20 years after the Italians had declared victory.
The expenses of the Libyan pacification left Italy in a poor financial position when World War 1 actually broke out – not to mention that it still had to commit a significant number of troops to the punitive campaigns. To finance the war effort debt quadrupled to about 180% of GDP by the end of the war. The struggles of managing this debt sent the economy into turmoil, discrediting the ruling liberal government, and helping to pave the way for the fascists, who made renegotiating the debt with the US and UK a priority and established some of their early their credibility by doing just that in 1925.
Libya remained an Italian province until their defeat in World War 2.
The European Aftermath
Italian attempts to foster nationalist movements in the Balkans also caught the ire of the Empire of Austro-hungary, which was especially concerned about nationalism in Greece and Serbia. Relationships between the two nations suffered significantly. Though nominally allies, Italy didn’t inform Austria or Germany of the Libyan invasion before beginning it, and when Austro-Hungary issued its ultimatum to Serbia it did not consult Italy, helping to drive the Italians to the entente.
Furthermore, the balance of power was ultimately massively thrown apart by the dissolution of the Ottomans and the birth of the fractious Balkan nation states, whose conflicts of course eventually set the spark that started the fire of ww1.
To quote the Serbian diplomat Miroslav Spalajković on the events that led to the First World War "all subsequent events are nothing more than the evolution of that first [Italian] aggression."
The Ottoman Aftermath
Throughout all this conflict the Ottoman Empire had been wracked by internal instability. The Libyan war threw gas on the fire of this power struggle which saw a 1912 coup and ended with the Young Turks crushing all of their opposition in 1913. The period following is called the age of the three Pashas, so named after the triumvirate of tyrannical leaders who restored absolutism to the Empire and launched the great genocides.
In fact, from the Libyan War onwards the Ottoman Empire is never not at war – they go straight into the First then Second Balkan Wars, then World War 1, then the Greco-Turkic War which only finally ends in 1922. This eleven year stretch of constant battle has been nicknamed the Ottoman War of Succession, as the Empire splintered apart and spewed forth nation states, until it finally became one itself under the leadership of Mustafa Kemal, who first attained his military prestige in where else but the Libyan war.
A few weeks ago, I discussed writing a kind of book review of Kantian and Lockean Philosophy. For those interested in that, the first post to that end, is approximately 50% complete, so please, consider this a warm-up of a pseudo-random topic I wanted to examine, so constructive feedback and/or questions and comments will help tune my approach.
At the end of the day, much of Philosophy has to deal with "words, what do they mean???", and much of the ire targeted towards philosophical bloviating tends not to hit the root of philosophical consequence, but simply getting bored of the problems which stem from a definitionalist's debates. Cryptography, classically, is about ensuring that the meaning and the information you are attempting to encode looks as close to random noise as possible. You cannot, in practice wholly ban encryption. If you ban strong encryption, then people will create ciphers where the intended meaning of a sentence has multiple meanings, or there are key words which signal a particular message that only those who are "in the know", so to speak, or those who spent the time to decipher, will be able to understand.
In a piece of text, there can be multiple layers of intended and unintentional or accidental meaning. From something as stupid as cosmic randomness flipping a piece of ascii text, to deliberately encoding multiple layers of meaning. Recently, Scott Aaronson has discussed setting up the sampling algorithm on large language models (a la GPT-4) so the entire text is watermarked, and those "in the know" will be able to determine, using their cipher, with great confidence, whether a piece of text is generated by the language model, without humans being able to tell that it was (specifically) GPT-4.
This runs us up into one of the first questions- What IS free choice? And, how much dimensionality in one's action space (and/or effect size) is required to make said free choice? See, Cryptography, without what I'm calling "hard" cryptography, is about embedding that message within a message. The system of the true message / meme, or even idea that is being conveyed, is arbitrarily limited by the text.
- Free Choice is the ability to pursue your goals
- Free Choice is the ability to take any action, without constraint
- Free Choice is the ability to make a mark on the world or universe, of your own volition
You are not free. And by this, I don't mean free in the sense of "the universe is deterministic". For this post, let's avoid the question determinism entirely, as it requires a full physical understanding of exactly what consciousness is, and we still do not know, even if we have strong hints.
That is, under any system which is capable of containing information specifically those which can sustain forms of life (as many might argue text is the landscape and memes (the dna of the soul!) are the biological soup. You MUST breathe air in order to continue living. You MUST eat food, and your body will provide certain impulses which will in many cases can even override your consciousness. We exist in systems of chaos, and yet, are bound by limits.
That is, to say, your action-space is limited. You live in this exact time period. You only have so much money. Maybe you have four hours of meetings each day that you must attend or else you lose your job. In this sense, your life is like a slime mold. You can only take so many actions at a single time, and their effect sizes depends on a variety of factors (how influential you are, how much money you have, and how catchy or interesting your actions are, which might cause others to emulate or try them).
The effect-size of your actions is occasionally referred to as your power- or threat- level, depending on which circles you run with. Unfortunately, definitions vary, so most people only use these terms to refer to how cool they think a person is. However, if you're a particularly stitious person-- the kind to respect and follow those who have higher effect sizes in their actions, this can circle back around and become real.
"X is cool, because I think it's cool, and I am cool, therefore, it is Cool," or definitions of words shifting because of how they're used online. Words that are completely nonsensical, and were spontaneously spoken into existence due to typos or even just people shitposting online.
And yet, the total action space is still limited. Let's take an easy, seminal example. Elon Musk.
Elon musk is not a god, yet reverberations of actions he's taken have already caused other websites to follow suit. The business groups follow him, not the other way around. Will his actions remain effectively-unconstrainable, both on reality, culture, and society forever? Obviously not. He'll likely die at some point in the next fifty years. His total action-space is yet unconstrained, but the reverberations of his ventures and the myth, will last forever. But the stition is this: he and his effect size were still a result of globalist and cooperative policies, and his meteoric rise made possible by everything from his parents having sex, to colonization of africa, to potentially even from the existence of Japanese animation. The culture and society wrapped around and produced Elon Musk, and he is a result of the world as much as he has such a huge effect size on it.
Winding back, to ai and language models. Their total action-space is continuously increasing, regardless of your stance on their effective iq. And yet, despite their mostly-limited individual domains, they will have profound impact on the world, and their total effect size on the world (even if you don't believe in grey-goo or similar paperclipper end-scenarios) will continue exploding.
It doesn't take much to see artificial intelligence already making waves, culturally- everything from the writer and actor's union protests, to searching for books on amazon and finding incoherent garbage that was spammed by GPT-3 two years ago. And this effect will continuously wrap around into action. Because, well, it would be stupid not to attempt to respond to the existence of ai.
And so, like all good things, I leave us with a non-answer. Language models are a result of their inputs, and thus have a certain level of action space, and act within it.
In The American Empire has Alzheimer's, we saw how the US had repeatedly been rebuffing forecasting-style feedback loops that could have prevented their military and policy failures. In A Critical Review of Open Philanthropy’s Bet On Criminal Justice Reform, we saw how Open Philanthropy, a large foundation, spent and additional $100M in a cause they no longer thought was optimal. In A Modest Proposal For Animal Charity Evaluators (ACE) (unpublished), we saw how ACE had moved away from quantitative evaluations, reducing their ability to find out which animal charities were best. In External Evaluation of the Effective Altruism Wiki, we saw someone spending his time less than maximally ambitiously. In My experience with a Potemkin Effective Altruism group (unpublished), we saw how an otherwise well-intentioned group of decent people mostly just kept chugging along producing a negligible impact on the world. As for my own personal failures, I just come out of having spent the last couple of years making a bet on ambitious value estimation that flopped in comparison to what it could have been. I could go on.
Those and all other failures could have been avoided if only those involved had just been harder, better, faster, stronger. I like the word "formidable" as a shorthand here.
In this post, I offer some impressionistic, subpar, incomplete speculation about why my civilization, the people around me, and myself are just generally not as formidable as we could maximally be. Why are we not more awesome? Why are we not attaining the heights that might be within our reach?
These hypotheses are salient to me:
- Today's cultural templates and default pipelines don't create formidable humans.
- Other values, like niceness, welcomingness, humility, status, tranquility, stability, job security and comfort trade off against formidability.
- In particular, becoming formidable requires keeping close to the truth, but convenient lies and self-deceptions are too useful as tools to attain other goals.
- Being formidable at a group level might require exceptional leaders, competent organizational structures, or healthy community dynamics, which we don't have.
I'll present these possible root causes, and then suggest possible solutions for each. My preferred course of action would be to attack this bottleneck on all fronts.
Post continued here. I'm posting to The Motte since I really appreciated the high quality comments from here on previous posts.
The Wednesday Wellness threads are meant to encourage users to ask for and provide advice and motivation to improve their lives. It isn't intended as a 'containment thread' and any content which could go here could instead be posted in its own thread. You could post:
-
Requests for advice and / or encouragement. On basically any topic and for any scale of problem.
-
Updates to let us know how you are doing. This provides valuable feedback on past advice / encouragement and will hopefully make people feel a little more motivated to follow through. If you want to be reminded to post your update, see the post titled 'update reminders', below.
-
Advice. This can be in response to a request for advice or just something that you think could be generally useful for many people here.
-
Encouragement. Probably best directed at specific users, but if you feel like just encouraging people in general I don't think anyone is going to object. I don't think I really need to say this, but just to be clear; encouragement should have a generally positive tone and not shame people (if people feel that shame might be an effective tool for motivating people, please discuss this so we can form a group consensus on how to use it rather than just trying it).
Since the original thread fell of the main page, I figured I'd turn this into a monthly thread.
The goal of this thread is to coordinate development on our project codenamed HighSpace - a mod for Freespace 2 that will be a mashup between it and High Fleet. A description pf how the mechanics of the two games could be combined is available in the first thread.
Who we have
-
@FCfromSSC - 2D/3D artist
-
@netstack - developer, tester, and suggester of great ideas
-
@Mantergeistmann - writer
-
Me - developer
Who we need
The more the merrier, you are free to join in any capacity you wish! I can already identify a few distinct tasks for each position that we could split the work into
-
developers: “mission” code, “strategic” system map code
-
artists: 2D (user interface), 3D (space ships, weapons explosions)
-
writers: worldbuilding/lore, quests, characters
What we have
-
Concept art for a long range missle cruiser, curtesy of @FCfromSSC
-
A proof of concenpt for “strategic” system map we jump into on start of the campaign. It contains a friendly ship and 2 enemy ships, you can chose where to move / which enemy ship to attack.
-
A somewhat actual-game-like workflow. Attacking a ship launches a mission where the two ships are pitted against each other. If you win, the current health of your ship is saved, and you can launch the second attack. If you clean up the map you are greeted with a “You Win” message, or “You Lose” if you lose your ship.
-
*New:* a “tactical” RTS-like in-mission view where you can give commands to your ships (see more in comment below)
What's next
The fun stuff can now begin:
-
The system map is only a proof of concept, for one, it's not really a map of a star system. Also, the enemies cannot move, your ship is instantly teleported instead of moving gradually as time goes by, etc.
-
Missions start with the player in control of a default fighter craft, because we need a mission file, and a mission file needs a player ship. An easy way to solve it is to turn the single ship in the system view into a group containing a fighter wing, that the player will be in control of. A more complex solution is a bit more crazy, but I think it might work - the mission files are just text, and the lua API has read/write access to the file system. I think it should be possible to dynamically rewrite the mission file to setup the player ship to be the one that was moved from the system map
-
The “tactical” view is also pretty rudimentary. The camera cannot be moved, only basic right-click commands can be given (move / attack / protect), wheras the game supports pretty complex stuff (disabling, disarming, attacking specific subsystems). As battles grow in scope, finding a way to show what the hell is going on in a clear and simple way would also be useful.
This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?
This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.
Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.
Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.
This is a general catch all thread for people who want to talk about international relations or foreign policy. Pretty much anything is welcome, whether people want to give updates from other countries, talk about the Ukraine War or some other current event that’s grabbed your attention, or even just share any interesting books or articles you’ve been reading lately. I like to get the ball rolling with some general coverage of a bunch of countries, including some I think people here will be generally interested in and some people might not already follow too closely.
Spain
Following the ruling Socialist party’s poor May performance in municipal elections, Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez dissolved parliament and called new snap elections. Spain will now be heading to the polls on the 23rd amidst a month of heatwaves and flooding.
The center right Popular Party (PP) is currently in the lead, trailed by the ruling Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party (PSOE). A PP victory raises the spectre of a coalition with Vox, one of Europe’s newest far right parties, who are currently polling similarly with the far left Sumar, the most likely ally for the PSOE. A conservative victory seems like the most likely outcome but it’s still too soon to say.
Ghana
Ghana recently split its four administrative regions into six. This might not sound like a big deal but the border lines split several ethnic enclaves apart. Despite the fact that these regions don’t actually have self-governance or anything, the divisions ended up being extremely contentious and the security forces had to deployed in the Volta region to deal with growing ethnic unrest.
Senegal
The last few months have been stressful in Senegal, with a high profile sexual assault case disbarring the main opposition leader from running for their upcoming election. All eyes were on current President Macky Sall, to see if he planned on running for an illegal third term. Amid mounting deadly protests he has finally announced that he will actually retire at the end of his term, leaving the field wide open.
Zimbabwe
The ZANU-PF party in Zimbabwe has held power since independence in 1980, with the current President taking power right after Mugabe via a coup and then a fraudulent election. New elections are next month featuring the same opposition candidate as the last one. Unfortunately there are already worrying signs that they won’t be free and fair, with the opposition Citizens Coalition for Change having members arrested and rallies banned.
Various growth reports for Zimbabwe have actually been decent, though inflation is still gonzo high at 175% YoY and Zimbabwe’s government health insurer for federal employees seems to be collapsing due to mismanagement.
Japan
Following Japan reestablishing trade relationships with Korea the previous week, Europe has finally lifted their 2011 post Fukushima restrictions on Japanese food imports. Japan and Ukraine also held a summit in Lithuania Wednesday where Zelensky is expected to further request Kishida’s assistance in rebuilding Ukrainian infrastructure. This is a normal role for Japan to fill as they are the second largest aid donor in the world and have quite a bit of infrastructure experience.
CW: sexual violence
There has been a fair amount of public uproar over Japan’s outdated laws on sexual harassment and violence, which has led to a flurry of reforms. They raised penalties for taking nonconsensual sexual photos of someone to up to three years in prison, expanded the definition of assault to require consent (as opposed to physical resistance) and expanded the statute of limitations, and raised the age of consent to 16 from 13, where it has stood since 1907 (it was often higher at the individual prefecture level).
This continues in Abe’s footsteps of making Japan a generally better country for women and is newsworthy on its own, but I also bring it up to show how Japan’s continuously dominant party, the Liberal Democratic Party, has remained in power so long. They’re a big tent party that’s held together by cliques based on personality rather than policy, which allows them to practice a fair amount of policy flexibility to the advantage of draining away popular wedge issues. Basically whenever they hear the opposition find an issue that’s popular with the public they say “actually we’re totally into this idea.” Then they take the lead on passing it to strip away any momentum the opposition would have gotten off of it. Or, if they don’t actually want to pass it, they just say it’s in committee for a while and release various bulletins about their plans. This has the downside of keeping one party entrenched in power (plus some other electoral shenanigans, like if the LDP calls elections only they will know in advance and have been preparing), but has the advantage of keeping the party actually decently responsive to democratic public sentiment.
Turkey
In recent months, Sweden has made efforts to meet Turkey’s demands, amending its Constitution, passing new counterterrorism legislation and agreeing to extradite several Turks who stand accused of crimes in Turkey. But Swedish courts have blocked other extraditions, and Swedish officials have said that they cannot override their country’s free-speech protections.
Turkey was in rare form this week, throwing another wrench in the Swedish NATO ascension process by bringing up a new demand to greenlight Sweden: that Turkey be allowed to join the EU. Turkey having made almost no progress on their EU ascension goals meant this could only happen if the EU waived nearly all of their normal requirements. The US replied that it supported Turkey’s “aspirations”.
Turkey has finally relented, seemingly, after negotiations that are not yet fully clear, and Sweden will be joining NATO.
Erdogan will also meet soon with Putin over the grain deal from last year, which is set to expire next week. Russia has expressed unwillingness to extend the deal, which could throw another crisis situation wide open if the world loses access to Ukraine’s grain exports (“the U.N. argues that it has benefited those [developing world] states by helping lower food prices by more than 20% globally”).
Due to Turkey’s negotiating leverage here and with Sweden they’ve gained themselves quite a bit of influence, if not much in the way of good will. Erdogan will be visiting the Gulf later this month, where he has also been building alliances, particularly with Qatar.
Colombia
The recently concluded ceasefire between the government and the rebel group ELN has finally come into effect, with both the rebels and the armed forces halting attacks. Ideally it is supposed to last six months, which would be the longest period of peace since the 60s. This is a major victory for Colombia and for President Gustavo Petro, whose administration thus far has been wracked by corruption scandals and stillwater reforms. They are now separately entering into negotiations with the much smaller conflict with a faction of FARC that rejected the last peace agreement.
A new legislative session will start soon and he plans to re-submit his pension and labor reforms laws. The Finance Ministry has also released their new budget with some ambitious spending raises which critics say might exceed budgetary rules Colombia has in place to reduce their deficits. The Central Bank has held steady on interest rates this month and is anticipated to begin to cut them soon as inflation recovers.
Brazil
Lula looks to be on his way to pass a major consumption tax reform that previous administrations have failed on. It remains to be seen if it can pass the Senate but even a surprising amount of conservative law makers voted in favor. Lula has successfully continued his campaign to replace the Central Bank governors with his allies in hopes of driving them towards interest rate cuts, and also successfully elevated his personal lawyer to the Supreme Court.
At the recent Mercosur summit he pushed for Bolivia’s ascension and for “the Mercosur trade bloc to advance in talks for deals with Canada, South Korea and Singapore, while aiming to increase commerce with other countries in Latin America and Asia…In addition to those three nations, Lula said, Mercosur could also "explore new negotiation fronts" with China, Indonesia, Vietnam and countries in Central America and the Caribbean. The Brazilian leader reaffirmed he is committed to completing the trade agreement struck in 2019 between the bloc and the European Union, but again called some addenda proposed by EU 'unacceptable'."
Guatemala
In excellent headlines today we have “Top tribunal certifies Guatemala’s election result minutes after another court suspends party”.
Guatemala’s Supreme Court has given the thumbs up to the first round of elections but the Attorney General has now suspended the anti-corruption underdog Bernardo Arévalo. As best as I can tell, their constitution forbids suspending a candidate mid-election.
Thailand
Thanks to @cake for the breaking news update, Thailand's underdog progressive candidate, Pita Limjaroenrat, has been blocked from the office of the Prime Minister by the military-appointed senate.
I am goddamn well pissed-off because yet another one of these bloody spam blackmail emails hit a work account this morning, and thus the question posed above.
Why don't ordinary people accept that crypto is THE CURRENCY OF THE FUTURE? Why does it have a bad reputation? Don't they know something something blockchain contracts Satoshi Nakamoto computers something something means it's beans on toast all round?
Well, this is why. This is just another iteration of the kind of thing I see too frequently for my liking, and I'm quoting it in full because it'll be pertinent:
Hello there!
Unfortunately, there are some bad news for you.
Around several months ago I have obtained access to your devices that you were using to browse internet.
Subsequently, I have proceeded with tracking down internet activities of yours.
Below, is the sequence of past events:
In the past, I have bought access from hackers to numerous email accounts (today, that is a very straightforward task that can be done online).
Clearly, I have effortlessly logged in to email account of yours [deleted].
A week after that, I have managed to install Trojan virus to Operating Systems of all your devices that are used for email access.
Actually, that was quite simple (because you were clicking the links in inbox emails).
All smart things are quite straightforward. (>_<)
The software of mine allows me to access to all controllers in your devices, such as video camera, microphone and keyboard.
I have managed to download all your personal data, as well as web browsing history and photos to my servers.
I can access all messengers of yours, as well as emails, social networks, contacts list and even chat history.
My virus unceasingly refreshes its signatures (since it is driver-based), and hereby stays invisible for your antivirus.
So, by now you should already understand the reason why I remained unnoticed until this very moment...
While collecting your information, I have found out that you are also a huge fan of websites for adults.
You truly enjoy checking out porn websites and watching dirty videos, while having a lot of kinky fun.
I have recorded several kinky scenes of yours and montaged some videos, where you reach orgasms while passionately masturbating.
If you still doubt my serious intentions, it only takes couple mouse clicks to share your videos with your friends, relatives and even colleagues.
It is also not a problem for me to allow those vids for access of public as well.
I truly believe, you would not want this to occur, understanding how special are the videos you love watching, (you are clearly aware of that) all that stuff can result in a real disaster for you.
Let's resolve it like this:
All you need is $1450 USD transfer to my account (bitcoin equivalent based on exchange rate during your transfer), and after the transaction is successful, I will proceed to delete all that kinky stuff without delay.
Afterwards, we can pretend that we have never met before. In addition, I assure you that all the harmful software will be deleted from all your devices. Be sure, I keep my promises.
That is quite a fair deal with a low price, bearing in mind that I have spent a lot of effort to go through your profile and traffic for a long period.
If you are unaware how to buy and send bitcoins - it can be easily fixed by searching all related information online.
Below is bitcoin wallet of mine: 1Nx353jT8zZYaqmoMdMr2PRtdixStrDoZE
You are given not more than 48 hours after you have opened this email (2 days to be precise).
Below is the list of actions that you should not attempt doing:
Do not attempt to reply my email (the email in your inbox was created by me together with return address).
Do not attempt to call police or any other security services. Moreover, don't even think to share this with friends of yours. Once I find that out (make no doubt about it, I can do that effortlessly, bearing in mind that I have full control over all your systems) - the video of yours will become available to public immediately.
Do not attempt to search for me - there is completely no point in that. All cryptocurrency transactions remain anonymous at all times.
Do not attempt reinstalling the OS on devices of yours or get rid of them. It is meaningless too, because all your videos are already available at remote servers.
Below is the list of things you don't need to be concerned about:
That I will not receive the money you transferred.
- Don't you worry, I can still track it, after the transaction is successfully completed, because I still monitor all your activities (trojan virus of mine includes a remote-control option, just like TeamViewer).
That I still will make your videos available to public after your money transfer is complete.
- Believe me, it is meaningless for me to keep on making your life complicated. If I indeed wanted to make it happen, it would happen long time ago!
Everything will be carried out based on fairness!
Before I forget...moving forward try not to get involved in this kind of situations anymore!
An advice from me - regularly change all the passwords to your accounts.
Forget all the guff about "I saw you jerking off to kinky porn", this is an old work account that we only keep around because a few sites won't let us change to the new email address. There isn't any camera, mike, etc. set up and do I really need to say nobody here is jerking off to kinky porn during work hours?
Yes, they're trying to reel in people who are panicked and ignorant of what goes on with computers and just have vague ideas they've picked up from news headlines about large corporations getting hacked (such as happened in my own country to the national health service). I know it's trash and I regularly delete these and the more sophisticated invoice scam ones.
But.
This is the experience most ordinary people will have about bitcoin/cryptocurrency, and mostly what it says is true: I haven't the faintest idea how to start tracking these bozos down if I wanted to. They do have secure and untraceable anonymous transactions. Hackers do steal and sell on information.
So long as cryptocurrency is associated with criminals and fraud, nobody is going to trust it or touch it with a ten-foot barge pole. You don't want goverment interference and regulation? Then do something about these guys who are scamming and making money off scams.
The Wednesday Wellness threads are meant to encourage users to ask for and provide advice and motivation to improve their lives. It isn't intended as a 'containment thread' and any content which could go here could instead be posted in its own thread. You could post:
-
Requests for advice and / or encouragement. On basically any topic and for any scale of problem.
-
Updates to let us know how you are doing. This provides valuable feedback on past advice / encouragement and will hopefully make people feel a little more motivated to follow through. If you want to be reminded to post your update, see the post titled 'update reminders', below.
-
Advice. This can be in response to a request for advice or just something that you think could be generally useful for many people here.
-
Encouragement. Probably best directed at specific users, but if you feel like just encouraging people in general I don't think anyone is going to object. I don't think I really need to say this, but just to be clear; encouragement should have a generally positive tone and not shame people (if people feel that shame might be an effective tool for motivating people, please discuss this so we can form a group consensus on how to use it rather than just trying it).
Long take I wrote on what sustains a cultures values and the dream of a "Dark Bill of Rights" that could be unalterable and untarnish-able, like the 1400 year long tradition of Sharia.
Does the Culture War Thread still make sense as the primary place for Motte discussion now that the community has its own dedicated website?
I think the answer is probably "yes, we should stay with the Thread as-is," but only because of inertia. If we could have created a culture shift away from the thread and towards individual posts, I think there may have been some benefits, as I'll discuss below. However, this is a relatively small community, and so we probably want to avoid alienating the current members as much as possible with radical changes.
While I'm sure I'm missing things, or getting things completely wrong, here's some problems I see with the current Culture War Thread format. (I also want to note that none of this is meant as a criticism of the mods or anyone else who put in a ton of work to get this site going; I think it's great and I really enjoy having a censorship-free place to get my culture war fix and read interesting comments from intelligent people.)
- Comments and the Thread receive differing amounts of engagement depending on the day of the week, with weekends disfavored
For me, this is probably my biggest gripe with the Culture War Thread. Because a new Thread gets posted every Monday, it seems to make little sense to post on a Sunday (or even Saturday) if you want to get a decent amount of engagement. This is unfortunate, because the weekend is one of the times when people probably have the most time to write up a post and engage with it. While it's true you could write something up over the weekend and wait till Monday to post, this adds a bit of friction, a bit of "I'll do it later," which, for me at least, reduces my desire to post at all. Moreover, even if you do wait till Monday to post, if you have a fulltime Monday - Friday job, you probably have less time to respond to comments, etc., during the day during the week than you would on the weekend, further weakening engagement.
- High engagement posts dying out faster
The nature of the Culture War Thread, especially given that the default view setting here is "new" (a good thing!), is that older posts get less engagement as the week goes on and new posts push them out. Of course, this will be true of any post, including front-page posts, and maybe it would be equally true of front-page posts, rendering this point meaningless. But I don't think so. For one thing, a front-page post allows for more top-level comments on that post, which I think potentially allows for more wide ranging and extensive discussion and which (I believe) keeps a post farther up on the front page. This is partially due simply to the UI; the more nested a comment is, the more quickly it gets relegated to "click here to see rest of thread" oblivion, where far fewer people see them (see below). I also get the sense that the algorithm works a little different for front-page posts than for comments, and that it allows a well-engaged front page post to stay higher up on the page than a well-engaged comment, though I could be wrong about this.
- By shifting to front-page posts, we would get a whole extra level of viewable comments!
Due to how a reddit-style UI works, relegating our major posts to the Culture War Thread means that we shift the entire discussion one step "over" (or "deeper"?), which in turn means that comments become unviewable without clicking "see more," which definitely decreases viewership and thus discussion. If people's responses to comments/posts were top-level, instead of second level, we could have more wide-ranging conversations and perhaps a little bit more engagement (which adds up) on interesting posts.
- It may be confusing to new users
I'm not sure about this one, since I was lucky enough to find the Motte before the move, but intuitively it seems right to me. Imagine you have no idea what "the Motte" is, and have no idea about its history as a spin off of the Culture War Thread from the SSC subreddit, etc., etc. Assume also that like many visitors, you don't bother clicking on the FAQ on anything like that, but instead simply start scrolling through the site's posts. You'll notice that there aren't actually that many front-page posts, and that many of those posts don't get very much engagement at all. If you don't notice that the Culture War Threads get thousands of comments (especially likely if you come on a Monday or Tuesday, see above), you might then conclude that this is a relatively "dead" website, and move on. I'd like the site to keep getting new blood, so this worries me, although I have no idea how big a problem this might be in reality. (Also it seems possible that the kind of person who can't figure out about the Culture War Thread, etc., might be the kind of person we're not particularly interested in attracting in the first place, but I don't know that for sure.)
Any other thoughts on this? Reasons you like the Culture War Thread vs. a front-page post format? Ways the Culture War Thread could be improved? Other ways in which the current format creates problems?
This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?
This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.
Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.
Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.
Turning this into its own weekly thread. I’m hoping for this not to really be a thing I lead,, more like an open place each week where people can talk foreign policy/international relations. That could mean country updates, analysis of some dynamic (ie the Ukraine War), or even history or interesting books you’re reading.
The response on these have been positive but engagement has been pretty low, I think partially because a lot of the countries I find interesting just aren’t that interesting to other people. I’m trying to address that by finding a balance between the more obscure places I like with bigger name countries like Brazil, Italy, Korea, etc. As always others are strongly encouraged to add on coverage of any country you find interesting, or just anything else you want to talk about.
Guatemala
As mentioned last week, the electoral success of anti-corruption underdog Bernardo Arevalo, son of Guatemala’s first democratically elected leader, represented a major upset. Currently he’s supposed to go into a runoff election with Sandra Torres in August, but the latter has accused voting software of biasing Arevalo. The establishment has responded cheerfully and the courts have suspended the results of the first round of the election and called for a tribunal to review the voting tallies. The US, EU, and OAS election observers have criticized the court’s decision. Regardless of the Presidential results, the current conservative ruling party Vamos has surprised everyone by winning a majority, so there’s a limit to how much an isolated executive will accomplish.
Brazil
Brazil’s Supreme Electoral Tribunal has banned Bolsonaro from running for office again for eight years by the for fueling the January 8 uprising:
Brazil’s electoral court ruled that Mr. Bolsonaro had violated Brazil’s election laws when, less than three months ahead of last year’s vote, he called diplomats to the presidential palace and made baseless claims that the nation’s voting systems were likely to be rigged against him.
Five of the court's seven judges voted that Mr. Bolsonaro had abused his power as president when he convened the meeting with diplomats and broadcast it on state television.
He can appeal the ruling but hasn’t made a lot of friends in the high courts and as of now he has accepted the ruling.
Venezuela
While we’re on a roll with candidates being pushed out by their systems, María Corina Machado, the favorite to lead the opposition in the 2024 elections, has been banned from running for 15 years. The charges are based on her being a fifth column for the US, supporting American sanctions and former opposition leader Juan Guaidó. All true, but also nobody expects Maduro to allow a free and fair election under any circumstances:
“If you want free elections, we want sanctions-free elections. Therein lies the dilemma”
Speaking of sanctions, oil production has actually risen recently in spite of them, though much of the gains have gone up in smoke from corruption and crime, with everything from fuel theft to an audit finding that middle men have pocketed an astounding $21 billion in unpaid sales. Partially in light of these finding and PDVSA’s significant debt to its Russian partner, Roszarubezhneft, the European oil magnate has now requested the ability to take control of joint exports itself to avoid massive middle men losses.
At least negotiations over sanctions and the election have resumed, with Venezuela and America resuming direct communications in Qatar, a nation which has unexpectedly come to play the recent role of mediator between the two rival countries.
Italy
Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s right wing coalition has continued a year of electoral success with victories in the longtime center-left stronghold of Tuscany.
The Eurozone Stability Fund was created in 2012 to provide “eurozone states in difficulty with loans at below-market rates in return for reforms to public finances”. It’s been suspended since the pandemic but its latest iteration is near to passing. However, it requires the approval of every member and Italy remains the last stalwart not having voted for it yet. Italy would actually qualify to use it but Meloni has pledged not to, because she’s afraid of having austerity imposed upon Italy, although the Italian Treasury apparently thinks it might actually lower debt costs.
One way or the other Italy’s enormous 145% debt to GDP ration must be addressed. Bloomberg has an interesting article on Meloni’s turn towards a more industrial policy, increasingly intervening in the corporations the government has a stake in, or buying larger stakes. She’s betting on her pro-business policies getting the Italian economy back on its feet; in particular she cut corporate taxes, taxes on the self employed, and taxes on the rich by phasing in a flat tax on labor. She's partially offset the loss in revenue by cutting benefits, in particular an anti-poverty measure called the Citizen’s Income (remember southern Italy still has exceptionally high poverty for a European country). She also gave employers more flexibility in hiring short term contracts and has strictly opposed public sector unions demands for wage increases. Predictably, this hasn’t made her many friends in the unions, who have been consistently on and off strike (it should be said Italy has more strikes than a normal country in the best of times). Actually there’s another major strike happening tomorrow, a 24 hour nationwide strike tomorrow of all public transit workers, bus, metro, ferry, and even airline staff.
Kosovo
In April Kosovar Serbians boycotted municipal elections, which were then won by Albanian candidates who tried to install their candidates by force, leading to ethnic violence and dozens of injuries. By now 4000 NATO Peace Keepers have entered Kosovo to stave off the rising ethnic tensions. Serbia’s troops are currently mobilized on the border and they have now threatened to militarily intervene if ethnic Serbs aren’t protected from Albanian violence.
South Africa
Seven opposition parties, led by the Democratic Alliance and excluding the radical EFF, have formed a big tent coalition to challenge the African National Congress in the 2024 legislative elections. Popularity with the governing party is at (probably) an all time low with crime, a faltering economy, and mass electricity shortages.
Speaking of which, South Africa’s power grid has been wracked by mass corruption, and instability and load shedding has become a norm this past year. However, blackouts have been reducing recently and surprisingly, Electricity Minister Kgosientsho Ramokgopa has said the period of electricity cuts will soon come to a close.
In a contentious case with shades of the America dreamer debate, South African high courts have ruled against the government’s attempt to end the special permitting exemptions for Zimbabweans who fled instability at home. This would require some 200,000 people to return to Zimbabwe if they can’t obtain normal work permits, even if they have had children in South Africa.
Thailand
Eyes are peeled on Thailand as the new parliament has come into session. The major victors of the election, the anti-military, anti-monarchical Move Forward and Pheu Thai, now have the unenviable task of creating a coalition big enough to form a government. This is harder than it might sound because a third of seats are automatically given to the military, and the two upsetters have campaigned on an anti-establishment platforms that made some of their more establishment potential allies understandably skeptical (ex they want to “abolish monopolies,” aka make enemies with every business interest).
For now the two parties have managed to at least work with each other; there was some tension over which party gets to pick the new Speaker of the House but ultimately they settled on a respected Pheu Thai ally from a third party. The real question is who would be the Prime Minister if they can form a coalition. The military’s motivation is to prevent Move Forward’s leader Pita Limjaroenrat from winning at all costs; they might even accept being pushed into the minority if they could avoid that situation. They’re already investigating him to see if he broke election laws and will likely pursue other tricks as well.
Korea
President Yoon Suk-Yeol ran on a comically anti-labor agenda, once quipping that they should replace the 52 hour work week with a 120 hour work week. Since coming to power he’s pushed for and backed away from a 69 hour work week (this is probably much closer to what South Koreans actually do) and has pursued the unions doggedly, attempting to standardize professional requirements, refusing to extend a minimum wage increase, and demanding that labor unions submit their records of spending. In response to his labor agenda the Korean Confederation of Teachers Union (KCTU) has gone on strike (and separately they’re mad about Japan discharging Fukushima waste water into the open ocean). It’s pretty massive in size, a two week strike of over half a million people; this last time a smaller strike happened it led to notable fuel shortages.
Separately (or related?) President Yoon’s popularity has hit a high of 42%, mostly to his restoration of trade ties with Japan and public posture against the “cartels” (Suk-Yeol pursued some of leading Chaebol businessman during his time as a prosecutor, but it remains unclear if he will actually oppose them significantly in office.)
I’ve been wanting to write down my thoughts on the subject of belief and truth for some while now. The distinction between the two is one of the cornerstones of how I see the world. A good theory of what the truth is, and what it means to have a belief has a profound impact on how we think about the world. It also has a profound impact on how we understand other peoples’ perception of the world.
The Truth:
The objective truth. The true truth. The truth is true even if you don’t believe it is true. It is true even if you don’t know it is true. It is true even if you can’t prove that it’s true.
Belief:
A person’s perception of the truth. We form our beliefs based on a combination of several things, including our personal obversations, our reasoning, and our prior beliefs. A belief might not be the objective truth, and it’s foolish to treat it as if it were. However, belief is how we experience the truth, so it’s the closest thing we have.
The role of evidence:
Many people equate evidence with truth. If you ask people to define objective truth, they will likely say something about evidence. Some people even treat an idea with no evidence in the same way they that they would treat an outright false idea, such as in the anectote described in this post by David J. Balan.
Neil deGrasse Tyson has put out his own theory of “Objective Truth”. And his theory is all about evidence.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=CxUWD6LRR20
According to Neil deGrasse Tyson, an idea becomes the Objective Truth only after it has been established by a substancial amount of evidence. This is a fine way to define objective truth, since if we want to be extremely sure that an idea is true, then we almost certainly need a strong body of evidence to prove it. However, I think it’s worthwhile to acknowledge that an idea can be true even if there is no evidence for it. If there’s no evidence, it can still be true, we just wouldn’t know it.
Newton produced the proof for how gravity worked in the 1600s However, the equations that Newton came up with would have still worked at any prior period in history. They would even have worked if nobody had proven them. The evidence for Newton’s equations isn’t the thing that made them true. What the evidence did was allow us to be certain that they were true. Essentially, evidence is just a tool that we use to make sure that our beliefs are close to the truth.
Likewise, a thing can be untrue, even if there actually is evidence. What looks like good evidence can often be flawed. There are many examples of this in the criminal justice system.
One good example of this is the case of Ronald Cotton where eyewitness Jennifer Thompson famously misidentified the perpetrator.
She had never been so sure of anything.
His name was Ronald Cotton and he was the same age as she. Local man, headed down the wrong road, had already been in trouble with the law. He had been arrested on first-degree burglary charges and had served 18 months in prison for attempted sexual assault. Cotton had insisted that the relationship resulting in the assault charge was consensual and that he was being unfairly targeted by police because he liked to date white women.
When Thompson picked him out of the lineup, everyone was sure they had the right man.
Cotton is tall and handsome, with baby-smooth chocolate skin and a warm, engaging smile. Confronted by Thompson, his normal calm failed him. He was petrified. But he said nothing, betrayed no emotion.
Cotton’s actions and past hadn’t helped his case. He was nervous. He got his dates mixed up. His alibis didn’t check out. A piece of foam was missing from his shoe, similar to a piece found at the crime scene.
Not only was Cotton identified by the primary eyewitness, but there was other evidence too. There was physical evidence regarding the foam on his shoe. He couldn’t keep his story straight. He had past convictions for sexual assault. There was a lot of evidence that suggested he did it, and it was pretty compelling.
However, DNA Evidence showed that Cotton couldn’t possibly have been the rapist.
Cotton was unsuccessful overturning his conviction in several appeals. But in the spring of 1995, his case was given a major break: the Burlington Police Department turned over all evidence, which included the assailant’s semen for DNA testing, to the defense.
The samples from one victim were tested and showed no match to Cotton. At the defense’s request, the results were sent to the State Bureau of Investigation’s DNA database and the database showed a match with the convict who had earlier confessed to the crime to a fellow inmate in prison.
Evidence is not synonymous with truth, and even if you have evidence for something, that doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s true. There could be a mistake in the evidence, or there could even be a nuance that you haven’t thought of.
My Truth? Your Truth? His Truth? Her Truth?
One concept that occasionally comes up in online discourse is the idea of a person having their own truth. Most of the time when you see it, someone “telling their truth” is portrayed as a positive thing. But when a post is specifically about what a person’s truth actually means, it usually ends up saying somethint to the effect of “there is no her truth or his truth. There is only the truth”
Take the following comic for example:
https://imgur.com/gallery/pleGM
This is a widly circulated comic online, and it contains 2 people expressing different beliefs about what number is drawn on the ground. They state these beliefs as though they are the truth, and there is a caption below in black font that implies that both of their beliefs are valid.
Then apparently, someone altered the comic, crossed out the black text, and added their own text in red. This red text assumes that both of the characters are “uninformed” and that at least one of them is definitly wrong. It goes on to say that they should have checked the facts, that they don’t want to do any research, and that what they’re doing is ruining the world.
I think that the person who wrote the black text, knows best what that symbol is supposed to be. That person is presumably the original author of the comic, and the person who created the symbol in the first place. I can’t think of a way any other person can possibly know better what the symbol is supposed to be. Apparently, according to that person, both 6 and 9 are right, and if that’s true, then the red text seems very silly.
Furthermore, this the symbol in this comic is a metaphor for much more complicated questions in real life. With real-life versions of this dilemma you don’t always have an obvious alternative explanation for what the truth might be. You just see a 6 and already know about ‘9’. In real life, both sides might be incredibly informed, and the reason they disagree might be because the problem is so complex that each party doesn’t have all the information the other party has, or they might have made a mistake in their reasoning.
They may even have seen what appears to them to be 100% conclusive evidence. However, one or both of them might have misinterpreted something along the way. They can’t reasonably be expected to know about the mistake. If they did, then they would have already gone back and fixed their reasoning. To them, their side is the Objective Truth.
It could also be the case that all their facts are both totally true, and the reason they disagree is because they’re not seeing the bigger picture. They might not even know about a bigger picture. It’s not always obvious where one exists.
I prefer this other widly-circulated image. It covers some important nuance that the above comic (the original version) doesn’t.
The core problem is that belief is how a person experiences truth. You can’t tell the difference between a strongly-held, but false belief and the truth. If you could, then you wouldn’t have the false belief in the first place. You can’t expect other people to tell the difference either. To them, it is the truth! This is what “their truth” actually is. Humans don’t have some sort of mystical “truth-sence” that lets us know for sure what the truth is. It’s not so easy to just choose objective truth over your truth, when “your truth” is the very way that you experience truth.
The Wednesday Wellness threads are meant to encourage users to ask for and provide advice and motivation to improve their lives. It isn't intended as a 'containment thread' and any content which could go here could instead be posted in its own thread. You could post:
-
Requests for advice and / or encouragement. On basically any topic and for any scale of problem.
-
Updates to let us know how you are doing. This provides valuable feedback on past advice / encouragement and will hopefully make people feel a little more motivated to follow through. If you want to be reminded to post your update, see the post titled 'update reminders', below.
-
Advice. This can be in response to a request for advice or just something that you think could be generally useful for many people here.
-
Encouragement. Probably best directed at specific users, but if you feel like just encouraging people in general I don't think anyone is going to object. I don't think I really need to say this, but just to be clear; encouragement should have a generally positive tone and not shame people (if people feel that shame might be an effective tool for motivating people, please discuss this so we can form a group consensus on how to use it rather than just trying it).
I struggle to imagine any educated person in North America admitting that they do not possess the power of critical thought. Few uneducated people would say "Oh yeah, I'm a total rube." I have heard doctors say that they would only trust other doctors to raise their children in case of an accident because medical training imbues critical thought. Complaints about "stupid people" being allowed to vote are widespread. I am a teacher, and literally every teacher I have ever met believes that it is their core mission to "teach kids to be critical thinkers." The fact that not one of those teachers shows any evidence of critical thought suggests either that I am the world's most arrogant man (possible) or that I do not understand what critical thought actually is.
So what is critical thought? This is an honest question. Some uncritical googling gives these definitions:
-the objective analysis and evaluation of an issue in order to form a judgment
-self-directed, self-disciplined, self-monitored, and self-corrective habits of mind
-the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action. In its exemplary form, it is based on universal intellectual values that transcend subject matter divisions: clarity, accuracy, precision, consistency, relevance, sound evidence, good reasons, depth, breadth, and fairness.
-Critical thinking is the ability to think clearly and rationally about what to do or what to believe.
The problem with these is that pretty much everyone would say that their own thought meets the criteria in the definitions and few people would accept that their own thought is irrational, shallow, unclear, etc if you tried to point it out. Consequently, critical thought comes off as a sort of cool kids club, where we, the in-group, are right about important things because of our superior something-or-rather, and the erroneous out-group is deluded by their own biases and lack of discipline. The definitions are either so vague or so inclusive that they boil down to "I know it when I see it." I don't see it very much, though. Perhaps it is only me who lacks this understanding, since it is probably impossible to imagine anyone smarter than oneself (because if you'd imagine their thoughts and then you'd be that smart too). Maybe I just can't imagine anyone more critical(?) than me.
Below are some possibilities and the reasons why I don't think they work. Tell me why I'm wrong, and how to be right.
-
Formal logic: A sound deductive argument provides true conclusions, but even a little work with formal logic raises the question of GIGO. "All men are mortal" is pretty uncontroversial, so Socrates must be mortal. Beyond that, however, very few premises are solid enough to merit insertion into logical argument. Induction is famously self-defeating (Hume), enough to lead to hypotheses that we're just hard-wired to believe in it (Kant, Schopenhauer). Abduction (Sherlock Holmes-style reasoning) is a nice idea, but boils down to experience and breadth of knowledge.
-
Avoidance of fallacies: Fallacies are obviously bad, but day-to-day thought is just not very prone to fallacies of any consequence. Again the big danger is untrue or misunderstood premises. When someone brings up the Bible, for example, and says "The Bible says that the Bible is true, lol," they aren't really taking issue with the question-begging reasoning; if some Biblical council proved that that line was a later addition, the fedora guys wouldn't all become Christians- they just don't believe the Bible is true. The object-level debate over the facts is the root of the issue.
Furthermore, formal fallacies are of very limited applicability and informal fallacies are fallacies in limited enough circumstances that their fallaciousness is at very least debatable (the slippery slope, for example, happens all the time).
-
The stuff stupid teachers tell students: "If the website ends in .edu you can trust it," "If bad people funded the study it's not true," "Check the credentials of the author," etc. List of tips on how to spot fake news are full of this. If these tips are even true, they depend on you either blindly trusting that PhDs (or whoever) are right about everything, which even someone as confused as I am can tell is not critical thought, or they depend on you knowing which PhD's are trustworthy and which aren't, who the bad study-funders are and why, which parts of .edu are part of the replication crisis, and so on. This doesn't take a PhD, but it takes a ton of subject knowledge.
-
Fighting The Man: Big corporations are lying to you, Manufacturing Consent, AdBusters, cui bono, don't trust anyone over 30, and so on. This is all true enough, I guess, but the people who are the loudest about critical thinking are now The Man themselves (See the Disinformation Governance Board). Fighting The Man these days involves not getting vaccinated, driving your truck in a freedom convoy and rooting for Putin. If critical thought is the power of telling truth from falsehood, or Truth from Falsehood, then it doesn't shift as the culture shifts. And if it shifts as the culture shifts, then it would seem to be no more than a proclamation of tribal allegiance.
-
Avoidance of cognitive biases: You shouldn't embrace them, but are they even real? Did most of that stuff not come out of questionable psych research?
-
LessWrong-style rationalism: Even if Bayesianism is questionable, much of what is written in the Sequences is still true. That whole line of thinking, however, depends on knowledge of statistics, engineering, computer science; lots of knowledge of subject matter. Furthermore, it has severe blind-spots with regard to morality and metaphysical stuff because stats and programming don't lead that way. This is a sort of "I'm looking for my keys out front because the light is better" solution, where the meta-problem ("We don't have a solution") gets solved, but the actual problem ("How can we be right?") doesn't. That's why it's called LessWrong, and not just Right.
-
All of these put together: Maybe the task is so huge that you need all of this. It seems to me that that would compound the flaws in each approach and result in amalgamating everything good into "Just know tons of stuff about the world. Like, literally everything, if possible." And if that's the case then "critical thinking" just means "breadth and depth of knowledge." It would also correlate with knowledge, though, which plainly isn't the case. Lots of polymaths are very wrong about things outside their specific fields, and one hears of them being wrong even within their fields.
-
All of this plus intelligence: This seems like we're back to the cool kids club: "We just know more and we're smarter." This would, however, explain why some very knowledgeable people don't seem to fit the definition (?) vibe (?) aura (?) of critical thought- they just aren't smart enough. But it takes a certain intelligence to become very knowledgeable, so it would be surprising to find very many knowledgeable people without this power. This would also explain why many smart people don't fit the definition- they just don't know enough. It would suggest, though, that you could take smart people and have them read Wikipedia all day for 2 years and then everyone would agree that they were critical thinkers. I can't be sure that this isn't true, and I don't have an argument for why. But I really don't think it's true.
-
All of this, plus wisdom. Well, what is wisdom? And so we go back 3000 years and start the entire conversation over again and hope for a better result the second time. Let's not.
-
Emotion: When I consider the many defects I see in other people's thought and consider the ways I have avoided those exact defects (not all defects- you can't imagine anyone smarter than you, remember) I get:
-Intelligence
-Breadth of Knowledge of "facts."
-Familiarity with philosophy and religion (breadth of knowledge of "ideas," maybe?)
-Suspicion of consensus
-Love of conflict
-Hatred of error
-PROFOUND suspicion of any comforting thought/EXTREME fear of motivated reasoning. Like, crippling fear.
The last 4 are at best aesthetic preferences and at worst emotional tendencies. Is that what it takes? If so, is there any hope for someone without them?
TLDR:
-Is that what it takes?
-Is there any hope?
-What is critical thought?
-Are my objections flawed?
-Have I missed something?
-And I guess, is it possible to imagine anyone smarter than oneself?