Maximum_Publius
No bio...
User ID: 780
Maximum_Publius
10mo ago
I'm not sure I see what you're getting at here. I don't see why having a model that classifies people on the basis of their biology in some way conflicts with the fact that people sometimes present in a way that makes them appear to be the sex they are not.
There's no meaningful epistemological issue here. Yes, people can dress and generally display themselves in ways that will deceive others as to what their biological sex is, or just look relatively androgenous. As you say, this means that maybe 2% of the time, we are wrong about the sex of people we see on the street. But in the vast, vast majority of those cases, we could figure out their biological sex if we really needed to (say, to determine whether or not to allow someone into a sports competition limited to people of the female sex) relatively easily.
Is the implication of your model that if a biological man lets his hair grow out, such that some percentage of people confuse him for a woman, even if he hasn't actually changed what he "identifies" as, he "is" a woman in those interactions?
Maximum_Publius
10mo ago
I also can't think of any UFO incidents in India either, but I know of ones (I believe all involving gov't personnel too) in the USSR, Iran, Brazil, France, Belgium, UK (happy to provide links if requested).
Can't speak to the the volume in the US vs. the rest of the world, you may be right about that, but that could also simply be due to US cultural hegemony making it harder to gather info from non-English language sources.
Maximum_Publius
10mo ago
Yeah, I certainly agree about the confusion. I'd add that it doesn't seem totally unbelievable to me that the US military would want to keep potentially powerful military tech secret given that a good chunk of those 80 years occurred during the Cold War.
Maximum_Publius
10mo ago
-
I agree that this becomes more credible if the MSM picks it up, and the fact that Kean and Blumenthal couldn't get it reported in the NYT/WaPo initially is disappointing, and if they don't pick it up eventually that would be a strike to the story's credibility.
-
A fair point.
-
My understanding is that he now feels more comfortable saying things because in some appropriations bill from 2022 Senators Rubio and Gillibrand added language providing some whistleblower protection for UAP information. From the article: Grusch "helped draft the language on UAP for the FY2023 National Defense Authorization Act, spearheaded by Senators Kirsten Gillibrand and Marco Rubio and signed into law by President Biden in December 2022. The provision states that any person with relevant UAP information can inform Congress without retaliation, regardless of any previous non-disclosure agreements."
Also, apparently he got clearance to say these things from the DoD? Article says "his statements [were] cleared for publication by the Pentagon in April," and then also Ross Coulthart (Australian journalist) says the same here.
Maximum_Publius
10mo ago
I'm not exactly sure what you mean about this "bullshit" only happening in the USA. Do you mean claims about the government being in possession of non-human tech, or just UFO incidents/etc. in general? Because there are plenty of the latter in other countries, including ones reported by foreign military officials.
Maximum_Publius
10mo ago
Yeah, I agree with this for the most part. Hoping the fact that the article claims he has been reporting to Congress means that they will get their hands on some documents/hard evidence soon.
Maximum_Publius
10mo ago
Indeed, assertions by a former high level member of the US intelligence services. You must admit that's not no evidence, especially when considered in light of things like the videos that have been released by the military.
Maximum_Publius
10mo ago
I largely agree with you except for the fact there have been people who have said things (including this current leaker!) over the years and been dismissed. If you think a few leakers aren't enough evidence, fair enough, but then I don't think it's fair to base your skepticism on the fact that there haven't been leakers when in fact there have.
Maximum_Publius
10mo ago
The site is being pounded right now. Link works for me, you might need to try it again.
What does the Motte think about UFOs/UAPs? I ask because there was a relatively big instance of "disclosure" today within the UFO community. A former senior US intelligence figure (who allegedly had enough high level classifications to report directly to the president) has apparently stated to Congress and journalists that the US has recovered "non-human technology."
From the article:
"A former intelligence official turned whistleblower has given Congress and the Intelligence Community Inspector General extensive classified information about deeply covert programs that he says possess retrieved intact and partially intact craft of non-human origin.
...
Grusch said the recoveries of partial fragments through and up to intact vehicles have been made for decades through the present day by the government, its allies, and defense contractors. Analysis has determined that the objects retrieved are “of exotic origin (non-human intelligence, whether extraterrestrial or unknown origin) based on the vehicle morphologies and material science testing and the possession of unique atomic arrangements and radiological signatures,” he said.
In filing his complaint, Grusch is represented by a lawyer who served as the original Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG).
“We are not talking about prosaic origins or identities,” Grusch said, referencing information he provided Congress and the current ICIG. “The material includes intact and partially intact vehicles.”
...
"Jonathan Grey is a generational officer of the United States Intelligence Community with a Top-Secret Clearance who currently works for the National Air and Space Intelligence Center (NASIC), where the analysis of UAP has been his focus. Previously he had experience serving Private Aerospace and Department of Defense Special Directive Task Forces.
“The non-human intelligence phenomenon is real. We are not alone,” Grey said. “Retrievals of this kind are not limited to the United States. This is a global phenomenon, and yet a global solution continues to elude us.”
...
"Grusch left the government on April 7, 2023, in order, he said, to advance government accountability through public awareness. He remains well-supported within intelligence circles, and numerous sources have vouched for his credibility.
“His assertion concerning the existence of a terrestrial arms race occurring sub-rosa over the past eighty years focused on reverse engineering technologies of unknown origin is fundamentally correct, as is the indisputable realization that at least some of these technologies of unknown origin derive from non-human intelligence,” said Karl Nell, the retired Army Colonel who worked with Grusch on the UAP Task Force.
...
Jonathan Grey says secrets have been necessary. “Though a tough nut to crack, potential technological advancements may be gleaned from non-human intelligence/UAP retrievals by any sufficiently advanced nation and then used to wage asymmetrical warfare, so, therefore, some secrecy must remain,” he says. “However, it is no longer necessary to continue to deny that these advanced technologies derived from non-human intelligence exist at all or to deny that these technologies have landed, crashed, or fallen into the hands of human beings.”
Grey noted that the hypothesis that the United States alone has bullied the other nations into maintaining this secrecy for nearly a century continues to prevail as the primary consensus amongst the public at large. “My hope is to dissuade the global populace from this archaic and preposterous notion, and to potentially pave the way for a much broader discussion,” he said.
Grusch said it was dangerous for this “eighty-year arms race” to continue in secrecy because it “further inhibits the world populace to be prepared for an unexpected, non-human intelligence contact scenario.”
“I hope this revelation serves as an ontological shock sociologically and provides a generally uniting issue for nations of the world to re-assess their priorities,” Grusch said."
I figure that most people in this community are good rationalists and dismiss UFOs/UAPs/"non-human intelligences" out of hand. Does this kind of evidence change your mind at all? What would?
For those who, like me, think this (in conjunction with the massive amount of other evidence for UFOs/UAPs/etc.) is fairly good evidence that this phenomenon is real, what might be the social and political implications of this? It's kind of hard for me to imagine anything changing our current political stalemate and trajectory, and I can definitely imagine a situation where the US completely admits to the existence of "non-human intelligences" only for the story to be overtaken the next day when Trump says something allegedly racist, or whatever. And unless reverse-engineered non-human technology starts seeping into consumer electronics or something, it's hard to see it affecting people that much on a day-to-day basis. On the other hand, it's hard to imagine news that could be more important.
Maximum_Publius
10mo ago
I strongly disagree with this characterization of OP's post. The rule states in relevant part that, "we ask that you refrain from posting bare links to culture-war-related discussions held outside of this sub. If you are going to link to another platform we ask that you please put in the work to contextualize the post and explain why it is relevant to readers of this community."
This is not a "bare link" to a culture war discussion from an outside website. The OP provided plenty of context, and it's obvious why this is relevant to the culture war--it's an example of progressive/woke discussion norms and of what is considered "out of bounds" in woke spaces.
The fact that OP is directly involved in this culture war drama should be irrelevant. If this interaction had happened on a college campus between students, with some of the students trying to "cancel" another student for saying what OP said, and someone had given this description of the events along with light commentary describing their thoughts on the matter, no one would have batted an eye. This is classic Culture War Thread content and OP shouldn't be punished for posting it.
Maximum_Publius
11mo ago
I agree with you that there was a point at which the US had a meaningful culture to defend. My point is that at some point along the line, the waves of mass migration to the US, along with economic ("right wing") and cultural ("left wing") liberalism, destroyed any meaningful, unified culture the country had. Yes, there are people who can trace their descent to the Mayflower, but they are a very small percentage of the current US population (and I also think that a lot of them no longer care about, protect, or even know the culture and traditions their ancestors brought here). Given this situation, I think the benefits of ~open borders (to both the migrants and the country) outweigh the harms. If you talked to me 70 years ago, maybe I'd go the other way, but we're way past the point that Sweden only passed about a decade or two ago and could still meaningfully reverse.
Maximum_Publius
11mo ago
I don't think crime rate is separate from questions of "culture." I'd argue that in fact the crime rate is a reflection of culture. How often a given group of people commit crimes is a behavioral fact about that group of people just as much as any other behavioral fact that we consider "cultural" (like a tendency to listen to certain types of music, adhere to certain religions, etc.). To the extent that some group enters a society and increases that society's crime rate, I'd argue they are changing that society's culture.
As to the statistics you cite, it does seem as though I may be indulging in a bit of hysteria here, so thanks for the context.
Maximum_Publius
11mo ago
By non-Western I mean to indicate that I don't think Sweden would be having these problems if all of these immigrants were, say, (non-immigrant) Germans or French. Admittedly, they probably wouldn't have them if the immigrants were Asian either.
Maximum_Publius
11mo ago
How Peaceful Sweden Became Europe’s Gun-Murder Capital
This link is probably paywalled for most, so some of the salient points:
"Turf wars for control of the drug trade, driven by an influx of guns, personal vendettas and a pool of available youths, many from marginalized migrant communities, have resulted in a gun-homicide rate approximately 2½ times the European average, according to the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention.
With 62 people shot dead last year, up from 45 in 2021, Sweden’s overall homicide rate is about one-sixth of the U.S.’s. But in a European context, it is extraordinary. Stockholm’s gun-murder rate was roughly 30 times higher per capita than London’s.
Perpetrators are becoming younger, and are also resorting to increasingly violent tactics such as throwing hand grenades and placing bombs, injuring a growing number of bystanders, including children.
Because most shootings in Sweden take place among individuals from migrant backgrounds, they have fueled a surge of right-wing populism. In the 2022 election, the Sweden Democrats, a party that has roots in Nazism and blames Sweden’s liberal migration policies for the violence, gained more than 20% of the votes to become the country’s second-largest. Today it rejects Nazism and white nationalism on its platform.
The new center-right government has promised to tighten migration policies, double sentences for offenses committed in “gang environments,” widen the use of electronic surveillance and expel more criminals who aren’t Swedish citizens.
“Compared internationally, we have had a much laxer criminal law. And we have now lost control over the situation,” said Daniel Bergström, an adviser to the Swedish minister of justice.
Experts, however, say there is no simple explanation for the violence.
Nikoi Djane, a former gang member turned criminologist, said authorities had failed to help refugees integrate into society, instead segregating them from society in housing estates with few job opportunities or treatment for conditions like post-traumatic stress disorder.
“The perpetrators have a responsibility, but they are also victims of their circumstances,” Djane said.
Manne Gerell, an associate professor at Malmö University with expertise in organized crime, said the problem was caused by poor integration and exacerbated by years of insufficient response from authorities, police and politicians.
Today, an estimated 75% to 80% of deadly shootings remain unsolved, and the low risk of getting caught has prompted a growing number of youths to kill for bounties issued by gang leaders, said Salihu, the crime expert.
It might also be helpful to look at this article in conjunction with this Free Press article on violence in Sweden: Two Bombings in One Night? That’s Normal Now in Sweden.
At least on its face, this situation has a clear cause (migration from non-Western countries) and a simple solution (stop accepting migrants and remove many of the migrants that are already in Sweden), but to even state these facts gets you labeled a "right-wing populist" (nice of WSJ to omit the customary "far right populist").
I do see where the Left is coming from here. Most migrants aren't committing violence, and it does seem cruel to kick out people who have been living somewhere for years or even decades. But I also think a given community has the right to maintain the integrity of its society and culture. That's also why I'm more okay with something closer to open borders in the USA: Our culture is already so hollowed out that migrants moving here are probably adding, not subtracting, from whatever "culture" there is in the US.
Maximum_Publius
11mo ago
While agreeing with ymeskhout’s response, I also think part of the issue here is that there’s a whole set of truth statements which depend for their accuracy on the beliefs of a given group. “Defund the Police is a harmful movement because they want to totally remove police officers” is either true or false (assuming a given set of morals), and that in turn depends on what the DTP movement actually believes.
Maximum_Publius
11mo ago
I think your approach is clearly the right one when engaged in a particular debate with a particular person, and OP says as much. But I think ymeskhout’s post is directed more to the scenario where someone is writing about a movement or argument in general instead of engaging with a particular person. In such cases the weakmanning concern is more real.
This all seems right. Well said and thanks for the post.
More options
Context Copy link