@Nwallins's banner p

Nwallins

Finally updated my bookmark

0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 04 23:17:52 UTC

				

User ID: 265

Nwallins

Finally updated my bookmark

0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 04 23:17:52 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 265

I think that Wokeism and Marxism are both branches of Progressivism, which is the ideology of the Enlightenment.

Wokism, Marxism, and Progressivism are all collectivist ideologies. The Enlightenment was very much individualist in contrast. Perhaps if Progressivism’s collectivism were replaced with individualism, we might have something resembling Enlightenment. But without this substitution, I reject the descendent relation.

I agree, there is something ghoulish about the media salivation over this, as well as anticipated protests and riots. That said, we’ve known for a long time that if it bleeds, it leads.

DePape uses the hammer to break into the back door of Pelosi's house. This is not how you typically invite male prostitutes into your house

Several possibilities, mostly revolving around prior encounter / relationship. DePape feels scorned, or wants money, or wants leverage for anarchist / crazy / Nancy reasons. His arrival is neither invited nor welcomed in this instance, yet DePape is determined to proceed.

Is it useful for you and I to try and understand the mind of the lowly Russian serf?

Insofar as one is curious, of course!

Is this kind of half-baked understanding going to reflect anything but our own biases, whether for peace or for war?

It’s better than nothing! I struggle with your intellectual defeatism and know-nothing approach. Tug at small threads for long enough and eventually you will have the entire sweater! (in a pile of spaghetti on the floor)

And to be honest we never really had a Ukraine policy before the war. They couldn’t join NATO with territorial disputes. They had some trade deals.

Wasn’t the US heavily involved in the leadup to and aftermath from the 2014 revolution? With a strong policy interest in removing Yanukovich?

Based Chris Rufo demonstrates how to deny the heckler’s veto.

I’m having trouble understanding your point, with a lot of what seem to me like unsubstantiated yet controversial assertions.

I think Scott's title is actually wrong. People do want a purely biological apolitical taxonomy of mental disorders - they just also want the world to be just, so there wouldn't be any conflict. That what is true and what we want to be true do, in the end, coincide; that the truth would never be inconvenient to those with the correct values.

I read Scott as saying “No, you don’t want to eat that tub of ice cream, even though you are tempted. It comes with consequences, laid out here, that you are not actually willing to accept”. Is that your read in this paragraph? I don’t think so, but I’m not sure what you’re getting at either.

To take a very different example: Todd Akin's claim that "legitimate rape" could not cause pregnancy: often considered an example of rank misogyny, but even if so, I would say it's much more importantly clear just-world thinking.

I’m not familiar with this person or claim. I’m struggling to understand how pregnancy can be ruled out, given PIV intercourse, whether coerced or not.

EDIT: Akin said “legitimate rape” rarely causes pregnancy, because because their bodies prevent them from doing so. “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”

I have no idea of the biology there. Maybe stress hormones in a traumatic situation somehow prevent conception? Does this still comport with your point?

I’m struggling with the rest, likely because of the above.

these guys are getting soft-balled. It's almost staged.

I understand your point, but disagree. I felt kinda bad posting Rufo dunking on the Karen president, particularly in response to the Charlie Hebdo massacre, but I also feel like we've seen tons of well-meaning administrators cave to the forces of safetyism and pearl-clutching in order to prevent certain views from being aired.

But there's kind of a structural bind here: if Karen wants to come back from this setback, she needs to go, ultimately, full Charlie Hebdo. There are of course many steps in that direction. But Karen now needs to pray for violence in order to prevent speech. Yet -- where security and safety are truly concerns, one may host debates in highly secure environments.

Dreher’s Law of Merited Impossibility: X will never happen, and when it does, you bigots will deserve it.

Thanks. I didn’t see any serious wrangling with the idea that the trauma and stress of a violent rape may induce physical changes that prevent conception. The wiki article showed many plausible statements from conservative doctors in support of the idea, and just bare rebuttals from the medical establishment, presumably along the lines of “there is no evidence…”, likely driven by mood affiliation. I dug into the most direct rebuttal but it 404d and I stopped there.

Great link, in terms of actually digging down instead of flinging talking points. My take is that Rufo is comfortable fighting fire with fire, getting dirty with the hogs, etc. He can also shower off and don a 3 piece suit for the Harvard set.

EDIT: disregard the below. I missed the course description link

You’ve got a slight problem in your post: a circular reference.

That is because the course description is not a curriculum, and the course description, like all AP course descriptions, says:

[no specifics about this AP class]

I have attended several AP trainings in my day, and can attest that they make a big deal about individual teachers being given autonomy, as long as their syllabus addresses the content and skills set forth in the course description.

From this, it looks like anything could be taught and match the course description. We should really look at the actual course description, and much more importantly What’s on the test??

Sorry, I missed your links. Let me review. I was responding to your text, trying to follow the argument, but I was premature in responding.

That’s my prior, but I’d also be surprised if there were zero effect on conception from the stress and trauma of a violent rape. Direct evidence would be impossible to gather, but I can imagine studies based on other forms of stress and trauma.

Let me attempt some kind of steelman here. First, like you, I am extremely skeptical of grievance study courses, and particularly CRT. Second, while I think it’s fine to study these phenomena at arm’s length, often high school students assume they are being taught the truth, not merely one perverse angle on it. In 99% of my high school classes, it was obvious I was meant to internalize and adopt the teachings presented. Only the most careful of teachers could approach truly controversial topics. I have little confidence this can be maintained across our public high school education system.

Nonetheless. The course description describes what to expect at college. This is an AP class after all. I can’t argue with the course description, which certainly covers a great deal of CRT, even if seemingly out of proportion with its influence and impact on ordinary African Americans.

Now, Florida DOE is faced with a course description that it has significant disagreement with. They could design a curriculum that sideskirts all the CRT stuff, but then its students will fare poorly on the AP test. Which failure is a greater disservice to its students? Failing to prepare them for a very important test, or breaking the ban on CRT?

It would be nice if the College Board could separate the most controversial, politically charged aspects of their African American History into a seperate module, perhaps Advanced African American History. It seems we are forced to throw the baby out for the bathwater.

Oh gosh, good point. So maybe the distinction I propose is already there? It would make sense, to me, for Florida to offer AAH but maybe not AAS. I feel like much of “liberal” uproar assumed Florida was cutting out AAH. Is AAH generally a prereq for AAS?

Cancel culture regards the intent and attempt to end one’s career, reputation, and livelihood. Just like we did to the Nazis. It’s very real and very alive. That some Nazis escaped to South America does not change the Allies’ intent and attempt to hold them accountable.

What is risible is for ordinary people to try to give other ordinary people the Nazi treatment. Before social media, CK may have run into some small-time, inside baseball sanctions. Maybe FX and HBO get wind of allegations and fail to renew his hit series. And if the CK infractions are truly egregious and criminal, then maybe there is mainstream media coverage. But I believe the whispers here both started and were amplified by social media before mainstream media ran with it.

Yes, I don’t understand quite what Trace means by “the cultivation of more intellectually serious humanities and social sciences departments”. Cultivation sounds like grassroots, bottom up. Conservatives certainly can’t improve the intellectual seriousness of these departments from the top down. I’d say that’s a bigger responsibility, for those in charge.

So what can conservatives do for cultivation? Hillsdale and GMU, I guess. But aren’t they already doing this? What’s the actual prescription here?

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-usa-ukraine-tape/leaked-audio-reveals-embarrassing-u-s-exchange-on-ukraine-eu-idUKBREA151VA20140207

The audio clip, which was posted on Tuesday but gained wide circulation on Thursday, appears to show the official, Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, weighing in on the make-up of the next Ukrainian government.

Nuland is heard telling U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey Pyatt that she doesn’t think Vitaly Klitschko, the boxer-turned-politician who is a main opposition leader, should be in a new government.

“So I don’t think Klitsch (Klitschko) should go into the government,” she said in the recording, which appeared to describe events that occurred in late January. “I don’t think it’s necessary. I don’t think it’s a good idea.”

Separately on Thursday, a senior Kremlin aide accused the United States of arming Ukrainian “rebels” and warned Russia could intervene to maintain the security of its neighbour.

Conservative universities exist

Right, that's why I mentioned Hillsdale (and GMU, though less so)

do not get particularly used by American conservatives as part of their intellectual backing.

That's news to me. I think (e.g.) Hillsdale and GMU are part of the conservative intellectual backing.

What the allies did to the nazis wasn't 'cancel culture'. It was just warfare. The enemy was the nazis and they hunted the enemy down and murdered them.

I'm talking about the de-nazification policies after the war. Not so much the end of war massacres and war crimes tribunals. Nazis got canceled.

What I don't understand is why you would say it's risible for 'ordinary people' to try and give other people the nazi treatment. It was always ordinary people who did these things. From the soldier and his rifle to the largest institutions in the world. It's all individual people.

I'm talking about social media accounts versus powerful organizations like US government. Twitter accounts that contact Justine Saccho's employer. That's cancel culture rather than realpolitik amongst Great Powers. Which yes, are all composed of individual people.

From an American point of view, while I'm totally sucked into supporting Ukraine and hating Russia's invasion, it's pretty nice that Russia is bleeding itself on the other side of the world with all kinds of internal tension and dissent. I have Ukrainian friends, and while I'd love to see Russia expelled immediately and peace restored, that is only a temporary reprieve from Russia's imperial ambitions. So while a grinding stalemate is terrible for Ukraine, I don't mind seeing the greatest geopolitical blunder in my lifetime be extended indefinitely to Russia's detriment.

I had honestly hoped for greater ties and reconciliation with Russia in 2005ish era. I wonder if that was truly a possibility or just foolish.

My understanding is that the US was heavily interested in and involved with Ukraine leading up to 2014. And certainly afterwards. I am not an expert, but I believe I can come up with hundreds more links if prompted. Do you wish to restate your understanding of the US foreign policy interest in Ukraine before the current invasion?

https://www.cato.org/commentary/americas-ukraine-hypocrisy

The extent of the Obama administration’s meddling in Ukraine’s politics was breathtaking.

But I guess Cato is a propaganda outlet (??). I'd love to see your Fisking of this article.

Regarding post 2014:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/ukraine-military-success-years-of-nato-training-11649861339

If you want to argue NATO =/= US, well, I suppose we'll have a disagreement about US foreign policy as regards NATO and Ukraine.

That's not a relevant distinction. It would still fall under the definition I am giving of it just being warfare. The term 'cancel culture' is obfuscatory and redundant. It's just cultural warfare.

I guess we'll have to leave this one here. Agree to disagree.

I still don't understand why you would say that it's risible for 'ordinary people' to engage in warfare when all warfare is enacted by ordinary people.

The most charitable I can be here is that this seems facile. Yes, I agree, all organizations are composed of individuals. But those responsible for the greatest losses of human life and dignity in warfare were very much not "ordinary people". Mostly, I mean ordinary people who are not instrumental to a large and powerful organization. I don't imagine this conversation bearing much more fruit, either. Cheers.