@fishtwanger's banner p

fishtwanger


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2024 February 21 06:52:56 UTC
Verified Email

				

User ID: 2896

fishtwanger


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2024 February 21 06:52:56 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 2896

Verified Email

one of the purposes of Oct 7 was to disrupt the normalization of relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia that Netanyahu was nearly achieving despite the dogma

Yeah, it seemed like the Palestinians were gradually being discarded by the governments of Arab/Muslim states (except perhaps Iran), even if the general population still cared. It reminds me of the way the Chinese government cracks down on nationalist revanchism every so often: partly it's that they don't actually want to invade Taiwan/wherever at this particular moment, but also it feels like they're setting things up so that they get to play "good cop" in international relations ("if you don't work with us, we might lose some domestic legitimacy, and then we'd have to appease those people").

Thanks for providing an infodump. I'm somewhat new here, and I confess that I don't know your position on this whole mess, but you seem like a calm and reasonable person. So I'm going to ask a couple more questions on sensitive topics, in case you still feel like answering. If you don't want to, I completely understand.

  1. I've seen a few videos that appear to be of harmless Gazans being shot dead. I don't think they're fakes. What's up with that? And why aren't they viewed as more of a Abu-Ghraib-level scandal by Israelis and supporters of Israel? I worry that Israeli society has fallen to the level that American society did shortly after Sep 11, where pretty much anything could be justified, and almost no one was willing to dissent. And that parts of the IDF are taking out their anger and frustration in ways that are more about personal vengeance than about any strategic purpose. Here's the two worst ones that I've seen; they're old but they've stuck in my mind. I haven't had the heart to look for more recent ones, and none have been forced into my attention, but I don't know whether that's because they stopped happening, or whether they're just better hidden. https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/idf-slams-uk-network-after-claim-unarmed-gazan-was-shot-dead-shortly-after-interview/ https://edition.cnn.com/2024/01/26/middleeast/hala-khreis-white-flag-shooting-gaza-cmd-intl/index.html

  2. It seems that factions in Israel supported the initial incarnation of Hamas, decades ago, in order to destabilize the PLO/Fatah. What's your take on that? To me, it seems like either a short-sighted plan that backfired (much like assassinating heads of state, in hopes that whatever replaces them is more controllable), or an extremely cynical ploy to eliminate compromise in favor of the preferred extreme solution. (None of which should be read as relieving Gazans of their ethical responsibility for their own actions.)

Thanks again, in advance, for even considering a response.

What is the end-result you believe we are investing in?

I don't see in the thread the result I have found most convincing, so here goes: the end-result is a world where military force is not used to change state borders, and is not sent across state borders in any way that could be ambiguous. Countries can go to hell in their own handbaskets, and descend into civil war and massacre civilians and bleed out endless streams of refugees, but as long as the chaos stays within the lines on the map, the rest of the world can get on with their lives.

Yes, this is hypocritical coming from America (I'm American), but I don't think anyone serious thought that we were going to annex Iraq or Afghanistan or anywhere else. If Russia sent troops to (say) Mali as "peacekeepers" or to put down "insurrections" that were causing "human rights violations", whatever. No one serious thinks that the Wagner Group is going to annex the Central African Republic. But if Russia does the same to Ukraine or Georgia or any other neighboring country, that's much more dangerous.

What Russia did in Ukraine - sending tanks and infantry across border in what is objectively an invasion - that seems like the bad old days starting up again. By doing that, Russia made themselves into an enemy, and I am happy to see them bleed. Especially if it has a side-effect of causing NATO to improve its military-industrial capacity. The more damage we can do to Russia, the less likely any other country will be to try something like this in the future. Like China.

Probably the Russians felt the same way about America during Vietnam, and, you know, I'm fine with that. Ditto for anyone who was funding resistance in Afghanistan and Iraq. And yeah, America's messed with a lot of other countries, including Ukraine, in ways that I with my limited knowledge think of as a stupid waste of power. I still think this is different from all of those cases.

And maybe America is too dysfunctional to pull this off. Maybe we can't stop Russia from peeling off its Sudetenland. It's still worth trying. I'm glad we're not going gently into that night.

On the contrary, it might sometimes be the case that society will follow the rule more if I (1) break the rule, (2) keep it secret that I broke the rule, and (3) use my ill-gotten gains from breaking the rule to promulgate the rule.

I don't think it could never happen, but I think it doesn't happen very often, and has a chance of severely backfiring. SBF comes to mind. I think it much more likely that someone who breaks the rule and keeps it secret, will be less likely to follow through on promulgation, and more likely to continue to break rules and keep them secret. I think that anyone who actually cares about promulgating the rule shouldn't use high-variance strategies that risk destroying everything they worked for.

Or do you claim that secretly breaking a rule for the purpose of strengthening the rule is moral if the rule is a good one?

I think that's classic self-delusion, and while it might happen to lead to a correct conclusion in some instances, the chain of thought that leads to it is corrupt.

Do you believe, for example, that stealing a horse is immoral because it causes other people to steal other things if and when they find out about it?

Not solely because, but yes, among other things it contributes to the collapse of civil society, especially if it's never punished.

Is the immorality of A's theft mitigated by its secrecy, and the fact that it is instrumental in him promulgating anti-theft mores?

Not very much, but it's better than not hiding the theft, and better than using the proceeds from the theft to do more evil. Do you disagree?

I believe that B and C have done more damage to the moral prohibition against stealing than A has.

Partly this depends on whether A ever gets caught. (SBF, again.)

If so, should the actions of B and C be illegal, and punishable by prison terms longer than what A would serve if he had gotten caught stealing the horse?

Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of an organization that advocates for the violent overthrow of the government of the United States of America?

I don't think we humans have a good track record at using laws to propagate virtue. Especially when it comes to people acting in good faith who we think happen to be wrong. Are you suggesting that everything bad should be illegal, and that the law should be a perfect mapping of all possible actions to their ethical value and from there to the punishment or reward that is appropriate? (Should I report your comment for advocating for a system under which the comment itself might be bannable?)

All I recall advocating for was integrity and a bit of forethought. The alternatives, while not uniformly worse, seem quite lopsidedly worse. Hopefully we (humans) are in this (civilization) for the long haul.

This doesn't address the main thrust of your argument, which (to try to sum it up in less than one sentence) I think is about how proximity correlates to care, and what that says about universalist ethics, but...

Perhaps there is some deep metaphysical argument that establishes, on an objective basis, that one ought to behave the way they wish others in "their community" to behave

If you want society to follow a rule, hold to that rule and propagate that rule. If you hold to it but don't propagate it, it won't last. And if you propagate it but don't hold to it, people will eventually Notice.

Doesn't really matter what the rule is. Utilitarianism, Christianity, Nazism, whatever. And clearly other factors can be involved (like losing WWII).

Of course, if one were merely aiming for a short-term effect, like personal benefit, that doesn't apply. One might be able to fool enough of the people, enough of the time, to get away with whatever one wants.

The Israelis have radicalized and international pressure will radicalize them further still. The Israeli left is crushed utterly. Nobody believes peace is possible short of crushing the enemy now.

Could you go into this in more detail? It might be worth a top-level post.

This sounds remarkably similar to the problems the Union faced in the South, after defeating the Confederacy.

One trick that occasionally works for me is to think of today-me and tomorrow-me as separate people, close as twin siblings, and to try to have today-me do favors for tomorrow-me.

For weight gain specifically, you might try fasting. In my experience, the first two days are the hardest, after that it gets much easier (when ketosis kicks in). It helps if you learn to appreciate unflavored tea. (A major contraindication is if you're on medication that needs to be taken with food.) And in my opinion, exercise is fun when I'm in shape, and miserable when I'm not, and I think a lot of people get the correlation/causation thing wrong there.

As for whether to go on living... I don't particularly, either. It's more of a habit; I can get some enjoyment out of daily life, and occasionally there are specific things I look forward to. True, it would be very convenient to die in my sleep, and I've gone to bed plenty of times hoping that would happen. But ultimately, there are some people out there whom I love, who love me, and as long as they're alive and in touch with me, I don't want to hurt them. (Did you ever watch "The Wire"? The end of season 2? I don't want to do that to them.) In the meantime, I try to find little pleasures in life, like smelling flowers, petting kitties, taking hot showers, and so on. It doesn't help with motivation toward long-term goals, but it fills the days. I wish I could help more.

Thanks!

I didn't realize it had gotten that bad in the last few decades. I'd assumed that the Israeli left had come up with a different vision, but it sounds like they never did?

I'd heard talk about Netanyahu being unpopular and his coalition being shaky, prior to Oct 7, but from what you say it doesn't seem like there's anything coherent that could replace him? It's just "stomp hard" or "stomp harder"... :-(

I thought the casting in Hamilton was artistically appropriate. It implicitly compared the modern American black/white divide with the colonial-era American/British divide. Similarly, with the use of rap by the Americans contrasted with the more musical stylings of George III. I've heard that there's even another layer, with different factions of revolutionaries using different styles of rap, but I don't have the ear to tell. And that's not even taking into account Lin-Manuel Miranda being Hispanic. It all contributed to a theme of pitting the vibrant, vigorous, immigrant-fueled multi-cultural melting pot of America against the stagnant, static ancien regime of Britain.

Yeah, that sounds familiar. If you happen to come across those links, it'd be nice to have them here for reference, but no worries if not. :-)

Yeah, he did that.

There's a whole thing about the City of Seattle and King County selectively not enforcing certain laws (although the City of Seattle has gotten better, while King County is still playing progressive while the city suffers the results). Plus the thing about how a lot of gun control laws primarily target lawful users but ignore the illegal users who actually do most of the killing. I'm libertarian enough that I like having few laws, strictly enforced, and while I have some doubts about the wisdom of the 2nd amendment in the modern world, it - unlike abortion - is in the fucking Constitution until repealed.

But was it that specific event that caused the negative publicity and contributed to the shutdown? I'm curious; I don't know what it looked like to people outside. I was focused on the innumerable local problems, plus recovering from covid and dealing with some other life stuff.

Maybe Raz did something I'm not aware of, but the reports I heard seemed overblown to me. "Warlord of Capitol Hill" sounded like a catchy phrase that got picked up and tossed around right-wing media, and persisted virally until the end. But maybe that meme contributed to public opinion turning, allowing the shutdown, regardless of whether it was true.

I wasn't down there a lot, but I never felt unsafe because of the large men with guns. It was the opposite, actually: I worried more about the criminals, crazies, addicts, and people currently high, and I thought the presence of the "security" team made it less likely that one of those other people would start something. That's just one person's perspective, of course. But I don't recall hearing about them being involved in the rapes or murders or fencing or drug dealing or whatever else went down.

I do still wonder about extortion, though - there's a liquor store across the street from the police station, right in the heart of the CHAZ/CHOP, and it seemed to survive without visible damage (other than graffiti outside). It's hard to imagine someone there not wanting to shake down the store for free booze, but either they didn't, or it was covered up. I assume the people who run the place wouldn't say anything, because they want to stay safe.

Your OWS story does sound very familiar. The incident that triggered the shutdown of the CHOP was a shooting, that left a black 16-year-old boy dead and a 14-year-old boy wounded. Apparently the kid was from San Diego and had borrowed some money from family the previous Wednesday, to travel north to be part of the protest. Sunday night, he died in a shooting that had some connection to a carjacked SUV, although reports agree that someone else had stolen the SUV and brought it to the CHOP, so last I heard it was still unclear what he and the other kid were doing around it.

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/everybody-down-what-happened-at-the-chop-shooting-that-killed-a-teenager-and-led-to-the-areas-shutdown/

I meant, it's clear that someone else reported the comment as high quality, and I just validated their choice while doing janitor duty. So should I report the comment as high quality myself, thus giving it 2 HQ reports, and forcing some other volunteer janitor to read the same high quality comment? The answer appears to be "yes".

Will do, thanks!

Do you think Virginia's non-consecutive-governor rule has an effect on their ability to make lasting change?

Don't worry, I know the nutters are real. It's just that I'm going to have to try hard to not get carried away with this cool new explanation that you provided. :-)

(At the very least, once my Mom passes…)

Yeah, same here, and I'm not quite sure how my decision process will go after that. But I do have some nephews and nieces, and some little first cousins once removed, and maybe they'll keep me going.

There's an old children's book of Greek mythology I had when I was a kid, "The Greek Gods", by Evslin, Evslin, and Hoopes. It's got the story of the twins, Apollo and Artemis, and part of the story is that Artemis gets to choose her own gifts. Among her requests is "I wish to be your maiden always, never a woman." And Zeus' response is "You shall have the gift of eternal chastity, and also the gift of changing your mind about it at any time, which will help you not want to." I feel the same way about suicide.

There's another part of my situation which makes the choice a bit easier. I shouldn't go into detail, but I'll just say that sufficiently strong anger appears to be able to overwhelm any other emotion I can feel, including despair. I don't know whether this is actually a good thing, but in the spirit of honesty, I thought I'd share.

Did you ever watch "The Wire"? Nope.

Well, personally, I consider it the best TV show ever made. Opinions differ, but I'd say it's definitely worth trying out a few episodes.

Yeah, I don't really have those — not nearly enough to "fill the days."

Hm. I suppose one thing I have going for me is that I got into Buddhism enough to be able to "live in the moment", most of the time. Even just eating plain rice, if I pay attention and go slow, I can actively enjoy it, the flavor and texture and the entire process of the thing. I don't actually know whether this is good for my long-term mental health - I think there might be ways in which this partial half-assed approach has crippled my internal mechanisms that could lead to recovery - but it does work on a moment-to-moment basis. You could try taking a look at "The Way of Zen" by Alan Watts, if you want an overview. It's short and a good read, anyway.

Reading while stretching is fun, especially gravity-assisted stretches where no muscle activation is needed.

What, then, is something we don't believe but take action as though we do believe?

Going in a few directions: faith? ideals? social fictions?

There was even a great opportunity for me to have a punch-up with one particular post if I wanted

When I saw that, my first thought was that this seems to be engaging on the wrong level, but my second was to wonder what you'd make of it. I'm still curious, if you're up for a non-argument explanation of what you personally think?

I understand that Christian caritas is not a guiding principle here, but from a secular perspective, I still value allowing people the opportunity to grow and improve, even if people rarely take it. It feels like the right thing to do. Humane.

I'm not a mod, I don't want to be a mod, but I've been mod-like elsewhere at times. I don't know you, but in your shoes I've felt weary; worn down. And who knows, maybe this is one of those cases where enforcing the line with one person can help others veer back before crossing the line themselves. @HlynkaCG would probably appreciate how that works. But I'll go on hoping for the mods to collectively show mercy, or grace, or something like that.

I think @JTarrou called it a year ago - Trump is Tiberius Gracchus. After he goes down, every future populist leader will know what's waiting for them.

Around a decade ago I saw a report that some research group had produced vat-grown ground beef, and made a burger. At the time, the theoretical cost was $50 per burger, and it apparently tasted mediocre. But I have hope that America's engine of innovation (given time and effort and lack of government regulation) will improve quality and bring down prices until it's competitive. One of these decades. crosses fingers

Sandman, of course. Nausicaa, The Dark Knight Returns, Kingdom Come, and Red Son are all classics. From Hell might be worth reading, especially if you can find a collected edition with all the notes in the back where he explains his process. Astro City (intermittently ongoing) is a favorite of mine, but some people don't get into it.

Going from memory, it seems like the fun may only be on one side. In the 1st book, Feyd-Rautha thinks he's having sex for fun, but he was being seduced and brainwashed by Margot Fenring. In the 3rd, Alia has sex for fun, but spoilers mean that it's not actually a contradiction. In the 3rd and 4th, various Duncans do have sex for fun, but they're mostly being used for one reason or another. I don't know if you count books 5 and 6, but at that point sex is a weapon, to such an extent that they've made me wonder about Frank Herbert's kinks, much more so than any other author I've read.