starless_sea
No bio...
User ID: 1533
There's always a plan. The US had a plan to invade Canada in 1930. The question is if it was the plan?
The answer is probably yes but we don't know. Some say that the declassified Warsaw Pact war plan of 1964 involves nuclear attacks on Sweden, but I can't find the original sources and confirm it. Even if the plan calls for such strikes, it's hard to know if this plan is the plan, but it seems like it. Then we can discuss if Sweden was truly neutral, or if it was an open secret that it was actually unofficially part of NATO. I would err on saying that Sweden was neutral.
So the counterfactual is that Sweden was super happy to form a joint investigation. In which case, I could well imagine some Motte-poster writing how this indicates that the saboteur was a state actor within NATO, as the likely explanation is that Sweden is paying NATO ransom by basically handing over the investigation to NATO Denmark and NATO Germany. The Motte-poster would go on: If Russia was the suspected culprit, Sweden would like to do its own, thorough investigation to verify against the statements of Denmark and Germany to check the trustworthiness of their old friends and hopefully-new allies (and also to hone their skills at these kinds of investigations). Such an thorough investigation would be dangerous if it risked finding the "wrong" culprit, as the investigation results might leak: much safer to involve NATO Denmark and NATO Germany if the results might be "wrong". Heck, it might even be the US pressing Sweden to do their own investigation, since they don't trust the Germans.
Did anyone say "Sweden not joining the investigation would indicate NATO culpability" before the news broke? Or just supply some stronger reasoning to as why this indicates a NATO culprit, taking the counterfactual into account?
starless_sea
1yr ago
The "imagine a guy" was just me using some rhetoric to make the writing less dry. I don't really see how I could argue that the counterfactual is relevant without making a hypothesis like this.
starless_sea
1yr ago
I'm not speculating, I'm just pointing out that this evidence doesn't point in any direction by considering the counterfactual. If my argument is wrong, please correct it.
Sure, that Germany is excluded from the investigation is suspicious. But Germany being included is also suspicious. This is a suspicious event, every action is suspicious. I can't update just based on a plausible story, when you can make a plausible story for either culprit. If I'm to shift my probability of blame, I need a story that is better than the counterfactual, and I'm not feeling like I'm getting it here.
Change your Instagram password to something random you cannot remember. Remove the Instagram app if you have it installed on your phone. If you use Instagram on a laptop, change the zoom to be maximized and use your addblocker (you use an addblocker, right?) to block everything on the site.
Edit: You say you use third-party browser apps to access their accounts. Remove those apps now! Use your addblocker to block everything on their page in the appstore. Set zoom on those pages to 500 %. Basically same as above.
All of this can be reversed/circumvented if you really want to, the goal is to make to make it too many clicks to be worth the effort, and to give you time to reconsider.
starless_sea
1yr ago
Neither. By killing 40 million Americans, you would arguably (likely IMO) end up with worse global warming, since that devastating blow to the American economy would delay the invention and adaption of technology that replace fossil fuels and enable carbon capture. Dito for the Angolans.
starless_sea
1yr ago
Very interesting! You write convincingly on the benefit of your proposal over "pure" liquid democracy, but what is the benefit of your proposal over representative democracy, specifically a proportional representation parliament?
starless_sea
1yr ago
A common trope is that spies gets tapes of some politician doing something immoral or illegal, which is then used for blackmail. Allegations of this is rife, e.g. Trump in Moscow, Epstein, etc. Do we have any clear example of this actually working? E.g. some politician pushes policy X. Years later it is revealed that this was because of blackmail from Y. An example of failed blackmail would also be interesting, e.g. some politician saying "Y has an embarrassing video of me which they are using for blackmail, but I won't give in!" followed by Y releasing the video.
(I guess most of the time the blackmail is more a way to generally pressure someone and keep them in line. I also know that most cases probably wouldn't become known to the public)
starless_sea
1yr ago
Someone spread an embarrassing video of him, but it's not clear if any blackmail was involved.
starless_sea
1yr ago
But as far as we know, this blackmail didn't work and the embarrassing tape was never released. So it doesn't match either scenario i present.
starless_sea
1yr ago
Interesting, thanks! Though that looks more like the whip keeping track of rumors. The whips are not setting up hidden cameras in hotel rooms (as far as we know at least).
starless_sea
1yr ago
I might need to look into it. Do you know how far down the conspiracy rabbit hole the author is?
starless_sea
1yr ago
It seems entirely plausible that whomever had the video released it just to ruin Crawthorn without attempting to do any blackmail. Or that they did a "traditional" blackmail for money, not the kind of political favors blackmail I'm discussing here. And if they did a blackmail, why wouldn't Crawthorn tell the details, or go to the police?
starless_sea
1yr ago
Or because there was no blackmail. I know that most cases of political blackmail is in shades of grey and veiled from the public, that's why I'm looking for clear-cut cases.
starless_sea
1yr ago
Doctors can prescribe to family members in almost all countries. It's not what's causing the US malaise.
Exactly how should Scott fix the red tape in the system? (Except for running his own experimental shoestring clinic, and talking loudly about the problem to his big and influential audience, both of which he already does.)
starless_sea
1yr ago
Maybe decide on no videogames for a week, and as much videogames as you want after that. You can survive one week, right? Then just take the time where you would have been playing videogames to sit in a chair and be bored. You can survive being bored as well. (Hopefully this will make you so bored that work feels like fun. It works for me.)
starless_sea
1yr ago
Against Malaria Foundation has received millions of dollars and prevented many deaths.
I disagree. If you invite the whole world to your country by voluntarily hosting the World Cup, you should expect the world to show up. If you do not want people in your country who do not conform to the rigid social taboos of your culture, you shouldn't host the World Cup.
Wearing an armband is not shitting on anyone's culture or forcing anything on anyone. Being annoyed when your invited guests wear innocuous armbands that are perfectly fine in their culture is rude.
starless_sea
1yr ago
Yes, that would be totally fine with me. I mean, this is TheMotte, would anyone here want to ban something like that? I'm pro armband freedom for everyone everywhere.
Your comment reminds me of the classic https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/03/08/the-slate-star-codex-political-spectrum-quiz/
I'm European.
Also, OPs argument seems more American to me. "My house, my rules" and similar mindsets are very American and signals that famous rugged individualism. We in the old country are more graceful hosts IMO.
Like you know how brides bans certain colors for the guest clothes, or makes all their bridesmaids wear the same dress? A very American thing IMO.
starless_sea
1yr ago
I don't see the contradiction. The Qatari government is bad for expecting their guest to conform to their rigid social norms. FIFA is bad for allowing Qatar to host the World Cup. People should not go to the World Cup. Three true statement, no contradiction.
starless_sea
1yr ago
The obvious answer is yes? When Germany hosted the World Cup in 2006, it would have been perfectly fine for a Qatari to show up with armbands that say "God made marriage between man and women" or something like that.
starless_sea
1yr ago
There are several Muslim players in the NBA. don't understand you point. (Also, the NBA is a national affair.)
starless_sea
1yr ago
Yes, it would be rude for a guests in Qatar to walk around in drag and chant "Are there any men here ready to fuck!?". But that's pretty far from wearing an armband with a rainbow on.
Threat of bombing caused surrenders in early WW2, when Germany invaded the Low Countries.
More options
Context Copy link