t3tsubo
1yr ago
Huh. I didnt realize this exact idea was discussed before on themotte. Guess the idea is more common than I thought.
How hard would it be for a billionaire to take over a country like Haiti?
For those out of the loop, Haiti has slowly failed as a nation state and is currently controlled almost entirely by gangs: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/10/03/haiti-cholera-gang-violence-water/
As of today, Haiti still had no president (due to the last one being assassinated), no parliamentary quorum, and a dysfunctional high court due to a lack of judges. (https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/countries/haiti/)
From a "going down in history" view, you'd think quite a few of the ultra-wealthy would love the chance to become an actual dictator of an internationally recognized sovereign nation. You'd have the added benefit of being able to set your own laws, have a seat at exclusive international clubs (UN etc), and having other countries have to deal with you and your existing private businesses be protected by the right of sovereignty (assuming you relocate them to the country). I wonder what's stopping ultra-wealthy from doing this. Haiti's not even the only nation, there surely some in Africa as well that could be taken over if enough money was thrown at the problem. Mexico is basically a case study of how running such a country through money and force can even work.
Obviously there would be logistical problems with actually buying and transporting the weaponry and private mercenaries you'd have to hire to do this, but it seems like a solvable problem. From a PR perspective, you don't even need to be facetious about going in for the benefit of the native people. You could, in all seriousness, be going in to improve the lives of the Haitians who are currently dying due to their dysfunctional country.
t3tsubo
1yr ago
What is the response that the US government will have toward Russia if (when?) they deploy nuclear weapons in the Ukraine conflict?
What's the response other European countries, or NATO will have?
It seems more and more likely that Russia will be facing a choice between capitulation on Ukraine or further escalation, and I personally think its rather likely some kind of nuclear bomb will be detonated somewhere in the next year or two. Would the western response be different if it was the lowest form of escalation, i.e. a "demonstration explosion" over some unoccupied area of Ukraine? Is the response to get serious about forcing Ukraine to negotiate a peace, even if that means giving up territory?
I don't think reciprocal nuclear escalation is really on the table (nor would I want it to be), but what can the US/NATO do in that situation? Clearly there is a plan, I just wonder what it is, if it differs from what was "communicated to the highest levels of the Kremlin" by US, and what you all think it should be.
Personally, I wonder if in that situation, whether there really are any downside to escalating, not on the nuclear front, but on a "special forces boots in Russia decapitation strike" front. Or even a public, US government sanctioned/sponsored bounty on the heads of Putin et al.
obligatory substack article that first got me thinking about this: https://policytensor.substack.com/p/a-nuclear-zugzwang
t3tsubo
1yr ago
small nitpick - the 250k number you quote as being wrong is different from the source you linked. $250k in total spending over 4 years of undergrad seems reasonable if you account for rent and cost of living expenses in addition to tuition (although still a bit high). Your figure is just the total student debt at graduation, which is typically only for tuition. So its describing two different figures.
t3tsubo
1yr ago
Is it actually the case that competition trends towards the truth? That would be ideal, but why would you be sure that a more truthful report will be looked at more favorably by Putin? How would he distinguish a truthful from a rosy report other than the truthful reporter having an easier time adding details that a rosy reporter would have to make up? Maybe the sweet spot for competition is a rosy report that is (arbitrarily) 20% rosier than the actual truth, and Putin looks badly on reports less rosy or more rosy than that. Who knows?
Right, that kind of coup is what I was envisioning but it wouldnt have to be how its actually gone about. The incentives for being the actual ruler (dictator or "prime minister with rigged elections", are the same.
Yea international attention I supposed from CIA and other more secretive international agencies I could see being a major concern.
More options
Context Copy link