zeke5123
2yr ago
This is nonsense. During the Cold War, neither the US nor the USSR gave weapons in proxy wars that resulted in incursions into the other sides’s territory let alone amped up the exchange.
Mentioning Korea is besides the obvious point — Korea wasnt LA. Mentioning ballistics is also obviously beyond the point. They weren’t actively being used.
The Cold War did not have anything close to the current situation.
Finally the causal mechanism is clear — weapons are provided that help Ukraine make serious inroads into say Crimea and Russia uses tactical nukes. NATO responds and the world ends.
zeke5123
2yr ago
When actually challenged to explain how, say, conventional arms delivery meaningfully risk nuclear war despite an entire cold war to the contrary, that doesn't seem to be a particular close-held belief when put into context by even casual inquiry.
The Cold War isn’t even close to analogous. Now because of advanced weapons, the US can give Ukraine weapons that easily and frequently do hit Russia’s territory (including Moscow). That never happened during the Cold War as far as I know.
zeke5123
2yr ago
Isn’t this basically “Ukraine good, Russia bad.” No need to think through the details.
zeke5123
2yr ago
I just randomly read TK’s manifesto this week and I thought of the alienation of labor. They both struck a chord with me that they are obviously correct about a problem in a society.
I also think they are wrong about the solution. That is, they’ve done half the work.
zeke5123
2yr ago
Coase theorem suggests that provided property rights are clear and transaction costs low enough property will ultimately be put to its highest and best use notwithstanding the initial distribution.
Over hundred+ years, transaction costs are low enough. I think the US bears this out.
zeke5123
2yr ago
What issue is there to take with Jews being successful? Provided they weren’t stealing from people or doing something illicit it seems to me that anyone taking issue with Jews being successful is engaging in resentment.
zeke5123
2yr ago
My point is that being successful is not a bad thing and therefore it’s weird to imply there is some moral failing by Jews being successful and thereby causing resentment.
zeke5123
2yr ago
Are Jews overrepresented? Of course. Is that a problem? I don’t think so. Could that cause jealously? Naturally.
zeke5123
2yr ago
Nice snide little comment — especially since most HBDer would cite Igbo as being intelligent population that has black skin.
But I do think genes matter more than environment, at least in the modern setting. That doesn’t mean environment doesn’t matter. I’d probably put it 60-70 genes and the balance environment noting the two intersect (genes help build environment and environment reinforced the success of certain genes).
zeke5123
2yr ago
It’s funny. I’m not Jewish by Jewish standards (father was Jewish but not mother). I’m married to a Jew. My kids are Jewish. So presumably the antisemites view me as Jewish while the Jews do not!
zeke5123
2yr ago
I don’t believe anyone operates this way in real life.
We all use models that are GIGO if said model provides a slightly better view of the world and it is very costly to acquire a better model. It’s called a heuristic.
So yes, I’m going to mind my P&Qs more when I see generic male black youths walking in my direction compared to generic Asian girl youths.
If I am approving someone for say a loan, then I have harder data and therefore the cost to acquire a better model is rather limited.
zeke5123
2yr ago
Politicians “just asking” is never solely just putting reputational pressure.
zeke5123
2yr ago
Agreed. Laurie was by far the best part of the show. Some of the other cast members were decent. Hence the somewhat charming.
zeke5123
2yr ago
Which is the whole point behind SOLs. There is no way to mount a proper defense.
Of course, if I was a jury and the defendant merely stated “I was drugged” and there was zero corroborating evidence I don’t see how I could vote to convict.
Feminism has been very successful at changing people’s default assumption (ie if there is an allegation it is probably true).
zeke5123
2yr ago
House had two points:
-
House had an internal contradiction. He was very nihilistic yet believed heavily in doing whatever was possible to save his patient’s life.
-
House was very utilitarian. The kind of medicine he practiced was effectively take calculated risks. He didn’t get fired despite being an ass because he had more points in the hood column.
Mix that in with a somewhat charming cast and soap opera and you have somewhat interesting tv.
zeke5123
2yr ago
This comment just seems crazy to me. Here you have a government official pressuring a private company to censor someone and your response is “nationalize a platform.”
zeke5123
2yr ago
It seems terrible in that allegations are enough to demonetize someone who earns income from the internet meaning their ability to fully defend themselves (legally and in court of public opinion) is curtailed.
I hope Dame Caroline is accused of something, loses her income streams as a result, cannot defined herself, and goes to prison for something of which she is innocent.
Edit: I don’t know if Brand is innocent, guilty, or somewhere in between. I do know that what Dame is doing is wrong.
zeke5123
2yr ago
He also was listed as one of the top people wanted by the FBI until they quietly took it down. So going from most wanted to a barely misdemeanor smells fishy.
zeke5123
2yr ago
And that makes him, if the allegations are true, an adulterer. That’s an issue for his family. I don’t see the need to make this a national story.
zeke5123
2yr ago
Maybe you are right. Communist China sucks. But at the same time, I know the allure of wanting to ban disfavored speech is to turn everything I don’t like into commies. Don’t stare into the void.
zeke5123
2yr ago
I understand the position. My concern with the paradox of tolerance paradigm is that it is an easy cudgel to stifle dissidents.
zeke5123
2yr ago
I’m fine with libel laws and the incitement standards. They are robust narrowly defined set of rules (I would overturn NYT v Sullivan).
And yes, there is a problem that some people only like free speech when it’s their speech that is being censored. I am honestly okay with allowing progressives, commies, Nazis, or even the Amish to have free speech rights.
That’s a lot of words undermined by your first sentence. My whole point is “this war is categorically different from what happened in cold war proxy wars” and you confirmed in the first paragraph that I am correct.
You can’t say on one hand the Cold War established when nuclear weapons would be used and we haven’t reached that point while on the other hand acknowledge this situation never occurred during the Cold War.
Finally, my scenario hasn’t been falsified. My position is that if Russia was seriously threatened in Crimea or Moscow, Russia May use nukes which creates a spiral. Since the only way Ukraine could possibly threaten Russia this way is with our support, you just have your causal mechanism.
Finally, one need not find this example compelling to be worried about an existential threat. Let’s say there is a 5% chance. That is clearly a valid concern when giving weapons to Ukraine
More options
Context Copy link