domain:gurwinder.substack.com
If he's willing to move to and live in a system, then he gets to use "us" and "our" statements. He's walking the walk, so he gets to talk the talk.
The erosion of shame as a social force is one of the biggest impacts of the Trump presidencies.
Shame comes with fiduciary responsibilities: it is the interest paid on a positive balance of social credit.
When the faction[1] stewarding the account runs out of social credit, or the social interest rate drops to 0 or (worse) goes negative, shame disappears. Wrong but aesthetically pleasing policies decrease this balance, like rioting, defending illegal migration, and hysteria over an uncommon cold- the trick is to limit your imposition of shame to the interest only so you don't run out of it. A virtuous people can do this, but being too focused on your social credit balance compromises you in other ways.
A minimum level of shame (and interest) is required to enforce message discipline. Once you stop having that, you stop being able to generate interest entirely, and the opportunity for rival investors appears to take over stewardship of the account- once the interest rate rises, they're locked in until they overspend or the bottom falls out of the social economy again.
This is now what has happened- the right overspent hard from 2016-2024, and now the left is hunting the right's institutions of social capital generation (academia, etc.)
they are storing it up to be brought down on their asses in much larger quantities later
I disagree. If the left/classical liberals can deliver on its promises- that fixing the abuses of right-wing/progressive privilege will make things better- then the left will start generating social capital [and thus shame] for itself and transition back into being right-wing. The 'first they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win' cycle typifies this- social credit holders always eventually go bankrupt, and this happens slowly, then suddenly.
Elon Musk's claim that empathy is the most dangerous force in society would be the peak example of this phenomenon.
Elon Musk is a liberal (definitionally, but not popularly, left-wing), so he doesn't believe the right should be allowed to accrue any social credit because when they do, the typical abuses happen. Left-wing thought has the opposite problem in that, when the economy switches from a positive-sum to a zero-sum mode, it failed to store up social credit and gives way to whoever the right-wing is at the time; this is why classical liberalism ultimately died in the '80s, and part of why it has returned now.
[1] Right-wing thought is defined by the desire to keep a balance higher than what market conditions otherwise dictate; or in other words, the dominant faction that's seeking to increase and wield a balance in this way is by definition right-wing. (This is currently Progressives- the people who call themselves left-wing- so it's very confusing.) This is also, by definition, why the left "always wins" (Progressives simply believe that calling themselves "the left" means they should always win, but winning ain't a left-wing idea and "correct" isn't a real political identity.)
I don't care about the ban, I'm just saying, I don't think that word means what you think it means.
granted political asylum in the US in 1987 after being tortured under the regime of the Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet
So he's probably a communist fleeing anti-communists backed by the US. Then let into the US. "This poor cobra is being oppressed by the mongoose. Quick, let him shelter in our home to keep him safe."
I thought the rules were communists don't count and should not be let in. Googling a bit, the specific immigration policies reference party membership. I suppose this guy was not a communist party member since that was illegal in Chile in 1987. Maybe he was technically eligible for entry only because he couldn't officially join a party matching his ideology. I'm getting more and more skeptical of political asylum. It seems to be misapplied.
To me this thread, from start to finish, is the Britta/Chang plot of the UN episode of Community. But I got here too late to break out my globe and red paint.
The erosion of shame as an asymmetric weapon is one of the biggest impacts of the Trump presidency; the right will no longer accept being shamed.
This is the problem though. Large parts of the right now won't accept being shamed full stop, by either side. They won't be shamed by the left. And they won't shame themselves. Trump has identified accepting shame of any kind as weakness; I suspect it would be soul death for him to think of himself as having done something wrong or acknowledge contrition. With the regulation that shame provides gone from both directions, nothing can stop awful things being happily written off as costs worth paying in the name of a bigger cause such as lowering immigration.
To my mind a wise right wing person would accept shame for something like this story, if true. They are then welcome to e.g. turn the tables and say it's the left who should be really ashamed for not taking immigration seriously in the first place. That'd be a stronger response, one that keeps shame in play, versus claiming oneself to have moved beyond shame altogether.
An opinion I've seen for years expressed in this image.
They really try to lay on the tears to get us to agree with their border policies. Like AOC's weeping photoshoot in front of that empty parking lot.
Civ 7 heavily cribbed off competitors like Humankind, and for all the wrong reasons.
The ability to change civs could have been so good. All they needed to do was to be sensible about it.
Start as Rome in the Classical era? Become some kind of post-Roman state in the medieval era, be it Byzantium, France, Germany, England or, if you want to stretch it further, the Ottomans.
Go English? Get the option to remain that way post Enlightenment, or perhaps fork off to America.
You could add more leeway, especially for dead-end states, but avoid absurdities like Caesar running China, or America being a thing in the fucking Stone Age.
The idea of their being an ebb-and-flow to progression, with setbacks at the end of each era, that works great in theory for preventing rampant snowballing, but the current execution is utter ass.
Sigh. I'll go back and look lovingly at my copy of Civ 4. Last entry I wholeheartedly enjoyed.
Putin is not putting forces anywhere near other borders. He’s not issuing threats to anyone else.
Please be serious. Where Putin puts his forces after taking out Ukraine is the concern.
You can argue that the Europeans should shoulder the bulk of their own defense, but you seem to be arguing they are paranoid. I would be concerned were I a Moldovan.
The winners of this are not the Western powers, but the weapons manufacturers who made bank off of that money.
Personally I think that's a win-win since we have lost some key industrial capacities for munitions productions. Those are good factory jobs.
And for all that, we managed to turn a six week war into a two year war that went the way it was always going to go, except with more deaths and more destruction, more ordinance buried under now useless farmland.
Two years, huh? At least get your defeatism timeline right please.
France does ok on agriculture despite having the Iron Harvest.
And as far as the West goes, tensions between the West and BRICS wouldn’t be high at all if we’d simply minded our own business.
Just like Putin minded his?
Anyone pretending "BRICS" is a useful label because it represents an actual coalition is just ignorant about geopolitics. For starters, China and India don't get along very well. Who gives a fuck about Brazil or or South Africa as major geopolitical players?
Ironically, there's a far stronger natural argument for defending Ukraine against Russia than there is for defending a rogue Chinese province from its sovereign government. Given that Trump won't even ban TikTok, how on earth would he commit to a serious loss of life and risk of WWIII to defend an island where we have no formal obligation?
Russians didn’t have a problem with us, China didn’t
After the Cold War, the US and Russia have been at loggerheads way before the Ukraine invasion on a host of geopolitical issues.
Same with China. Issues with North Korea and Taiwan didn't begin yesterday.
Iran only hated us over Israel and really not that much.
What universe do you live in? "Only"? "Really not that much"???????????????????
"Death to America" was just for show then? Shame about all the Americans they've killed over the years. I suppose Trump et al have nothing to worry about from those assassination plots.
So one thing I think is very common in modern western countries is something like the following:
- No administration may bind a future administration to a promise.
- An administration has a deep, deep desire to do something that they think will take more years than they will be in power.
- So what they do is let themselves be "negotiated" into a position where breaking the promise that they made, although possible, is extremely costly.
If voters want to express a sentiment against something a government has done, sometimes the more rational option is to bite the bullet and do the costlier option, even if it'd be "easier" to not do so. I think for a lot of voters, they've hit that point with immigration.
That sounds like a fair definition for 'escalating pace.'
Not sure what can be done for Ukrainian morale if their sole foray into Russian Territory is now completely reversed. With, allegedly, 70k casualties? the scale of this war still blows my mind sometimes.
And man, a lot of westerners who have staked so much of their personality on the belief that Ukraine can win this thing will presumably be inconsolable for a while if Ukraine throws in the towel with Russia making actual territory gains.
This is not an actual available option.
Why not?
If we have munitions capacity issues what better way to fix them.
Sure, if Ukraine/Europe can release funding to fund US munitions (which I do gather is happening, and that seems fine). But if the US has budget X and they can split it between the Pacific and Europe, or just spend it on the Pacific, the latter option is scarier for China.
What on earth does "bogged down" mean here? I'm not arguing we conduct military operations.
That ship has already sailed. The US has been conducting "non-kinetic" military operations in support of Ukraine's war effort for the duration of the war.
Civ 3 was peak except for the stupid global warming mechanics. 4 was really good, especially with the live map editor. 5 and onwards have been sore disappointments for me, and the more I look at 7, the harder I gag.
https://playclassic.games/games/turn-based-strategy-dos-games-online/play-sid-meiers-civilization-ii-online/play/
You can play 2 online, via this emulator I linked.
Meh. If someone's so thin-skinned that their response to "you don't know the context" is a passive aggressive "sorry to disturb you I'm leaving and never coming back" instead of lurking more and/or digging through to find context, or at bare minimum shrugging off the critique and ignoring it, then they're probably not a good fit anyway.
I don't think threats to leave, from new people, or old people, or in real life, should be met with begging "no please stay." That sets a bad precedent. As a matter of principle I think you call the bluff and either they stay or they leave and it's a win-win either way.
Taiwan is a naval battle first; I don't think we've been supplying much naval weaponry to Ukraine.
I agree with this on the whole, but we have given Ukraine a fair amount of Patriot missiles, which would be very helpful defending against Chinese ballistic/cruise missiles, particularly for point defense around airfields.
when we've been able to help hold back Russian forces for this long while barely even lifting a pinky.
Two trillion dollars, 20 percent of all existing Patriot systems, several dozen western and Warsaw Pact fighter aircraft, 700 Soviet pattern tanks donated by former Warsaw Pact NATO members, 250 NATO standard tanks donated by Western European NATO members, 100 modern MLRS systems, hundreds of tube artillery pieces, and 2000 light armored vehicles isn’t a Herculean effort, but it’s not “barely lifting a pinky” either.
The erosion of shame as a social force is one of the biggest impacts of the Trump presidencies.
The erosion of shame as an asymmetric weapon is one of the biggest impacts of the Trump presidency; the right will no longer accept being shamed. Its use for anything but had long since died. McCarthy could be brought down with "have you no sense of decency, sir?"; while McCarthy himself probably didn't, others on his side did. The woke could not be shamed; when they brought down Nobel Laureate Tim Hunt based on a lie, or Hawaiian Shirt Scientist for no good reason at all, it was to thunderous applause.
Elon Musk's claim that empathy is the most dangerous force in society would be the peak example of this phenomenon.
Finding empathy to be dangerous has little to do with shame; Musk was talking about a phenomenon similar to what rationalists call "utility monsters".
As for Leon, I suspect the truth lies between "The story is completely fabricated and no such 82-year-old Allentown grandfather named Luis Leon even exists" and "82-year-old Allentown grandfather Luis Leon got his green card replaced because he needed it to take a trip to Guatemala, which he then did". Making up stories to shame people is certainly one way to immunize them against shame, and there's been a LOT of stories.
To be the devil's advocate here, that's not true in practice. Drunk driving without killing someone is punished because it could have lead to someone dying as a consequence, or at least severely increased the risk of an adverse outcome.
The US ditching Ukraine to prioritize Taiwan I think would actually spook China.
This is not an actual available option. Please try again. Trump won't even ban TikTok ffs.
The US doubling down on its commitments to Ukraine means fewer weapons in the Pacific
Prime the Pump. If we have munitions capacity issues what better way to fix them.
China would prefer the US bogged down in Ukraine
What on earth does "bogged down" mean here? I'm not arguing we conduct military operations.
Mr. Lee held the popular idea that language was a zero-sum game? No, Mr. Lee understood the commonsensical idea that your brain has limited storage capacity. Like anything else. Your brain is made of atoms. It is not made of magic. It is not made of godly dust. It is a material thing. It is, in a sense, a container of information, and information takes space. It obviously does in computers; pray tell, NYT, why the brain should have infinite capacity? It doesn't make sense.
The human brain is obviously finite, and doesn't have infinite capacity. Yet, I find the idea that merely learning additional languages has any risk of exhausting its stores to be highly unlikely.
The plausible range is vast, ranging from a mere 10 terabytes to tens of petabytes. Whatever the figure in question, languages definitely do not take up a significant fraction. Even tiny ass LLMs, with only a few billion parameters, are fluent in multiple languages. They are a tiny fraction of the complexity of the brain at best.
Further, the claims that learning new languages hampers fluency in the mother tongue is quite controversial. Not using a language for the majority of speech will obviously have deleterious effects, but language acquisition has steeply diminishing returns. Speaking English for 40 years will not make you twice as fluent as when you were 20.
I also find the claims about Singaporean English... questionable at best. There are all kinds of English derivatives and dialects, and it's no surprise that the locals learn those instead of standard English. That's what they're growing up hearing or speaking! Being fluent in Singlish is just as valid as being fluent in Anglosphere English.
To further hammer the point home, IQ doesn't seem to be that big of a factor. Africans tend to me trilingual or better, often speaking a mother tongue, another local language, and then a trade dialect such as English/French/Arabic or Swahili. They find that entirely normal and not a big deal.
Most people who suffer from additional language acquisition grew up in a linguistically impoverished context, just speaking to immigrant parents provides a much poorer experience than growing up in a country where most people speak the language. There's also the issue of the motivation to learn, which is often lacking. If you're thrown into a brand new country and have no choice but to start learning the language to survive, then you're going to be much better and faster than someone whiling away time on Duolingo.
The US/West failing to sufficiently back Ukraine emboldens China and other would-be aggressors when they do their risk calculations.
The US ditching Ukraine to prioritize Taiwan I think would actually spook China. The US doubling down on its commitments to Ukraine means fewer weapons in the Pacific, unless the US also slashes its social services or something else to double down on walking and chewing gum. China would prefer the US bogged down in Ukraine, and the US openly abandoning them to their fate to focus on the Pacific would demonstrate that the US "ambiguous" policy towards Taiwan is actually one of total strategic commitment to Chinese containment.
It's not an infrequent observation that nearly any diet is better than no diet just because you have to start paying attention.
HFCS is IIRC pretty darn similar to honey in terms of sugar composition. And if you think fructose is the enemy specifically, there are "healthy, natural" options advertised with higher fructose content.
I ran into this a couple years back reading up on DIY endurance nutrition: the quick, cheap recommendation is usually a mix of maltodextrin (long-chain glucose polymers, used in home brewing fairly often) and something high in fructose (typically agave nectar) because the two metabolic pathways are largely orthogonal. That said, those results are largely applicable to specific circumstances resembling "how many calories can I usefully consume while running in warm weather", not general nutrition advice.
ISW is considered mostly a joke by people who aren't pro-Ukrainian. Nakedly partisan, not that smart. E.g. they said this about the failed Ukrainian summer offensive.
More options
Context Copy link