The shrouded sinister history of the bulldozer(noemamag.com)
noemamag.com
The shrouded sinister history of the bulldozer
https://www.noemamag.com/the-shrouded-sinister-history-of-the-bulldozer/
73 comments
The P-80 might not have seen any action but the Gloster Meteor was introduced into service in July 1944 and saw a fair bit of combat through to the end of the war in Europe. Not a massive impact and wasn't really that important in the grand scheme of things, but it's still an allied jet powered plane that made some contribution to the war effort.
It says "aircraft engine" for me
You're both right, it says aircraft engine in the article body but jet engine in the pull quote. They caught the error but forgot to update the latter.
[deleted]
great catch - deff seems inaccurate of a statement (more like lack of jet engine used against)
tangentially, had to dig up https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37945006 as it triggered the ol brain
tangentially, had to dig up https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37945006 as it triggered the ol brain
They had an impact, just in the wrong way.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Me_262
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Me_262
Bulldozers can be used to grade surfaces prior to buildings being constructed... Buildings in which crimes are committed, from financial fraud to outright murder.
Something interesting I read about building a foundation for a structure is that the soil below the foundation should be undisturbed. So can't grade below the surface for the future foundation.
A church which owns land, much land. Land on which houses have been built. Houses in which it is statistically probable that private acts of lesboid love have been committed![0]
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVRODdXVI3Q content warning: extensive presentation of lesbianism as some sort of crime. I do believe the sketch is however poking fun at people who do seem to think that way and not promoting it as a valid viewpoint itself.
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVRODdXVI3Q content warning: extensive presentation of lesbianism as some sort of crime. I do believe the sketch is however poking fun at people who do seem to think that way and not promoting it as a valid viewpoint itself.
Stephen Fry has been out as a gay man for a very long time. It's very hard to believe he could be promoting homophobia.
If you think this skit is promoting homophobia you need to work on your media literacy. If anything it's lampooning homophobia. The entire situation is portrayed as being absurdly focused on the witness' (alleged) sexual orientation.
Just because you portray something doesn't mean you endorse it. Alan Howard portrays the ring in the Lord of the Rings, That does not make him (or the movie) evil incarnate. Similarly Stephen Fry portrays a barrister with a weird obsession with lesbianism, that does not make him (or the skit) homophobic.
Just because you portray something doesn't mean you endorse it. Alan Howard portrays the ring in the Lord of the Rings, That does not make him (or the movie) evil incarnate. Similarly Stephen Fry portrays a barrister with a weird obsession with lesbianism, that does not make him (or the skit) homophobic.
Bulldozers themselves have been used to murder. There were examples given in the article? Not sure the point of this comment?
> Bulldozers themselves have been used to murder. There were examples given in the article?
https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/latest-news/israelpa...
https://www.business-humanrights.org/en/latest-news/israelpa...
killdozer? although "No one else was injured or killed,[1] in part due to timely evacuation orders"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvin_Heemeyer
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvin_Heemeyer
Here, I got another: https://archive.seattletimes.com/archive/19910912/1305069/ir...
[deleted]
I believe the comment's point is sarcasm
I believe it was what we call a joke.
Relevant to the part about the brown tree snake on Guam, the inspectors for Hawai’i just had their building lease canceled by GSA/DOGE and barely kept their jobs:
https://www.hawaiipublicradio.org/local-news/2025-03-10/brow...
I was stationed on Guam for a bit, on the aviation side. We had to do quite a few inspections for those snakes, and worked with the people in the article I linked. In three years we found 7 on birds I inspected (a few hundred I imagine), all just before deployment overseas. Those snakes got into the oddest places.
https://www.hawaiipublicradio.org/local-news/2025-03-10/brow...
I was stationed on Guam for a bit, on the aviation side. We had to do quite a few inspections for those snakes, and worked with the people in the article I linked. In three years we found 7 on birds I inspected (a few hundred I imagine), all just before deployment overseas. Those snakes got into the oddest places.
What kind of safeguards are we imagining the bulldozer should have? Should we attach an AI camera to the engine to prevent bulldozing the wrong things?
It sounds like the article is advocating something more along the lines of, buy a copy of a newspaper and if the front page has a picture of your customer committing war crimes with your product maybe ask them about it.
thorncorona(1)
We have to keep bulldozers out of the hands of criminals. Honestly, the only protection against a bad guy with a bulldozer is a good guy with a bulldozer.
The author pointed out that commercial machinery can be fitted with a kill-switch, which would have been easy to activate had Caterpillar decided that genocide was against company values.
> What enabled this remote disabling was a practice known as “VIN-locking,” which manufacturers use to prevent unauthorized repairs to their products ... When it suits their purposes, then, the technology exists for heavy machinery companies to monitor, control and even disable products. Human rights abuses against Palestinians and Indians apparently don’t rise to the level of violating company values, let alone cause enough concern for the company to brick their machines
You can imagine more complicated safeguards if you like, but there's a simple solution sitting and waiting right there. All that's requires is for Caterpillar to decide they have any principles other than money...
> In 2017, an investigation by The Guardian and The Bureau of Investigative Journalism revealed that after the conclusion of the Corrie case, Caterpillar hired the corporate espionage company C2i* to spy on the family and report back on any subsequent actions they might be planning.
... Not fucking likely though.
* Think this was actually the Increment Group, Intelligence Company. C2i were in the same investigation for spying on environmental 'activists'.
> What enabled this remote disabling was a practice known as “VIN-locking,” which manufacturers use to prevent unauthorized repairs to their products ... When it suits their purposes, then, the technology exists for heavy machinery companies to monitor, control and even disable products. Human rights abuses against Palestinians and Indians apparently don’t rise to the level of violating company values, let alone cause enough concern for the company to brick their machines
You can imagine more complicated safeguards if you like, but there's a simple solution sitting and waiting right there. All that's requires is for Caterpillar to decide they have any principles other than money...
> In 2017, an investigation by The Guardian and The Bureau of Investigative Journalism revealed that after the conclusion of the Corrie case, Caterpillar hired the corporate espionage company C2i* to spy on the family and report back on any subsequent actions they might be planning.
... Not fucking likely though.
* Think this was actually the Increment Group, Intelligence Company. C2i were in the same investigation for spying on environmental 'activists'.
It's surprising to me that the conclusion reached here is "they should use the kill switch more" instead of a horrified "kill switches and remote monitoring in purchased products shouldn't be a legal practice".
That was not the conclusion, in either the article or my comment.
Hypothetically - if you learned that your product was being used to run over people "dead and alive, in the hundreds", so that "everything squirts out", would you shrug and fob off responsibility? Even when you already had the technology to shut down those machines installed, and major human rights orgs are warning of genocide?
... Or would you just argue that your machines shouldn't have had that capability in the first place? ... Do you see how far that's missing the point?
Tbh even that would be better than Caterpillar's likely response, which was probably to try and book even more sales based on the 'success' of their machinery and the pending reconstruction.
Hypothetically - if you learned that your product was being used to run over people "dead and alive, in the hundreds", so that "everything squirts out", would you shrug and fob off responsibility? Even when you already had the technology to shut down those machines installed, and major human rights orgs are warning of genocide?
... Or would you just argue that your machines shouldn't have had that capability in the first place? ... Do you see how far that's missing the point?
Tbh even that would be better than Caterpillar's likely response, which was probably to try and book even more sales based on the 'success' of their machinery and the pending reconstruction.
More regulation, of course. It's worked so well for guns, after all. Because making more laws prevents people who disregard laws from breaking other laws.
Really, we should just cut to the chase and outlaw murder.
Really, we should just cut to the chase and outlaw murder.
It has worked for guns - the countries where guns are a problem either have very lax regulation, or very lax enforcement (because of a breakdown of government)
Well, there are also countries like Switzerland where there is a substantially higher amount of gun ownership compared to that of the rest of Europe but very few of the same issues of other countries with similar ownership per capita. Though, that’s probably due to the required service training and the screenings that come along with it. And it being a relatively small country.
There are areas of similarly low crime in the US, depending on how you go about drawing lines on your map. Probably it is a mistake to treat any country as a single unit in such an analysis.
Fair
[deleted]
I think there are several serious issues with such a claim. However I'll limit myself to pointing out that at absolute minimum you'd need to define "problem" and "working".
For example, I'd observe that organized crime pretty much everywhere in the world possesses weapons. The extent to which they resort to them varies of course, but it seems unreasonable to blindly dismiss that as being due entirely to regulation.
For example, I'd observe that organized crime pretty much everywhere in the world possesses weapons. The extent to which they resort to them varies of course, but it seems unreasonable to blindly dismiss that as being due entirely to regulation.
You're right defining problem and working is tricky
Here is a very coarse overview of what I would term "problem". It's the list of countries by firearm related homicide rates https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-r...
Sorting the second table (Homicide rates by firearm per 100,000 inhabitants. Latest available year.) by rate is rather eye-opening.
The USA is four times as high as Canada - and almost forty times as high as Australia
Jamaica * 44.706 2022
Saint Lucia * 30.580 2022
Honduras * 28.721 2021
Bahamas 28.538 2022
Saint Kitts and Nevis * 25.207 2021
Ecuador * 22.565 2022
Belize * 22.454 2022
Trinidad and Tobago * 20.551 2020
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 20.128 2021
Puerto Rico * 18.382 2016
Colombia * 18.127 2022
Mexico * 17.497 2022
Brazil * 15.945 2020
Barbados 11.717 2022
Panama * 10.227 2021
Antigua and Barbuda * 8.532 2022
Costa Rica * 8.304 2021
Uruguay 6.807 2022
Dominican Republic * 6.724 2022
Paraguay * 4.803 2021
El Salvador * 4.782 2022
Bermuda 4.674 2021
United States * 4.054 2020
Chile * 3.637 2022
Guatemala * 3.436 2021
Suriname * 3.398 2022
Guyana * 2.983 2021
Peru * 2.937 2020
Argentina * 2.305 2022
Egypt * 2.062 2011
Nicaragua 2.000 2021
Here is a very coarse overview of what I would term "problem". It's the list of countries by firearm related homicide rates https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-r...
Sorting the second table (Homicide rates by firearm per 100,000 inhabitants. Latest available year.) by rate is rather eye-opening.
The USA is four times as high as Canada - and almost forty times as high as Australia
Jamaica * 44.706 2022
Saint Lucia * 30.580 2022
Honduras * 28.721 2021
Bahamas 28.538 2022
Saint Kitts and Nevis * 25.207 2021
Ecuador * 22.565 2022
Belize * 22.454 2022
Trinidad and Tobago * 20.551 2020
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 20.128 2021
Puerto Rico * 18.382 2016
Colombia * 18.127 2022
Mexico * 17.497 2022
Brazil * 15.945 2020
Barbados 11.717 2022
Panama * 10.227 2021
Antigua and Barbuda * 8.532 2022
Costa Rica * 8.304 2021
Uruguay 6.807 2022
Dominican Republic * 6.724 2022
Paraguay * 4.803 2021
El Salvador * 4.782 2022
Bermuda 4.674 2021
United States * 4.054 2020
Chile * 3.637 2022
Guatemala * 3.436 2021
Suriname * 3.398 2022
Guyana * 2.983 2021
Peru * 2.937 2020
Argentina * 2.305 2022
Egypt * 2.062 2011
Nicaragua 2.000 2021
I have mixed feelings about outlawing concealed bulldozers.
[deleted]
Protesting Israel and getting murdered at the protest is one of those "sticking your hand into a lawnmower" situations. Do not anthropomorphize lawnmowers, Larry Ellision, or the state of Israel.
Lawnmowers don't throw parties to celebrate the hands they shredded: https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/israeli-so...
As someone who lives now in Louisiana and with someone born here, we did not know that the term was used to describe mostly white Democrats attacking black Republican male voters.
I wonder if there's any historical markers to that effect.
Also interesting is that "bullpup" to describe a type of firearm comes from this usage of bulldozer.
I wonder if there's any historical markers to that effect.
Also interesting is that "bullpup" to describe a type of firearm comes from this usage of bulldozer.
> Also interesting is that "bullpup" to describe a type of firearm comes from this usage of bulldozer.
It does? Can you point me to more information on this topic? I thought the etymology of "bullpup" was far from settled.
It does? Can you point me to more information on this topic? I thought the etymology of "bullpup" was far from settled.
it's in TFA - "bulldog pistols" and "bulldozer" rifles or whatever. bulldog -> smaller -> bullpup.
if there's some other etymology i'd be curious how convoluted it is, since this makes practical sense. Sorry i have no more information than that.
if there's some other etymology i'd be curious how convoluted it is, since this makes practical sense. Sorry i have no more information than that.
Bulldogs: dogs with short snouts?
Bulls: temperamental male herbivores?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Bull_Dog_revolver
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bullpup
"Etymology
From bull + pup. The firearms sense originated from firearm designers in the United States during the 1930s. The unconventional configuration of bullpup rifles was compared by analogy to bulldog puppies, which were considered "squat, ugly, but still aggressive and powerful"."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Bull_Dog_revolver
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bullpup
"Etymology
From bull + pup. The firearms sense originated from firearm designers in the United States during the 1930s. The unconventional configuration of bullpup rifles was compared by analogy to bulldog puppies, which were considered "squat, ugly, but still aggressive and powerful"."
The article says Bulldozer was a gun, then bulldog was a pistol. bullpup is the obvious evolution for a smaller rifle.
but since we want to argue etymology with genewitch:
https://www.archivingindustry.com/Gunsandgunmakers/directory...
> Bulldog, also known as ‘Bulldozer’. An angular cartridge derringer patented by Henry Hammond in 1866 and made by the Connecticut Arms Co. until 1868 in chamberings ranging from .22 Short rimfire to .50. The barrel was released by a catch on the breech top and pivoted to the left to expose the chamber.
> Bulldog A five-shot double-action swing-cylinder revolver designed by Douglas McClenahan, and made in the U.S.A. by the Charter Arms Corporation in .357 Magnum or .44 Special. Barrels may be 2.5 or 3 inches long, the latter being discontinued in 1988. Finish may be blue or stainless steel, and some guns (usually with ‘P’ suffix catalogue numbers) may be obtained with the snubbed ‘Pocket Hammer’. They also have wraparound neoprene grips instead of wood. See also ‘Police Bulldog’, ‘Target Bulldog’. Bulldog Pug Introduced by Charter Arms in 1986, this is a variant of the Bulldog with a 2.5in barrel, fixed sights, a shrouded ejector and a broad hammer spur.
>Bulldog Tracker Another variant of the Charter Arms Bulldog, dating from c. 1982–6 and 1989 to date, this .357 Magnum revolver has adjustable sights, hand-filling wooden grips and barrels of 2.5–6 inches.
> Bulldozer A cartridge derringer patented in the U.S.A. by Henry Hammond, better known as the ‘Bulldog’ (q.v.)
but since we want to argue etymology with genewitch:
https://www.archivingindustry.com/Gunsandgunmakers/directory...
> Bulldog, also known as ‘Bulldozer’. An angular cartridge derringer patented by Henry Hammond in 1866 and made by the Connecticut Arms Co. until 1868 in chamberings ranging from .22 Short rimfire to .50. The barrel was released by a catch on the breech top and pivoted to the left to expose the chamber.
> Bulldog A five-shot double-action swing-cylinder revolver designed by Douglas McClenahan, and made in the U.S.A. by the Charter Arms Corporation in .357 Magnum or .44 Special. Barrels may be 2.5 or 3 inches long, the latter being discontinued in 1988. Finish may be blue or stainless steel, and some guns (usually with ‘P’ suffix catalogue numbers) may be obtained with the snubbed ‘Pocket Hammer’. They also have wraparound neoprene grips instead of wood. See also ‘Police Bulldog’, ‘Target Bulldog’. Bulldog Pug Introduced by Charter Arms in 1986, this is a variant of the Bulldog with a 2.5in barrel, fixed sights, a shrouded ejector and a broad hammer spur.
>Bulldog Tracker Another variant of the Charter Arms Bulldog, dating from c. 1982–6 and 1989 to date, this .357 Magnum revolver has adjustable sights, hand-filling wooden grips and barrels of 2.5–6 inches.
> Bulldozer A cartridge derringer patented in the U.S.A. by Henry Hammond, better known as the ‘Bulldog’ (q.v.)
It usually really bothers me (not joking) when people use “sinister” when they actually mean “nefarious” or “odious” or whatever, because it perpetuates old superstition about left-handed people being evil even if does so unknowingly.
> “bulldozer” […] popped up in […] an Illinois court case to describe a manufacturing machine that had ripped off a worker’s left arm.
…but this time I guess I have to give it a pass :) Hug a lefty today!
> “bulldozer” […] popped up in […] an Illinois court case to describe a manufacturing machine that had ripped off a worker’s left arm.
…but this time I guess I have to give it a pass :) Hug a lefty today!
That's hysterical! (geddit?)
But more seriously, there's a number of words like that, IIUC. E.g. cretin, barbarian, slave, hysterical, lesbian. Probably other terms as well, I'm guessing.
I'm not sure it's worth getting too worked up about the original usages of those terms, if most people using them aren't making the connection.
But more seriously, there's a number of words like that, IIUC. E.g. cretin, barbarian, slave, hysterical, lesbian. Probably other terms as well, I'm guessing.
I'm not sure it's worth getting too worked up about the original usages of those terms, if most people using them aren't making the connection.
Too many words have gauche secondary meanings: we can't sidestep every nuance or there'd be no words left. I love me some wry leftfield connotations. Although I think maladroit and dextrous can rightly be left out.
I've never heard this, and I doubt many others have. Feels like this level of word policing is digging up long forgotten previous uses which don't have any relevance today.
Eh. This all seems very backwards to me.
It seems to be a human tendency to want to oversimplify problems. It seems very wrong-headed to me to concentrate on one particular machine than for instance on that one influential guy had no appreciation for the jungle, plus whatever politics surrounded that, plus the desires/needs/etc of the surrounding communities, investors, etc.
Because yeah, the right machine sure helps get wrong things done faster, but it's not like we've ever lacked means to be inventive when we really want to, or just sheer pigheadedness to do it even if it was hard. If it's not a bulldozer it might be flamethrowers, defoliants, repurposed tanks, chainsaws, etc.
If enough people (or a few rich enough people) want a jungle gone, then they'll probably get that done sooner or later with whatever means they can. It's this bigger and more complex issue we should be looking into solving.
It seems to be a human tendency to want to oversimplify problems. It seems very wrong-headed to me to concentrate on one particular machine than for instance on that one influential guy had no appreciation for the jungle, plus whatever politics surrounded that, plus the desires/needs/etc of the surrounding communities, investors, etc.
Because yeah, the right machine sure helps get wrong things done faster, but it's not like we've ever lacked means to be inventive when we really want to, or just sheer pigheadedness to do it even if it was hard. If it's not a bulldozer it might be flamethrowers, defoliants, repurposed tanks, chainsaws, etc.
If enough people (or a few rich enough people) want a jungle gone, then they'll probably get that done sooner or later with whatever means they can. It's this bigger and more complex issue we should be looking into solving.
I just took it as poetic, not that bulldozers are actually a problem. Innocent-looking machine can be used for grotesque things, which is creepier in a way than regular weapons. That's about it. Idk if that's what the author intended.
ISIS also used bulldozers, notably to destroy ancient cities like Nimrud.
> The bulldozer we know today took shape in the first quarter of the 20th century. In 1917, the Russell Grader Manufacturing Company advertised a bulldozer in their catalog: a huge metal blade pulled by mules that could cut into the earth and flatten the land.
Isn't that just a "plow"?
We had horse-drawn plows well before the 20th century.
Isn't that just a "plow"?
We had horse-drawn plows well before the 20th century.
I thought plows were more about tilling than flattening, but I'm no expert.
A plow cuts furrows into the soil; a bulldozer just flattens it.
It's kind of like a sideways plow
Every time the Machines Become Self-Aware and Murderous a dozer is going to show up eventually.
It just takes a while since they top out around 8 mph.
Case in point: Shake Hands with Danger
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v26fTGBEi9E
It just takes a while since they top out around 8 mph.
Case in point: Shake Hands with Danger
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v26fTGBEi9E
Nice!
Obligatory RiffTrax version: https://youtube.com/watch?v=_nqa6e6WV2o&si=d9eX8-vrPEZmd2de
Obligatory RiffTrax version: https://youtube.com/watch?v=_nqa6e6WV2o&si=d9eX8-vrPEZmd2de
Marvin Heemyer may be relevant in some way to readers as well:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvin_Heemeyer
The documentary “Tread” is something I recommend if available.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvin_Heemeyer
The documentary “Tread” is something I recommend if available.
This means I have to start calling my lucky bulldozer charm, something else, oh well, it's not like it didn't cause befudlement and awkward moments, I missed the sinister bulldozer thing somehow.
New Journalism and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.
Nothing good happens in the path of a bulldozer. The operation of this machine extracts a heavy toll from the soul of the operator.
The Scoops Are On Their Way!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ehI9Fvbz7Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ehI9Fvbz7Y
Technically it was a modified garbage truck but they were sort of used like people bulldozers. https://scifi.fandom.com/wiki/Scoops
[deleted]
[deleted]
That's a strange statement since the jet engine had approximately zero impact on the Allied victory; the P-80 Shooting Star was produced too late to be useful.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_jet_aircraft_of_World_...