"Escapist" might be a good name for the emerging nihilist-libertarian ideology behind Bitcoin.
Escapists aren't Republicans or Democrats. They don't have any strong opinions on whether the bus should turn right or left. They would just like it to stop so they can get off...
> The whole point of fact checking is that the fact check / rebuttal is put side by side or preceding the original claim
And of course, the original source's surrebuttal to the rebuttal is put side by side with that. Truth is so strong, it can let error have the last word...
Oh wait, that's not how it works at all. In fact I've hardly ever seen this "side-by-side" thing. Usually what I see is the original source paraphrased, then reduced to its most mockable possible strawman. Could you provide some examples of what you see as fact-checking done right?
> I would consider that progress in China
I would consider it progress in America. It would certainly be progress on Twitter. (I recall one tweet saying "So Twitter has gone from a sewer, to a sewer with unexplained disappearances.")
Abstractly, this is a good thought. It would probably gain some nuance, however, by watching an hour or so of WSHH, 30 Sec Fights, even the First 48 or Bait Car:
These are basically the types of people who are involved with America's criminal-justice system. There are certainly a few hard-working Mendocino pot farmers whose luck ran out, but the exception is not the rule.
Albs or no albs, there may well be a way to turn these people into good traditional Catholics. I actually believe there is. But it's definitely not consistent with our modern vision of civil liberties.
Our society has made a lot of efforts to help them let their inner human goodness shine forth spontaneously, perhaps more in the Quaker style than the Catholic. It doesn't strike me that these efforts have been terribly successful. Yes, an American prison is barbarous and dehumanizing -- but it's far from the only barbarous and dehumanizing aspect of America.
Yes, perhaps the reason rape seems so much more common is that people in the 1940s didn't understand what rape is.
I want to order a time machine and send you back to have a conversation with your great-grandparents, for whom you seem to have so little respect.
Sure, the "list" isn't real. People wouldn't have been passing it around in the '70s if it hadn't reflected the actual experience of living in the '40s, which many, many people at that time remembered well.
A time machine is not actually available. Your great-grandparents are probably dead. But you can still go read a bunch of books from the amazing, wonderful, astoundingly different, and yes -- not at all perfect -- world that they lived in. Chronological chauvinism is not a healthy emotion.
Can you think for yourself without authorities, man? I know it's hard.
This passage from the Economist article I think nicely, and unintentionally, demonstrates the level of insanity here:
The result was that some 20,000 convicts who otherwise would have been sent to prison remained free. The state incarceration rate reverted to 1990s levels without an attending rise. Indeed, studies found no effect on violent crime and a small effect on property crime. (Each year of prison not served due to California's reform was estimated to cause an additional 1.2 auto thefts.) However, the social cost of a stolen Corolla is not clearly greater than the cost to taxpayers of a year of prison time.
So, 20,000 innocent people per year have their cars stolen. But no biggie! Without plutonium, how would we have electricity? If someone steals 1.2 cars per year, why lock him up? It's not worth the cost of a "Corolla."
The result is the insane predatory atmosphere of a normal American (for me, SF) street, in which anyone with any sense is on yellow alert all the time except behind locked doors. As for my children, I'm resigned to being a helicopter parent until they're old enough to... defend themselves, I guess? Should probably start with those karate lessons now.
Meanwhile, in Japan, which has zero tolerance for crime, you can send your five-year-old around the corner to buy milk. Have you ever lived in a crime-free society? Even visited? Try it sometime -- the feeling is downright amazing. You really don't know what you're missing.
That wasn't an appeal to authority, just an appeal to reason.
You'll have to forgive me if I prefer to trust Dr. Pryor and common sense over the Brookings Institution's "studies and accidental experiments."
If people were fruit flies and it was possible to actually conduct controlled experiments in "social science," I'd be happy to take their results seriously. Or more to the point, if controlled experiments were possible, no one would take uncontrolled experiments seriously (not to mention studies by the Brookings Institution, with its very large axe to grind -- see the Moskos commentaries on Brookings research linked above).
But the definition of science isn't "the best we can do." When actual science isn't physically practical, "the best we can do" is not science but pseudoscience. Fortunately, there are other ways to use our brains.
Well, it's beyond dispute that prison populations nationwide quadrupled -- that's the whole point of "mass incarceration."
I don't know of any attempts to model how many crimes these inmates would commit if on the street.
Perhaps they're all choirboys, and the real crisis would be a communion epidemic. You're just walking down the street and this 6-5 jacked dude with prison pecs be like "BODY OF CHRIST, BLOOD OF CHRIST!" as he's jamming a huge ass wafer into your face... social science certainly can't refute this hypothesis...
Society's tolerance for crime is bizarrely irrational. There will be about 800 murders in Chicago this year -- yawn.
Now imagine if 800 Chicagoans were killed by radiation leaks from a nuclear plant. "Well, you can't have electricity without plutonium. Do you want to turn everyone's lights off?" Or if 800 African-Americans were lynched Emmett Till style by KKK thugs. "Regrettable, but what are you going to do? And don't white people have legitimate complaints?"
Even murder rates can be fudged -- turn the homicide into a "death investigation":
Another point to keep in mind when you see these too-good-to-be-true stories is that criminal subcultures are actually quite conservative. When laws and policies change, it takes time for people to collectively figure out what they can get away with. This makes crime rates a lagging indicator -- we're still experiencing the positive effects of the crime crackdown of the '90s, not just in incarceration rates but in cultural behavior.
The mid-'60s were another period when social scientists realized that punishment was a medieval anachronism. It took 10-20 years to see the full effects of these policies, and another 10 for the political backlash to get started. It seems like we're due for another round of this pendulum.
I think you're making the very common mistake of thinking about transmitted traditions phenotypically, rather than genetically/cladistically. This methodology leads you to wander around comparing birds to bats.
The question that enables rigorous analysis is always: "where did these ideas come from?" Some people invent ideas on their own, but that's so rare it's lost in the noise.
It's very, very unlikely that your hypothetical observer looked at the world and concluded independently that all members of the species Homo sapiens have equal potential.
First, this person would have to be thinking independently, which is very rare. Second, there is no empirical evidence for this proposition -- or at least, none has ever been brought to my attention. (Fortunately, equality of potential is by no means the only reason to believe in equality of opportunity.)
If I observe that someone is a Catholic, which is more likely: that he learned his Catholicism from another Catholic? Or that he independently derived the Trinity from empirical evidence?
Your hypothetical observer may have derived his or her opinions about school choice and local government from personal observation. More likely, they came from Rush Limbaugh. Their opinions on human biology are straight-up American humanism, ie, leftism. (With nontrivial historical links to Christianity, but that's a separate conversation.) So... a wolf-dog.
Because the goal (or rather the means) of terrorists is to scare people. And it's much scarier to imagine your plane being blown up in the air.
Reason has nothing to do with it. The number of deaths due to car accidents, even falling down the stairs, is much greater. The main impact of terrorism is the irrational fear, not the rational risk aversion. But it's much easier to stamp out terrorism by force, hard as that may be, than to convert human beings into rational animals.
The goal of terrorists is to achieve power through violence. The gold standard would be the PLO, now the PA. The ANC also did extremely well with this strategy.
There are two effective ways to combat terrorism. One is to surrender to the terrorists. Neither the PLO, nor the ANC, nor the IRA, is setting off any bombs these days. Works great especially if surrounded by a cloud of euphemisms.
The other is to treat the terrorism as an isolated incident and counterattack on the political front. Consider the response to Timothy McVeigh or especially Dylann Roof -- textbook. Great stuff, America still knows how to do it.
If terrorism is committed in the name of the Confederate flag, ban the Confederate flag and crack down on white nationalists everywhere. Even the peaceful ones. Especially the peaceful ones. No one ever said that the best way to defeat racist terrorism is to satisfy the legitimate grievances of moderate racists. But if the USG adopted this strategy, the GOP would probably grow a "militant wing" in well under a decade...
Love to hear any book recommendations on the Algerian wars, especially older books in English, not by Alistair Horne, and not taking the standard Western "missionary position." Really like Wolves in the City by Paul Henissart, about the OAS episode...
Leftists won the last three big wars, so even most of today's "conservatives" are more than a little hybridized. You won't find any independent clade of wolves who bark for their own separate wolf reasons. Barking is a marker of dogness, egalitarianism is a marker of leftness.
Depends on whether you're willing to call a wolf-dog a wolf.
East Coast coyotes are apparently full of dog DNA, as well as wolf DNA. So maybe they bark, or even howl a bit. But I maintain that barking remains a dog thing.
"Jugurtha" is a pretty easy tipoff. Not that Americans would learn who Jugurtha was in school, except maybe grad school, but a few of us still read books...
A: "My neighbor's wolf barks all the time. Drives me crazy."
B: "That might lead you to suspect that your neighbor's 'wolf' is actually a wolf-dog. Or maybe just a husky? You should get out more, meet some actual wolves..."
Wut? searches mental database for any trace of right-wing egalitarians... You must be thinking of... Nietzsche? Definitely not Nietzsche. Maistre? Mmm... no. Can't be Maistre. Bonald? Filmer? Okay, you win, I give up.
In case you're wondering how this plays out in practice:
Perhaps you've seen The Big Lebowski. "Leads? Leads?"
The odds of the SFPD "investigating" a mere wallet theft are even lower than the Malibu PD trying to figure out who stole Jeff Bridges' car.
For one thing, after Prop 47, stealing anything under $950 is a misdemeanor. A misdemeanor is basically a traffic ticket for anyone already involved with the criminal justice system. Misdemeanors basically do not result in any kind of custodial sentence in CA today.
Only a reporter could get them to care at all. ("Journalist privilege" is real.) Even then, they can only care so much.
Spoilers: thief is a 40-something Egyptian, appears to live in a French migrant shelter in Mulhouse and work as some kind of a pimp in Amsterdam, very religious but also watches porn and smokes a lot of hash.
Director develops sympathy for him, even sends him free credits because the spyware is eating his bandwidth. Later goes to one of the thief's hangouts and realizes that in fact, the thief is a weird scary guy and not lovable at all.
Sequel hook: phone has been reactivated in Romania. Stay tuned for next episode. "Diversiteit is onze kracht."
Escapists aren't Republicans or Democrats. They don't have any strong opinions on whether the bus should turn right or left. They would just like it to stop so they can get off...