... you can talk all night.
(And please consider using The Althouse Amazon Portal if you've got any shopping to do.)
६ सप्टेंबर, २०१७
At the Gray Sky Café...
... you can talk all night.
(And please consider using The Althouse Amazon Portal if you've got any shopping to do.)
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
५७ टिप्पण्या:
Turned out the the "Web's most toxic trolls" live in Vermont!
https://www.wired.com/2017/08/internet-troll-map/
By the way, it's toxic to point out that Hitler was a socialist, and therefore not right-wing. We know this because Google's Alphabet has an algorithm that measures toxicity of comments on Disqus. I gotta meet some of these guys. I bet any anti-Hillary comment gets automatically rated as "toxic." Or skeptical take on climate change, or making fun of Al Gore, who is on the board of Google, and so probably Alphabet.
It kind of makes me proud to be among a band of heterodox commenters who get under Disqus's skin.
I wonder how the algorithm handles irony? Ha! No I don't, Boss Al Gore is deaf to irony.
I have not read "Mein Kampf" and do not intend to, but I do not think Hitler was much of an ideological socialist. I think he was a one idea man, and his idea was to rearm Germany, restart "The Great War," and this time win it for Germany. Any ideology that would serve that purpose and let him be in charge of the works would be grist for the mill.
@tim, I think you did most of that all by yourself just on this blog. My grimy John Deere hat is off to you, sir!
Mein Kampf was a crude promise to murder his enemies. The later Nazi propaganda was 10 times better at persuasion, and is still lethal to many who read it today. But trying to pin that doctrine on Socialism is just stupid. You need to research his past and understand Alistair Crowley's influence that made Hitler a true monster. That was neither right wing or left wing. It was will to power.
@Hagar,
Also, Germany lost about 13% of its land after WWI. That's what happens when you lose wars - the winners take land (see Mexican-American War, US; see 6-Day War, Israel)
So Hitler also yapped about recapturing Germany's lost lands. Hence, the march East.
Haven't read Mein Kampf either - it was written in 1925, before he murdered anybody.
Fired gurgle sexist on Joe Rogan:
Joe Rogan Experience #1009 - James Damore
Well, my neighbors are boarded up, determined to sit Irma out. I even sensed an air of excitement at the supermarket earlier today as people scurried for the last drop of water and man's final alkaline battery.
Now, it' do or die.
Over and out, from Palm Beach County.
I like this shot of Lake Wingra better than your earlier post ... I prefer the brighter foreground; this is a better balanced exposure. But, the horizon looks a little crooked here.
I've read that Mussolini's Jewish mistress ghost wrote his autobiography. The book is said to be readable, although, of course, no one reads it. Trotsky wrote a lot of books. I've read some of his stuff. He was strong on vitriol and absolutely certain about absolutely everything, but the writing held your attention. Lenin wrote some books, but his prose was turgid and impersonal. Stalin wrote one book. It had something to do with Marxist theory and was read by nobody, not even by his sycophants. I haven't read Mein Kampf, but I've heard that it was a book that his followers owned for the sake of owning rather than for reading. Churchill has the distinction of being the only leader of that era whose books were and are still read for fun rather than for term papers.
That was neither right wing or left wing. It was will to power.
Right.... He could have done the same thing with a small limited government. (Toxic comment alert!)
(Trigger warning! Google's Alphabet deems this comment toxic!)
It's amazing to me how otherwise intelligent people can overlook the nut of a particular matter so easily, and head off into the weeds. The problem is that "left-right" is a one axis measure, and there are at least three major axes (National Socialism - International Socialism - Economic Liberalism) Don't get Mussolini started on economic liberalism! So if you have a triangle, Hitler/Mussolini - Stalin/Mao are going to be on two corners, and off alone is going to be Barry Goldwater in the third corner. If you project this triangle back onto a one dimensional line (left - right) you have to make a choice about what you think is the most important to represent on your line, because something is going to be lost.
Strictly as a matter of economics, Hitler and Stalin end up on the same side (It makes little difference if an industry is run by a private individual who is absolutely required to serve the interests of the state, or a government official who lives as if he were wealthy under a communist system) both are command economies. Goldwater is on the other side defending economic liberty.
If you look at the metric of government power and intrusiveness into personal life (the personal is political), once again Hitler and Stalin are on the same side of the line, and Goldwater is there alone on the other side.
Most "teabaggers" would have zero problem with "a nation of shopkeepers."
I am not sure how you put Goldwater and Hitler on the same side of any issue really. Where would they agree? It's quite easy to find lots of issues where Stalin and Hitler would agree. The international Socialism/National Socialism thing is more a "turf war" than an ideological difference over economics. But like deeply believing theists who genuinely can't believe that there are people who don't believe in God in some way or other, Nazis and Commies can't believe that people exist who are not socialists of some stripe.
By the way, National Libertarianism led to the mass slaughter of the aboriginal inhabitants of the United States. I suppose that in that way, you could get economic liberals onto the same axis as Hitler, but white nationalism is a fringe ideology in the United States today, having been mostly extinguished, despite the caterwauling of the left on the "rise" of Neo-Nazism based on the actions of a small number of clearly troubled individuals. While the mainstream press apologizes and covers for the Neo-Maoists who make up AntiFa.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-facebook-propaganda/facebook-says-likely-russian-based-operation-funded-u-s-ads-with-political-message-idUSKCN1BH2VX
DACA highlights:
> Came to the United States before their 16th birthday
> Have lived continuously in the United States since June 15, 2007
> Were under age 31 on June 15, 2012 (i.e., born on June 16, 1981 or after)
> Were physically present in the United States on June 15, 2012.
Mysteriously, there is no mention of the parents. Well, actually there is no mystery.
It's almost like Americans would do those jobs, just for more money than the illegal alien scabs are willing to work for!
What is the mystery of the whereabouts and status of the parents of DREAMers?
We are supposed to presume that the parents sneaked across the border with the toddler, and the toddler grew to be a 22yo virtual USA person, and it would be a sin to separate the 22yo from the parents now and send it back whence it came, partly because it would separate it from the parents.
How did the parents get here, and where are they now?
We should show compassion toward the 22yo, but the storyline doesn't make sense.
Lovely. and I see you're not getting any of the miserable fire smoke.
(I'm just expounding on Humperdink's question. It's a mystery, or not. But "we should not separate families" is not a legitimate argument for DACA.)
You cannot tell "You're Hitler!" yelling leftists that Hitler was a leftist.
Politico - Losing the Hillary religion?
tim in vermont: I am not sure how you put Goldwater and Hitler on the same side of any issue really.
Because they're both, um...authoritarians. Yeah, that's it, authoritarians.
How was Goldwater an authoritarian? Well, he...yeah...um...he was "against Civil Rights", yeah that's it...and that makes him a big meanie, and authoritarians are mean mean people, not nice people like us.
Don't ask me to define "authoritarian" in less vague terms than that. For that matter, don't ask me to talk about "nice" or "mean" in any terms that go beyond muh feelz. I have some recycled, warmed-over '50s and '60s pop-sociology explaining why non-progs all have authoritarian minds, just like Hitler, and I'm sticking with it.
"The headline to one early Verrit borrows from the literary methods of Kim Jong Un’s North Korea to assert, “Hillary Democrats Are the Heart and Conscience of America.” Does anybody outside of the Daou re-education camp really think this way?"
Most of her voters live in CA. CA should swim to NoKO and take refuge.
I miss when Althouse started her posts earlier in the morning.
Possibly tied to the retirement, I guess.
Oh what I would give for a written strangely early in the morning post.
I am Laslo.
A Verrit is a member of the weasel family.
"I like this shot of Lake Wingra better than your earlier post ... I prefer the brighter foreground; this is a better balanced exposure. But, the horizon looks a little crooked here."
I agree (except that it's a lakeshore, not a horizon that's looking crooked).
I did a little adjustment. Still looks off to me!
Might be the effect of the lights green sloping strip on the left.
The light green is continuous with the light area that is the lake, that needs to look level (and maybe the curving shape of the shoreline, which your eye perceives as wanting to behave like a horizon). Or maybe it's just still genuinely off.
"By the way, it's toxic to point out that Hitler was a socialist, and therefore not right-wing."
It's not toxic, just wrong.
There's not that many lakes left in the US that are good for downhill waterskiing.
Authoritarians can live with each other; totalitarians can't - it would be a contradiction in terms.
Nazis and Communists are both totalitarians, not authoritarian.
As are the "progressive" left.
No - Hitler was a national socialist. Period.
Hitler desired command and control.
It's neither toxic nor wrong. It's just the truth. Hitler was a statist. He wanted the state to control people and their enterprises, and he wanted to profit from that control.
That is leftism. Sucks to be leftist.
"Right-wing" was a term that thirty years ago meant someone on the extreme right, a conservative weirdo that could not be identified, someone with no identifiable ideology except "me me me". A selfish jerk who would sell his grandma's head for ten bucks. "Right-wing" meant someone way to the right of others who were maybe only partially right. The definitions change every day, since "right" and "left" have largely switched places.
Nowadays everyone on the left says "right-wing" to connote everyone to the right of them, which includes most of Western civilization.
MYTH BUSTED: Actually, Yes, Hitler Was a Socialist Liberal
"Nazis and Communists are both totalitarians, not authoritarian."
Authoritarianism and totalitarianism are simply different degrees or varieties of the same thing.
Well, now we're getting all linguistic. "Authoritarianism" should mean putting authority (however defined) at the top of the chain of command. "Totalitarianism" should mean total control of people's lives.
Real totalitarianism has never happened, because it's impossible, even in North Korea.
That leads to the problem of authoritarianism. It's an attempt, a leap toward the hoop of totalitarianism.
Authoritarianism is the leftist impulse. Totalitarianism is the goal. Most leftists don't see it, don't know it, don't understand it, and get all confused when you point out that the authoritarian regimes are all, and always have been, leftist.
"It's neither toxic nor wrong. It's just the truth. Hitler was a statist. He wanted the state to control people and their enterprises, and he wanted to profit from that control.
"That is leftism."
Being a statist is not synonymous with leftism. Statists can be either right wing or left wing.
Hitler was the first Antifa.
"Authoritarianism is the leftist impulse."
No. Authoritarianism is a trait of human personality, and is not a trait of a particular ideology.
Authoritarian and totalitarian are close to each other and at a considerable remove from free market liberalism. Both place the state first. That's why they look like fraternal twins to the rest of us China and Russia transitioned from communism to fascism with little more than a change of letterhead.
"Most leftists...get all confused when you point out that the authoritarian regimes are all, and always have been, leftist."
They're not confused; they just know it's not a correct assertion.
The MSM is agog that Trump has made a deal with Chuck and Nancy.
They fail to note that Chuck and Nancy also has made a deal with Trump.
Leftist authoritarians label anything they don't like as "right wing."
Cookie's 8:43 comment is why leftism goes so wrong so often. Communism requires massive state power to supress markets, which are human nature, and people who have a strong authoritarian impulses are highly attracted to the power communists may have amassed with the best of intentions.
Plus omelette, broken eggs. Next thing you have Che executing dissenters against his garden wall.
And as disregard for the laws of economics cause shortages, the first instinct is to take more power. Viz: Chavez.
Authoritarians tend to be about protecting their "iron rice bowls" while totalitarians wish to "fundamentally transform" their societies.
Thus authoritarians tend to ignore you unless you present a threat to them and their positions, while totalitarians aim to convert you in order for them to gain power and so you cannot be ignored - you must be converted - one way or another.
Another way to put it is that authoritarian governments tend to be about protection against foreign enemies, while the totalitarians go after their own people.
Again with the linguistics!
Hey, you wanna control people? Then you're an authoritarian. You wanna use politics to do it? Then I got a few tools for you: fascism, socialism, communism. Take your pick from my coat right here, just a few bucks each. Antifa, I got that somewhere in my back pocket, give me a sec...
And be sure to project! Tell everyone that your enemies are what you hate you are yourself!
I would love to see the before shot again to compare. I agree, we're trained to use water lines as horizons.
I clicked through to your Flickr page and see that you shot this with your iPhone 6. The wide angle lens distortion may make this picture hard to "level" without more sophisticated editing tools -- features in Adobe Lightroom or Photoshop. I love the mood of the shot though for sure!
(For me, this post reminds me of a news photo you posted where the columns were all wonky. I'm too lazy to go find that!)
"Leftist authoritarians label anything they don't like as 'right wing.'"
Rightist authoritarians label anything they don't like as "left wing."
If you were of parenting age and had to attend a talk, what would you want it to be about? Say that the topic has to deal with parenting, schooling, math, or science.
This:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/mathematicians-chase-moonshine-s-shadow/#
Tim, that is neat.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा