The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
by afew Mon May 11th, 2015 at 01:55:08 AM EST
The debonair, metropolitan response to Thursday's crushing defeat for Labour is to wonder who they'll pick as their new leader. Come on, depression is for losers; pep yourself up with an opinion or two about whether Andy Burnham or Yvette Cooper will take the party in a more marketable direction. "Labour should search its soul before it searches for a new leader," wrote Neal Lawson, from Compass. "Any wannabe Labour leader should stand down so the party can understand why it lost before it can decide how it might win". Although I agreed, I couldn't understand why he was saying it: if this party were capable of listening to criticism from outside, making connections that weren't hacked from its bumper book of why-we-lost-in-1992 cliches, it wouldn't be in this situation. An organisation that needs to be told to think seriously cannot be told to think seriously. "I'm just kicking the cat to check that it's dead," Lawson replied. The problem will not be solved by Cooper or Chuka Umunna because the problem is not that Ed Miliband was too far left. "We mustn't descend into left-wing factionalism," David Blunkett said on Thursday night, as if all their problems could be solved if only they could return to a time when they were considered "centrist". These words - left, far-left, centrist, right - have no objective meaning. The ideas of the centre ground - that the private sector is better at everything, that growth is the highest value for a society to aspire to, that people on benefits must be starved into work because they're lazy - would five years ago have been called the right, and five years before that been called the far right.
"Labour should search its soul before it searches for a new leader," wrote Neal Lawson, from Compass. "Any wannabe Labour leader should stand down so the party can understand why it lost before it can decide how it might win". Although I agreed, I couldn't understand why he was saying it: if this party were capable of listening to criticism from outside, making connections that weren't hacked from its bumper book of why-we-lost-in-1992 cliches, it wouldn't be in this situation. An organisation that needs to be told to think seriously cannot be told to think seriously. "I'm just kicking the cat to check that it's dead," Lawson replied.
The problem will not be solved by Cooper or Chuka Umunna because the problem is not that Ed Miliband was too far left. "We mustn't descend into left-wing factionalism," David Blunkett said on Thursday night, as if all their problems could be solved if only they could return to a time when they were considered "centrist". These words - left, far-left, centrist, right - have no objective meaning. The ideas of the centre ground - that the private sector is better at everything, that growth is the highest value for a society to aspire to, that people on benefits must be starved into work because they're lazy - would five years ago have been called the right, and five years before that been called the far right.
there's 1001 essays floating around the internet, flogging old sores and dead horses trying to establish a dominant narrative and create the mould for the coming Labour leader. Much of it you've heard before more times than you care to mention, some of it comes from the excluded getting their retaliation in first.
And just occasionally, if you trawl enough of the rubbish you'll find the odd nugget of gold. This essay is one such.
Asking all the right questions and pointing out flaws in the emerging narriatives.
Not that any of it matters cos the new leader will be some dreary neo-Blairite. But it's nice to get the bullshit pre-washed keep to the Fen Causeway
Barack Obama's ambitions to pass sweeping new free trade agreements with Asia and Europe fell at the first hurdle on Tuesday as Senate Democrats put concerns about US manufacturing jobs ahead of arguments that the deals would boost global economic growth. A vote to push through the bill failed as 45 senators voted against it, to 52 in favor. Obama needed 60 out of the 100 votes for it to pass. Failure to secure so-called "fast track" negotiating authority from Congress leaves the president's top legislative priority in tatters. It may also prove the high-water mark in decades of steady trade liberalisation that has fuelled globalisation but is blamed for exacerbating economic inequality within many developed economies with the outsourcing of manufacturing jobs. Internet activists had said the deal would curb freedom of speech while other critics charged it would enshrine currency manipulation.
Barack Obama's ambitions to pass sweeping new free trade agreements with Asia and Europe fell at the first hurdle on Tuesday as Senate Democrats put concerns about US manufacturing jobs ahead of arguments that the deals would boost global economic growth.
A vote to push through the bill failed as 45 senators voted against it, to 52 in favor. Obama needed 60 out of the 100 votes for it to pass.
Failure to secure so-called "fast track" negotiating authority from Congress leaves the president's top legislative priority in tatters.
It may also prove the high-water mark in decades of steady trade liberalisation that has fuelled globalisation but is blamed for exacerbating economic inequality within many developed economies with the outsourcing of manufacturing jobs. Internet activists had said the deal would curb freedom of speech while other critics charged it would enshrine currency manipulation.
It lets the European parliament off the hook. I wasn't looking forward to seeing it standing up to the Commission's negotiators... then standing down again. It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue - Queen Elizabeth II
Obama's plans for trade deals with Asia and Europe in tatters after Senate vote | US news | The Guardian
"This is one of the most important issues that will come before the Congress for business in America, particularly exports," Arizona senator John McCain told the Guardian after the vote. "They're going to have to galvanize the business community to put pressure on the Democrats to at least allow votes."
Perhaps the best hope is the rather surrealist bill to force negotiators to force the EU to place no restrictions on trade with the occupied territories in Palestine. There's a limit to how much of this sort of bullshit that even the Commission's negotiators can take. Surely. (Reassure me!) It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue - Queen Elizabeth II
As far as "a majority of the Senate supports it", under the rules as abused repeatedly by the Republicans when in minority, a working majority in the Senate is now 60/40.
There is a process that can be employed to destroy that and return the Senate to a majoritarian system, but the White House (specifically, the Vice President) has to go along with that process, and there are enough things that a simple House and Senate majority could pass that the White House would rather not veto that its not likely to proceed to that option. I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
Is it common for a president to fail to pass key legislation with the support of the opposition, against his own party?
It was, at one time, common for key legislation to be passed on a "bi-partisan" basis. For instance the Civil Rights Act under Johnson passed with a smaller Democratic majority and a larger Republican majority, and required the votes of some from each caucus to pass the House and to escape filibuster in the Senate (where previous efforts to pass Civil Rights Acts had been quashed through the 1950s).
Note also that President Obama is entering Lame Duck status, when the actions that the President can take to reward supporters and punish opponents are dwindling, and so the administration's ability to sway key votes on the Democratic side is fading. I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
... At the least, the agreement means the Senate is likely to pass new powers for the president to fast-track trade pacts through Congress. But Democrats failed to guarantee enactment of their priorities by attaching them to the fast-track bill. ...
But Democrats failed to guarantee enactment of their priorities by attaching them to the fast-track bill. ...
Zimbardo gave a TED talk in 2011 outlining the problems facing young men's social development and academic achievement, which he puts down to excessive use of porn, video games and the internet [...] Giving an example of the mindset of a gaming and pornography-addicted young man, he says: "When I'm in class, I'll wish I was playing World of Warcraft. When I'm with a girl, I'll wish I was watching pornography, because I'll never get rejected" [...] Phillip Zimbardo is famous for the 1971 Stanford prison experiment, in which 24 students were asked to play the roles of 'guards' and 'prisoners' in a mock prison at Standford University. Intended to last for two weeks, the experiment was abandoned after six days, after the previously normal 'guards' became extremely sadistic and the 'prisoners' became submissive and depressed.
Giving an example of the mindset of a gaming and pornography-addicted young man, he says: "When I'm in class, I'll wish I was playing World of Warcraft. When I'm with a girl, I'll wish I was watching pornography, because I'll never get rejected" [...]
Phillip Zimbardo is famous for the 1971 Stanford prison experiment, in which 24 students were asked to play the roles of 'guards' and 'prisoners' in a mock prison at Standford University. Intended to last for two weeks, the experiment was abandoned after six days, after the previously normal 'guards' became extremely sadistic and the 'prisoners' became submissive and depressed.
Zimbardo gave a TED talk in 2011 outlining the problems facing young men's social development and academic achievement, which he puts down to excessive use of porn, video games and the internet.
Correlate or cause? Maybe young men with poor social development and academic achievement take refuge in excessive video games, online and porn rather than books and TV as in the good old days. Looks like self-medication to me.
Nevertheless, how great is the percentage of men worthy of positive feminist attention nowadays?
The best criteria I can think of for being "worth of positive feminist attention" is respecting women as equals and not being a sexist dickhead.
Frankly, I think assholes pushing their justifications for being assholes on boys are more of a problem than feminism: the traditional men's roles so beloved of uptight conservatives, MRAs, PUAs and the like are a deeply uncomfortable straightjacket for many men. Not to mention the effects of the heteronormalism bundled up with being a Real Man™
If we are concerned about recent male issues (justifiably or not), the traditional "straightjacket" would not be foremost problem.
Why on earth not?
Here's a fun story to put with your other ones.
And the rest, as they say, is history. It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue - Queen Elizabeth II
You want to pick the best hunters? I'd guess 30% of them would be women.
There's a fun anecdote about a building in one of the ancient Sumerian cities. We know almost nothing about the culture. Big structure, colonnades and so on. Two archeologists interpret it: one, from a capitalist background, is sure it's a market hall; the other, a marxist, is sure it's a central facility for cooperative works and sharing of produce. All we know is that it was a pretty big covered building ...
The shift to agriculture had a big impact on male genetics, most certainly. A new mode of resource distribution alters a lot.
There is certainly a lot of wishfulness in your 30% guess.
For example.
Many evolution psychology "stories" refer to the hunter-gatherer legacy.
I had nice pet theories as well. Something about greed, violence being just not-so-common viruses of human interaction, perpetrated by relatively few, for example. But I recognized a few times that less lovely established "stories" are not cynical jokes.
As for dogs and wolves - definitions of hierarchy could be bended, mismatched heavily. But "fair" hierarchal considerations definitely help to explain a lot of canine behavior.
Greed, selfishness, violence are universal. Conversely, so are generosity, selflessness and compassion. The mix, and the circles to which each are applied, varies from person to person according to life experience and genetics - and how they've been taught to gain status in their culture.
Other people, in the flesh, seem to me very much akin to natural disasters. One can only try to prepare, and sit them out. Experience keeps a dear school, but fools will learn in no other. -- Dr Johnson
In reality there is an abundance of everything that is necessary. What is missing is a philosophy of abundance. Experience keeps a dear school, but fools will learn in no other. -- Dr Johnson
I make my living being paid to refrain from planting crops on my land. It makes too much sense financially for me to do other wise. Experience keeps a dear school, but fools will learn in no other. -- Dr Johnson
However, thus far in human history, in every country where the survival of one's children to adulthood is reasonably guaranteed, where there is a pension system so that old people don't die in extreme poverty, and where, crucially, young women have access to education, the demographic transition has happened.
These conditions are easily achievable everywhere in the world, with a more equitable distribution of resources.
It is possible that there is a country where these conditions would not achieve the expected result. But I doubt it.
Achieving the more equitable distribution is the only hard part. The rest is human nature :) It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue - Queen Elizabeth II
Plus, is the question causation or correlation settled here?
Modern agriculture is a wonder of feeding the billions of people - but with ~7:1 ratio of energy investment / output. The energy flow is becoming more expensive, and this is visible in rising food prices, smaller packings, lesser processed quality.
Would you employ all the hectares now just to feed all people today, or would consider twice what awaits in 2099?
To challenge the established paradigm, you really have to come up with high quality data and behavioral models.
This isn't physics: this is story-telling around small and disputed statistical differences.
Men are, on average, stronger than women: it does not follow that I can bench-press more than my woman competitive weight-lifter friend.
Also, this is gibbering bollocks: any deviations from it are punished.
Performing "female" roles will reduce your status, will attract opprobrium, may even attract violence depending on the details.
I have limits for feminist militant attention for deviations.
Again, you seem to have invented your own language here.
Even here at ET, we implicitly accept that some (practically, a majority of the humanity) has to find itself in lower status - because they won't vote for own interests, or do not understand progressive theories (including feminism), or listen to wrong "just so" stories. Is this enough justification to burn other status evaluations?
We implicitly accept what now?
And the story is true. Except for the fraction of the population that "forgets" to go downstream - these become steelhead on the Pacific coast of NA, distincly different in appearance - and the fraction, always, that wanders off into adjacent streams and watersheds on their way home. They are not lost; this variability, this plasticity of behavior, is the key to the success of the salmonids. Is it such a stretch to imagine that similar plasticity of phenotype and behavior - undelineated and largely unknown to us still - might play a role in human development? Experience keeps a dear school, but fools will learn in no other. -- Dr Johnson
Not that there is nothing there, but every time a discussion about addiction overly focuses on the specific substance or action alarm bells start ringing in my head.
Might of course also be a result of journalists being journalists and always telling the same story.
Being bored in school is an entirely new phenomenon caused by video games.
Hate to contradict, but I was bored in school long before video games existed. And I was not alone.
Puberty is a powerful thing.
So what would the effect of this be on the way we behave? Dr Ashley Conway is, as far as he knows, the only psychologist in the UK developing VR as a tool to treat psychological disorders. He has had much first-hand experience with the technology and says that VR porn has the potential to become the "crack cocaine" of the industry.
New Zealand-based technology firm Touchpoint Group is developing the world's angriest artificial intelligence machine that it hopes will one day help big banks, telcos and insurance companies defuse explosive episodes in customer service. The new machine learning research project, which Touchpoint is investing $500,000 to develop, is being built with input from one of Australia's big four banks, which is supplying reams of real-life customer interactions that have been collated over the past two years. Telecommunications companies and insurance firms are also contributing data.
The new machine learning research project, which Touchpoint is investing $500,000 to develop, is being built with input from one of Australia's big four banks, which is supplying reams of real-life customer interactions that have been collated over the past two years. Telecommunications companies and insurance firms are also contributing data.
The truth is I'm angry about the extents Hollywood and the director of Fury Road went to trick me and other men into seeing this movie. Everything VISUALLY looks amazing. It looks like that action guy flick we've desperately been waiting for where it is one man with principles, standing against many with none. But let us be clear. This is the vehicle by which they are guaranteed to force a lecture on feminism down your throat. This is the Trojan Horse feminists and Hollywood leftists will use to (vainly) insist on the trope women are equal to men in all things, including physique, strength, and logic. And this is the subterfuge they will use to blur the lines between masculinity and femininity, further ruining women for men, and men for women.
The truth is I'm angry about the extents Hollywood and the director of Fury Road went to trick me and other men into seeing this movie. Everything VISUALLY looks amazing. It looks like that action guy flick we've desperately been waiting for where it is one man with principles, standing against many with none.
But let us be clear. This is the vehicle by which they are guaranteed to force a lecture on feminism down your throat. This is the Trojan Horse feminists and Hollywood leftists will use to (vainly) insist on the trope women are equal to men in all things, including physique, strength, and logic. And this is the subterfuge they will use to blur the lines between masculinity and femininity, further ruining women for men, and men for women.
Charlize Theron sure talked a lot during the trailers, while I don't think I've heard one line from Tom Hardy. And finally, Charlize Theron's character barked orders to Mad Max. Nobody barks orders to Mad Max.
Nobody barks orders to Mad Max.
Both Australia and NZ are down under, anyway.
Guess I was expecting far too much. Though one glance at the website should have warned me there would only be blunt macho man rage.
Now wait a minute... How come you're reading that?!?
But the final straw is that the film shows a man and a woman standing together against the kind of world reactionaries fantasise about inhabiting. A postapocalyptic, hierarchical society that treats women as chattels, and gives free rein to cosplay machismo: that's a pretty good picture of the redpill utopia. For a woman to take the lead in challenging it, and for a man to support her efforts, is far too depressing a reminder of the kind of progressive change they impotently rail against.
But the final straw is that the film shows a man and a woman standing together against the kind of world reactionaries fantasise about inhabiting.
A postapocalyptic, hierarchical society that treats women as chattels, and gives free rein to cosplay machismo: that's a pretty good picture of the redpill utopia. For a woman to take the lead in challenging it, and for a man to support her efforts, is far too depressing a reminder of the kind of progressive change they impotently rail against.
Thinking of a more realistic Mad Max world, I see 2 guidelines. For one, power dynamics in human societies (however crumbled) is based more on establishing authority rather than overwhelming with force. Relying on the latter would be a ridiculously hard (and soon disrespectable) way. A post-apocalyptic anarchy would have no shortage of demand for imaginative leadership.
Secondly, all humans (including maniacs) operate from their core values and beliefs. Dependence of the core values on available resources (personally, or in the social environment) is well captured by Graves' value systems, inspired by Maslow's pyramid of needs. Even the authoritarian "level #3" band lords (godfathers, etc) have their responsibilities. In sum, I do not see how a sex-obsessed lord would keep his status even within his group.
Women and homosexuals are discouraged from commenting here.
Sane heterosexual men as well, it would seem. I thought I was familiar with the general outline of retarditaire thought online, but this! It is an enormous labyrinth of folly:
Socialism, feminism, cultural Marxism, and social justice warriorism aim to destroy the family unit, decrease the fertility rate, and impoverish the state through large welfare entitlements.
Every civilization was formed on the backs of slaves
The Damaging Effects Of Jewish Intellectualism And Activism On Western Culture
As for the film itself, meh. I don't freight it with all this cultural significance. Miller wanted to outdo himself yet again, and he succeeds. Genius in its way. On the other hand, I am 35 years older now and have seen enough things blow up already.
Can't wait to see a review of Maggie from the loons at ROK. Or I could just write it for them. Schwarzenegger emasculated, blah blah. Experience keeps a dear school, but fools will learn in no other. -- Dr Johnson
And he would win. Experience keeps a dear school, but fools will learn in no other. -- Dr Johnson
General Election results: Did just 900 voters hand the Tories a majority government?
As for the US:
Love this guy.
by gmoke - May 6
by rifek - May 4 3 comments
by gmoke - Apr 26 1 comment
by gmoke - Apr 20 1 comment
by rifek - Apr 18
by rifek - Apr 17 2 comments
by Oui - May 8
by rifek - May 43 comments
by Oui - May 42 comments
by Oui - May 4
by Oui - May 1
by Oui - Apr 27
by gmoke - Apr 261 comment
by Oui - Apr 25
by Oui - Apr 23
by Oui - Apr 22
by gmoke - Apr 201 comment
by Oui - Apr 204 comments
by gmoke - Apr 18
by Oui - Apr 181 comment
by rifek - Apr 172 comments
by Oui - Apr 12