I see what you're saying, but the US put trillions into NATO because it was defending itself by containing communism. The US isn't defending itself through NATO now. It's just exercising global influence. I think most Americans would question the wisdom of continuing to take that role. What's in it for us?

My question is do you agree with Harris’ point regarding topics that have no strictly objective or easily proven right or wrong? — Captain Homicide

It's true that defining has to stop somewhere. It ends with assumptions, axioms, faith, etc. This is pervasively true. It's not just true of morality and health. It's true of science as well. What am I supposed to be concluding from that?

Btw, I judge art by giving a rating for the size of the aspiration (the grandeur of the artist's intentions) and the success of the execution. The product of the two is a sort of aesthetics rating. For instance War and Peace has big numbers for both, whereas Young Frankenstein has a minor aspiration rating, but almost perfect execution.

I think their goal is to overthrow the liberal democratic world order we have had the past 75 years. This is not about some policy change left or right, but about a total system change based on core values that are not the same.

If this is indeed their goal, then what they are doing kindof makes sense. — ChatteringMonkey

Exactly.

How was it out of date? It has worked well. — ssu

I thought NATO had to do with opposing communism. Communism is gone.

You don’t get the authentically Asian or Pacific Islander without exclusivity. — Fire Ologist

I don't think it matters how we treat them. They're still Filipino. That's not something we're creating with our hiring practices.

The idea is that some people opposed DEI because they think it forces stupid people to the top, where they contaminate the elite with their stupid genes. Chattering Monkey and I were adding in some futurism.

Remember, when you go to make sense of history, you inevitably narrate it according to some presuppositions or biases. Same thing with trying to understand the present moment.

This inspires me to look at all the significant viewpoints on the scene and place them as if on a chessboard where I can move them around and let them interact. Do I escape bias this way? Probably not entirely, but it's maybe a little more sophisticated than the rooting-for-my-team approach, which is just blind bs.

They aren't related — AmadeusD

What two things aren't related?

But if you can't be bothered reading, then I can't be bothered explaining. — Wayfarer

I don't blame you. You can't be bothered.

The general arc historically has been towards more integration. But I don't think this is necessarily the direction we should expect the future to go. — ChatteringMonkey

I wish I could come back in 10,000 years and see what happened. :grin:

Maybe we will get seperation and evolutionary bottlenecks. — ChatteringMonkey

Maybe from climate change?

You don't really want to summarize. I get it.

I should add that I can't claim to have reached any plateau of serene detachment, although I do see the point. — Wayfarer

What's the point?

This is maybe overly generous, but I think there's way to read this as being about culture and ethnicity rather than race ultimately. — ChatteringMonkey

And if we add in the part about eugenics, it's about genetic fragmentation of Homo Sapiens into different subspecies, and maybe eventually different species.

Imagine we're at a crossroads where we could remain fairly closely related, or we could start splitting apart as in HG Wells' Time Machine. The philosophy of staying together is liberalism and egalitarianism. The philosophy of splitting is what Land is talking about.

You're knowledge of this is pretty in depth. I didn't realize they were thinking along eugenics lines when they condemned DEI. I thought it was just racism. Plus eugenics had it's day. Wasn't the science behind it debunked?

The law of identity is derived from, or based in, the observed temporal continuity of things, the tendency for things to remain as they are through a duration of time — Metaphysician Undercover

That might work for some things, but not for things like Descartes' wax. What exactly are we observing that tells us it's the same wax as it melts and then solidifies as a puddle? This looks like more of a read-only memory feature. In other words, we're built to think in terms of identities with changing properties with change always appearing in association with something relatively changeless.

But whether you bring in time or not, the object still moves by the force. — Corvus

Force and energy are both physical constructs. Time is part of the construction.

I’m actually really nice. If people were equally nice, there’d be no problems. — Mikie

:up:

I think you'd really like the climate change subreddit. Their posting structure makes it practically impossible to troll. Trolls just disappear down the branches. Plus with enough down votes, a post will disappear. But just as you can't troll, you can't bully either. They'll bomb you for that.

Then maybe the first question should be, do we really want to take the time to have this conversation? Cause it’s a slog. — Fire Ologist

We need a diagram.

The whole conversation about race, to me, should be “why are you afraid of your brother?” — Fire Ologist

Because he stood on my neck in the middle of the street until I was dead? It's a complicated issue.

This is the 'leftist corpse' Land complains about. All posturing, no anchor to reality.

@Wayfarer

How Musk's actions fit into plans for an autocratic takeover of the US government.

Typical right-wing tactic of blaming the Left for creating their own ideology — Maw

So it's more surprising that Land was influenced by Marx and Deleuze in his academic youth. Now he's a libertarian going on about how democracy doesn't work.

Everything about the right-wing resurgence seems to me some way or another of shouting, "if you're going to do it, so shall we!" And in this sense they're right. If power is all that matters, how can you complain when the people you trample use it to trample you? Left wingers trample right wing beliefs, values, and ideas daily – like it or not. Right wingers trample in the reverse direction. — kudos

"Trample" is the key word there, each side viewing the other as a stampeding herd. No nuance allowed, no variation.

The Left does contain braindead zombies, and if you lean left, you're going to be lumped together with them. Land complains that the same is happening to the right. No conversation is possible about the nature of systemic racism. If you ask, you're racist.

But if it's power that you want, isn't it also the impotence that you desire? — kudos

Land's claim is that Libertarians are not sitting still. They're "exiting" regular politics, although I'm still working on understanding what that implies.

Question is really, are you serious that these discussions are only tossing and turnings over powe — kudos

In the background, authoritarianism looms, so not just more status quo.

I think Holocaust denial is an oblique attack on Jews. It's meant to show disrespect. Climate change skepticism isn't an attack on anyone, though the deployer may be aware that it's a good way to get someone's goat.

If it's a danger to the public, it should be squashed.

If we relieve a person of full responsibility, why not do the same for the ideology they followed? The poor ideology was shaped by this it that circumstance. Blame the circumstances. This opens up into blaming everything for everything.

Ultimately, there's an opposition between understanding and judging. The more you understand, the harder it becomes to judge. The more you judge, the harder it becomes to understand. We forever swing between these poles, the extremes of which are meaningless.

Would you like to say that to me again in the parking lot? — Leontiskos

Yes. I want to show you my bumper sticker collection.

I don't think your characterization is accurate tho.

Did you watch this video?

:up: Thank you.

There certainly are leftists / liberals / progressives (whatever term...) who are focussed on race and marginalized, under-represented, and disadvantaged groups. They have substituted D.E.I for the class and labor issues of the "old left". The alt-right, ultra-conservatives, far right, etc. are quite exercised about D.E.I., but that isn't the big game they are hunting for. — BC

Nick Land came from an academic setting, so I think that must be the group of leftists he thinks made race "holy." I guess some of the things you've said in the past made me think you would agree that the progressive stance on race is like doctrine that can't be discussed, it just requires agreement? The picture he paints is of a Leftism that's solidified into doctrine so that reasonable discussion can't be had. Is that totally wrong?

The alt-right isn't screaming about unions because, as important as organizing labor is, it's at low tide in most fields, except maybe public employment. — BC

Right. But both tariffs and migration control have the potential to shore up the power of American labor. I'm not trying to be naive here, it's just that for real, it's the first substantial movement I've seen in my lifetime toward protecting American labor. It may well be that it's the bone thrown to the dogs to make them think things are getting better, but still, it's the truth. And that's what Nick Land's views leave me thinking about: telling the truth.

Just one quick addition: The alt-right most wants to destroy the gains which the 'old-left/liberals' achieved over the decades. Getting rid of DEI is just gravy. — BC

I've been looking for whether people like Land and Vance understand the population they're cozying up to. Do they understand that the alt-right is where Neo-Nazis go? Or are they just not afraid of that?

In general, the Canucks have been growing tired of the noise and crap for some time. — jorndoe

I can understand that. I'm American and I'm tired of it.

I didn't step down because of burnout. — fdrake

I hope you stepped down because of something good, and not something bad.

I think it was because possible worlds are figments of imagination. Too much dubious ontology.

How could you do quantum theory without modality? Isn't possibility central to it? If this is off topic, please ignore.

I don't think he'll want a third term. He'll just want lots of pardons. But yes, let's reassess in four years.

Well, let's revisit it in 10 years and see which of us understood the situation better. :razz:

Europe should get it's shit together at first. — ssu

If you mean they need to further integrate, I think they will, with China as an ally. It's their only choice. Europe couldn't withstand an attack from the US.

really think that Europe should first approach Canada, — ssu

Not a chance

Remember that Trump won only a narrow victory, and there are many Americans that don't like Trump either. — ssu

I think Vance comes next, and he much younger and smarter than Trump. Time to start learning Chinese.

Europe just needs to work on developing its relationship with China.

Make sure it avoids conspiracy theories and has standards for posting. — Philosophim

I think they just need to hang out at a philosophy forum and learn what "rule out" means. :grin: