tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post182818125756949562..comments2024-03-28T04:58:13.341-07:00Comments on CONTRARY BRIN: A Time for Colonels and Captains: Part ThreeDavid Brinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comBlogger49125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-24404660416780026342017-06-26T19:54:56.192-07:002017-06-26T19:54:56.192-07:00Dear Mr Brin,
Please, just tone it down. I get ve...<br />Dear Mr Brin,<br /><br />Please, just tone it down. I get very tired of the "party of science" stuff. OK; some Republicans are crazy. But let's review some of the challenging scientific realities that prevail on the left-side of the aisle. <br /><br />Nuclear power (You call this one, credit to you)<br /><br />GMOs<br /><br />Economic opportunity cost and discount rates. Do I need to spell out Econ 101? Money spent on clean energy cannot be spent on curing cancer. Or space travel. It's not "zero sum" (yes, some of us have post grad game theory) to point out that you can reduce CO2 emmissions or fix onchocerciasis, but not both with the same $. <br /><br />In fact, most microeconomics generally is pretty tough for the left.<br /><br />Intelligence studies<br /><br />Human genetics, and biodiversity. <br /><br />Evolutionary Game Theory.<br /><br />Human group psych, virtue signalling, and pathological narcissism. <br /><br />Vaccines. <br /><br />And incidentally, there's plenty of positions on AGW that acknowledge warming but don't think we will all die unless we spend a gazillion dollars on reductions RIGHT NOW. Please respect the strongest opposing position, not the weakest. <br /><br />Overall, no party has a monopoly on magical thinking; and thinking that you're immune to it is usually the first sign that, as Feynaman might have said, we might be fooling ourselves.Alistair M.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-3908622653764342372017-06-25T11:27:03.160-07:002017-06-25T11:27:03.160-07:00Thinking about this a little more, there should be...Thinking about this a little more, there should be a way for to pay for this. Consider the following two conversations:<br /><br /><b>Us:</b> Mr. Colonel, we'd like to draft you to run for office.<br /><br /><b>Mr. Colonel:</b> I'd love to serve my country that way. What's our budget like?<br /><br /><b>Us:</b> Umm... We haven't figured that part out yet... let us get back to you...<br /><br /><b>Mr. Colonel:</b> Don't bother.<br /><br /><b><i>* * * VERSUS * * *</i></b><br /><br /><b>Us:</b> Mr. Colonel, we'd like to draft you to run for office.<br /><br /><b>Mr. Colonel:</b> I'd love to serve my country that way. What's our budget like?<br /><br /><b>Us:</b> We can give you $100,000 in seed money, plus $25,000/month for the duration of the campaign.<br /><br /><b>Mr. Colonel:</b> I'm in!<br /><br />My own thinking is to run a progressive thrift store on the Goodwill model, but support progressive candidates instead of job training. Unfortunately, that's as far as I've gotten, but maybe someone who has some business knowledge can take it further.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-27324368177280535012017-06-24T20:48:57.982-07:002017-06-24T20:48:57.982-07:00I believe that even in the USA you are more likely...<i>I believe that even in the USA you are more likely to win big by going "left" - the GOP is going to say that anybody standing against them is a "Pinko Liberal"</i><br /><br />And the response, botched by Democrats as far back as Carter is to say, "Yes, I'm a Liberal. I believe we should have clean air to breathe, and clean water to drink. I believe we should have a society that's free from prejudice. I believe we should have a great education system. (etc.) My opponent, who is not a Liberal opposes those things.<br /><br /><i>...the Democratic establishment only cares about their own, diminished by minority status, power. What you are proposing would upend those power-brokers' own power. Not gonna happen.</i><br /><br />I agree with you. Unfortunately, overthrowing the Democratic establishment is the first priority. They don't understand the various new realities of winning and are part of the problem; essentially the enablers of the Republican craziness. By their actions they have no idea of what the fight is really about or how to win that fight.<br /><br />Dr. Brin's ideas are very good in this regard, but I suspect that most modern Democrats would fight him just because it is a "new" idea.<br />Troutwaxernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-35015670011711730542017-06-24T15:01:42.131-07:002017-06-24T15:01:42.131-07:00Ricardo Montachio yes, there are millions like you...Ricardo Montachio yes, there are millions like you, basically decent people who can see that the Republican Party has gone stark, jibbering insane, utterly treasonous and vile, top to bottom... yet you cling to mantras that get you off the hook for having been their sucker, for years. The mantra that "democrats are just as bad!"<br /><br />Um... no?<br /><br />All you have to back that up are anecdotes. Separate incidents. No statistics. Almost all blue states - except Illinois - are better run than almost all red states - except Utah - in almost every single category. Try actually comparing outcomes, as here:<br />http://davidbrin.blogspot.com/2014/06/so-do-outcomes-matter-more-than-rhetoric.html<br /><br />Will some dem idiots reject ex-military blue dogs? Sure. I guess we'll see how many.<br /><br />onward<br /><br />onward<br /><br />David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-74347879831753941402017-06-24T14:58:44.945-07:002017-06-24T14:58:44.945-07:00"..the fact is that Putin’s FSB etc wanted th..."..the fact is that Putin’s FSB etc wanted the GOP to win.." Source please.<br /><br />"..whether to deprive the perpetrator of either life or freedom with prison. But it is an absurd standard _politically_. These are traitors, pure and simple. That is “traitors” with a small-t… for now.." I do not recognize the distinction. If someone is a traitor then that is what they are and the punishment is clear. You would not distinguish Rapists from rapists would you? You are adept enough at words to use them with clarity.<br /><br />"..corruptible voting machines.." Evidence of these is, shall we say, meager. More so than the voter fraud concerns that are roundly denounced here.<br /><br />Look, I don't care for President Trump one little bit. But he is, and will remain President. There are more constructive ways to deal with this fact.<br /><br />T.<br /><br />Tacitushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17007086196578740689noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-91819650681979622562017-06-24T14:21:09.127-07:002017-06-24T14:21:09.127-07:00Ricardo: I am a Dem, in a deeply Dem state, but I ...Ricardo: I am a Dem, in a deeply Dem state, but I am not so deluded as to think it's my way or the highway. One of my best HS friends went to West Point, served with honor, and is currently still working in a non active service capacity with the military. I'm pretty sure he was Republican, but by this time is probably voting independent; Steve's brain would explode from the illogic of Trump's trip through Wonderland. I'm also not sure I would ask him to put his family through the insanity of running for office, even though I'm sure he would be a credit to his training and be a wonderful, dutiful (as in: performs his duty to his constituents) politician. West Point and officer training in general tends to weed out the dunderheads, although in some it adds a flavor of hideboundness that is contrary to our need for across the aisle compromise. Why would I NOT want someone with those qualifications to contemplate a political career? IMHO, military service is no disqualification to political office, and you are nutty to think Democrats would bag a viable candidate on that reason.TheMadLibrariannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-61717782836754233282017-06-24T13:52:02.414-07:002017-06-24T13:52:02.414-07:00"Yes, some of them have crewcuts and erect po..."Yes, some of them have crewcuts and erect posture and may even sound like the dad in Leave it to Beaver, or Andy Griffith"<br /><br />And that's why the Democrats won't even talk to them. You're deluding yourself if you think the ideological insanity of the Dems is in any way lesser to the Reps.Ricardo Montachiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11502343883858322775noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-56201244740496915412017-06-24T12:49:20.596-07:002017-06-24T12:49:20.596-07:00To add to my post above: this article in Slate giv...To add to my post above: this article in Slate gives an interesting take on Obama's reluctance to air the intelligence about Russia (as in the Wapo article) before the elections. The author states that this helped protect US democracy at a critial point.<br /><br />http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2017/06/obama_s_response_to_russian_interference_he_did_his_job.htmlTwomindsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-70499653209109561542017-06-24T12:42:03.596-07:002017-06-24T12:42:03.596-07:00TimH. My problem with far-lefties is about persona...TimH. My problem with far-lefties is about personality, not specific policy proposals. They are inherently and almost always teleological, fanatical, and zero-sum romantics who are convinced that their model of reality and prescriptions are not only correct and necessary, but also (coincidence!) would leave them justified to wield total power.<br /><br />Yes, exactly the same description encompasses almost all rightists, as well. With a few differences.<br /><br />1. Lefty teleology envisions an ever- upward arc (as they would define it) to human destiny, while rightist teleology goes in for “cyclical history.” Both are loony, baseless and disproved, but facts have no effect.<br /><br />2. Lefty despots will kill you, but spare your children (teaching them to hate you) because they tend (mostly) to dismiss genetic or racial inheritance in favor or notions of infinite human mold-ability. Right wing or fascist or feudal despots will kill you and then slaughter your children.<br /><br />3. Lefty despots will tightly control science. Right-wing despots tend to tear it out and destroy it, root and branch.<br /><br />4. Both create religions and aristocracies to enforce order. There have been far, far fewer left wing despotisms, so the religions have generally been Marxist.<br /><br />5. Both cater to romantic fanaticisms. Both fret about losing defectors to a reasonable middle.<br /><br />—<br />I do not fail to understand your strawmen, locumranch. They simply have nothing to do with me. I am not behooved to answer accusations that are psychotic hallucinations, crafted by a strange mind who rails that others are just like what he sees in the mirror.<br /><br />To be clear, I do argue with folks when they make accusations that at least fire in the general direction of the horizon where I stand. On occasion I have thus argued with you. But there’s no basis here. Your salvos disappear into some Twilight Zone.<br />David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-16121577612712235012017-06-24T12:33:48.195-07:002017-06-24T12:33:48.195-07:00TimW: You keep being distracted by squirrels.
1. ...TimW: You keep being distracted by squirrels.<br /><br />1. Irrespective of GOP-Russia collusion, the fact is that Putin’s FSB etc wanted the GOP to win, not just the presidency, but across the board. That outcome is what they blatantly sought. That is a fact of profound political redolence. It should deeply bother all patriotic Americans. While it is not a court-of-law conviction, it is consistent with mountains of evidence that the Republican Party is not healthy for the U.S.<br /><br />2. All right then, but did the GOP collude with Moscow toward that end? We are not (yet) in a court of law, so demanding court-of-law proof of GOP-Russia collusion is just plain wrong. The pile of circumstantial evidence is overwhelming. It is a mountain! <br /><br />Manfort, Flynn, Pence, the ENTIRE circle of people surrounding Jared Kushner, secret meetings and channels! Scads of business connections and sweetheart deals with Russian oligarchs. Exxon, for H sake! “Emoluments” amounting to billions! You know I could go on and on.<br /><br />Dig it. We do not need to be hamstrung or stymied by court-of-law standards when deciding that something stinks to high heaven and the security of the American state is at stake. Those who demand court-of-law standards are Fox shills. They scream "witch hunt!" while the townsfolk close in on a coven of pointy-hatted, Satan-chanting crones who have children suspended over a cauldron. These may not quite be witches, but we are perfectly right to demand answers to our questions.<br /><br />3. Court-of-law hairsplitting over definitions of “obstruction” are necessary when deciding on criminal prosecutions and whether to deprive the perpetrator of either life or freedom with prison. But it is an absurd standard _politically_. These are traitors, pure and simple. That is “traitors” with a small-t… for now… until it’s proved in court. But the shoe fits.<br /><br />4. The same term applies to those who drag their feet over reforming the weaknesses that the Putin-cabal tried to exploit. The issue is not whether the FSB etc were THE tipping factor in 2016. The issue is the fact that Congress is holding ZERO hearings about how to strengthen US electoral processes, investigating corruptible voting machines. The horrific influence of partisan secretaries of state. Gerrymandering. Weaponized narrative. <br /><br />They are complicit. As the old saying goes: "We've settled what you are. Now we're just trying to determine the pricew you sold us out for." It is the "T-Word." We're only arguing over whether it is "t" or "T."<br />David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-21826579498387978672017-06-24T12:21:37.495-07:002017-06-24T12:21:37.495-07:00@Larry Hart, 9:22 AM
I think you're referring...@Larry Hart, 9:22 AM<br /><br />I think you're referring to this article? It's worth a read in full.<br /><br />https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/world/national-security/obama-putin-election-hacking/?hpid=hp_rhp-banner-high_russiaobama-banner-7a%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.63bb74a63a85Twomindsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-80912111826987409302017-06-24T11:28:34.576-07:002017-06-24T11:28:34.576-07:00So far, Hillary Clinton's private e-mail serve...So far, Hillary Clinton's private e-mail server seems to be the only one <b>not</b> being read in Moscow.<br /><br />And we're truly into a weird place if Trump is preferable as a candidate to Hillary because Hillary might have let something slip to Russia, whereas Trump is openly in bed with them. It is just like that oft-quoted Simpsons episode where people couldn't vote for Mayor Quimby because he's so soft on crime he let Sideshow Bob out of prison early. So instead, they vote for Sideshow Bob.<br /><br />As to yesterday's conversation, I'd still have trouble voting for you as a Republican as long as you refuse to acknowledge (and counter from within) the Republican tactics of suppressing the vote and suppressing factual information which leads to politically-inconvenient conclusions.LarryHartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-50074311586223394522017-06-24T10:23:02.894-07:002017-06-24T10:23:02.894-07:00LarryH
Noted. Really nothing new here. I see as m...LarryH<br /><br />Noted. Really nothing new here. I see as mentioned earlier that the Officially Approved term "meddled" has now replaced "hacked". I can easily believe that the Russians did this. I have a harder time imagining that it decided the outcome of the election. Or that this is the first time something like this has happened.<br /><br />And as with all such stories, there are an awful lot of off the record sources without names.<br /> <br />I remain skeptical that this was decisive. The revelations mostly were that Democrats were lazy with cyber security and were at least as venal as the public generally regards all politicians. Perhaps it also had some resonance with the related questions - now well and truly buried - as to whether Ms. Clinton's communications were also being read in Moscow. <br /><br />T.Tacitushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17007086196578740689noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-21193158733933454032017-06-24T09:37:39.491-07:002017-06-24T09:37:39.491-07:00locumranch:
LOL. As I accused David of mistaking ...locumranch:<br /><i><br />LOL. As I accused David of mistaking ends for means, it's clear that he fails to grasp the nature of my critique.<br /></i><br /><br />Whose fault is that?<br /><br /><i><br />Larry_H makes a good case <br /></i><br /><br />Oh, help me, Jesus.<br /><br /><i><br />...for negotiation & compromise in the post above by postulating 'civilization' as some sort of Abilene Compromise, <br /></i><br /><br />"I won't kill you if you don't kill me" is a good <b>start</b> on a civilized compromise, not the full extent of a good one. <br /><br /><i><br />making me wonder how much slavery, inequality, racism, feudalism & global warming (percentage-wise) he is willing to accept as the price of civility. <br /></i><br /><br />A clever bit of sophistry equivalent to asking "How much would you be willing to kill yourself as the price of my not shooting you?" You use your powers well for evil, but I wonder why you don't use them for good instead.<br /><br /><i><br />Would he compromise away 10, 20 or 30% of his desires in order to 'get along'? How about a modern '3/5ths compromise' in order to balance population inequalities between Blue & Red States? <br /></i><br /><br />On some issues, I would gladly give up some level of what I would wish if it means that much to the other guy, and he's willing to reciprocate in the opposite direction when it means that much to me. But what you and your fellow Republicans argue is, "We don't compromise, so give us everything we want or else we're at war." And if I or liberals or Democrats don't cave unconditionally, then <b>we're</b> putting party before country.<br /><br />Let me be clear, if one side wants peace through compromise, and the other side wants its own way on everything or else war, there can be no compromise <b>between</b> the two. And the fault of that is not on the side who refused to capitulate unconditionally.<br /><br /><i><br />We await his Solomonic Wisdom with baited breath.<br /></i><br /><br />I'm pretty sure the expression is not spelled that way, even in Canada.<br />LarryHartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-41202171410541004312017-06-24T09:22:09.919-07:002017-06-24T09:22:09.919-07:00I call Tim Wolter's attention to today's (...I call Tim Wolter's attention to today's (June 24) www.electoral-vote.com :<br /><i><br />The Washington Post has published a report saying that last August, the CIA informed Barack Obama that not only was it certain the Russians were actively working to damage Hillary Clinton and help Donald Trump in the election, but they had captured Vladimir Putin's detailed instructions on how to do it. Since Putin, a former KGB agent, is extremely cautious and rarely communicates by phone or computer, the intercept probably came from a top-level mole high in the Russian government who is actually a CIA spy.<br /><br />In the months following the revelation, top administration officials debated what to do. This included (potential) cyberattacks on Russian infrastructure, release of material the CIA had that could embarrass Putin, or sanctions that could crater the Russian economy. In the end, Obama approved only a minor package: expelling 35 "diplomats" and closing two compounds that were used for spying. Trying (and succeeding) to flip a presidential election has to be the crime of the century, but the response was just a slap on the wrist. Later, one Obama administration official said: "I feel like we sort of choked." President Donald Trump has shown no interest whatsoever in punishing the Russians for their actions. To the contrary, he has talked about lifting existing sanctions rather than imposing new penalties. However, Congress may impose some new sanctions on its own.<br /><br />Obama's main concern, as he and a small number of top officials discussed their options in the highly secure Situation Room, was not making things even worse. One thing he ordered was offering assistance to the states to shore up their voting systems. To his amazement, Brian Kemp, the Republican secretary of state in Georgia, denounced the move as a violation of states rights. So did other state officials. Republican leaders in Congress didn't believe the CIA's evidence. So, Obama wasn't able to do much to stop or punish the Russians.<br /><br />The Post's reporting is based on more than three dozen interviews with former and current senior officials in the White House, as well as the State, Defense, and Homeland Security departments and the intelligence community. It goes into a great amount of detail about what happened and when. The paper also left out key information at the request of the government. (V)<br /></i>LarryHartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-29168180001571444752017-06-24T09:03:36.139-07:002017-06-24T09:03:36.139-07:00locumranch, you're real good at putting words ...locumranch, you're real good at putting words in other people's mouths. Try putting words in your own and speak for yourself - and no more word salad. Nor these rhetorical tricks that are so passe.Jumperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11794110173836133321noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-54159647333970687142017-06-24T07:25:04.679-07:002017-06-24T07:25:04.679-07:00LOL. As I accused David of mistaking ends for mea...<br /><br />LOL. As I accused David of mistaking ends for means, it's clear that he fails to grasp the nature of my critique.<br /><br />To what ends? Our wants & desires.<br /><br />Fact, reason, logic & empathy are not the ends he seeks. Instead, they represent the means to which we may achieve our ends, fact being the 'fair', reason & logic being the 'level' and empathy being the 'open' on the fair/level/open playing field of value.<br /><br />Space Travel, Power, Pleasure, Immortality & Divinity: These impulses, wants & desires are inherently IRRATIONAL as they seek to overturn the factual order, achieve the fantastic and abolish natural equity.<br /><br />We preserve & amplify our humanity when we make science serve our ends, but we become servile mechanisms when science becomes our purpose & end.<br /><br /><br />Best<br />______<br /><br />Larry_H makes a good case for negotiation & compromise in the post above by postulating 'civilization' as some sort of Abilene Compromise, making me wonder how much slavery, inequality, racism, feudalism & global warming (percentage-wise) he is willing to accept as the price of civility. Would he compromise away 10, 20 or 30% of his desires in order to 'get along'? How about a modern '3/5ths compromise' in order to balance population inequalities between Blue & Red States? We await his Solomonic Wisdom with baited breath.locumranchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-7967344070258151672017-06-24T06:40:40.594-07:002017-06-24T06:40:40.594-07:00locumranch:
The answer to the oft-asked question ...locumranch:<br /><i><br />The answer to the oft-asked question of 'Why can't we just all get along?' is that we just don't want to. It is really just that simple and there is no great mystery here.<br /></i><br /><br />Some don't want to. Some may not especially care to, but agree to get along anyway in return for not being in a permanent state of war with their neighbors. If you want to refuse even that consideration, then you are essentially declaring yourself to be outside of civilization and at war with anyone unlucky enough to cross paths with you, like the bugs of "Starship Troopers"--there's no negotiating with you, so it's you or us. Don't be surprised if you lose that war.<br /><br />I'm reminded of perhaps the funniest dialogue blooper from 1960s Marvel Comics. The bottom of one page has Captain America fighting with some nasty armored supervillain, and Cap says something like, "This is it! Only one of us is going to walk away from here under his own power..." Then, the next page has a large panel of Cap smashing the guy with his shield while finishing the line, "...And it won't be <b>me</b>!"<br /><br />LarryHartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-43420328071904253102017-06-24T06:26:25.849-07:002017-06-24T06:26:25.849-07:00Dr. Brin, I understand why you'd have reservat... Dr. Brin, I understand why you'd have reservations about the left, after all they like the nominally conservatives, have about half of a decent plan, ideally, there would be honest negotiation and compromises that wouldn't tread on too many toes. Unfortunately, we're stuck with a bunch of fudpuckers who think life can be like a football game, wonder if they're just wearing their ties too tight and restricting their carotids?Tim H.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-22799585249074130862017-06-24T05:36:20.808-07:002017-06-24T05:36:20.808-07:00A lot of "the left" was in recognition o...A lot of "the left" was in recognition of some legitimate form of labor organized enough for some negotiation. I'm not ashamed of that. We even have non-compulsory communism in the USA in the form of Hutterite communities - and we see them as very old-fashioned! I'm not embarrassed by them, either. Extremists are a different story.Jumperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11794110173836133321noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-24766826119356112482017-06-24T04:33:43.696-07:002017-06-24T04:33:43.696-07:00Alfred Differ:
You are obviously a former believe...Alfred Differ:<br /><i><br />You are obviously a former believer of what you now perceive as a Progressive Fraud.<br /></i><br /><br />Heh. I was going to say that loc exemplifies the metaphorical "liberal who has been mugged" conservative.<br />LarryHartnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-6617668765872837482017-06-23T20:55:12.792-07:002017-06-23T20:55:12.792-07:00Alfred, I am not an atheist, though I am obedient ...Alfred, I am not an atheist, though I am obedient to God's Great Sermon, which is "I'll provide no objective evidence of my existence, thereby implicitly commanding you to pretend that I'm not here and figure it all out for yourselves."<br /><br />That Sermon is so huge and blatant that it is the height of arrogance to disobey. <br /><br />===<br /><br />Tim H I am not eager to see a return of genuine leftism. It was a genuine sickness that - in extreme forms - was as bad as confederatism or jihadism... though they did believe in human improvement... with a fiercely unforgiving, scary utopianist tinge.<br /><br />Liberalism is not and never has been leftist, except that liberals believe in not wasting human talent through injustice or prejudice and liberals do believe in human improvability, gradualistically and with maximum, eclectic individual choice.<br /><br />Liberals grasp the notion of positive sum and being able to keep some of the old, while embracing the new. They grasp - at some level - that reciprocal accountability demands open-fair competition, and hence are more loyal to true market enterprise than today's libertarians are.<br /><br />Among the hundred horrid sins of the GOP-Fox-oligarch madness has been their apparently relentless determination to create conditions that will revive a True Left. That madness had been mostly buried. But it is re-sprouting, watered by the tears of the mad-right's victims.David Brinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14465315130418506525noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-12998205938577442182017-06-23T19:03:59.776-07:002017-06-23T19:03:59.776-07:00@locumranch | David errs as I once erred
Ah. I un...@locumranch | <i>David errs as I once erred</i><br /><br />Ah. I understand now.<br /><br />Both my parents raised me in a manner that pretty much ensured I avoided acquiring an education in matters of faith. It wasn’t easy as I was a curious boy, but after getting uninvited from a Sunday school and noting my mother couldn’t care less, it got easier for them. So that makes me an atheist by upbringing. <br /><br />I know a number of people who were educated, though, and have since lost their way. Their atheism is often much more combative. It seems standard for them to feel they were the victims of a fraud, so anytime a conversation steers into one of their former beliefs, the response is vigorous and possibly out of proportion. Sometimes they trigger for no apparent reason, but their explanation for doing so demonstrates a kind of memetic proximity.<br /><br />I’m over-simplifying a lot. I’m even guilty of stereotyping. However, stereo-types are useful structures to keep in mind as short-cuts to understanding people one has only recently met. As long as one doesn’t take the stereotypes too seriously and build biases that cannot be challenged, they can be valuable. For example, ex-smokers are often the most vocal complainers when smokers violate their air space. That is another stereotype with a potential hazard, but it is correct often enough to be useful.<br /><br />You are obviously a former believer of what you now perceive as a Progressive Fraud.<br /><br />There are quite a few atheists I had to quit hanging out with because they were former believers and prone to see everything in those terms. They felt cheated, became very sensitive, and turned quickly to indignation at even minor whiffs of their former beliefs.<br /><br />Take it from someone who isn’t much of a progressive, but is married to one. They aren’t all that bad. When moderated by liberals and conservatives, we all make a pretty good team.<br />Alfred Differhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01170159981105973192noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-59081233065498791612017-06-23T18:42:05.164-07:002017-06-23T18:42:05.164-07:00Dr. Brin, I read Duncan's statement more as it... Dr. Brin, I read Duncan's statement more as it will take left/progressive candidates to energize young voters. Folks our age who've drunk the "Conservative" kool aid are largely not reachable until they're desperate, and our generation is beginning to shuffle off stage anyway. Any thoughts on how the overreach of contemporary conservatism will shape whatever political philosophy that takes that name fifty years from now?tim H.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8587336.post-50439703746123727862017-06-23T15:20:57.179-07:002017-06-23T15:20:57.179-07:00I want to agree with you about our civil servants,...I want to agree with you about our civil servants, but I look, for example, at how ICE is acting theses day and I can't share you optimism. Along with a lot of good work (I am the last one to disparage them), daily news reports nationwide tell of agents collecting kids from proms, mothers from hospitals, etc. <br /><br />Just doing their job... with a touch of comic book villainy that would embarrass Snidely Whiplash. <br /><br />Smurphsnoreply@blogger.com