Recent posts

#1

Off the Record / Re: What does a TRUMP presiden...

Last post by Josquius - Today at 05:38:11 AM

Is that the position of the Greens or Your Party?  "We support you but..."

I see what you're doing there.
You know this is the way good support is meant to work right?
Not just blind cheerleading but trying to steer those you support away from doing stupid and terrible things?

More on the fake question, no idea what Your Party say, the Greens are on that wavelength however as are most mainstream parties in Europe.

#2

Off the Record / Re: Elon Musk: Always A Douche

Last post by Tamas - Today at 05:17:22 AM

Curious thing I heard which highlights musks known sympathies....
He was ranting about the EU fining vichy 150 million for breaking the law. Despite the fact they did. And this is pocket change for him.
Someone added a note on this that Russia, Belarus, and many other countries had blocked Twitter....
He personally removed it.

Hopefully someone put it back, and keeps doing so each time Elon nuts removes it

Sure but there is no point. Thanks to Trump's regime the last faint coatings of the fake concerns about free speech are coming off. Far-right people don't want everyone to be able to say what they want. They want themselves to be able to do so.

#3

Off the Record / Re: Brexit and the waning days...

Last post by Tamas - Today at 05:13:59 AM

Yes that's a huge problem. We need a progressive vision for the future that doesn't involve highlighting minorities in a negative but also positive manner. Like it or not it's the economy. If people (think they) are prospering or expect to be prospering they will put up with not being allowed to pick on vulnerable minorities.

#4

Off the Record / Re: Brexit and the waning days...

Last post by Josquius - Today at 04:45:18 AM

Correct in terms of stuff like citizen of country X can access the social system of country X, work in country X, buy property in country X, etc...
In terms of what they're doing and constraining fundamental rights of non citizens.... No. That's something that is meant to be universal.

Yes but clearly a revision of practical applications of that is needed in the modern world. The current rules were clearly made with European conflicts in mind. Not when technology and global crisis intertwine to turn those old processes and interpretations into effective vehicles for immigration.

I'm not sure what you mean here.
All are equal before the law is a concept that long predates the 20th century. I don't think European conflicts had much to do with it.

In terms of what they're doing and constraining fundamental rights of non citizens.... No. That's something that is meant to be universal.

That is western thinking though and much, probably most, of the world doesn't follow that philosophy. It is, in other words, wishful thinking.
And something that can be weaponised against against the west.

Not really.
Its pretty standard the world over that this is how the law works in theory at least.
In practice of course in some countries there's lots of corruption and other shit going on, and even in the west data suggests there's a lot of unconscious(?) bias, so a foreigner might face harsher treatment than a local. But in theory all are equal before the law.
Quite the opposite of this being unique western thinking, the main exception example that comes to mind was western extraterritoriality in Qing China.

I think this is an example, which I've mentioned to Raz before, of a lot of "identity politics" not being driven by the left but by the centre left.

The Right.
Identity politics is the weapon of the Right.

Olufemi Taiwo's Elite Capture is fantastic on this. But it just seems like such a weak argument here remove jury trial in certain cases because....woke? Or worse remove jury trial because opposition to it is "not a good look". Not great.

Wanting rapists put in jail is woke?

Two slightly wider points this made me think of though is the thing about Magna Carta. Which I think is interesting in a wider way because I actually think that "myth" is our constitution in many ways. I think it's Linda Colley who makes the argument (I think it's in her book on constitutions: The Gun, The Pen and The Ship) that the British constitution is fundamentally the Whig narrative of history - and I think she's absolutely right. It's not Magna Carta, or the Bill of Rights or the Great Reform Act - each of these matter in their moment but are, as Fleet points out, of specific significance. What makes them matter is that they form a wider narrative with meaning - that may be a myth but the myth is really significant (just like the myths of, say, the French or American revolutions are in those countries). But Whig history has been in decline for over a century, it is now broadly recognised as "myth" in a perjorative sense and I'm not really sure how our system works without that intellectual underpinning. It feels like a lot of form without any substance or feeling for what works and what doesn't and where the edges are. I think similarly we've embraced many of the forms of a more American constitutional order (Supreme Court, advancing political arguments through the courts etc) without there being an underlying, shared, agreed, consensual basis like the US constitution/Bill of Rights.

Other thing is it reminds me of Blair in a weird way. In that Blair always liked to cast his politics (and I think genuinely thinks in these terms) between forces of modernity and progress (him) v their opponents (vested interests, unions, Tories). Whether it's all of his constitutional reforms (Human Rights Act, FOIA, Supreme Court) or embrace of almost unfettered globalisation, public-private partnerships, "cool Britannia" or his desire to join the Euro, I think Blair saw it all as having modernised the Labour Party, New Labour's job was to modernise the country. Ultimately peaking in his absolutely mad conference speech about Britain being a "young country" which seems like nonsense in basically any way you look at it

Its funny though, as this whig view of history is held to by those who have absolutely no interest in progress. They see things as settled and sorted by the turn of the 20th century and any more progress is not wanted.

I think it's often an effective framing but I think it is a problematic as the experience of this country since Blair left office shows. I'd add that he is still very much of the same view but what constitutions progress has, possibly, shifted. So he's now very focused on embracing tech and AI as the coming wave. I think one of the big problems is the lack of politics in ideas of "progress" or "modernity" - so who is benefiting, where will the gains in power and wealth accrue etc. I think for Blair that was a detail and you just re-distribute the issue away, whereas I think in the last 10 years especially it's become very clear that who has the power matters and it's not just a case of re-distribution.

That's definitely something Blair had and we're missing now. Even under Thatcher it was there despite the super-regressive government, this belief in civilization moving forward. Wilsons white heat of technology....
Now....yeah. Its just a desperate scrabble to turn back the clock. Nobody is interested in actually making something better. Just battling for who gets what share of the scraps.

#5

Off the Record / Re: The adventures of AI Faceb...

Last post by Syt - Today at 04:42:26 AM

Gonna use this as a general AI slop thread.

#6

Off the Record / Re: What does a TRUMP presiden...

Last post by Crazy_Ivan80 - Today at 03:59:15 AM

Still a year out iirc, not sure they won't cook up something by then

#7

Off the Record / Re: The EU thread

Last post by Crazy_Ivan80 - Today at 03:12:42 AM

That's definitely Putin and Thiel's read on Europe.

And not necessarily wrong. Eu regulation and ideological stubbornness is getting our industry because of far to harsh and unrealistic goals resulting, among other, in energy prices that are far too high.
If you then know that, for example, Antwerpen has the second biggest petro-chemical cluster in the world and that they're sounding the alarm...
All because we sent fools to the eu parliament and commission.

Industry first is the name of the game. On that foundation you can build your services to sell the things you make.  Otherwise you're just a glorified pass-along.
And for that you need to mine, refine, research and have cheap and abundant energy. Even if it pollutes, which is something you can fix if you have an industrial base that name worthy.

And currently the eu is squandering that in an effort to lower global emissions in an attempt to stop warming with an insignificant amount.

#8

Off the Record / Re: The EU thread

Last post by Crazy_Ivan80 - Today at 02:59:50 AM

It worked, reading it now. Thanks

Nice. I can probably link more from there. Just shout if a link is needed.

#9

Off the Record / Re: Elon Musk: Always A Douche

Last post by Crazy_Ivan80 - Today at 02:57:10 AM

Curious thing I heard which highlights musks known sympathies....
He was ranting about the EU fining vichy 150 million for breaking the law. Despite the fact they did. And this is pocket change for him.
Someone added a note on this that Russia, Belarus, and many other countries had blocked Twitter....
He personally removed it.

Hopefully someone put it back, and keeps doing so each time Elon nuts removes it

#10

Off the Record / Re: Brexit and the waning days...

Last post by Crazy_Ivan80 - Today at 02:55:50 AM

In terms of what they're doing and constraining fundamental rights of non citizens.... No. That's something that is meant to be universal.

That is western thinking though and much, probably most, of the world doesn't follow that philosophy. It is, in other words, wishful thinking.
And something that can be weaponised against against the west.