Posts by Angus Robertson
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I am often astounded to hear the vehement hatred , from the resentful Right, for anybody with the slightest regard for the environment or for policies that lead toward a sustainable future.
Mostly its a intuitive response assuming that the people making such claims are scum sucking politicians of an order of magnitude beyond even the baseline crappiness of all politicians. The enviromental claims are of such seemingly nigh impervious, and indeed perfect "it's for the children", morality that they should set off the BS detectors in anybody beyond the age of 3 yo.
So far the enviromental lobby is responsible for such a great number of things. The adoption of bio-ethanol policies was a victory of theirs. The luddite scaremongering against GM. The Kyoto fest where the worlds richest jet off the schmooze fests in exotic locations and get their pictures taken with celebrities. These haven't helped the enviroment one iota, they've helped the politicians.
-
He is an optimist. Japanese households have lots of savings, with which they buy lots of Japanese debt. Japan has cashed up conglomerates which again hold lots of Japanese debt. The Americans have no savings, their comglomerates are very multinational - the support mechanisms Japan has, these do not exist for America.
When America goes it is more likely to mimic the Soviet Union, decline followed by massive collapse. America is fast becoming a place that makes nothing anybody wants to buy, like the USSR became, and therefore has nothing supporting its apparent wealth. The Americans have a big military, like the Soviets did, so they will continue to be respected until the collapse.
Then the fun starts - interesting times.
-
Hard News: A few (more) words on The Hobbit, in reply to Craig Ranapia,
Its not exactly a big story if the government is caught doing what it should be doing.
-
Some people really don't like the police. Some people hate the police. These attitudes have been in existance about as long as there have been police.
Censoring dialogue that expresses this is the height of stupidity.
-
Hard News: The Wogistan form book, in reply to Martin Lindberg,
+1.
The effectiveness of airport security is akin to saying a prayer before flying.
-
Hard News: The Wogistan form book, in reply to Lucy Stewart,
At that point it's firmly in the realm of farce.
At every point, airport screening is a farce. It doesn't work well enough to justify 1/100th of the cost of doing it in the first place.
-
Hard News: The Waterview Bore, in reply to Rich of Observationz,
Or an Ekranoplan service.
-
Hard News: Cultures and violence, in reply to Megan Wegan,
And having privilege doesn't necessarily mean having power. Which is a huge part of the problem. "Everything is supposed to work for me, but I feel powerless. So what am I meant to do? If the world is set up for (white, cis, hetero, able men like me, and I still feel "emasculated", then what alternative do I have but violence?"
False dichotomy alert, cap'n.
Self-obssessed creeds have picked powerless groups and blamed them for many problems in the past - and will continue to do so into the future. When people decide to scapegoat a race, gender, orientation and blame this "other" group for their problems - its a reflection on the problems of the people doing scapegoating. Privilege theory is just one of the later iterations in a long and tragic line, generating ill will by blaming the powerless for things the powerless are literally powerless to change.
Privilege theory is wrong, because privilege does not equate to power. And the world is set up for the powerful, not the privileged.
Peversely privilege theory is ensured ongoing success as a creed of belief by being so usefully wrong it serves the purposes of some powerful groups. It is a favourite theory taught in rich, first world academia who serve to educate the powerful.
-
Hard News: Cultures and violence, in reply to Danielle,
Hear ye, for Sanctuary has spoken: the gendered nature of gun violence and mass shootings is not at all relevant. Good to know.
Incidence of being male = 50%; incidence of firearm related death = <0.1%.
The relevence of gender to gun violence seems statistically very poor.
-
Hard News: Cultures and violence, in reply to Russell Brown,
Also the country with a deadly Drug War, which kills tens of thousands of people a year.
If I lived there I'd probably break the law and get a gun.