31–40 of 175 posts
EDIT: The article does break down the purpose of Section 1615, and shed light on its context - I did not see that the article continued beyond the massive picture below the blurb that I quoted.
It's very strange you would read that bit entirely but miss the multiple paragraphs directly below it saying it is equivocally untrue.
This new flavor of conservatism is so strange in light of how bound to free market ideals most flavors of conservatism are. In general, I really quite dislike Conservative/Liberal labels as political stances are not two-dimensional, but rather multidimensional. Parties are loose alliances of disparate groups. And somehow there's this rising contingent of neocons, who also happen to dislike SpaceX. Does anyone underst…
EDIT: The article does break down the purpose of Section 1615, and shed light on its context - I did not see that the article continued beyond the massive picture below the blurb that I quoted.
1615 doesn't restrict the military from investing in new launch systems. What it says is that we already have launch infrastructure, so if you're going to spend money on more, it either needs to be compatible/in-line with the existing infrastructure, or you need to have a good reason (which are quite extensive). That's all it says.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/2810...
This new flavor of conservatism is so strange in light of how bound to free market ideals most flavors of conservatism are. In general, I really quite dislike Conservative/Liberal labels as political stances are not two-dimensional, but rather multidimensional. Parties are loose alliances of disparate groups. And somehow there's this rising contingent of neocons, who also happen to dislike SpaceX. Does anyone underst…
The only consistency with Breitbart seems to be that they never let any of those annoying facts get in the way of the narrative. I can't see any ideological justification here, SpaceX getting money from the US government isn't fundamentally different than ULA getting money from the US government. The article does imply at the end that there is likely someone behind these articles that has a specific interest in this…
This new flavor of conservatism is so strange in light of how bound to free market ideals most flavors of conservatism are. In general, I really quite dislike Conservative/Liberal labels as political stances are not two-dimensional, but rather multidimensional. Parties are loose alliances of disparate groups. And somehow there's this rising contingent of neocons, who also happen to dislike SpaceX. Does anyone underst…
I think the key to understanding the so-called neo-consrvatism is that it is not 'for' anything; rather, it is against a long list of things, and virulently so. They are conservative in that conservatives have generally defined themselves by opposition to whatever has been changing in the societies of their generation.
Its other feature is the belief that its ends justifies the means, including the incitement of irrational anger and even hatred, which they regard as a virtue. This trait is latent at all political extremes, but only gains traction when a significant number of the generally more moderate or uninterested members of the populace believe they are being cheated out of something they are entitled to.
As much as I despise all "news" organizations, I say good. Considering that most of the media has been fawning over musk and spacex and everything musk does, perhaps some criticism of musk is required in a free and democratic system. I just don't like how so much of media are pretty much colluding with each other to spread the same narrative. On almost all topics, it seems like most of the media is pushing a particul…
> But I wonder if musk has pr firms working the social media scene? I would say the downvotes are more due to the fact you're commenting on an article that says a certain section of what we are still calling "The Right" has incorrectly demonized Musk in this case and you decided to piggyback on the criticism of him. In addition, your extended ad hominem in response to an article you didn't read is disappointing.
Okay. But why is arstechnica even defending musk. Is arstechnica musk's PR firm? Isn't that strange in and of itself? Lots of bad things get said about everyone and yet arstechnica decided to jump in on musk's defense.
That seems pretty odd to me.
> you decided to piggyback on the criticism of him.
I've criticized musk. And I've also praised him too. But the problem is that I get attacked for criticizing musk.
I just find it odd how any criticism of musk gets a swarmed response. That isn't an ad hominem. That's just wondering how strange things are.
I would be interested if arstechnica or their employees have any direct or indirect financial stake in musk's enterprises. I also would be interested if breitbart/et al have any financial stake in having musk's companies fail ( ie short positions or interests in musk's competitors ).
This new flavor of conservatism is so strange in light of how bound to free market ideals most flavors of conservatism are. In general, I really quite dislike Conservative/Liberal labels as political stances are not two-dimensional, but rather multidimensional. Parties are loose alliances of disparate groups. And somehow there's this rising contingent of neocons, who also happen to dislike SpaceX. Does anyone underst…
"Neocons" were the foreign-policy hawks of the 2000s. These guys largely call themselves the "alt-right". They're basically as bad as you've heard, but hiding it sometimes. Even I find this particular turn against SpaceX somewhat weird. My internal model of the alt-right has largely been that they have one wing who are basically Nazi fanfiction, another who idolize the "throne and altar conservatism" of pre-Revolutio…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> where's Peter Thiel in all this? The evidence seems to suggest Thiel has gotten in with the "throne and altar" crowd, the Neo-Reactionaries and self-described "Dark Enlightenment". https://thebaffler.com/latest/the-moldbug-variations-pein How that intersects with his techy leanings, I don't really know, it's very possible that he's being thrown overboard as you describe.
Bloody hell, I swear we're living in the pulpiest political-thriller novel I've ever fucking heard of.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The only consistency with Breitbart seems to be that they never let any of those annoying facts get in the way of the narrative. I can't see any ideological justification here, SpaceX getting money from the US government isn't fundamentally different than ULA getting money from the US government. The article does imply at the end that there is likely someone behind these articles that has a specific interest in this…
I wonder if it's just Bezos stirring the pot with the hopes of a favorable outcome for Blue Origin...
This new flavor of conservatism is so strange in light of how bound to free market ideals most flavors of conservatism are. In general, I really quite dislike Conservative/Liberal labels as political stances are not two-dimensional, but rather multidimensional. Parties are loose alliances of disparate groups. And somehow there's this rising contingent of neocons, who also happen to dislike SpaceX. Does anyone underst…
I don't quite grasp the details of the story, but the "four kinds of money"[1][2] theme may help understand the point of view.
Why exactly would Musk spend money in a way that disturbs conservatives more than how say ULA does it, is probably complicated, but I assume they have their reasons.
PS. Also, quite illuminating is Ron Paul's original opinion piece on foxnews [3].
1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-MQp-5lZToE
2. http://lpmaryland.org/liberty-quotation-milton-friedman-four...
3. http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/09/12/ron-paul-crony-def...