Anthony Levandowski Pardoned

One quote stood out to me at the very end of the article:

“The only thing that matters is the future,” he told me after the civil trial was settled. “I don’t even know why we study history. It’s entertaining, I guess—the dinosaurs and the Neanderthals and the Industrial Revolution, and stuff like that. But what already happened doesn’t really matter. You don’t need to know that history to build on what they made. In technology, all that matters is tomorrow.”

I've always been obsessed by history but always struggled with this same sentiment: that I was escaping reality and my responsibility to try interesting things by plunging into the past.

[0]https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/10/22/did-uber-steal...

edit: to clarify my thoughts given the sudden replies: I don't mean to say I argue for a wholesale casting off of the past. Clearly, I understand the trivial observation that such a view of history has naive aspects, but that's not at all what I am interested in. For me and most other people here that enjoy history and such things, ignoring history would be impossible anyway because the draw is too great. I'm merely putting out a reminder that all our inner or outer debates about the finer points of politics or history or other such topics are often a way to escape seeing what we can do in the present.

Looking at people like Levandowski, you might see yet another arrogant techie that has a blinkered view of the world, (and that is more or less true) but at the same time they are out there doing bold things and living life on the edge for better or for worse. They essentially act like the historical figures we read about, although I am not implying that he is some important figure as of yet (though who knows in the future) just that he shows the same zest for life.

I'm essentially speaking for those whose main problem is the opposite of Levandowski: too much intellectual masturbation, too much thought as entertainment, and too little meaningful application of whatever lessons you may or may not have learned. You may harp on about how history matters, but how many of you have actually been presented with choices that mattered beyond the parameters of your own life?

I have relatives my age in new zealand, and it was also common there.

Memes have an amazing power to spread, huh?

- Have a public vote, direct legitimation (or via some extra electoral college or something) this means that judges have to be "popular" and run campaigns and question is, if that's really smart ...

- Have the "juristical class" elect within, so judges from lower courts would lick somebody, or current judges elect additional ones. That would put judges into their own "class" and remove all democratic legitimation

- or do what is done and have a democratically elected body do it. In the case of the U.S. it's done by a combination of president (nominating) and Senate (confirming) where the Senate represents the different states.

It is one of the tough problems.

For the pardon the idea comes from absolutist times where a King would pardon as he likes. The modern interpretation comes from correcting "blind" justice. Justice has to rule according to law. But sometimes one either might decide that a law was bad and than a pardon might be a way to correct that (ideally if law is rewritten as well) and sometimes there are hard cases, like the 90 year old who should get a chance to die outside of prison, for sake of family etc.

Generally the system assumes the actors act mostly in good faith and were removed (impeachment etc.) otherwise.

This pardon was... really pretty conventional. It's of a non-violent crime and a comparatively compartmentalized one that doesn't impact the nation as a whole. Incentivising industrial espionage isn't "not bad", but it's not that bad.

This is routine Washington stuff, really. The genuinely corrupt pardons, of his family and associates (and potentially himself) for crimes committed during the administration don't seem to have materialized[1]. The list from yesterday is very long, but really pretty unsurprising.

[1] But there is still an hour and a half left. A pardon can be scrawled on a napkin in 30 seconds and then shown to the media to deliver it. There's no formality requirement in the constitution. If he does it before noon then it counts.

I would say that it is uncommon for presidents to abuse the pardon power like this, it's just not completely unheard of. It's also worth noting that Trump multiplied the total number of corrupt presidential pardons in US history by something like 10 in his time in office. The scale is hard to fully grasp.