Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Duty, Democracy and the Threat of Tribalism

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 77 posts

Re: Duty, Democracy and the Threat of Tribalism

#41

Post by creaghpatr »

gnusty_gnurc wrote: post #33

General Mattis and others like him from the administrative, technocratic state have to do so much more to try to convince us that they're qualified. His appeals to decency and fitness of leadership ring supremely hollow after 20 years in the Middle East absolutely screwing up at every turn. We're in the current mess, largely defined by lack of trust in government, precisely because of "respectable" heads of state lik…

Not to mention spending years on Theranos' board, I guess he gets a free pass for letting Elizabeth Holmes play him like a fiddle.

https://www.axios.com/mattis-theranos-1521137535-f08d8b9b-78...

Re: Duty, Democracy and the Threat of Tribalism

#42

Post by rayiner »

frankbreetz wrote: post #19

From the article: "Nations with allies thrive, and those without them wither. Alone, America cannot protect our people and our economy. At this time, we can see storm clouds gathering. A polemicist’s role is not sufficient for a leader." This is a true statement, I just hope the damage done can be undone. We are stronger together than we are alone.

Is that empirically true? The USA was the largest economy in the world by 1890, despite pursing a policy of isolationism for the entire century before that. By the time we entered the First World War, we accounted for a quarter of the world economy, about as much as all of Western Europe put together.

Re: Duty, Democracy and the Threat of Tribalism

#43

Post by Nasrudith »

frankbreetz wrote: post #19

From the article: "Nations with allies thrive, and those without them wither. Alone, America cannot protect our people and our economy. At this time, we can see storm clouds gathering. A polemicist’s role is not sufficient for a leader." This is a true statement, I just hope the damage done can be undone. We are stronger together than we are alone.

That reminds me of one thing I noticed about nations and needing a "designated driver". Occasionally one prosperous democratic nation does something which the rest of the world can tell would be a terrible idea, warn them as such and get ignored because so many feel so strongly about. Predictably disaster strikes. The int

It makes me wonder if some sort of international veto arrangement might be a good idea - unfortunately it seems that even if they did so they would be unlikely to listen "because this time is different".

Re: Duty, Democracy and the Threat of Tribalism

#44

Post by amoorthy »

American foreign policy has been inconsistent and often deadly to many civilians worldwide. Americans sometimes go in with the best of intentions, but not always, as we know from the Iraq war, CIA overthrow of Iranian government, and many other debacles.

For Mathis to disregard this and put the military and intelligence apparatus above politics is disingenuous, or at least ignorant of reality. He may be non-partisan but his department has a hand in why our current tribalism exists, and always has.

If American military and intelligence organizations had a truly non-interventionist approach and one which works with our allies then there are politicians on both sides to support them - Tulsi Gabbard, Ron Paul, for example.

Finally, Mathis admits our defense spending exceeds all but 20 countries' GDP. In an era where our enemies are often digital, or terrorist organizations, more so than nation states, is our military spending oversized for what we need? Would any secretary of defense admit to this and redirect funds to more pressing causes at home or abroad? Such a leader would be a truly remarkable and laudable.

Re: Duty, Democracy and the Threat of Tribalism

#45

Post by johnisgood »

flixic wrote: post #34
DanielBMarkham wrote: post #21

This was a good essay: well-written, cogent, and thought-provoking. I know there are a lot of folks that want to take this essay and bash it into some political points. I think that's probably part of the problem Mattis is describing; our desire to make social media hay out of whatever we're given. He does have a point about current politics in there. It's hidden quite a bit. His larger point, though, is about how in…

> I don't know what the solution is. Neither do I but I see tribalism as one of the most destructive forces of the last decade, responsible for almost all big changes (and lack of change) in the world. Politics spill out to other areas. It is not difficult to connect the dots between rapid clicks-and-likes driven social media to the burning of Amazon forests. I don't know what the solution is but this is the meta pro…

> It is not difficult to connect the dots between rapid clicks-and-likes driven social media to the burning of Amazon forests.

Would you please elaborate on how "rapid clicks-and-likes driven social media" leads to the burning of Amazon forests?

I would also like to add these two related paragraphs:

> According to various reports on the subject (Greenpeace, FAO), livestock farming, including soya production, is responsible for about 70 to 80% of deforestation in the Amazon region. The development of intensive livestock production, combined with the increasing consumption of meat in developed countries, is thus the main cause of Amazonian deforestation.

> According to the WWF, It’s estimated that deforestation caused by livestock is responsible for the discharge of 3.4% of current global emissions of carbon to the atmosphere every year. That’s why the late 2018 IPCC report stood out that reducing meat consumption by 90% is the single biggest way to reduce global warming. Some studies also show that without meat and dairy consumption, global farmland use could be reduced by over 75%. In this way, reducing your meat consumption is also a big step to stop not only deforestation but also global warming on a larger scale.

Source: https://e-csr.net/definitions/what-is-definition-deforestati...

Re: Duty, Democracy and the Threat of Tribalism

#46

Post by jacobush »

amoorthy wrote: post #44

American foreign policy has been inconsistent and often deadly to many civilians worldwide. Americans sometimes go in with the best of intentions, but not always, as we know from the Iraq war, CIA overthrow of Iranian government, and many other debacles. For Mathis to disregard this and put the military and intelligence apparatus above politics is disingenuous, or at least ignorant of reality. He may be non-partisan…

"In an era where our enemies are often digital, or terrorist organizations, more so than nation states, is our military spending oversized for what we need?"

Hawks will only hear, "we need to spend more of the military budget on cyber threats".

Re: Duty, Democracy and the Threat of Tribalism

#47

Post by dariusj18 »

Nasrudith wrote: post #43
frankbreetz wrote: post #19

From the article: "Nations with allies thrive, and those without them wither. Alone, America cannot protect our people and our economy. At this time, we can see storm clouds gathering. A polemicist’s role is not sufficient for a leader." This is a true statement, I just hope the damage done can be undone. We are stronger together than we are alone.

That reminds me of one thing I noticed about nations and needing a "designated driver". Occasionally one prosperous democratic nation does something which the rest of the world can tell would be a terrible idea, warn them as such and get ignored because so many feel so strongly about. Predictably disaster strikes. The int It makes me wonder if some sort of international veto arrangement might be a good idea - unfortu…

The problem is sometimes someone has to choose the least bad option. Sometimes there aren't any solutions that more than half a constituency are happy with, but not choosing is an even worse option. You can see this happening right now with Brexit IMO.

Re: Duty, Democracy and the Threat of Tribalism

#48

Post by dariusj18 »

rayiner wrote: post #42
frankbreetz wrote: post #19

From the article: "Nations with allies thrive, and those without them wither. Alone, America cannot protect our people and our economy. At this time, we can see storm clouds gathering. A polemicist’s role is not sufficient for a leader." This is a true statement, I just hope the damage done can be undone. We are stronger together than we are alone.

Is that empirically true? The USA was the largest economy in the world by 1890, despite pursing a policy of isolationism for the entire century before that. By the time we entered the First World War, we accounted for a quarter of the world economy, about as much as all of Western Europe put together.

I'd be interested in seeing this data. I couldn't find anything with a cursory search, can you point me in the right direction?

Re: Duty, Democracy and the Threat of Tribalism

#49

Post by Fricken »

DanielBMarkham wrote: post #38
flixic wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't know what the solution is. Neither do I but I see tribalism as one of the most destructive forces of the last decade, responsible for almost all big changes (and lack of change) in the world. Politics spill out to other areas. It is not difficult to connect the dots between rapid clicks-and-likes driven social media to the burning of Amazon forests. I don't know what the solution is but this is the meta pro…

Perhaps what we're finding out is that humans have had all sorts of natural obstacles to communication: geography, the ability of sound to travel, and so forth. As time progressed, trade and travel have presented unique challenges. When I meet a strange person, they might not be friend or foe but something in-between. We can still converse and exchange, but I don't trust you. Not like my people. We've socially evolve…

>What we tech folks have done, and we had no way of knowing, is flatten all of that out.

We did have a way of knowing, Marshall McLuhan went on at length about the rise of tribalism in the upcoming age of 'peer to peer electronic media'.

"The electronically induced technological extensions of our central nervous systems, which I spoke of earlier, are immersing us in a world-pool of information movement and are thus enabling man to incorporate within himself the whole of mankind. The aloof and dissociated role of the literate man of the Western world is succumbing to the new, intense depth participation engendered by the electronic media and bringing us back in touch with ourselves as well as with one another. But the instant nature of electric-information movement is decentralizing——rather than enlarging——the family of man into a new state of multitudinous tribal existences. Particularly in countries where literate values are deeply institutionalized, this is a highly traumatic process, since the clash of the old segmented visual culture and the new integral electronic culture creates a crisis of identity, a vacuum of the self, which generates tremendous violence——violence that is simply an identity quest, private or corporate, social or commercial…"

https://mcluhangalaxy.wordpress.com/2017/02/16/marshall-mclu...

Re: Duty, Democracy and the Threat of Tribalism

#50

Post by dagw »

jacobush wrote: post #46
amoorthy wrote: post #44

American foreign policy has been inconsistent and often deadly to many civilians worldwide. Americans sometimes go in with the best of intentions, but not always, as we know from the Iraq war, CIA overthrow of Iranian government, and many other debacles. For Mathis to disregard this and put the military and intelligence apparatus above politics is disingenuous, or at least ignorant of reality. He may be non-partisan…

"In an era where our enemies are often digital, or terrorist organizations, more so than nation states, is our military spending oversized for what we need?" Hawks will only hear, "we need to spend more of the military budget on cyber threats".

More likely "We need a larger budget so we can spent more on cyber threats"
Post reply on HN