631–640 of 750 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
This sentiment strikes me as somewhat beneath the usual caliber I see here. Perhaps it would serve you well to step away from the keyboard for a while: take a walk, grab a drink at a bar, enjoy a quiet evening, and allow some real-world perspective to settle in.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
i don't think you know much about islamist parties and are just grasping for reasons to justify suppressing democracy in certain places. ennahada (tunisia), pks (indonesia), jui (pakistan) are all examples of islamist parties that have compromised or reached across the aisle at various points just off the top of my head. besides, isn't the point of democracy to allow people to be led by those who represent their prin…
> ennahada (tunisia), pks (indonesia), jui (pakistan) are all examples of islamist parties that have compromised or reached across the aisle at various points Would love to read more on this. Naïvely, I shared OP’s view of Islamist parties’ intransigence. (Note to third parties: Islamist != Islamic majority or even Islamic parties, and certainly separate from Arab parties.) > isn't the point of democracy to allow peo…
Brookings Institute has a series of papers about Islamist movements around the world: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/rethinking-political-isla...
which includes both analyses from Western academics as well as responses from members of Islamist parties.
> It absolutely follows that intolerant populations can systematically elect intolerant leaders who then cause instability.
Intolerant of what, and what do you mean by "instability"? If the ideology of the political parties and institutions reflects that of the (vast) majority of the population, why would we expect "instability"?
Democracy can descend into demagoguery; I believe that occurs when the "people" feel like the state has been captured by an elite (oligarchy) that doesn't represent their interests (i.e. interests of the majority), "intolerant" or not - e.g. Gracchi brothers, Hugo Chavez, etc etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Repeated PD is very different. The whole point of a cartel is that everyone inside is incentivized not to cheat, and it works as long as they agree on what's fair. The problem for cartels is people not in the cartel.
It’s well known that some OPEC members cheat nonetheless.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tangent but: this is also why reducing greenhouse gas emissions is hard. As long as fossil fuels remain one of the cheapest easiest to scale ways to make power, there’s a similar incentive to cheat. If everyone else cuts emissions and you don’t, your margins are higher and you can undercut them. Global reductions require an all-cooperate scenario. Developing nations have the strongest incentive to cheat since they ne…
> Developing nations have the strongest incentive to cheat since they need those margins to catch up This isn't really how it works, since greenhouse gas output is pretty much corellated to income level, and even that's an understatement, since people in rich countries buy stuff made in poor countries, and manufacturing causes emissions. The real problem is carbon credits - rich countries can both pollute, and absolv…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, exactly. The panel's control system is connected to the Internet and there's an app that an attacker could take advantage of to interfere with critical infrastructure at an inopportune time.
If you are doing grid-scale installation, surely you would want your own control system (perhaps also on your own network, separated from the general internet), precisely in order to protect the grid.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tangent but: this is also why reducing greenhouse gas emissions is hard. As long as fossil fuels remain one of the cheapest easiest to scale ways to make power, there’s a similar incentive to cheat. If everyone else cuts emissions and you don’t, your margins are higher and you can undercut them. Global reductions require an all-cooperate scenario. Developing nations have the strongest incentive to cheat since they ne…
So little political will is needed at this point as the economics now favor renewables. Unfortunately most of the political will seems to be leaning towards protecting the more expensive fossil fuel sources of energy.
Don't worry too much, the return on investment of renewables is much better than politics. Politics can put a few brakes on, but that only slows things a little, it won't stop it. (and politics is not set - there are plenty of forces opposing oil - they are not in power now but they are still powerful and are likely to gain power again as the tides switch)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you have a reputable sources to back up your claims here? Johnny cites sources pretty consistently.
https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/critical-thinking-health-a... > The quick cuts and dazzling montages, as well as the dramatic shots of Harris absorbed by a document he’s unearthed, highlighting it suspensefully in tight close-ups, all lend credence to the often-excellent work he does. But it also makes it easy to mask his mistakes. And for someone who takes journalism to heart, his mistakes are big, leading to over…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Asian countries in particular are going to burn They won't sit still, though. Eventually, if this were tried, we'd see Chinese-flagged tankers buying passage rights from Iran and being escorted by PLAN ships. No way does Commander TACO take that shot. The US interdiction threat in the gulf is empty, and everyone know it. Iran gets paid at the end of every story. The whole boondoggle has been a failure for the US in…
> escorted by PLAN ships This would be a blunder by Beijing. It would involve trotting their ships through half a world of American and allied sensors, only to put an untested-in-blue-waters navy perilously far from nearest bases or support if anything goes wrong. I’m not saying the likes of Xi, Putin or Trump couldn’t do it. But it would be an intelligence bonanza for the West, India, Japan and Taiwan.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're probably aware of your bigotry, as the stupid smiley at the end of your comment seems to suggest, but your reasoning only serves to support the pre-made conclusion of 'Palestinians are genetically evil'.
How can you not acknowledge that essentialism is basically correct? Some cultures go thousands of years without ever forming civilizations that escape barbarism. Slavs in particular seem especially unable to find their way out of tyranny, for literally thousands of years. Sometimes you call a spade a spade. Essences exist. Copes against it like “intersectionality” have been thoroughly rejected by the body politic and…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_to_Arabs > Death to Arabs" or "Death to the Arabs" (Israeli Hebrew: מָוֶת לָעֲרָבִים, romanized: Mávet la'Aravím) is an anti-Arab slogan originating in Israel.
Your source documents a real phenomenon but doesn't support the universal claim that "Israelis hate Arabs". Please provide evidence proportional to the scope of your argument.