PizzaSnake wrote: ↑Sun Aug 13, 2023 10:39 am
MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 13, 2023 8:59 am
old salt wrote: ↑Sat Aug 12, 2023 6:30 pm
MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 12, 2023 10:07 am
Stop objecting to being asked questions, repeatedly, and then claiming foul when the questioner asks for clarification as to meaning. They're NOT putting words in your mouth, they're trying to find out whether that's what you mean, or not, and, if not, giving you the opportunity to clarify.
You can choose to be slippery as an eel, but folks are asking you to respond to the implications of what you seem to be saying...
For instance:
Lots of people were responsible for lots of things...
Was Trump responsible and if so, for what?
Any aspect of what happened Jan 6...details please.
Tell us in the same accusatory way, giving no leeway for nuance.
Then answer this:
Did Trump hope to obstruct the counting of the votes that had been legally certified and did he hope that the crowd would help pressure that to occur? Did he attempt to stop the violence when he realized it was happening?
Don't wriggle, say what you think Trump intended based on everything you've seen, read, heard and considered to date.
Then, tell us whether you think Pelosi hoped for this violence, didn't try to stop it.
...or you two can learn to read objectively.
Chief Sund was talking about the physical security measures for the Capitol on Jan 6th, not who caused the riot.
Remember all your questions about the NG response -- he provides some answers, if you'd bother to listen.
My posts were all & only about the security measures.
You read too much into things & go on a Trump rant even when he is irrelevant.
yup, keep squirming away from directly answering direct questions.
Frankly, I don't expect anyone on here to be perfectly "objective", rather I'm interested in your subjective views and their basis. I'm looking for direct, clear answers. And if something I write isn't clear, I'm happy to try and clarify...why aren't you?
Good, because it is all we have. The real question is, "do people act in good faith?" Some do, some don't. We have a few of each here.
Me, I know I'm a prisoner of my personal, highly curated "view" of reality. While I'd like to think that it is "true and accurate," I KNOW the likelihood of my "owning" such a perspective is rapidly approaching zero. I'm afraid the rush to embrace STEM and the expense of the humanities (like basic philosophy and literature) has rendered us a nation of dullards incapable of accurate self-assessment and critical thinking. I chalk it up to Reagansim and Thatcherism. Seen how the two nation's fates and economic decline mirror each other of the past 45-odd years?
"And so castles made of sand
Melts into the sea eventually" --Jimi Hendrix Experience
For an example of the general profligacy and stupidity of human endeavor take a look at automotive junkyards. The energy expenditure and resource allocation that has been discarded in favor of the new and shiny is breathtaking. It is almost as though WWII drove humanity mad and they went on a resource consumption binge that we are now beginning to pay the price for. My favorite development is the insane idea that humans can now colonize new planets and gather extra-terrestrial resources (asteroids) to feed the maw of the resource consumption monster human civilization has become. The math doesn't add up, yet the proponents of the same are hailed as visionaries and large funds are gambled away on these pipe-dreams. Insert my rant re capitalism as a failed resource allocation mechanism here.
A lot in there!
Yes, I think we're all, at best, "prisoners" of what we observe, which is highly dependent on particular exposure and non-exposure to ideas, facts, etc.
However, with effort (and exposure to the potential rewards of such effort and the mechanisms to do so), we
can widen our intake, challenge our prior assumptions, and imagine outcomes less obvious.
But it'll never be perfect...
I'm not sure whether I'd blame an emphasis on STEM for a loss of critical thinking and empathy, but I do think that the dismissal of the value of the humanities is a serious issue. I have people in my life who are brilliant mathematicians, computer scientists, who are passionate about science, who are also deeply suspicious of the study of the arts, of literature, of history; they tend to eschew empathy except as a means to an end...and these are the people who seem most prone to conspiracy theories and extreme political views.
Likewise, I see the less "brilliant" among us who gripe about US education not being focused on producing an income right out of college. No concern for the development of informed citizenship (other than for some in an ideologically conforming sense), rather they think that the only focus should be on whether course work will lead to a "good job"...these too seem prone to conspiracy and extreme politics.
Maybe that's overstating, but it's my subjective observation.
I think STEM and humanities should co-exist in emphasis, indeed each enliven and challenge the other to
imagine in ways that without these efforts would indeed have likely calamitous results.
I'm less negative about capitalism and its effects, given that it's been the best construct of human progress developed to date, far superior to prior efforts at human organization...likewise democracy.
However, and it's a big however, capitalism depends upon its imperfections...and necessarily has consequences that need to be addressed else will result in "calamitous" outcomes. Capitalism depends on lots and lots of competing "bets" on various forms of human ingenuity, many of which will necessarily fail...not unlike evolutionary processes.
However, the system does not allocate true costs sufficiently to the "bets" made when they impact beyond the decision itself... eg pollution.
Thus the development of regulated capitalism and social democracy. Imperfect, but efforts to at least mediate the negative consequences.
Yes, "consumption" is a big driver of negative effects and while we've actually begun to address many of these more obvious issues over the past decades, the pace of growth of consumption continues ahead.
She was too craven to give Chief Sund what he was asking for (& DoD offered, in advance) to adequately protect the Capitol.
BINGO !!! ...& if Trump had ordered the NG to be activated in advance (even just standing by at the Armory & Andrews), then you & Pelosi & Bowser would have accused him of staging a coup.