|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,889 Year: 4,146/9,624 Month: 1,017/974 Week: 344/286 Day: 65/40 Hour: 1/5 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Failure of Progressivism | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hyroglyphx Inactive Member
|
I was watching a video that pointed to a very interesting blog post that postulates that, in the absence of a unified external threat, that nations just about to fall begin with internal strife. More than ever does that appear to be the case as the United States ekes closer and closer to civil war.
quote: This self-loathing is on display on EvC. As is summarized in the above quote, it is ironic in the sense that the ability to be overly-critical of one's own country and culture is usually an indication of its own successes. As it relates to the current topic, if the Left's dystopian view of the US was so apparent then it would not be living a society that allows it to openly be this critical. The constant and insistent harangue that minorities are systematically oppressed is itself the strongest indication that its total bullshit.
"Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 440 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Hyroglyphx writes:
Crows are "free" to make a lot of noise and we either ignore them or shoot them. The constant and insistent harangue that minorities are systematically oppressed is itself the strongest indication that its total bullshit."I've been to Moose Jaw, now I can die." -- John Wing
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hyroglyphx Inactive Member |
Crows are "free" to make a lot of noise and we either ignore them or shoot them. Your typical attempt at one-liner profundity fails again... Debate honestly or don't bother replying. "Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 440 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Hyroglyphx writes:
I'll say the same thing to you - reply to what I said. Your typical attempt at one-liner profundity fails again... Debate honestly or don't bother replying."I've been to Moose Jaw, now I can die." -- John Wing
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hyroglyphx Inactive Member |
I'll say the same thing to you - reply to what I said. Rebut anything I said in this thread. So far your message is about squawking crows. There is a laundry list of things to unpack and for you to rebut. But you know that you can't so you resort to pithy phrases in an effort to sound profound. It failed again. Either debate honestly or don't bother responding. "Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Phat Member Posts: 18348 From: Denver,Colorado USA Joined: Member Rating: 1.0 |
I think what he is subtly trying to do is to consider Oikophobia in the context of Jim Crow. ringo is rather clever sometimes.
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain " *** far from science having buried God, not only do the results of science point towards his existence, but the scientific enterprise itself is validated by his existence.- Dr.John Lennox The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.- Criss Jami, Killosophy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 440 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Hroglyphx writes:
I did. I pointed out that the right to protest does not mean that everything is okay.
Rebut anything I said in this thread. Hyroglyphx writes:
It was a heavy-handed metaphor. Phat got it.
So far your message is about squawking crows. Hyroglyphx writes:
I'll be the judge of that.
It failed again. Hyroglyphx writes:
I'll say the same thing to you - reply to what I said. Either debate honestly or don't bother responding."I've been to Moose Jaw, now I can die." -- John Wing
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tusko Member (Idle past 129 days) Posts: 615 From: London, UK Joined: |
Thanks for starting this topic. It is interesting. Your thinking seems to be quite US-centric. Someone like AOC or Bernie Sanders isn't very extreme in a European context. Do you think their views are extreme specifically in the US context, or for you are views like theirs extreme wherever they manifest?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hyroglyphx Inactive Member |
Thanks for starting this topic. It is interesting. Your thinking seems to be quite US-centric. Someone like AOC or Bernie Sanders isn't very extreme in a European context. Do you think their views are extreme specifically in the US context, or for you are views like theirs extreme wherever they manifest? Bernie at least has an identifiable plan. AOC is just a starry-eyed little girl that has no business in politics. If you actually read the Green New Deal you'll see that the vision isn't even remotely feasible. Its pie-in-the-sky nonsense that sounds great on a theoretical basis but is ultimately self-defeating, expensive beyond measure, and incredibly inefficient. Edited by Hyroglyphx, : No reason given."Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hyroglyphx Inactive Member |
I did. I pointed out that the right to protest does not mean that everything is okay. That's not a rebuttal. You're basically saying, "nuh-uh," and pretending that's a counter-argument. Have the integrity to go line item by line item and for once actually debate or don't bother saying anything at all.
It was a heavy-handed metaphor. Phat got it. Its low hanging fruit for the troglodytes mindlessly nodding their heads on cue.
I'll say the same thing to you - reply to what I said. Impressively bold gaslighting attempt, Ringo... Reply to what was stated and stop swinging at the air and accusing others of doing what you're doing. Anything less will result in you being ignored until you're capable of debating honestly. "Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tusko Member (Idle past 129 days) Posts: 615 From: London, UK Joined:
|
I'm going to react primarily to the video you supplied. This isn't something I'm very well versed in, so please point out any issues.
I smell a bit of disingenuousness in the headline argument, but I'm not sufficiently knowledgeable to say how significant it is. The main thrust in the opening minute or two is that the carbon emitted and the minerals extracted building the massive infrastructure is going to result in environmental costs greater than business as usual, and that those who propose it are at best misguided or ill-informed. This seems a little suspect to me, a little bit like a sleight of hand, and I want to see the working behind this assumption. It doesn't seem take into account that the infrastructure, once built, will be making carbon reduction "gains" year after year after the one off outlay. Surely there is a carbon spent/carbon saved arithmetic here that would make the massive initial outlay something worth doing in environmental terms? If you could prove that the Green New Deal failed in these terms, and was indeed going to do more environmental damage than if we did nothing at all, then this would be the argument to make refute it, rather than saying some big numbers and sniping at the (assumed) foolishness of the deal's silly proponents, surely? So they don't address the issue of the carbon spent/carbon saved by the New Deal, which is disappointing (if you've got something that addresses this point I'd be very interested to see it). However, their next step isn't to offer an alternative; rather they seem to be content to settle into a council of despair. They seem to make the assumption that because the initial outlay is significant, there can be no solution to the problem, because it is in human nature (or specifically people with environmental concerns?) to reject the only actual solution, nuclear power. Personally, I tend to think that while we're hanging around for cold fusion, a patchwork of renewables and nuclear is probably our best bet. The fact that only 3% of US power comes from solar and wind isn't itself a good argument not to increase the solar and wind mix in the US. In the UK it is approaching 50%, and although the geographical/meteorological realities of the two countries are very different, it would suggest that a concerted increase in the mix would get the US to a more sensible spread relatively quickly. The video makes a reasonable point - we don't want humanity to take actions to mitigate that is worse than inaction. To be fair, I don't think anybody who is serious about the problem wants that. The question is, if we accept that climate change is happening, is already having significant effects, and is only going to get worse at current rates, what do we do instead to prevent massive social and economic upheavals in the coming decades as a result of the climate changes coming down the pipe? As far as I see it, the GDP losses we risk from doing nothing - not guaranteed losses of course, just risks - are so massive that what we need is a workable solution, even for the more conservative projected risks. As an aside, I find it interesting that their headline bullet point at the end is the cost to the poor. I wonder if these commentators take a similar hard line about the disproportionate damage to the poor from private healthcare, trickledown economics etc...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hyroglyphx Inactive Member
|
It doesn't seem take into account that the infrastructure, once built, will be making carbon reduction "gains" year after year after the one off outlay. Surely there is a carbon spent/carbon saved arithmetic here that would make the massive initial outlay something worth doing in environmental terms? Its specific to the Green New Deal proposal which outlined an impossible timeline. You've probably heard many times that we have about a 9 year window to make substantial attempts to mitigate greenhouse gasses before we reach a point of no return. I won't argue the point. We absolutely have to do something different but they are absolutely right to point out that you are going to make more greenhouse gasses in an effort to reduce greenhouse gasses. Also, solar panels work great in Texas... How well do you think they'll work in Montreal? In Alaska? Oregon? Maine? Vermont? Or dare I say..... in London? AOC honestly thinks she can retrofit every home in America with solar panels but can never explain how. This isn't at all a knock on solar panels or anything, in fact I have them! Its absolutely true that there is a finite amount of natural resources that make up components of battery cells. Even if you had a small army of installers and factories churning out thousands of solar panels a year, you would come nowhere close to overcoming the logistical nightmare she is proposing. Mining for lithium itself presents ecological problems. I'm not saying we shouldn't mine for them, I'm saying inherently you take away one problem and add a new one in its place. We know that we cannot continue down the path of fossil fuels but the Green New Deal, while well-intentioned, is not feasible. And even if it was if you or anyone can explain how to pay that price tag, I'm open to hearing it. Nowhere is there an actual source to explain how a project with a 93 trillion dollar price tag is supposed to be funded in practice, not principal. "Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 640 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
Well, I don't consider John Stossel 'reading what it actually says'. It misrepresents things, and shows that propoganda is in full swing there.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hyroglyphx Inactive Member |
Well, I don't consider John Stossel 'reading what it actually says'. It misrepresents things, and shows that propoganda is in full swing there. Oh, hey, yeah, we should obviously be listening to a 12 year old bartender with no political or scientific experience for advice on climate change You're absolutely right, the propaganda is definitely in full swing Edited by Hyroglyphx, : No reason given."Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 312 days) Posts: 16113 Joined:
|
Yeah, ya know, I was just looking around me and thinking, "You know what's failed? Progressivism." Pfft.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024