droid

Well-known member
Yeah, this seems to have been verified in a few places. Seems like the FSB were definitely behind it.
 

Corpsey

bandz ahoy
On the 'plus' side, if Trump DOES get in, at least we know that Putin won't be too quick to launch nukes at him.
 

Corpsey

bandz ahoy
It does sometimes occur to me that it would be in the interest of those who abhor violence to become skilled in being violent, should such a need ever occur. Which, the violent being so violent, is a distinct possibility.

I mean to say that if decent, violence-abhorring people were trained to be effectively violent when pushed, than the people who LOVE being violent would be less able to inflict their violence on the unwilling.

For example, that video that was posted recently of the two yobs on a bus in Manchester being racist towards an innocent man - nobody else on the bus did anything, because they aren't comfortable with violence, and the yobs evidently would have been. But if everybody on the bus had been trained in the deadly art of Ninjitsu, they could have easily stood up to the yobs, outnumbering them as they did, and disabled them with shurkien stars.

NOTE: I realise this would open the way for all sorts of disastrous effects. I don't agree with that essay (from having skimmed it), although I see where he's coming from. The state has sanctions upon it, unlike individuals free of law, and therefore while the threat of violence is essential to law and order, the violence can (And has) become less gratuitously cruel over time. (Trump, of course, advocates MORE and WORSE violence.)

OTOH, it's something similar to women being taught self-defence techniques. Looking back, I was bullied as an infant, and though I don't nurse revenge fantasies (much), I think I'd have been better off having been trained in the deadly art of Ninjitsu at the age of 4, because then I could have disabled my attackers with shuriken stars. Every child knows (or knew, perhaps things have moved on since?) that telling the teacher was no good. A shuriken star in the eye is the only thing a bully understands.
 
Last edited:

Corpsey

bandz ahoy
I'm saying us lefties need to be able to throw hands, cos the UKIP hordes are crowding the horizon, flailing their cricket bats, toting splintered pint glasses, high on bitter.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/04/america-tyranny-donald-trump.html

As this dystopian election campaign has unfolded, my mind keeps being tugged by a passage in Plato’s Republic. It has unsettled — even surprised — me from the moment I first read it in graduate school. The passage is from the part of the dialogue where Socrates and his friends are talking about the nature of different political systems, how they change over time, and how one can slowly evolve into another. And Socrates seemed pretty clear on one sobering point: that “tyranny is probably established out of no other regime than democracy.” What did Plato mean by that? Democracy, for him, I discovered, was a political system of maximal freedom and equality, where every lifestyle is allowed and public offices are filled by a lottery. And the longer a democracy lasted, Plato argued, the more democratic it would become. Its freedoms would multiply; its equality spread. Deference to any sort of authority would wither; tolerance of any kind of inequality would come under intense threat; and multiculturalism and sexual freedom would create a city or a country like “a many-colored cloak decorated in all hues.”

This rainbow-flag polity, Plato argues, is, for many people, the fairest of regimes. The freedom in that democracy has to be experienced to be believed — with shame and privilege in particular emerging over time as anathema. But it is inherently unstable. As the authority of elites fades, as Establishment values cede to popular ones, views and identities can become so magnificently diverse as to be mutually uncomprehending. And when all the barriers to equality, formal and informal, have been removed; when everyone is equal; when elites are despised and full license is established to do “whatever one wants,” you arrive at what might be called late-stage democracy. There is no kowtowing to authority here, let alone to political experience or expertise.

The very rich come under attack, as inequality becomes increasingly intolerable. Patriarchy is also dismantled: “We almost forgot to mention the extent of the law of equality and of freedom in the relations of women with men and men with women.” Family hierarchies are inverted: “A father habituates himself to be like his child and fear his sons, and a son habituates himself to be like his father and to have no shame before or fear of his parents.” In classrooms, “as the teacher ... is frightened of the pupils and fawns on them, so the students make light of their teachers.” Animals are regarded as equal to humans; the rich mingle freely with the poor in the streets and try to blend in. The foreigner is equal to the citizen.

And it is when a democracy has ripened as fully as this, Plato argues, that a would-be tyrant will often seize his moment.
 

baboon2004

Darned cockwombles.
the debates will be huge, trump could lose composure when grilled one-on-one for 90 minutes. hillary might not be likable but she's a good debater.

I'm sure there's loads of footage I haven't seen, but when I checked out her 2008 head-to-heads against Obama, I've got to say that I wasn't impressed at the way Clinton handled the pressure (and prior to reviewing those, I'd held the view that she was a good debater if nothing else)...
 
Last edited:

vimothy

yurp
I mean to say that if decent, violence-abhorring people were trained to be effectively violent when pushed, than the people who LOVE being violent would be less able to inflict their violence on the unwilling.

For example, that video that was posted recently of the two yobs on a bus in Manchester being racist towards an innocent man - nobody else on the bus did anything, because they aren't comfortable with violence, and the yobs evidently would have been.

There's some truth in that, but it's wrapped in (without wanting to offend) something like a juvenile superhero fantasy. The issue is not that people are no longer prepared to fight one another in the streets, but that there has been widespread societal breakdown; but, because of the nature of that breakdown, its effects are largely hidden from many. People lack social solidarity, the "moral unity" that previously bound them together by concomitant (sometimes sacred) obligations. It's notable that you refer to racist abuse - one of the few acts that that we can agree, as post-modern liberals, are immoral. What else would we be prepared to fight for?

Plato understood this: "the longer a democracy lasted... the more democratic it would become... [d]eference to any sort of authority would wither". Society cannot survive without authority, and authority must somehow be grounded to have any legitimacy. But in what? Maistre (Jack Donovan before there was 4chan) suggests the hangman's noose. We reject that, of course. But can we suggest anything in its stead? We have no religion, but we do have Facebook, and lots of stuff. Hopefully that is enough.
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps
It's notable that you refer to racist abuse - one of the few acts that that we can agree, as post-modern liberals, are immoral. What else would we be prepared to fight for?

Not sure I agree with this. Most of us wouldn't want to get involved in a fight between two more or less equal-sized men (or women) but would either intervene, or at least wish we had the courage to intervene, in a clear case of a smaller and weaker person being picked on - older kids beating up a younger kid, or someone terrorizing a granny, a disabled person, or whatever.

The point about good, enlightened liberals having no clue how to defend themselves is given an interesting spin here - a 'violence researcher' in Germany says the New Year's Eve mass sex attacks in Cologne happened because "German men no longer know how to stand up for themselves or face violent conflict", because they're used to having the State do it for them - although I can't agree with him that this is a good thing. It's surely desirable to be able to look after yourself, and if necessary other people, if the need arises, isn't it?

Note that I say this as someone who is in no way particularly 'hard' - the only black belt I own is the leather one I use to hold my jeans up. (Having said that, I did get into a fight with a guy on a train last year to stop him sexually assaulting a woman. Not sure what I'd have done if he'd had two or three mates with him, though.)
 

Mr. Tea

Let's Talk About Ceps

Lol - "people who view this item also viewed..."

s-l500.jpg
 

Leo

Well-known member
can we move this badman conversation to another thread, please. :confused:

we're missing the window of opportunity to discuss today's trump WTF: publicly encouraging russia to FURTHER meddle in a US election.
 

Corpsey

bandz ahoy
Not to derail from any discussion of Trumputin, but this article about the other candidates for Republican nomination in the LRB hilariously and terrifyingly shows how Trump was an oaf in a field of lunatics: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n15/eliot-weinberger/they-could-have-picked

Old news to most of you, but shocking to me that one of the two mainstream parties in the US is fielding candidates with views which would be seen in the UK as highly eccentric and possibly outright extremist.
 

baboon2004

Darned cockwombles.
Not to derail from any discussion of Trumputin, but this article about the other candidates for Republican nomination in the LRB hilariously and terrifyingly shows how Trump was an oaf in a field of lunatics: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n15/eliot-weinberger/they-could-have-picked

Old news to most of you, but shocking to me that one of the two mainstream parties in the US is fielding candidates with views which would be seen in the UK as highly eccentric and possibly outright extremist.

While I thought I understood how lunatic the Republican Party was, that article has shocked me out of my complacency. It really is even madder than I thought, and certainly extremist.

The Carly Fiorina 'demon sheep' advert is priceless. She was so fiscally conservative that she refused to pay for any special effects, choosing instead to make a man dress up as an unconvincing sheep. I guess that's kind of admirable in her world.
 

Corpsey

bandz ahoy
Martin Amis reviews a couple of Trump's books: http://harpers.org/archive/2016/08/don-the-realtor/

As a fan of Amis's critical work, it's a relief to read an essay by him that doesn't cause the by now customary full body cringe.

Actually, Trump is the perfect subject for Amis, having made 'Money' look less and less like a satire lately. He's practically an Amis character, with his linguistic idiosyncrasy, his hypersensitive machismo and egomania, and most of all the cheerful, brazen, 'neon' vulgarity.
 
Top