Solved.
Advertisement
by The East Marches II » Thu Jun 18, 2020 3:30 pm
Cisairse wrote:The East Marches II wrote:
The first goal of NATO is to deter conflict by strength. In terms of force ratios and the pathetic nature of our allies. Bit can no longer do that. The second goal is to win. It can not do that at the moment either.
I'll spare you an extended lecture on equipment readiness rates and spending. Instead, I'll make it simple. We lose in every scenario run up. We will be fighting a two front war. We can not afford worthless allies who can't supply their own bullets much less get working planes. Conscription isn't the answer alone. It's integrating multiple armies into one whole that can fight together. We used to have this ability. We do not anymore.
Why don't we have this ability anymore? Assuming NATO's leaders are aware of the issue, and have some idea of how to resolve it, why are steps not being taken?
by Cisairse » Thu Jun 18, 2020 3:31 pm
The East Marches II wrote:Cisairse wrote:Why don't we have this ability anymore? Assuming NATO's leaders are aware of the issue, and have some idea of how to resolve it, why are steps not being taken?
Because we do not have rational governments led by rational people. We no longer keep serious people in our defense departments. It's a civilization wide competency failing in virtually every Western country at the moment.
by The East Marches II » Thu Jun 18, 2020 3:33 pm
by Novus America » Thu Jun 18, 2020 3:45 pm
Cisairse wrote:The East Marches II wrote:
The first goal of NATO is to deter conflict by strength. In terms of force ratios and the pathetic nature of our allies. Bit can no longer do that. The second goal is to win. It can not do that at the moment either.
I'll spare you an extended lecture on equipment readiness rates and spending. Instead, I'll make it simple. We lose in every scenario run up. We will be fighting a two front war. We can not afford worthless allies who can't supply their own bullets much less get working planes. Conscription isn't the answer alone. It's integrating multiple armies into one whole that can fight together. We used to have this ability. We do not anymore.
Why don't we have this ability anymore? Assuming NATO's leaders are aware of the issue, and have some idea of how to resolve it, why are steps not being taken?
by Liriena » Sat Jun 20, 2020 11:08 am
I am: A pansexual, pantheist, green socialist An aspiring writer and journalist | Political compass stuff: Economic Left/Right: -8.13 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.92 For: Grassroots democracy, workers' self-management, humanitarianism, pacifism, pluralism, environmentalism, interculturalism, indigenous rights, minority rights, LGBT+ rights, feminism, optimism Against: Nationalism, authoritarianism, fascism, conservatism, populism, violence, ethnocentrism, racism, sexism, religious bigotry, anti-LGBT+ bigotry, death penalty, neoliberalism, tribalism, cynicism ⚧Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know gender and sex aren't the same thing.⚧ |
by Kowani » Sat Jun 20, 2020 11:12 am
Liriena wrote:Being on Twitter has made me feel like a lot of ostensibly left-wing people have been haphazardly improvising their "theory" on a whim, and that said "theory" seems to exist mostly as a way to justify what, in practice, is a purposefully exclusionary way of doing politics. They don't want to build a coalition. They don't want to foster solidarity. They're not trying to invite people who are not "in the know" into the movement. It all feels self-indulgent and occasionally malicious.
by Liriena » Sat Jun 20, 2020 11:19 am
Kowani wrote:Liriena wrote:Being on Twitter has made me feel like a lot of ostensibly left-wing people have been haphazardly improvising their "theory" on a whim, and that said "theory" seems to exist mostly as a way to justify what, in practice, is a purposefully exclusionary way of doing politics. They don't want to build a coalition. They don't want to foster solidarity. They're not trying to invite people who are not "in the know" into the movement. It all feels self-indulgent and occasionally malicious.
Almost as if tribalism is poison or something…
I am: A pansexual, pantheist, green socialist An aspiring writer and journalist | Political compass stuff: Economic Left/Right: -8.13 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.92 For: Grassroots democracy, workers' self-management, humanitarianism, pacifism, pluralism, environmentalism, interculturalism, indigenous rights, minority rights, LGBT+ rights, feminism, optimism Against: Nationalism, authoritarianism, fascism, conservatism, populism, violence, ethnocentrism, racism, sexism, religious bigotry, anti-LGBT+ bigotry, death penalty, neoliberalism, tribalism, cynicism ⚧Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know gender and sex aren't the same thing.⚧ |
by Questarian New Yorkshire » Sat Jun 20, 2020 11:20 am
You only just worked this out?Liriena wrote:Being on Twitter has made me feel like a lot of ostensibly left-wing people have been haphazardly improvising their "theory" on a whim, and that said "theory" seems to exist mostly as a way to justify what, in practice, is a purposefully exclusionary way of doing politics. They don't want to build a coalition. They don't want to foster solidarity. They're not trying to invite people who are not "in the know" into the movement. It all feels self-indulgent and occasionally malicious.
by Liriena » Sat Jun 20, 2020 11:22 am
I am: A pansexual, pantheist, green socialist An aspiring writer and journalist | Political compass stuff: Economic Left/Right: -8.13 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.92 For: Grassroots democracy, workers' self-management, humanitarianism, pacifism, pluralism, environmentalism, interculturalism, indigenous rights, minority rights, LGBT+ rights, feminism, optimism Against: Nationalism, authoritarianism, fascism, conservatism, populism, violence, ethnocentrism, racism, sexism, religious bigotry, anti-LGBT+ bigotry, death penalty, neoliberalism, tribalism, cynicism ⚧Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know gender and sex aren't the same thing.⚧ |
by Liriena » Sat Jun 20, 2020 11:23 am
Questarian New Yorkshire wrote:You only just worked this out?Liriena wrote:Being on Twitter has made me feel like a lot of ostensibly left-wing people have been haphazardly improvising their "theory" on a whim, and that said "theory" seems to exist mostly as a way to justify what, in practice, is a purposefully exclusionary way of doing politics. They don't want to build a coalition. They don't want to foster solidarity. They're not trying to invite people who are not "in the know" into the movement. It all feels self-indulgent and occasionally malicious.
I am: A pansexual, pantheist, green socialist An aspiring writer and journalist | Political compass stuff: Economic Left/Right: -8.13 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.92 For: Grassroots democracy, workers' self-management, humanitarianism, pacifism, pluralism, environmentalism, interculturalism, indigenous rights, minority rights, LGBT+ rights, feminism, optimism Against: Nationalism, authoritarianism, fascism, conservatism, populism, violence, ethnocentrism, racism, sexism, religious bigotry, anti-LGBT+ bigotry, death penalty, neoliberalism, tribalism, cynicism ⚧Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know gender and sex aren't the same thing.⚧ |
by Galloism » Sat Jun 20, 2020 11:24 am
Liriena wrote:Kowani wrote:Almost as if tribalism is poison or something…
I saw a lot of it particularly over the past couple of weeks with the BLM protests: lots of contradictory demands and recomendations on the role of non-black people during these protests. Lots of, perhaps understandable, but functionally counter-productive criticism of the ways non-black people expressed solidarity with the protests.
The contradictory nature of it all makes sense because the BLM movement isn't organized enough that its adherents could really claim to have a unified theory or praxis, but waaaaay too much of what's been said online reads like people are making it up as they go along, and without really putting a lot of thought into it.
by Lucja » Sat Jun 20, 2020 11:25 am
Liriena wrote:Being on Twitter has made me feel like a lot of ostensibly left-wing people have been haphazardly improvising their "theory" on a whim, and that said "theory" seems to exist mostly as a way to justify what, in practice, is a purposefully exclusionary way of doing politics. They don't want to build a coalition. They don't want to foster solidarity. They're not trying to invite people who are not "in the know" into the movement. It all feels self-indulgent and occasionally malicious.
Cyprian Norwid wrote:Ogromne wojska, bitne generały,
Policje - tajne, widne i dwu-płciowe -
Przeciwko komuż tak się pojednały?
- Przeciwko kilku myślom... co nienowe!
by Proctopeo » Sat Jun 20, 2020 11:27 am
Liriena wrote:Kowani wrote:Almost as if tribalism is poison or something…
I saw a lot of it particularly over the past couple of weeks with the BLM protests: lots of contradictory demands and recomendations on the role of non-black people during these protests. Lots of, perhaps understandable, but functionally counter-productive criticism of the ways non-black people expressed solidarity with the protests.
The contradictory nature of it all makes sense because the BLM movement isn't organized enough that its adherents could really claim to have a unified theory or praxis, but waaaaay too much of what's been said online reads like people are making it up as they go along, and without really putting a lot of thought into it.
by Liriena » Sat Jun 20, 2020 11:28 am
Galloism wrote:Liriena wrote:I saw a lot of it particularly over the past couple of weeks with the BLM protests: lots of contradictory demands and recomendations on the role of non-black people during these protests. Lots of, perhaps understandable, but functionally counter-productive criticism of the ways non-black people expressed solidarity with the protests.
The contradictory nature of it all makes sense because the BLM movement isn't organized enough that its adherents could really claim to have a unified theory or praxis, but waaaaay too much of what's been said online reads like people are making it up as they go along, and without really putting a lot of thought into it.
Some of it is just damn out there too - like the weird demand from the Seattle group to bring back segregation in medicine and education.
Just.... what?
I am: A pansexual, pantheist, green socialist An aspiring writer and journalist | Political compass stuff: Economic Left/Right: -8.13 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.92 For: Grassroots democracy, workers' self-management, humanitarianism, pacifism, pluralism, environmentalism, interculturalism, indigenous rights, minority rights, LGBT+ rights, feminism, optimism Against: Nationalism, authoritarianism, fascism, conservatism, populism, violence, ethnocentrism, racism, sexism, religious bigotry, anti-LGBT+ bigotry, death penalty, neoliberalism, tribalism, cynicism ⚧Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know gender and sex aren't the same thing.⚧ |
by Aureumterra » Sat Jun 20, 2020 11:30 am
Liriena wrote:I don't think this is exclusive to "identity politics", mind you. I certainly see a lot of Marxists and post-modernists doing the same: creating spaces which almost nobody would ever feel comfortable approaching because the requirements to be included are increasingly numerous, specific and restrictive.
by The Marlborough » Sat Jun 20, 2020 11:31 am
Galloism wrote:Liriena wrote:I saw a lot of it particularly over the past couple of weeks with the BLM protests: lots of contradictory demands and recomendations on the role of non-black people during these protests. Lots of, perhaps understandable, but functionally counter-productive criticism of the ways non-black people expressed solidarity with the protests.
The contradictory nature of it all makes sense because the BLM movement isn't organized enough that its adherents could really claim to have a unified theory or praxis, but waaaaay too much of what's been said online reads like people are making it up as they go along, and without really putting a lot of thought into it.
Some of it is just damn out there too - like the weird demand from the Seattle group to bring back segregation in medicine and education.
Just.... what?
by Liriena » Sat Jun 20, 2020 11:32 am
Proctopeo wrote:Liriena wrote:I saw a lot of it particularly over the past couple of weeks with the BLM protests: lots of contradictory demands and recomendations on the role of non-black people during these protests. Lots of, perhaps understandable, but functionally counter-productive criticism of the ways non-black people expressed solidarity with the protests.
The contradictory nature of it all makes sense because the BLM movement isn't organized enough that its adherents could really claim to have a unified theory or praxis, but waaaaay too much of what's been said online reads like people are making it up as they go along, and without really putting a lot of thought into it.
A friend showed me some weird shit she saw on Twitter pertaining to BLM and Juneteenth (I don't have social media); among them were two completely separate threads of black people dropping links for nonblack (presumably, preferably but not exclusively white) people to send them money for "reparations". Is this the sort of stuff you're thinking of, or am I way off the mark here?
I am: A pansexual, pantheist, green socialist An aspiring writer and journalist | Political compass stuff: Economic Left/Right: -8.13 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.92 For: Grassroots democracy, workers' self-management, humanitarianism, pacifism, pluralism, environmentalism, interculturalism, indigenous rights, minority rights, LGBT+ rights, feminism, optimism Against: Nationalism, authoritarianism, fascism, conservatism, populism, violence, ethnocentrism, racism, sexism, religious bigotry, anti-LGBT+ bigotry, death penalty, neoliberalism, tribalism, cynicism ⚧Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know gender and sex aren't the same thing.⚧ |
by Owans » Sat Jun 20, 2020 11:33 am
by Liriena » Sat Jun 20, 2020 11:34 am
Proctopeo wrote:Liriena wrote:I saw a lot of it particularly over the past couple of weeks with the BLM protests: lots of contradictory demands and recomendations on the role of non-black people during these protests. Lots of, perhaps understandable, but functionally counter-productive criticism of the ways non-black people expressed solidarity with the protests.
The contradictory nature of it all makes sense because the BLM movement isn't organized enough that its adherents could really claim to have a unified theory or praxis, but waaaaay too much of what's been said online reads like people are making it up as they go along, and without really putting a lot of thought into it.
A friend showed me some weird shit she saw on Twitter pertaining to BLM and Juneteenth (I don't have social media); among them were two completely separate threads of black people dropping links for nonblack (presumably, preferably but not exclusively white) people to send them money for "reparations". Is this the sort of stuff you're thinking of, or am I way off the mark here?
I am: A pansexual, pantheist, green socialist An aspiring writer and journalist | Political compass stuff: Economic Left/Right: -8.13 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.92 For: Grassroots democracy, workers' self-management, humanitarianism, pacifism, pluralism, environmentalism, interculturalism, indigenous rights, minority rights, LGBT+ rights, feminism, optimism Against: Nationalism, authoritarianism, fascism, conservatism, populism, violence, ethnocentrism, racism, sexism, religious bigotry, anti-LGBT+ bigotry, death penalty, neoliberalism, tribalism, cynicism ⚧Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know gender and sex aren't the same thing.⚧ |
by Liriena » Sat Jun 20, 2020 11:35 am
Lucja wrote:Liriena wrote:Being on Twitter has made me feel like a lot of ostensibly left-wing people have been haphazardly improvising their "theory" on a whim, and that said "theory" seems to exist mostly as a way to justify what, in practice, is a purposefully exclusionary way of doing politics. They don't want to build a coalition. They don't want to foster solidarity. They're not trying to invite people who are not "in the know" into the movement. It all feels self-indulgent and occasionally malicious.
As a side note, this feels like a very loose use of the word theory.
I am: A pansexual, pantheist, green socialist An aspiring writer and journalist | Political compass stuff: Economic Left/Right: -8.13 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.92 For: Grassroots democracy, workers' self-management, humanitarianism, pacifism, pluralism, environmentalism, interculturalism, indigenous rights, minority rights, LGBT+ rights, feminism, optimism Against: Nationalism, authoritarianism, fascism, conservatism, populism, violence, ethnocentrism, racism, sexism, religious bigotry, anti-LGBT+ bigotry, death penalty, neoliberalism, tribalism, cynicism ⚧Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know gender and sex aren't the same thing.⚧ |
by Cisairse » Sat Jun 20, 2020 12:59 pm
Liriena wrote:I don't think this is exclusive to "identity politics", mind you. I certainly see a lot of Marxists and post-modernists doing the same: creating spaces which almost nobody would ever feel comfortable approaching because the requirements to be included are increasingly numerous, specific and restrictive.
by South Odreria 2 » Sat Jun 20, 2020 1:02 pm
Cisairse wrote:Liriena wrote:I don't think this is exclusive to "identity politics", mind you. I certainly see a lot of Marxists and post-modernists doing the same: creating spaces which almost nobody would ever feel comfortable approaching because the requirements to be included are increasingly numerous, specific and restrictive.
On the other hand the feds admitting that it's impossible to infiltrate leftist groups because the barrier to entry is so high was a major win for the movement.
Valrifell wrote:
Disregard whatever this poster says
by Liriena » Sat Jun 20, 2020 1:34 pm
I am: A pansexual, pantheist, green socialist An aspiring writer and journalist | Political compass stuff: Economic Left/Right: -8.13 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.92 For: Grassroots democracy, workers' self-management, humanitarianism, pacifism, pluralism, environmentalism, interculturalism, indigenous rights, minority rights, LGBT+ rights, feminism, optimism Against: Nationalism, authoritarianism, fascism, conservatism, populism, violence, ethnocentrism, racism, sexism, religious bigotry, anti-LGBT+ bigotry, death penalty, neoliberalism, tribalism, cynicism ⚧Copy and paste this in your sig if you passed biology and know gender and sex aren't the same thing.⚧ |
by Kowani » Sat Jun 20, 2020 1:47 pm
Galloism wrote:Liriena wrote:I saw a lot of it particularly over the past couple of weeks with the BLM protests: lots of contradictory demands and recomendations on the role of non-black people during these protests. Lots of, perhaps understandable, but functionally counter-productive criticism of the ways non-black people expressed solidarity with the protests.
The contradictory nature of it all makes sense because the BLM movement isn't organized enough that its adherents could really claim to have a unified theory or praxis, but waaaaay too much of what's been said online reads like people are making it up as they go along, and without really putting a lot of thought into it.
Some of it is just damn out there too - like the weird demand from the Seattle group to bring back segregation in medicine and education.
Just.... what?
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Alvecia, Ancientania, Ariddia, Ifreann, Likhinia, Lumaterra, Omphalos, Pasong Tirad, Shearoa, Tungstan
Advertisement