A counter example is this study on extinction that doesn't use the groundless estimates that the Environmentalist spout, but rather looks at exactly how many, where, and how species die off. It turns out, no surprise really, that species are truly at risk in small, isolated areas (islands) where more advanced predators and competitors are introduced. Continental species do quite well, thank you.
Back in 1986, the BBC aired an incredible series called The Living Isles that was the sanest bit on how to handle the environment I've ever seen. The maker, Peter Crawford, stated in no uncertain terms that the British Isles haven't been "wild" since the last ice age and that most of what we think of as "wild" is, in fact, the result of careful cultivation. The moors, for example, would be forests in a few generations if left to themselves. In fact, the entire islands would be oak forest from sea to sea were it not for man's hand.
Crawford observes that plants and animals don't give a damn about where their environment comes from; just that it's there. Plants that live on lava flows are just as happy in a factory slag heap and Peregrine Falcons are quite cheerful about nesting on skyscrapers. He never uses nonsense terms like "old growth" or "pristine", but says "wild woods" when he means wild woods and he is clear that stewardship of the environment isn't about protecting it from man's contamination, but in cultivating it as a garden–which the British Isles now are.
As to species, Crawford advocates three things: First, some species are so rare and of so little significance that there's no point in preserving them in the wild. Second, some are such opportunists that they must be culled like weeds or the skies will be blotted out with seagulls and starlings. Third, it is not a matter of preservation, but cultivation.
I dearly wish that it was available on DVD or as more than fragments on the Internet. It would be so nice to hear something else for a change other than the bleatings of anti-human Luddites and neo-feudal elites lusting for a new peasantry to serve them.
42 comments:
This is very much present both in my profession - metallurgy - and my country. Some 70% of Finnish area is forest.
Iron is extracted in blast furnace by using carbon as the reductive agent. Carbon is present in all organic materials and fuels. Unfortunately, the blast furnace process requires quite pure carbon because impurities will contaminate the product, pig iron.
Before the 18th century, the only viable source of carbon was charcoal. Mineral coal, of which Europe is abundant, contains too much sulfur to be able to be used in metallurgy.
So the forests of Europe were pretty much Saruman-ized into charcoal and ironmaking. In the 16th centuries the only viable countries left anymore were Sweden and Finland. The whole Europe pretty much deindustrialized on ironmaking everywhere except Scandinavia, where both ore and wood for charcoal was abundant.
It is claimed all Finnish forests are younger than 300 years. Making charcoal deforested Finland pretty quickly. The by-product was wood tar - Finnish tar was exported all around the world.
Everything changed in 1709 when Abraham Darby invented coke oven. Now the mineral coal became a viable source as coking removes almost all volatile compounds and sulfur off the coal, and coke is almost pure carbon. The Europe reindustrialized soon - and in the end also Scandinavia became reforested as the Scandinavian ironmakers began to use imported coal instead of charcoal as it was cheaper.
Today steelmaking with charcoal is considered an example of environmental crime - scavenging of natural resources.
with the added irony that it was an early example of a biofuel. Perhaps those environmentalists could learn from the effects it had
Hear hear, David. If sensible people were allowed to educate the young, rather than the screaming crop of indoctrinatorial loons who call themselves "enlightened educators" today, who then force their views through curricular legislation on our children, the world would be a saner place. Mr. Crawford should be lauded and his series distributed, and required in classrooms, just as the loony fringe courses are today in our schools. David, you are or were an educator. As one in the know, please share - What can be done to bring sanity back to our schools?
Sanity to schools? I'd say make control of them as local as possible down to the village level with minimal involvement from central governments beyond overseeing accreditation (though not operating it. That I'd leave to a private organisation.).
I'd also make as many schools as possible private–preferably religious (and I lump Atheism in here, so no one is left out) with state schools acting as a safety net or for local communities who decide that is the most efficient for them. I'm particularly keen on the religious schools because I'd rather what a school teaches be out in the open and subject to criticism and market forces rather than as a monopoly flying under the false colours of "diversity".
Needless to say, I'd also break the teacher's unions. Holding future generations hostage to a self-serving clique is monstrous.
I also feel that the Internet is already a great step in the right direction. If it had been around in my day, I'd have never set foot on campus.
David, so right. If the government and union monopolies that control education could be broken it would be a giant step in the right direction. Isn't it strange that single-player, when applied to government institutions, is touted as celebrating diversity?
Competition among various local schools would serve to grant children a better educational product, as is available with any type of product any time the free market is tried.
And yes, the Internet is a valuable resource, which truly does offer diversity of opinion, but people must be able to think about and discern between what's available - not merely latch onto a catchy page or a politically touted concept - since there are thick patches of tares growing among the wheat.
Maybe Ravi Zacharias has it right; a good catchphrase for today is "Let my people think".
Now: How do we implement your excellent ideas, in this current climate of intolerance of workable ideas?
I was thinking more about how you can now watch MIT lectures online, learn foreign languages, take tutorials, and that the Open University is now truly open. With a little discipline and the outlay of a few dollars on ebay for lab equipment, there isn't much you can't learn these days.
Right - Hard sciences and standardized subjects (such as languages) are always good bets for online learning. The discernment must be applied in the areas people commonly dispute - Political, sociological, and religious realms. That is one of many reasons why maintaining accurate historical records is so crucial if individuals and indeed societies are to learn, grow, and prosper - or decline into the morass of unlauded depravity and squalor. That is why the revisionist history that's so in vogue today is so insidious. "For lack of wisdom, the people perish." We must always, particularly as individuals, be active and not rely on the other guy - another truism: "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance".
I'm guilty, I admit. I talk, and I write - But what do I do? Thought without action is often worthless. Thought and action are effective when employed together.
Daniel, the big breakthrough was the hot blast (Cowper stoves) and recovery of the blast furnace gas. As the woods (and charcoal) was abundant, it was squandered. Coke, on the other hand, was a scarcity commodity. As it was scarce, it was to be used up as efficiently as possible.
Blast furnace gas contains some 30% to 40% of carbon monoxide, which can still be used as fuel. Either in the cowpers for pre-heating the wind, or in steelmaking such as open hearth process.
The same question of scarcity can be seen on conscription. Armies based on conscription are large, poorly trained and soldiers are treated as mincemeat. Conscripts are abundant and equipment is the scarcity commodity. As life is cheap, men and not gear are wasted - weapons ans equipment are more valuable than human life. Professional armies which are based on salaried soldiers rather than boys pressed into service on pain of firing squad the men became a scarcity commodity. Life is expensive, and it is to be used as efficiently as possible. Professional armies tend to be small but well trained and well equipped; they squander gear and attempt to avoid human losses.
Before WWII a loss of a battalion in some remote place seldom made in news. Today a loss of squad in Afghanistan makes headlines.
David, so right. If the government and union monopolies that control education could be broken it would be a giant step in the right direction.
Oh yeah. Just as in health care. Creating a natural cartel which is both ineffective and horribly expensive - and the small guy pays through the nose.
The solution for natural cartel is monopsony. That is, single payer.
That is also why trade unions exist. They act as a cartel to counter the employer's monopsony. Without trade unions the salaries would quickly sink to the subsistence level as in India and China. Or in American and Mediterranean agriculture which run on illegal immigrants. It is called capitalism.
There are instances where free markets simply don't work and they are instances where there are natural monopolies, natural cartels or natural monopsonies.
The free market provides quantity, not quality. It provides abundance, but does a lousy job of upholding high standards. At every opportunity, voters elect politicians who water down standards. Any school that really imposed high standards would find its school board voted out of office. Any state that imposed an achievement test that required enough study time to seriously cut into students' leisure time, jobs, athletics, or family vacations would come under unovercomeable pressure to water down the tests. So we can assume that if we privatize all education and eliminate compulsory attendance laws, we will see a huge proliferation of schools that turn out mediocre, semi-literate students. We do that now, you say? Just wait to see how much worse it can get.
Isn't it strange that single-player, when applied to government institutions, is touted as celebrating diversity?
Because they do. It is diversity in unity. Everyone is provided the same and they can flourish in diverse ways.
Competition among various local schools would serve to grant children a better educational product, as is available with any type of product any time the free market is tried.
Competition with schools will polarize the schools into very good and very expensive, and
If you really want to trash meritocracy and the principle of equal opportunity, go ahead for private schools. Only the rich will have any chances of getting any decent education in such system.
That has been seen so many times in the history and we have so nasty historical experiences of such systems - which squander talents and which promote privileges of the rich - that it really is not worth of trying.
The wisdom of Conservativism is not only to see what worked in the past but also which didn't, and not try that again.
Sanity to schools? I'd say make control of them as local as possible down to the village level
Becomes horribly expensive. Small units have always larger overhead costs than large units. [Let's say there is a reason why steelmaking is corporate business and not something you can do at dad's garage.]
with minimal involvement from central governments beyond overseeing accreditation (though not operating it. That I'd leave to a private organisation.).
Which will leave it all as a complete Wild West. There is no guarantee of curricula, no guarantee of quality of teaching, no guarantee of discipline and no guarantee against straightforward abuse, such as corporal punishments or public humiliation.
It is said the British boarding schools are the best preparatory institutions for life in prison. All the abuse present in penitentiary institutions are present there. There is a reason why word "fag" means cigarette in UK speech and homosexual in US.
I'd also make as many schools as possible private–preferably religious
Oh yeah. Do the words "yeshiva" and "madrassa" ring the bells? How many child abuse scandals do we need. We have had enough paedophilia scandals in the Catholic Church, and God only knows what happens in the mikva when the day in the synagogue is closed. Not to say anything about the Islamic schools.
Religious schools are sure-fire ways to instil intolerance, bigotry, fanaticism and violence on children's minds. Plus outright flimflam, such as Creationism.
Needless to say, I'd also break the teacher's unions. Holding future generations hostage to a self-serving clique is monstrous.
So there would be basically no standards for paedagogy and who can teach and what...?
I also feel that the Internet is already a great step in the right direction. If it had been around in my day, I'd have never set foot on campus.
The function of the schools is not only education. It is also the socialization - to teach people to get along with each other and to acquire the social skills needed in interaction with each other. Homeschooling - or schooling by internet - produces asocial nerds with little to speak about social skills on interaction with each other and how to deal with conflicts.
One of the reason why peregrines thrive in cities is the reduction on environmental pollution.
Peregrines are apex predators, and their biggest peril has been environmental toxins which accumulate on their metabolism and eggs.
Onde the worst of these - DDT, Aldrin, Dieldrin, Lindane, methyl mercury - were prohibited and strict limits of heavy metal and polyaromatic or heterocyclic hydrocarbon emissions were set, the birdlife began to recover. Especially the avian apex predators - eagles, falcons, owls - recovered remarkably well.
Likewise, the eagle owls have found their places in the urban environment as well. One currently lives in the tower of the Helsinki Olympic Stadium - it gave our national football team the name "Eagle Owls".
IM, I'm so sorry you refuse to see the basic facts of how people are motivated and therefore feel the need to flame for several pages to try to press home points that have been proven to fail every time they are tried. I know; I was "educated" the same way as you apparently were, with the same type of curricula. A difference between us appears to be that the curricula as presented obviously did not line up with the world I see around me. Some posts back, on another topic, I invited you to look into some resources that may help you understand the human condition better. Once again, please avail yourself of those resources, use your God-given intelligence to examine the evidence which for you will be quite new, then, after processing and comparing the new (for you) world view with your closely-held (apparently for some time as it has been drilled into you quite thoroughly) current world view, with the benefit of history - and I mean dispassionate, accurately-reported history, not the in-vogue revisionist history found in the mass media (to find it you may have to go to source material from generations ago) - as a grid, you can accurately discuss what is and what should not be compared to what succeeds.
In short, just because we are told something will work if we just try harder, and throw more money at it, because we're smarter and more diverse now than those old white guys who tried it a couple of generations back, does not make it so.
Becomes horribly expensive.
As opposed to the wonderfully cost effective practice of the Party?
Which will leave it all as a complete Wild West.
There would be oversight, just not that of a corrupt, self-serving political class.
Oh yeah. Do the words "yeshiva" and "madrassa" ring the bells?
Absolutely. Get the barbarians out in the open where it can be roundly condemned and fought.
Religious schools are sure-fire ways to instil intolerance, bigotry, fanaticism and violence on children's minds.
Not to worry, there will be Atheist schools as well, so the dears can be tolerant, open minded, placid, and non-violent–like the Nazis and the Communists.
So there would be basically no standards for paedagogy and who can teach and what...?
As opposed to Unions that demand lock-step worship of the Party?
The function of the schools is not only education. It is also the socialization
The purpose of education is to instruct the young in the ways of their fathers.
The free market provides quantity, not quality. It provides abundance, but does a lousy job of upholding high standards
Ironmistress, I read the above and nearly spilled my tea all over high-tech privately developed computer. I must remember to drop a memo to Steve Jobs complaining about how wretched his ipads are compared to the far superior Soviet versions.
By the bye, regarding monopolies, there are very, very few natural ones and most of those turn out not to be so. Telecommunications were once thought that, but when the systems were privatised and competition was introduced, that's when the real innovation started.
Oh, and private doesn't necessarily mean "for profit". The Church, non-profits, charities, and philanthropists can all educate as well. If you ever visit the United States or Great Britain, you might want to visit one of the thousands of local libraries scattered across them–the ones founded by that hated Capitalist and infamous anti-intellectual Andrew Carnegie.
As to "diversity in unity", that's right up there with "one size fits all". Procrustes, call your service.
Becomes horribly expensive.
As opposed to the wonderfully cost effective practice of the Party?
Big units are always more economical than small. Basic economics of scale Just keep the politicians and other remfs away.
There would be oversight, just not that of a corrupt, self-serving political class.
Golden rule of Capitalism: The one who has gold makes the rules. That is the oversight. Which is lesser evil: corrupt, self-serving Party or corrupt, self-serving Plutocracy?
Absolutely. Get the barbarians out in the open where it can be roundly condemned and fought.
You cannot. Freedom of religion is one of the cornerstones of the Western society. Unfortunately making it legal to found religious schools basically gives the barbarians an open cheque.
Not to worry, there will be Atheist schools as well, so the dears can be tolerant, open minded, placid, and non-violent–like the Nazis and the Communists.
Tu quoque. Atheists do not abuse their children.
BTW, Nazis weren't Atheists, and Communism was a religion on itself. Better to keep any form of conviction away from the schools.
As opposed to Unions that demand lock-step worship of the Party?
You cannot become a teacher's union member without teacher's credentials. I'd rather trust my kids' education on a qualified teacher rather than a layman.
The purpose of education is to instruct the young in the ways of their fathers.
What use is of that in the modern, ever-changing and ever-evolving world? You cannot look in the future via the rear-view mirror.
Ironmistress, I read the above and nearly spilled my tea all over high-tech privately developed computer.
Which most likely would not originally have been developed without the abundant state contracts with the American military industry.
I am currently typing this by using the marvellous operation system originally developed in University of Helsinki, Linux. I just refuse to pay on what I can get free.
Oh, and private doesn't necessarily mean "for profit". The Church, non-profits, charities, and philanthropists can all educate as well.
Who pays the piper calls the tune. Or like we say in Finland, every bait has a hook.
If you ever visit the United States or Great Britain, you might want to visit one of the thousands of local libraries scattered across them–the ones founded by that hated Capitalist and infamous anti-intellectual Andrew Carnegie.
We have had parish-funded libraries in Finland since the 18th century. Being able to read and write has been a pre-requisite here to be eligible to marry since the 15th century.
Given to the personal history and acts of Andrew Carnegie, I would call that philantropy as hypocrisy.
As to "diversity in unity", that's right up there with "one size fits all".
No. It is rather that all sizes fits one.
IM, your comments and rebuttals indicate one whose mentality and ideology are rigid to the point of fracture. It has been proven time and again that to attempt to reason with people who are so tied to their belief system merely generates greater quantities of arguments that do not produce useful dissertations of thought; they merely open gushers of repetitions of the core ideology occasionally couched in different phrases.
You apparently hold your socialist atheist ideology mantra as your religion. To attempt to divorce you from your religion would cast you without mooring into a world you could not understand because your mind would be unable to make sense of the images your eyes send to it, like the blind man told of in the Bible whom Jesus healed (physically) who saw men as trees, walking. It was only when Jesus opened the eye of the man's mind that he saw people as they were. If you remain blind to the world, again as said in an earlier unrelated post, all the evidence in the world could not make you, who believe the earth is flat, admit that it is spheroid.
Argument with such ideologists is pointless. However, Barack Hussein Obama is of like opinion and has a similar world view to you. Perhaps you would have more satisfaction bobbing your head to his Marxist mantra than to the thinking you run across here on David's blog.
try to press home points that have been proven to fail every time they are tried.
It is just what is the way of the lesser evil. The small guy ends up screwed in any case. It is just that getting screwed by Party is a lesser evil compared to screwed by Plutocracy.
The capitalism may collapse now at any moment. US is indebted up to its ears and basically insolvent. EU is about to disintegrate due to the crisis of the PIIGS countries. China is the creditor of the whole world, and US has so far survived only by becoming indebted to China. Japan has suffered from deflation for over two decades. Islam is preparing for holy war. The economical turmoils are global; and basically the global Capitalism is one gigantic Ponzi scheme based on ruthless profiteering. It is just a question of time when everything will collapse. I wish to be out at the sea when it happens.
The future belongs to Fascism. My prediction is that there will soon be a military coup in Greece. So much with euro, so much with the whole EU - and so much with the global economic system as we know it. Capitalism is based on trust, and if that trust is broken, the result is collapse.
Once again, please avail yourself of those resources, use your God-given intelligence to examine the evidence which for you will be quite new, then, after processing and comparing the new (for you) world view with your closely-held (apparently for some time as it has been drilled into you quite thoroughly) current world view, with the benefit of history - and I mean dispassionate, accurately-reported history, not the in-vogue revisionist history found in the mass media (to find it you may have to go to source material from generations ago) - as a grid, you can accurately discuss what is and what should not be compared to what succeeds.
I rather trust my own eyes and my own experience. The Communists lied about Communism but told the truth about Capitalism.
The bread lines re-appeared in Finland only after demolishing of the welfare state. We haven't had them since the 1930s, but they are here to stay. The rich get filthy rich and the poor get dirt poor. That is Capitalism. Is it really worth of it?
In short, just because we are told something will work if we just try harder, and throw more money at it, because we're smarter and more diverse now than those old white guys who tried it a couple of generations back, does not make it so.
What did not work in the past will not work in the future either. The golden rule of Capitalism is that the one who has the gold, makes the rules. Simple as that. That is why private schools will produce similar results as private health care in US: horribly expensive, squanders resources and the small guy always ends up screwed.
IM, your comments and rebuttals indicate one whose mentality and ideology are rigid to the point of fracture.
No. It is just being Realist. I do not believe in any particular ideology nor any particular economic system. It is just the question of the lesser evil.
You apparently hold your socialist atheist ideology mantra as your religion.
Funny you call me a Socialist. Usually I am called a Capitalist by my fellow countrymen. Perhaps that makes me something in-between.
And I am not an Atheist. I am an Agnostic. I just have historical antipathy against Christianity because of the history of my nation, and I have absolutely no reason to assume any deities, let alone any benevolent deities, would exist.
Judaism is a good idea since it rejects the notion of a good and loving deity, and it stresses strict adherence to a legal code to get results. Unfortunately it is too strictly tied to one single nation of which I am not a member.
It is just that I have too much experience of this world and how it works to believe in any ideology, any religion or any economic system.
If you remain blind to the world, again as said in an earlier unrelated post, all the evidence in the world could not make you, who believe the earth is flat, admit that it is spheroid.
This world is a nasty place, and it won't get any nicer by any religion, ideology or economic system. What we need is pragmatism and Realpolitik - not ideology.
Argument with such ideologists is pointless. However, Barack Hussein Obama is of like opinion and has a similar world view to you.
It is the results which count, not the world view. Every US president in office has always been considered as the worst ever. Only after one's term his achievements can be objectively evaluated.
It is called Realpolitik.
Perhaps you would have more satisfaction bobbing your head to his Marxist mantra
As far as I know, Obama is not a Marxist and has never been. In Finnish perspective, he is Randian. Marx is dead and buried. However, that doesn't mean Rand would work any better.
We Finns have enough experience on Realpolitik and how it works. In retrospect, jumping in the bandwagon of global Capitalism and globalization was a horrible mistake - one whose bills our grandchildren will pay.
IM, you are most amusing - You say the same thing over and over and apparently believe you are making different points. But it is bittersweet amusement.
Unfortunately, regurgitating wrong information continually does not make it any more correct. It just becomes sadder as you continue to offer David's readers more proof of just how little you wish to acknowledge reality, of how little you understand history, of how unaware you are of the world you find yourself in.
I look forward to your next multi-page rant as you continue your attempt to justify your outmoded belief system.
I look forward to your next multi-page rant as you continue your attempt to justify your outmoded belief system.
That will make two of us.
I am just too experienced, seen too much of this world and become too jaded to believe in any cloudcuckoolandish ideas which assume something of the humankind what it really isn't and require of blind faith of something of which there is no evidence whatsoever.
If you had done any stock market trade yourself, especially with derivatives, you'd know the whole Capitalism is nothing but a grand scam. It is shameless profiteering and predation of other people's work, their lives, their achievements and their future. Something in which psychopaths thrive and flourish. I have first hand experience on stock tradingand made enough money to pay my home and buy a car and yacht. Why do you think I have become so jaded with Capitalism? Because I have seen it and I know how it works. It is nasty and filthy stuff and profiteering on other people's work really makes me ashamed of myself. But perhaps the Nazis too just thought they were just acting by the rules.
IM, you are most amusing - You say the same thing over and over
Which? The truth that the small guy always gets screwed, no matter which economic system? Or that the Communists lied about Communism, but told the truth about Capitalism? If you'd understand in one saying, there would be no need for repeating.
Unfortunately, regurgitating wrong information continually does not make it any more correct.
I do not consider claiming Obama was a Marxist to be correct information. Just show me where I am wrong.
It just becomes sadder as you continue to offer David's readers more proof of just how little you wish to acknowledge reality,
I have seen enough of the reality not to believe in any rosy-coloured pipe dreams of Capitalism, free markets or any other buzzwords.
of how little you understand history,
Please prove your claim.
of how unaware you are of the world you find yourself in.
I know exactly where I am in. I am a member of a nation who is always in-between. Twenty-five years ago it was between Bolsheviks and Imperialists; today it is between Mafia and Plutocracy.
Oh my little Ironmistress. When I see someone struggling under the burden of a commonly-held, but oppressive, stifling belief system that leads to mental (and physical, eventually) slavery, my greatest desire for that person is to see him or her freed from its shackles. Such is my desire for you.
Big units are always more economical than small. Basic economics of scale Just keep the politicians and other remfs away.
Rot. Local control is the most efficient way of handling local matters. Police, fire fighting, disaster relief, road maintenance, health care, etc, etc, work best when local people who understand their wants and needs are in control. Your dogged centralism rather reminds me of a story I once read about a man who invented a super tin opener that weighed 30 tons. He had one installed in Moscow so that people could queue up weekly with their tins to have them opened.
Golden rule of Capitalism: The one who has gold makes the rules. That is the oversight. Which is lesser evil: corrupt, self-serving Party or corrupt, self-serving Plutocracy?
Neither, thank. I prefer individuals pursuing their individual interests. Collectively, this produces far better results than any planner. Compare the healthy lobster fisheries in New England, which are privately controlled, as opposed to the disaster of the Empire controlled European ones.
You cannot. Freedom of religion is one of the cornerstones of the Western society. Unfortunately making it legal to found religious schools basically gives the barbarians an open cheque.
Freedom of religion does not mean immortality for any sect. Let them compete and the Barbarians will go to the wall.
Tu quoque. Atheists do not abuse their children.
The only answer this derserves is a derisive laugh.
BTW, Nazis weren't Atheists, and Communism was a religion on itself. Better to keep any form of conviction away from the schools.
Atheism is a religion as well, my dear. Only a beast lacks a faith.
You cannot become a teacher's union member without teacher's credentials. I'd rather trust my kids' education on a qualified teacher rather than a layman.
I have those credentials. They mean squat. They mean less than squat in the hands of an incompetent socialist.
What use is of that in the modern, ever-changing and ever-evolving world? You cannot look in the future via the rear-view mirror.
Who let Tony Blair in the hall?
Which most likely would not originally have been developed without the abundant state contracts with the American military industry.
Nice try. I've worked with the American IT industry for many years and the number of government (let alone military) involved in Apple or Microsoft's R&D? Try a nice, round zero.
Who pays the piper calls the tune. Or like we say in Finland, every bait has a hook.
And a wet bird does not fly at night. Really, this cynical attitude is merely what it is, cynicism. You're far too intelligent, Ironmistress to indulge in such undergraduate posturing.
Given to the personal history and acts of Andrew Carnegie, I would call that philantropy as hypocrisy.
Call it hypocrisy all you want, but the libraries are still there. Remember, every cathedral was built by sinners.
No. It is rather that all sizes fits one.
By stretching on the rack and lopping off feet. No, thank you.
Capitalism is one gigantic Ponzi scheme based on ruthless profiteering.
Ironmistress, You surely mean Socialism, which is the actual cause of every one of the problems cited.
The golden rule of Capitalism is that the one who has the gold, makes the rules.
Actually, there are no rules to Capitalism. Unlike Socialism, it is not an ideology or a human invention. It is merely basic human behaviour as it relates to economics. As to the "little guy", this "little guy" has more wealth, knowledge, and raw power at my fingertips than the greatest Emperors of the ancient world–not to mention living in the freest society in human history.
In my experience, the only plutocrats that are a threat to me are the Marxist ones.
Ironmistress, from your writings it appears your belief system can be distilled to a few essential components:
1) It’s okay to believe in a god as long as that god does not inconvenience me or ask me to question my beliefs.
2) Christianity is bad because I don’t want to understand it and I’ve read that it causes bad things.
3) Gaia is very, very angry with us.
4) The free market is bad. And the corollary: So are people who practice free market principles.
5) Freedom for others to choose what they want to believe that disagrees with what I believe leads to bad things.
6) A small ruling class of people making decisions for everyone is much better than everyone making decisions and choices for themselves.
7) Liberty is bad and leads to bad things like capitalism and religious schools (not to mention iPads).
8) Statism is good.
Unfortunately for your arguments, there are numerous logical fallacies inherent in all of the above-mentioned beliefs. Some examples:
Numbers 1, 2, and 3: These conclusions come naturally to the natural man and woman. They will be buttressed up with all sorts of anecdotal evidence that does not bear up under scrutiny of actual history and facts. There is a blindness,spiritual in nature, in operation.
Number 4: Your unwillingness to entertain the factual basis that the many arguments offered to refute your beliefs indicates a desire to hold on to ideology in the face of all evidence that is contrary to that ideology. This further indicates a mind that has shrunk to brittle Pavlovian behaviorism.
Numbers 5, 6, 7, and 8: Unfortunately, while you vehemently try to argue in favor of these beliefs, your arguments are weak or merely invalid, but in all cases easily refuted with correct historical and commonly observed data. Again, you have been unwilling to examine logical evidence to the contrary.
Conclusion: Ironmistress is wedded to several modern Myths.
Remediation: Likely impossible using mere human power.
Much things said! But I have been too busy lately to participate, and come too late to the party to join in. I'll post an incoherent rant or two on another thread.
Rot. Local control is the most efficient way of handling local matters. Police, fire fighting, disaster relief, road maintenance, health care, etc, etc, work best when local people who understand their wants and needs are in control.
Now we are in it. Which boils down to the question: which is the lesser evil: high overhead costs or rot?
The problem with Centralism is well known in control theory; the longer a control loop is, the more vulnerable it is and the more prone it is for oscillations and disturbances.
Yet the paradox is that all Capitalist organizations are extremely centralist and authoritarian. Any corporation you can name is a centralist organization where the organization structure is aimed to minimize the overhead costs.
That is what happened in Finland when the various municipalities privatized their health care business. They aimed for savings; instead, they ended up on paying for more and getting less. The business didn't go to local enterpreneurs; it went to national and international provider corporations. It is exactly the same in every business: the smaller the units, the bigger the overhead costs; the bigger the units, the bigger also the rot, friction and inertia.
Neither, thank. I prefer individuals pursuing their individual interests.
Exactly. Unfortunately, that is not the case in the real world. Globalization and global capitalism has led us to the point where local providers are simply too small units to function in the competition anymore.
That same applies on national level. Nation states are too small players anymore. With hindsight, my nation should never have joined that globalization game and never have opened its market to foreign players. But the mistake has already been made. It is better to stick with EU than be outside. The thirties already taught what happens to small nations who are alone.
Which leaves us back to the question: greedy, corrupt Government or greedy, corrupt Capitalists?
Collectively, this produces far better results than any planner. Compare the healthy lobster fisheries in New England, which are privately controlled, as opposed to the disaster of the Empire controlled European ones.
Compare the European and American steel industry.
Freedom of religion does not mean immortality for any sect. Let them compete and the Barbarians will go to the wall.
Unfortunately in such competition the Barbarians will always gain the upper hand. It is because they won't compete fair.
The only answer this derserves is a derisive laugh.
Child abuse is prominent in religions and sects with strict and restrictive sexual morals. That is why it is rampant in Catholic church (celibacy for priests) and Islam (strict segeregation of sexes and strict gender roles), but not so evident in Protestant sects. I don't know about Judaism, but I am very, very afraid.
Atheism is a religion as well, my dear.
Atheism is not religion. It is by definition lack of religion. Baldness is not the colour of hair, it is lack of hair.
Only a beast lacks a faith.
Homo sapiens is a beast.
I have those credentials. They mean squat.
They are still more than a complete layman.
Nice try. I've worked with the American IT industry for many years and the number of government (let alone military) involved in Apple or Microsoft's R&D?
Windows made its breakthrough only when the US government and armed forces chose Windows NT as its standardized operation system.
President Eisenhower warned of military-industrial complex. His predictions came true.
And a wet bird does not fly at night. Really, this cynical attitude is merely what it is, cynicism.
Cynicism equals wisdom, realism and honesty.
Call it hypocrisy all you want, but the libraries are still there. Remember, every cathedral was built by sinners.
But not by robber barons.
Ironmistress, You surely mean Socialism, which is the actual cause of every one of the problems cited.
Saying Capitalism is a scam doesn't imply Socialism was any better. The future belongs to Fascism. I just wish to be out at the oceans when it happens.
Actually, there are no rules to Capitalism.
Yup. The only result is that the small guy ends always up screwed.
It is merely basic human behaviour as it relates to economics.
Where immoral psychopaths thrive and the rest are screwed. "Business ethics" is an oxymoron.
You have called me a cynic. Yes, I am very much one, since cynicism" equals honesty, wisdom and level headed reality. Cynicism - or rather realism to the point of disgust strengthens you and makes you realize what's actually important in life, and makes you much more well-suited to handle hardship and adversity. Believing the worst of human nature and motives helps well to see beyond the veil and the true motives of this naked ape called Homo sapiens.
As to the "little guy", this "little guy" has more wealth, knowledge, and raw power at my fingertips than the greatest Emperors of the ancient world–not to mention living in the freest society in human history.
But less than the big guys anyway. The big guys of today have more wealth, knowledge and raw power than all the big guys of history combined. You are still a little guy.
In my experience, the only plutocrats that are a threat to me are the Marxist ones.
But not the Randist?
1) It’s okay to believe in a god as long as that god does not inconvenience me or ask me to question my beliefs.
It is stupid to believe in gods but it is completely insane to believe in humankind. But everyone becomes pious with their own faith
2) Christianity is bad because I don’t want to understand it and I’ve read that it causes bad things.
Christianity is bad because it was followed with slavery by a foreign conqueror. We had a perfectly good Pagan religion before the Russians, Teutonic Knights and Swedes.
3) Gaia is very, very angry with us.
Gaia couldn't care less of us. We are nothing but insignificant bugs in the biosphere. Sure we can cause wholesale destruction in a very short time, but we will only cause our own extinction and world will return back to what it was before Homo sapiens in couple of hundred years.
4) The free market is bad. And the corollary: So are people who practice free market principles.
Just the other way around. Evil people practising unlimited and unrestricted free market will produce only evil results. The rules and restrictions apply to minimize the damage caused by exploitations, frauds, swindles and bubbles.
5) Freedom for others to choose what they want to believe that disagrees with what I believe leads to bad things.
E.g. Islam.
6) A small ruling class of people making decisions for everyone is much better than everyone making decisions and choices for themselves.
Most people do not have faintest idea on what they want or what they need. Given the chance, most people act in the stupid way rather than sensible. But the choice is whether you want state to make those decisions or the capitalists. Both are equally nasty.
7) Liberty is bad and leads to bad things like capitalism and religious schools (not to mention iPads).
Too much liberty equals anarchy. Which is a bad thing. Somalia is the most libertious society available. Including the religious schools and unlicensed bearing of arms. Including large caliber weapons and rapid fire arms.
8) Statism is good.
Etatism is sometimes the way of the lesser evil compared to Plutocracy.
Numbers 1, 2, and 3: These conclusions come naturally to the natural man and woman.
We have absolutely no evidence of any gods or deities or supernatural, but we have clear evidence of this world and how it works. There is no reason to assume any nice, good, loving or anyhow benevolent deities. It is called realism.
Number 4: Your unwillingness to
entertain the factual basis
Communists lied about Communism but told the truth about Capitalism. So?
Numbers 5, 6, 7, and 8:
5) Islam. Some beliefs are not constructive, but destructive.
6) Illusion of individuals being able to realize what is best to them usually leads into troubles. Sooner or later there will anyway rise a small decision-making elite. Whether it is better than that elite will rise by power (government) or by money (plutocrats) is a matter of taste.
7) Unrestricted freedom will lead into anarchy. Somalia.
8) From claim "A is bad" does not follow that "B was good".
Ironmistress, I must admit I'm embarrassed for you. Your rants get more preposterous and shrill the longer you roll with them. To butcher an old truism, you can lead an Ironmistress to knowledge, but you can't make her think. Unlike your friends, however, I do not wish to make you do anything. But it would be wonderful if you could see the world as it is, instead of wasting your life to champion a lie.
Really, Ironmistress, if that's the best your statist philosophers that you seem so bent on quoting can conjure up for you, maybe you need to find some class - that can help you learn to espouse reasoned, rational thinking, rather than merely regurgitating someone else's garbage. None of what you write is original, and it has all been debunked. Right here on David's blog, in fact. David has labored to provide you an education, to get through your blind fog - Yet you do not seem capable of rationally discussing the points he makes; you merely go on with your same tired lies that you so wish were true. But wishing doesn't make it so, neither yesterday, today, nor forever, world without end. David’s patience is commendable, and while you cannot derive the value of his words, perhaps his efforts are not in vain; maybe others whose minds are not closed tight like a steel trap will start thinking because of what he’s writing here. If you truly could put aside your tightly-grasped prejudices, Ironmistress, you’d look around you and see it's time you switched horses midstream, the latest fear watchword from your friends in the US media.
While it can be amusing to read your repetitious ramblings, what is not amusing is that the ideology you embrace, that you are so desperately inured of, what is not amusing is that the ideology which you embrace is the same that’s viciously cultivated and practiced by those who would – and do! – rule over others, those who pursue political positions of power. Those who seek not to represent us, but to usurp us. That same unbending, slavish belief in and worship of the tired old statist ideology is held just as stubbornly by the tyrants who would – and whom we too often allow to – control us.
These political hacks do not merely gripe that they don’t like liberty, or Christians, or the free market, or “rich” people whose wealth, they say, must be stolen – for social justice, of course!; they actively make policies to destroy freedoms – of thought, of faith; and to redistribute the wealth of the successful to the failures who support them. They steal opportunities to thrive from those of us who want to live our lives without being told by self-anointed masterminds how we must behave. They destroy the opportunities of future generations who will have to pay for their follies – just as we are paying today. They are interested only in their own selfish – what they perceive as – gain, to blinded by their agendas to see that they diminish us all.
How can you, in good conscience, be a slave who wants others to submit to the same slavery? You are in a prison, Ironmistress. A prison for your mind.
Yes, the last two sentences were a quote. Hat tip to the great Hollywood philosophers.
Ironmistress, For someone as intelligent and obviously well-read as yourself to spout such bile, I can only conclude that it's a rhetorical posture taken so that you can enjoy the cut and thrust of debate. The world is run by Monopoly game "plutocrats"? You're an agnostic indistinguishable from a militant Atheist who thinks belief in god is "stupid" and can't see the contradiction? People are evil and "stupid", need a dictator, and will soon get one? Christians are rapacious monsters indistinguishable from the Taliban? You think that throwing around "I'm a cynic because I'm a realist" like a second year undergraduate is an argument? And all of it sewn up in trite little slogans lifted out of propaganda leaflets? You surely don't regard this piffle as having any weight.
If you do, then argument is useless. I will, however, include you my prayers.
Ironmistress, For someone as intelligent and obviously well-read as yourself to spout such bile, I can only conclude that it's a rhetorical posture taken so that you can enjoy the cut and thrust of debate. The world is run by Monopoly game "plutocrats"?
Exactly. Ever heard of the Bildenberg group?
Mayer Rotschild once said "Permit me to issue and control the money and I care not who makes the laws". That is how it works: the one who has the gold makes the rules. Likewise, Jakob Fugger once said he is the true emperor of the Holy Roman Empire - he decides, who will be the emperor.
Christians blame it is the Jews who control the world. Jews blame it is the Catholic Church which control the world. Catholics blame it is the Swiss bankers who control the world. Everyone points at each other and nobody really seems to know who it really is, yet it is those who control the flow of the money, control the world. George Soros could manipulate whole countries into bankruptchy by manipulating their monetary units. The crisis initiated by one single American bank led into an international catastrophe. That should have shown everyone who really controls this world.
The nightmares of the cyberpunk literature - international megacorporations, hightech combined with lowlife, legitimate business and racket blending with each other, single businessmen being more powerful than entire nation states - have become true. The only prediction not yet realized is cyborgization.
My experience on stock market is that it all is a grand scam. Doing day trading was nothing short of a racket.
You're an agnostic indistinguishable from a militant Atheist who thinks belief in god is "stupid" and can't see the contradiction?
I have absolutely no reason to believe in any deities. Belief in gods is about as stupid as believing in horoscopes.
The good old theodichy is a problem which has never been solved and never will. God is assumed to be omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent. Yet evil exists. Why? The best brains of Christianity have pondered this for 2000 years and no answer can be found.
People are evil and "stupid", need a dictator, and will soon get one?
Hobbes basically was right. Like I said, the future belongs to Fascism, but I really do not want to be around when it happens.
Christians are rapacious monsters indistinguishable from the Taliban?
Given to the history, it is pretty much a matter of opinion. I would still consider the Taliban a much bigger evil.
Silvio Berlusconi is a perfect example of a corrupt Plutocrat. His media empire has enabled him to trash the Italian democracy from inside. He basically owns the Italy - even Mussolini wasn't such bastard.
You have called me a cynic. Yes, I am very much one, since cynicism" equals honesty, wisdom and level headed reality.
Really? Hows this for a dose of reality. You claim to hate Christianity for what it did to your country; about how the evil Christians descended with fire and sword and gave the Finns the choice of convert or die. I politely let this stand because I do not wish to be impolite to a guest.
Very well, reality-minded Cynic. That is a load of bull. There was no forced conversion, no swarms of knights with crosses in one fist and a bloody sword in the other. Finland came to Christ slowly and peacefully. There is a legend of a "Swedish crusade" in the 12tn century, but it is just that: A legend without an iota of archaeological or historical evidence to support it. By the time Sweden did conquer Finland under the cover of an ecclesiastical reshuffle, the country had long been Christian.
Now show how reality-based you are and renounce your hatred of Christianity or admit what it really is. You cling to this myth to justify not your hatred of Christianity, but the deep-down fear that it is true.
My participation in this thread is ended.
But it would be wonderful if you could see the world as it is, instead of wasting your life to champion a lie.
I see the world as it is. It is an awfully nasty place already and I am afraid it will get even worse in the future.
Really, Ironmistress, if that's the best your statist philosophers that you seem so bent on quoting can conjure up for you,
Discussion would be so much easier for everyone if you did not throw up ad hominems but rather counter my arguments with better counter-examples if you have. I have had my share of both Etatist and Libertarian propaganda and I am fed up with both.
The one single event which really opened my eyes was the saying of CEO of Kansallis Bank, Pentti Voutilainen: The ordinary customers brings nothing in the bank except the dirt on his shoes. That really opened my mind. That is how Capitalism works and that is how much those who have the controls of the money really care about the small guy. My personal experiences in the stock market confirmed it - I noticed on my own personality that I am getting corrupt and my integrity is dissolving with my success on speculations. What is nasty with Plutocrats, unlike politicians, you cannot vote them away.
If it was legal to behead a debtee who has made a personal bankruptcy, and sell his internal organs on transplants market, the Capitalists sure would do it.
That same unbending, slavish belief in and worship of the tired old statist ideology is held just as stubbornly by the tyrants who would – and whom we too often allow to – control us.
It makes absolutely no difference whether that tyranny is political or economical by nature.
The prophet of Capitalism - Adam Smith - recognized that clearly and he especially warned of any Capitalists ever gaining real power on national issues. He said they won't care of nothing else but themselves.
These political hacks do not merely gripe that they don’t like liberty, or Christians, or the free market, or “rich” people whose wealth, they say, must be stolen – for social justice, of course!;
Here is something which Adam Smith said about this issue already 200+ years ago. He especially warned of plutocracy.
How can you, in good conscience, be a slave who wants others to submit to the same slavery?
Let's say it is a lesser evil to be a field-tilling serf to a nobleman than a cotton-picking slave to a capitalist.
Why? At least nobility obliges. The nobleman is obliged to protect and govern to legitimize his status. On the other hand, there is no honour amongst thieves and thieves and merchants share the same patron deity, Mercury. The bourgeoisie has never had similar concepts of honour and decency as the nobility. It would be bad for business.
While you are accusing me of servility, you yourself cannot see the exactly same position in which you are when you praise Plutocracy and its virtues. The exactly same arguments which you use apply to Capitalism and Plutocracy as well. It really doesn't matter whether your shackles are iron or gold, they are still shackles.
At least when living in Democracy, you can vote your government away if you do not like it. You cannot vote the Plutocrats away.
You are in a prison, Ironmistress. A prison for your mind.
That makes two of us.
It isn't Barack Obama who runs the United States. It is the Federal reserve, megacorporations, banks, oil barons and old money families. They are the puppetmasters who pull the strings.
Ironmistress
In distress
The door's open
But she's not budgin'.
Very well, reality-minded Cynic. That is a load of bull. There was no forced conversion, no swarms of knights with crosses in one fist and a bloody sword in the other. Finland came to Christ slowly and peacefully. There is a legend of a "Swedish crusade" in the 12tn century, but it is just that: A legend without an iota of archaeological or historical evidence to support it. By the time Sweden did conquer Finland under the cover of an ecclesiastical reshuffle, the country had long been Christian.
This is a claim you have to substantiate. Could you please cite your sources?
There were altogether three crusades to Finland. First either 1153 or 1154, second 1249 and third 1293. First crusade was to subjugate Finland proper, second to subjugate Tavastia and third to subjugate Karelia.
Ironmistress, talkin' to the ether.
But she don't care; she's always there...
Wesley, going into ad hominems is the last defensive line of a loser.
Class - Phrase of the day: ad hominem. "–adjective
1.
appealing to one's prejudices, emotions, or special interests rather than to one's intellect or reason.
2.
attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his argument."
I would say definition 1 is quite appropriate when describing your "arguments", that is to say, closely held prejudices. Surely you would admit your statements are based on your prejudices rather than an actual accounting of facts.
You have attacked Christians, capitalists, et al quite regularly in your comments. Therefore definition 2 also applies.
So why would you accuse someone else of what you yourself are guilty?
Have a nice day, and thank you for your cooperation.
Post a Comment