leicsmac

Those are the only motivations required for people like them. Abuse of power and self interest are their own motivators.

The unwavering belief in social Darwinism at a nation state level would be utterly farcical if it didn't have such tremendously dire consequences for the rest of our species.

Vance with the usual Might Makes Right spiel regarding Greenland, then.

7.7 on the magnitude scale with a 6.4 aftershock not long afterwards, apparently. Heard from a friend there that he's safe, but there's understandably a lot of confusion over there right now.

Astute. The only problem is that if it fails, that failure may not only be costly for the population of the US, but the entire world.

Appalled, aggravated, but still scrabbling for a solution that doesn't involve a lot of blood on the floor.

It's certainly the direction they want it to go in, but I'm really hoping that it's not inevitable, because if it is that's going to be a whole bunch of no fun.

https://www.politico.eu/article/marjorie-taylor-greene-uk-reporter-journalist-british-sky-news-donald-trump/ U.S. Republican House Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene clashed with a British journalist during a press conference on Wednesday, telling her to “go back” to the United Kingdom. The confrontation occurred when Sky News reporter Martha Kelner attempted to ask Greene, a vociferous ally of President Donald Trump, about the so-called Signalgate scandal, in which senior officials from the Trump administration used the encrypted messaging app to discuss a planned military strike in Yemen. How very proud the people of Georgia must be.

... you're such a bloody WUM sometimes Tommy

Thus far, yes. I hope that they're ready for the campaign of smears, intimidation and likely outright violence that is coming their way from Trump and his supporters, though. They need to be - they're about the only one of the "checks and balances" acting as such right now. Agreed, but we should remember Grey's Law and not underestimate them.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/c4g9nzg9nppt Firefighters are racing to save people and ancient artefacts from the largest wildfires in South Korea's history, which have killed at least 26 people so far Tens of thousands have also been displaced in the blazes, which started in the south-east on 21 March. That's grim. Unusually hot and dry there for the time of year, too, which really doesn't help.

The power of Social Darwinism in action over there, mate.

Possibly not. Unfortunately decisions like this will divide and cause more conflict right up to the point where there is serious civil unrest. Which is exactly what Convict#47 and his followers want, because a. They have less compunction to use and are therefore better at violent repression than the side they want to repress, and b. It leads to a situation where enough people will accept such a repressive state for anyone outside a particular demographic simply to stop the aforementioned violence (or the risk of it).

What was it that someone said about evil containing the seeds of its own destruction?

Worth it tbh.

Kessler Syndrome. It is a real potential threat.

That's a key part of it all too, yes. I know I keep saying it, but anyone really aware of the pathway we're going down as a species outside the most ardent nihilist really should be terrified.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cdxq37nxl55o US President Donald Trump has signed an executive order that aims to overhaul US federal elections, including by requiring voters to show proof of citizenship and limiting when states can receive mail-in ballots. Experts warn the move could disenfranchise millions of Americans who do not have easy access to a passport or other legal documents proving they have the right to vote. It is unclear how enforceable the order is, given US states have wide legal leeway to determine how they run their elections. It is expected to be challenged in court. The logical next step, I suppose. Why risk rigging an election when you can suppress the vote to win it instead? And the following one, and the one after that...

I'll happily confess to being surprised by the speed and the vehemence of the change. Since then, it would appear that the ideological conflict has only intensified, and the stakes continue to rise (in fact, they may end up being absolute.)

I still maintain that the year 2016 broke something in the space-time continuum.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvgwjllld1ro US Vice-President JD Vance will join his wife Usha in travelling to Greenland on Friday, a visit that follows Donald Trump's threats to take over the island. The couple will go to the Pituffik Space Base to receive a briefing on Arctic security issues and meet members of US forces stationed there, according to the White House. Usha Vance had planned to travel to the Danish territory on a cultural visit before her husband announced his plans. Trump's National Security Adviser Mike Waltz is also set to visit this week on a separate trip. Officials in Greenland have fiercely criticised the planned visits as disrespectful. I hope that the Greenlanders make their feelings clear while he's there. Preferably in the form of an accurately thrown snowball or two.

Yeah, this plays into what I said earlier about while the method and the way it is executed can be flawed because it is human, it's also self correcting. People can raise legitimate noise about the topics you mention here but when that is then used to go further and craft policy that ignores legit scientific consensus and bad things happen as a result of it (and they almost always do), that's on the people that took it too far, no one else. We've talked in person about this before, and we both know what's out there in the future if ideas not derived from the scientific method are used for critical decision making at a high level.

I hear that. Allow me to clarify below. That is exactly what the scientific method is, yes. However, what is happening now is questioning of people using that scientific method by people not using it themselves (or not rigorously, anyway). They have the right to do that, but that comes hand in hand with the responsibility to take the consequences for decisions made based on that mindset. And there are some, there will be some, and some of them are and will be rather serious. Sagan knew that politics could be important in making sure necessary scientific progress occurred, yes, but see above. Additionally, I think his thought about ignorance having equal weight to knowledge in the future is sadly becoming prescient. Certainly the study of the mind is an inexact science and it, like other areas, are open to question and discussion. However, again, if you're going to discuss and raise questions about such expert testimony, it would be a good idea to have solid evidence as a basis for it. Hitchens Razor applies. There has to be a distinction made between legitimate questioning of expertise and that expertise being sidelined entirely in decision making. There's an awful lot of the latter occurring right now, and all that shows is that free choice includes the right to choose disaster. If there are corruption issues within the scientific community as is inferred here, they will be rooted out by other scientists. Scientific fact cannot be bought, not for long, anyway. If that's not true and the whole method is in fact corrupt, it would be nice to have some proof of that beyond mere assertion, before libelling decent people who are legitimately trying to make the future a better place. I agree, the method is human and therefore imperfect, like anything else human. However, it remains the best method we have for divining facts about the universe around us, and is self correcting. Critique of it is welcome, but in the absence of showing a better way, rather hollow, IMO. I guess the thread of my thoughts throughout this response is pretty much this; people can be and have the right to be sceptical about the scientific method and the results it gives, but they should be warned that if that then leads to a world where the viewpoint of the layman has as much pull as the expert on scientific matters in terms of policy making, that will be punished by the Earth. It has been in the past, it will be in the future, and that punishment will be severe. And the responsibility for the depth of trouble caused by that punishment will lie, solely, on the shoulders of those who thought it would be a good idea for those with little scientific knowledge to steer policy decisions on matters of science.

There's no easy solution. There's the Chinese solution, but that's not easy. It's long past time crimes purely based on power and humiliation (like this one is) were taken more seriously.

And it's reasonably obvious how such "death of expertise" ends.