604 Matching Annotations
  1. Last 7 days
    1. It's wishful thinking to believe that a group of people competing to advance their agendas will be universally pleased with any hierarchy of knowledge. The best that we can hope for is a detente in which everyone is equally miserable.

      The fate of true democracies.

  2. Jul 2020
    1. “Essentially a friend of mine is head of procurement for NHS London. He has really struggled to get stuff to people in the right timeframe. So essentially what we decided to do was set up a little company and become sales agents for people in the UK who have got stock. And then essentially we would help in linking up the supply chains that are massively disastrous at the moment.”

      essentially

    2. Singleton said he disclosed his business to superiors in the NHS, in accordance with the rules, and was told there was “unlikely to be a conflict”.

      I can see 3 different explanations for this response:

      • He offered a cut of the profits to the superiors
      • He was unclear / lied about what exactly the business was about
      • The superiors are incompetent
  3. Jun 2020
    1. America’s workplace problems don’t begin and end with the identities of those atop corporate hierarchies—they’re embedded in the hierarchies themselves.
    1. they had already sent hundreds of thousands of people to this country to spread that virus

      Hard to say if they explicitly "sent" these people to spread the virus. I do agree that it is heinous that they didn't disclose information about the virus for the first month or so, and that might've been on purpose

    1. I wonder how I can tie this into the furry fandom as a whole. It's pretty clear from this graph that members of the furry fandom, even in Texas, seem to lean towards more liberal political beliefs. Considering the large LGBTQIA+ & animal rights activist populations, groups that tend to skew more liberal themselves, within the furry fandom, this isn't entirely surprising.

  4. May 2020
    1. Ultimately, no one really knows who controls the planet. Over time an amalgam of heads of state, bankers, managers, advisers, dictators, mafia, criminals and despots have taken the reins.
    1. Hartman, T. K., Stocks, T. V. A., McKay, R., Gibson Miller, J., Levita, L., Martinez, A. P., Mason, L., McBride, O., Murphy, J., Shevlin, M., bennett, kate m, & Bentall, R. (2020). The Authoritarian Dynamic During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Effects on Nationalism and Anti-Immigrant Sentiment [Preprint]. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/4tcv5

    1. The UK voted to leave the European Union in a referendum on 23 June 2016 (and ceased to be a member state on 31 January 2020). This withdrawal from the EU makes the Republic of Ireland–United Kingdom border on the island of Ireland an external border of the European Union.[36] However, the Irish and UK governments and the President of the European Council have stated that they do not wish for a hard border in Ireland, taking into account the historical and social "sensitivities" that permeate the island.[37] In September 2016 the British Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, David Davis, stated that the UK government would not seek a return to a "hard border" between the UK and Republic of Ireland
    1. Jersey is not part of the United Kingdom,[15] and has an international identity separate from that of the UK,[16] but the UK is constitutionally responsible for the defence of Jersey.[17] The definition of United Kingdom in the British Nationality Act 1981 is interpreted as including the UK and the Islands together.[18]The European Commission confirmed in a written reply to the European Parliament in 2003[19] that Jersey was within the Union as a European Territory for whose external relationships the UK is responsible. Jersey was not fully part of the European Union but had a special relationship with it, notably being treated as within the European Community for the purposes of free trade in goods.
  5. Apr 2020
    1. If paralysis ended once you walked out of the Capitol, we wouldn’t have a housing crisis. We’d have better social insurance infrastructure. We’d have better infrastructure, period. But it doesn’t. Report Advertisement To put the question simply: Why is Penn Station, the flagship rail station in New York City, such a dump? Why can’t the richest city in the richest nation in the world have, at the very least, a train station with seating, some nice restaurants, working elevators, and an absence of human waste falling through the ceiling? Marc Dunkelman spent years cataloging the many failures to revamp Penn Station, a number of which came complete with hefty doses of federal funding. Each time, the story was the same: Plenty of people who wanted to build, and plenty of money with which to build, but too many people with vetoes who simply didn’t want the building to happen.

      "vetocracy"

    1. On October 18, 1948, the flag of the Arab Revlot was adopted by the Palestinian government and the Arab League. The current version, with it’s altered stripe order, was adopted in 1964 by the Palestine Liberation Organization under Yassir Arafat and then in 1988, as the official flag of the State of Palestine (unless you don’t recognize Palestine, that is).
    1. In early 2009, on her first trip to Asia as Barack Obama’s secretary of state, Hillary Clinton thanked Chinese policymakers for their “confidence in United States Treasuries” amid the global financial meltdown, adding that human-rights disagreements shouldn’t “interfere” with crisis-fighting efforts.Then, suddenly, relations started going downhill. China grew more assertive as President Hu Jintao came to the end of his term, moving to assert claims to disputed territory in the South China Sea and the Sea of Japan over strenuous American objections. It was also becoming much more confident in the superiority of its economic model, which had come through the crisis relatively unscathed. When Biden visited Beijing in August 2011—shortly after S&P’s Global Ratings downgraded the U.S.’s credit rating—then-Premier Wen Jiabao gave him a mini-lecture on the importance of fiscal prudence, according to a person familiar with the exchange. Wen, the person said, also delivered a thinly veiled threat, saying he hoped China wouldn’t need to find an alternative to parking its wealth in U.S. bonds. Biden replied that Wen’s government was welcome to sell its holdings—plenty of global investors would be happy to buy them. No one, the person recalled Biden saying, had ever won by betting against the U.S. economy.

      WOW

    1. Anachronisms of the Constitution + consequences of an aging democracy => a legislature/politics built for "show"

      In a provocative June 2018 essay in Commentary, the political scientist Yuval Levin posited that 231 years on, Congress had acquired a problem James Madison never anticipated: a reluctance to compete with the other two branches of government in the exercise of power. Partisanship, he concluded, had displaced ambition to legislate. Senators and representatives, he wrote, now “see themselves as players in a larger political ecosystem the point of which is not legislating or governing but rather engaging in a kind of performative outrage for a partisan audience.” Levin didn’t put it this way, but he seemed to be suggesting that Congress had grown decadent, like fin de siècle Vienna, but without the solace of Sacher tortes.

      The U.S. doesn’t have a Politburo, but if you calculate the median age of the president, the speaker of the House, the majority leader of the Senate, and the three Democrats leading in the presidential polls for 2020, the median age is … uh … 77.

      None of this means a septuagenarian can’t function effectively as a political leader. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell are 79 and 77, respectively, and by all reports they’re operating at peak mental capacity. But to affirm that not all elderly people are impaired cognitively is very different from affirming that none is.

      Wisdom may be more valuable in the digital age than ever before, because the velocity of information and normative judgments on social media, cable news and elsewhere constantly threatens to make glib idiots of us all.

      But here’s the rub: The aging of America’s ruling class does not automatically increase its experience level. In presidential politics, notes Brookings Institution senior fellow Jonathan Rauch, political experience, which “used to be a selling point,” has “become a liability. Voters and the public have come to see experience as inauthenticity.”

      In a November 2015 Atlantic article, Rauch plotted experience level for presidential candidates from 1960 to 2012. His graph showed a clear increase in experience level among the losers and a corresponding decrease among the winners. Gerald Ford lost to Jimmy Carter. George H.W. Bush won with more political experience than Michael Dukakis, but four years later lost to Bill Clinton, who had less. John McCain lost to Barack Obama, who’d been in national politics a mere four years.

      Donald Trump, who is 73, entered the Oval Office with no political experience at all. The single greatest mental compensation that age provides was therefore unavailable to the oldest president in American history.

      Old people really like to vote. In 2016, for instance, 71 percent of eligible elderly voters reported to the Census that they voted. For other age cohorts, the turnout percentages were 67 percent (aged 45-64), 59 percent (aged 30-44) and 46 percent (aged 18-29).

      You often hear older Americans complain that the younger generation, with its fixation on social media, can’t distinguish between fact and opinion, making it difficult for them to apply the critical thinking necessary to consume news and be responsible citizens. A 2018 Pew survey found that Americans do indeed experience great difficulty telling these two things apart: Given five factual statements and five statements of opinion, a majority of Americans couldn’t identify them properly.

      But younger Americans actually scored better on this test than older ones. Thirty-two percent of 18-49 year-olds were able to identify all five factual statements, and 44 percent were able to identify all five statements of opinion. Among the over-50 cohort, only 20 percent identified all five factual statements correctly, and only 26 percent did the same with the statements of opinion.

      The list of the Constitution’s anachronisms and ambiguities is long.

      Article One says Congress may “regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States,” phrasing that strictly limited the regulation of private business at the federal level until the New Deal, when the Supreme Court reversed itself and concluded the federal government’s power to regulate private business was pretty vast. Had the Founders grasped that the modern economy would all but eliminate purely local commerce—and that it could, unchecked, alter the very climate of planet earth—they might have had more to say on the subject. As things stand, the powers of the regulatory state are the subject of endless legal combat.

      Article Two says you must be a “natural born Citizen” to be president, which excludes for no apparent reason Arnold Schwarzenegger and Jennifer Granholm, who previously governed two of the nation’s most populous states. The racist “birther” movement that challenged the legality of Barack Obama’s presidency (and that ushered Donald Trump onto the national political stage) wouldn’t have been possible without Article Two.

      Article Two also established that presidents be elected through the Electoral College, an antique mechanism borrowed from the Holy Roman Empire that twice during the past two decades delivered the presidency to the popular-vote loser. Some people have a problem with that.

      The Second Amendment frames the right to bear arms within the context of “well-regulated” state militias that no longer exist, an ambiguity that the Supreme Court interpreted in 2008 to mean the Constitution protected the right to bear arms, after holding for the preceding seven decades that it did not. Had the Founders known the extent to which the nation would tear itself apart over the regulation of firearms more deadly than they ever imagined, they might have laid down a few broad parameters.

      And so on. None of this would matter much if our government were more amenable to reconsidering first principles, but that’s getting harder, too. The Constitution can be amended, and it has been, 27 times. But growing political polarization in recent years has made that difficult. Only two constitutional amendments were ratified during the past half-century (one giving 18-year-olds the right to vote and another, more anodyne amendment that makes it a little harder for Congress to give itself a raise).

  6. Mar 2020
    1. It’s perhaps a positive sign that, despite how polarized people are worried that society is, people can pull together and try to get things done and support each other and recognize people who are heroes on the front lines fighting this stuff
    1. “Using Twitter to bypass traditional media and directly reach voters is definitely a good thing,” Newt Gingrich said, in 2009.

      Is this because it makes it easier for misdirection and outright lies to reach an audience without being checked and verified? Very likely.

    1. Political Polarization

      And important: the role media plays in political polarization. On this topic, I've found works from the Pew useful, like "U.S. Media Polarization and the 2020 Election: A Nation Divided":

      "As the U.S. enters a heated 2020 presidential election year, a new Pew Research Center report finds that Republicans and Democrats place their trust in two nearly inverse news media environments."

      Also useful are works from Data & Society like "Media, Technology, Politics: six new pieces on the networked public sphere"

      "Although many people are anxious to understand how much influence old and new media had over the US presidential election, the reality is that we will never know comprehensively. We can, though, seek to understand how different cultural and technical factors are shaping the contemporary information landscape."

  7. Feb 2020
    1. an O’Byrne,assistant professor of education at the College of Charleston, wrote, “Power and money ultimately influence decisions made by democratic bodies. With growing unrest,citizens can use social media and current/new digital tools to make themselves heard. Ultimately this will be pushed back again by existing powerholders and nothing may ultimately change. The existing powerholders will continue to exert their influence, and citizens will be left to continue to voice their opinions by shouting into the cyberverse.”

    Tags

    Annotators

    1. Declaration of Independence

      We have the right to petition the government for redress of grievances

      That seems impractical these days with our government so big.

      We don't even write to our representatives in Congress. Why not? Maybe most of us don't think it would do any good.

      But if we don't stand up for our rights, they will gradually be taken away.

      Where is our militant faith? We're afraid of it being called hate speech.

      "Bigotry disguised as religious liberty is still bigotry"

      Republicanism is a country without a king. Protestantism is a church without a Pope.

      Pope Francis

      Jesuits

      Protestantism is [religious] racism Well, I don't want to be a racist. I better not speak up. Affects free speech.

      Sunday sacredness is the mark of Catholic church's authority.

      "Ecumenism is not optional"

      The persecution from Catholic Church will return again renewed

  8. Jan 2020
    1. A president with credibility

      Repetition used to emphasize a point he is trying to make. He clearly enjoys using rhetorical strategies in his writing, instead of taking a straight-forward, completely formal voice.

  9. en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org