Trump: An Emerging Dictatorship?

This is a forum for discussing philosophical theories of government and social structure. It is not a venue for partisan rants or plugging favored candidates.

Re: Trump: An Emerging Dictatorship?

Postby Serpent on February 17th, 2018, 3:42 pm 

mitchellmckain » February 17th, 2018, 1:43 pm wrote:This is one on which I agree with Neri. I presented my case in another thread that the real culprit in global warming is not human CO2 production but the human created holes in the ozone layer.

So you agree with Neri and Trump that coal is clean; that mining ought to be expanded to create the 45,000 e American jobs Trump promised? Is that possible/practical? Was Clinton wrong to suggest miners ought to be trained for other jobs? Does that agreement include an approval of tariff walls against solar power equipment? (which puts about 30,000 Americans out of work in the short run, though they may be reinstated if/when enough US investment has been put into the domestic production of those panels and components,)
Would that endorsement of coal extend to the enormous amounts China has been using? Should they, too, expand their mining operations, instead of changing their energy strategy?

These are important issues. I don't believe either Trump or his supporters have given them the necessary attention. Have you?
Serpent
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3109
Joined: 24 Dec 2011


Re: Trump: An Emerging Dictatorship?

Postby zetreque on February 17th, 2018, 3:56 pm 

mitchellmckain » February 17th, 2018, 1:43 pm wrote:This is one on which I agree with Neri. I presented my case in another thread that the real culprit in global warming is not human CO2 production but the human created holes in the ozone layer.


Typical human quest for the cure-all and single solution in the complex world still beyond human understanding. If only atmospheric chemistry was that simple and we could blame a single emission conveniently leaving out the one that is more profitable in the short-term.
User avatar
zetreque
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 3661
Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Location: Paradise being lost to humanity
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Trump: An Emerging Dictatorship?

Postby zetreque on February 17th, 2018, 4:03 pm 

If Ozone is damaging to life, what about complete destruction of the forests and heavy metals seeping out into the environment via coal removal?

What about ocean acidification and coral bleaching due to the ocean acting as a CO2 buffer? Algal blooms associated with large scale mortality events?
User avatar
zetreque
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 3661
Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Location: Paradise being lost to humanity
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Trump: An Emerging Dictatorship?

Postby Braininvat on February 17th, 2018, 4:41 pm 

Literally hundreds of peer-reviewed sources have been presented in multiple threads here in the Environment forum, showing the work of thousands of climatologists on the role of CO2 as a greenhouse gas, with overwhelming evidence for CO2 and methane and diesel soot as anthropogenic-sourced and causative of rising global temperatures, and someone with no training in this field suddenly has the real answer and seemingly no evidence for it. It's funny what propaganda will do to an otherwise fine mind. Evil flourishes when good men get their ideas from fringe bloggers instead of trained and reputable scientists.
User avatar
Braininvat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 6790
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills
Mosslingzetreque liked this post


Re: Trump: An Emerging Dictatorship?

Postby mitchellmckain on February 17th, 2018, 7:44 pm 

Serpent » February 17th, 2018, 2:42 pm wrote:
mitchellmckain » February 17th, 2018, 1:43 pm wrote:This is one on which I agree with Neri. I presented my case in another thread that the real culprit in global warming is not human CO2 production but the human created holes in the ozone layer.

So you agree with Neri and Trump that coal is clean; that mining ought to be expanded to create the 45,000 e American jobs Trump promised? Is that possible/practical? Was Clinton wrong to suggest miners ought to be trained for other jobs? Does that agreement include an approval of tariff walls against solar power equipment? (which puts about 30,000 Americans out of work in the short run, though they may be reinstated if/when enough US investment has been put into the domestic production of those panels and components,)
Would that endorsement of coal extend to the enormous amounts China has been using? Should they, too, expand their mining operations, instead of changing their energy strategy?

These are important issues. I don't believe either Trump or his supporters have given them the necessary attention. Have you?

I agree with neither Trump nor Clinton -- neither expansion nor elimination. Of course coal is not clean. Burning coal has a long history of negative environmental impacts. But that does not mean it should be phased out. Frankly the biggest problem I see with coal is the dangers of the profession both in regards to health and safety. On the other hand, I also have coal miners in the family and don't see taking away their jobs as a good thing. But having this done by old and established companies is one thing, while pushing for an expansion, which is too likely to involve increased risk, is quite another thing.

As for China, I don't think we have either the right or the ability to interfere in their affairs. I reject that a global impact changes this fact at all.


I certainly do not deny the role of CO2 in the greenhouse effect. What I dispute is concerning the cause of the increase in CO2 levels. I do not think is human production but rather the damage to the ozone layer. This is for two reasons.
1. O2 is 100% a product of the biosphere which changes CO2 into O2.
2. The low percentage of CO2 does mean that the conversion of CO2 to O2 is the dominant process by a considerable margin.
3. I saw a scientific study which measured a correlation between the CO2 levels and radiation reaching the surface of the earth due to those holes in the ozone layer.

However, there are a some caveats in this
1. That O2 is a product of the biosphere doesn't it can do so rapidly.
2. I may not take a huge increase in CO2 levels to produce severe climate changes.
3. The above doesn't mean that human CO2 production is of no significance whatsoever, especially when the damage to the ozone layer is already there.


However.... new technology to create vehicle fuels from coal is an interesting idea which should be explored.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: Trump: An Emerging Dictatorship?

Postby mitchellmckain on February 17th, 2018, 8:22 pm 

Braininvat » February 17th, 2018, 3:41 pm wrote: It's funny what propaganda will do to an otherwise fine mind. Evil flourishes when good men get their ideas from fringe bloggers instead of trained and reputable scientists.

This is sound exactly like the rhetoric of dismissal (with the employment of imaginary bloggers) you can expect from those who who replace an objective discussion of the issue with bombastic rhetoric laded with the my-side blindness of political ideology.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: Trump: An Emerging Dictatorship?

Postby Lomax on February 17th, 2018, 10:51 pm 

Whoa. I came here in response to a post report, not expecting to see child rape referred to as "homosexual abuse".

Neri - you've climbed down a little from your previously unquantified claim that "aspiring actresses like to have stars grab their pussies" so as a moderator I'll let it slide this time. As a debater I'm curious to see a source for your claim that "Socrates engaged in homosexual intercourse with his underage students" - a fact which seems to have passed Martha Nussbaum by in her book - and I'm curious whether you mean under the age of consent for his country and time, or for yours. I will also add that I consider "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" probably the second worst piece of advice in the Bible, after "take no thought for the morrow". Imagine what would become of the world if everybody lost the capacity for critique.
User avatar
Lomax
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 3664
Joined: 01 Jul 2010
Location: Nuneaton, UK
Mossling liked this post


Re: Trump: An Emerging Dictatorship?

Postby Serpent on February 17th, 2018, 11:12 pm 

mitchellmckain » February 17th, 2018, 6:44 pm wrote:
I agree with neither Trump nor Clinton -- neither expansion nor elimination.


I admire a firm stand on well-founded convictions.
Serpent
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3109
Joined: 24 Dec 2011


Re: Trump: An Emerging Dictatorship?

Postby Braininvat on February 18th, 2018, 10:59 am 

mitchellmckain » February 17th, 2018, 5:22 pm wrote:
Braininvat » February 17th, 2018, 3:41 pm wrote: It's funny what propaganda will do to an otherwise fine mind. Evil flourishes when good men get their ideas from fringe bloggers instead of trained and reputable scientists.

This is sound exactly like the rhetoric of dismissal (with the employment of imaginary bloggers) you can expect from those who who replace an objective discussion of the issue with bombastic rhetoric laded with the my-side blindness of political ideology.


Not imaginary, unfortunately. The "myth of greenhouse gases" is a prevalent trope in the rightwing blogosphere. I moderated here for 3 years (and several years elsewhere in cyberspace), quite a bit on climatology and environment issues, so I am by now well acquainted with the science denialists. My comment was primarily directed to Neri's confidence that CO2 has no role as a GHG. But, to be frank, your assertions seemed under-supported by evidence as well. And rather off-topic, given the thread focus.
User avatar
Braininvat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 6790
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: Trump: An Emerging Dictatorship?

Postby zetreque on February 18th, 2018, 5:01 pm 

Braininvat » Sun Feb 18, 2018 6:59 am wrote: And rather off-topic, given the thread focus.


Agreed. Time to get back to the OP topic.
User avatar
zetreque
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 3661
Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Location: Paradise being lost to humanity
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Trump: An Emerging Dictatorship?

Postby mitchellmckain on February 18th, 2018, 5:06 pm 

Braininvat » February 18th, 2018, 9:59 am wrote:Not imaginary, unfortunately. The "myth of greenhouse gases" is a prevalent trope in the rightwing blogosphere. I moderated here for 3 years (and several years elsewhere in cyberspace), quite a bit on climatology and environment issues, so I am by now well acquainted with the science denialists. My comment was primarily directed to Neri's confidence that CO2 has no role as a GHG. But, to be frank, your assertions seemed under-supported by evidence as well. And rather off-topic, given the thread focus.


The bloggers are imaginary when you attribute opinions of people to bloggers without a shred of evidence that their opinions have anything whatsoever to do with any bloggers you may have encountered. I agreed with Neri on that one issue that the idea of human CO2 production being the problem is hard to swallow because of the scientific facts that it is part of a natural cycle which is clearly dominated by the conversion of CO2 to O2. It is not a denial of the the problem. With that you are employing an unwarranted knee jerk reaction which reeks of political my-side bias rather than any scientific objective assessment of the issues. I went on to explain what I think is the actual source of the problem, according to a previous discussion you had no problem with, and certainly not based only any bloggers you are imagining responsible but scientific studies I have encountered.

The difference between scientific study and political rhetoric is the focus on details. The scientific studies are not about political agendas but about specific findings. When it goes to political warfare then suddenly it becomes some absurd with me or against me sort of nonsense which has NOTHING to do with science. It is typical of such rhetoric that it shifts from actual findings to blustering claims that science on your side. It is a signature red flag on the BS meter.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: Trump: An Emerging Dictatorship?

Postby mitchellmckain on February 18th, 2018, 5:10 pm 

Serpent » February 17th, 2018, 10:12 pm wrote:
mitchellmckain » February 17th, 2018, 6:44 pm wrote:
I agree with neither Trump nor Clinton -- neither expansion nor elimination.


I admire a firm stand on well-founded convictions.


I admire an appreciation of the facts that is not restricted to how well it supports your political bias.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: Trump: An Emerging Dictatorship?

Postby mitchellmckain on February 18th, 2018, 5:16 pm 

zetreque » February 18th, 2018, 4:01 pm wrote:
Braininvat » Sun Feb 18, 2018 6:59 am wrote: And rather off-topic, given the thread focus.


Agreed. Time to get back to the OP topic.


Ok...

Trump an emerging dictatorship?

Not so much.

It is more of an emerging circus dominated by clowns -- and one clown in particular as the main attraction. Of course, that doesn't mean they are not doing considerable damage to this country and the world.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: Trump: An Emerging Dictatorship?

Postby Serpent on February 18th, 2018, 5:36 pm 

mitchellmckain » February 18th, 2018, 4:10 pm wrote:I admire an appreciation of the facts that is not restricted to how well it supports your political bias.

I wasn't referring to political anything, but to your yes-but-no stance on each issue.

. Of course coal is not clean. Burning coal has a long history of negative environmental impacts.

What Clinton affirms and Trump rejects.
But that does not mean it should be phased out. ...the biggest problem I see with coal is the dangers of the profession both in regards to health and safety. On the other hand, I also have coal miners in the family and don't see taking away their jobs as a good thing.

It's better to take away their health?
But having this done by old and established companies

per Trump.
As for China, I don't think we have either the right or the ability to interfere in their affairs. I reject that a global impact changes this fact at all.

No opinion should be expressed?

There follows some highly dubious science. Numbered points don't make it any more valid. Nor does clawing them backs again with numbered caveats.
All I asked was where do you stand on coal.
What I take to be your answer is: Keep it at status quo - which, as you say, doesn't agree with Clinton or Trump - and also doesn't agree with Neri on the subject of a national policy on coal use.
Serpent
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3109
Joined: 24 Dec 2011


Re: Trump: An Emerging Dictatorship?

Postby Braininvat on February 18th, 2018, 6:22 pm 

mitchellmckain » February 18th, 2018, 2:06 pm wrote:
Braininvat » February 18th, 2018, 9:59 am wrote:Not imaginary, unfortunately. The "myth of greenhouse gases" is a prevalent trope in the rightwing blogosphere. I moderated here for 3 years (and several years elsewhere in cyberspace), quite a bit on climatology and environment issues, so I am by now well acquainted with the science denialists. My comment was primarily directed to Neri's confidence that CO2 has no role as a GHG. But, to be frank, your assertions seemed under-supported by evidence as well. And rather off-topic, given the thread focus.


The bloggers are imaginary when you attribute opinions of people to bloggers without a shred of evidence that their opinions have anything whatsoever to do with any bloggers you may have encountered. I agreed with Neri on that one issue that the idea of human CO2 production being the problem is hard to swallow because of the scientific facts that it is part of a natural cycle which is clearly dominated by the conversion of CO2 to O2. It is not a denial of the the problem. With that you are employing an unwarranted knee jerk reaction which reeks of political my-side bias rather than any scientific objective assessment of the issues. I went on to explain what I think is the actual source of the problem, according to a previous discussion you had no problem with, and certainly not based only any bloggers you are imagining responsible but scientific studies I have encountered.

The difference between scientific study and political rhetoric is the focus on details. The scientific studies are not about political agendas but about specific findings. When it goes to political warfare then suddenly it becomes some absurd with me or against me sort of nonsense which has NOTHING to do with science. It is typical of such rhetoric that it shifts from actual findings to blustering claims that science on your side. It is a signature red flag on the BS meter.


No rhetoric. No knee jerking. Your assertions, including "dominated by the conversion of CO2 to O2," revealed nothing evidentiary and overlook an imbalance thoroughly studied by atmospheric scientists which is the enormous amount of CO2 being suddenly dumped into the system by fossil fuel burning. Planting trees is nice, but present CO2 concentrations have soared due to the sudden oxidation of millions of years of stored bio carbon. I've put up dozens of citations here, peer reviewed research, as has Zetreque and other members, in multiple threads. You seem unwilling to follow any of them or catch up with that years long conversation at SPCF or ÀFAICT, studied much of the literature on greenhouse gases and carbon cycle. I have been, as you recommend, focused on those details for 20 years, and am happy to discuss them in the relevant SCF forums. But I am weary of doing other people's homework for them. Show your data, show your peer-reviewed research, or kindly bow out.

The only legitimately political ramification of climatology ignorance is that the present adminstration is severely afflicted by said ignorance and seems impervious to the sort of details you say you respect and seek. We should be allies against this ignorance and disrespect of science.
User avatar
Braininvat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 6790
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: Trump: An Emerging Dictatorship?

Postby mitchellmckain on February 18th, 2018, 9:21 pm 

Braininvat » February 18th, 2018, 5:22 pm wrote:Your assertions, including "dominated by the conversion of CO2 to O2," revealed nothing evidentiary

Incorrect. You apparently just do not understand the evidence.

When you have two processes going on, then the concentrations of the products tell us the relative rates at which those processes are occurring.
Process 1: CO2 -> O2
Process 2: O2 -> CO2
Then a concentration of CO2 equal to .04% and a concentration of O2 equal to 20.95% means that process 1 is proceeding at a much higher rate than process 2. It is a simple scientific fact which you learn in basic chemistry.


Braininvat » February 18th, 2018, 5:22 pm wrote: and overlook an imbalance thoroughly studied by atmospheric scientists which is the enormous amount of CO2 being suddenly dumped into the system by fossil fuel burning.

There are an enormous amounts of CO2 being dumped into the atmosphere by a large number of things. But it is completely erroneous to suggest that process 1 only converts a fixed amount. Processes like this do not work that way. Increase the amount of available CO2 and the amount converted increases proportionally. Furthermore, those coming from fossil fuels represent CO2 that was originally in the atmosphere and converted to O2 by the biosphere. These are the reasons why scientists like Neri and myself are going to confront the danger of increasing CO2 levels by asking whether anything is happening to process 1. The answer is yes that something has happened to damage process 1 -- the holes in the ozone layer.

Braininvat » February 18th, 2018, 5:22 pm wrote: Planting trees is nice

Since 70% of the oxygen in our atmosphere is produced by the oceans then that where intelligent people will be looking in order to check up on process 1.

Braininvat » February 18th, 2018, 5:22 pm wrote:present CO2 concentrations have soared due to the sudden oxidation of millions of years of stored bio carbon.

Yes present CO2 concentrations have soared (relative to the last 400,000 years). But I continue to disagree as to the reasons why this is case. No it is not simply because of the burning of fossil fuels but because the conversion of CO2 into O2 has been greatly inhibited by the holes in the ozone layer. Yes all additions to process 2 contribute. But when process 1 logically dominates then it is problems with process 1 which are the most crucial.

Braininvat » February 18th, 2018, 5:22 pm wrote:I've put up dozens of citations here, peer reviewed research, as has Zetreque and other members, in multiple threads. You seem unwilling to follow any of them or catch up with that years long conversation at SPCF or ÀFAICT, studied much of the literature on greenhouse gases and carbon cycle. I have been, as you recommend, focused on those details for 20 years, and am happy to discuss them in the relevant SCF forums. But I am weary of doing other people's homework for them. Show your data, show your peer-reviewed research, or kindly bow out.

Your peer reviewed research simply does not address the question. The only thing which those demonstrate is the points which are not in dispute --- that CO2 levels are on the rise and that higher concentrations of CO2 cause global warming.

Links to the research of which I have been talking about:
https://phys.org/news/2013-05-global-ch ... oxide.html
https://phys.org/news/2013-01-ozone-thi ... tists.html
http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/ ... 9213500732
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 093458.htm
Last edited by mitchellmckain on February 18th, 2018, 9:54 pm, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: 27 Oct 2016
BadgerJelly liked this post


Re: Trump: An Emerging Dictatorship?

Postby mitchellmckain on February 18th, 2018, 9:31 pm 

Serpent » February 18th, 2018, 4:36 pm wrote:
mitchellmckain » February 18th, 2018, 4:10 pm wrote:I admire an appreciation of the facts that is not restricted to how well it supports your political bias.

I wasn't referring to political anything, but to your yes-but-no stance on each issue.

Some people prefer simple yes or no, black and white answers to questions. I do not.

Serpent » February 18th, 2018, 4:36 pm wrote:
But that does not mean it should be phased out. ...the biggest problem I see with coal is the dangers of the profession both in regards to health and safety. On the other hand, I also have coal miners in the family and don't see taking away their jobs as a good thing.

It's better to take away their health?

It is better to take away nothing. Lots of professions are dangerous and this is a reason for finding ways of dealing with those dangers not for doing away with these professions.

Serpent » February 18th, 2018, 4:36 pm wrote:Neri on the subject of a national policy on coal use.

I stated the issue on which I agreed with Neri.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: Trump: An Emerging Dictatorship?

Postby Serpent on February 18th, 2018, 11:14 pm 

mitchellmckain » February 18th, 2018, 8:31 pm wrote:Some people prefer simple yes or no, black and white answers to questions. I do not.

Fair enough. I wish the ballot had more room for shades of grey, but it doesn't. You have to choose between two policies, two styles of governance, that have short- and long-range consequences for people and other living things.
So, even if you don't think a specific man-made pollutant poses a danger to the future of the planet, you must take into consideration what affect the decisions of the government you elect will have on the welfare of the citizenry. For the moment of pulling that lever or checking that box, you have to come down on one side or the other. Afterwards, you can second-guess and vacillate all you want.
Serpent
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3109
Joined: 24 Dec 2011
Mossling liked this post


Re: Trump: An Emerging Dictatorship?

Postby mitchellmckain on February 19th, 2018, 6:08 am 

Serpent » February 18th, 2018, 10:14 pm wrote:
mitchellmckain » February 18th, 2018, 8:31 pm wrote:Some people prefer simple yes or no, black and white answers to questions. I do not.

Fair enough. I wish the ballot had more room for shades of grey, but it doesn't. You have to choose between two policies, two styles of governance, that have short- and long-range consequences for people and other living things.

Yeah, I voted for Hillary. Like many people I didn't even imagine that Trump could win. But he did. And what did I learn? Both Trump AND Hilary were worse than I thought. And I still would never vote for Trump and still cannot understand how Trump could win an election.

But in any case, this either-or character of politics is exactly why you should not make this the basis for understanding things. The actual issues are not like that.

Serpent » February 18th, 2018, 10:14 pm wrote:So, even if you don't think a specific man-made pollutant poses a danger to the future of the planet

Incorrect. The holes in the ozone layer were created by man-made pollutants. CO2, however, is not a man made pollutant. It is natural part of the biosphere. Half the living organisms on the planet need the stuff for photosynthesis.

Serpent » February 18th, 2018, 10:14 pm wrote:you must take into consideration what affect the decisions of the government you elect will have on the welfare of the citizenry.

You must take into consideration that reality is not black and white and therefore a single disagreement on one little thing is a lousy reason for dumping all your canned rhetoric for the fighting the opposing political party. Frankly it just makes you sound like a moron.

Serpent » February 18th, 2018, 10:14 pm wrote: For the moment of pulling that lever or checking that box, you have to come down on one side or the other. Afterwards, you can second-guess and vacillate all you want.

I can tick the Hillary box and still fight her on the issues where she is wrong. This with "me or against me" BS typical of Nazis and fundie Xtians is for mindless sheep.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: Trump: An Emerging Dictatorship?

Postby Serpent on February 19th, 2018, 10:42 am 

mitchellmckain » February 19th, 2018, 5:08 am wrote: This with "me or against me" BS typical of Nazis and fundie Xtians is for mindless sheep.

I was prepared to take all the foregoing with good humour. Not this.
If it's moronic to draw lines, I can live with the label.
Serpent
Resident Member
 
Posts: 3109
Joined: 24 Dec 2011


Re: Trump: An Emerging Dictatorship?

Postby Braininvat on February 19th, 2018, 10:42 am 

....enormous amounts of CO2 being dumped into the atmosphere by a large number of things. But it is completely erroneous to suggest that process 1 only converts a fixed amount. Processes like this do not work that way. Increase the amount of available CO2 and the amount converted increases proportionally.
. -- Mitchell

Thanks for posting citations, Mitchell. I hope to have time to look at them later and very much appreciate your effort. As a general matter, my skepticism will hinge on the problem of proportional conversion when various anthropogenic processes are clearing rainforest, reducing phytoplankton, raising oceanic temperatures, and other changes that reduce the capacity of the carbon sink.

Ancillary processes, relating to diesel soot on snowfields and release of methane hydrates along thawing coastal regions, also play a role, but I will leave that for now. Perhaps our posts can be moved to one of the climate change threads?
User avatar
Braininvat
Forum Administrator
 
Posts: 6790
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills


Re: Trump: An Emerging Dictatorship?

Postby Neri on February 19th, 2018, 1:48 pm 

Lomax.

I previously observed:

“The problem with our discussion is this: You [another poster] believe that Trump is the devil incarnate and hold this belief with a kind of compulsive departure from common sense. Many on the extreme left agree with you, basically because they cannot abide straight talk and political incorrectness. More than all else, they do not tolerate anyone who disagrees with them.

“If they had their way, they would repeal the first Amendment and confer on everyone the right to agree only with them. This sad fact is amply demonstrated on college campuses by the inclination to punish those who have conservative opinions.”

I did not fully realize the wisdom of these words until I read many of the recent posts in this thread. It appears that anyone on this forum who disagree with the ideology of the extreme left can expect personal attacks, ridicule and insults of every description.

It is a sad state of affairs that there are some who see no benefit in the free exchange of ideas but, like peevish children, seek instead to muzzle those with whom they disagree. This does not speak well for this forum. Although, this is a matter for you, the moderator, it cannot help but make one disinclined to have any connection with such doings.

In fact, I was prepared to present a legal and political analysis of the recent indictments returned against several Russian citizens by the special prosecutor. To that end, I secured a copy of the full presentment.

Such an analysis would certainly bear directly on the issues presented. However, in view of the level to which this discussion has sunk, I am no longer interested in submitting it.

In your recent post, you seem more interested in side issues than in the more relevant aspects of the discussion. For the moment at least, I will indulge this inclination by presenting what follows.

Here are a few quotes from:
http://www.biomedsearch.com/article/Sex ... 84381.html

Regarding Socrates:

“In Plato's early dialogues, Socrates engages in almost light-hearted banter around the subject of pederasty. He is ready to advise young men on the way to win a beloved, and he speaks openly of his own erotic arousal.(56)”

“Through much of the dialogue, Socrates seems to favor the ‘non-lover,’ [the young boy] but the climax is reached when Socrates, in altogether driven language, suddenly pours forth in glorious depiction of erotic erousal. Eros is 'inspired madness,' it is 'the greatest of heaven's blessings,'(57) and the soul possessed of it flies heavenward like a wing of feathers.” [Numbers refer to citations of authority in the paper]

Regarding the Age of the Victims:

“The boy himself was thought to be at the peak of his attractiveness between the ages of 12 and 16, though he might have been used by the man when he was even younger. The boy remained beautiful so long as his body seemed sexually immature. Once he passed through puberty and began to grow bodily hair, the man usually would replace him with a younger child. (16)”

I think that any decent human being would regard the homosexual exploitation a boy of 12, 13, 14 or 15 years as serious criminal behavior meriting a long term of imprisonment. The Exploitation in this way of a 16 year old boy, at the, very least, will constitute the serious crime of corruption of a minor.

I have prosecuted cases of this sort and I can tell you that the homosexual abuse of a particular boy typically starts at about the age of 12 and extends at least to about the age of 16. These boys are traumatized by this abuse and suffer mental problems all their lives. Many, if not most, become homosexuals themselves, although not necessarily pederasts.

Plato who likely was both a pederast and a victim in his youth, did, in the wisdom of old age, condemn the practice and argued that it be outlawed.

The homosexual exploitation of young boys was reviled by the lower classes in Athens but continued unabated for centuries among the ruling class. [See link above]

There was no law in ancient Greece that forbad the homosexual abuse of underage boys. However, I think it is safe to say that in the modern world this loathsome practice has been properly criminalized, except in the most backward areas.

Pederasty is abuse because it involves the sexual exploitation of young boys. It is homosexual because it involves sexual acts between males. Accordingly, it is a proper use of the English language to refer to this practice as “homosexual abuse.” I prefer the precise use of the language and do not concern myself with the foolishness of PC speech.

You miss the point of the expression. “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.” It certainly does not mean that “everybody has lost the capacity for critique,” as you put it. It means that it is hypocritical for one to condemn the sexual behavior of another when he and others commonly engage in the same behavior themselves. Here I refer to sex among consenting adults.

However, one who engages in consensual sex may properly condemn the sexual abuse of children, the forcing of young girls into prostitution, the sexual harassment of women, the unwanted groping of women, sexual assaults on women, the abuse of power by actual or implied threats designed to take sexual advantage of women, and the like.

This distinction should be clear enough.
Neri
Active Member
 
Posts: 1978
Joined: 11 Jun 2006
Location: Pennsylvania, USA


Re: Trump: An Emerging Dictatorship?

Postby zetreque on February 19th, 2018, 5:58 pm 

Neri » Mon Feb 19, 2018 9:48 am wrote:“The problem with our discussion is this: You [another poster] believe that Trump is the devil incarnate


All parties, biases, NGOs and stereotypes aside, I am at a loss to understand how people can't see him as at least incredibly bad, worse than average, a liar, uneducated on the bigger picture, selfish, unaware, unfit to lead global society into a better future, a bigger hypocrite than average and many other things. Unless they were uneducated about the man who day in and day out shows evidence of this.
User avatar
zetreque
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 3661
Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Location: Paradise being lost to humanity
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Trump: An Emerging Dictatorship?

Postby mitchellmckain on February 19th, 2018, 8:18 pm 

Braininvat » February 19th, 2018, 9:42 am wrote:
....enormous amounts of CO2 being dumped into the atmosphere by a large number of things. But it is completely erroneous to suggest that process 1 only converts a fixed amount. Processes like this do not work that way. Increase the amount of available CO2 and the amount converted increases proportionally.
. -- Mitchell

Thanks for posting citations, Mitchell. I hope to have time to look at them later and very much appreciate your effort.


If these don't exactly match what I have been saying it is because they are the product of a quick search and not what I read originally as a basis for what I have been saying. I am still looking for that one. Though I think it may be the same chinese scientist involved who has been challenging the standard dogma. And the point is that they directly address the reasons why myself and Neri feel so skeptical about the CO2 as the cause of the problem. And let me reiterate... this is NOT in any way a denial of the problem as you have blindly accused. Nor does it mean that burning fossil fuels are not a problem because other pollutants than CO2 are produced by this. Then there are other reasons why we should be opposed to burning up our oil reserves -- because we also use them in the production of great many materials.

Braininvat » February 19th, 2018, 9:42 am wrote:As a general matter, my skepticism will hinge on the problem of proportional conversion when various anthropogenic processes are clearing rainforest, reducing phytoplankton, raising oceanic temperatures, and other changes that reduce the capacity of the carbon sink.

Ancillary processes, relating to diesel soot on snowfields and release of methane hydrates along thawing coastal regions, also play a role, but I will leave that for now. Perhaps our posts can be moved to one of the climate change threads?

I have admitted in numerous caveats that there are certainly other considerations involved. For example, although the higher CO2 levels should cause increased conversion CO2 to O2 in principle, there is a question of how quickly this happens. Can it cope with the increased rate at which we are producing CO2? What are the effects of ozone depletion, rising temperatures, and ocean pollution on the ability of phytoplankton to balance this out? It could well be that these conspire to greatly slow down the expected balancing mechanism. It is not wise to simply trust nature to handle these things because "nature" includes some drastic changes in climate.
Last edited by mitchellmckain on February 19th, 2018, 8:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: Trump: An Emerging Dictatorship?

Postby zetreque on February 19th, 2018, 8:27 pm 

mitchellmckain you are repeating yourself and it's come exhausting listening to this ridiculous CO2 ozone argument when you are missing out on all the other dangers of CO2 such as the ocean environment. Take it to another thread.

As for the first amendment and getting back on topic.

Did Trump Ban Words At The CDC? The Full Story Is Less Simple
https://www.elitedaily.com/p/did-trump- ... le-7635956

So much for free speech when the rich use their money to influence free speech and continually implement policy that supports the wealth pyramid.
User avatar
zetreque
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 3661
Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Location: Paradise being lost to humanity
Blog: View Blog (3)


Re: Trump: An Emerging Dictatorship?

Postby mitchellmckain on February 19th, 2018, 8:32 pm 

Science is so much more interesting that all this whining about a lunatic.
User avatar
mitchellmckain
Active Member
 
Posts: 1327
Joined: 27 Oct 2016


Re: Trump: An Emerging Dictatorship?

Postby Mossling on February 20th, 2018, 8:41 am 

Neri,

If you wish to pursue the Socrates topic further, I have opened up a new thread for that and have replied to your last post regarding that here: Socrates' Sexual Behaviour. Thank you.
User avatar
Mossling
Active Member
 
Posts: 1287
Joined: 02 Jul 2009


Re: Trump: An Emerging Dictatorship?

Postby zetreque on February 20th, 2018, 2:06 pm 

Curious about the type of government Greece has had over the course of history, I looked up where it was on the spectrum of type of government it was in when certain things were thought to be acceptable. I found a few interesting articles.

This one puts together an opinion on Greece, the US and Socrates and Plato talking about the evolution of governments between oligarchs, democracies, and tyrants.
The people’s tyrant: what Plato can teach us about Donald Trump
By Sean Illing Nov 7, 2016

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/7/13512960/donald-trump-plato-democracy-tyranny-fascism-2016-elections
User avatar
zetreque
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 3661
Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Location: Paradise being lost to humanity
Blog: View Blog (3)
mitchellmckain liked this post


Re: Trump: An Emerging Dictatorship?

Postby Mossling on February 21st, 2018, 3:15 am 

zetreque » February 21st, 2018, 3:06 am wrote:Curious about the type of government Greece has had over the course of history, I looked up where it was on the spectrum of type of government it was in when certain things were thought to be acceptable. I found a few interesting articles.

This one puts together an opinion on Greece, the US and Socrates and Plato talking about the evolution of governments between oligarchs, democracies, and tyrants.
The people’s tyrant: what Plato can teach us about Donald Trump
By Sean Illing Nov 7, 2016

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/7/13512960/donald-trump-plato-democracy-tyranny-fascism-2016-elections

Thanks for that. Very interesting:

Democracies give way to tyrannies when mob passion overwhelms political wisdom and a populist autocrat seizes the masses. But the tyrant is not quite a tyrant at first. On the contrary, in a democracy the would-be tyrant offers himself as the people’s champion. He’s the ultimate simplifier, the one man who can make everything whole again.

Sound familiar?

With Trump, we have a glimpse of what this sort of evolution looks like: A vulgar right-wing populism emerges out of a whirlwind of anti-establishment hysteria; a strongman fascist promises to stick it to the elites and says only he can make the country great again; he gives the people a familiar boogeyman, some alien other, on whom they can dump their resentment.

For a fractured and embittered citizenry, this is a rhetorical balm, and, according to Plato, just the sort of thing that sends the city over a cliff
.

A tyrant, for Plato, wasn’t just someone who ruled over others; a tyrant is someone who can’t rule over himself. He’s Eros incarnate — pure impulse. He’s always in the thrall of his own lusts and passions.

Plato likens the tyrant to a drunken man, in whom there is a constant “succession of passions, and the new gets the better of the old and takes away their rights.” Because he can’t get along without domineering or being served, moreover, he “never tastes of true freedom or friendship.”
User avatar
Mossling
Active Member
 
Posts: 1287
Joined: 02 Jul 2009


Re: Trump: An Emerging Dictatorship?

Postby BadgerJelly on February 21st, 2018, 4:40 am 

And the nice little photo on that article tells you something about 'The Art of Rhetoric" and how to make someone look far worse than they actually are. To needlessly splice in irrelevant details to demean the person rather than let their political actions speak for themselves.

There is, of course, no mention that Plato was speaking about City States not nations. Aristotle's views in Poltics are equally telling to the modern distortion of these terms from the ancient Greek world.

There is little to no poltical discussion here. All I've seen is people espousing personal opinions; which I seem to remember a few years ago had posts quickly removed from the "Poltical thread" or deleted.

Anyway, what Plato was saying in The Republic was that democracy necessarily turns into tyranny and tyranny necessarily turns back into democracy, and that this is the nature of the City State. His solution was the idea of the Philopsher Ruler, the creation of the good dictator.

Some, including myself, have sometimes argued that The Republic was more of a analogy of the individual. I am not overly fond of that idea anymore, but in general I do certainly think it was based on the principle voiced by Socrates and the "Chariots", the balance between the animal instinct and reason.

Also, note that the running theme throughout ancient Greece was how education shaped the future rulers. Socrates was put to death because he was against tyranny, and both Plato and Aristotle were forced to flee at one time or another away from the shifting political landscape because people wanted to kill their ideas. The schools lived on and with Alexander and his father, they progressed and founded the Islamic world in many respects and advanced science - Alexander was a tyrant, but of the right flavor for Aristotle (to a degree.)

Comparisons with Trump to ancient Greece seem disjointed, a farce, or at best, a poor and transparent use of poltical satire.

You have two choices. Blame Trump or blame the system. I fhe came to be president whose "fault" is this? What is more, what is the best you can do with the situation?

"Emerging dictatorship"? For who? Americans or foreign citizens? What do you mean by "dictatorship"? It seems ove rthe cours eof history we've morphed the meaning of "tyranny" so better to be clear here before we start throwing labels around ... eg. "racist" and "sexist".

Here is something from Rousseau -

"As soon as I was in a state to observe men, I watched them all and heard them speak; then, seeing that their actions in no way resembled their words, I sought the reason for this disjunction, and I found that being and appearing were two things as different from each other as were acting and speaking, and that this second difference was the cause of the other, and had itself a cause it remained for one to seek."


What actions do we expect to see in an "emerging dictatorship"? Are such actions also present in other political movements that in no way resemble a "dictatorship." If they are present in both then I conclude such actions cannot be indicators for "dictatorship" if they are also indicators for other political structures.

That was generally Aristotle's approach to studying the different systems in the various Greek City States (which actually existed.)

I am by no means well versed in political history and the development of nationhood. It interests me greatly, but my focus is elsewhere. What has changed since the City State political structure from ancient Greece to the modern day world and the rigidly bordered emergence of the "nation"? When was it that men were stopped from roaming freely from nation to nation? How was this implemented? What was the outcry like at the time? What can we learn from those times compared to today given that nations and patriotism has become more and more geographically defined and regulated? How have revolutions shaped the political landscape? When have revolutions happened that have not caused mass death and all out physical violence and war (if ever)?
User avatar
BadgerJelly
Resident Member
 
Posts: 5383
Joined: 14 Mar 2012


PreviousNext

Return to Political Theory

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests