6 ms·

You're engaging in a straw man of both sides and it makes me want to disregard your argument entirely. > you choose only to talk endlessly about tweets like...

You're engaging in a straw man of both sides and it makes me want to disregard your argument entirely. > you choose only to talk endlessly about tweets like... Do you really think that's what people are complaining about here? Not the professors being fired, the well known economists being forced to resign? There was a professor who lost his status running a residence hall because he was on the legal defense team for someone despicable. As a society, we've decided that yes, even criminals need lawyers. To cancel someone and permanently affect their career for engaging in the most liberal of virtues and defending even criminals (especially if you believe we live in an authoritarian state) is beyond the pale. > when at the same time protestors are being arrested by secret police in the US. I've been working for police reform in what I believe is a flawed system for years. Everything the protestors are doing has probably set us back a decade. Every protestor killed by a fellow protestor (17 is the current count), every major spike in crime due to police being defunded instead of retrained, and every cop sent to the hospital because of folks throwing glass bottles and chunks of brick is not going to magically dry up and go away the next time we want to raise a serious issue. We have a legal and social framework for affecting longterm change and it works much better than arson.

jacobush 6y ago
But the reform way hasn't worked very well, if at all, either. Not saying that means one should revolt or anything, just that America seems like it's stuck between a rock and hard place, currently.
- luckylion 6y ago
  >But the reform way hasn't worked very well, if at all, either. You don't see a difference between USA, 1960 and USA, 2020?
  - BoiledCabbage 6y ago
    And you know what was the cause of the largest changes between 1960 and 2020? The civil rights protests. And those protesters were disapproved of / hated by the majority of the population at the time. For upsetting the status quo - and "pushing for change to quickly". There are surveys that list this - that mirror the exact same responses that a number of people give today about BLM.
    - luckylion 6y ago
      > And you know what was the cause of the largest changes between 1960 and 2020? The civil rights protests. So there was change that was achieved by non-revolutionary ways, but this time it's different? This time it needs to be riots and proclaiming autonomous zones of a weird mix of war lord justice and lawlessness? I'm not convinced.
  - harimau777 6y ago
    My understanding is that inequality is much worse now than in the 60s. It also seems like back then it was much easier to have a good quality of life with a non-skilled job than it is today. However, I haven't looked into it too much so I could be mistaken.
    - refurb 6y ago
      Census data on percentage of blacks living in poverty.[1] 2018 - 23.3% 1966 - 31.1% [1]https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/income-poverty/historical-poverty-people.html https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/income-p...
      - zone411 6y ago
        Not saying that you're making it at all but there is a very common error people make when looking at the poverty stats. "The official poverty definition uses money income before taxes and does not include capital gains or noncash benefits (such as public housing, Medicaid, and food stamps)." (https://www.census.gov/topics/income-poverty/poverty/guidance/poverty-measures.html https://www.census.gov/topics/income-poverty/poverty/guidanc...) After these programs, the poverty rate is reduced by 53% (https://www.nber.org/papers/w24567.pdf https://www.nber.org/papers/w24567.pdf)
        refurb 6y ago
        This is a good point and something I had heard before! You are correct this is before gov't transfers. I was looking more at the relative change versus arguing the numbers were absolute.
      - harimau777 6y ago
        Thanks for posting this! Good to have numbers to discuss! I'm having trouble opening the spreadsheets on my Mac. How do the numbers compare for all races? Do numbers like this factor in things like health insurance or renting versus owning a house?
oisdk 6y ago
> Do you really think that's what people are complaining about here? Not the professors being fired, the well known economists being forced to resign? There was a professor who lost his status running a residence hall because he was on the legal defense team for someone despicable. So the only actual example I was able to google here was the last one: and I have to say, is that it? A guy wasn’t asked back as a dorm administrator once he joined Harvey Weinstein’s legal team? That’s the “cancel culture” you’re talking about, in contrast to one of the most brutal and grotesque onslaught of police brutality in the west in recent memory? Like you realise the protests were sparked off by a murder, right? This is what I mean when I say it’s ridiculous. The Harvard guy didn’t even lose his job, for goodness’ sake. > Everything the protestors are doing has probably set us back a decade. Where did I defend or endorse the actions of protestors? My point is simply that it’s ridiculous to think the main authoritarian crisis in the US right now is “cancel culture” when it is literally in the midst of a brutal police crackdown against protestors. Also I’m sorry but it’s hard to take you seriously with regards to police violence when you didn’t mention a single thing the police did wrong in your list of grievances, but you’re happy to talk about the protestors. > every major spike in crime due to police being defunded instead of retrained This is not a view supported by the evidence. > We have a legal and social framework for affecting longterm change and it works much better than arson. The US has more prisoners per capita than any society at any point in history in the world. The police are armed and violent. And those systems which apparently work so well have been in place throughout all this. But maybe you should tell me more about how these systems work so well. Also I’m continually amazed that Americans forget their proud history of violent protest so quickly. It always seems like protest against injustice was fine in some unspecified “past” but of course all of that Is behind us now and The best we can do is vote (vote for the party at least partly responsible for the state of the police today, by the way).
- vorpalhex 6y ago
  > Like you realise the protests were sparked off by a murder, right? And since then they've resulted in 17 deaths. Tit for tat? Were those 17 people guilty in that murder? Yes that initial act was wrong and we should address that, vandalizing businesses and setting federal property on fire has nothing to do with that original offense. > it’s ridiculous to think the main authoritarian crisis in the US right now You keep asserting this. You don't show evidence for this. What's the authoritarian crisis? That cops have qualified immunity? That's not new. Is it that you think poorly of the president? I think poorly of him too but he's not Mussolini. You can't vaguely claim there's something wrong with a system and use that as an excuse for violence and destruction - especially when the violence and destruction isn't even targeted at the people you're accusing. > you didn’t mention a single thing the police did wrong in your list of grievances No I didn't because it's not relevant. You're creating a strawman when the reality of the situation is complicated. This isn't cops versus protesters and attempts to cast it as a binary problem is partisanship. If you're interested in solving problems instead of stirring up anger then your interest should be in understanding the problem and not polarizing sides. > This is not a view supported by the evidence. 1. https://nij.ojp.gov/library/publications/effect-higher-education-police-behavior https://nij.ojp.gov/library/publications/effect-higher-educa... 2. https://inpublicsafety.com/2014/07/how-education-impacts-police-performance/ https://inpublicsafety.com/2014/07/how-education-impacts-pol... > The US has more prisoners per capita than any society at any point in history in the world That has nothing to do with this topic. Like, I agree that's a problem and we should address that by considering how we treat low level drug offenses, but it has nothing to do with police brutality and cancel culture. > The police are armed and violent. Police brutality has decreased mindbogglingly since the 1960s. Yes the police have more gear and we can talk about why it makes sense to do things like remove camo from their inventory and the pros/cons of using APCs, but that has nothing to do with canceling people and ruining their careers. > But maybe you should tell me more about how these systems work so well https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assassinated_American_politicians https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assassinated_American_... > proud history of violent protest so quickly Violence is not something to be proud of. A violent victory for one person is a funeral for another. Violence is against justice and it deprives the accused of reasonable and rational defense. You talk so much against authoritarianism, but violence is the fundamental tool of it. Courts and ballot boxes are the tools of democracy.
AlexandrB 6y ago
> We have a legal and social framework for affecting longterm change and it works much better than arson. This is a non-sequitur. Police violence has (probably) been increasing for years[1]. Over the last 20 years the police have become more militarized and killings by police have increased even as crime rates have decreased sharply. Clearly the legal and social frameworks are not working. [1] https://fee.org/articles/how-many-people-are-killed-by-police/ https://fee.org/articles/how-many-people-are-killed-by-polic...
- leereeves 6y ago
  From [1]: > There are a few reasons to be skeptical of this trend. Reporting might be a lot better in recent years, and reports in prior years (if they were made at all) may be increasingly difficult to find the further back you go. In addition, FE’s totals for the last three years — the years they consider most complete — are pretty flat. > Like a puzzle missing most of the pieces, the data so far are interesting, but not illuminating.
- refurb 6y ago
  Police violence has (probably) been increasing for years From what I've gathered, police violence has likely decreased at least compared to 50 years ago. I would argue fewer incidents, but much more publicity around them. It wasn't unusual in the least for cops to rough up a suspect. Disrespect the police, well, you'll get a good beating because you're a criminal and no one will believe you. This video about "Whistling Smith", a Vancouver cop in the 70's was really eye opening for me.[1]. Look at his interactions, you think that would fly today? Same thing with this quote from a cop investigating biker gangs in Quebec in the 90's. "Don't forget this before the Charter of Rights. You saw a guy walking up the street in his colors, you kicked the shit out of him, and that was it".[110] Bouchard argued that the "old school" methods of beating up outlaw bikers were far preferable to modern policing methods as outlaw bikers only respect violence.[2] [1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZ5oYz6uufU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZ5oYz6uufU [2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_Boucher https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_Boucher
snowwrestler 6y ago
It's crazy to say "Everything the protestors are doing has probably set us back a decade." There have been literally millions of American citizens marching peacefully for change, and a very small number of bad actors. There is no way you are informed or serious about what is going on if you are willing to make such broadly derogatory comments about one of the largest civil right movements in history. And worse, taking the bad actions of a few, and using it to broadly discredit the valid actions of the many, is a textbook tactic for discrimination and maintaining the status quo. Who do you think you are helping by doing that?
- nitrogen 6y ago
  There is no way you are informed... Who do you think you are helping by doing that? This kind of turning on people who agree with you in principle but might have some of the details wrong is exactly the kind of fractally magnifying divisiveness that some of these subthreads are talking about. We are all largely on the same side w.r.t. wanting positive outcomes for everyone. We will get there through deescalation and cooperation (not that I am perfect at either).
  - joshuamorton 6y ago
    When you say "Everything the protestors are doing has probably set us back a decade." it really doesn't sound like you agree with the protestors. So maybe if you do agree with them, don't say things that undermine them, or they'll respond in kind. Saying "Everything the protestors are doing has probably set us back a decade." isn't deescalating or cooperating, and insisting that the protestors need to deescalate and cooperate after you say something uninformed and inflammatory is self-centered, it implies that whatever you were doing is better than what they were doing. That they need to cooperate with you, but you don't need to cooperate with them. That it's their responsibility to deescalate, not yours. And, well, that really doesn't sound like cooperation to me.
    - nitrogen 6y ago
      IMO the more charitable reading of that is "everything [I've heard about the] protestors doing", in which case the blame lies on biased information sources, not directly on our fellow commenter. So, again IMO, a productive reply might be, "Data shows that most of the protestors are peaceful, but I do acknowledge there are some bad actors that are getting the bulk of the attention. Maybe we can brainstorm solutions to this attention bias at the same time we try to solve these other problems."
BoiledCabbage 6y ago
These protests are possibly the single largest protests for civil rights in the country's history. It is estimated that between 15 and 26 million Americans protested. Roughly 6% to 10% of the US adult population. If after almost 1 in 10 Americans protesting for the same thing you're pushing, you think you're less capable of succeeding at your job, I think you may want to question your approach. And I don't mean that disrespectfully. I mean that in a sincere way. These protests were Americans saying that more of the same won't work. Yet another police sensitivity training class won't work. Yet one more less than lethal weapon won't work. Meeting with community leaders isn't sufficient. Raising the police budget so they can address this concerns isn't the answer. That's all been happening for a quarter of a century at this point and it's still fundamentally broken. Almost 1 in 10 people are saying, we need a fundamentally different approach w.r.t. to policing. Police don't need to be called in for every mental health case, for every role of a social worker, for patroling schools and "arresting" kids because middle schoolers got into a fight. The fact that out of ~20 million people, including plenty of outside agitators that disagreed with the protests and participated maliciously trying to discredit them, that the vast overwhelming majority have been peaceful is a testament. The system is fundamentally broken, and has acquired sufficient power to resist all of the normal checks and balances. That's when protests is most useful - to raise awareness of what is truly happening and advocate for change. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/07/03/us/george-floyd-protests-crowd-size.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/07/03/us/george-flo...
- wisty 6y ago
  If the mayor of Portland joins them, and many of them just chant "fuck Ted Wheeler" at him, maybe they need to come to the table with solutions rather than just problem?
- eezurr 6y ago
  I think it's important to step back see the bigger picture. Your comment IMO is exactly what PG is talking about when he defines "aggressively conventional" (down to using the actions of the masses to support your POV). A perfect system cannot exist, and getting there is limited by economics -> diminishing returns. It seems like you are pushing for a social structure that will consume American freedom to lower rate of failure (which is a drop in the ocean considering our population size) from our social system. The system is not fundamentally broken, it's just human; comprised and run by humans.
harimau777 6y ago
It seems to me that we don't actually have a legal and social framework for affecting longterm change since its been co-opted by corporations and the ultra-rich. I just don't see any good alternatives.
renewiltord 6y ago
If you don't mind sharing, on what metrics (or other independently verifiable information) are we set back a decade? To make it easy on you and not go all "citation needed", names of the metrics will be sufficient. I'll go look at the numbers myself as close to 2010 as possible and as close to 2020 as possible and provide sources here, if I can. Then if possible I'll compare last June to this June and see if it looks closer to June 2010.

jacobush 6y ago

But the reform way hasn't worked very well, if at all, either. Not saying that means one should revolt or anything, just that America seems like it's stuck between a rock and hard place, currently.

luckylion 6y ago
>But the reform way hasn't worked very well, if at all, either. You don't see a difference between USA, 1960 and USA, 2020?
- BoiledCabbage 6y ago
  And you know what was the cause of the largest changes between 1960 and 2020? The civil rights protests. And those protesters were disapproved of / hated by the majority of the population at the time. For upsetting the status quo - and "pushing for change to quickly". There are surveys that list this - that mirror the exact same responses that a number of people give today about BLM.
  - luckylion 6y ago
    > And you know what was the cause of the largest changes between 1960 and 2020? The civil rights protests. So there was change that was achieved by non-revolutionary ways, but this time it's different? This time it needs to be riots and proclaiming autonomous zones of a weird mix of war lord justice and lawlessness? I'm not convinced.
- harimau777 6y ago
  My understanding is that inequality is much worse now than in the 60s. It also seems like back then it was much easier to have a good quality of life with a non-skilled job than it is today. However, I haven't looked into it too much so I could be mistaken.
  - refurb 6y ago
    Census data on percentage of blacks living in poverty.[1] 2018 - 23.3% 1966 - 31.1% [1]https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/income-poverty/historical-poverty-people.html https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/income-p...
    - zone411 6y ago
      Not saying that you're making it at all but there is a very common error people make when looking at the poverty stats. "The official poverty definition uses money income before taxes and does not include capital gains or noncash benefits (such as public housing, Medicaid, and food stamps)." (https://www.census.gov/topics/income-poverty/poverty/guidance/poverty-measures.html https://www.census.gov/topics/income-poverty/poverty/guidanc...) After these programs, the poverty rate is reduced by 53% (https://www.nber.org/papers/w24567.pdf https://www.nber.org/papers/w24567.pdf)
      - refurb 6y ago
        This is a good point and something I had heard before! You are correct this is before gov't transfers. I was looking more at the relative change versus arguing the numbers were absolute.
    - harimau777 6y ago
      Thanks for posting this! Good to have numbers to discuss! I'm having trouble opening the spreadsheets on my Mac. How do the numbers compare for all races? Do numbers like this factor in things like health insurance or renting versus owning a house?

oisdk 6y ago

> Do you really think that's what people are complaining about here? Not the professors being fired, the well known economists being forced to resign? There was a professor who lost his status running a residence hall because he was on the legal defense team for someone despicable. So the only actual example I was able to google here was the last one: and I have to say, is that it? A guy wasn’t asked back as a dorm administrator once he joined Harvey Weinstein’s legal team? That’s the “cancel culture” you’re talking about, in contrast to one of the most brutal and grotesque onslaught of police brutality in the west in recent memory? Like you realise the protests were sparked off by a murder, right? This is what I mean when I say it’s ridiculous. The Harvard guy didn’t even lose his job, for goodness’ sake. > Everything the protestors are doing has probably set us back a decade. Where did I defend or endorse the actions of protestors? My point is simply that it’s ridiculous to think the main authoritarian crisis in the US right now is “cancel culture” when it is literally in the midst of a brutal police crackdown against protestors. Also I’m sorry but it’s hard to take you seriously with regards to police violence when you didn’t mention a single thing the police did wrong in your list of grievances, but you’re happy to talk about the protestors. > every major spike in crime due to police being defunded instead of retrained This is not a view supported by the evidence. > We have a legal and social framework for affecting longterm change and it works much better than arson. The US has more prisoners per capita than any society at any point in history in the world. The police are armed and violent. And those systems which apparently work so well have been in place throughout all this. But maybe you should tell me more about how these systems work so well. Also I’m continually amazed that Americans forget their proud history of violent protest so quickly. It always seems like protest against injustice was fine in some unspecified “past” but of course all of that Is behind us now and The best we can do is vote (vote for the party at least partly responsible for the state of the police today, by the way).

vorpalhex 6y ago
> Like you realise the protests were sparked off by a murder, right? And since then they've resulted in 17 deaths. Tit for tat? Were those 17 people guilty in that murder? Yes that initial act was wrong and we should address that, vandalizing businesses and setting federal property on fire has nothing to do with that original offense. > it’s ridiculous to think the main authoritarian crisis in the US right now You keep asserting this. You don't show evidence for this. What's the authoritarian crisis? That cops have qualified immunity? That's not new. Is it that you think poorly of the president? I think poorly of him too but he's not Mussolini. You can't vaguely claim there's something wrong with a system and use that as an excuse for violence and destruction - especially when the violence and destruction isn't even targeted at the people you're accusing. > you didn’t mention a single thing the police did wrong in your list of grievances No I didn't because it's not relevant. You're creating a strawman when the reality of the situation is complicated. This isn't cops versus protesters and attempts to cast it as a binary problem is partisanship. If you're interested in solving problems instead of stirring up anger then your interest should be in understanding the problem and not polarizing sides. > This is not a view supported by the evidence. 1. https://nij.ojp.gov/library/publications/effect-higher-education-police-behavior https://nij.ojp.gov/library/publications/effect-higher-educa... 2. https://inpublicsafety.com/2014/07/how-education-impacts-police-performance/ https://inpublicsafety.com/2014/07/how-education-impacts-pol... > The US has more prisoners per capita than any society at any point in history in the world That has nothing to do with this topic. Like, I agree that's a problem and we should address that by considering how we treat low level drug offenses, but it has nothing to do with police brutality and cancel culture. > The police are armed and violent. Police brutality has decreased mindbogglingly since the 1960s. Yes the police have more gear and we can talk about why it makes sense to do things like remove camo from their inventory and the pros/cons of using APCs, but that has nothing to do with canceling people and ruining their careers. > But maybe you should tell me more about how these systems work so well https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assassinated_American_politicians https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assassinated_American_... > proud history of violent protest so quickly Violence is not something to be proud of. A violent victory for one person is a funeral for another. Violence is against justice and it deprives the accused of reasonable and rational defense. You talk so much against authoritarianism, but violence is the fundamental tool of it. Courts and ballot boxes are the tools of democracy.

AlexandrB 6y ago

> We have a legal and social framework for affecting longterm change and it works much better than arson. This is a non-sequitur. Police violence has (probably) been increasing for years[1]. Over the last 20 years the police have become more militarized and killings by police have increased even as crime rates have decreased sharply. Clearly the legal and social frameworks are not working. [1] https://fee.org/articles/how-many-people-are-killed-by-police/ https://fee.org/articles/how-many-people-are-killed-by-polic...

leereeves 6y ago
From [1]: > There are a few reasons to be skeptical of this trend. Reporting might be a lot better in recent years, and reports in prior years (if they were made at all) may be increasingly difficult to find the further back you go. In addition, FE’s totals for the last three years — the years they consider most complete — are pretty flat. > Like a puzzle missing most of the pieces, the data so far are interesting, but not illuminating.
refurb 6y ago
Police violence has (probably) been increasing for years From what I've gathered, police violence has likely decreased at least compared to 50 years ago. I would argue fewer incidents, but much more publicity around them. It wasn't unusual in the least for cops to rough up a suspect. Disrespect the police, well, you'll get a good beating because you're a criminal and no one will believe you. This video about "Whistling Smith", a Vancouver cop in the 70's was really eye opening for me.[1]. Look at his interactions, you think that would fly today? Same thing with this quote from a cop investigating biker gangs in Quebec in the 90's. "Don't forget this before the Charter of Rights. You saw a guy walking up the street in his colors, you kicked the shit out of him, and that was it".[110] Bouchard argued that the "old school" methods of beating up outlaw bikers were far preferable to modern policing methods as outlaw bikers only respect violence.[2] [1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZ5oYz6uufU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZ5oYz6uufU [2]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_Boucher https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_Boucher

snowwrestler 6y ago

It's crazy to say "Everything the protestors are doing has probably set us back a decade." There have been literally millions of American citizens marching peacefully for change, and a very small number of bad actors. There is no way you are informed or serious about what is going on if you are willing to make such broadly derogatory comments about one of the largest civil right movements in history. And worse, taking the bad actions of a few, and using it to broadly discredit the valid actions of the many, is a textbook tactic for discrimination and maintaining the status quo. Who do you think you are helping by doing that?

nitrogen 6y ago
There is no way you are informed... Who do you think you are helping by doing that? This kind of turning on people who agree with you in principle but might have some of the details wrong is exactly the kind of fractally magnifying divisiveness that some of these subthreads are talking about. We are all largely on the same side w.r.t. wanting positive outcomes for everyone. We will get there through deescalation and cooperation (not that I am perfect at either).
- joshuamorton 6y ago
  When you say "Everything the protestors are doing has probably set us back a decade." it really doesn't sound like you agree with the protestors. So maybe if you do agree with them, don't say things that undermine them, or they'll respond in kind. Saying "Everything the protestors are doing has probably set us back a decade." isn't deescalating or cooperating, and insisting that the protestors need to deescalate and cooperate after you say something uninformed and inflammatory is self-centered, it implies that whatever you were doing is better than what they were doing. That they need to cooperate with you, but you don't need to cooperate with them. That it's their responsibility to deescalate, not yours. And, well, that really doesn't sound like cooperation to me.
  - nitrogen 6y ago
    IMO the more charitable reading of that is "everything [I've heard about the] protestors doing", in which case the blame lies on biased information sources, not directly on our fellow commenter. So, again IMO, a productive reply might be, "Data shows that most of the protestors are peaceful, but I do acknowledge there are some bad actors that are getting the bulk of the attention. Maybe we can brainstorm solutions to this attention bias at the same time we try to solve these other problems."

BoiledCabbage 6y ago

These protests are possibly the single largest protests for civil rights in the country's history. It is estimated that between 15 and 26 million Americans protested. Roughly 6% to 10% of the US adult population. If after almost 1 in 10 Americans protesting for the same thing you're pushing, you think you're less capable of succeeding at your job, I think you may want to question your approach. And I don't mean that disrespectfully. I mean that in a sincere way. These protests were Americans saying that more of the same won't work. Yet another police sensitivity training class won't work. Yet one more less than lethal weapon won't work. Meeting with community leaders isn't sufficient. Raising the police budget so they can address this concerns isn't the answer. That's all been happening for a quarter of a century at this point and it's still fundamentally broken. Almost 1 in 10 people are saying, we need a fundamentally different approach w.r.t. to policing. Police don't need to be called in for every mental health case, for every role of a social worker, for patroling schools and "arresting" kids because middle schoolers got into a fight. The fact that out of ~20 million people, including plenty of outside agitators that disagreed with the protests and participated maliciously trying to discredit them, that the vast overwhelming majority have been peaceful is a testament. The system is fundamentally broken, and has acquired sufficient power to resist all of the normal checks and balances. That's when protests is most useful - to raise awareness of what is truly happening and advocate for change. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/07/03/us/george-floyd-protests-crowd-size.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/07/03/us/george-flo...

wisty 6y ago
If the mayor of Portland joins them, and many of them just chant "fuck Ted Wheeler" at him, maybe they need to come to the table with solutions rather than just problem?
eezurr 6y ago
I think it's important to step back see the bigger picture. Your comment IMO is exactly what PG is talking about when he defines "aggressively conventional" (down to using the actions of the masses to support your POV). A perfect system cannot exist, and getting there is limited by economics -> diminishing returns. It seems like you are pushing for a social structure that will consume American freedom to lower rate of failure (which is a drop in the ocean considering our population size) from our social system. The system is not fundamentally broken, it's just human; comprised and run by humans.

harimau777 6y ago

It seems to me that we don't actually have a legal and social framework for affecting longterm change since its been co-opted by corporations and the ultra-rich. I just don't see any good alternatives.

renewiltord 6y ago

If you don't mind sharing, on what metrics (or other independently verifiable information) are we set back a decade? To make it easy on you and not go all "citation needed", names of the metrics will be sufficient. I'll go look at the numbers myself as close to 2010 as possible and as close to 2020 as possible and provide sources here, if I can. Then if possible I'll compare last June to this June and see if it looks closer to June 2010.