4 ms·

Why is it clear that your life won't suffer more under domestic control than foreign control, other than reflexive jingoism? Domestic control has more direct le

Why is it clear that your life won't suffer more under domestic control than foreign control, other than reflexive jingoism? Domestic control has more direct levers and the gloves are off right now.

tivert 2y ago
> Why is it clear that your life won't suffer more under domestic control than foreign control, other than reflexive jingoism? Domestic control has more direct levers and the gloves are off right now. Because foreigners are even less accountable to Americans and even less interested in their well being than any domestic group? It just stands to reason, there's not even the weak ties of being members of the same group. I mean, to be a little outlandish: if there was a conflict, and some foreign adversary could transmit a mind virus to Americans that would cause them to go on murderous rampages and kill everyone, they'd probably do it. It'd be an instant win, and there'd be some sweet, sweet land to colonize afterwards.
- ceejayoz 2y ago
  > Because foreigners are even less accountable to Americans and even less interested in their well being than any domestic group? That is not necessarily true. The Hitlers and Putins of the world will happily sacrifice their own citizenry and their country's future for more power in the moment. It's entirely possible for some foreigners to hold more goodwill towards a country than its own leadership. > I mean, to be a little outlandish: if there was a conflict, and some foreign adversary could transmit a mind virus to Americans that would cause them to go on murderous rampages and kill everyone, they'd probably do it. It'd be an instant win, and there'd be some sweet, sweet land to colonize afterwards. Several countries are entirely capable of doing this with nukes.
  - tivert 2y ago
    > That is not necessarily true. The Hitlers and Putins of the world will happily sacrifice their own citizenry and their country's future for more power in the moment. Don't you think they'd be even more willing to sacrifice Americans or other foreigners? > Several countries are entirely capable of doing this with nukes. No, and you're kind of missing the point, which was the adversarial leader cares less about foreigners. Also: nukes are somewhat controlled with MAD, and they'd spoil that sweet, sweet land with fallout.
    - ceejayoz 2y ago
      > Don't you think they'd be even more willing to sacrifice Americans or other foreigners? I'm saying I'd rather, say, France's Macron calling the shots here than an American-born version of Hitler.
      - brookst 2y ago
        Sure. But that’s not the choice on the table.
        ceejayoz 2y ago
        Again: > Because foreigners are even less accountable to Americans and even less interested in their well being than any domestic group? In my example, the foreign group probably has my well being as a higher priority than the domestic one.
- add-sub-mul-div 2y ago
  The rich who are currently raiding the country are effectively unaccountable and care as little for the bottom 99% of the US as the Chinese government does. If we ignore murder mind viruses and look at what's actually going on.
brookst 2y ago
You see it as “jingoistic” to prefer more local corruption that sucks, but largely zero sum among the country you live in, to foreign corruption that is zero sum with adversaries? I’ll be charitable and assume your point is “any corruption is so unbelievably awful that we might as well have the worst possible form of it if we have any at all.”
- spencerflem 2y ago
  No its more - if the Chinese find out I support Occupy Wall St. , what are they going to do about it? Vs the local govt that has a monopoly on violence

Why is it clear that your life won't suffer more under domestic control than foreign control, other than reflexive jingoism? Domestic control has more direct levers and the gloves are off right now.

tivert 2y ago

> Why is it clear that your life won't suffer more under domestic control than foreign control, other than reflexive jingoism? Domestic control has more direct levers and the gloves are off right now. Because foreigners are even less accountable to Americans and even less interested in their well being than any domestic group? It just stands to reason, there's not even the weak ties of being members of the same group. I mean, to be a little outlandish: if there was a conflict, and some foreign adversary could transmit a mind virus to Americans that would cause them to go on murderous rampages and kill everyone, they'd probably do it. It'd be an instant win, and there'd be some sweet, sweet land to colonize afterwards.

ceejayoz 2y ago
> Because foreigners are even less accountable to Americans and even less interested in their well being than any domestic group? That is not necessarily true. The Hitlers and Putins of the world will happily sacrifice their own citizenry and their country's future for more power in the moment. It's entirely possible for some foreigners to hold more goodwill towards a country than its own leadership. > I mean, to be a little outlandish: if there was a conflict, and some foreign adversary could transmit a mind virus to Americans that would cause them to go on murderous rampages and kill everyone, they'd probably do it. It'd be an instant win, and there'd be some sweet, sweet land to colonize afterwards. Several countries are entirely capable of doing this with nukes.
- tivert 2y ago
  > That is not necessarily true. The Hitlers and Putins of the world will happily sacrifice their own citizenry and their country's future for more power in the moment. Don't you think they'd be even more willing to sacrifice Americans or other foreigners? > Several countries are entirely capable of doing this with nukes. No, and you're kind of missing the point, which was the adversarial leader cares less about foreigners. Also: nukes are somewhat controlled with MAD, and they'd spoil that sweet, sweet land with fallout.
  - ceejayoz 2y ago
    > Don't you think they'd be even more willing to sacrifice Americans or other foreigners? I'm saying I'd rather, say, France's Macron calling the shots here than an American-born version of Hitler.
    - brookst 2y ago
      Sure. But that’s not the choice on the table.
      - ceejayoz 2y ago
        Again: > Because foreigners are even less accountable to Americans and even less interested in their well being than any domestic group? In my example, the foreign group probably has my well being as a higher priority than the domestic one.
add-sub-mul-div 2y ago
The rich who are currently raiding the country are effectively unaccountable and care as little for the bottom 99% of the US as the Chinese government does. If we ignore murder mind viruses and look at what's actually going on.

brookst 2y ago

You see it as “jingoistic” to prefer more local corruption that sucks, but largely zero sum among the country you live in, to foreign corruption that is zero sum with adversaries? I’ll be charitable and assume your point is “any corruption is so unbelievably awful that we might as well have the worst possible form of it if we have any at all.”

spencerflem 2y ago
No its more - if the Chinese find out I support Occupy Wall St. , what are they going to do about it? Vs the local govt that has a monopoly on violence