chomskyole

8 ms·

31.
by chomskyole 2y ago
Re agricultural revolution: I'm not an expert in this, but there were plenty of Romans with plenty of time to innovate. And innovate they did. They had significant achievements in engineering and construction. I mean some of their cons
32.
by chomskyole 2y ago
None. Just to state the obvious. If you are in for the fight, you do know the rules, so you know that there is no divine authority coming for your support.
33.
by chomskyole 2y ago
Magical criteria and private schools. That's where this thinking is honed....
34.
by chomskyole 2y ago
I think this knowledge is at the base of their identity. That's why they push the narrative that their success is driven by personal merit. Having spent weekends with some of the rich, they are pretty aware of what is happening in a wa
35.
by chomskyole 2y ago
Perhaps a bit controversial in the first instance, but the purpose of business is not to have a positive impact on society. Businesses are vehicles to make money and with that comes a logic and a set of tendencies that has nothing to do wit
36.
by chomskyole 2y ago
That is simply not true. The same families that were wealthy before the Nazi time (say Quandt, Flick, Krupp, ...) made a killing during the Nazi time and retained and expanded their fortune after Nazi Germany was no more. It is absolutely n
37.
by chomskyole 2y ago
There has been plenty of replacement for nuclear. It's something that really never made it big due to costs. I would also highlight risks, given the current environment in Europe. If you build nuclear, you would have to allow for defen
38.
by chomskyole 2y ago
The lack of cooling water would be a concern. Then, in addition, every nuclear reactor being a military target. How would you pay for that insurance?
39.
by chomskyole 2y ago
Re Arms sells: Your point here about selling to non-problematic countries is really moot. As shown, the US does 40% of arms trade by revenue and counts over 100 countries as their client. They are selling to everyone that pays. They also ne
40.
by chomskyole 2y ago
I suppose with enough funds that legal maneuvering is available to every single citizen, and that is what this is really about: equality of opportunity! Right? /s just in case....
41.
by chomskyole 2y ago
As shown in my other answer, neither have you shown that the points matters. The scale of the US weapons program and military which outsizes any other countries definitely still supports the main point made. That some parts of the world app
42.
by chomskyole 2y ago
Sorry but I find your criticism quite misleading. For one, the countries you labelled as problematic aren't the only ones on the list, so the $3b is vastly understated. The list includes sells to 58 countries, so I don't think tha
43.
by chomskyole 2y ago
This answer really is a bit of a handful. To start: an army is not only there for military response but also for threat of attack and denying defense. So I don't really see your point here. Europe bent over since they are weaker strate
44.
by chomskyole 2y ago
> Do you really think Europe would've sat by meekly if they had solid evidence that the US did it? What would their options be? Their military is tiny compared to the US. Another data point is that they did sit by meekly when they h
45.
by chomskyole 2y ago
Do you have any data supporting this? The five largest weapon manufacturers are all from the US [1]. The US army is bigger than the next ten-ish armies together by budget [2] (I eyeballed that one). The US has a rich history of propping up
46.
by chomskyole 2y ago
I don't know, there aren't many countries that imprison more people per capita than the US, including historical countries. There are also lots of political prisoners, secret courts and that kind of stuff. In terms of winning elec
47.
by chomskyole 2y ago
What info did they leave out in the MKUltra series?
48.
by chomskyole 2y ago
Look, they are comparing Europe to the US, the current hegemon, and criticise that the US does not include it's history of violence and abuse in its curriculum to the same extend as they do in Europe. I honestly don't think your c
49.
by chomskyole 2y ago
> What the west had over the last 100 years is what's pretty unique. It seems to be slipping away, and we should care about that, because it was pretty wonderful. It was the most violent time we know of. I'd be keen to learn wh
50.
by chomskyole 2y ago
How do you define "socialist"? I know you respond here to op but you generalise at lot here, don't you think?
51.
by chomskyole 2y ago
The soviet states and associated block had economic power distributed in a much more balanced way than we have today (please don't read more into this statement than what it says), noting that the inequalities in 2024 are pretty extrem
52.
by chomskyole 2y ago
Why? I'm sure that op read stuff before, and this is not the first time this topic was explored and maybe they came to a conclusion based on other data? Just wanted to highlight that this comment displays so much bad faith, dressed in
53.
by chomskyole 2y ago
> So much here is wrong I'm kind of astounded. Let me nitpick too: is this really an accurate statement? The first rebuttal (flipped homes) highlights an actual error, though does not comment on how this error impacts on the stateme
54.
by chomskyole 3y ago
It means that ownership is democratized. I.e. either owned by the workers or by the stakeholders/users.
55.
by chomskyole 3y ago
Couldn't agree more. Let's democratize them!
56.
by chomskyole 3y ago
From grandparent: > Walmart cashiers are being fired everyday for things like immaturity and poor judgment, why should YC CEO be held under lower behavior standards than blue collar workers?! Parent: >> If being immature and showi
57.
by chomskyole 3y ago
A death threat by one of the richest persons = A small transgression when they apologise after the fact Seriously?
58.
by chomskyole 3y ago
Mate, no I don't say this to my friends, but even if I take your point: if I say it to my friends there won't be any impact on anyone's life. Gary's rant absolutely has a potential to impact lives. So you chose your word
59.
by chomskyole 3y ago
>This is the anthropic principle [1] which is an observer bias implies the universe supports observers. Coupled with the fact a spacefaring civilization at 1% the speed of light could colonize the galaxy in about a million years (0.007%
60.
by chomskyole 3y ago
> What Chomsky is saying is that if you include only the people who are "healthy" according to some subjective criteria and take a crossection of their moralities - the result isn't an empty set. Well duh. Where do you get

More ›