(Reading ‘How the South Won the Civil War’ – Heather Cox Richardson
The upshot is that there were & are so many things wrong with
the circumstances, events & practices of *white* Americans
over the period of the past 400 years or so, it’s amazing
that we’ve made it thus far.)
(Sometimes it’s the Dems who are awful; then they became
Republicans and got worse. Sometimes it’s the Republicans
who are good, but then they remember that they are all about
preserving wealth & property. All those who are non-White
– and non-Wealthy – suffer through this.)
A good example of how China would stimulate economic growth and also future problems as detailed on Page 50 by fellow China traveler Richard Smith. “Climate arsonist Xi Jinping: a carbon-neutral China with a 6% growth rate?”
And so it remains today. Thus when Xi’s Made in China 2025 initiative (2015) budgeted billions for new energy vehicles, the only way local officials could tap the money on offer was to DIY (build their own factories). That’s how China ended up with 487 electric car manufacturers by 2018 compared with 3 in the US: Tesla, GM, and Nissan.
Today, it’s microchip factories.
As Trump cut Huawei off from using US-made microchips, Xi is spending tens of billions of dollars to build Chinese microchip factories in a drive to become self-sufficient in chip production. Thus every mayor wants his town to be a Silicon Valley.
In China’s system, it can be a good business plan to apply for and get the start-up $millions from Beijing even if the start-up never produces chips.
Now Beijing is complaining about the hundreds of companies with no experience, no technology, and no talent are nevertheless “blindly taking on projects” requiring great technical sophistication. The result being “stalled projects and vacant manufacturing plants which have wasted huge amounts of resources.”
Why pursue renewables?
In October 2019 climate scientists published research showing that on present trends, global warming is going to “all but erase” Shanghai, Shenzhen, and “most of the world’s great coastal cities before 2050.” Page 52
The article splashed across the cover of Saturday’s New York Post seemed designed to enrage Republicans who railed against the Biden administration’s immigration policies.Under the tabloid-ready headline “KAM ON IN,” The Post, which is controlled by the conservative media baron Rupert Murdoch, claimed that copies of a children’s book written by Vice President Kamala Harris were provided at taxpayer expense in a “welcome kit” for unaccompanied migrant children at a shelter in Long Beach, Calif.The story whipped around conservative media and elicited denunciations from leading Republicans, including the party chairwoman. A reporter for the Murdoch-owned Fox News, which published its own online article about the claims, asked about it at a televised White House press briefing.But the claims were untrue. And on Tuesday, the Post reporter who wrote the original article said she had resigned from the paper because of “an incorrect story I was ordered to write,” describing the episode as “my breaking point.” In fact, no books by Ms. Harris were provided by government officials at the shelter, and the sole copy seen in the photograph that The Post published on its front page had been donated through a neighborhood toy and book drive for the migrant children, local officials told The Washington Post.Despite these facts, The New York Post initially repeated the falsehoods in a follow-up article falsely claiming that “thousands” of copies of Ms. Harris’s book had been distributed at migrant shelters. …
Review – Southern elites, Western libertarians and the conservative coalition‘How the South Won the Civil War’ – Heather Cox RichardsonNote: The linked WaPo story focuses on Barry Goldwater’s run forthe presidency in 1964 as the start of conservative resurgence of the GOP.That is NOT the point of the Richardson book at all. The ‘resurgence’ goesback to the aftermath of the Civil War, with roots far earlier in US history.
Coberly, As a true son of the South, then I must say that you nailed it. With two conservative political parties vying for control of government in the US since the ink dried on the US Constitution, then the liberal versus conservative meme has occasionally gotten confusing. I guess that the Square Deal and New Deal progressives were partly to blame for this as they introduced the notion that not all politicians were conservatives. Truly not all politicians are conservatives on their face, but when you examine the other end of things then a distinction without much difference appears. That said, then ordinary Joe has been a vast relief from the reign of the ill-tempered orange moron. Many Republican voters have admitted as much, but Republican politicians cling to their posturing inanity as a survival tactic. After all, who needs Republicans when we can have Democrats?
Ron (RC) Weakley (A.K.A., Darryl For A While At EV) says:
The problem with redistributive plans is not that they do not work or that they cost rich people too much leading to reduced investment. The problem with redistributive plans is that they remain politically vulnerable for scapegoating and reversal in future election cycles. For the long run benefits of redistribution to cement into cultural and institutional arrangements then such redistribution plans must stay in place for at least a full generation. That said then we are on best right track presently accessible. If ordinary Joe can fulfill his plans, then this will be the best US political development in my 72 years. Yet it is no more than a start.
Ron given that rich people have the money and therefore the power and the time, and that it is really easy to lie to the people, at least until things get so bad the people stop believing the old set of lies… it is inevitable that the rulers will be conservative, and the best liars will work for the conservatives. and good cop – bad cop works pretty well in politics, i don’t think it’s likely we’ll see much in the way of redistributive policy for longer than it takes to shake out a new regime of lies and liars. i do think, because i am a romantic, that it might just be possible to convince the rulers that some policies that might look redistributive at first would be in their own best interests. but i am not so sure the current crop of rulers are smart enough to see that. meanwhile … while i can easily be convinced that capitalism always leads to theft by the rich, an equally strong case might be made that capitalism by its nature does create “wealth” and much of that …as much as is barely necessary…does leak down to lift all boats. well, not all. but most of us have i-phones, don’t we? trouble is, wealth itself has become the enemy of humanity… it is destroying the planet. and yet the redistributive-ists can only think in terms of transfering more wealth from “the rich” to “the poor.”i think a lot less wealth all around might save us. but that’s a hard item to sell in the marketplace.
WASHINGTON — On the eve of his 100th day in office, President Biden used his first address to Congress on Wednesday to tout the nation’s successful COVID response under his leadership and to urge Americans to back a massive expansion of the social safety net financed by taxes on the wealthy.“A hundred days ago, America’s house was on fire,” Biden said, adding that “America is on the move again’’ and painting a hopeful vision for the future. “We’re vaccinating the nation,” he said. “We’re creating hundreds of thousands of jobs. We’re delivering real results people can see and feel in their own lives.” …Biden called on lawmakers to act on several major bills stalled in the narrowly divided Congress, including ones to help ensure equal pay for women, expand the ability of unions to organize, strengthen voting rights, reform the immigration system, ban assault weapons, and reform police practices in the wake of the murder of George Floyd.“We have all seen the knee of injustice on the neck of Black America,” Biden said. “Now is our opportunity to make real progress.”He sought to sell his vision for the nation by emphasizing how the government could help average people and enable the United States to compete globally at “an inflection point in history.” “Think about it, public investment and infrastructure has literally transformed America, our attitudes as well as our opportunities,” Biden said, ticking off government-funded accomplishments like the interstate highway system, public schools, the moon landing, and creation of the Internet. “These are the investments we made together, as one country, and investments that only the government is in the position to make. Time and again, they propel us into the future.”Biden said he inherited a nation in crisis. ”Now — after just 100 days — I can report to the nation: America is on the move again,’’ he said. ’’Turning peril into possibility. Crisis into opportunity. Setbacks into strength.’’His speech took place in the shadow of a global health crisis and at the site of an insurrection that revealed the dangerous depths of the nation’s partisanship. …For the first time, two women sat in the seats of honor behind the president as he delivered his address. Vice President Kamala Harris, the first woman to hold the office, gaveled the proceedings into order and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi made Biden’s first formal introduction to Congress.“Thank you Madam Speaker, thank you Madam Vice President,” Biden said before launching into his speech. “No president has ever said those words and it’s about time.”Biden arrived with achievements to tout in an address held later than usual for a new president. The extra two months allowed the administration to make more progress against the coronavirus, and Biden touted the vaccination campaign as “one of the greatest logistical achievements our country has ever seen.” Infections and deaths are down significantly from the winter peak as about 230 million vaccine doses have been administered, more than double Biden’s initial goal for his first 100 days. And Biden’s popular $1.9 trillion rescue plan, enacted by the narrow Democratic majorities in Congress, has begun boosting the pandemic-stricken economy. …
A Sharp Divide at the Supreme Court Over a One-Letter Word https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/29/us/supreme-court-immigration-notice.html?smid=tw-shareWASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that the government must comply strictly with a requirement that immigrants receive detailed notices about their deportation hearings.The 6-to-3 decision featured unusual alliances, with the three conservative justices most committed to interpreting statutes according to their plain words — Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil M. Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett — joining the court’s three-member liberal wing to form a majority.The case concerned a 1996 federal law that allows immigrants subject to deportation to apply to stay in the country if they meet various criteria, including that they had been continuously present for at least 10 years. The law stops that time from accruing once immigrants receive “a notice to appear” for a deportation hearing listing various kinds of information, including the nature of the proceeding and when and where it will take place.The question in the case was whether the government had to provide all of the information at once or could do so piecemeal. Justice Gorsuch, writing for the majority, said the statute’s use of the article “a” in “a notice to appear” was crucial. “To an ordinary reader — both in 1996 and today — ‘a’ notice would seem to suggest just that: ‘a’ single document containing the required information, not a mishmash of pieces with some assembly required,” he wrote, giving other examples.“Someone who agrees to buy ‘a car’ would hardly expect to receive the chassis today, wheels next week, and an engine to follow,” Justice Gorsuch wrote.The decision means that Agusto Niz-Chavez, an immigrant from Guatemala who entered the United States unlawfully in 2005, may apply to seek permission to stay. Mr. Niz-Chavez received the required information in two documents in 2013, appeared at the hearing specified in them with a lawyer and had been ordered deported.Justices Stephen G. Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan also joined Justice Gorsuch’s majority opinion in the case, Niz-Chavez v. Garland, No, 19-863. … (Justice Kavanaugh dissented…)
Ron (RC) Weakley (A.K.A., Darryl For A While At EV) says:
Coberly, Yep. BTW, there really is no such thing as AI unless we define AI as the facsimile of intellect as described by a socially challenged nerd back when computers were stupid machines. In any case a computer is just a tool with no personality and a lot of programmers hiding behind that screen. Computers cannot replace human beings as teachers, but they can replace teachers that are just tools with no personality just fine, mostly in STEM subjects, but conceivably in history. Unless word count is how term papers are graded, then that is not an “AI” job. Humanities are the domain of humans. The working advantage of “AI” is continuous interaction with student for subject matter that needs self-paced doling out into digestible morsels, e.g., AP calculus or even computer programming. The syllabus is prepared by top teachers and the courseware is developed by cognizant programmers. Of course the stuff that kids could do fine for themselves such as reading a book did not require a teacher and will not require an AI, but computer screens replacing paper books seems to be a trend.
Ron (RC) Weakley (A.K.A., Darryl For A While At EV) says:
Coberly, Also, do not confuse AI learning with general intelligence and general learning. Humans have more going on than just a growing searchable database. Higher life is born with a fear of pain and death, a desire for the comfort of others of its kind, and, among mammals, empathy for our kind is developed from the bio-feedback that controls suckling. One can argue that reproductive desire is particularly integrated in the relationships of mammal pairs, unlike the harsher reality of black widow spiders. When one utters “F computers,” then that is not what is meant.
Ron I wouldn’t be so sure (about F computers). And while I think I agree with you about AI (as much as I know about it), I’d caution you just a little about believing everything you hear about human psychology… you have to believe some of it just to get by in this world, and some of it might even be true, but theories about human behavior have caused more trouble (so far) in this world than theories about computer behavior.and books don’t hurt my eyes the way computer screens do. besides being easier to use, and less given to the sort of abuses that computers are led to. should have quit while i was ahead (in my own mind anyway); we are not making machines more like people. we are making people more like machines. As a computer scientist said (in about 1980) “we can teach a computer to do everything a doctor or a lawyer does, but we can’t teach them to do anything a sea turtle does.”
ron…re theories of human behavior see wiki article on Harry Harlow….note Harlow was criticized for the cruelty of his experiments, but before his experiments the cruelty was the standard advice of child raising experts…. story i heard when in school was that Harlow was criticized, not for cruelty (that was never even mentioned), but for not being a behaviorist (Skinnerian).
Ron (RC) Weakley (A.K.A., Darryl For A While At EV) says:
Coberly, There have been only two psychologists for which I have much use. One is Frederick Perls, the principle psychoanalyst author of the Gestalt Therapy discipline, and Desmond Morris, a zoologist and popular author in human sociobiology. Note that neither was a psychologist by training or vocation. Computer programming is how I earned a living along with computer performance analysis and large scale system planning and integration. So, I will just have to take my own word on computers. In any case, it is warm and not raining constantly here now, so most of my day is spent outside.
Ron well, heck. i am willing to take your own word on computers. as for psychologists, i only take the word of those who agree with me.i wish i could spend most of my day outdoors, even when it is cold and raining. not sure about the nights though.
Review – Southern elites, Western libertarians and the conservative coalition
(Reading ‘How the South Won the Civil War’ – Heather Cox Richardson
The upshot is that there were & are so many things wrong with
the circumstances, events & practices of *white* Americans
over the period of the past 400 years or so, it’s amazing
that we’ve made it thus far.)
(Sometimes it’s the Dems who are awful; then they became
Republicans and got worse. Sometimes it’s the Republicans
who are good, but then they remember that they are all about
preserving wealth & property. All those who are non-White
– and non-Wealthy – suffer through this.)
How China Does It
A good example of how China would stimulate economic growth and also future problems as detailed on Page 50 by fellow China traveler Richard Smith. “Climate arsonist Xi Jinping: a carbon-neutral China with a 6% growth rate?”
And so it remains today. Thus when Xi’s Made in China 2025 initiative (2015) budgeted billions for new energy vehicles, the only way local officials could tap the money on offer was to DIY (build their own factories). That’s how China ended up with 487 electric car manufacturers by 2018 compared with 3 in the US: Tesla, GM, and Nissan.
Today, it’s microchip factories.
As Trump cut Huawei off from using US-made microchips, Xi is spending tens of billions of dollars to build Chinese microchip factories in a drive to become self-sufficient in chip production. Thus every mayor wants his town to be a Silicon Valley.
In China’s system, it can be a good business plan to apply for and get the start-up $millions from Beijing even if the start-up never produces chips.
Now Beijing is complaining about the hundreds of companies with no experience, no technology, and no talent are nevertheless “blindly taking on projects” requiring great technical sophistication. The result being “stalled projects and vacant manufacturing plants which have wasted huge amounts of resources.”
Why pursue renewables?
In October 2019 climate scientists published research showing that on present trends, global warming is going to “all but erase” Shanghai, Shenzhen, and “most of the world’s great coastal cities before 2050.” Page 52
New York Post Reporter Who Wrote False Kamala Harris Story Resigns https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/27/business/media/new-york-post-kamala-harris.html?smid=tw-share
Review – Southern elites, Western libertarians and the conservative coalition‘How the South Won the Civil War’ – Heather Cox RichardsonNote: The linked WaPo story focuses on Barry Goldwater’s run forthe presidency in 1964 as the start of conservative resurgence of the GOP.That is NOT the point of the Richardson book at all. The ‘resurgence’ goesback to the aftermath of the Civil War, with roots far earlier in US history.
Dobbs I like to say the only thing the South learned from the Civil War is that it’s cheaper to rent than it is to buy, and white is as good as black.
Coberly, As a true son of the South, then I must say that you nailed it. With two conservative political parties vying for control of government in the US since the ink dried on the US Constitution, then the liberal versus conservative meme has occasionally gotten confusing. I guess that the Square Deal and New Deal progressives were partly to blame for this as they introduced the notion that not all politicians were conservatives. Truly not all politicians are conservatives on their face, but when you examine the other end of things then a distinction without much difference appears. That said, then ordinary Joe has been a vast relief from the reign of the ill-tempered orange moron. Many Republican voters have admitted as much, but Republican politicians cling to their posturing inanity as a survival tactic. After all, who needs Republicans when we can have Democrats?
Too few lines of break flow together and too many lines of break get thrown into trash.
The problem with redistributive plans is not that they do not work or that they cost rich people too much leading to reduced investment. The problem with redistributive plans is that they remain politically vulnerable for scapegoating and reversal in future election cycles. For the long run benefits of redistribution to cement into cultural and institutional arrangements then such redistribution plans must stay in place for at least a full generation. That said then we are on best right track presently accessible. If ordinary Joe can fulfill his plans, then this will be the best US political development in my 72 years. Yet it is no more than a start.
Ron given that rich people have the money and therefore the power and the time, and that it is really easy to lie to the people, at least until things get so bad the people stop believing the old set of lies… it is inevitable that the rulers will be conservative, and the best liars will work for the conservatives. and good cop – bad cop works pretty well in politics, i don’t think it’s likely we’ll see much in the way of redistributive policy for longer than it takes to shake out a new regime of lies and liars. i do think, because i am a romantic, that it might just be possible to convince the rulers that some policies that might look redistributive at first would be in their own best interests. but i am not so sure the current crop of rulers are smart enough to see that. meanwhile … while i can easily be convinced that capitalism always leads to theft by the rich, an equally strong case might be made that capitalism by its nature does create “wealth” and much of that …as much as is barely necessary…does leak down to lift all boats. well, not all. but most of us have i-phones, don’t we? trouble is, wealth itself has become the enemy of humanity… it is destroying the planet. and yet the redistributive-ists can only think in terms of transfering more wealth from “the rich” to “the poor.”i think a lot less wealth all around might save us. but that’s a hard item to sell in the marketplace.
http://Biden calls for sweeping new social programs in first joint address to Congress https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/04/28/nation/biden-calls-sweeping-new-social-programs-first-joint-address-congress/?event=event25
A Sharp Divide at the Supreme Court Over a One-Letter Word https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/29/us/supreme-court-immigration-notice.html?smid=tw-shareWASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that the government must comply strictly with a requirement that immigrants receive detailed notices about their deportation hearings.The 6-to-3 decision featured unusual alliances, with the three conservative justices most committed to interpreting statutes according to their plain words — Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil M. Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett — joining the court’s three-member liberal wing to form a majority.The case concerned a 1996 federal law that allows immigrants subject to deportation to apply to stay in the country if they meet various criteria, including that they had been continuously present for at least 10 years. The law stops that time from accruing once immigrants receive “a notice to appear” for a deportation hearing listing various kinds of information, including the nature of the proceeding and when and where it will take place.The question in the case was whether the government had to provide all of the information at once or could do so piecemeal. Justice Gorsuch, writing for the majority, said the statute’s use of the article “a” in “a notice to appear” was crucial. “To an ordinary reader — both in 1996 and today — ‘a’ notice would seem to suggest just that: ‘a’ single document containing the required information, not a mishmash of pieces with some assembly required,” he wrote, giving other examples.“Someone who agrees to buy ‘a car’ would hardly expect to receive the chassis today, wheels next week, and an engine to follow,” Justice Gorsuch wrote.The decision means that Agusto Niz-Chavez, an immigrant from Guatemala who entered the United States unlawfully in 2005, may apply to seek permission to stay. Mr. Niz-Chavez received the required information in two documents in 2013, appeared at the hearing specified in them with a lawyer and had been ordered deported.Justices Stephen G. Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan also joined Justice Gorsuch’s majority opinion in the case, Niz-Chavez v. Garland, No, 19-863. … (Justice Kavanaugh dissented…)
Coberly, Yep. BTW, there really is no such thing as AI unless we define AI as the facsimile of intellect as described by a socially challenged nerd back when computers were stupid machines. In any case a computer is just a tool with no personality and a lot of programmers hiding behind that screen. Computers cannot replace human beings as teachers, but they can replace teachers that are just tools with no personality just fine, mostly in STEM subjects, but conceivably in history. Unless word count is how term papers are graded, then that is not an “AI” job. Humanities are the domain of humans. The working advantage of “AI” is continuous interaction with student for subject matter that needs self-paced doling out into digestible morsels, e.g., AP calculus or even computer programming. The syllabus is prepared by top teachers and the courseware is developed by cognizant programmers. Of course the stuff that kids could do fine for themselves such as reading a book did not require a teacher and will not require an AI, but computer screens replacing paper books seems to be a trend.
Coberly, Also, do not confuse AI learning with general intelligence and general learning. Humans have more going on than just a growing searchable database. Higher life is born with a fear of pain and death, a desire for the comfort of others of its kind, and, among mammals, empathy for our kind is developed from the bio-feedback that controls suckling. One can argue that reproductive desire is particularly integrated in the relationships of mammal pairs, unlike the harsher reality of black widow spiders. When one utters “F computers,” then that is not what is meant.
Ron I wouldn’t be so sure (about F computers). And while I think I agree with you about AI (as much as I know about it), I’d caution you just a little about believing everything you hear about human psychology… you have to believe some of it just to get by in this world, and some of it might even be true, but theories about human behavior have caused more trouble (so far) in this world than theories about computer behavior.and books don’t hurt my eyes the way computer screens do. besides being easier to use, and less given to the sort of abuses that computers are led to. should have quit while i was ahead (in my own mind anyway); we are not making machines more like people. we are making people more like machines. As a computer scientist said (in about 1980) “we can teach a computer to do everything a doctor or a lawyer does, but we can’t teach them to do anything a sea turtle does.”
ron…re theories of human behavior see wiki article on Harry Harlow….note Harlow was criticized for the cruelty of his experiments, but before his experiments the cruelty was the standard advice of child raising experts…. story i heard when in school was that Harlow was criticized, not for cruelty (that was never even mentioned), but for not being a behaviorist (Skinnerian).
Coberly, There have been only two psychologists for which I have much use. One is Frederick Perls, the principle psychoanalyst author of the Gestalt Therapy discipline, and Desmond Morris, a zoologist and popular author in human sociobiology. Note that neither was a psychologist by training or vocation. Computer programming is how I earned a living along with computer performance analysis and large scale system planning and integration. So, I will just have to take my own word on computers. In any case, it is warm and not raining constantly here now, so most of my day is spent outside.
Ron well, heck. i am willing to take your own word on computers. as for psychologists, i only take the word of those who agree with me.i wish i could spend most of my day outdoors, even when it is cold and raining. not sure about the nights though.