cannoli-reader

[cannoli-reader]

The thing that killed his rep for me was the Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman incident. There were all sorts of ways he could have approached it, even taking the side he did, and in line with his party's positions, such as decrying gun violence, or the stand-your-ground laws or the divisions that make people suspicious of one another.

Instead, he decided to say "If I had a son, he might look like Trayvon Martin."

Fuck you. That is the exact opposite of what America is supposed to be about. He literally went out and announced he was taking sides because of skin color (not that this surprised anyone after prematurely sticking in his two cents on the Henry L Gates arrest).

Well, guess what, fucknuts, I have three nephews with a German last name and a Hispanic mother. By Barry O's standards, if I was serving on a jury (or police force) in Florida, I would be justified in siding with Zimmerman, no matter what he might have done. Because I have (actual, not theoretical) young male family members with more superficial traits in common with George Zimmerman than Barry Jr would with Trayvon Martin.

[cannoli-reader]

There is also the fact that he freaks out, channels by accident and burns down his girlfriend's tavern and when she suggests repairing to her family's mountain cabin* to get away from everything, he demurs, stating he does not want to hurt her. But he is fine with hurting absolutely everyone else in one of the largest cities in the world, which is just as much a possibility if he stays, as hurting "Selene" if he goes. What is the logic?

*Common-born owners of an inn, in preindustrial, aristocratic societies, totally had vacation homes in the mountains, this is an incredibly realistic thing that does not break immersion in the setting, and not at all the product of an urban-oriented screenwriter who is utterly incapable of writing outside her own experience of the world.

Sadly, the answer to this, and all questions posed by the OP, are: The writers wanted Rand to be in Cairhien, because they had some vague ideas of doing political intri- who are we kidding? The books say Moiraine is from Cairhien* and she is the character they want to write about, so Rand will have to be in Cairhien to conveniently interact with her.

*The books also say that Moiraine broke with her Cairhien heritage as much as possible, doing the next best thing to disavowing anything to do with it. During her time in that city in the books, despite her belief that she might be dying soon, there is no indication that it means anything to her, that she visited any well-loved person, place or grave or monument to one of the same, just some speculation projected from the mind of a young man who so loves the home he believes lost to him forever that he assumes being back in her "home" is having a profound effect on her. She has multiple encounters with her brother's daughter, who herself is so welcoming to family connection that she creates half a dozen or more fictive ones over the course of the series, and yet there is not the slightest indication on either of their parts that they are aunt and niece.

Thinking hard. Brainpower needed to imagine Emmy acceptance speeches precludes giving scripts verisimilitude.

It might not have been an interesting viewing, but on the show I kind of would have liked a bit more info on how Rand got from the blight and the eye of the world to Cairhien. [i put the circle there only because they arrived and went through Shienar, don't know where in the blight the eye of the world is]

How he changed his mind from 'i'm going to take myself somewhere i can't hurt anyone' to venturing deep inland. How he found out Logain was in Cairhien, like was he sat in a tavern somewhere and overheard people talking? Did Lanfear or Ishamael put the thought in his mind?

Rand meets 'Selene' in Cairhien, but what of his journey between walking away from Moiraine to meeting 'selene'

[cannoli-reader]

Johnny Cash's "Won't Back Down" and "Hurt", recorded as an old man, add so much to both songs. Warren Zevon's cover of "Back in the High Life Again" is so much more feeling.

Also, "Barbara Ann" by the Beach Boys is technically a cover.

There are song covers i think are better than the original and I think id get tomatoes thrown at me if I said them

[cannoli-reader]

Also, the slaves not bound for the New World were marched across the Sahara to the Middle East. They never got lost, because they just had to follow the trail of bones of slaves who died on previous trips. On their arrival, the men were all castrated, which, in addition to servicing the weird sex issues of their new masters, allowed the slave traders to maintain demand by ensuring the slave population could not reproduce, and would be dependent on a constant supply of death marches. The American colonies* was the best place be sent if you were enslaved in Africa.

*the US put an end date to the importation of slaves in the Constitution

Also, the USA was such an inimical environment for the institution of slavery that the slave owners spent most of their political effort in trying to ensure parity in the Senate so that no anti-slavery bills could make it through Congress. They basically wrote off the House of Representatives, acknowledging that a majority of Americans were going to be opposed to their agenda. Eventually, it got so bad that they tried to break away from the USA. The Constitution they wrote to replace it was almost functionally identical, in some places borrowing the same wording, making it clear that their only real problem with America was the predominant anti-slavery atmosphere (and several peripheral issues that might facilitate a non-slave economy, like tariffs and dams and, oddly, re-electing presidents).

[cannoli-reader]

No? Rand freed his own ass. It was the Shaido attack that diverted his captors to allow him to escape. Rand actually saved Perrin's rescue party. Also, having mundane combat skills in his captivity only made things worse for him. Which doesn't make him wrong in principle wrt Taim and weapons training, just an example of "sucks to be Rand"

"When you were shielded by the Aes Sedai, you might still have escaped if you knew how to use a sword, how to fight with your hands.” “I did escape. Here I am.” “Some of your followers broke you free"

Oh gods the parallels to Dumai's Wells are too much.

[cannoli-reader]

She died, almost certainly as a result of A. bonding him, B. failing to honor the bond & putting it at the disposal of other sisters and C. not releasing him when he discovered that was possible and asked.

It was because of those things that she ended up where she did, with no one available to Heal her, because their channeling was needed to help her illicit warded.

You can also look at what Siuan told Gawyn in tSR about her fall from power as a possible punishment (excepting of course, Siuan's utter insincerity). Again, because of the bond, the situation wet Rand and the embassy deteriorated rapidly, leading to him falling into the hand of the Tower group, and then, of course, Dumai's Wells. If she had not bonded Rand, or respected the relationship she imposed and told the other sister to pound sand, she would never have ended up kneeling to him or being treated like a spoiled child by a bunch of witch doctors.

Beyond that, trying to balance the scales in pain just makes things ugly.

“The gall of the man. The utter gall! Detaining us! Restricting us!”

Fuck you, Alanna. What he did was far less than you deserve.

[cannoli-reader]

This is why I hate centrists and extremists. People are such idiots for listening to either group. I am firmly against both, and prefer my superior, more intelligent position. You can tell I'm in the right, because you can never find someone I supported going down in flames or betraying his base.

Do you think centrists are spineless

No. Most centrists are just people who have varied opinions and don't easily fall within the modern left/right divide in a big way.

But I do think there are a group of people who call themselves centrists, or who are lumped in with centrists, who only want to be against everything. The "pox on both houses" people who only ever seem to be against things, never for anything. Except being smug online about how everyone else is stupid for believing in anything. And I think those people are worthless.

[cannoli-reader]

Another thing to keep in mind is that WoT is about the importance of communication, and one of the ways it highlights that importance is by showing how easy it is to refrain from communicating, to tempting it is to keep secrets, or how your attitude can frighten off people you want to help from communicating your problems. Like telling them "I will destroy you before I let the Dark One have you." All well and good, but when the Dark One invades their dreams and says "You are mine!" they are going to be really reluctant to share that detail with someone who has basically threatened to kill them if he's telling the truth.

When you appreciate all the reasons, motivations, and allure of suspicion, mistrust and secret-keeping, then you can recognize the moments of trust, honesty and willingness to ask for, or give, help, as the triumphs they really are.

Was a bit bothered at first by how suspicious everyone in the Wheel of Time books are of each other, but then I realised it's actually a lot more psychologically realistic that way. In the real world you would have no clue who's a friend and who's a foe, and even less so in a world where secret allegiances and evil conspiracies abound.

[cannoli-reader]

yaolin could also be how they make baby Andalites.

<I am Samilin-Corrath-Gahar, captain of this ship,> the oldest of them said. <My tactical officer Hareli-Frodlin-Sirinial, and our ship's physician, Doctor Coaldwin-Ashul-Tahaylik. Now what in yaolin are you doing drifting around in Zero-space with five aliens?> p. 66

More named Andalites.

Also, what is yaolin? I feel like the sentence would still work fine if I replaced it with 'God's name' so, is that something to do with Andalite religion? Just the vibes it gives me.

[cannoli-reader]

First of all, Tam screwed that up by divulging her role in bringing him there, even though she warned him against that.

Secondly, there is the point that everything suggesting Cadsuane was trying to control him came from tGS. She specifically eschewed multiple attempts or opportunities to control or contain him in the prior five books, which means it was only an error she fell into out of desperation at the extremes of the situation, namely, the really bad choices Rand was making. Yes, there were reasons why he was making them, but reasons are not excuses, and the champion against the Dark One is supposed to be better. If the Aes Sedai and others are responsible for driving Rand to his emotional state, you can just as easily contend that Rand's own behavior and nihilism were responsible for Sanderson writing her out of character her own desperation in trying to coach Tam for their meetup, just as he also drove Min & Nynaeve to turn to Cadsuane to deal with his state.

Cadsuane takes Rand back to the Palace, after he is stabbed by Fain, rather than her current residence, where she'd have control, simply because it would be better for him. Min's dire warnings notwithstanding, with her ter'angreal, and the strength & number of her retinue, she could have restrained him and prevented him doing harm, had he panicked waking up among strange sisters.

She knew damn well Rand was not going to stay in bed after he awoke and kept quiet.

She promised him, on multiple occasions, her help without control, and offered reassurances against getting power over him

She allowed Alanna to retain the bind instead of passing it, because Alanna could not control Rand with it

She offered unsolicited and free warnings about the dangers of Callandor without making him work for it, or adding strings or using her knowledge to any advantage over him

She worked with Verin to prep the rulers of the city where Rand was, to hopefully make them fearful of interfering with, or opposing, Rand.

She agreed to keep Rand's followers away from him in Far Madding for an indefinite time, simply because he asked her (semi-) politely

She rescued him from captivity, doing things she otherwise would not have done except for his sake, and demanded nothing in return

She did nothing to oppose or prevent Rand from trying to cleanse saidin, despite the concerns of the other sisters, and, in fact, did a lot to facilitate the security of the operation, addressing concerns Rand had voiced to Min at the beginning of the quest

She kept him hidden while he recuperated, and in her stream of consciousness, was glad to see him behaving with her needing to make him or punish him. As we see elsewhere in the series, you establish control by seeking excuses to reprimand, correct or order the subject, so accustom them to taking your direction, and fearing your displeasure. We see that in examples from Niall's 'lion in the street' speech, to Elayne suborning Vanin and the Redarms en route to Ebou Dar, to the training regimen Bethamin prescribes for Teslyn. Cadsuane being happy she does not have to correct Rand is like Niall being happy that someone killed his lion before he could give any orders - it only makes sense for some who prioritizes solving the problem over exerting control.

And then all of a sudden, she's stomping around Arad Domon, talking about herself in the third person and botching things with Rand. Like Rand himself, the only Watsonian explanation is that she's cracking under the strain, after a long track record of good behavior. It's like the personality flip phenomenon described in Michael Crichton's "Congo".

Everyone was always wondering what Rand is doing but only now, halfway through The Gathering Storm, does it occur to anyone to ask how Rand is doing, and it turns out the answer is: extremely bad!

Like God damn Cadsuane you fucked this kid up so bad and you're never gonna accept that, are you?

[cannoli-reader]

Literally, no.

Cadsuane has been concerned about how Rand has been doing since the moment she showed up on the scene. She explicitly stated, while bound by the First Oath, that Rand could do whatever he wanted. She made him promises that she would not harm him or control him, that she would prioritize his well-being over absolutely anything, and she regretfully destroys the political career of a woman she respects, stating (again, bound by the Oath), that she is sorry to do it, but her reason is keeping her promise to Rand.

The problem vis a vis Rand & Cadsuane is that everyone else, especially the Aes Sedai, from Moiraine, to Siuan, to Alanna and the respective embassies, plus most of the political establishment and the Aiel (and Perrin & Egwene didn't help much either), all had him so twisted around that Caduane's efforts to help him honestly didn't have anything like a reasonably expected effect.

Everyone was always wondering what Rand is doing but only now, halfway through The Gathering Storm, does it occur to anyone to ask how Rand is doing, and it turns out the answer is: extremely bad!

Like God damn Cadsuane you fucked this kid up so bad and you're never gonna accept that, are you?

[cannoli-reader]

Well, Lysenko was a Marxist, so it's not like it's a reach to associate Marx with junk science.

My favorite reference to phrenology was in Discworld, where they had a profession which I believe was called "retrophrenology", where the practitioner, equipped with a hammer & blunt chisel/stake, would imbue the patient with personality traits and skills by creating dents and lumps in the skull. It follows pretty good, on the original logic, IMO.

I am curious to hear out why you liken Marxism to phrenoogy? I am aware Marx himself had pro-phrenological views, but I don’t think I’ve read anything that connects his political theory to his personal biases

So when I say phrenology, I'm talking about a movement that was popular in the 19th century that posited that the brain was not a singular organ, rather it was made up of modules with focused abilities. By measuring the skull, you could theoretically determine talent, as the muscles that were used in those modules would be bigger (the way muscles gain mass with use). There's racism involved, so I'm going to throw this under a cut.

Phrenology was highly non-credible even when it was published, with doctors disproving the physical science while it was still in the public sphere. But phrenology was wildly popular across social strata because it created a method by which Europeans could rationalize their own superiority though a racial lens. Phrenology was published in accessible jargon and printed for middle-class individuals, it was not an esoteric medical knowledge for the elite.

This is what I think makes me think of Marx. The actual science doesn't pan out, but that's not the gain. The virtue is creating a pseudo-academic framework to rationalize and articulate the inferiority of a subgroup with a veneer of objective, empirical thought that falls apart the second it is examined. This is a desirable end-state, so people will latch on to it regardless of whether it stands up to scrutiny.

That's just a theory though.

-SLAL

[cannoli-reader]

Yeah, I think there would have been situations where they flew over probably hostile locals, and he wasn't allowed to open fire until they saw a SAM launched.

I remember reading a novel set in Vietnam, where the PoV character was a Soviet advisor to the NVA, and he's amused that they can travel in perfect safety in an automobile, because the US rules of engagement forbid firing on a vehicle that might be civilian instead of military or government "...in a country where a bicycle was a status symbol!"

As far as the sergeants' anecdote goes (FWIW, I worked with a former Air Force noncom who had that exact same duty), that seems like a criminally irresponsible policy. Either it connotes a paternalistic view that the local "sullen peoples, half-devil and half-child" could not be expected to understand and comply with responsible firearms behavior (absolutely never, ever point a gun at someone you don't mean to kill, for any reason), or someone up the chain of command made the calculation that it was less hassle to bury a guard than to deal with the fallout of (rightfully) shooting a person who pointed a firearm at on-duty service personnel.

I'd be interested in an expert's opinion on Egwene's conduct against the Seanchan in tGS, especially since I am absolutely sure Sanderson's comprehension of military stuff is 100% fiction, video games, and layman's historical knowledge.

I don't really dispute the ostensible intent of the Second Oath, just the effectiveness and the assertion in the glossaries, that there are believed to be no loopholes, unlike the First. It's not just that they have warders to do their killing, it's that anyone who fights back to any effect suddenly becomes a legit target under the Oath. Also, the bullshit lawyering we see in play with the sisters accompanying Mat & Perrin in KoD should not be possible, much less the travesty of Dumai's Wells. If you are entering the conflict of your own volition, and can easily retreat, it's not "the last extreme." Kurina should have been executed on the spot when she expressed that nonsense rationalization to Perrin after Dumai's Wells, as a suspected Black sister who proved it by lying to him, or a criminally stupid moron if she actually believed what she was saying, who got soldiers under her authority killed by violating the plan for no good reason.

I love these new thoughts. They help stimulate more or new mental rotations on my part.

When I was in the Air Force, we learned the Law of Armed Conflict. What I remember of the lessons was that if I ever happened to be on guard duty with a firearm, I was not allowed to shoot at anyone until they opened fire. The sergeants who had done such work in the Middle East told us stories of the enemy taunting them by periodically pointing their rifles at the guards. It sounded extremely stressful and I'm glad that it's nothing I ever experienced. My views on what warrants lethal force were heavily influenced by these lessons, though. Lethal force is only appropriate in response to a legitimate threat to your own life, to someone else's life whom you are protecting, and as a last-ditch effort to prevent disaster (as in, the guy trying to break the airplane window gets knocked unconscious for good fucking reason, although I guess that technically qualifies under the first two as well).

Thinking on this recontextualized the Aes Sedai oath to not kill with the One Power. They are bound by the Law of Armed Conflict. Which makes me wonder what restrictions James Rigney Jr. was operating under in Vietnam. Did he receive the same lessons in basic training? Were they relevant in the jungles of Vietnam?

[cannoli-reader]

I think he was part of the flight crew of a helicopter. IDK what his service involved wrt his personal weapons.

That said, I would be careful about extrapolating anything from the Three Oaths, because that one in particular is sheer bullshit, and utterly worthless as a principle or a restraint on Aes Sedai power or capacity for harm.

I would be extremely disappointed in RJ if he actually believed it was a good practice, or that Siuan was in any way right in her lecture on the Oaths to Egwene in tPoD.

When I was in the Air Force, we learned the Law of Armed Conflict. What I remember of the lessons was that if I ever happened to be on guard duty with a firearm, I was not allowed to shoot at anyone until they opened fire. The sergeants who had done such work in the Middle East told us stories of the enemy taunting them by periodically pointing their rifles at the guards. It sounded extremely stressful and I'm glad that it's nothing I ever experienced. My views on what warrants lethal force were heavily influenced by these lessons, though. Lethal force is only appropriate in response to a legitimate threat to your own life, to someone else's life whom you are protecting, and as a last-ditch effort to prevent disaster (as in, the guy trying to break the airplane window gets knocked unconscious for good fucking reason, although I guess that technically qualifies under the first two as well).

Thinking on this recontextualized the Aes Sedai oath to not kill with the One Power. They are bound by the Law of Armed Conflict. Which makes me wonder what restrictions James Rigney Jr. was operating under in Vietnam. Did he receive the same lessons in basic training? Were they relevant in the jungles of Vietnam?

[cannoli-reader]

Yeah, okay, the other conversation was something I got a glimmer of in one of your later posts. I was pretty sure I wasn't calling you names. Sorry about the mixup.

As regards the original mixup, remember, it started with a post that was just playing with words and analogies. I was not condemning anyone for their actions wrt immigration, or commenting on the situation. I do believe it's wrong, but also, as you point out, the tacit policy being carried out by default makes it easier to do the wrong thing than the right. And I think whatever actions taken to rectify things are going to involve ripping off some very painful band-aids. However, my point about the rights is just that because of the principles of sovereignty and collective property rights and so forth, it should the national interests that gets priority, not the needs of the people unfortunately caught between. I'm saying "fuck all the immigrants" just that some people, are going to have to get fucked, because that's the unfortunate reality, and we can't let that deter making the reforms. I give points to the people whom Trump listens to for at least having an idea that the problem needs to be fixed and the reality that some necessities are going to be hard in doing so, but none of the rhetoric I am hearing suggests this administration is the one to fix it. On the other hand, I REALLY side-eye the economic arguments, just because so many of them amount to a modern version of "but who will make our shoes" from 15th century Spain (or "who will pick the cotton?" if you want a more proximate, and probably closer in spirit, precursor), and a lot more tacitly imply that it's okay to do to Indians or Mexicans what you can't to Americans.

That said, we're not going to solve it here (and people trying to do so in similarly limited fora has contributed to the situation), and it's not a major issue for me in the big scope.

So. People exist who believe:

Immigration carries moral weight, and "illegal" immigration is evil. (They also fail to engage with how our laws are actually written and enforced, so there you have it.)

-AND-

Theft is reasonably punishable by lethal force.

What a fucking moral base.

This is why I stopped engaging with conservatives for so long. They always ALWAYS show their entire ass eventually.

[cannoli-reader]

Yeah, in that regard, we've lost something across the board it seems like.

Old Pencil Sharpener in Action

[cannoli-reader]

I'm not sure we have? Most of these look like bigger, clunkier versions of the grinders that were in most classrooms when I went to school. The 1904 one with the razor blade is basically the same as the little individual sharpeners you'd keep at your own desk, except it has a mechanism to move the razor against the pencil, as opposed to sticking the pencil into a hole, next to a razor blade, and twisting the pencil to get the same effect.

They're all neat to watch, but they more or less do the same thing as more modern mechanical sharpeners, and in some cases with more mess, and less idiot-proof aspects to their operation. I think the average class of modern children would get at least four bloody fingers a month with one of the devices in this video in the classroom.

Old Pencil Sharpener in Action