#modern politics

[warsofasoiaf]

Why DO we need to invest more in STEM (assuming you're talking about education, like most people saying that phrase these days, otherwise that need is self-evident)? Do we want the next leaps forward being undertaken by people who were pushed & prodded or coddled into the fields? "Hidden Figures" turned me against STEM programs. I want a Katherine Johnson who had to FIGHT for her STEM skills sending us to Mars not those twit kids in the ads showing us how virtuous the investing companies are.

I'd rather have the next Katherine Johnson be free to pursue her interest in mathematics.

I don't think forcing people into STEM is the only way to "invest more." Education at an early age (and parental involvement) can nourish a lifelong love of the sciences, just as it can nourish interest in the arts or sports. One of the reasons I'm so hard on the teaching of science (and history) is that we teach them in the worst ways - rote memorization of theorems and concepts. You want people to love science, have experiments in elementary school where you set something on fire.

Also, from a practical perspective, we will need good STEM graduates. The US will need people to run the fabs. Chips are one of the dimensions of Cold War 2.0, and the US will need to ensure domestic capacity to help maintain their quality. Invention and innovation can help spur economic development and improve quality of life - that makes everyone's lives better off.

Thanks for the question, Anon.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

[ravnlghtft]

https://www.gocomics.com/nonsequitur/2024/01/21

[antebellumite]

you know that twitter tweet? i can't find it.

[morgan-la-fay]

There is something supremely wrong with modern wars. Not that wars were ever right but ever since WW2 there’s been a shift that I only heard about very recently. You see, before WW2 most wars that have recorded victim numbers had more military casualties than civilian casualties. WW2 changed that. Out of the estimated 70 million people who died (and that’s the lower end) around 2/3 were civilian. That is people who should not be directly affected by warfare. 50 million people, conservatively. And the thing that almost frightens me more? According to my Professor for modern history it`s been that way ever since. In every war since 1945 (excluding ongoing conflicts) more civilians have died than soldiers. That information terrifies me. I don`t know why exactly this piece of information hit so hard for me, but it did and now you have to deal with it too

[arcanistsdelight]

Well, hi there!

Do you base your beliefs purely in 'common sense'?

Do you know that those pesky medical associations are wrong because all your friends think the same thing you do?

Do you reblog the most hateful version of rhetoric you can find because, hey that persons says they're a political ally!

Well, do I have good news for you. This year at Science is Communism and Communism is Bad, Inc. We're offering a brand new host of introductory packages. Ranging from our Polite, but Privileged Asshat monthly subscription, to the one-time-fee exclusive membership for our So Deep Into my Echo Chamber that it Always Sounds like my Own Voice in Here Club!

If you sign up today, we'll even include access to our forums, where you can survey people who believe exactly what you do about their opinions. Not only will we publish that in a real scientific journal, we'll make sure the media only runs the parts we like!

And remember, don't worry at all about our scientists. If one of them loses their career for something silly like misrepresenting data in order to cause harm to marginalized communities, then we'll fast track them into the punditry spotlight, and soon, they'll be on YOUR FAVORITE NEWS SHOW every. single. week.

[hecatine-writer]

It boggles the mind how far people will go to be incredulous towards the powerless and to only muster absolute credulity to the powerful.

[catchperfectamericanpresidents]

gotta love how 90% of the republican centric fics in the 21st century rpf fandom are usually serious and introspective with dramatic prose and irony and emotional turmoil and the banality of evil and faustian deals and politics and 90% of the democrat centric fics are joe biden x cucumber.

[beyondmistland]

When it comes to Joe Rogan, I’m of two minds. On the one hand, he doesn’t really take responsibility for having a large platform that clearly reaches and influences a lot of people.

On the other, if you’re primarily getting your medical and political information from Joe Rogan podcasts, isn’t there a bit of personal responsibility that needs to be taken from the individual?

Race for the Iron Throne and Warsofasoiaf answered this far more eloquently than I ever could.

Thanks for the question, anon

[spikebit]

Social media has given voice to some people who had little previously, and it has made it easier to hold powerful people accountable for their misdeeds, not just in politics but in business, the arts, academia, and elsewhere. Sexual harassers could have been called out in anonymous blog posts before Twitter, but it’s hard to imagine that the #MeToo movement would have been nearly so successful without the viral enhancement that the major platforms offered. However, the warped “accountability” of social media has also brought injustice—and political dysfunction—in three ways.

First, the dart guns of social media give more power to trolls and provocateurs while silencing good citizens. Research by the political scientists Alexander Bor and Michael Bang Petersen found that a small subset of people on social-media platforms are highly concerned with gaining status and are willing to use aggression to do so. They admit that in their online discussions they often curse, make fun of their opponents, and get blocked by other users or reported for inappropriate comments. Across eight studies, Bor and Petersen found that being online did not make most people more aggressive or hostile; rather, it allowed a small number of aggressive people to attack a much larger set of victims. Even a small number of jerks were able to dominate discussion forums, Bor and Petersen found, because nonjerks are easily turned off from online discussions of politics. Additional research finds that women and Black people are harassed disproportionately, so the digital public square is less welcoming to their voices.

Second, the dart guns of social media give more power and voice to the political extremes while reducing the power and voice of the moderate majority. The “Hidden Tribes” study, by the pro-democracy group More in Common, surveyed 8,000 Americans in 2017 and 2018 and identified seven groups that shared beliefs and behaviors. The one furthest to the right, known as the “devoted conservatives,” comprised 6 percent of the U.S. population. The group furthest to the left, the “progressive activists,” comprised 8 percent of the population. The progressive activists were by far the most prolific group on social media: 70 percent had shared political content over the previous year. The devoted conservatives followed, at 56 percent.

These two extreme groups are similar in surprising ways. They are the whitest and richest of the seven groups, which suggests that America is being torn apart by a battle between two subsets of the elite who are not representative of the broader society. What’s more, they are the two groups that show the greatest homogeneity in their moral and political attitudes. This uniformity of opinion, the study’s authors speculate, is likely a result of thought-policing on social media: “Those who express sympathy for the views of opposing groups may experience backlash from their own cohort.”

Finally, by giving everyone a dart gun, social media deputizes everyone to administer justice with no due process. Platforms like Twitter devolve into the Wild West, with no accountability for vigilantes. A successful attack attracts a barrage of likes and follow-on strikes. Enhanced-virality platforms thereby facilitate massive collective punishment for small or imagined offenses, with real-world consequences, including innocent people losing their jobs and being shamed into suicide. When our public square is governed by mob dynamics unrestrained by due process, we don’t get justice and inclusion; we get a society that ignores context, proportionality, mercy, and truth.

[warsofasoiaf]

Could you explain a little more about "non-defense government contracts are much worse" I always hear about defense contracts and bloat but less about others.

A lot of infrastructure contracts and overall handling of infrastructure is riddled with corruption. US ports are lower in efficiency than Tanzania, primarily due to dockworker unions refusing any automation. Road expansion and upkeep are typically closed tender contracts given to political donors, many of which explicitly have provisions in the contract that the contractee cannot be fired solely for poor performance or cost overruns.

The entire contracting process could do with a thorough anti-corruption campaign, defense and non-defense alike. It would never happen though. At least our bureaucratic apparatus isn't as bad as Germany.

Thanks for the question, Anon.

SomethingLikeALawyer, Hand of the King

[antebellumite]

its a sign.

[mexicanistnet]

Mary Beard's “Women and Power” explores how women's voices have been historically silenced. From Greek myth to modern politics, women in power are considered monstrous or must adopt masculine traits.

[bookhouseboy1980-blog]

The Diplomat (Netflix) S1X01: The Cinderella Thing (Review)

Sub to my channel: https://www.youtube.com/@borednow5838/videos

[uncanny-tranny]

This might seem like an "old man yells at cloud" situation, but it's just wild growing up and being told how dangerous distracted driving is - how, at highway speeds, you can traverse the length of a football field (100 yards, 91 meters) in a matter of seconds - how one split second sending a text while driving could result in a potential fatal crash, and then getting on the road as a driver and being surrounded by billboards. Their entire purpose is to catch one's attention, so they're lining major roads, which tend to be highways. How is it that you're told how important it is to never be distracted while driving, but still being advertised to?

At best, this type of advertising is an eyesore to pedestrians and motorists and a general waste of electricity to light it, and at worst, it is an active danger considering they are there to advertise and therefore, must catch people's attention.

I'm not even against advertising in theory, but this particular mode bothers me so much and I hate how pervasive it is - especially in large cities or highways.

[saxafimedianetwork]

Traditional Institutions In Modern Governance: The House Of Elders

In recent yrs criticism of the role that the #Guurti has played in #Somaliland has been growing & there have been calls for a fundamental review of how the Guurti is selected & its function. Sadia Musse considers the relationship b/t traditional & modern governance institutions

(more…)