Ha - I've not seen any of the series, although I know everyone says they're great. I try to limit the platforms I subscribe to, and actually I watch very little TV compared to most people, but I imagine I'll weaken at some stage...
russell: Jackson Lamb is a great creation and character, and someone a joe would definitely want on their side. But the Rodmeister - what bliss he is in all his deluded glory. Have you read all of them, including the Slough House adjacent "The Secret Hours"?
"Simply loving the image of Imperial Rome as an anarchist collective!"
But all the decisions of the emperor must be ratified by a simple majority of the collective for purely internal decisions, but by a two-thirds majority for external decisions.
India started doing it after it was clear that the world had already overshot the climate boundaries
Yes, it plugs into the idea that Robinson said started the book, which was the observation that it is easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism. It is difficult to imagine a profit motive sufficient to move the current titans of industry, though one could imagine a savior complex moving them to do it.
lj - I think that Kim Stanley Robinson had the Indian government doing the sulfur geoengineering (rather than a private entity) is because India started doing it after it was clear that the world had already overshot the climate boundaries. It was part of a hodgepodge approach to solutions that was necessitated by our collective inability to make collective change.
The reasons for private entities to do this are more complicated, and get at wj's thoughts about the profit motive. The tech startups that are working the geoengineering angle are doing so partly for public minded reasons, but that is also mixed with the conviction that whatever we do collectively must not interfere with the economy or their own business interests. They are trying to delay the moment of accountability in order to stretch the bubble for their own fortunes.
It's an informative comparison, and it highlights the difference in priorities between the global north and south.
Well, geoengineering could also be used to actually accelerate global warming since some would directly profit from that (e.g. fossil fuel extraction in the Arctic and ice-free transport lanes for the same).
Btw, this idea can already be found in Jules Verne's 3rd part part of the Gun Club Trilogy (there it is about righting the rotational axis of the earth in order to get the Arctic ice-free to get at assumed large coal deposits).
I guess Robinson has a national effort because it avoids the question of capitalism trying to harness geo-engineering, but it seems to me the latter is much more likely than the former.
For capitalism to harness geo-engineering, there would need to be some way, probably some fairly obvious way, to profit from it. Profit directly, not just from having a better world to live in generally. I'm not really seeing one -- probably lack of imagination on my part.
The actual alternative to a national effort would be a billionaire with an obsession, and a willingness to spend vast ssums of his own in pursuit of it. The example we have before us is SpaceX. Musk is obsessed with going to Mars, and was willing to personally fund a company to develop the technology so he could do that. Sure, it turned out he could sell launch services to NASA etc. But that was really just a happy unintended consequence as the technology developed.
The point about geoengineering startups had me think about Kim Stanley Robinson's book The Ministry for the Future, a science fiction work about climate change. Crooked Timber did a seminar on it if you aren't into reading the fiction, but are interested in some of the ideas. I believe Donald mentioned the book for its horrific description of a heat wave in India, which then has India engage in geoengineering, specifically seeding the upper atmosphere with sulfur dioxide. I guess Robinson has a national effort because it avoids the question of capitalism trying to harness geo-engineering, but it seems to me the latter is much more likely than the former.
Just chased one of the Newsweek links from the anti-weather militia article to see what MTG had to say about her anti-weather-tampering bill.
She is an idiot - I am not suggesting otherwise - but at the same time, I don't think that it's a bad idea to pass laws forbidding unauthorized geoengineering because we are already seeing startups that are attempting to kick start this sort of environmental hacking in the name of combatting climate change:
There is a thought that nous' comment puts in my mind. One thing that I note is how German fascism was underpinned by particular notions of science, while the current American instantiation seems to me to completely ignore science. The Germans had notions that we've pretty much abandoned (though they still float around in the cultural psyche, such as eugenics and biological determinism), but I feel like there was a culture of putting science on a pedestal. The discussion of Heritage Americans, which nous notes is infinitely malleable, is, like other MAGA snipes that are chased down, fundamentally unserious. Another example is something like this
https://www.newsweek.com/anti-government-militia-targets-weather-radars-2097670
I suppose that the MAHA movement has some sort of scientific notions, in the idea that science is being perverted to tout vaccines and other medical interventions, and 'real' science just needs people doing internet research (like putting forward invermectin).
I realize that the US has a strong 'know-nothing' streak, but it's remarkable how easy it has been for Trump supporters to simply reject science and I'm wondering what others think.
"Heritage American" is a bit like "Originalism" in that the term is infinitely Humpty-Dumpty-able. Once you establish that the Founding Fathers were Christian Nationalists (the subject of so many books and church basement visits by "noted Bible-believing historians") then the heritage in question becomes a spiritual heritage, and any American born Christian Nationalist regardless of ethnicity can be provisionally adopted into the family of Heritage Americans.
Of course that heritage is instantly revocable as well, even for actual Heritage Americans. I have ancestors on my father's side of the family going back at least to 1700, and possibly to Jamestown. I'm pretty sure that my status as a Heritage American was revoked the moment that it became clear to everyone that I was an exvangelical, a feminist, and in favor of LGBTQ+ rights. When my mother passed, the only people who spoke to my wife and I at her funeral were blood relatives or the two Taiwanese converts who were treated as adopted family. The pastor of the church was literally the only other member of my parents' church who spoke to us, and he only did so enough to try to suggest that I read CS Lewis (as if I hadn't already done that during my evangelical days).
"“heritage American” refers to the offspring of the Anglo-Protestant and Scotch-Irish settlers — in other words, the white people — who populated the original colonies before heading west to settle the American frontier."
That's not going to be a very large slice of the US population. It's not even a very large slice of the white population.
Notably, it excludes Trump, whose family history here starts around 1885.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.
On “Am I missing something?”
Thanks lj, will check that out today!
"
cleek, but the Roman anona was only for the deserving poor and their number was limited by law (and excluded migrants).
"
Gary Oldman as Lamb is worth the price of admission.
Ho is perfectly cast as well FTM.
"
GftNC, AppleTV is 50% off for Black Friday if you want to do a binge. There are some other shows that are pretty good to binge thru as well.
"
Ha - I've not seen any of the series, although I know everyone says they're great. I try to limit the platforms I subscribe to, and actually I watch very little TV compared to most people, but I imagine I'll weaken at some stage...
"
"Have you read all of them"
I've only seen the series on Apple TV. The books are in my queue.
And yes, Roddie Ho is non-self-aware perfection.
"
russell: Jackson Lamb is a great creation and character, and someone a joe would definitely want on their side. But the Rodmeister - what bliss he is in all his deluded glory. Have you read all of them, including the Slough House adjacent "The Secret Hours"?
"
"Simply loving the image of Imperial Rome as an anarchist collective!"
But all the decisions of the emperor must be ratified by a simple majority of the collective for purely internal decisions, but by a two-thirds majority for external decisions.
Might have worked better.
"
Roddy Ho is my fave
Team Lamb here. The man is my shadow self. Or maybe not so shadow.
In early Christian times, there was no state or welfare, so I think that you can argue that, actually.
Followed by:
The Christian tradition is about communities and families and charity, not about compulsory taxation in order to pay welfare.
Somebody needs a theological / historical clean-up on aisle three.
"
no state and no welfare?
what is the whole "Render unto Caesar" thing about, if not about paying taxes to the state?
and no welfare? they had a whole goddess dedicated to the distribution of grain and they named their welfare system after her.
"
Pontius Pilate was known to be an Antifa wanna-be after none of the kids from Occupy Wall Street wanted him hanging around.
"
Simply loving the image of Imperial Rome as an anarchist collective!
"
lj: yes, I loved that!
"
Re Badanoch, this by Stephen Bush via Zoe Williams in the Grauniad
There was no state. Who does she think crucified him, an anarchist collective?
On “The surprising philosophy behind Palantir”
India started doing it after it was clear that the world had already overshot the climate boundaries
Yes, it plugs into the idea that Robinson said started the book, which was the observation that it is easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism. It is difficult to imagine a profit motive sufficient to move the current titans of industry, though one could imagine a savior complex moving them to do it.
"
lj - I think that Kim Stanley Robinson had the Indian government doing the sulfur geoengineering (rather than a private entity) is because India started doing it after it was clear that the world had already overshot the climate boundaries. It was part of a hodgepodge approach to solutions that was necessitated by our collective inability to make collective change.
The reasons for private entities to do this are more complicated, and get at wj's thoughts about the profit motive. The tech startups that are working the geoengineering angle are doing so partly for public minded reasons, but that is also mixed with the conviction that whatever we do collectively must not interfere with the economy or their own business interests. They are trying to delay the moment of accountability in order to stretch the bubble for their own fortunes.
It's an informative comparison, and it highlights the difference in priorities between the global north and south.
On “uncomfortability?”
assuming it comes from "comfortability" (which has only been a thing for a couple of years)?
On “The surprising philosophy behind Palantir”
Well, geoengineering could also be used to actually accelerate global warming since some would directly profit from that (e.g. fossil fuel extraction in the Arctic and ice-free transport lanes for the same).
Btw, this idea can already be found in Jules Verne's 3rd part part of the Gun Club Trilogy (there it is about righting the rotational axis of the earth in order to get the Arctic ice-free to get at assumed large coal deposits).
"
For capitalism to harness geo-engineering, there would need to be some way, probably some fairly obvious way, to profit from it. Profit directly, not just from having a better world to live in generally. I'm not really seeing one -- probably lack of imagination on my part.
The actual alternative to a national effort would be a billionaire with an obsession, and a willingness to spend vast ssums of his own in pursuit of it. The example we have before us is SpaceX. Musk is obsessed with going to Mars, and was willing to personally fund a company to develop the technology so he could do that. Sure, it turned out he could sell launch services to NASA etc. But that was really just a happy unintended consequence as the technology developed.
"
The point about geoengineering startups had me think about Kim Stanley Robinson's book The Ministry for the Future, a science fiction work about climate change. Crooked Timber did a seminar on it if you aren't into reading the fiction, but are interested in some of the ideas. I believe Donald mentioned the book for its horrific description of a heat wave in India, which then has India engage in geoengineering, specifically seeding the upper atmosphere with sulfur dioxide. I guess Robinson has a national effort because it avoids the question of capitalism trying to harness geo-engineering, but it seems to me the latter is much more likely than the former.
"
Just chased one of the Newsweek links from the anti-weather militia article to see what MTG had to say about her anti-weather-tampering bill.
She is an idiot - I am not suggesting otherwise - but at the same time, I don't think that it's a bad idea to pass laws forbidding unauthorized geoengineering because we are already seeing startups that are attempting to kick start this sort of environmental hacking in the name of combatting climate change:
https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/12/24/1066041/a-startup-says-its-begun-releasing-particles-into-the-atmosphere-in-an-effort-to-tweak-the-climate/
MTG is not the only idiot around, and in this case I'll support one idiot in order to stop other idiots.
"
There is a thought that nous' comment puts in my mind. One thing that I note is how German fascism was underpinned by particular notions of science, while the current American instantiation seems to me to completely ignore science. The Germans had notions that we've pretty much abandoned (though they still float around in the cultural psyche, such as eugenics and biological determinism), but I feel like there was a culture of putting science on a pedestal. The discussion of Heritage Americans, which nous notes is infinitely malleable, is, like other MAGA snipes that are chased down, fundamentally unserious. Another example is something like this
https://www.newsweek.com/anti-government-militia-targets-weather-radars-2097670
I suppose that the MAHA movement has some sort of scientific notions, in the idea that science is being perverted to tout vaccines and other medical interventions, and 'real' science just needs people doing internet research (like putting forward invermectin).
I realize that the US has a strong 'know-nothing' streak, but it's remarkable how easy it has been for Trump supporters to simply reject science and I'm wondering what others think.
"
"Heritage American" is a bit like "Originalism" in that the term is infinitely Humpty-Dumpty-able. Once you establish that the Founding Fathers were Christian Nationalists (the subject of so many books and church basement visits by "noted Bible-believing historians") then the heritage in question becomes a spiritual heritage, and any American born Christian Nationalist regardless of ethnicity can be provisionally adopted into the family of Heritage Americans.
Of course that heritage is instantly revocable as well, even for actual Heritage Americans. I have ancestors on my father's side of the family going back at least to 1700, and possibly to Jamestown. I'm pretty sure that my status as a Heritage American was revoked the moment that it became clear to everyone that I was an exvangelical, a feminist, and in favor of LGBTQ+ rights. When my mother passed, the only people who spoke to my wife and I at her funeral were blood relatives or the two Taiwanese converts who were treated as adopted family. The pastor of the church was literally the only other member of my parents' church who spoke to us, and he only did so enough to try to suggest that I read CS Lewis (as if I hadn't already done that during my evangelical days).
On “An openish thread featuring the comedy stylings of Steve Witkoff”
RIP Tom Stoppard. And, relevant to current US politics and democracy worldwide:
“It’s not the voting that’s democracy,” a character says in “Rock ’n’ Roll.” “It’s the counting.”
On “The surprising philosophy behind Palantir”
"“heritage American” refers to the offspring of the Anglo-Protestant and Scotch-Irish settlers — in other words, the white people — who populated the original colonies before heading west to settle the American frontier."
That's not going to be a very large slice of the US population. It's not even a very large slice of the white population.
Notably, it excludes Trump, whose family history here starts around 1885.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.