the only way to have a unified state is to refine it into a homogenous, elemental society that is not vulnerable to any sort of othering
There is one (and, I would argue, only one) way to achieve a "society" which is not vulnerable to othering: become a hermit on a desert island. Because as soon as you have multiple people involved (which is what a society involves), othering is not only possible but relatively simple.
Doesn't mean it has to happen. But the risk is unavoidable. The most one can do is make othering socially unacceptable.
President Trump has urged the new Japanese prime minister, Sanae Takaichi, not to provoke China
The idea that Trump, Trump of all people, urging anyone not to be provocative? It simply boggles the mind. Next he'll be adminishing Americans to eat healthy, no doubt.
I had been aware that Witkoff got rich in real estate. What I had not known was how he got rich.
Basically, while Trump was making money by helping Russian oligarchs and mobsters launder money via New York apartment buildings, Witkoff was doing the same with commercial property there.
Suddenly, what we're seeing from the two of them becomes expliciable. Unsurprising even.
So what happens to nationalism if many more people are either moving from place to place or or at least relocating from where they were raised?
It depends...
If people are relocating across national boundaries, that could reduce nationalism, because they are not rooted anywhere. Say if they relocate because their job moves.
Or increase it, because they have moved on the basis of "I want to go to this particular place" (vs "I need to leave where I am.") See the immigrants to the US who embrace America to the point that they, or their children, volunteer for the US military.
On the other hand, there are those who relocate within a single country. It seems like they might embrace nationalism, simply because that is the level of group they still belong to. If you relocate from Alabama to Texas, you may not have strong ties to either. But you still have strong ties to the country overall.
There is doubtless a bit of racism in the mix. But I think by far the biggest part is simply that China is in a position to be an economic powerhouse rivaling the US. (And thus potentially a military peer.)
In contrast, Russia, at this point, is a second rate power. Or maybe third rate considering how they are faring against Ukraine. They've got nukes and (so far as we know) the technology to deliver them. But otherwise? They're a petrostate crossed with a kleptocracy. Even India is closer to being an economic peer than Russia.
The significant difference being that most members of Congress are fairly rabid when it comes to China. A lot of them may not care that much if Russia expands. But China is a whole different deal. If Trump makes a deal there, he may need to publish the Epstein Files as a distraction.
Those other debts weren’t being enforced by the Russian Mafia.
Doesn'tneed to involve the Russiab mafia. The Russian government has demonstrated its ability to conduct its own enforcement operations around the globe.
One possibility: Trump is trying to get the Europeans to truly step up. Trump successfully got member nations to pay their fair share to NATO
Since there is nothing in it for Trump personally, it's hard to credit him with caring about whether they step up. He may complain about it, but then he complains about anything and everything. Actually doing anything is rare.
As for "getting NATO members to pay their fair share", it's hard to see a valid complaint from the US on that. The one and only time that NATO has invoked its mutual defense clause was when the Europeans stepped up to support the US in Afghanistan. They stepped up to support us! Seems to me we've got no complaint.
The European members of NATO have not increased their defense spending in response to anything Trump has done. If you must credit anyone, "credit" Putin.
Perhaps someone here can explain something to me. Trump says Ukraine must accept the Russian-written "peace proposal or "risk losing US support. So, let's assume a counterfactual: Ukraine accepts the proposal. What good is US support supposed to do them, even assuming it lasts more than milliseconds beyong Russia moving it's troops forward?
It looks to me that the actual choice is between losing US support or losing US support. The only difference is between losing a bunch of territory at the same time or not.
I have tried to put down roots here, and I think I’ve done a good job, but given that it has been a conscious effort, I have to say that those roots aren’t deep, certainly not as deep as Japanese from here.
It's true that those who have moved tend to have shallower roots than those who have lived somewhere for a lifetime. And also, it's not surprising that some are better than others at developing new roots when they move. But I would point out that, while you feel your new roots are shallow, you are hardly someone who is perpetually moving. (I'd put the threshold for "perpetually moving"/rootless at relocating every couple of years or less.)
I acknowledge that my perspective is probably skewed by my personal experience. The US is called "a nation of immigrants" (suck eggs, Steven Miller!) for a reason. And California is a bit extreme, even for the US.
Growing up, I lived in a little farm town, just starting to evolve into a suburb. When my parents moved here, after WW II, the population was under 500. By the time I graduated high school, my graduating class was around 500. For all that there were a couple of families who had been here for a century, pretty much everybody in town was from somewhere else. Often, the kids in my classes had moved a couple of times already. Today, the town is up to nearly 50,000.
That sort of thing continues. I'm in the long time rooted category because, although I've lived in a half dozen different places over the years, they've all been within a hundred miles of here. But my family, my friends, my neighbors? All have moved or lived previously, far away. I've got a brother who, in his 20s and 30s, lived "in Europe" -- never settled anywhere for more than a couple of months, as far as I could tell. Definitely in the perpetually moving category.
“Maybe we are done putting down roots and will just keep moving.”
In reality, there have always been those who put down roots, and those who kept moving. As far as I can see, that is still true today.
There were also those who, from necessity, picked up and moved, sometimes a very long way, before stopping and putting down new roots. (I am put in mind of a story I read long ago about a guy who moved from Europe, but having arrived in New York City, never went west of Ocean Parkway.)
I suppose you could make a case that, at least in the US since the middle of the last century, it became more common for entire families to pull up stakes and relocate multiple times. They put down roots serially though; they weren't really moving constantly.
The one thing I think has changed is that those who just keep moving are now able to form lasting connections online. Before, they were largely isolated. Being able to make lasting connections allows them to form communities. Just communities not based on geography. That makes them more visible.
I hope the Wall Street Journal editorial is right about American voters, but I fear it is not. Surely if American voters hated dishonour as much as all that, there would not be a second Trump presidency
It all depends on what American voters perceive as dishonor. Perhaps surprisingly, they seem more likely to take that view of foreign policy screwups than they do of dishonorable behavior on the domestic (or personal!) front.
Yeah. I get warnings about the site being potentially unsafe. But I cheerfully downloaded the files anyway. Now I just need to get the software to open them.
I am amazed by the number of people I have encountered over the last few months who said variations of “but Trump will eventially get/is getting impatient with Putin, so it looks like things are going to change”.
It's pretty human to expect things that you really, really want to see happen will indeed happen . And it's also all to easy to assume that others will do what you would expect anybody to do. Even when you know, if you stop and think about it, that the person isn't even remotely rational, let alone sensible.
So, we'd like to see Trump cease being Putin's patsy when it comes to Ukraine. And, given how Putin is behaving, any normal person would long since have gotten exasperated. So, easy to think any little glimmer in that direction is the beginning of a real change. No matter how many times it proves not to be.
It must be incredibly frustrating for Dmitriev. He keeps putting out ever more outrageous demands, in the hopes that Witkoff will say No, so he can blame the US for negotiations failing. But Witkoff keeps giving him everything he asks and more. Over and over. The draft plan differs from Russia's maximal demands only in giving Russia even more.
About all that's left is Russia demanding massive reparations from Ukraine. Watching this space....
Percentage wise, America saw way more immigration in the 1700s than in the 19th century. Also way more in the 19th century than in the 20th century. Certainly there were peaks and valleys. And the raw numbers climbed, but as a percentage of the (non-Native American) population? No.
I suspect that we also saw more in many decades of the 20th century than we have so far in either decade in the 21st century. The usual peaks and valleys may have impacted what we've seen this century so far. But by now, our population is just too big for the percentages to get that high.
Banknotes stuffed in a mattress is looking better and better.
Works right up to the moment that serious debasement of the currency (aka inflation) sets in. Which, the idiots at the top of this administration being how they are, seems a distinct possibility.
Might be better to put your money into reconfiguring your back yard (if you have one) into a big vegetable garden.
lj, I suppose it depends a lot on the behavior of the companies one is familiar with. I've certainly seen (and worked for) some that practice "devil take the hindmost" capitalism.
But I've also worked for companies which thought being a good person and a good citizen was important. And seen a lot more of them. Plus, of course, their owners and managers were bright enough to realize that their people were what kept the whole thing running.
It’s not like there are some tiny companies, hidden in the shadows, that are somehow ‘doing capitalism right’.
Actually, I think there are. Not just tiny ones either; medium and moderately large ones, too.
The behemoths get all the attention precisely because they are so big. As you say, a handful of them make up half the NASDAQ. But by numbers, as opposed to simple market capitalization, the vast majority not only do more business, they employ, in aggregate, far more people.
And they survive by doing capitalism right. Not "right" as a lot of economists seem define it. They take care of their customers and they take care of their people. Without screwing over either in pursuit of a tiny fraction of a percent better numbers. And their executives don't make tens (or hundreds) of thousands of times as much as their average employees.
What kills me is that this is basically capitalism 101 and the Chinese are proving to be a whole lot better at it that the US.
Say rather that the Chinese are a lot better at it than enormous Silicon Valley firms. Which is to say, firms that so dominate their niche that they no longer have to pay much attention to competition. If you are Google or Microsoft or Amazon, you've got money to burn. So why not spend some of it on whatever shiny object has caught your biggest shareholder's eye?
Expect them to eventually, possibly sooner rather than later, discover why not. Although, if they can (apparently) afford to pay their CEOs hundreds of millions per year, maybe not.
I wonder if there’s such a thing as MAGA fatigue. By that, I don’t mean the fatigue that I would guess most of the people commenting here feel after dealing with all the bullsh*t the MAGAts produce. I mean fatigue among the MAGA faithful.
I suppose they are more Heritage-faithful than actual MAGA-faithful. But quite a few of the negative rulings lately seem to be coming from judges who were appointed by Trump. Which probably mostly speaks to the level of incompetence of the new bozos at DoJ.
Nvidia designs chips. All of their chips are fabricated by TSMC in Taiwan.
Another potential issue here. If China decides to forcibly reunite Taiwan, all that chip production is no longer secure. (Even making the heroic assumption that the various fabs are not severely damaged or destroyed.)
That would, I suspect, bring AI expansion to an abrupt halt. With obvious massive disruption to any business (not just AI providers) which has reorganized and restructured their operations to depend on it.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.
On “The surprising philosophy behind Palantir”
the only way to have a unified state is to refine it into a homogenous, elemental society that is not vulnerable to any sort of othering
There is one (and, I would argue, only one) way to achieve a "society" which is not vulnerable to othering: become a hermit on a desert island. Because as soon as you have multiple people involved (which is what a society involves), othering is not only possible but relatively simple.
Doesn't mean it has to happen. But the risk is unavoidable. The most one can do is make othering socially unacceptable.
On “An openish thread featuring the comedy stylings of Steve Witkoff”
President Trump has urged the new Japanese prime minister, Sanae Takaichi, not to provoke China
The idea that Trump, Trump of all people, urging anyone not to be provocative? It simply boggles the mind. Next he'll be adminishing Americans to eat healthy, no doubt.
"
I had been aware that Witkoff got rich in real estate. What I had not known was how he got rich.
Basically, while Trump was making money by helping Russian oligarchs and mobsters launder money via New York apartment buildings, Witkoff was doing the same with commercial property there.
Suddenly, what we're seeing from the two of them becomes expliciable. Unsurprising even.
"
GftNC, I thought sure you were channelling The Onion. Because it just seemed too over the top. But now it just seems creepy. And stomach turning.
Sorry to have doubted you.
On “Shabana burns the cakes”
So what happens to nationalism if many more people are either moving from place to place or or at least relocating from where they were raised?
It depends...
If people are relocating across national boundaries, that could reduce nationalism, because they are not rooted anywhere. Say if they relocate because their job moves.
Or increase it, because they have moved on the basis of "I want to go to this particular place" (vs "I need to leave where I am.") See the immigrants to the US who embrace America to the point that they, or their children, volunteer for the US military.
On the other hand, there are those who relocate within a single country. It seems like they might embrace nationalism, simply because that is the level of group they still belong to. If you relocate from Alabama to Texas, you may not have strong ties to either. But you still have strong ties to the country overall.
On “An openish thread featuring the comedy stylings of Steve Witkoff”
There is doubtless a bit of racism in the mix. But I think by far the biggest part is simply that China is in a position to be an economic powerhouse rivaling the US. (And thus potentially a military peer.)
In contrast, Russia, at this point, is a second rate power. Or maybe third rate considering how they are faring against Ukraine. They've got nukes and (so far as we know) the technology to deliver them. But otherwise? They're a petrostate crossed with a kleptocracy. Even India is closer to being an economic peer than Russia.
"
The Putin playbook is clearly an inspiration…
The significant difference being that most members of Congress are fairly rabid when it comes to China. A lot of them may not care that much if Russia expands. But China is a whole different deal. If Trump makes a deal there, he may need to publish the Epstein Files as a distraction.
"
Those other debts weren’t being enforced by the Russian Mafia.
Doesn'tneed to involve the Russiab mafia. The Russian government has demonstrated its ability to conduct its own enforcement operations around the globe.
"
One possibility: Trump is trying to get the Europeans to truly step up. Trump successfully got member nations to pay their fair share to NATO
Since there is nothing in it for Trump personally, it's hard to credit him with caring about whether they step up. He may complain about it, but then he complains about anything and everything. Actually doing anything is rare.
As for "getting NATO members to pay their fair share", it's hard to see a valid complaint from the US on that. The one and only time that NATO has invoked its mutual defense clause was when the Europeans stepped up to support the US in Afghanistan. They stepped up to support us! Seems to me we've got no complaint.
The European members of NATO have not increased their defense spending in response to anything Trump has done. If you must credit anyone, "credit" Putin.
"
Perhaps someone here can explain something to me. Trump says Ukraine must accept the Russian-written "peace proposal or "risk losing US support. So, let's assume a counterfactual: Ukraine accepts the proposal. What good is US support supposed to do them, even assuming it lasts more than milliseconds beyong Russia moving it's troops forward?
It looks to me that the actual choice is between losing US support or losing US support. The only difference is between losing a bunch of territory at the same time or not.
On “Shabana burns the cakes”
I have tried to put down roots here, and I think I’ve done a good job, but given that it has been a conscious effort, I have to say that those roots aren’t deep, certainly not as deep as Japanese from here.
It's true that those who have moved tend to have shallower roots than those who have lived somewhere for a lifetime. And also, it's not surprising that some are better than others at developing new roots when they move. But I would point out that, while you feel your new roots are shallow, you are hardly someone who is perpetually moving. (I'd put the threshold for "perpetually moving"/rootless at relocating every couple of years or less.)
I acknowledge that my perspective is probably skewed by my personal experience. The US is called "a nation of immigrants" (suck eggs, Steven Miller!) for a reason. And California is a bit extreme, even for the US.
Growing up, I lived in a little farm town, just starting to evolve into a suburb. When my parents moved here, after WW II, the population was under 500. By the time I graduated high school, my graduating class was around 500. For all that there were a couple of families who had been here for a century, pretty much everybody in town was from somewhere else. Often, the kids in my classes had moved a couple of times already. Today, the town is up to nearly 50,000.
That sort of thing continues. I'm in the long time rooted category because, although I've lived in a half dozen different places over the years, they've all been within a hundred miles of here. But my family, my friends, my neighbors? All have moved or lived previously, far away. I've got a brother who, in his 20s and 30s, lived "in Europe" -- never settled anywhere for more than a couple of months, as far as I could tell. Definitely in the perpetually moving category.
"
“Maybe we are done putting down roots and will just keep moving.”
In reality, there have always been those who put down roots, and those who kept moving. As far as I can see, that is still true today.
There were also those who, from necessity, picked up and moved, sometimes a very long way, before stopping and putting down new roots. (I am put in mind of a story I read long ago about a guy who moved from Europe, but having arrived in New York City, never went west of Ocean Parkway.)
I suppose you could make a case that, at least in the US since the middle of the last century, it became more common for entire families to pull up stakes and relocate multiple times. They put down roots serially though; they weren't really moving constantly.
The one thing I think has changed is that those who just keep moving are now able to form lasting connections online. Before, they were largely isolated. Being able to make lasting connections allows them to form communities. Just communities not based on geography. That makes them more visible.
I suppose
On “An openish thread featuring the comedy stylings of Steve Witkoff”
I hope the Wall Street Journal editorial is right about American voters, but I fear it is not. Surely if American voters hated dishonour as much as all that, there would not be a second Trump presidency
It all depends on what American voters perceive as dishonor. Perhaps surprisingly, they seem more likely to take that view of foreign policy screwups than they do of dishonorable behavior on the domestic (or personal!) front.
"
Yeah. I get warnings about the site being potentially unsafe. But I cheerfully downloaded the files anyway. Now I just need to get the software to open them.
"
I am amazed by the number of people I have encountered over the last few months who said variations of “but Trump will eventially get/is getting impatient with Putin, so it looks like things are going to change”.
It's pretty human to expect things that you really, really want to see happen will indeed happen . And it's also all to easy to assume that others will do what you would expect anybody to do. Even when you know, if you stop and think about it, that the person isn't even remotely rational, let alone sensible.
So, we'd like to see Trump cease being Putin's patsy when it comes to Ukraine. And, given how Putin is behaving, any normal person would long since have gotten exasperated. So, easy to think any little glimmer in that direction is the beginning of a real change. No matter how many times it proves not to be.
"
It must be incredibly frustrating for Dmitriev. He keeps putting out ever more outrageous demands, in the hopes that Witkoff will say No, so he can blame the US for negotiations failing. But Witkoff keeps giving him everything he asks and more. Over and over. The draft plan differs from Russia's maximal demands only in giving Russia even more.
About all that's left is Russia demanding mas
sivereparations from Ukraine. Watching this space....On “Shabana burns the cakes”
London’s foreign-born population is 41%.
And the percentage of foreign born residents in New York City over the years would be what?
If you're going to cherry pick numbers, gotta expect folks here will notice.
"
Percentage wise, America saw way more immigration in the 1700s than in the 19th century. Also way more in the 19th century than in the 20th century. Certainly there were peaks and valleys. And the raw numbers climbed, but as a percentage of the (non-Native American) population? No.
I suspect that we also saw more in many decades of the 20th century than we have so far in either decade in the 21st century. The usual peaks and valleys may have impacted what we've seen this century so far. But by now, our population is just too big for the percentages to get that high.
"
It’s the guy blowing leaves off our roof.
Except he's not blowing leaves off, he's ripping off the shingles.
On “Pop!”
Banknotes stuffed in a mattress is looking better and better.
Works right up to the moment that serious debasement of the currency (aka inflation) sets in. Which, the idiots at the top of this administration being how they are, seems a distinct possibility.
Might be better to put your money into reconfiguring your back yard (if you have one) into a big vegetable garden.
"
lj, I suppose it depends a lot on the behavior of the companies one is familiar with. I've certainly seen (and worked for) some that practice "devil take the hindmost" capitalism.
But I've also worked for companies which thought being a good person and a good citizen was important. And seen a lot more of them. Plus, of course, their owners and managers were bright enough to realize that their people were what kept the whole thing running.
"
It’s not like there are some tiny companies, hidden in the shadows, that are somehow ‘doing capitalism right’.
Actually, I think there are. Not just tiny ones either; medium and moderately large ones, too.
The behemoths get all the attention precisely because they are so big. As you say, a handful of them make up half the NASDAQ. But by numbers, as opposed to simple market capitalization, the vast majority not only do more business, they employ, in aggregate, far more people.
And they survive by doing capitalism right. Not "right" as a lot of economists seem define it. They take care of their customers and they take care of their people. Without screwing over either in pursuit of a tiny fraction of a percent better numbers. And their executives don't make tens (or hundreds) of thousands of times as much as their average employees.
"
What kills me is that this is basically capitalism 101 and the Chinese are proving to be a whole lot better at it that the US.
Say rather that the Chinese are a lot better at it than enormous Silicon Valley firms. Which is to say, firms that so dominate their niche that they no longer have to pay much attention to competition. If you are Google or Microsoft or Amazon, you've got money to burn. So why not spend some of it on whatever shiny object has caught your biggest shareholder's eye?
Expect them to eventually, possibly sooner rather than later, discover why not. Although, if they can (apparently) afford to pay their CEOs hundreds of millions per year, maybe not.
On “Your quest begins now!”
I wonder if there’s such a thing as MAGA fatigue. By that, I don’t mean the fatigue that I would guess most of the people commenting here feel after dealing with all the bullsh*t the MAGAts produce. I mean fatigue among the MAGA faithful.
I suppose they are more Heritage-faithful than actual MAGA-faithful. But quite a few of the negative rulings lately seem to be coming from judges who were appointed by Trump. Which probably mostly speaks to the level of incompetence of the new bozos at DoJ.
On “Pop!”
Another potential issue here. If China decides to forcibly reunite Taiwan, all that chip production is no longer secure. (Even making the heroic assumption that the various fabs are not severely damaged or destroyed.)
That would, I suspect, bring AI expansion to an abrupt halt. With obvious massive disruption to any business (not just AI providers) which has reorganized and restructured their operations to depend on it.
*Comment archive for non-registered commenters assembled by email address as provided.