Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us $3,400 per month for bandwidth bills alone, and since we don't believe in shoving popup ads to our registered users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
  • Locked thread
duck monster
Dec 15, 2004



Always a good read..

The paranoid style in american politics
http://karws.gso.uri.edu/jfk/conspi...noid_style.html

e: fixed. LIEbrals are breaking my links

duck monster fucked around with this message at Oct 19, 2011 around 06:59

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

duck monster
Dec 15, 2004



ReidRansom posted:

Way back when we tried to make a wiki of this sort of thing in LF, but you know, LF, so that didn't work at all. This was kind of the idea though, a repository for all the informative kind of poo poo that gets posted but not everyone keeps up with. One stop argument shop.

I don't see the odds of a D&D wiki escaping a similar fate once outside the swing range of the mod banhammer. Goons and lurkers get kind of douchey once the threat of bans and probations disapear. We'd make a terrible anarchist community, alas.

duck monster
Dec 15, 2004



The Anarchist FAQ

http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/index.html

This is an extremely well researched and complete document outlining the theory of Anarchism, as well as very clearly explaining why anarcho-capitalism is not anarchism or part of the tradition.

Its a go-to primary document when investigating this school of ideas.

http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchis...nquest/toc.html

Kropotkins "The conquest of bread".

duck monster fucked around with this message at Oct 26, 2011 around 11:39

duck monster
Dec 15, 2004



I.W.W. ATTITUDE posted:

Does anyone have any good links that lay out in layman's terms:

Debunking of arguments for returning to the gold standard.

Pros and cons of fractional reserve banking.

The relationship between 'fiat' currency and global trade.



Productivity, environmental impact, and sustainability of organic vs. modern agriculture, or addresses the claim that the current global population could sustain itself with organic agriculture.

My Occupy [Location] GA is becoming subject to a growing faction of goldbugs and agricultural Luddites and I need some decent counterpoints to their positions so we don't end up sliding too far into Infowars territory.

Yeah this please. We're having a poo poo of a time in perth with these Infowars/David Icke type loons insisting that what we REALLY NEED TO BE FOCUSING ON is fiat currency and how moneys aaaalll just a big fraud maaaaaan.

I've been doing my best at slapping these kids some educating with some good old fashion dialectical disco, but honestly I cant get anywhere without a good loving debunking of this currency standard horseshit.

e: Don't get me started on Icke. That fucker even has me pre-empted by convincing his followers that "dialectics" see is this thing where you have a problem then a reaction then a solution and uh it somehow is this tactic THE SYSTEM uses to brainwash people.

Which has loving nothing to do with marxism at all, but oh well. Wheeee we're all in loopyland together now!

duck monster fucked around with this message at Nov 8, 2011 around 13:04

duck monster
Dec 15, 2004



My suggestion with dealing with science-scare stuff is learning to tease apart the bad-science from the reasonable-politics.

A friend of mine is a physicists, uh, does stuff with surface physics and polymers and some poo poo I dont understand. I humor him when he gets drunk and tries to explain it to me. But he's also an anti-nuke activist. He's also pro-nuke as well. That might not make sense but I think I can explain it.

From his perspective the problem with nuclear power is not even remotely scientific, but a matter of political principle in geo-politics. We advocate nuclear power for ourselves, then threaten to bomb people when they chose it for themselves. The problem, he argues, is basically Kantian. If its not moral for them, then we mustn't be hypocritcal by claiming its moral for us. If a potential side effect of adopting nuclear power is "Getting bombed by americans", then we have to acknowledge theres a big elephant in nuclears loungeroom. Ultimately it comes down to the bomb. If the lens of "what if the bad guys do it?" can tell us that perhaps theres a problem with nuclear fuel cycle being part of the nuclear bomb production process we perhaps need to exercise more caution and perhaps spend our funds getting Fusion or Thorium fuel working so we can do this nuke thing, which he agrees is necessary, without having to live in fear of some nutty loving american or pakistani leader mashing the nuke button and killing hundreds or thousands or even millions of people.

Now he's a frusturated activist. As a physicist when he goes to talks he almost wants to scream "YOU STUPID HIPPY" at the people talking because he thinks they are loving up a worthwhile cause by injecting worthless data into the equasion. He even tried to write a book "Nuclear physics for activists" , released the chapters periodically on the net, and watched the hitcounter hover at zero the whole time.

But his method of approaching it is excellent, by not letting very serious political issues with the relationship of the nuclear economy and geopolitical violence get lost in very silly pseudoscience.

This is the heuristic I'd advise when looking at GE crops. Separate the spazzy pseudoscience from the more serious political issue.

At the core of GEs *REAL* issues is the deadly serious matter of access to seed. Monsanto et al create dependency in their markets by exploiting the need for seed consumers to have access to this excelent new technology by forcing a seed subscription model on very poor people. The problem is , the old techniques of seed saving then become effectively illegal, because the farmer has to now buy the seeds , even if the previous crop failed and they have no money, and they are not allowed to keep a seed bank to re-establish. This creates an effectively imperialist dependency between the third world farmer and a first world company that can basically now control the market.

There are some issues with the Roundup ready stuff too, with overuse of glycowhatsitscalledagain herbicides (or pesticides I cant remember) being overused and causing ecological issues, but honestly I think one needs to deploy Alinskys advice here and if your not an expert on the topic , dont go there.

So thats my advice. Don't throw away the whole concern with GM over silly science phobia in some western activists. Third world GM activists don't give a rats rear end about whether the canola is as god intended it, they DO however worry about the fact that nobody in their village owns their crops anymore and are now effectively paying rent to a western megacorporation to perform the farming duties they had previously performed self sufficiently for generations before.

Keep it real, and keep it political. No need for bad science, the real issues are enough.

duck monster
Dec 15, 2004



Strudel Man posted:

Well, except that you can always go back to using regular seeds.

It sucks that the benefits of genetically-engineered crops are limited to the farmers who can pay (and keep paying) for them, but it's hardly a "try once and you're hooked" situation.

Easier said than done. Monsanto actually go after people who don't comply with the program with lawsuits that whilst might be baseless can't be defended against by people with no cash. Food INC pointed out the US example where Monsanto just sue the poo poo out of companies that provide seed saving services where theres even a remote possibility on of their clients was a monsanto customer. Its enough to have put most out of business.

duck monster
Dec 15, 2004



Its not the outcomes that have been the problem in these cases, it was the actual costs of the litigation itself.

And again, as I said, the (pseudo)scientific claims are red herrings, its the economic and political problems of patented food that are the problems, notably that of creating dependency for third world farmers.

duck monster
Dec 15, 2004



Strudel Man posted:

You want to see institutionalized injustice, check out the Cops on the Beat thread. A company offering a product with a single-season growing permission doesn't even come close.

Unless you've now got entire sections of some of the poorest farmers in the world under your thumb and paying you rent to do what they had done for free for countless generations. In that case, no a cops batton in the head really isn't even in the same league.

duck monster
Dec 15, 2004



Strudel Man posted:

And thus we come full circle.
If only was it that simple. See buying the seeds and pesticides isn't cheap. So monsanto loans the farmers money to invest in the infrastructure in return for mortgages on the farms. The problem is, the contracts dont necessarily allow for the farmers to just pull out when the debts start piling up too high. We're talking functionally iliterate farmers without business smarts in dealing with mega-corps here lured by travlling salesmen, and flashy adverts featuring top bollywood actors and the like.

The end result is, if they stop participating, monsanto takes the loving farm.

This has led to spates of suicides as farmers realise they have become destitute and have no way to service the debts except give up farms held in the family often for centuries.

Here, have a video about farmer suicides over monsanto:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Av6dx9yNiCA

'scuse the annoying editing. Its the first result on the list.

And keep in mind, in places like india , for certain crops like cotton, you cant actually GET non GM seeds, meaning that its not possible anymore to avoid monsanto unless you've kept seeds from your traditional crop, which you probably havent if you have switched to monsanto.

This poo poo is predatory. Food should not be monopolized by a single profit driven company, especially in economies as fragile as india.

e: Yes nationalizing monsanto would be good. There are genuine benefits to be had from GM if its conducted by ethical scientists not unethical businessmen fucks. Really actually, this research should be done by universities for the public good.

duck monster fucked around with this message at Nov 10, 2011 around 06:08

duck monster
Dec 15, 2004



evilweasel posted:

Books about how people are nothing close to rational are good starts. It's solid science you can't handwave away as political disagreement.

Pretty much any psychology text written in the last century.

Though that said, I still see the austrians try and hand-waving it away by continuously re-defining "rational" until it has almost no descriptive power at all.

Either way, their spergy concept fails.

duck monster
Dec 15, 2004



I really don't know if IQ tests mean that much. I do really well in IQ tests , but honestly, I'm dumb as a bag of rocks sometimes, and seemingly more so the older I get

e: annecdote wheeee.

With all that said, how does one tease out environmental from genetic factors in IQ with this whole heritability jibba jabba. Surely having smart parents just means you grow up in a household that values and encourages intelligence. How is that variable teased apart from genetics?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

duck monster
Dec 15, 2004



dorkasaurus_rex posted:

Here's another one I'd like some help with:


Any help? Also here's a bonus quote from a crazy friend of this friend:

"We just had a global recession you dumb gently caress" is the correct response, followed by an exposition of the historical trend of the debts increasing under republicans and decreasing under democrats in both federal and state governments.

Throw in lots of references to "Big-government conservatives" in there.

Then finally put on your best face and say "Read Marx" before moonwalking backwards out the room.

Not that marx has anything to do with it, but its fun to upset conservatives. Or punch him or something I dont know

duck monster fucked around with this message at Jan 24, 2012 around 08:46

  • Locked thread