http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/philosophy/people/miller/wroclaw2b.pdfVia frank. Miller on justificationism
You know. I look at this problem quite differently. But I still agree.
Source date (UTC): 2016-04-28 12:27:00 UTC
http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/philosophy/people/miller/wroclaw2b.pdfVia frank. Miller on justificationism
You know. I look at this problem quite differently. But I still agree.
Source date (UTC): 2016-04-28 12:27:00 UTC
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-31020283GREAT INTRODUCTION TO “MASKIROVA” (DECEPTION)
Source date (UTC): 2016-04-28 05:08:00 UTC
RT @AliceTeller: Okay, I admit, I had some emotional attachment to democracy, but now I am convinced. Burn it down, burn it all down. https…
Source date (UTC): 2016-04-26 21:22:49 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/725072668014313473
https://t.co/VJ9nCRlXtNRetweeted Alice Teller (@AliceTeller):
Okay, I admit, I had some emotional attachment to democracy, but now I am convinced. Burn it down, burn it all down.
Source date (UTC): 2016-04-26 17:22:00 UTC
http://www.constitution.org/col/0610staredrift.htmTHE CASE AGAINST PRECEDENT: STARE DECISIS
(And by implication, the case for strict construction)
Source date (UTC): 2016-04-26 06:20:00 UTC
http://krytyka.com/en/reviews/eurasianism-and-european-far-right-reshaping-europe-russia-relationship#sthash.oMdEAt5S.dpufDOING GOOD. SO BE OPEN ABOUT IT.
—Laruelle volume’s collection fills a whole number of gaps in the mosaic of Russia’s increasing integration into transnational extremely right-wing networks. These well-researched papers provide, with the partial exception of the less detailed chapter on Hungary, by themselves sufficient starting points for more narrow research into this or that episode in neo-Eurasianism’s relationship to the countries covered here.”—
Source date (UTC): 2016-04-26 02:58:00 UTC
https://twitter.com/J_Bloodworth/status/724704869148446720RUSSIA’S PROBLEM: LYING
—“In 1981 Russia was denying it invaded Afghanistan”—
THERE IS NO NEED TO LIE IF YOU HOLD THE MORAL HIGH GROUND.
Source date (UTC): 2016-04-26 02:54:00 UTC
—“The Russian elite has become European at the level of consumption, but in order to preserve their incomes and consequently their power,” Shevtsova says, “they must isolate ordinary Russians from Europe” and from European values. Thus, “the Kremlin will struggle with Western values inside Russia even as it tries to achieve compromises with European business and elites.”—
Source date (UTC): 2016-04-26 02:41:00 UTC
https://www.quora.com/Are-human-rights-superior-than-sovereignty/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=46c45223ARE HUMAN RIGHTS SUPERIOR TO SOVEREIGNTY?
(obviously a non-english speaker in india posted this question)
The question is somewhat interesting since both Human Rights (which are all property rights by the way), and Sovereignty are ambitions one can seek to produce not states of nature that must be abridged. However, the misleading nature of the question aside:
The ‘Postwar Consensus’ and the International Charter of Human Rights, were designed to prevent wars by requiring that all states direct policy and resources to the development of rule of law and modern economy, using largely political and economic pressure. But also military pressure if necessary – almost always provided by the USA, as the successor to, or continuation of, the British Empire.
In this sense, sovereignty was limited by the western world (America-and-Anglo-conquered-Europe) to the expansion of human rights and consumer capitalism (and mistakenly, democracy) in exchange for limited aggression against them.
This consensus held largely until Russia invaded Ukraine, set up rebel governments in the Donbas basin, seized Crimea, threatened Eastern Europe with reconquest in 2014. Since then, the combination of policies designed to weaken American political economic and military power by the Obama Administration, and the need to pivot back against the Russian threat, have exposed the Nato Alliance (the USA) as incapable of protecting member states, and the remaining member states unwilling to defend other member states – and possibly themselves. Furthermore, China’s expansion into sea territories claimed by others, and Russian expansion into disputed the arctic, have further ended the postwar consensus. So the postwar consensus has been de facto ended.
Practically speaking, the only guarantee of sovereignty in the 21st century is provided by nuclear weapons, and a standing military capable of suppressing both domestic populations and at least making invasion extremely difficult or expensive. There is no longer any even tepid guarantee of human rights imposed by a collection of foreign states. And in fact, the only incentive for states to defend human rights is to defend the financing of their militaries, by defending their economies using consumer capitalism, which requires human rights in order to function.
South Korea being the world’s only substantial hold out. The Arab countries quickly switching now to consumer capitalism given the change in future oil revenue predictions. The same problem faces Russian which for all intents and purposes is an enormous gas station, where 50% of revenues depend on natural resources.
Source date (UTC): 2016-04-25 11:39:00 UTC
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/04/24/we-re-teaching-drones-how-to-overthrow-humanity.htmlDO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW GOOD WE ARE AT KILLING AND DESTROYING THINGS? YOU THINK MACHINES HAVE A CHANCE?
Nope. Until they are sentient and self replicating they’re just longer range, smarter, arrows. Kill the archer, and the arrow never flies.
Source date (UTC): 2016-04-25 07:58:00 UTC