Superpower, Economic Scale, Rule of Law, Global Currency, and insurer of sovereignty of nation states worldwide.
Not sure what that last bit is obvious because it’s the costly part….
Source date (UTC): 2024-11-13 03:53:34 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856545916490309849
Reply addressees: @UnchainedCanuck @Kojak_Strangler @RichardDawkins
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856538199780413551
Would you rather we took the opportunity postwar to conquer and rule the whole world – because it was easily within our power?
We learned from colonialism that we cannot save you – we can only create an environment where you can save yourselves.
Had the middle east not held such reserves it would still be a backwater like much of africa. But as such we needed to defend those reserves for the purpose of completing our project of dragging humanity into modernity and prosperity. We did.
But we can’t civilize the uncivilized. We can only create the environment where they can civilize themselves.
The only places we have been successful at ‘civilization’ has been by total replacement. That includes the total replacement of native europeans by the steppe herders europeans creating what is today european peoples.
Reply addressees: @Chuckytuh @RichardDawkins
Source date (UTC): 2024-11-13 03:40:38 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856542662121394176
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856541885181112418
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
We succeeded in most of the world, in modernizing most of the world and dragging it out of poverty. The fact that russia is recidivist, that china even more so, that the muslim world needs another two to three generations without the oppression of iranian imperialism is simply a recognition that we no longer possess the population, economic and scientific advantage we did when the world committed suicide in the world wars.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1856541885181112418
No, I’m just more experience with the world at the scales Trump operates and understand his strategy and tactics, because, while he’s far beyond my abilities I have and do practice the same strategies? Why? When negotiating you are not always negotiating with moral people and strategically giving away your intentions is detrimental to achieving your ends through that negotiation.
The left manipulates and lies to you with false promise of a good that will ome from depriving you of responsibility and accountability. Trump, is far more a product of aristocratic tradition, which is to presume you are immoral, and pursue moral ends by creating an environment for negotiation that deprives you of your capacity for immoral actions.
Reply addressees: @TheWatc53981021 @gspeth @RichardDawkins
Source date (UTC): 2024-11-13 03:03:34 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856533334161276928
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856519619877691609
What war did we start rather than seek to settle? How do americans live off anyone else? Explain it. We have, since the end of the second world war, sought to stop the spread of the plague of communism, stop the spread of its reformation in it’s adoption by islamic fundamentalism, continued the program of ending empires of conquest by fostering responsible cooperation between nation states, and done so by baiting people into international market cooperation and free trade that has lifted the world out of poverty. And we have done it at the expense of the american worker. When we try to withdraw from policing world human rights, borders, finance, and free trade, everyone other than the remaining empires begs us not to. No one wants the american order to end. They want us to end ‘woke’, riding on it, and they want us to soften our use of the economic power of the dollar and sanctions to let them ally with the remaining empires when it suits them. Look at europe terrified that they have to carry their own weight. Look at all the countries that talk trash in public but in private say that they will have an economic and political catastrophe without american defense of finance transport trade and international law.
The reason americans want to stop is that you’re thankless. No more american lives, no more american jobs, no more american technology gifts, no more spent on those who are thankless for our burden.
So Trump is stopping it. And the truth is, whether you know it or not, the USA will profit the more chaos that results. The more wars that result. The less trade that results. The more military buildup that results. The better off the USA. Because we are energy and trade autarkic, live on a vast island defended by seas, and have a government for whatever faults it has, that defends property so that private sectors can organize witout fear of governmetn intrusion.
Reply addressees: @NarataStudio @RichardDawkins
Source date (UTC): 2024-11-13 02:51:42 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856530347355451392
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856523956800352607
(I don’t like a lot of people in politics, but I don’t vote on whether I like them but their competency and policies.)
Source date (UTC): 2024-11-13 01:11:26 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856505114976281004
Reply addressees: @crazzyleggs11 @gspeth @RichardDawkins
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856504917055135973
–“You can save your condescension”–
Noblesse oblige. Some of us must take responsibility for the commons, even the informational commons, else participatory government must be reduced once again to those who can demonstrate competency and responsibility without others policing…
Source date (UTC): 2024-11-13 01:10:43 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856504935317487894
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856501754537627950
THE 2020 ELECTION CONTROVERSY VS “THE NARRATIVE”
At the time, because the court would not intervene, Trump and a very large (and still reluctant) percentage of voters believed that the election had been stolen because of the late night data shift in votes in key districts. Upon full investigation it was an effect of ballot harvesting overwhelming the staffs and their ability to input data. So it was rationally suspicious. And it led a significant population to show up on January 6th. Had the court simply ordered an audit everyone would have been happy. We did the audit. It turned out reasonably legit (if you assume ballot harvesting is legitimate) and the case was made.
In other words, Trump voters, and Trump were of the belief that the election had been stolen and that the court needed to stall and force an investigation. This was not an irrational belief given the evidence at the time in particular the involvement of Dominion Voting and their machines. And the political regions in which the behavior was observed. My opinion was that it was statistically impossible for those votes to have changed that late at night. However, it was possible because of the vote harvesting and the boxes of harvested votes that were used for the first time. It was the most suspicious way of doing such things, and conservatives were against vote harvesting specifically because they were aware of the possibility of this tactic being used to skew the results.
To say the case for the legitimacy of the 2020 election was made sufficiently in advance to achieve the legal term ‘settlement’ (public perception of legitimacy) then you are simply in error as demonstrated by the vast evidence of conservative voter behavior in at the time. It’s not an opinion that people weren’t convinced. It’s just your bias and conviction despite the evidence.
The court was afraid to intervene because the court believes the entire government other than the court, and increasingly the military, has lost sufficient legitimacy that they must preserve what they have, while at the same time reversing mid to late 20th lawfare and activism that abused the court, because we have been far too close to our cold civil war turning hot.
Unfortunately, they probably should have taken the risk. But, as expected, the public reaction to those events combined with the past four years caused the radical change in our electors and their strategy, fully reforming the republican party as an evolution of the Tea Party under Trump, as a populist middle and working class majority, that broke the race-marxist strategy of causing racial division.
Cheers
Curt Doolittle
The Natural Law Institute
Reply addressees: @RaveCozensHardy
Source date (UTC): 2024-11-13 01:07:13 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856504054874288131
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856500492311871541
It was a deterrent. It was meant to stop them from coming. It was a good idea. But as you suggest the deterrence was insufficient and so the consequences of separation outmoded the strategy.
Source date (UTC): 2024-11-13 00:50:38 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856499881973821619
Reply addressees: @annaclarity1 @RichardDawkins
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856497679523844252
WHY THEY STILL SEPARATE CHILDREN AND WHY THERE ARE CAGES
REASONING
The policy of separating children from their parents at the U.S. border was part of the Trump administration’s “zero tolerance” approach to immigration enforcement, which began in 2018.
Here are the main reasons cited for this policy:
Deterrence: The policy was initially framed as a deterrent to illegal immigration. The idea was that if the consequence of illegal entry included family separation, fewer families would attempt to cross the border illegally.
Prosecution of Parents: Under the zero-tolerance policy, all adults crossing the border illegally were to be criminally prosecuted. Since children cannot be held in criminal facilities, they were separated from their parents for this reason.
Verification of Relationships: There was indeed an aspect where officials needed to verify the familial relationship between adults and children due to concerns over human trafficking, smuggling, and the use of children by unrelated adults to gain entry or better treatment in the immigration process. This verification process sometimes led to separations when the relationship couldn’t be immediately confirmed.
Logistical and Legal Challenges: The separation also occurred because of logistical issues, such as insufficient family detention facilities, and due to legal interpretations of how to handle minors under laws like the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008, which mandates special handling for unaccompanied minors.
However, the implementation of this policy led to widespread criticism for causing significant trauma to children, for lacking adequate procedures to track and reunite families, and for not having a comprehensive plan for reunification post-separation. The policy was reversed in June 2018 via an executive order, but the reunification process has been complex and ongoing, with some children still not reunited with their parents years later due to various reasons including parents being deported without their children.
The policy of family separation as a deterrent for illegal immigration was officially ended by an executive order in June 2018. However, here are some key points regarding its current status:
Legal Prohibition: A federal judge has prohibited the separation of migrant families at the U.S. border for eight years as part of a settlement, aimed to prevent the reimplementation of family separations for deterrence purposes. This prohibition was set to last until December 2031.
Limited Circumstances: Separations can still occur, but under very limited circumstances. These include situations where there’s suspicion of child abuse, if the parent is convicted of serious crimes, or if there are doubts about the familial relationship between the adult and child.
Ongoing Separations: Despite the formal end of the policy, there have been reports and instances where family separations have continued to occur, sometimes due to misinterpretations of the policy, new policies like Title 42 which led to children being sent back alone if their families were expelled, or when children are deemed unaccompanied due to various reasons like the lack of immediate proof of kinship.
Reunification Efforts: The Biden administration has been working on reuniting families who were separated under the Trump policy, with some success, but there are still children who remain separated from their parents, many of whom were deported without their children.
Public and Legal Scrutiny: The practice and its aftereffects continue to be a point of contention, legal battles, and public discourse, focusing on human rights, immigration policy, and the welfare of migrant children.
While the policy as it was under the Trump administration has been legally curtailed, the broader issues of family unity, verification of relationships at the border, and how children are handled in immigration processes remain complex and subject to ongoing policy adjustments and legal oversight.
Reply addressees: @annaclarity1 @RichardDawkins
Source date (UTC): 2024-11-13 00:48:36 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856499368003809280
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856497679523844252
I haven’t really internalized what it means for freedom of speech to be restored on social media. My work is much more ‘dry’ than it was before the ‘silencing of voices’ in 2021.
Source date (UTC): 2024-11-13 00:22:07 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856492703460278587