ToZanarkand
Some day the dream will end
No bio...
User ID: 2935
I cannot imagine getting so asschapped that I need to signal just how upset some guy on the internet made me
How is blocking someone a signal that someone on the internet upset you? Is there even a way to tell who's been blocked by someone?
ETA: Apparently there is. Huh.
ToZanarkand
Some day the dream will end
3mo ago
It seems unlikely to me that Russia would honor any such obligation, if the recent situation with Armenia is at all representative of how Putin treats such partnerships.
ToZanarkand
Some day the dream will end
3mo ago
Rationalists from a core base of White and Asian men who have been systemically excluded from the traditional pathways to the elite (Ivy League) due to affirmative action.
They're also privileged (i.e. have above-average incomes).
ToZanarkand
Some day the dream will end
3mo ago
and whether the US will be less committed to defending the current Saudi regime.
Presumably they would? My loose understanding is that the Saudis would likely start developing their own nuclear deterrent without the US defending them, and the US is pretty keen on avoiding nuclear proliferation.
ToZanarkand
Some day the dream will end
3mo ago
It's hard to imagine such an effect, if it exists, could be observed between any but significantly phonologically distinct languages. It sounds like a stretch to imagine it could play a role in why some British-English speakers might look different from American-English speakers.
ToZanarkand
Some day the dream will end
3mo ago
Not surprising, given they're a Germanic people.
Do they actually have any kind of choice? I don't believe that Israel would be terribly accepting of an official Hamas Military outpost showing up anywhere in Gaza.
Yes, they obviously have a choice. They've got an extremely extensive underground network, there's very little reason they couldn't have most of their military hardware there. While they're at it, they could open up their tunnels for civilians to shelter in rather than say it's not their responsibility to look after them.
It's not like the possibilities end there. They could choose to keep kids away from "schools" jam-packed with weapons and firing facilities. The hit to the kids' education is probably compensated for by their subsequently increased life-expectancy. They could store military hardware in apartment blocks that actual civilians are forbidden from living in. And so on.
Anecdotally, I've never heard anything like this from my older relatives,
Seconded. Of the people over 60 whose personal lives I know anything about (e.g. my parents, their friends, my friends' parents) the majority seem to be in happy relationships.
At the same time, internet comment sections have been around for a while, and if more old people than before are complaining about their love lives then that probably signifies at least something has changed. Maybe relationships between older people are actually getting worse, or old women feel more empowered to complain about men, or something else.
Vote third party? Don't vote? It's a well known problem with FPTP that you don't have a lot of recourse if you don't like one of the two options on offer.
I'm not sure it hasn't been weaponized - I'm pretty sure the right points out Biden's age quite frequently.
ToZanarkand
Some day the dream will end
3mo ago
The usual consensus is that VP picks don't meaningfully alter the likelihood of a given candidate winning the US general election. There are some widely recognised exceptions, like Sarah Palin hurting John McCain's chances in 2008 (although he was facing an uphill battle anyway), and Biden picking Kamala Harris in 2020 to appeal to black voters. But the accepted wisdom is that they don't matter.
With both candidates being so old this time around, are people likelier this time to take therunning mates into account when voting in November? Do there exist a non-negligible number of voters who would vote for Donald Trump to avoid Kamala Harris? Or e.g. people who might be inclined to vote for Trump but dislike his VP pick so much they don't want to risk being saddled with them after a year or two?
ToZanarkand
Some day the dream will end
3mo ago
The rise did indeed took place, though in a milder form than expected, with nationalists making big gains in countries like France and Germany but getting beaten back in the Nordic countries.
Regarding the mediocre performance of the SwedenDemocrats (Sweden's far-right party) in particular, my guess is that a lot of people who vote for them domestically aren't particularly Eurosceptic, but sick of MENA immigration and perceived softness on crime. There's probably therefore less motivation for to vote in an election that they're likely to feel has less direct influence on these issues.
ToZanarkand
Some day the dream will end
3mo ago
Yes, it does not explain why Jews may choose to get into politics,
Do Jews go disproportionately into politics? They're not exactly under-represented in scientific fields, or finance (hence all the stereotypes), law, medicine etc.
ToZanarkand
Some day the dream will end
3mo ago
Sounds like a good way to generate energy?
LOL what makes you say that?
ToZanarkand
Some day the dream will end
3mo ago
I don't think future attempts at Oct 7th style attacks by themselves will test the viability of Israel as a state. My point was that the lesson that nations like Iran will (correctly IMO) draw from this is that such an attack gets Israel diplomatically isolated and threatened with sanctions for trying to respond, while its supposed main ally actively sabotages its attempts to achieve its war aims (see Biden delaying the initial Gaza invasion, and then the whole circus about refusing to allow a Rafah invasion for months) and even gives permission for further attacks against Israel. I don't think a war with Hezbollah tomorrow will lead to Israel getting destroyed, but Iran can keep refunding and re-arming them, Israel will find it increasingly hard to recover from war losses over the coming decades as the west and the US continues to abandon them under Democrat administrations while further embracing Iran.
ToZanarkand
Some day the dream will end
3mo ago
revealed preference by all the major nuclear powers is a preference to endure non-existential attacks and even lose wars rather than use them, even when the threat of counter-use isn't present.
The reason I gave Israel as the likeliest to launch a nuclear weapon is that for them any given war is far likelier to be existential, and there aren't many ways they can lose militarily that don't involve them getting destroyed as a nation. This isn't a suggestion that they would directly attack Iran, more that they would do something like launch a tactical strike in Lebanon as a show of force and to take out a large part of Hezbollah's capabilities.
ToZanarkand
Some day the dream will end
3mo ago
Almost certainly. And that it's in the poorer, ex-communist eastern half of the country.
ToZanarkand
Some day the dream will end
3mo ago
I assume you meant to reply directly to @hydroacetylene with this comment?
What are people's guesses for when the first nuclear weapon (since WWII) will be fired?
Could it happen before 2030? Before 2040? In our lifetimes? And between which actors, and in what context? And how would the likelihood of this change depending on political changes like upcoming elections (both in the US and elsewhere?) This isn't necessarily referring to a MAD scenario or global nuclear war, simply any non-test use of such weapons by a state or group for military purposes.
I'm far from an expert on geopolitics but my sense is that these are the regions where this is likeliest to happen:
1/ The Middle East
Since the start of the Israel/Gaza war, US and global efforts have been overwhelmingly focused on convincing Israel to abandon military action. Whether or not you agree with that, it's hard to imagine that Hamas/Hezbollah/The Houthis/Iran will look at this and feel anything but emboldened to continue attacking Israel in the near future (as is already happening with Hezbollah in the north). An extreme hypothetical scenario is one where Iran and its proxies continue making war on Israel while Western nations distance themselves more and more, refusing diplomatic support and eventually imposing economic sanctions including prohibitions on the sale of weapons. Backed into a corner and beginning to face existential threats, Israel launches one or more tactical nuclear strikes to change the situation on the battlefield.
With the Democrats increasingly hostile to Israel and in favour of conciliatory action towards Iran, and Donald Trump's likely intention to maintain his prior administration's forceful foreign policy in the region, I think this is the one situation where the choice of next US president will have the largest impact on whether we see nuclear weapons get used. I'm going to make the prediction that there's a 50% chance Israel launches a nuke in some capacity by 2030 if Biden is elected later this year Since posting, people have pointed out that tactical nukes aren't especially useful for, so instead I'll predict there's a 50% chance they launch a nuke by 2040.
2/ Ukraine
This is another obvious candidate for where we might see nukes used. This is something that has been talked about since 2022 although obviously nothing like this has come to pass. With greater resources and numbers of soldiers, it's hard to imagine Putin feeling the need to escalate the situation in such a manner, unless the West starts deploying their troops such that the course of the war radically changes.
This is another situation where the choice of next US president will play a crucial role, although it's less obvious IMO what effect this choice will have. Biden has been rhetorically and financially supportive of Ukraine, but has been cautious of engaging the US more deeply in the war, only recently permitting Ukraine to strike inside Russia using US weapons. Trump's friendly attitude towards Putin is well known, as is his skepticism towards foreign intervention, but he's also unpredictable and belligerent. I've seen the point made here that he may take the idea of the US "losing" in Ukraine as an affront to his pride and consequently decide to escalate.
3/ China and Taiwan
This feels less likely than the previous two examples, mostly because there's no active conflict in the region yet so there are still several further stages of escalation that would need to be crossed before nuclear weapons become worth considering for anyone involved. The US also seems to be taking steps to reduce their dependence on Taiwan. On the other hand, the US is interested in countering Chinese influence for reasons that go beyond the situation with Taiwain, and if China starts making SK and Japan worried enough to think about establishing their own nuclear programs, the US might start to find its credibility in the region tested.
4/ Pakistan and India
I unfortunately know almost nothing about the situation here, besides the fact that these are two nuclear armed neighboring states with a pretty unfriendly history, which felt like a good enough reason to add them to this discussion.
ToZanarkand
Some day the dream will end
4mo ago
Berlin is relatively poor after all - something I think surprised a lot of people who assume by default that it's the national center of wealth generation akin to London, Paris, Madrid etc.
ToZanarkand
Some day the dream will end
4mo ago
Dirty, full of CCTV, brown people.
Dirty? Compared to what? Of the comparably sized cities I've been to (NY, Paris, Berlin), I'd say London generally holds up pretty well on this front. There are horrendous areas, granted, but that's the same everywhere.
ToZanarkand
Some day the dream will end
4mo ago
his instincts are deeply "woke", for lack of a better term.
ToZanarkand
Some day the dream will end
4mo ago
Housing regulations at least are probably likelier to loosen up under labour (though not necessarily likely in absolute terms) as their base consists less of older homeowners who are against new building for house price/aesthetic purposes.
Once the world's richest nation now looks set to be overtaken by Poland within the decade, at least on a per capita basis.
I enjoyed your analysis, and this is a minor nitpick, but isn't this figure based on PPP (which will probably become less favorable to Poland as it becomes wealthier in absolute terms)?
Even when it comes to this lots of people don't care that much. What shifts a lot of people from "whatever" to "fuck off" is being told they're awful and/or stupid for not agreeing with trans people's conception of "gender", the accompanying entitlement to women's-only spaces, their kids being encouraged to change their identities etc.
More options
Context Copy link