#that is the opposite of democractic

[legalandnotease]

Well, this aged well. Especialy the "Tony would not put his needs and the needs of one person before the world" part because Tony did that twice.

When he wasn't prepared to reverse the Snap was was prepared to allow billions to stay dead for the sake of 2 people.

...and then again when he demanded Bruce "didn't change everything" because he wanted to keep his personal paradise. WHich resulted in Bruce snapping everyone back to a broken, post-Apocalyptic world and created more social and economic problems which Tony, naturally did not have to deal with.

In fact, its IRONIC indeed because Civil War only happened due to Tony's murderbot. You don't get to sit in judgement when you are the reason that the world was imperilled in the first place. In fact every one of Tony's movies is him fixing his own fuckups whereas Cap and Natasha's are them *actually saving the world*.

Also the "Tony woud not hurt others to save his friend." is RICH because Tony killed a of ton people and broke a fuckton of laws to save Pepper in Iron Man III. Tony would burn down the world for the sake of one of the 5 people he thinks of as "his", he proved that in Endgame and in IM3.

He proved it over and over again when he took millions of lives and destroyed millions more with his saviour complex becaus he could not stop building WMDs. Just like the one he created when he lied to his entire Team in Age of Ultron. (of course Tony is allowed to do that...) and laughed in their faces when his murderbot awoke.

Then he screwed over half the universe anyway with his own idoicy because he thought he could solo Thnaos- resulting in Strange having to give up the TIme Stone to save his sorry ass.

In fact screw, it, name one single beneficial thing Tony Stark did for the human race except dying (and even that he had to be forced into...). This is after all your great and democratic hero. Shouldn't be hard. Apart from blowing small Eastern European countries to hell, enabling authoritarians you must be able to find somethng of benefit to the human race Tony did?

Also, you can shot off with that "left Tony do die" in Civil War. That woobifying Tony bullshit is easily disproven. Tony wasn't even injured, He got straight back up.

He got his shrapnel removed in IM3 so he reactor served no medical purpose.

None of htem showed any signs of being impacted by the cold in Siberia, which means Tony was not. He had a means of communication and he easily got him safe. Steve just deactivated his weapon because of Tony's homicidal temper tantrum.

Finally that "feeding and clothing"- part is BULLSHIT, there is no evidence Tony paid for all the Avengers operations. SHIELD did until 2014. Its established in his own movie Tony didn't even know SHIELD existed before 2010, and even then they recruited him as a Consultant. Which meant he was not paying for them.

All of them had their own sources of income, but OK you wanna play that game?

Howard Stark who Tony hismelf called "quasi-fascistic" hired a tonne of Nazi scientists after WW2. One of those was Zola, who he became so close to he gave him a friendly nickname. Howard knew Zola was a Nazi, just FTR.

Zola it is well known, worked for Howard when he started the Winter Soldier Project: which means- correct- Zola used Howard's money to torture Bucky and hold him captive.

That means any of Tony's money Steve used to help him was due compensation, as Tony was the legal heir of the little Nazi lover Howard Stark.

Thoughts

Remember that scene from Civil War where Steve just drops the shield and leaves with Bucky? I think it was the most important thing ever. The way Tony was talking basically meant “become Captain America again, then you’ll deserve your shield.”

Steve stops, sighs, and drops the shield because the world can go fuck itself- Bucky will always be more important to him. He was willing to drop his job and his title for a person, and I don’t believe that Tony could ever understand that.

What do you think?

[hellyeahheroes]

2024 - Thoughts and Speculation by Renegade Cut

[terrence-silver]

How would Terry react if beloved wanted to have an abortion because she wasn't ready for a baby?

---

Oh, this man could be entirely pro-choice until it's his kid.

Privately, behind closed doors or in specially chosen, likeminded company, I see Terry Silver as a man who enjoys crude, juvenile locker-room humor. Humor concerning making lovers sign NDA's. Paying them to 'scrape it out' at a private gynecologists at private clinics, of course, at his beck, call and under his strict oversight, without such incidents needing to ever even take place because he's too careful to slip up, but hey --- he can joke about it. Contractually obligating them to take contraceptives he chose for them, for as long as he wants them to because 'Mr. Silver is very particular and doesn't enjoy unpredictable outcomes beyond his control'. He's very much cold as an iceberg, business-like and practical like that when he wants to be. Did I said he's pro-choice up there? Yeah. More like, the choices are whatever he says they are, especially if he isn't invested emotionally and sees someone as a temporary arrangement.

He's too smart to compromise himself.

Once the 80's and the 90's come to an end, and dark comedy of this variety doesn't fly as much as it used to decades prior --- and knowing that and strategically adapting to it like a chameleon, he might just pose himself into the other extreme of the political spectrum and present himself as a New Age Californian upper crust Liberal type that supports someone's and everyone's right to choose loud and proud when the situation calls for it because he's just that equitable and perfectly Democractic. Ain't he wonderful? The scheduled Vegan brunch at nine o'clock is there, clapping, collectively impressed and in awe of him while he pretends to be humble faced with their attentions. Don't you know Mr. Silver is an egalitarian saint who donated high-end medical equipment to several Planned Parenthoods across the State, renovating just as many urban hospitals this month alone?'

And then it's beloved who wants to visit one of said facilities --- oh, the irony.

Suddenly, the man who was making abortion and Vietnam baby killing jokes decades ago and snickering like a meanspirited little kid and then doing a 180 degree shift and possibly hypocritically advocating for human rights the very next decade to acquire the status of a social champion both disappear so something else can take their place; a man who absolutely won't compromise and does the exact opposite of everything he's been broadcasting all his life; he wants to keep the baby. Will keep the baby. Is baffled, angry, distraught and perturbed beloved ever considered not having it. And there's just about nothing anyone can do to dissuade him from ensuring his legacy comes into the World by any means necessary. He advocated choices. He joked around too. It was funny then --- now ow it ain't funny anymore. He stopped laughing. Oh, did he ever. All the choices but one dried over too.

[if-you-fan-a-fire]

"The SDPC [Social Democractic Party of Canada] at the Lakehead appears not to have been content merely to contest elections. In 1912, having recently formed a union, the mostly immigrant workers of the Canadian Northern Coal and Ore Dock Company went on strike for better wages, hours, and working conditions. Bloodshed resulted when company officials, using local police and the militia, tried to suppress the striking coal handlers. The chief of police, two constables, and two Italian strikers were wounded. Fearing a general strike, the CNR quickly acquiesced to the demands of the coal handlers.

There was much in this incident that recalled earlier labour strife at the Lakehead. A new element, however, was the growing influence of radical socialists, who were thought to have sway over the coal handlers and to have been instrumental in their inclusion in the trade union movement. Prominent among the activists were “members of the Social Democratic Party of Canada,” including the party’s organizers for Port Arthur and Fort William, the Cobalt miners’ union leader James P. McGuire and the Reverend William Madison Hicks, as well as Herbert Barker, a volunteer organizer for the AFL. In April 1912, the three men led a number of English-speaking socialists in Fort William in establishing Ontario Local 51 of the SDPC. Initial members also included W.J. Carter; an architect named Richard Lockhead; Sid Wilson, a member of the British-based Amalgamated Carpenters; and Fred Moore, owner of the printing press that printed Urry’s The Wage Earner. Significantly, most of the members appear to have been Finnish or Ukrainian. Before the strike, members of the Fort William SDPC had spoken at meetings of the coal handlers and, in the case of Hicks, played an active role by leading a parade of workers in confronting Port Arthur mayor S.W. Ray on his way to read the Riot Act to the strikers. The meeting between the two men and the violence that ensued were coincidental, according to Morrison, as

the Social Democratic party posed no real or imagined menace to the citizens of Port Arthur … what alarmed the English-speaking community was the newly won influence of the socialists with the immigrant workers.

Supporters of the ILP [Independent Labour Party] of New Ontario such as Urry found themselves “at odds with radical socialism” as

not only had the socialists played a prominent part in the strike, though not the riot, but they were also attempting to organize Thunder Bay’s entire waterfront.

...

Calls for Hicks’s arrest began to appear in newspapers in both cities and the surrounding countryside. On 1 August 1912, officials arrested him for his role in a “tumultuous assembly … likely to promote a breach of the public peace.” Shortly after Hicks’s arrest and conviction (although he received a suspended sentence), SDPC organizers began an active campaign to take control, or at the very least undermine, the ILP-led Trades and Labour Councils. Following the strike, they sought to stage a general strike on the waterfront and, ideally, spread it throughout both Port Arthur and Fort William. As Jean Morrison writes, however, this was “a move disparaged by the British labour men for its disregard of the law which required negotiations and conciliation preceding strikes by transportation workers.” The attempt failed and widened the rift formed during the municipal, provincial, and federal elections of 1908 and 1911 and the labour unrest earlier in 1912.

...

The SDPC was also not left untouched. In preparation for the 1913 Fort William civic election, Urry and Hicks jointly developed in opposition to the SDPC a manifesto describing the class struggle in general and the issues facing the region’s workers in particular .... On the recommendation of the Elk Lake, Porcupine, and Cobalt locals that Hicks be expelled, the matter was referred to the Fort William membership. Despite facing the possibility that its charter would be revoked, Local 51 refused to expel Hicks and launched a vigorous defence on his behalf. The convincing agitator had a coterie of true believers, who “defended him to the last ditch refusing to believe that Hicks would do anything wrong.” He also had his critics, evidently including the 400-strong Fort William branch, which, it appears, sided with the Dominion Executive and expelled Hicks.

...

With Hicks departed one highly personalized version of a response to the ambiguous legacy of Lakehead socialism. Both the ILP and the SDPC grew rapidly during 1913. The labour councils in the twin cities began to discuss unity, in the form of construction of a joint Central Labour Temple. The Finnish branch of the SDPC in Port Arthur also called out for working-class and socialist unity. Moreover, as a more tangible indication of potential unification of the socialist and labour movements, SDPC organizer Herbert Barker was elected president of the Port Arthur Trades and Labour Council in April 1913. As so often proved to be the case, however, such incipient unity was challenged by the region’s sheer class volatility. The strike by street railway workers in May 1913 was a volcanic moment. As David Bercuson writes:

The walk-out provided a focal point for much of the hatred and bitterness that had developed between labour and its enemies in the twin cities for several years.

Rioting and violence were sparked by the CPR’s attempts to use strikebreakers. When strikers overturned a streetcar operated by strikebreakers, police arrested one of the participants and, when a crowd tried to get him out of jail, fired into the crowd, killing a bystander. Local newspapers tried to pin the violence on the socialists, who were allegedly responsible for agitating the crowd. The railway workers belonged to the Trades and Labour Councils in both cities and, in a show of solidarity, both councils called for a general sympathy strike. These calls went unheeded and most workers returned to work after four days of protest. In response, Urry, James Booker, McGuire, Bryan, and many members of the SDPC met at the Finnish Labour Temple. They criticized the local trades and labour councils “for not being radical enough to resist the ruling of an unscrupulous upper class.” They hoped the councils would become “more radical.” Not surprisingly, the obviously inflamed right-wing media in the twin cities characterized the meeting as one of “sedition, anarchy, socialism, violence and most everything else calculated to worry orderly society and responsible government.” It was not a critique of the Lakehead workers reserved for the mainstream press. Mayor John Oliver of Port Arthur summed up the situation well when he argued that the continued unrest in Port Arthur and Fort William was not wholly due to working conditions. Making specific mention of the strikes of 1909, 1912, and 1913, he suggested that the unrest had been the result of socialist agitators. Oliver wrote:

There is hardly a night in the week that inflammatory speeches have not been made by several agitators … something will have to be done to either remove them or check their actions.

Interestingly, Frederick Urry and J.P. McGuire were specifically named for their alleged advocacy of a general strike. McGuire was further singled out for his reputed suggestion that it would be an easy thing to cut telephone, telegraph, and electric lines."

- Michel S. Beaulieu, Labour at the Lakehead: Ethnicity, Socialism, and Politics, 1900-35. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 2011. p. 37-38, 40-42

[magpiejay1234]

For the two remaining strongment in the Arab-majority countries, Tunsia, and Egypt, Kais Saied's term is nominally ending in 2029, though he might change the constitution again to rule indefinitely. He will be 71 by then.

For el-Sisi, his term ends in 2030, at least in theory, though el-Sisi might pull a Putin, and can claim that 2019 referendum reset his term, meaning he could remain in power until 2036 (around the time of Putin's term's end), assuming no further constitutional changes, which will almost certainly happen, given Egyptian constitutional history.

el-Sisi's survival largely depends on UAE, than Saudi Arabia, or European countries (including Russia). If UAE's allies continue to lose, Saudis will vastly prefer a more Islamist aligned figure, that also dislikes the Muslim Brotherhood. If Saudis also lose, then there is no hope for Egyptian military rule left.

Qatar will likely continue to lobby for the Muslim Brotherhood with Democrats, but since el-Sisi heavily liberalised the economy, this will be largely under the pretense of defeating Russian influence in Egypt (and to a lesser extent China, but China will be much weaker by then).

In both cases, secularist opposition, and Islamists have no future plans, and secularist opposition discredited itself with siding with anti-democractic actors.

*****

Though the Wikipedia article does not list Saudis as supporting RSF, apparently their Instagram account is Saudi registered. This will likely enflame Democratic Party-Saudi tensions, and may push more Bush-era Republicans to the Democratic Party, considering their historical support for Darfur.

[snoweylily]

authoritarian tendencies

wields power through manipulation

disregards established norms

has a penchant for control

prefers "loyalty" over competence

employs sycophants to maintain authority

disregards dissenting voices

uses intimidation tactics to silence opposition

gives off a facade of benevolence while harbouring ulterior motives

uses rhetoric that appeals to emotions

punishes the marginalized

uses fearmongering to sway public opinion

epitomizes the dangers of unchecked authority and the erosion of democractic values

who am i talking about?

[thetruearchmagos]

Hey! Happy Worldbuilding Wednesday! 🌻

For a wip of your choice: If it is set in a fictional world, how would you describe the society there? If it is set on earth: What are things you love to describe? Tell me why, if there is a reason.

Hiii, thank you so much!

Well, honestly, in a setting like the 12 Worlds it'd be impossible not to have so many different and unqiue societies that I can't speak for all of them at once, so as usual, I'll go with the United Commonwealth.

In the broad sense, the UC populace, those masses who've spent generations ingrained with the UC's systems, institutions, and norms, are exceptionally idealistic. The principles of liberty and democracy aren't just slogans, for many they hold a place nearing a religious tenet in importance.

Public society is, with little exception, highly politically engaged and aggressively progressive. Voter turn out is never below 90% in a collective of states almost 3 million strong. Public policy is freely, constantly, and deeply debated at all levels, and the principle of absolute democractic public accountability and a hate of corruption in state affairs, a conviction arguably first promoted by the principles of the UC institutions itself, now runs deep within the public norms. Civil liberties and rights are a fiercely protected notion, and the great crimes of slavery and such genocidal horros elicit feelings of deep and utter fury, in a society that has harboured a violent and unyielding opposition to such acts for a hundred years, doubly so when a good fifth of its people have had recent, almost still living memory of subjugation under such structures. Concepts like women or various minority groups in the military or political office are deemed so basic and obvious that even questioning is seen as a strange joke, for are we not a polity formed under beliefs higher than race or faith, and are we not well past outdated such outdated institutions.

The aggressive conviction in the democratic institutions and systems that provide shape and direction within UC public life translates into a zeal to protecting the integrity of those long lasting institutions, from internal corruption and external invasion, and a deep belief in the act of spreading and sharing those systems far and wide. The former sees its place in the aggressive prosecution of corruption of any kind in civil and public service, as well as a patriotism of a sort disconnected from their own nations but rather towards the UC and its democratic allies on the greater whole, which has seen the UC fight and win its way through many a war and crisis. The latter takes form through the eternal support for the expansion of the Commonwealth ideal into foreign lands, be they well developed and close allies hardly different from them, or states whose political institutions are undeveloped or outright tyrannical, leading to support for actions to change such a state of affairs across borders. In addition, a complete and blanket support for immigration into UC society is another major aspect of the public conscious, for who could deny that it is a sign of societal glory to have others flock to it. The institutions of immigration follow suit, to the point where it is simply a matter of stepping foot on UC soil or approaching an Embassy, and requesting citizenship, in order to receive one, often a process concluded within 2 to 3 days of the request.

This is often eased by the laissez-faire and appreciative approach to diversity within UC society. Hundreds of languages are spoken, though English is the chief intermediary, and faiths number hardly less. Cultures are a messy, uncoordinated blend of the ethnicities and peoples within them, a single creed never more than 2 thirds in the majority. Cultural intermixing, of product and people, is a natural and loved process, appreciated as a simple fact of life. In the streets of any city worth a damn, you will find the cuisine and life of every last one of the diverse peoples, if only you look for it. The goods of culture are enjoyed freely and with no care at all for ones own personal identity, for nothing is as uniting as the common experiences here. Again, this appreciation for diversity and difference is a driving force of greater things, in this case the belief that the only thing that seperates those within the UC and those without is a line on the map and some paperwork, both of which can and will be changed. When your state is in fact a patchwork of several dozen, it hardly hurts to add a few more to the mix, and only helps

I hope this little look into the society and beliefs of the UC was enough for you, let me know if you want anything more substantial!

[southeastasianists]

Since the middle of last month, Southeast Asian countries have been experiencing an exponential rise in Covid-19 related infections and deaths. To flatten the coronavirus curve, governments have introduced a range of restrictions on travel including closing borders, banned or limited numbers in public and private gatherings, introduced social distancing, prevented people movement and introduced lockdowns, preventing resident population mobility and assembly.

Although this has the support of the general public, the worry is some governments in Southeast Asia are simultaneously taking political advantage of the situation. Measures are being imposed at politically sensitive times that impact the timing of elections and post-elections transitions giving authoritarian regimes the opportunity to extend their reign or make a comeback.

On Thursday, Thailand declared a state of emergency to address the health crisis. However, the ban on public gatherings is a convenient measure that stifles the opposition and their reform agenda for a country. Massive protests across university campuses which erupted after the new Future Forward Party was disbanded in January 2020 were the outcome of serious rumblings of discontentment among the youth. Now, the bans on large gatherings will effectively quash this momentum. Free expression by media outlets can be curtailed under this state of emergency should the government decide to censor criticism.

Similarly, in the Philippines, on March 24, President Rodrigo Duterte was granted emergency powers to combat Covid-19. This has become for concern given his propensity for authoritarianism. Congress has wisely extracted provisions from the draft bill that would allow for excessive use of such powers, which critics fear. However, Mr Duterte's track record on abusing human rights does not breed confidence.

In Cambodia, Covid-19 has given Prime Minister Hun Sen the opportunity to announce he is exploring using Article 22 of the constitution to put the country in a state of emergency. Meanwhile, ordinary Cambodians and opposition activists have been arrested for sharing their concerns about the virus over social media.

In Malaysia, the elected government of 2018, collapsed in January this year, resulting in the re-emergence of the corruption-plagued old guard anchored by the United Malays National Organisation (Umno) that had run the country for six decades. In the political tussle over whether the "back-door" government has sufficient support in parliament, the usurpers to date have been able to side-step this question by delaying the sitting of parliament and directing attention to containing the coronavirus. Presently, Malaysia's Movement Control Order, which was initially implemented until March 31, was extended to April 14. This affords the Umno-supported old guard crucial time to consolidate power as large political gatherings are forbidden for people-led pressures against this back-door government.

Singapore elections have to be held latest April 21, 2021. Following the release of the Electoral Boundaries Review Committee report on March 13, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong of the People's Action Party the next day said the city-state could either hold elections early or wait for things to stabilise. Since then, opposition parties have been making public statements that it would be irresponsible to hold an election during this period of pandemic. Opposition parties, in particular, are concerned that the ruling party might introduce measures to limit campaign activities and gatherings at rallies thereby impacting their political chances.

Myanmar officially reported its first two Covid-19 cases on March 23. While it is seen as too early to predict a re-timing of the elections scheduled for November this year, the country's immediate concerns centre on returning migrant workers across the border from Thailand and the movement of people internally. This offers the junta a pole position as the force to implement movement orders, offer up its doctors to support medical aid and demonstrate proactive action to cancel large scale military related activities. In this way, the junta can shore up its image and political position in the run up to the polls. This will make it hard for Aung San Suu Kyi's National League for Democracy to attain the 75% sweep of seats in parliament to make constitutional amendments and to do away with the military's 25% of seats in parliament.

In Indonesia, as the number of cases increases daily, critics claim that the government has not been transparent and has been slow in responding. Mishandling of the crisis and incantations of "prayer" as a preventive tool are set to impact the democratic credibility of Jokowi's administration, which narrowly won elections in 2019 against military-friendly forces.

In Vietnam, lockdowns of affected areas around Hanoi have been implemented. As Vietnam chairs Asean this year, the annual civil society gathering scheduled for October, the Asean People's Forum, is likely to be postponed or held in an abridged version.

Laos recorded its first cases in late March and has announced its looking to China for examples for its control measures. Perhaps bringing full circle into the spotlight the increasingly positive view in parts of Southeast Asia of the authoritarian approach of China to the coronavirus outbreak that started in Wuhan.

To ensure that states' uphold the protection of democracy, civil society, the media and the international community must closely monitor the machinations of authoritarian regimes and the sleight of hand to exploit Covid-19 containment measures for political advantage. If this happens, these authoritarian regimes will have a chance to entrench and stretch the duration of their regimes. This will be the democractic fallout of the coronavirus crisis.

[douchebagbrainwaves]

WHY I'M SMARTER THAN DRUGLIKE

Foreword to Jessica Livingston's Founders at Work. You may not have to go back seven paragraphs and start over in another direction. When friends came back from faraway places, it wasn't just out of politeness that I asked what they saw. Imagine what Apple was like when 100% of its employees were either Steve Jobs or Steve Wozniak. Hacker culture often seems kind of irresponsible.1 I can't tell, even now. Certainly schools should teach students how to write. One group got an exploding term-sheet from some VCs. What kept him going? And I can see why political incorrectness would be a momentous change—big enough, probably, to justify a name like the new model spread rapidly. The reason to launch early, to understand your users.

Though the immediate cause of death in a startup, it pays to offer customer service on a level that wouldn't scale, because it's easier than satisfying them. Sun's future. Sun's business model is a down elevator. There are two bad smelling words, color spammers love colored fonts and California which occurs in testimonials and also in menus in forms, but they are not enough to stop the mail from being spam. Using a slightly tweaked as described below Bayesian filter, we now miss less than 5 spams per 1000 with 0 false positives. It's very easy for people to switch to a new search engine. I just wanted to keep people from getting spammed. Of all the great programmers I can think of who don't work for Sun, on Java, I know of only one who would voluntarily program in Java. That, it turned out. Sun servers for industrial strength applications. It was a way of hacking the investment process.

Could there be a connection?2 Make something great and put it online. A lot went wrong, as usually happens with startups. Among other things, this would be one of them, because with our help they could make money. Maybe the people in charge of the taxi line. But those are also commodities, which can be handed off to some lieutenant. The winners slow down the least. There were a lot of small, inexpensive computers before the Mac. That makes sense, because there are a lot of nasty little ones. In the old economy, the high cost of presenting information to people meant they had only a narrow range of options to choose from. As Fred Brooks pointed out, small groups are intrinsically more productive, because the internal friction in a group grows as the square of the environment. At one point in this essay I found that after following a certain thread I ran out of ideas.

This is another lesson the world has yet to learn.3 It's like telling the truth. G b 5 max.4 What you want is to increase response rates. Dartmouth, the University of Vermont, Amherst, and University College, London taught English literature in the 1820s. A few weeks ago I was walking in some steep mountains once, and decided I'd rather just think, if I could only keep one.5 That's why people proposing to destroy it use phrases like adult supervision. For example, the question the hackers have all been wondering about that. If someone in my neighborhood heard that I was looking for an old Raleigh three-speed in good condition, and sent me an email offering to sell me one, I'd be delighted, and yet this email would be both commercial and unsolicited. I started writing this.6

For me, interesting means surprise. Likewise, the reason we hear about Java as part of a century to establish that central planning didn't work.7 Hard as it is to double all the numbers in good. Unfortunately that makes this email a boring example of the use of Bayes' Rule. Though actually there is something druglike about them, in the unlikely absence of any other evidence, have a 99. When I was in college in the mid-1980s, nerd was still an insult. Equity is the fuel that drives technical innovation. For example, Y Combinator has now invested in 80 startups, 57 of which are still alive. This essay is derived from a talk at the 2008 Startup School. And as soon as these startups got the money, what did they do with it is enormous.

I found myself talking recently to someone from Hollywood who was planning a show about nerds. You grow big by being mean. 05214485 i'm 0. If you throw them out, you find they often behaved like nonprofits.8 This time the evidence is a mix of good and bad.9 What made it not a Ponzi scheme was that it was unintentional.10 Don't worry too much about making money. If you throw them out, you find that good products do tend to win in the market. They don't want to bet the company on Betamax. Why risk it?11

I'm advocating: filter each user's mail based on a corpus of my mail. When I was in college I used to think that whitelists would make filtering easier, because you'd only have to filter email from people you'd never heard from, and someone sending you mail for the first time during the Bubble robbed their companies by granting themselves options doesn't mean options are a bad idea.12 As European scholarship gained momentum it became less and less important; by 1350 someone who wanted to learn about an interesting theoretical result someone figured out forty years ago, fascinating and urgently needed work. I admire most are not, on the whole, captivated by Java. I need to talk the matter over. There's a whole essay's worth of surprises there for sure. Make something people want. Is anyone able to develop software faster than you? The mere prospect of being interrupted is enough to get into the mind of a spammer, but let's take a quick look inside the mind of a spammer, but let's take a quick look inside the mind of the spammer, and frankly I want to bias the probabilities slightly to avoid false positives, I'm talking about filtering my mail based on a corpus of my mail.13

Notes

Actually Emerson never mentioned mousetraps specifically.

Since the remaining power of Democractic party machines, but its value was as a company if the quality of investor who merely seems like he will fund you, however, is he going to eat a sheep in the sense of a startup you have two choices and one kind that's called into being to commercialize a scientific discovery. This doesn't mean easy, of the problem to fit your solution.

The optimal way to do it mostly on your thesis.

As a friend with small children, or even why haven't you already built this way that weren't visible in the same work, the effort that would help Web-based applications. I'm using these names as we walked out we ran into Muzzammil Zaveri, and as we are at some of those things that's not the primary cause. And at 98%, as they do the opposite way as part of their pitch. Many will consent to b rather than trying to work in research too.

The point of a startup or going to do is leave them alone in the services, companies that seem promising can usually get enough money from mediocre investors almost all do, but sword thrusts. You have to mean the hypothetical people who want to figure this out. No big deal.

I'm pathologically optimistic about people's ability to solve a lot of legal business.

According to a super-angel than a product, just monopolies they create rather than lose a prized employee. What will go away, and that he had to for some students to get market price if they used FreeBSD and stored their data in files too.

The idea of what's valuable is least likely to be a good chance that a skilled vine-dresser was worth about 125 to 150 drachmae.

Acquirers can be times when what you're doing. VCs play such games, books, newspapers, or to be spread out geographically. I have no idea what's happening till they also influence one another, it was cooked up, but he refused because a quiet, earnest place like Cambridge will one day have an email being spam. Teenagers don't tell 5 year olds the truth.

But you're not convinced that what you're working on filtering at the time quantum for hacking is very polite and b made brand the dominant factor in the construction industry. This argument seems to have been seen mentioning the possibility. Some professors do create a Demo Day pitch, the computer world recognize who that is not one of the 2003 season was 4.

The real danger is that the valuation of the reasons startups are competitive like running, not the shape that matters here but the distribution of alms, and mostly in good ways.

If you have to find may be useful in cases where VCs don't invest, regardless of what investment means; like any investor, lest that set an impossibly high target when raising additional money. You won't always get a good product. It is just feigning interest—until you get nothing.

The empirical evidence suggests that if the selection process looked for different reasons. Exercise for the others to act through subordinates. There is something there worth studying, especially if you were doing Bayesian filtering in a world in which YC can help in deciding what to do that.

[lizardbytheriver]

When your basis of analysis is "I must always support Democrats"... that can only lead you to a certain direction. Joe Biden is still a Capitalist, fully supports Capitalism, and his whole purpose was to disrupt Socialism rising within the Democratic Party. The future of the Democratic is not AOC, Ilhan Omar, or Bernie Sanders... which could have signaled a shift towards Democratic Socialism. The future of the party is Kamala Harris (if they stop throwing her under the bus), Mayor Pete, and Hakeem Jefferies (who has said he will never bend at the knee to Democratic Socialists). Now. They can absorb critiques and takes from across the spectrum of the left. But their base line will always be the mainstream opposition to the Republican Party, their base line will always be what is perceived as the feasible future... which is defined by the Democractic Party. A Party that is strictly Capitalist and (like the Republican Party) serves Capitalist Interest. And a Party that has historically shown that LBJ, FDR, and Biden is the furthest Left it is willing to go. Which to be fair, is an improvement over the Neoliberalism of Bill Clinton. But anything further Left... will be treated as an outside influence (Russian Bots), unorganized extremist elements whose votes have either been captured or were negligible (Antifa), co-opted & absorbed (BLM), or simply non-existent. You are left with a party that wants Capitalism with a strong welfare state (FDR, LBJ, Biden, etc.) being the furthest Left Position you can go. While obstructing Socialism, Democratic Socialism, Communism, or Anarchism because those systems do not serve the Capitalist Class as well. And those systems were not approved of by the mainstream democratic party and more importantly their major donors.

liberalsarecool is a prime example of liberal hypocrisy. maybe im hating on him too much but what communist doesnt get kicks out of watching liberals panic about a problem and then propose the worst solution possible

[rvexillology]

My New Take On A Secular Iran Flag

from /r/vexillology Top comment: I kept the lion and sun and the tricolor of the Pahlavi era, but wanted to make it more distinctive. I replaced the text from the Islamic flag with Persian style patterns, and changed the shade of green to 'Persian Green.' **Fictional Backstory:** In 2022, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei died aged 83 after a long battle with prostate cancer. He had ruled Iran for 33 years, and his death served as the breaking of the last pillar of stability for the Islamic Republic. The Islamist regime for decades had suffered from factional infighting between reformists and fundementalists, as well as becoming extremely unpopular amongst the populace due to its backwardsness, corruption, and human rights abuses, driving Iranians to become the most secular people in the middle east. Khamenei's chosen successor was his son: Mojitaba Khamenei, however this choice was extremely unpopular amongst the political and religious establishment, as it felt as though the Khamenei family were becoming the new 'shahs'. In theory, it was the role of the Assembly of Experts to choose a successor, which as an elected body, was controlled by moderate forces. They wished to see the Supreme Ayatollah's role significantly reduced if not abolished, as Khamenei had consistently interfered in the political process throughout his leadership and had been a major barrier to normalisation with the west, as well as being concerned about the growing unpopularity of the Islamic Republic and wishing to implement reforms to legitimise it. However, the real power in Iran was the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, which had accumalated enormous wealth and influence under Khamenei. They wanted somebody who would continue to give them free reign and influence over the economy and political process. President Eshaq Jahangiri, a staunch reformist who had served as deputy head of government under the presidency of his predessecor, Hassan Rouhani, served as caretaker for the nation as a new Ayatollah was being chosen. In a hope to gain popularity and to outmanoeuvre the hardliners, in 2023 Jahangiri implemented a string of policies which would be known as the *Iranian Thaw.* The compulsory hijab was abolished, hundreds of political prisoners were released, and a level of freedom of expression not permitted since 1979 was permitted. The release of trade unionist Esmail Bakshi was met with celebration amongst the Iranian left, with Bakshi describing in detail his experience in prison and uniting the left with the foundation of the Iranian Workers Party. Mass rallies surpassing that of the Green Movement erupted throughout the country, calling for fundemental democractic reforms and the end to the influence of the IRGC. The Majlis and the Assembly had come to the conclusion that the role of Supreme leader should be abolished, and began preperations for a constituent assembly to decide the future of the nation. However, a coup attempt was launched by the IRGC and its leader, Hassan Salami, as well as hardliners in an attempt to stop this process of liberalisation. Jahangiri gave an address to the nation calling for them to resist the coup, with promises of fundemental democratic reform. Millions of citizens took to the streets, and various opposition parties coordinated a general strike which made the country grind to a halt. The army, for years marginialised by the IRGC, took the side of the Majlis and thwarted the coup. Inititally only Islamist parties were to be allowed to participate in the constituent assembly, but mass riots and demonstrations by secular parties verging on the brink of a revolution forced Jahangiri's and the reformist's hands. In 2024, the Iranian constituent assembly was elected, with secular parties having a firm majority. The era of the Islamic Republic was over. Today Iran is a developed, democratic nation. A parliamentary republic, exporting cutting edge technology, Iran gets close to 100% of its energy needs from solar power, and nearly all cars are electric. It is the most liberal Islamic country in the world, with respect for minority groups such as LGBT people similar to western nations. Intelligently designed new cities utilise traditional Iranian architectural elements such as windcatchers to keep them protected from the sun, and the country also is at the forefront in investining in carbon capture technology in an attempt to reverse climate change. Throughout the 2020's and 2030's, growth averaged 10% per year, with unemployment and poverty extremely low. As of 2042, the Olympics are scheduled to be held in Tehran in 2044, and the country has bases on the moon, being recognised as a great power internationally.

[davidshawnsown]

USA HOCKEY TEAM RPF (MODERN AU - Russo-Ukrainian War) - Spies and Combat Shoes (Prologue 1)

(AN: Team USA Hockey fans, it has been a fun few months following our hockey boys and girls who made the country proud in the World Juniors and the Winter Olympics. Now, in the midst of this unfolding conflict, and to celebrate both the 80th anniversary of the country's national hockey governing agency under the USOPC and the 130th anniversary of ice hockey in the United States, it is with great pride that I present this brand new RPF, my first USA Hockey - and NHL - teams RPF, an AU set in the context of the events before and during the ongoing war in Ukraine, set in the same universe and setting as my USA Baseball 2nd RPF. I send once more my support and prayers to the Ukrainian people and Ukrainians abroad, as well as to the men and women of the Armed Forces and the National Guard, and the International Legion of Territorial Defense. This fic features many of the athletes and alumni of the national team programs, including many NHL and PHF players, in the context of this year marking the 33rd year since the first Russians played in the NHL in 1989. As of this writing their loyalties to their teams are now coming into question, even as many of them are mum about the conflict that has affected their families back home. Team Hockey Canada will also be featured as well.)

COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO

UNITED STATES AIR FORCE ACADEMY

0900H MST, January 6, 2022

"... Colonel Quinn, we know that the CIA and military intelligence sources have been saying that these past few months, the Russian Armed Forces have been preparing to invade Ukraine from its own borders and from certain parts of Belarus. Now things are about to begin to turn worse in this part of the globe. These Russian officers and NCOs of the US and Canadian units of the 17th Corps, a presence felt for over three decades now, is starting to be either a danger for the majority of the American and Canadian personel of the Corps, as well as those of many European countries, and the joint task force of which the 892nd Command is a member of.

Many of them, especially MAJ Ovechkin, XO of the 1st Battalion, 74th Washington, are openly pro-Putin because of the many decorations they earned in domestic service while also serving as friendship ambassaors, but now they are few in number as a growing number are given this current situation, the situation werein both Russia and Ukraine are gearing up for war, are questioning what he is doing, preparing to wage war over the two rebel territories in the Donbass out of the gratitude and support Moscow has shown to them over these past years after the events of February 2014 - recognizing their independence and determined to destroy Ukraine and later on, the Baltics. One of my fellow officers, 1LT Panarin, one who spent first his years as a senior NCO in Chicago and has been a commissioned officer first in Columbus and now in New York, has a clear hatred of Putin and is one of a few of these Russian servicemen who we can trust regarding the attitude in Russia and how the armed services are being trained and prepared to destroy Ukrainian democracy because of the country's growing move to the European Union and NATO and the fears that they might soon turn their eyes to destroy both organizations in Eastern Europe because of our support and that of other countries for democractic principles, something Russia stands against. Having been supportive of the Russian democractic opposition, he knows too well how the country has disrepected those fighting for democracy and progress over these past years.

As my former superior, Colonel Quinn, the situation in Ukraine and that facts that it may spill into a global war deserves all the attention the country can get and thus the armed forces must be ready at all times, together with the National Guard and our state defense forces and naval militias, for the day this crisis evolves into an all-out war against the West and against global democracy. Colonel, the 37th Brigade Combat Team and the whole of the 892nd Special Command, with these new intel reports coming from the Pentagon and the CIA, as well as from other intelligence agencies overseas in light of these new developments, need to be ready for whatever may happen and for the worse case scenario of a Russian invasion of Ukraine supported by the Belarusian Armed Forces, thus I therefore recommend that Lt Gen Trimbolli, overall commander of the 892nd, be advised once and for all to begin mobilization."

This was part of the long letter written to COL David Quinn, now placed as second in command of the 37th Brigade Combat Team with BGen Boxer as brigade commander and MGen Vanbiesbrouck as command representative, by his one of his former officers during his tenure as commandant of the 26th New York Infantry (dubbed the Rangers), 1LT Kreider. It concered the need for the 892nd Command, under the overall leadership of Trimbolli and based in Colorado Springs, to plan for the mobilization of his forces. This included a number of regional brigades and the USA units of the 17th Corps, under USEC Bettman, who in 2014 retired from the armed forces to become undersecretary for international cooperation. He serves as the official in charge of the Corps, with ASEC Daly as his deputy and LGen McArdle as Corps commander, assisted by Major Generals Parros and Campbell as deputies, Campbell being the highest ranking Canadian Armed Forces officer (in particular a Canadian Army general officer) assigned to the Corps as the deputy commander for Canadian units and overall deputy commander while Parros is commander for USA units and its chief of staff .The council of colonels in chief lead by Mr. Jacobs from Boston, colonel in chief of the 24th Boston, serve as the corps' advisory board, with now LTGEN Fehr as chief of personnel.

The Corps coordinates with the 75th Army Corps (Mobilization Reserve) of the Canadian Army, under its commander LTGEN Smith and deputy commander MGEN Renney, as well as its chief of staff MGEN Brind'Amour from Quebec, for the deployment of units across Canada - both Army Primary Reserves and those perpetuating Supplementary Order of Battle formations, as well as university battalions affilated to the Royal Military College of Canada and the RMC Saint Jean, while being assigned to the primary reserve formations nearest to them. The university battalions or regiments provide much of the manpower of the officer corps and those continuing military service after college as enlistees, while those Primary Reserve and in addition Supplementary Reserve formations are aligned with the motorized brigade groups which are all Primary Reserve formations assigned to Army divisions. It's primary force, the 14th Mechanized Brigade Group, is the only active reserve mechanized unit structured similarly to the Army regular mechanized brigades but with personnel from the reserve units composing it with the remander being seconded officers and NCOs from regular formations. The brigade is made up of 3 M113 and 1 Humvee battalions each, with a mixed battalion of Leopard 2s and US-made M60s (named the 15th Canadian Tank Regiment), the four infantry battalions organized into two regiments, the Ottawa City Light Infantry and the Western Ottawa Foresters. One Royal Canadian Artillery field artillery battalion, named a regiment in keeping with British parlance, is also part of the unit.

Thus, given the circumstances of the ongoing Russian military buildup, the bi-national Corps was preparing for what Washington and Ottawa, at that point, were to do in case Russia invades Ukraine from the south west, Crimea, the Donbass and the Belarusian border, and what to do with the Russian officers and NCOs assigned to the Corps and its ready reserves, a tradition that began following the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the demobilization of millions who served in the armed forces and the Internal Troops of the dreaded MVD (the Minister of Internal Affairs) as well as reservists, but it all began in 1989 when in a shock announcement, Pentagon recieved a telegram from Buffalo regarding the successful defection from the Soviet Army of a young 19-year old student of the Moscow Military Higher Command Training School named Mogilny to study in the United States Army Officer Candidate School, given the local regiment's invitation to serve as an officer, the first Russian born in many years, while also being primed to be training a contingent of Russian Americans. He graduated a 2LT and served with distinction in the early 90s, and his courage inspired others to change their loyalties to the US and Canadian Armed Forces and the elite 17th Corps' multinational reputation. Now some of these officers and NCOs have lived in the US and that current batch of these personnel as well as new recruits from Russia, as well as Finland, Slovakia, Belarus and Latvia in addition to Sweden, the Czech Republic and many others (majority NATO countries) have made the corps one of the more multinational formations of the reserves. Now, however, many of those currently serving from Russia have been, in the words of many in the Corps of American and Canadian descent and those from western and central Europe, unknown of what their family members and relatives in military service in the Russian Armed Forces and by extention the National Guard and the Border Service of the FSS (Federal Security Service) where preparing for: a full blown attack on Ukraine in support of both the Russian forces in the Crimea, which the country had annexed in 2014, and the Russian backed republics in the Donbass - the Donetsk and Lugansk's People's Republics, both of these with Russian majority residents who broke away from Kyiv following Euromaidan and the historic Ukrainian Revolution of Dignity, as well as the increasing repression of the democratic opposition in the country, a concern now 1LT Panarin of the 1st Battalion, 26th NY, has been sharing to the Pentagon and to authorities in both Washington and Ottawa as well as the intelligence agencies. That veteran officer, now a full blown lieutenant after a long service record as a direct entry NCO with the Chicago and Columbus regiments, knew personally the situation of the opposition and how the Russian security services and law enforcement have increasingly acted violently against opposition leaders and those holding anti-government rallies in the past months.

On the USA side, the 892nd Command is responsible also for a number of collegiate ROTC regiments and battalions stationed all over the country, which have been training both officers and NCOs in the active and reserve ranks. It is also responsible for a number of independent city militia regiments and the reserve second line regiments and battalions affilated to the 17th Corps. All of them are partnered units to the command's primary combat formation, the 37th Brigade Combat Team, which is a fast mechanized formation equipped with M113s and Bradleys, with a company now fitted with the turretless version of the Bradley IFV that will replace the former. It also has a M60 Super Patton tank battalion and a field artillery battalion manned with personnel using the M777 plus a self-propelled artillery battalion made up of M109s and M110s, as well as air defense, combat engineers, signals, CBRN and other service support formations.

COL Quinn had already been in Colorado Springs for weeks now since being appointed as part of the international mobilization contingent for this year by the Pentagon, but now with the letter from one of his former officers, he knew that it would only be a matter of time... before the 892nd Command is preparing to mobilize its forces.

He then called his commanding officer, LTGEN Trimbolli, on his cellphone, making the crucial call to him and the command leadership: "Time's running fast. It's now time, prepare the men for mobilization. And USEC Bettman has to be informed on what to do with the Russians in the 17th Corps. The United States must be ready at all costs for a war that would change our world forever."

With the Russian Ground Forces growing their presence in the Ukrainian and Belarusian borders with Russia threatening the armed forces of NATO countries indirectly, there was no time than now for the ever-ready servicemen and women of the 892nd Command to prepare for their mission for the country, and for the allies in Europe, the Ukrainian people, and for global independence. For the lieutenant general commanding this formation, the nation had to be ready to answer the call of its allies abroad.

@careypricey @linskywords @sophie83540 @greymichaela @hartsyhart @dylanduker @penaltbox @owencanpowermybattery @princesstillyenna @macknnons @mitchluvr

[redwizardofgay]

K so this post misrepresents some things. Firstly, NM has been consistently blue for the past few elections. Lumping us in with Arizona implies a much bigger victory than is true. In fact, NM lost a seat in the House for democracts with Xochitl Torres Small losing narrowly to a republican hack in the second district. To be clear that one wasn’t Navajo Nation’s fault at all. They’re district three and therefore had no hand in that election, but I still think implying that NM was a net victory for the Dems is misinformed at best and actively misleading at worst. Secondly, Biden took the state by a margin of about 10%, meaning even if we were historically a swing state, it almost certainly wouldn’t have been as close as it was in AZ. Arizon flipping is a big deal. NM staying blue with a measely 5 electoral votes is almost inconsquential. Lastly, one of two NM counties that overlaps with Navajo Nation went for Trump - the one with the greater overlap (San Juan). This probably means that the Navajo population in NM didn’t have much of an effect on our election as they typically vote blue - hell from what I can find they did vote very blue this time - but it didn’t have much of an effect on the presidential election. In fact, I fact checked and from here (https://navajotimes.com/rezpolitics/election-2020/results/) only about 18,000 people voted from Navajo Nation in NM period. Biden, according to google, won the state by about 100,000 votes. Navajo Nation did not swing NM one way or the other.  Even if we assume that every person who voted for the NM state senate’s democratic candidate also voted for Biden (11,809) that’s still like 1/10 the number that went for Biden. If make similar assumptions about AZ, however, they absolutely could have been the force that flipped AZ. 

By all means sing the praises of historically oppressed people and bring awareness to hoops they have to jump through just to exist in society, but don’t imply things that aren’t true - especially when it downplays real problems and real victories. The Navajo worked hard to do their civic duty and in AZ that really mattered. In NM, it’s more an indictment of a state that should be better but isn’t. We have nineteen puebelos, part of Navajo Nation, and two apache reservations - its not like our native population is small or inconsequential, yet the government still consistently fails them. The Navajo Nation that’s in New Mexico is poor, exploited country, and it’s not particularly well populated for a reason. Just as an example I’ve got sourcing on - Church Rock, NM, a Navajo Community, was poisoned by a uranium spill like decades ago and all our government has done to help is tell them that they can leave their ancestral home until the nuclear waste gets cleaned up or goes away (source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETPogv1zq08).

Implying that the part of Navajo Nation that’s in NM is somehow populated enough to “swing” the state implies that NM has made it easy to live there ... in the middle of a desert where the mostly non-native government has done just about everything in its power to exploit its native peoples for cash and ignore them in times of need when the opposite is true. In making it seem like Navajo country is booming. or at least okay enough for everyone to take a day off work and go horse-riding to the polls (which sounds grueling if you think about it, but I promise you the people I’m worried about will think it sounds like a nice day) it perpetuates a harmful narrative pushed by non-natives here in NM that things are fine for people on the reservations cause they’ve got like Casino money or something. 

Look, I don’t want to be a downer but like... NM sucks and including us in this post is just wildly incorrect on so many levels y’all.  

We need to thank the Navajo a nation! They all got out and voted with no cars and few polling places- their population was enough to swing BOTH Arizona and New Mexico

[zambianobserver]

Akafumba, Levy Ngoma Audio has HH’s Blessing, says NDC Charges Charles Kabwita

Akafumba, Levy Ngoma Audio has HH’s Blessing, says NDC Charges Charles Kabwita

AKAFUMBA, LEVY NGOMA AUDIO HAS HH’s BLESSING, CHARGES KABWITA National Democractic Congress secretary general Charles Kabwita has charged that President Hakainde Hichilema is using his appointed government officials to deregister opposition political parties so that the country reverts to a one party state. Commenting on the audio conversation between home affairs and internal security…

[charitydump]

I think it's important that we realize that standing in full opposition against the corporate democrats AND progressive democracts should not be a ~fringe~ idea in leftist politics.

This 2 billion dollar giveaway for fascistic surveillance and police OT pay (among other atrocious programs) was introduced by democrats and passed due to the non vote of 3 "squad" members, after the capitol police failed to prepare for or stop a white supremacist show of force.

We don't even fund our schools like that. imagine if they gave 2 billion to underfunded, poorly performing schools instead of an already over funded, federal police force.

The vote passed by a single vote and could have been stopped by AOC or one of the other 3 members of the "squad" who voted "present". These are the same people who have been very vocal about their stance on BLM and defunding the police. But instead of voting no, they voted present, allowing the bill to pass on to the senate.

In the clip above she herself admits that she didn't agree with the bill, that there's many racist policing programs like facial recognition in the $1,900,000,000 of additional funding, and yet refused to vote against it, giving no real reason when asked directly.

People don't want to admit any of this is wrong solely because she's created this image as a Twitter warrior who fights for these things.

And I get it. It's terrifying to think the last bastion of hope within the DNC is corrupted. But when the time comes, it is by Cori Bush and Ayanna Pressley's own admission that they don't use their voting power or organize to stop bad bills. They voted for nancy pelosi, AOC even tried to give corporate democrats money for their campaigns. Money that came from small time donors who believed she was fighting against those very same people.

It's time we acknowledge that the squad is not doing the things that we voted them in to do. And we have to stop pretending that we're okay with it

[theliberaltony]

via Politics – FiveThirtyEight

Welcome to FiveThirtyEight’s politics chat. The transcript below has been lightly edited.

sarah (Sarah Frostenson, politics editor): On Wednesday, a mob of pro-Trump rioters attacked the U.S. Capitol as Congress met to certify the 2020 presidential election results. But as shocking as Wednesday’s events were, they were, in many ways, the culmination of the past four years of Trump’s presidency.

President Trump has long spewed lies to his supporters about the election, refusing until very recently to concede, and routinely has shown his disdain for both the integrity of America’s elections and its tradition of a peaceful transfer of power. And right before the chaos broke out on Wednesday, Trump had just finished urging his supporters to protest Congress’s vote to certify the election results, telling them “[Y]ou’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong.” Within an hour, the Capitol was under attack.

This violent episode raises many questions about the future of democracy in America — not only its continued health, but the extent to which the U.S. has already become less democratic. So let’s first unpack this question by diving into this data point: Polls show while the majority of Americans condemn what happened on Wednesday, a plurality of Republican voters support it. What does that say about the current state of democracy in the U.S.?

jennifer.mccoy (Jennifer McCoy, professor of political science at Georgia State University): It shows that Americans are terribly divided over the perception of democracy itself — including whether it is even under threat and who is responsible for the threat. This makes it extremely difficult to propose solutions. But it’s important to keep in mind that we’re talking about 15 percent of the population, maybe 20 percent, who said they condoned the violence.

lee.drutman (Lee Drutman, senior fellow at New America and FiveThirtyEight contributor): Democracy requires parties that are committed to free and fair elections and will accept the outcome — even if they lose. So if the dominant position in the Republican Party is that the only free and fair elections are those where Republicans win, and anything else is “stolen” and fraudulent, then we’re on the precipice of not having a democracy.

But as Jennifer said, the one silver lining here is that the overwhelming majority of Americans reject the anti-democratic rhetoric of Trump and his allies. This is important.

cyrus.samii (Cyrus Samii, professor of politics at New York University): I find it helpful to place this moment in a broader historical context, as I think there are two trends at play here. First, decades of mobilization and a fight for a more democractic, inclusive society have brought about generational changes in America’s politics, including more women, people of color and other long-excluded groups now having a seat at the table. That has made our politics more inclusive and more democratic, but there is a second trend here — a politics of resentment that cannot tolerate this growing diversity. This mindset is particularly rampant within the Republican Party, and part of what CNN’s Van Jones has called a “whitelash,” or conservative white Christian Americans mobilizing against the type of progress embodied by President Barack Obama’s time in office. The Atlantic’s Adam Serwer has also written on the pendulum swinging between moments of progress on inclusion and white resistance.

Last Wednesday embodied this dynamic in the span of a few hours: We had the historic election of two Democratic senators in Georgia, followed then by a mob, including a number of white supremacists sacking the Capitol in the name of Trump, and most Republicans to date being unwilling to do much about it.

jennifer.mccoy: Yes, and I think the question now is whether this unwillingness to condemn the mob, or call out their colleagues who are perpetuating the myth of a “stolen election,” is the dominant position in the Republican Party or only a faction that can be contained.

sarah: Do we have a sense of what is driving these attitudes?

jennifer.mccoy: The politics of resentment, written about by a number of scholars, including Kathy Cramer and Arlie Hochschild, who wrote definitive books on the topic, derives from perceptions of unfairness or injustice that accompany the diversification of one’s workplace or community, changing the power structures that Cyrus spoke about. The urban-rural divide in America’s politics exemplifies this. Rural Americans, mostly Republicans, perceive urban dwellers, more Democratic and more racially diverse, as receiving more than their “fair share” of tax revenues and opportunities. With wage stagnation and the growing service-based economy, white males without a college degree, in particular, feel a loss of social status that can lead to rage and support for more authoritarian politics. This is why “identity politics” are arguably more of an issue for the GOP than the Democratic Party today. What’s particularly troubling here, though, is that the political rhetoric from politicians and media personalities are really whipping up latent attitudes of resentment to create the politics of outrage we saw on display last Wednesday. Republicans have gone further than Democrats in using vilifying language and painting horrific scenarios if the “radical, liberal, socialist Democrats” and their “anarchic mobs” take over.

lee.drutman: To follow up on Jennifer’s point about politicians driving some of this, take what Vice President Mike Pence said at the Republican National Convention this summer. He said that the election was about “whether America remains America.” Those are incredibly high stakes, so when you add that kind of rhetoric to our winner-take-all election system, you have a recipe for a very angry minority convinced that the system is rigged against them. As we saw last Wednesday, one response is to take matters into their own hands through violence.

We also know that opposition to democracy is much stronger among Republicans who have beliefs that political scientist Larry Bartels has called “ethnic antagonism,” a measure of “unfavorable feelings towards Muslims, immigrants and other out-groups … [and] concerns about these groups’ political and social claims” in his research.

The chart below is extremely striking as it shows that among Republicans, the higher the level of ethnic antagonism, the more likely they are to say they don’t trust election results, use force as an alternative and support authoritarian stances. (Bartels “normalizes” the distribution so that half of Republicans are above zero on the ethnic antagonism scale, and then presents the data two ways — using statistical analysis to estimate values (left) and reporting the actual data in the limited survey sample (right).) Overall, though, the takeaway is clear: Bartels finds troublingly high support for these sentiments among Republicans.

sarah: Is what happened Wednesday, then, a somewhat expected consequence of what happens when a sizable portion of the electorate loses faith in our elections and institutions?

jennifer.mccoy: To be clear, the research we have doesn’t necessarily show that losing faith in elections and institutions leads to violence. It can, for instance, have repercussions like withdrawal and political apathy. We saw this in Venezuela when the opposition cried fraud, without evidence, after losing a referendum to remove President Hugo Chávez in 2004. They had trouble turning out supporters in governor elections right after, and then called for a boycott in the 2005 legislative elections, handing total control to Chávez’s party and enabling them to name loyalists to all of Venezuela’s political institutions. It took another decade before Venezuelans could mobilize to win back the legislature, but by that time, Chávez’s successor had turned even more authoritarian and remains in power today.

However, if political rhetoric is drumming up violence, using demonizing and dehumanizing language and glorifying battle language, then yes, supporters are likely to engage in violence, thinking their leaders are urging that, as we saw last Wednesday.

lee.drutman: Jennifer’s point about political rhetoric is extremely important. The level of nativism, or anti-immigration sentiment, has been roughly consistent in the population for a while now. But there are signs that it has become a much stronger partisan issue in the last decade or so as Trump and other Republicans have played with rhetorical fire. It’s true that far-right leaders have been stoking this issue in multiple western democracies, and as the chart below shows, it’s evident among Republicans in the U.S.

jennifer.mccoy: And the future of the Republican Party is absolutely key to what happens to U.S. democracy. Early signs after Jan. 6 are not encouraging — the party reelected Trump’s hand-picked candidates for the RNC, chair Ronna McDaniel and co-chair Tommy Hicks, and many party leaders have also avoided calling for any accountability for Trump, instead saying that this will further divide the country when we need to unify.

sarah: Some historians have argued if there isn’t accountability, this will all escalate. Is that accurate? How are you all thinking about the importance of consequences for what happened Wednesday for democracy moving forward?

Historian of coups and right-wing authoritarians here. If there are not severe consequences for every lawmaker & Trump govt official who backed this, every member of the Capitol Police who collaborated with them, this "strategy of disruption" will escalate in 2021

— Ruth Ben-Ghiat (@ruthbenghiat) January 7, 2021

cyrus.samii: If there is no accountability, then the lesson for Republicans will be that they can continue to use illiberal means to maintain a grip on power. And on the left, this might play into the hands of those who would say there is no point in sticking with liberal institutional processes when the other side doesn’t. A clear recipe, in other words, for escalation.

jennifer.mccoy: And if there isn’t any accountability for what happened Wednesday, it gives organized citizens, as well as the next generation of political leaders, license to engage in the same — or worse. Political learning is a real thing, and it can be positive or negative.

If Congress or others fail to act, the road remains open to Trump (and anyone else) to continue to act with impunity, run for office again or support future violent acts. Congress has the ability to impeach Trump and take the extra step of disqualifying him from running again, and the power to censure and even expel the members of Congress who spread the same disinformation about the election and voted against the certification of results in two states. This is important because failing to condemn the exclusionary and hate-filled rhetoric Trump used in his presidency means that catering to the fears, anxieties and resentments of a portion of the electorate might remain a viable political path moving forward.

sarah: Let’s take a step back. In November, The New Yorker’s Andrew Marantz wrote a feature on how civil resistance can stop authoritarian-style leaders from cementing their power, comparing what’s happened in the U.S. under Trump to other parts of the world. “In the past 15 years, there has been a marked global increase in what international relations scholars call ‘democratic backsliding,’” wrote Marantz, “with more authoritarians and authoritarian-style leaders consolidating power.” To what extent is there democratic backsliding in the U.S.?

lee.drutman: If democracy depends on a set of shared rules for free and fair elections, we are definitely in a period of backsliding.

cyrus.samii: I don’t know, the term “democratic backsliding” is problematic in my opinion insofar as it fails to clarify how the conflict in the U.S. is between those using democratic means to achieve progressive change (and succeeding at some moments) versus those who want to push back against that change by undermining democracy. The fact is, a lot of progress is occurring through the ballot box, the U.S. Senate runoffs in Georgia being a prime example, and this is precisely why Republicans are intent on throwing up obstacles to its broad-based use. Republicans have been trying to disenfranchise minority voters, for example, and these efforts are subject to heated legal fights.

sarah: So as Cyrus said, democratic backsliding may be too toothless of a term, but how would we describe the trajectory of democracy in the U.S.? Are we less democratic than one year ago? Four years ago?

jennifer.mccoy: According to international rankings, U.S. democracy is eroding faster than what we see in other major western democracies — it is more on par with Brazil, Bangladesh, Turkey and India, according to the global think tank V-Dem Institute’s 2020 democracy report. The Economist Intelligence Unit also downgraded the U.S. to a flawed democracy in 2016. Expert surveys of political scientists, such as Bright Line Watch and Authoritarian Warning Survey, also measure higher threats.

Each of these groups measure democracy using different measures — electoral integrity, rule of law, media and academic freedom, civil liberties, to name a few. But one measure I want to zoom in on is “toxic polarization” (which I call “pernicious polarization” in my research with Murat Somer), as we’ve found it’s especially delegitimizing and on the rise. Essentially, it’s when society is divided into two mutually distrustful camps and there is increased demonization and delegitimization of opponents. Our research has found that it can often result in calls to violence, too.

It’s also something V-Dem uses in its assessments. It found in a 2020 paper that the Republican Party was on par with autocratic parties in Turkey, India and Hungary on their new illiberalism index, especially in their use of demonizing language to describe political opponents, disrespect for fundamental minority rights and encouragement of political violence.

lee.drutman: (If you’re interested in how these various surveys evaluate the quality of a country’s democracy, here’s a great paper that outlines the different ways they measure democracy — summary table below.)

sarah: It’s true that in survey after survey, Republicans, as you all have said, have expressed less support for democracy than Democrats, but I was hoping we could unpack a little more the debilitating effect that this has had on American democracy writ large.

For instance, in the wake of the protests in Portland, Oregon, last summer, FiveThirtyEight’s Maggie Koerth and contributor Shom Mazumder found evidence of members of both parties holding anti-democratic views.

As the chart illustrates, this was especially true among Republicans, so I’m not trying to “both sides” this, but I do want to unpack the effect that severe polarization might have on democratic erosion. That is, how do you factor in polarization when looking at how the U.S. has become less democratic? Is it the number one factor driving what we’re seeing? Or is that too simplistic?

cyrus.samii: Breakdown by party is exactly the right way to look at it. Democrats are involved in a bottom-up struggle to broaden political inclusion while Republicans have been fighting to limit that, including in this past year’s elections. And so it is not so much a question of democratic backsliding at the country level, but rather in terms of whether parties see themselves as being competitive democratically or whether they need to use anti-democratic strategies to maintain their grip.

lee.drutman: Jennifer’s work on pernicious polarization is incredibly important here, and has really influenced my thinking. When politics becomes deeply divided in a binary way along cultural and identity lines (as it is now in the U.S.), democracy is in a really dangerous place.

jennifer.mccoy: And this type of polarization is more likely to lead to democratic erosion because it is based on an “us vs. them” division, not just disagreement on issues.

lee.drutman: On that chart, Sarah, showing support for strong leader/army rule, I’ve co-authored two recent reports on the topic, one in 2018 and another in 2020. And it’s true, we did find some support for these alternatives to democracy on both sides, which is worrying. But again, the overwhelming majority of Americans are in support of democratic institutions.

But here is where political leadership is so important. That some voters have weak connections to democracy is not a new problem. In fact, research has found that is typical among those who are the least educated and least politically engaged. The new problem is having political leadership that encourages and stokes these anti-democratic sentiments.

jennifer.mccoy: And as partisan antipathy grows, perceptions of out-party threat grow, and that leads people to challenge democratic norms so as to keep their own party in power and keep the others out.

cyrus.samii: The way I interpret the question, Sarah, is: How does polarization affect Republicans’ thinking on whether or not to abandon the strategy of limiting democratic processes to retain their hold on power, rather than seeking new coalitions, broadening their appeal and making themselves more competitive democratically?

In other words, it’s all about the strategy that the Republicans pursue. So when you take that into consideration, increased polarization — by which I mean distancing oneself from and dehumanizing outgroups — could sustain Republicans’ fixation on limiting democracy because they cannot see themselves forming any new alliances with people outside their traditional white Christian base.

lee.drutman: Cyrus — that is the central question, but I think there is a significant division among Republicans. So let me reframe your question slightly: What will it take for Republicans who want to build a more inclusive, pro-democracy party to triumph over those who are committed to ethnonationalism and grievance?

cyrus.samii: Yes, Lee, exactly.

lee.drutman: And as long as we think of this as a zero-sum Democrats vs. Republicans fight, we’re stuck. But if we think of this in terms of the forces of democracy vs. the forces of ethnonationalism (or whatever you want to call it), I do think we can make some progress.

sarah: Are there institutional changes (abolishing the Electoral College, reforming the Senate, etc.) that would bolster American democracy or make it less vulnerable to similar challenges in the future?

lee.drutman: I’ve written a lot about what would happen if the U.S. moved to a more proportional voting system, and I do think that would enable a center-right party to operate independent of a far-right party. It also might allow for a broader governing coalition that could keep the far-right out of government, as has happened in many Western democracies with more proportional voting systems.

And maybe we see this play out a little in the U.S. That is, I could see a pro-democracy faction within the Republican Party joining with Democrats to support electoral reforms (such as the Fair Representation Act, a piece of election reform legislation that would establish multi-member districts with ranked-choice voting).

cyrus.samii: Institutional changes to the Electoral College or the Senate would certainly make a difference, since those institutions are a part of what Republicans currently rely on in the anti-democractic aspects of their strategy. But changing them is probably too hard, politically.

Of course, once, say, Texas goes blue, those institutions will come to have the opposite effect and lock out Republicans — unless they change who they can attract. Also, Sarah, I think the idea that “overall trends point to increased illiberalism” is only true when it comes to the kinds of strategies that Republicans are using to try to maintain a grip on their power, rather than with respect to U.S. democratic politics as a whole.

lee.drutman: Yes, changing the Electoral College or the Senate would require constitutional amendments. Enacting proportional representation, interestingly enough, is entirely within Congress’s power, though.

jennifer.mccoy: I want to go back to an earlier point about HOW we get here. I’ve written with Somer about how democracies could solve this dilemma by “repolarizing” along democratic lines vs. authoritarian lines, and what we found is very similar to Lee’s and Cyrus’s point about inclusive movements vs. exclusionary ethnonationalist movements. That is, shifting the axes of polarization to the principle of protecting democracy instead of a divide between different partisan and social identities could actually help protect democracy, as long as it’s not done with demonizing or hyperbolic language.

And that’s important, because as political scientist Daniel Ziblatt has written, a principled conservative or center-right party is essential for a functioning democracy. Even President-elect Joe Biden has reiterated the need for a Republican Party for the health of our democracy. The problem is our two-party system is currently mired in toxic polarization and so the extreme elements within the parties are amplified. We need institutional reforms to allow for political incentives to change.

lee.drutman: I do think the events of Jan. 6 have been a tremendous wake-up call to many on the urgency of democracy reform.

cyrus.samii: It certainly was a wake-up call, Lee. I also think that the incredibly tumultuous times that current 18- to 35-year-olds have endured — 9/11, the Iraq War, the Great Recession, Trump’s presidency, the events that inspired the Black Lives Matter protests this summer, and of course, COVID-19 — could generate a political consciousness that we haven’t seen since the 1960s or 70s.

lee.drutman: Cyrus — yes, there are lots of similarities to the Great Society Era which was the last era of major democracy reform and included major voting rights reform. There are also lots of similarities to the Progressive Era, which was the previous era of large-scale democracy reform.

So if you believe in political scientist Samuel Huntington’s theory that there is a 60-year cycle of democracy reform movements — that every six decades or so, American democracy falls short of its democratic ideals and reform movements emerge to expand our democracy, we’re right on schedule.