EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 8668
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
| ||
|
ChristianS
United States3252 Posts
On September 07 2017 08:43 Danglars wrote: Followed by all the sensible climate alarmists reminding everybody that one or two weather events do not prove or disprove climate change. And you're all rubes for thinking that really cold winter means global warming is over. I mean, yeah? I'm sure some idiots out there are saying "Harvey wouldn't have happened without climate change" but all the scientists I've seen have said little more than "we have good reason to believe this sort of phenomenon gets more frequent and more intense as climate change progresses," or maybe "Harvey is a good reminder of the seeious consequences climate change could have." | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On September 07 2017 09:59 ChristianS wrote: I mean, yeah? I'm sure some idiots out there are saying "Harvey wouldn't have happened without climate change" but all the scientists I've seen have said little more than "we have good reason to believe this sort of phenomenon gets more frequent and more intense as climate change progresses," or maybe "Harvey is a good reminder of the seeious consequences climate change could have." It isn't hard to explain: If climate change keeps going, every year could be 2017's hurricane season. We could be rebuilding Florida every couple of years. It could make that entire sections of that state unlivable. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23470 Posts
| ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On September 07 2017 10:17 GreenHorizons wrote: Is it not weird that so many of the islands being hit are under European control/influence in the 21st century? Or is the imperialist nature of those relationships still supposed to be normal? doens't strike me as weird. a lot of places are simply so small that they're not that eager to be independent nations; they happily consider themselves people of the main country. it's not that imperialist in that the people there now aren't heavily "natives"; they're more a blend of various workers and slaves that were brought in. it's not really an imperialist relationship anymore. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On September 07 2017 10:17 GreenHorizons wrote: Is it not weird that so many of the islands being hit are under European control/influence in the 21st century? Or is the imperialist nature of those relationships still supposed to be normal? No one else was using them. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23470 Posts
On September 07 2017 10:25 zlefin wrote: doens't strike me as weird. a lot of places are simply so small that they're not that eager to be independent nations; they happily consider themselves people of the main country. it's not that imperialist in that the people there now aren't heavily "natives"; they're more a blend of various workers and slaves that were brought in. it's not really an imperialist relationship anymore. Pretty sure many of them aren't quite as happily being used as you describe. Pretty sure many of them still want reparations for the slave trade and genocide among other political and social ambitions. Their white ruling countries saying "No thanks" doesn't exactly strike me as a great relationship. Imperialist seems a far more appropriate description. Less so after they exterminated/enslaved them. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
otherwise I'll just assume your claims of imperialism are nonsense from you of the typical sort. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23470 Posts
On September 07 2017 10:41 Plansix wrote: GH, although I agree that the roots of colonial rule are present in a lot of those island nations, it has become a less exploitative relationship since then. A lot of these islands have zero ability to build up infrastructure or work out their own trade deals/relationships with other nations. They can't pave roads, have a phone system or do anything without dealing with the mainland. Even Puerto Rico doesn't want independence and is weird on state hood. Most of those islands govern themselves and don't want to break off the relationship with their the EU nations. Because after an event like this, without those EU nations, there would be no one to help them rebuild. Probably not unrelated to their desire for repayment for the undeniably exploitative relationship with the countries that they "need". On September 07 2017 10:42 zlefin wrote: If you care to provide citations for such GH I'll take a look. you being pretty sure of things doesn't count for much. otherwise I'll just assume your claims of imperialism are nonsense from you of the typical sort. Sounds like you didn't know much about the relationship before you suggested that my description was wrong... Caribbean countries Jamaica, Antigua and Barbuda already have national commissions on reparations, and each country that does not have a commission has agreed to set one up. The 14 Caricom nations voted unanimously to wage the joint campaign, saying it would be more ambitious than any previous attempt. Source | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23470 Posts
On September 07 2017 10:52 zlefin wrote: I did not know; which is why I'm willing to look at citations. it's a reasonable stance given your usual posting patterns and biases. filing a no chance lawsuit doesn't say that much about the current relationship though. It would be if you didn't spout off like you knew what you were talking about before asking for citations. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On September 07 2017 10:49 GreenHorizons wrote: Probably not unrelated to their desire for repayment for the undeniably exploitative relationship with the countries that they "need". I'm not going to comment on a large number of nations that likely each have their own independence movement. It is likely far more complex than either of us really understand. My only insight is that those nations generally keep the relationship for their own economic benefit. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23470 Posts
On September 07 2017 10:59 Plansix wrote: I'm not going to comment on a large number of nations that likely each have their own independence movement. It is likely far more complex than either of us really understand. Surely, but they do have a common theme. | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On September 07 2017 10:53 GreenHorizons wrote: It would be if you didn't spout off like you knew what you were talking about before asking for citations. I've still seen little evidence you truly know what you were talking about, rather than you simply googling a few choice links. You've yet to actually establish the thesis you provided. And your long history of posting is quite clear. So it was and is a very reasonable stance in any event. I don't care if you're unwilling to admit that, that's on you being rude and combative. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23470 Posts
On September 07 2017 11:00 zlefin wrote: I've still seen little evidence you truly know what you were talking about, rather than you simply googling a few choice links. You've yet to actually establish the thesis you provided. And your long history of posting is quite clear. So it was and is a very reasonable stance in any event. I don't care if you're unwilling to admit that, that's on you being rude and combative. You've provided 0 evidence you have any idea what I or you're talking about or that there would be any value in explaining it to you when you're going to challenge every aspect out of some "everyone else is an idiot" complex you've got going on. We know that it was an imperialist relationship to begin with, you may want to establish when it stopped being that before you demand I prove to you, in your admitted ignorance, that it still is. | ||
|
Adreme
United States5574 Posts
On September 07 2017 09:56 Danglars wrote: I'm going to need a translation of that first sentence there. Secondly, I fully admit after the hurricane=climate change crazies are done, winter weather rubes will begin. Basically scientists are going to be honest about the one hurricane not being caused by global warming and will instead emphasize that the overall trend of increased negative weather patterns is by not a single event. This assessment is based in fact. However, deniers do not have to base there arguments in fact because there fundamental position is not based in fact. Imagine if we had a debate where you say the sky is brown and I say it is blue (yes I know technicalities but roll with me for this). Factually the sky is blue so I am arguing a position of fact and every further argument will be forced to be held on a factual basis. However your argument is based on a lie. Since your argument is based on a lie you can continue to make it with more lies because you have already demonstrated that you are willing to ignore the truth. Basically the climate deniers are already arguing something that is provably untrue and as such they could argue for instance that Harvey was caused by liberals creating a hurricane machine in the middle of the Atlantic and deploying them to Flordia in order to drum up legislation to kill the coal industry and it wouldn't be out of bounds because they are already arguing something provably untrue. | ||
KwarK
United States43232 Posts
On September 07 2017 10:17 GreenHorizons wrote: Is it not weird that so many of the islands being hit are under European control/influence in the 21st century? Or is the imperialist nature of those relationships still supposed to be normal? It's not imperialist. The relationship exists because both parties wish it to. | ||
|
Adreme
United States5574 Posts
On September 07 2017 11:17 KwarK wrote: It's not imperialist. The relationship exists because both parties wish it to. Puerto Rico is being hit and havnt they voted several times that they do not wish to be a territory and want to be a state and the US has just ignored them? | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23470 Posts
On September 07 2017 11:17 KwarK wrote: It's not imperialist. The relationship exists because both parties wish it to. I'm not sure it's the type of "choice" you may be implying. When someone exploits the hell out of you and you are essentially dependent on them, perpetuating the relationship because "both parties wish to" is a bit myopic imo. But I also think you would have been a loyalist if you were here in the 1700's so we both have our biases on this. I think I got the answer I was looking for, in that it's still considered a (relatively) normal healthy relationship in the 21st century. | ||
| ||
