iNow

He’s using a very loose definition of racism in an attempt to conflate an infants ability to distinguish colors and patterns to be the same as “racist”

This realization of Huxleys world seems seems neither new nor brave.

Nobody (worth our time or attention) argues that a person with increased melanin content in their skin cannot be racist. That’s a man made of straw from the outset.

And those “experts” are either ignorant, lying, or both. Money and willful ignorance.

Yes. Wondered if you’d expand and elaborate a bit. Maybe offer more color and texture for that aforementioned “should” part. I’m seeking illumination and asking you for a light.

No better than a broken bot, then. Sad state that

Right, but what does that look like in practice? This issue is embedded in culture itself. It’s not going away any time soon. Encourage you to set this quixotic quest for universal unwavering equity somewhere in a parking lot for now and resist aiming your arrow at good ideas for failing to be perfect. Perfection is not the goal. Kaizen is. Using what mechanism?

Good question, probably worthy of exploration in another thread, but seems OT here. This is closer to what I’m hoping to explore here in THIS thread. Do you have an opinion on how the weights do/should adjust? How might we minimize this and related cronyism were we attempting to create/describe the functioning of a more ideal democracy?

Intriguing

Prescient Some people know them as Amazon (kidding, not kidding) A bit like ensuring every ion is accounted for when determining the overall positive or negative charge of a system. If only Maxwell had written about proper governance of great hordes. The need here IMO centers around user authentication. What is the confidence interval we have that this one vote is coming from the this one person and is not being spoofed by a 3rd party. I’m envisioning the scales of justice. Invariably the scales will tip one way or the other as items get added and removed from each side… the weights will adjust and the height will change. I posit there will always be displacement of resources in any system of governance. The objective on which we must recurrently return our collective focus IMO is balance. Maybe democracy is the framework by which we’re most likely to achieve balanced outcomes? Whatever that means…

I’ll put you down as more technocrat than democrat, then. You’d prefer control be given to the capable competent cool “other,” so long as that definitely would not be you.

All of the above, and then some. We’re speaking of human wants and desires, not practical realizable aims. I said total, not sole.

What we call it is less important to me than how it looks and functions, especially as pertains to the choices we’re given and how those are chosen. We should seek to minimize those.

I think people would prefer to have total control all by themselves, and if that can’t happen then they want the person they personally prefer to have total control and phenomenal power. Is THAT democracy? Anyone feel free to opine.

I’m just dropping a rock into the lake to see where the ripples radiate. And just to add: Asking bc these conversations are happening everywhere across the globe right now as humans figure out who we want to be… whether we want authoritarian strongmen or governance based on the voice of the masses. Why should people prefer democracy? What is it that they are preferring, and what are the appropriate guardrails once this path of democracy is chosen?

Across the world right now, and perhaps always, there is a battle over how we the people… the orc hordes through the mothers of dragons… shall be governed. The debate is especially intense with shifting power and economic dynamics, shifting technological might, a rapidly warming cancerous climate full of droughts and floods, wars, starvation… migration… more fights not just for resources, but for lives and tribes. Some find the strongmen and authoritarian gang leaders appealing. Others find anarchy and the chaos of every man for themselves appealing. Most, however, say they want something more orderly in between. Something where we’re both free and connected with each other in the ways which matter most. Something like a democracy. But what does that mean? Democracy is a bit of a Rorschach test, and “what it means” varies tremendously from one person to the other. Ask 10 different people and you’ll get 10 different answers, hence this thread. What does democracy mean to you?? So without pasting wiki quotes and google searches to us… What DOES and what SHOULD “democracy” mean?

Depends on the type. Democracy is a bit of a Rorschach test, and what it means varies tremendously from one person to the other. This is the battle taking place in countries all across the world right now. Gonna open a new thread instead of derailing this one. Done: https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/127785-what-doesshould-“democracy”-mean/

It doesn't much matter who. What matters is they will delay. That's the goal here. If you're losing a court case, the tactic is to slow things down until you can find something to stop your bleeding. If you're winning a court case, the tactic is to speed things up so you can close it out while you have the upper hand. Trump and team have used the delay with lawyers tactic with enormous success over the last 4 decades all the way back to his years screwing people over (not paying contracts and contractors, shady real estate deals, bad beef and airline projects, distractions through tabloids, etc.) since his time in New York.

When submarines move through the water, they use sound waves to detect their surroundings and gain information about their environment. They pulse out a sonar “ping” and listen for what comes back. I presume the various specie out there in Nigeria and elsewhere may be largely doing the same.

Yeah, if only NATO weren’t equivalent to a union then Russia wouldn’t right now be using power plants like nuclear weapons equivalent to 6 Chernobyls if any stray shrapnel hits the wrong component /ridiculous

🤦‍♂️

Since this keeps getting ignored…

You really need to stop blaming the rape victim for being raped. The rapist is the one at fault. Full stop.

Are you ignoring my question on purpose, or do you not even realize one was asked?

In a way, yes. They’re calling for mates. Staking their territories. Existing and acting. Perhaps less of a debate and more of a jazz band writ very large.