ffxtian

6 ms·

1.
by ffxtian 8y ago
Just as easy maybe, but fundamentally incorrect. Its mechanism of action is killing people -- choosing to believe the claim that killing those people will save lives alters neither the purpose nor MO of the tool.
2.
by ffxtian 8y ago
I don't see anything in the page you linked that would qualify him as a "left-wing economist". Neither supporting an openly capitalist political party nor providing theoretical underpinnings for financial deregulation qualif
3.
by ffxtian 9y ago
Re: your last paragraph, it seems to me that the question of "who wields power" will always have material priority -- one of the benefits of power is deciding what is and isn't a "mistake". Look at climate change --
4.
by ffxtian 9y ago
It's possible -- I'm not a regular reader of his blog, and thus might be missing stylistic cues, or other occluded methods of admitting a failing. The only thing I read him admit to is that he's less sure of himself than be
5.
by ffxtian 9y ago
When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.” “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.” “The question is,”
6.
by ffxtian 9y ago
> However I disagree that slavery still exists in the form of incarceration. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penal_labor_in_the_United_Stat...
7.
by ffxtian 9y ago
Except that many of the artifacts that ISIS "destroys" are in fact sold: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/islamic-sta...
8.
by ffxtian 9y ago
> Before we talk about Harvard grads destroying the eocnomy, lets talk about making it less and less likely for 75% of the people imprisoned to ever be able to contribute to society once they are released. Why not both?