#i do think that critical thinking should be the price of admission to activist spaces | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

hopefulfestivaltastemaker · 4 years

Text

June 14, 2020

My weekly blog post. Topics include Nikola’s hydrogen trucking, returns to civilization scale, progress urbanism, the rhetoric of crisis, and woke culture in the Bay Area.

Nikola and Hydrogen Trucking

Last week the well-hyped trucking company Nikola had their IPO. As of Tuesday, the company was valued at $26 billion despite not having pulled any revenue yet.

I have long been a skeptic of hydrogen for transportation but have been gradually revising my views in a more bullish direction. The release of the Toyota Mirai is another event that surprised me, showing that hydrogen was at least technologically ready for the mass market in a way that I hadn’t expected.

As a transportation fuel, hydrogen suffers from several major drawbacks. It is much less efficient than battery electric vehicles. Fuel cells are expensive (moreso than lithium ion batteries). Hydrogen presents all sorts of logistical challenges, which are much easier with electricity and hydrocarbon fuels. The main advantage of hydrogen over electricity is range, but for passenger cars that is becoming less relevant.

Over the road trucking is another matter, and it is unclear if battery electric trucks will ever be feasible. Hence hydrogen emerges as a plausible low emission alternative to diesel trucking.

I do try to pay attention to market conditions and take them into account in my own analysis. Investors can be wrong, of course, and it is impossible for anyone, including investors, to forecast technology trends with great precision. But Nikola’s valuation represents a kind of collective wisdom that should be paid attention to.

I will now go back to wondering why dimethyl ether hasn’t taken off.

Returns to Civilization Scale

Last summer, I spent two weeks at the Santa Fe Institute. I have long been interested in SFI’s work, especially the scaling work of Geoffrey West and Luis Bettencort and how it applies to cities. Indeed, Bettencort’s The Origin of Scaling in Cities is one of my most important influences in how I think about the topic.

While at SFI, I drafted a survey of how the urban scaling laws might apply to world civilization as a whole. At the time I did not attract much interest from SFI staff or other program participants. I link it here, without a clear sense of what I am hoping to find from doing so. There are a number of points that I might discuss further at a later time. Several points in the paper have not aged well or otherwise no longer reflect my current thinking, but I am posting it in its form as of last August.

I don’t claim the paper is well-written, but I do think it raises some important and under-explored questions. Unfortunately the project stalled out last summer and I have been uncertain whether and how to move it forward.

Progress Urbanism

Last week, I posed a question in the Progress Studies Slack group about whether there could be such a thing as progress urbanism, and if so, what it might look like. My basic premise was understanding and designing cities as engines of progress.

One reply was this.

I’m interested in understanding what factors contributing to urban progress can be decoupled from cities. That could be critical in fostering progress in other environments, like rural areas, online communities, or even space colonies.

I found it quite interesting. It hints at an understanding of urbanism (which may no longer be the right word) that takes as the defining characteristic the interpersonal interaction that it fosters and abstracts out the rest. Under this conception, a city is a physical manifestation of the urban process, and there are potentially many other manifestations.

The Politics of Crisis

Palladium Magazine ran a piece this week on the political rhetoric of crisis. Like most Palladium articles, it is worth a read.

A few years ago, there was apparently a collective decision among climate activists that, henceforth, climate change was to be referred to as “the climate crisis”, or some other comparably dramatic term such as climate emergency or climate catastrophe. Even though I consider climate change to be a serious issue that demands a serious response, I have avoided the change in terminology.

The word “crisis” is meant to connote a state of affairs that is far enough outside of normal operating conditions as to call for a suspension of ordinary ways of doing politics and business. In the case of environmental politics, the ordinary way is to build coalitions around solutions that fit into the current socioeconomic milieu, such as carbon pricing, clean energy R&D, energy efficiency standards, and so forth.

“Climate crisis” is the favored phrasing among a cluster of activists who see the proper response as to overturn the current socioeconomic milieu and replace it with a highly socialized system that greatly restricts individual consumption. Such changes are to be accompanied with equally dramatic rearrangements in the distribution of wealth and race and gender relations.

I suppose I am fundamentally conservative in the sense that I see the current system as working reasonably well, and where it is not, the proper response being reform rather than revolution. One could accuse me of small-bore thinking. I prefer to think of it as remaining grounded in reality.

Woke Culture: What is Happening?

The last few weeks have, among many other things, brought a spotlight on what, for lack of a better term, can be called “wokism” and its destructive effects on national discourse. I have neither the ability nor the inclination to keep up with everything that is happening. Just two recent examples of things I observed are Matt Taibbi’s review of “newsroom revolts” and other institutional purges, and Sam Harris’s recent podcast attempting to bring some reality-based thinking into discussions of policing and criminal justice. Both come from points left of center politically and expose a growing fissure between the hard activist left and the old guard left with its traditional commitment to open discourse.

I have never had a position of great influence or any formal training in political science, but I did spend two years (2016-18) in the Bay Area hanging around the periphery of the nation’s social elite, such as it is, and one thing I would like to do someday, before it recedes too far into the past, is write a detailed account of my experiences there. Part of what has held me back is that my experience was not generally good, and it would be difficult to present a complete and honest account without burning some bridges that I would like to remain standing. Still, the experience was important in shaping how I see the world now. And I think that more ordinary person observations of a situation can shed some light into aspects of a culture that professional pundits and academics will fail to see.

Anyway, I have seen quite a few commentaries likening today’s social justice drama to McCarthyism, the Maoist Cultural Revolution, or the Reign of Terror. These comparisons have some merit, reinforced by numerous stories circulating on social media of academics and other professionals being forced out of their jobs for alleged wrongthink, but much like images of police brutality, they tell a highly skewed story at best. If anything, Versailles court etiquette is a more appropriate historical analogy.

Among what Richard Florida terms the “creative class”--people in media, arts, politics, software, academia, etc.--in the Bay Area, insecurity is a defining aspect of life. Rents are a major financial burden, home ownership or raising a family is out of the question for most young people, job security is rare, and most business relationships are strictly transactional. There is a culture of near perpetual side hustling and job networking, because you know the current job won’t last long and even if it does, it will not offer a path toward advancement.

Wokism enters this milieu as a set of rules for social protocol and status competition, and it serves several important functions. In an environment where social standing is a scarce good for which there is fierce competition, commitment to social justice doctrine is a price of admission into polite society, not unlike the way a college degree is required for professions that will never use the knowledge learned in college.

The conception of the social justice warrior as a fanatic is large wrong. The social justice warrior is a striver, fighting in a highly competitive environment for the status needed for tenure, a promotion, invitation to the right parties, etc. The state of affairs could perhaps be likened to an intellectual Malthusian catastrophe among an overcredentialed population.

As will be obvious to anyone with passing familiarity of urban progressive politics, the ubiquity of social justice doctrine does not translate in any meaningful way into policy. Yes, Bay Area cities have their diversity, equity, and inclusion boards, proclamations, and so forth. But the make no progress toward reducing poverty and homelessness, and the ordinary business of municipal government--passing out goodies to homeowners, unions, and legacy businesses--continues unimpeded. The paranoia of some commentators in conservative media, that the Democratic Party is radicalized and will implement some grand socialist vision if elected, is laughable to anyone who has seen it govern up close.

One of these days, I would like to fill in the story with some names and dates. We’ll see if that ever happens.

0 notes

pressography-blog1 · 7 years

Text

Rwanda Genocide Blogger Goes On Trial

New Post has been published on https://pressography.org/rwanda-genocide-blogger-goes-on-trial/

Rwanda Genocide Blogger Goes On Trial

Kigali — One of the maximum arguable figures in the Rwandan genocide of 1994 is slated to move on trial Monday in the wake of fears of an unfair hearing.

Genocide Blogger

Rwanda Today

Joseph Nkusi, a Rwandan blogger who has sharply criticized Rwanda’s government, made fake and inflammatory claims approximately the genocide, and based a radical competition group even as exiled in Norway may be probed.

He faces a tribulation in Kigali on expenses of genocide ideology, sectarianism and inciting rebel inside the genocide that claimed around 1 million minority Tutsi. Nkusi lived in Norway between 2009 and 2016.

Norwegian authorities rejected his asylum declare, mentioning a loss of proof of a hazard of persecution in Rwanda. Nkusi turned into then deported, arriving again in Kigali last October. Rwandan government straight away arrested him for his writings and political activities Vinzite.

He has been held at Kimironko jail. Human Rights Watch stated even as Nkusi’s writings have been quite reprehensible, authorities have to make certain a fair trial and he was now not prosecuted nor convicted for criticism of the presidency or the ruling birthday party.

“Global factors, which include Norway, ought to closely display the trial complaints and be organized to publicly denounce any breaches of fair trial requirements or violation of free speech,” Ida Sawyer, director for Imperative Africa stated. – CAJ Information

The Immorality of Intense Speech We like to get labored up. You’ve got seen it – two humans facing off, crimson in the face, sweat on the brow, a chunk of saliva at the lips. Sure, I speak politics. Yeah, We adore getting worked up. This is fine. However, when our rhetoric or our debate descends into vulgarity, private attacks, shouting, abuse, or violence by way of language, we’ve got misplaced something essential. Vulgarity and abusive language are obvious symptoms of vulnerable, lazy wondering. But more importantly, there may be an essential immorality to Intense speech. That rhetorical immorality belittles those who have suffered and do suffer actual abuse, and Severe speech robs our international of a level of crucial that means.

Ideology and Politics as Amusement

Ideology has grown to be Enjoyment. Cable News, radio speak indicates shock jocks, bloggers – all of these have an inherent Leisure price. Of direction, the successful ones additionally have substance: something to say, thoughts, arguments. But frequently instances the style turns into the message. It isn’t always approximately the ideas; it’s about the insults. Perhaps that is ideal for online journals like Ideology Discussion board at some level, But it’s also troubling.

Elevating the extent and the temperature of your rhetoric can be first-rate for ratings and ad sales. There is a big range of humans who have to emerge as well-known and rich by means of skillfully exploiting Extreme rhetoric. Extremity brings notoriety and draws visitors. Of direction you had higher be cautious you don’t circulate from excellent to notorious – a shift that Don Imus made nearly in a single day. But even that line, as soon as crossed can emerge as a move to carry and market it. ‘My enemies are persecuting me.’ ‘those sensors are attacking my first change rights.’

We are collaborating in a gradual synthesis of Information, politics, and Entertainment. We are collaborating. In this more democratic media age, we take part with the aid of looking and listening and reading (and paying) the extreme audio system. We’re participating by way of joining the controversy at the net and using more and more Severe rhetoric ourselves. However, our speech has effects.

I love politics. I really like politics as it matters – for coverage, for governance, for the law, for liberty. I love it for the ideas and the debate. I love it for the human dramas that constantly play out in democracy. I love politics and ideology for many reasons – and amongst the ones is the exhilarating enjoy of politics as a game. We root for our parties, for our favorite politicians. We comply with the horserace. We stay up on election night time expecting the consequences, for the present day round of the USA government Championship Collection. Many even wager on the final results – in greater ways than one. That is extra than just another sports activities analogy for life. We do comply with politics as sports activities. I suppose that ideally, politics might not descend to the game – But it does.

Perhaps the most critical bad consequence of treating politics, thoughts, and ideology as recreation is: that we mistake the manner of politics for the ends. Elections and campaigns must be way closer to the stop of governance. After the election, suitable governance should be possible primarily based on principled debate and compromise on troubles. As an alternative, the election becomes the everlasting stop and we sacrifice principles and governance in want of attacking personalities and politicians. It is not about governance or laws; it’s approximately prevailing and dropping. And there is continually every other election in more than one years.

Genocide Rwanda

The permanent marketing campaign and politics as sport exacerbates using Severe speech. It does no longer matter what you are saying, as long as you damage your opponent. Even long after the marketing campaign, we keep to viciously attack one another because governance and compromise are now not the purposes. The purpose is winning the subsequent spherical, the next championship. Our flesh pressers are responsible of this; activists and lobbyists are responsible of this; We are all responsible for this.

The Weak spot of Severe Speech

Public debate and rhetorical combat is an extended-revered subculture. It is alive and nicely. Ideology Discussion board exists to offer a space for the exercise of open ideological debate. Do no longer misunderstand the motive of this newsletter – I do not think that we must all get alongside and compromise our concepts for the sake of peace and quiet. human beings have passionate beliefs and reasons for true reason. At a simple stage, loud, indignant rhetoric is better than the silence of apathy.

But there are a variety of weaknesses exposed by means of high quantity, non-public attacks, and vulgarity. Generally, they’re now not communicative. Shouting and insults do not communicate which means. they may be simply attacks. Vulgarity suggests a lack of idea and which means an inability to articulate ideas and a basic highbrow laziness. Vulgar attacks speak the best anger, frustration, (terrible) judgment, and (self) contempt. They searching for to demean in place of have interaction. Such attacks and rhetoric are an admission which you have lost the debate, otherwise, you lack the abilities or will to win rhetorically.

There have been instances in our beyond while insults had wit. Abraham Lincoln changed into now not above insulting his warring parties: “He can compress the maximum words into the smallest ideas of any man I recognize.” Winston Churchill and Oscar Wilde also had the knack for wit and insult that did no longer demean the listener truly by using hearing. However these days, we too regularly into calling our opponents ‘Nazi child killers’ then move on as though we’ve got completed a controversy.

there is any such big range of common examples of the Weak point of Severe speech that it hardly requires rehearsing them. So I won’t.

The Immorality of Excessive Speech

But Excessive speech is more than simply susceptible; it does extra than demean the speaker, the item, and the listener. Intense speech – mainly Severe analogies and Extreme relativism – truly belittle the ones who’ve suffered and do suffer real abuses, and Excessive speech robs our global of a level of important which means. Extreme analogies and Extreme relativism are truly fundamentally immoral.

Blogger Sites

Excessive analogies are an insidious form of rhetoric that has to grow to be practically ubiquitous. The fools’ gold preferred of Intense analogies is calling your opponent Hitler. Godwin’s rule of Nazi analogies states, “the longer a dialogue takes location on the internet and the greater humans involved, the opportunity of someone being compared to Hitler or the Nazis approached one.” In other words, if sufficient human beings communicate lengthy sufficient on the net, a person is positive to begin shouting, ‘Nazi!’ These attacks are everywhere. It’s far passé to name to name humans ‘Commies’. However declaring that your fighters are goose-stepping their manner in the direction of Fascism and genocide – what a controversy! – is so commonplace that we do not even balk at it. This is just another reasonably-priced manner to shout down your opponent, without enticing their ideas or arguments.

0 notes