Jump to content

Alarich II

Members
  • Content Count

    259
  • Joined

About Alarich II

  • Rank
    Hedge Knight

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Array

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I went the other way: since we have a new induction cooktop, we disposed of our old electric kettle wich had started to leak boiling water on your hands if you poured the wrong way. The new kettle is used on the induction cooktop and it is even faster than the old electric kettle.
  2. The question is: what is selfishness? Its a concept that (other than for example self-preservation) has largely negative cultural attributes and is seen as a deviation from "ideal" human behaviour. Most modern evolutionary anthropologists will argue, that humans have actually evolved to become less "selfish" and what some would call a "hyper-cooperative" ape-species. I have started reading Michael Tomasellos book Becoming Human: A theory of ontogeny and it is quite a fascinating read (albeit not easy for me as a layman, he basically condenses his 20 years of research as the head of the Department of Developmental and Comparative Psychology of the Max Planck Institute in Leipzig into his theory). His basic argument is that what makes us human is what he calls the capability for "collective intentionality" (there is a lot more to it, of course this is a very simplistic description of his findings). So what makes us human (distinctive from other great apes) is not selfishness, but rather to identify, "selfish" behaviour as deviation from common cultural norms and ostracize it, based again on shared cultural norms.
  3. I see; interesting perspective. My parents did put me and all my four siblings through at least 5 years of college, however university here is mostly free, so they paid for rent and food and for all else we had to get jobs (which is still a great deal, all things considered). But 140k for each of 5 children would've been very hard. They didn't attach any strings but especially for the three eldes of us it was pretty clear, that we couldn't just hang out and chill because our younger siblings would also want to go to university. So leaving all emotional stuff aside and just looking at the raw numbers, are the 140k justified in terms of better education or future education? Leaving aside the current state of unemployment because of extraordinary reasons, I would really be interested wether this kind of money can actually buy you a carreer that allows you to amortise your investment within a reasonable time-frame (say 15 years), compared to the free alternative. Isk indicated that there is a fair bit of consumerism involved in the fees, so maybe not, otoh - if you go "out of state" its presumably for a high reputation university?
  4. 140k student debt before you even get your first job, this is insane. Seriously, who in their right mind supports and votes for this kind of bullshit education system? With these kind of numbers, you probably get a better ROI on a plumbers apprenticeship than a college degree. Which makes me wonder, why parents still send their kids to college when it is such an obvious debt trap; especially the academically mediocre middle-class offspring (not your son, Chats, I'm sure he's brilliant) is probably not going to be able to pay back this kind of money for a long time and would maybe better served with learning a trade or craft.
  5. I think two things are quite telling: a) you're sidestepping my question why the story you quoted only makes sense if you know that the involved are of Turkish descent and the same goes for other incidents (maybe you are too young to remember "Chaostage Hannover", but the sudden explosion of violence/vandalism in inner cities is nothing new and nothing that is explained by immigration, it's more a combination of youth+male+alcohol than anything else). The term "partygoers" was btw. coined by the police when they reported about the night, so it seems strange to hold that against the media if they use this term in their initial reporting as well. b) you are constantly shifting the goalposts! First your claim was, that it is somehow taboo, which it isn't, I've posted enough articles to prove that this is not the case. Then you claimed that the fact that it is discussed indicates a problem, which refutes your first point, and that anyway "normal" media consider it a taboo. Your definition of "normal media" apparently is FAZ, where I've linked two articles that I've found very quickly, that also refute your point. Now your new argument is okay, it gets discussed, but in this one article from a different newspaper (TAZ), you find tone and thrust of the reporting inappropriate. I'm neither going to defend that article nor am I going to indulge in your speculative "what if"-reporting, this is a fruitless exercise where you make up an imaginary article in your mind, that just confirms your pre-existing opinion. It is just another attempt to shift the goalposts yet again, but now into the realm of imagination where finally you cannot be proven wrong. I have included this article to show you very clearly that the so called "taboo" does not exist and that even very left-wing publications like TAZ do mention it. You can agree or disagree with the way TAZ is reporting but there are plenty of other newspapers (and I did link another one in my other post, just for comparison) that do discuss immigration, also in relation to crime. Some may find the editorial choices of right-wing newpapers like Cicero appaling, others don't like the way TAZ is reporting, but there is a wide diversity of journalistic expression and discussion going on. So the claim that there is a taboo about this in German media is objectively false and if it is your subjective impression, then I would recommend a wider choice of newspapers than just FAZ (although they are IMO a solid newspaper and I've shown you via the linked articles that they don't skirt around the issue).
  6. it's fun to charter an accountant and sail the wide accountancy, to find, explore the funds offshore and skirt the shoals of bankruptcy! It can be manly in insurance. we'll up your premium semi-annually. it's all tax deductible. we're fairly incorruptible, we're sailing on the wide accountancy!
  7. So why does their Turkish descent explain this and not anything else that wasn't mentioned in the article? Also a funny question, as you already are making up an explanation: your explanation is that it's because they are Turkish, because apparently no other additional information would explain this otherwise completely unexplicable deed to you. Maybe you should ask yourself - "why am I making up this explanation?"
  8. Sometimes they do - say if Frankfurt Football Hooligans are invading Rome like whilom Barbarossa, their specific descent is important, with out the implicit knowlede that Frankfurters from the Main are prone to mindless violence, we could never make sense of this story. Same goes for Saxons, who of course have been be bloody bogeyman ever since Charlemangne. Of course, today this is coded, so if headlines say that Dynamo Hooligans are clashing in Hamburg, the common cultural connotation that every German would understand is that Saxonian hordes are invading the Free and Hanseatic City of Hamburg. Bavarians are usually discussed in the context of the inacceptable cultural appropriation when Americans wear lederhosen and talk about "their" octoberfest back in Fargo, ND. In the examples you mentioned, the reporting used to rely on that anti-semitic or anti-immigrant crimes are usually perpetrated by Germans, so the distinction between Franks, Bavarians, Saxons, Frisians etc. ist not made. However, in the specific case of anti-semitism, there has been a raise in criminals of arabic descent, so today the distinction is made, if it can be made. Otherwise the assumption is usually that these crimes are perpetrated by Neo-Nazis and those have been hesitant to welcome immigrants in their ranks, so their default nationality setting is "German", even if not explicitly mentioned.
  9. 1. You are changing the goalposts, first you said it is taboo and therefore a problem, now you say okay, it gets debated and this indicates that there is a problem. Please make up your mind. 2. "Normal" news. What I find via Google are mainly links to the online-versions of very normal newspapers; BILD, TZ, BZ, Sächsische Zeitung etc. etc. etc. Maybe your Google is broken? Now, I don't read much FAZ since my parents cancelled their suscription, so maybe your very limited view on German newspapers may give you that impression. But in my "normal" news (whatever that is supposed to mean, as if only FAZ and Welt are "normal"), there are plenty of examples that show that there is no taboo. 3. Your "random" headline example (which btw. I couldn't find on welt.de, perhaps you should post a link) exposes the pitfalls of the debate: First of all, most stupid group violence makes no sense, does it really matter where you or your grandparents were born? Second, the explanation is right there in the headline. So why does it only make sense to you, if you know that these two families are Turkish (or are they German, but of Turkish decent? Or maybe not Turkish, but Kurdish, or Lybian?)? I mean obviously, you are filling some kind of explanatory gap with that information, and obviously it is a very important part for you, because otherwise the entire story makes no sense to you. So maybe you can explain to me, why you cannot make sense of this article without this information? And this is something that journalists obviously to decide - is it newsworthy, does it add something to the story that needs to be told for full comprehension etc. And so sometimes things that may be of interest to you, specifically, are left out. 4. You are repeating that there is a taboo, your example is an article that is not even linked, and that's it? What about a counter example, the rape-case in Freiburg? Münchner Merkur and TAZ report on the nationality of the accused - obviously with a different tone which is to be expected. Or maybe you don't read FAZ close enough? Jordanian man sentenced to 14 years, Police raid against arab/turkish clans just to link two articles from your "normal" newspaper. There are plenty of examples despite your claim of taboo, so how does this work? Perhaps nationality or descent it is not always a newsworthy item, perhaps the police doesn't always release that kind of information but your claim that in German newspapers, the nationality or descent of a suspect or convicted is taboo does not fit the facts.
  10. Which newspapers specifically are you talking about? Because it seems to me that you must be reading very different German newspapers than I do. I would say immigration is not a taboo topic in Germany at all, on the contrary, we talk about it a lot and not only in JF or TAZ either in a range of newspapers (FAZ, Spiegel, SZ, Zeit). The question wether or not newspapers should state the descent of a suspect or a criminal is also one that gets debated all the time, but in most spectacular crime cases, newspapers will not leave that out. Both your examples fall short (the "Lybian clan" was in fact a Lebanese clan and they stormed an ER, not a courthouse iirc.), because the information was out there and you'll find tons of newspapers reporting about Lebanese clans (BZ, TZ, Stern, BILD, Focus etc. etc.); the same is true for thee "partygoers" because out of hundreds, the police arrested a dozen, perhaps a few more and of those, some were of foreign descent, some weren't. To describe this as a "crime of immigrants", as you would like to, would -a) in the immediate aftermath, literally only a few hours after the arrests, be very premature, as the police is still undergoing background checks on the arrested and - b) probably not be true for the entirety of persons involved in these incidents because the police only arrested a dozen "partygoers" or so.
  11. If you go on holidays to Spain or Italy (maybe even France or Austria), don't be surprised when the situation takes a sudden turn to the worse and you'll be quarantined. That something like this would happen as soon as traveling increases again, should come as no surprise to anyone.
  12. We don't have active shooter drills in Germany; our service club sent out and exchange student to the US and when she came back, she told us about her experiences and she said that the worst day was when there was a school lockdown because there was a shooting near the school, that she felt extreme anxiety. I don't know how American students deal with this, but it seems to me that having these kind of situations repeatedly cannot be very healthy for your mind. I do remember the fire drills in my school, we hade one iirc every year so that everybody would know where to go, where to assemble etc.
  13. Change is always invevitable, this argument of yours goes nowhere and doesn't adress my point. The question is has the communist party ceded their claim of exclusive occupation of the political sphere, of being the only possible outlet for political thought and action? The answer is no, it hasn't. And the justification is from the standard authoritarian playbook: If you are not for us, you are against us. Against us are the counter-revolutionaries who wand to go back to pre-revolutionary times and destroy all the good we have done. They are the enemies of the state, therefore if you are not for us, you are an enemy of the state and will be treated as such. I could have picked out China as well, and in many ways the changes in China are even more profound than in Cuba, especially in the last 30 years, but point is - the claim of a single party to exclusively represent the entirety of the political sphere has not changed, in fact the more change we see, the firmer they hold on to their power. And this kind of black/white, for us / against us line of thinking is also very common in right-wing authoritarian regimes like Russia or Hungary and it reveals that there isn't only a left/right axis in politics but also an authoritarism (at the expense of civil rights) vs. pluralism (at the expense of unity and decisive action) axis and what we're seeing today in the US (for example) is not only a left/right issue, but also a republican party that under Trump moves significantly further towards authoritarianism at the expense of human rights. Altough I would have to concede that in this line argument, Trump is probably not the best example, achieving neither unity nor decisive action, while sill abusing civil rights.
  14. Their existing political system, what else do you understand by status quo? Their revolutionary moment is over 60 years in the past, the communist party has won the revolution decades ago, they now want to preserve the fruits of their labour, and thus their objective has changed from revolution (attacking the status quo) to conservation (defending the new status quo), of course at the expense of certain rights like freedom of press, freedom of association etc.
×
×
  • Create New...