Corona Horse, Corona Rider - Covid #9

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

31 minutes ago, karaddin said:

The first part was at you! I just meant the second part.

You meant to slander me!

Quote

I think the early fuck ups with recognition of the outbreak show it's not all knowing. Certainly is totalitarian and the failure in information gathering should not be taken as me saying positive things about them. They just aren't as effective as they'd like to be/like to to think they are.

Totalitarianism is not about actually being all knowing. It's the appearance of it. That's how @Jace, Basilissa gets away with being snotty, from time to time. 

Quote

None of my comments are meant to be taken as in favour of their government, just China as a nation and the Chinese as a people.

Don't lie, you wrote all of this in Mao cosplay. 

[Rippounet]

27 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Totalitarianism is not about actually being all knowing. It's the appearance of it.

This is soooo 1980 dude. Today, if I can access your smartphone and/or computer I know pretty much everything I want to know about you, and probably a few things I don't want to.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

2 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

This is soooo 1980 dude. Today, if I can access your smartphone and/or computer I know pretty much everything I want to know about you, and probably a few things I don't want to.

I still subscribe to Playboy for a reason, even if it was dead before I knew what it was!!!! 

Checkmate! 

[Tijgy]

On 4/2/2020 at 1:11 PM, BigFatCoward said:

in any race where drafting and team tactics are irrelevant i would always go with Thomas de Gendt. 

No, it was Greg van Avermaet... Knowing when to sprint is apparently still the most important to win the race.  Years favorite, and first win! Finally 

[DMC]

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

One can have a totalitarian state and a vast network of crime. They often go hand in hand. 

No, not really.  Unless the network of crime is directly controlled by the state.  Organized crime outside of the state is antithetical to Arendt's (1954) totalitarianism.  For her, totalitarian regimes are wholly guided by overt terror enforced by a secret police and justified by an ideology.  "No group or institution in the country is left intact, not just because they have to 'co-ordinate' with the regime in power and outwardly support it - which of course is bad enough - but because in the long run they are literally not supposed to survive."

For Arendt, totalitarianism should be applied "sparingly and prudently" - she did not define Mussolini's Italy or the Soviets post-Stalin as totalitarian.  Friedrich & Brzezinski (1956) offer a more elastic classification of totalitarianism that I largely disagree with, but even their six defining characteristics of the term include a communications monopoly, a weapons monopoly, and a directed economy.  Organized (and certainly disorganized) crime operating outside the purview of the state is anathema to the totalitarian regime.  Totalitarianism means Bentham's Panopticon writ large.

Anyway, that academic discussion is all moot - China is not a totalitarian regime and hasn't been since at least Mao.  On the topic at hand, I whole-heartedly agree with @karaddin.  The outbreak could have happened anywhere, and there is absolutely no reason to stigmatize China unless you want to encourage the alarming increase in vile and violent racism directed toward the Chinese and those of Chinese descent that I have seen first-hand over the past six weeks or so.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

24 minutes ago, DMC said:

No, not really.  Unless the network of crime is directly controlled by the state.  Organized crime outside of the state is antithetical to Arendt's (1954) totalitarianism.  For her, totalitarian regimes are wholly guided by overt terror enforced by a secret police and justified by an ideology.  "No group or institution in the country is left intact, not just because they have to 'co-ordinate' with the regime in power and outwardly support it - which of course is bad enough - but because in the long run they are literally not supposed to survive."

For Arendt, totalitarianism should be applied "sparingly and prudently" - she did not define Mussolini's Italy or the Soviets post-Stalin as totalitarian.  Friedrich & Brzezinski (1956) offer a more elastic classification of totalitarianism that I largely disagree with, but even their six defining characteristics of the term include a communications monopoly, a weapons monopoly, and a directed economy.  Organized (and certainly disorganized) crime operating outside the purview of the state is anathema to the totalitarian regime.  Totalitarianism means Bentham's Panopticon writ large.

Anyway, that academic discussion is all moot - China is not a totalitarian regime and hasn't been since at least Mao.  On the topic at hand, I whole-heartedly agree with @karaddin.  The outbreak could have happened anywhere, and there is absolutely no reason to stigmatize China unless you want to encourage the alarming increase in vile and violent racism directed toward the Chinese and those of Chinese descent that I have seen first-hand over the past six weeks or so.

Why do you always have to take the fun out of things?

And besides, your point is moot because quite possibly the richest man in the world is both a head of state and an active member of organized crime. Which was my point. In these regimes, the head of state is often times no different than a crime mob boss.

But I do agree, the anti-Chinese, and really anti-Asian bigotry that is exploding is gross. 

[DMC]

9 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

And besides, your point is moot because quite possibly the richest man in the world is both a head of state and an active member of organized crime. Which was my point. In these regimes, the head of state is often times no different than a crime mob boss.

My point is that you were misusing the term totalitarian, which you were.  To the bolded, who the hell are you talking about?  And of course in many if not most autocratic regimes the head of state behaves like a crime boss.  Hell, certain scholars have literally equated state making to organized crime.

[Fez]

6 minutes ago, DMC said:

My point is that you were misusing the term totalitarian, which you were.  To the bolded, who the hell are you talking about?  And of course in many if not most autocratic regimes the head of state behaves like a crime boss.  Hell, certain scholars have literally equated state making to organized crime.

I would assume Putin, who some people estimated last year had a net worth somewhere between $70 billion and $200 billion; far, far higher than his official financial disclosures.

However, as a practical matter, I think Mohammed bin Salman is the world's richest person, since he has such control over the House of Saud at this point; and the estimates of the royal family's total wealth is somewhere in the $2 trillion range.

[DMC]

2 minutes ago, Fez said:

I would assume Putin, who some people estimated last year had a net worth somewhere between $70 billion and $200 billion; far, far higher than his official financial disclosures.

Yeah I definitely don't buy that Putin is the richest man in the world.  He's still gotta distribute to the rest of his entrenched oligarchs.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 minute ago, DMC said:

Yeah I definitely don't buy that Putin is the richest man in the world.  He's still gotta distribute to the rest of his entrenched oligarchs.

Give me back my pen!