Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 17, 2017, 08:27:20 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 165
1  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Opinion of the Social Democratic Party of Germany on: September 25, 2017, 04:56:32 pm
A party with a rich pedigree of screwing the pooch (from war credits to Freikorps to Agenda 2010). Although anybody who models themselves afterf the Social Democrat tradition has to admire them a bit.

This is true as far as it goes, but (and this doesn't apply to you personally) the opposite also happened:

Quote from:  Wiki
On March 23, 1933 Wels was the only member of the Reichstag to speak against Adolf Hitler's Enabling Act (the "Law for Removing the Distress of People and Reich"). The vote took place during the last session of the multi-party Reichstag, on March 23, 1933. Because the Reichstag building itself had suffered heavy fire damage in February, the March session was held in Berlin's Kroll Opera House. Despite the incipient persecution of opposition politicians and the presence of the SA, he made a courageous speech opposing the Enabling Act, which gave the Reich cabinet the right to pass laws without the consent of the Reichstag for a period of four years. He stated:
"At this historic hour, we German Social Democrats pledge ourselves to the principles of humanity and justice, of freedom and Socialism. No Enabling Law can give you the power to destroy ideas which are eternal and indestructible ... From this new persecution too German Social Democracy can draw new strength. We send greetings to the persecuted and oppressed. We greet our friends in the Reich. Their steadfastness and loyalty deserve admiration. The courage with which they maintain their convictions and their unbroken confidence guarantee a brighter future."
Speaking directly to Hitler, Wels proclaimed,
"You can take our lives and our freedom, but you cannot take our honour. We are defenseless but not honourless."
All 94 SPD members of parliament who were present voted against the act.
2  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Elections / Re: What is with on: September 25, 2017, 03:20:30 pm
I used to be with it, then they changed what it was, now what I'm with isn't it, and what's it seems weird and scary to me. It'll happen to you too.*

*I don't know if this thread is directed at me, although if it is I think that's unfair seeing as I only emerged to counter slander about the past, but if it's not this is still relevant.
3  General Discussion / History / Re: In 1000 years Adolf Hitler will be remembered as... on: September 24, 2017, 01:44:28 pm
We should remember that the movements of history aren't all one way. There are plenty of examples of people who have become more controversial in public memory recent years, for instance Christopher Columbus. Also Hitler was, all in all, rubbish, he was a pretty poor general who got lucky for a year or so and Mein Kampf is as well as being one of the worst books ever written, also one of the worse written. Leaving aside morality, in terms of sheer competence there is no comparison to people like Julius Caesar, Genghis Khan and Napoleon. If you're looking for the 20th Century Caesar or Alexander the Great I think you'd be better off with someone like Lenin.

The important thing when it comes to moral judgements on history, though, is that it isn't based on how long ago it was, but how recognisable the moral universe is to the historians. We can see this by the degree of judgement passed in the west on the Romans, and especially the Romans and their relationship with Christianity and Judaism, compared to the activities of, say, Chinese  and north american empires at the same time. This is because our current morality is largely based on Christianity and Greek philosophy. Similarly you are far more likely to see judgement of Medieval monarchs than of Genghis Khan, because the former were Christians and thus at least in outline understandable to us, the latter was not. We basically inhabit the same moral universe that the people of the 1940s did, so Hitler is an even starker case. As long as this remains the case, there will be people lining up to condemn him.
4  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Atlas Fantasy Elections / Re: Oakvale/Potus for Atlasia on: September 24, 2017, 01:07:18 pm
Basically I defined every election for Senate from the October 2013 Regional Senate elections through August of 2014 when I was no longer able to get online, in terms of "If more conservative candidate doesn't win, the Labor candidate will be a vote for the TNF agenda". Which was not a lie as Labor always seemed to vote as a block on most key issues. So whether or not "bore or Tyrion" were considered "reasonable laborites", made little difference and people finally learned that distinction was meaningless, when it was almost too late.

Worth noting, for those who were not around during this period of the game, that literally everything in this post is not only false, but extravagantly so. It's not just the errors in fact, of which there are remarkably many, especially given this posts surprising and merciful brevity, there is also the laughable delusions of grandeur. No elections were fought on the terms Yankee claims they were, labour never voted as a block on any real issue and everyone always knew that there was a very real difference between me and TNF.
5  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Tomi Lahren joins Fox on: August 31, 2017, 12:27:52 pm
Could've seen that coming. Fox tends to hire attractive women. Unlike MSNBC with Rachel Maddow looking like a 14 year old boy

It's a complete mystery that you're single.
6  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: University of Tampa professor sacked for saying hurricane is karma for Texas GOP on: August 31, 2017, 07:54:39 am
A world where everyone is one stupid comment on the internet away from losing their job seems pretty dystopian.
7  General Discussion / History / How should we approach the scum of the earth? on: August 30, 2017, 12:40:45 pm
This is an effort post from AAD, but it took me long enough and I'm egotistical enough to want to post it here as well

On holiday this week I read On Stalin's Team by the eminent Soviet historian Sheila Fitzpatrick, a collective biography of Stalin's henchmen. It was an interesting, well researched book and I know there are quite a few people on here who are similarly interested in Soviet history, so perhaps I'll discuss it more in another thread. But that's not my purpose here. As I always do after finishing a book, I went on to Google to read a variety of reviews and essays on it, and came across this very interesting review by Donald Rayfield, another notable historian. There is a very entertaining story about Voroshilov (perhaps the Soviet figure most worthy of ALL CAPS treatment) in the review, but again Soviet politics isn't the concern here.

The review criticises quite sharply the editorial choice of Fitzpatrick to adopt, tonally at least, the narrative of Nice Guy, FF. As Rayfield says:

Historians are vulnerable to Stockholm syndrome: they forgive the men who have taken them hostage. (This fascination also colours Simon Sebag Montefiore’s Stalin: At the Court of the Red Tsar.) The offspring of Beria, Mikoyan, Molotov and Kaganovich are loyal to their progenitors: they paint pictures of loving husbands and fathers who, if they killed, did so only to save their own families. Nino Beria, who lived to her 90s, claimed that her husband’s hundreds of female visitors were just “agents doing their duty”, while Beria’s son Sergo portrayed his father as the Albert Speer, not the Heinrich Himmler of Stalin’s team. They all lie. We should remember that commandants of Nazi extermination camps, too, loved their children and listened to Schubert: that mitigates nothing.
Indeed, Fitzpatrick often talks about the loving devotion of Molotov to his family, of Voroshilov's patronage of artists, of everybody's Javanka style disapproval of Stalin's latter day anti semitism. The obvious defence is that this is a book about the high courtly politics, not the social history, so a lot of the truly awful stuff wouldn't necessarily appear, whereas the good stuff is actually relevant. Not every work can be a worthy account of the oppressed millions, the personalities of the oppressors are important to.
 And, just as a statement of fact, it is true that Stalinists did love their children. After all, even the tax collectors love those who love them.

I don't know if I'm convinced by that, though. The question I'm interested in exploring here is what the right approach is here. Should we broadcast the unavoidable and irritating fact that Nazis and Soviets loved their children and were polite and well educated, and not all cartoonishly evil in each and every sphere? Yes, because otherwise we won't even begin to understand how mass murder can happen. But it is surely morally unhealthy to self flagellatingly identify so much with the perpetrators that we forget the victims. I know that it is said that there is not a finite amount of compassion in the world, but even if that's true, there is certainly a finite amount of attention, which is almost the same thing.

Perhaps the answer is that history should not be an inquisition, which sounds like a laudable ideal. But there is of course no such thing as a neutral narrative. We choose which people to study, which stories to tell, which anecdotes and statistics to use. The problem, to me at least, to put it like a church father is that the perpetrators are men, and so are the victims, and so are historians, and so we are of the same substance, but are different persons. It seems intractable, so I'm interested to hear what the great and good of this forum have to say about it.
8  General Politics / Political Debate / Re: The origin of the wrong idea that the nazis were lefties on: August 30, 2017, 12:02:24 pm
tbh implying that Louis XIV was a socialist is possibly the funniest thing i've read in a very long time.

Only Wulfric can provide the clarity that we so desperately need here.
9  General Discussion / History / Re: Did Albert Speer know about the Holocaust on: August 06, 2017, 06:26:57 pm
So did the German citizenry for the most part know what was going on.

How could they not know, seeing millions loaded into trains and never returning.

It's not that simple. It was always clear to them the Jews were never to return, with the official line being resettlement to the west (and, before 1938, forced immigration). The final solution as we knew it materialized only when the war was underway and Jews were already deported to ghettos. The Holocaust was never a public policy. In fact SS was very sensitive about keeping as much secrecy as possible.

While it became apparent something else was going on, I'm pretty sure most of Germans were shocked to see the full picture come 1945.

Nah Winfield is right.

There is a tendency to see the Holocaust through the prism of the camps, and particularly the concentration camps, where there was at least a slim chance of surviving, and not the Einsatzgruppen and the death camps, where there was not. But just as many jews died by bullets as  by gas, which, inevitably, means there are a tens of, if not hundreds of thousands of accomplices, not just from the SS but from the Wehrmacht as well. That's not counting all the people who knew from working on the trains, or dealt with jewish belongings. It's absurd to think that mass murder of that scale could be kept quiet. And, of course, it wasn't. To take an example from Richard Evans book on the Reich at war, as early as March 1942 the SD (who were very good at this sort of thing) reported back that "soldiers returning from Poland were talking openly about how Jews were being killed in large numbers there". By October 1942 Anthony Eden publicly reported that 2 million Jews had been murdered in the house of commons. And straight after that the British flooded Germany, through the BBC and through the RAF, with details on the camps, which Goebbels did not deny. Evans summarises that at the latest everyone knew by 1942, and I think that's a reasonable suggestion.

As for the idea that the SS were very concerned with the secrecy, that's true and it isn't. On the one hand, yes, Goebbels never outright announced that "Today we have murdered 5000 Jews, tomorrow we will do the same, and the day after....", and certainly talk about it by members of the public was discouraged. On the other hand, pretty much all political discussion was discouraged, and they didn't really make it too difficult to piece things together (which, to be fair, they couldn't have done if they wanted to). One of the most chilling lines in all of history is "if world Jewry launches another war in order to destroy the Aryan nations of Europe, it will not be the Aryan nations that will be destroyed, but the Jews.", which Hitler said to the Reichstag, and thus all of Germany, in January 1939, and repeated again in 1941 to the Reichstag and in 1942 on the radio.
10  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Opinion on Climate Change on: July 13, 2017, 07:55:22 am
55% of global warming is caused by humans, 45% by nature
11  General Politics / International General Discussion / Re: How do British Jews vote? on: July 10, 2017, 07:51:04 am
Well there was David Ward but he was effectively expelled from the party.

Jenny Tonge is another, although she has also, albeit much too late, been expelled from the party.
12  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: "Non-binary" gender people vs. furries on: July 03, 2017, 04:16:19 pm
Non-binary sounds like a computer having an identity crisis

Huh, this is apparently possible

(Normally I'd feel bad about hijacking a thread, but, BRTD.
13  General Politics / International General Discussion / Re: World leaders who are more popular in another country than they are at home on: June 30, 2017, 07:03:31 am
George W. Bush was probably pretty popular in Africa and Eastern Europe at the end of his administration.  He was greeted quite enthusiastically in Albania. 

George W. Bush: The Norman Wisdom of US Presidents
14  General Discussion / Religion & Philosophy / Re: Who is worse? Satan or God? on: June 30, 2017, 06:54:57 am
Satan is more fiscally conservative whereas God is more socially conservative
15  General Politics / International General Discussion / Re: UK General Discussion: 2017 and onwards, Mayhem on: June 27, 2017, 06:39:57 am
I just realized the UK hasn't had a left wing government in nearly 40 years.
That is all.

Wow, thanks for this blisteringly hot take, random american.
16  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Voting Booth / Re: June 2017 Federal Election on: June 25, 2017, 05:32:09 pm

1. BK/BK
2. Clyde/Siren

1 dr_novella
2 cxs
3 onej
4 peebs
5 alpha
6 poirot
17  Atlas Fantasy Elections / Voting Booth / Re: Lincoln Voting Booth, June 2017 on: June 25, 2017, 05:13:43 pm


1. This election will last for exactly 72 hours beginning at 1:00:00 AM (Eastern Standard Time) on Friday, June 23 and ending at 1:00:00 AM on Monday, June 26. All ballots cast outside of this period will be counted invalid.

2. You are eligible to vote in this election if you (a) have registered with the federal Census Bureau as a voter of one of the states of this Region; and (b) have not had your voting rights stripped as the result of deregistration or court order.

3. When voting for Senate and Assembly, please rank the candidates that appear on the ballot in order of preference, with "1" indicating your first choice, "2" your second choice, etc. You may rank all, some, or none of the candidates on your ballot. If you wish to vote for a candidate whose name does not appear on the ballot, you may do so by writing his or her name in the blank provided. If you only wish to vote for one candidate, you may mark the space next to that candidate's name with an "X" or simply type the candidate's name.

4. You are permitted, but not advised, to edit your ballot within 20 minutes of posting it in this thread. Editing your ballot more than 20 minutes after posting it in this voting booth will cause it to be counted invalid.

5. Please check over your ballot thoroughly before you click "Post". You have no excuse for casting a ballot which contains errors or does not accurately reflect your preferences. Failure to correct errors in your ballot may result in its disqualification.

ONE (1) to be elected

[1] 20RP12/R2D2 of Massachusetts

[2] cinyc of New York

[ ] Write-in:

ONE (1) to be elected

[2] Kingpoleon of New Jersey

[1] Mike Wells of New York

[ ] Write-in:

THREE (3) to be elected

[3] kyc0705 of New Jersey

[4] RGN08 of New York

[1] lok1999 of Indiana

[2] JGibson of Illinois

[ ] Write-in:


Text: [The Grammatical Accuracy and Equality Amendment to the Constitution of Atlasia may be read here.]
Question: Shall the proposed Grammatical Accuracy and Equality Amendment to the Constitution of Atlasia be ratified?

[1] YES

[ ] NO


Text: [The proposed Voting Rights Amendment to the Constitution of the Republic of Atlasia may be read here.]
Question: Shall the proposed Voting Rights Amendment to the Constitution of the Republic of Atlasia be ratified?

[1] YES

[ ] NO


18  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / International Elections / Re: UK General Election, 2017 - Election Day and Results Thread on: June 17, 2017, 02:57:15 pm
What Leave constituency/ies did the Lib Dems pick up?

Eastbourne, with Carshalton and Norfolk North being Leave holds.
19  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / International Elections / Re: UK Liberal Democrats leadership election, 2017 on: June 17, 2017, 02:51:39 pm
Only somewhat related, but do we know how Orkney and Shetland vote separately ? Is the LibDem base evenly distributed or more on one of the archipelagos ?

IIRC in the 2015 close shave (The Lib Dem majority was only 4% or something) the word from the count was that Carmicheal won Orkney but lost Shetland. Although given other results I imagine that wasn't due to innate partisanship but because Danus Skene, the SNP candidate, was based in Shetland and Carmichael is based in Orkney, and if there is one place in the UK where people are most likely to vote for local candidates for local people it's Orkney and Shetland.
20  Forum Community / Forum Community / Re: Does your family follow Austrian politics? on: June 17, 2017, 10:43:47 am
I force them to, by inserting tidbits into all of our conversations:

Mum: Are you free to come with us to Manchester in August?
Me: I'm as free as Vienna is likely to vote SPO at the next election

Dad: Do you want to watch that new drama on BBC1?
Me: I haven't been this excited since I had the chance to liveblog the funeral of OVP deputy from 2006 to 2008 Gunther Kesselburger.

Sister: Nice weather today
Me: You know what isn't nice? The views of the naive left leftist Van Der Bellen

Mum: How did your exams go?
Me: Isn't the real question what is the education system like in Austria? Let me tell you about that.
21  General Discussion / Religion & Philosophy / Re: What happened to Jesus of Nazareth? on: June 13, 2017, 11:14:01 am
Simplest possible solution: he wasn't really dead when they took him down for the cross. 9 hours generally wasn't enough to die. The part about the tomb is either artistic license, or maybe they really put him in there to keep up appearances and got him out soon after.

A hot take! The hottest of takes!

Anyway, option 1, although "ascend" obviously shouldn't be taken to mean what it normally does.

It's certainly hot, but not quite as hot as "Jesus had a lookalike go up on the cross for him and got away," i.e. the Muslim take.

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.
22  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / International Elections / Re: UK General Election, June 8th 2017 on: May 31, 2017, 12:25:54 pm
No evidence that giant polls are any better tbh.

True, it need not be. But 1/2K polls are usually meaningless. Most of this small sample size polls would even pass the 95% CL. With giant polls, you have a much larger sample size to analyze geographical, age wise pattern & so on. That is impossible in a smaller poll.

The last survation poll had a 50 odd sample size, that is meaningless & you have literally no idea from that ! For country wise issues, having 8-10K etc is pretty decent, perhaps 50K isn't needed (unless you want individual seat wise data which is hard even with 50K)!

Apart from the fact that crosstabs aren't worth much for small polls, this is pretty much all wrong.

A 1000 sample poll has a margin of error of about +/- 3%, assuming that the sample is representative, which is more than enough to predict the results of the general election, roughly speaking. Because the decrease in the margin of error is logarithmic, there is not that much advantage to be had from having a sample much larger than this, unless you poll the whole country.

This is only true, however, if the sample is representative in the first place, which is the hard part of polling, and is just as much as an issue for 50,000 sample polls as it is for 1,000 polls. (Especially for yougov, as their samples are self selecting)
23  General Politics / U.S. General Discussion / Re: Rep. Adrian Smith (R-NE-3) refuses to say whether people have a right to eat on: May 28, 2017, 12:16:01 pm
People have a right to eat, but peope don't have a right to food.

Huge difference.

People have a right to bear arms, they don't have a right to arms.

In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread.
24  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / International Elections / Re: UK General Election, June 8th 2017 on: May 28, 2017, 11:37:34 am
I wonder whether all this new momentum for Labour could start having any impact in Scotland and start moving unionist votes back to Labour from the Tories in which case Labour could pick up half a dozen Scottish seats. Just wondering

 just totally alienated by Scottish Labour only ever talking about "A SECOND REFERENDUM" and not the issues, which the SNP surprisingly do.  There's also the fact that the Tories are rising and you might have the whole "the SNP are bad and we aren't fond of them, but at least they aren't the Tories" thing going on.

The irony is that I have heard many Scottish Labour activists say they're the only party that doesn't drone on about independence; with the SNP+the tories being the ones who play it as a trump card

ICA is right that in terms of public, official, campaigning the SNP pretty much never mention independence. Of course, they don't have to. Everyone knows that they want another referendum and they want independence. And in 2015 and 2016 they had the support of pretty much every Yes voter, and it's pretty clear that these voters didn't switch en masse to the SNP simply because they loved their new education policies. If they want to get a landslide, like in 2015, though, they need to win over a few no voters as well, which is why they don't talk about independence, because otherwise they'll scare these voters off. But it is a bit rich for them to complain about others campaigning on the constitution when most of their voters are motivated by it too.

I get ICA's mum's frustration with Labour as well. I hate constitutional politics, and I hate that it is how we decide our votes now. But unfortunately the Scottish population don't, or at least don't hate it enough to not vote on it. We tried to run our 2016 campaign on moving on from the referendum and more spending on healthcare, but we got thrashed, and, worse, the tories, by running their campaign entirely against independence, surged. So the party made the decision that if it wanted to remain relevant in Scottish politics it had to have a strong position on the constitution, and it had to talk about it. It's unfortunate that that's the world is, but that is the way it is.
25  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / International Elections / Re: UK General Election, June 8th 2017 on: May 28, 2017, 11:22:50 am
I wonder whether all this new momentum for Labour could start having any impact in Scotland and start moving unionist votes back to Labour from the Tories in which case Labour could pick up half a dozen Scottish seats. Just wondering

Scottish Labour have deep, deep problems and I don't see this changing things for them.  Labour's traditional appeal wasn't to "unionist voters" but to your traditional working class voters and they've mostly gone to the SNP at this point - it honestly wouldn't surprise me if a bunch of those voters didn't actually support independence - my Mum is doing this at this point: just totally alienated by Scottish Labour only ever talking about "A SECOND REFERENDUM" and not the issues, which the SNP surprisingly do.  There's also the fact that the Tories are rising and you might have the whole "the SNP are bad and we aren't fond of them, but at least they aren't the Tories" thing going on.

I only see two Labour seats in Scotland in any remotely realistic scenario: I think that they'll hold onto Edinburgh South and have a small chance in East Lothian - past that, I see nothing.  The old heartland seats in the west are all SNP by huge margins now, and I can't see them getting anywhere near the swing they'd need even if they closed the gap.

Aren't Edinburgh North and Leith and Renfrewshire East closer than East Lothian though? Or do local issues make those harder for Labour?

Labour, against all expectations, held East Lothian in the Scottish Parliament elections in 2016 (and with an increased majority!) , and only lost one council seat and maintained largest party status at the council elections this month. So it's become clear over the last 2 years that Labour remain fundamentally strong in East Lothian, and it's being targeted accordingly.

Whereas Labour did relatively well in East Renfrewshire and Edinburgh North and Leith in 2015, they were standing popular, prominent incumbents. But since then, in the Holyrood and council elections we've fallen back in both seats substantially. In particular East Renfrewshire was, before 1997, a pretty solid conservative seat, and over the last few years the tories have re emerged, so Labour are no longer the obvious, or even a possible choice for unionist tactical voters. For instance in 2016 the Tories gained Eastwood, the scottish parliament seat that is broadly similar to East Renfrewshire, albeit Eastwood is better for the tories, as East Renfrewshire also contains areas like Barrhead and Neilston. Nevertheless, without a high profile incumbent (Jim Murphy was the leader of Scottish Labour when he lost east renfrewshire), with the Tories having become the largest party in the seat at Holyrood and at the locals, Labour have pretty much no chance in the seat, although they seem to be running a spirited campaign.

Edinburgh North and Leith is fundamentally better for Labour than East Renfrewshire, and it has quite a bit in common with Edinburgh South, so a victory wouldn't be completely shocking, but recent results, combined with the loss of incumbency, show far less resilience among the labour vote than East Lothian, so it's a less likely gain.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 165

Login with username, password and session length


Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines