|
Yinlock posted:I don't really understand civil war reenactments since it seems to be a really America thing, is it just people trying to pretend that the south won? American civil war reenactments are obviously an American thing but other countries do have reenactments pertaining to their history. The largest Viking moot in Europe is a few miles from where I live and I know some Brits who like to play knights at medieval reenactments. I don't know that there's winged hussars riding in Poland or Romans marching in Italy but one might suppose there's always someone who likes to dress up.
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 08:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 20:14 |
|
|
Albinator posted:As an aside, a lot of people have rather strange views of what nonprofits are. There are of course tiny groups that run out of church basements, but past a certain size they're run very similarly to for profits in a lot of ways. You expect to see an increase in revenue every year if only to stay ahead of inflation, and if you think what you're doing is relevant to society as a whole (rather than a particular local program) there's a strong impulse to try to grow. Very big NPs employ thousands of people and can have budgets measured in the billions, and your experience of working for or with one of those is not going to be much different than any other very big company. In which case, and not wanting to sound preachy here, but it even mentions in the wikipedia article on the Bill and Melinda gates thing how: "The foundation trust invests undistributed assets, with the exclusive goal of maximizing the return on investment. As a result, its investments include companies that have been criticized for worsening poverty in the same developing countries where the foundation is attempting to relieve poverty.[37][39] These include companies that pollute heavily and pharmaceutical companies that do not sell into the developing world.[40] In response to press criticism, the foundation announced in 2007 a review of its investments to assess social responsibility.[41] It subsequently cancelled the review and stood by its policy of investing for maximum return, while using voting rights to influence company practices.[42][43]" Now as a personal thing I don't think you should be looking for maximum return on investment, if the companies you are investing in undercut your own foundations supposed goals.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 08:35
|
|
|
I hope Hillary wins just so we get more Tim Kaine stories from The Onion.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 08:50
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:In which case, and not wanting to sound preachy here, but it even mentions in the wikipedia article on the Bill and Melinda gates thing how: On a fundamental level, the charity work of rich, white people in America in Africa, Asia, South America, and other predominantly non-white Third World areas is based on the notion of White Man's Burden and that we must step in to save those people from themselves. That doesn't mean that they do no good work, but it also means that it isn't surprising that they aren't really good at what they're trying to do. They're doing it, in the end, for themselves, not for the people they're supposedly working to help. That said, by any reasonable metric the Clinton Foundation is not an abnormally bad or otherwise unethical non-profit charity. It would seem, in fact, that by the standards of the industry it is fairly good at what it does, as far as such things go. And the notion that the Clintons are overtly corrupt or otherwise stealing money from the Foundation is absurd, because we have all the financial records to show that is not the case. People want the Clinton Foundation to be a special kind of evil because they want the Clintons to be a special kind of evil. Because decades of propaganda against a family that once and soon will again occupied the White House is very powerful. Republicans are projecting their failings onto her - see, the Trump Foundation - and progressives desperately want it to be true because we bought into this idea that the great savior Bernie was our last hope, never mind that Hillary is more qualified in practice and running on the same essential platform because Bernie achieved what he sought out to achieve.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 09:39
|
|
|
This is excellent
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 09:56
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:In which case, and not wanting to sound preachy here, but it even mentions in the wikipedia article on the Bill and Melinda gates thing how: That's not the foundation itself, it's a trust that feeds it. You have made that judgement as someone with an extremely low amount of information if you're going to go off wikipedia here. They have made their judgement call with a lot more than that. If their calculus says that the net benefit of the charitable work that type of investing allows for outweighs the net harm, I think it's probably worth considering more deeply than you have. This all said, it is extremely tangential to the Clinton Foundation, which does not include an investment apparatus afaik. Hillary Clinton's personal investments are in an index fund, which has some of the same moral hazards but is also the probably the way anyone not named Buffet should be investing if they aren't trying to actively manage influence in the companies they invest in. Tom Clancy is Dead fucked around with this message at 10:47 on Aug 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 10:44
|
|
|
computer parts posted:It's LARPing that's more socially acceptable. Reenactors are older nerd-types who distinguishing features include their use of history as a veneer of respectability over their dorky obsession. They start out as low level costume/history nerds before evolving into either ahistorical SCA/renfair party people, or serious historical reenactors. Attacks include terrible folk songs, "what they really ate/drank back then", and pedantic historical lectures, none of which are particularly damaging. Their real harm comes from 'reenactor' often being used as front for racists and other social regressives. The more lax renfair or SCA types can appear in any public space, but serious reenactors mostly spawn near relevant landmarks and locations like old battlefields and memorials.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 10:55
|
|
|
Tom Clancy is Dead posted:You have made that judgement as someone with an extremely low amount of information if you're going to go off wikipedia here. They have made their judgement call with a lot more than that. If their calculus says that the net benefit of the charitable work that type of investing allows for outweighs the net harm, I think it's probably worth considering more deeply than you have. Well yeah I am not going to second guess, but isn't that an appeal to authority? "These people know what they are doing" seems to be untrue in a lot of cases. Also, if you are doing "moral calculus" everyones calculus is different. Saying that the decision being made is objectivly good seems, to me at least, to be ignoring other efforts. If it is simply throwing money to help people instead of doing something to stop the structural problems then it is at best a plaster that can be easily removed. I wouldn't be able to comment on the Clinton fund directly, but why is it so tricky to give money to companies that aren't run by wankers who are hurting both the people and the earth itself?
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 12:06
|
|
|
Yinlock posted:I don't really understand civil war reenactments since it seems to be a really America thing, is it just people trying to pretend that the south won?
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 12:25
|
|
|
Civil War re-enacters do battles where the south lost as well. Generally they are a very fun family outing, it's like a ren-faire with tons of old style crafts and snacks, and you get to see them fire off old rear end cannons.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 12:31
|
|
|
"LARP for olds" is the best way to describe Civil War reenactment IMO. Not everyone who does it is a racist CSA fetishist, though those certainly exist.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 12:36
|
|
|
Over here it's generally our civil war that gets re-enacted, though fortunately it seems to mainly be the big battles and the random little skirmishes. I wouldn't really want to go and see one that is a massacre.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 12:38
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:Over here it's generally our civil war that gets re-enacted, though fortunately it seems to mainly be the big battles and the random little skirmishes. I wouldn't really want to go and see one that is a massacre. Yeah do Civil War re-enactors ever re-enact, say, Cold Harbor? 
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 12:41
|
|
|
Dr Cheeto posted:"LARP for olds" is the best way to describe Civil War reenactment IMO. Not everyone who does it is a racist CSA fetishist, though those certainly exist. I'll probably regret finding out, but what is a 'CSA fetishist?' I only know 'Community Supported Agriculture' for that acronym, which makes that sentence hilariously insane, but I'm sure that's not what you're talking about. E: Confederate States of America, never mind
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 13:06
|
|
|
Anos posted:American civil war reenactments are obviously an American thing but other countries do have reenactments pertaining to their history. The largest Viking moot in Europe is a few miles from where I live and I know some Brits who like to play knights at medieval reenactments. I don't know that there's winged hussars riding in Poland or Romans marching in Italy but one might suppose there's always someone who likes to dress up. There's a Thirty Years War enactor who posts in the A/T Military History thread for example.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 13:20
|
|
|
NippleFloss posted:The "not openly racist and more savvy" candidates will not appeal to the virulently racist, misogynistic, politically incorrect base, who will peg them as just another slick politician. The appeal of Truml is precisely that he's crass and mean and uncouth. Without that he's just another dime store republican, and guess what...those guys got their asses kicked by Trump! And there will always be some racist populist in the primary willing to embrace Trumpism because it's a winning strategy. In four or eight years, embracing Trumpism may not seem like a winning strategy considering the potential for a Clinton landslide this cycle. Someone like Kasich who wasn't a leader this year might be more palatable next time simply by virtue of having a real shot at winning. I think it's largely a matter of if the R voters as a whole can see beyond the primary, which is unlikely but possible. The biggest takeaway from this election has to be that framing a current election based on the past, rather than the trends of today, is a losing strategy for political prognostication.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 13:37
|
|
|
Between the rent hike story yesterday and this today I love how the Trump campaign isn't even trying to hide the fact that his entire campaign is a scam. He's still going to get at least 40% of the vote...  https://twitter.com/davidfrum/status/768411294986866692
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 13:50
|
|
|
People reenact the American Civil War all over the place, even in the UK and Australia. It's weird, but it's A Thing. eg American Civil War Society of the UK: http://acws.co.uk/index.php http://www.npr.org/sections/pictureshow/2010/09/08/129722983/civilwar-uk
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 13:56
|
|
|
Filthy Hans posted:In four or eight years, embracing Trumpism may not seem like a winning strategy considering the potential for a Clinton landslide this cycle. Someone like Kasich who wasn't a leader this year might be more palatable next time simply by virtue of having a real shot at winning. I think it's largely a matter of if the R voters as a whole can see beyond the primary, which is unlikely but possible. The biggest takeaway from this election has to be that framing a current election based on the past, rather than the trends of today, is a losing strategy for political prognostication. It didn't seem like a winning strategy in the first place. The 2012 autopsy was the political equivalent of saying don't punch yourself in the balls, and here we have Trump constantly sticking his dick in a blender. I don't see the people voting Trump to look back and think "oh god, I voted for a Cheeto hued demagogue pandering to my basest instincts... won't do that again!"
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 13:57
|
|
|
MadDogMike posted:There's a Thirty Years War enactor who posts in the A/T Military History thread for example. And is legitimately one of the best posters in the thread.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 13:58
|
|
|
deathbysnusnu posted:It didn't seem like a winning strategy in the first place. The 2012 autopsy was the political equivalent of saying don't punch yourself in the balls, and here we have Trump constantly sticking his dick in a blender. I don't see the people voting Trump to look back and think "oh god, I voted for a Cheeto hued demagogue pandering to my basest instincts... won't do that again!" A lot of them won't do that again because they're old and will be dead before the next election. Not all of them, but enough of them, hopefully.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 14:00
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:Well yeah I am not going to second guess, but isn't that an appeal to authority? "These people know what they are doing" seems to be untrue in a lot of cases. Also, if you are doing "moral calculus" everyones calculus is different. Saying that the decision being made is objectivly good seems, to me at least, to be ignoring other efforts. If it is simply throwing money to help people instead of doing something to stop the structural problems then it is at best a plaster that can be easily removed. The foundation has had some poor results when it comes to reforming education, but their Clean Water initiatives are an insanely good thing and worry that their money came from investment in bad companies is stupid and for stupid people.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 14:09
|
|
|
Anos posted:American civil war reenactments are obviously an American thing but other countries do have reenactments pertaining to their history. The largest Viking moot in Europe is a few miles from where I live and I know some Brits who like to play knights at medieval reenactments. I don't know that there's winged hussars riding in Poland or Romans marching in Italy but one might suppose there's always someone who likes to dress up. Since it's in July, it's a pretty fun family day. The whole week there are tournaments, duels, archery competitions and all that stuff.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 14:12
|
|
|
Academician Nomad posted:People reenact the American Civil War all over the place, even in the UK and Australia. It's weird, but it's A Thing. From a milhist nerd perspective, the ACW is both a relatively easy war to reenact (linear tactics were still in use, as was cavalry, and equipment is easy enough to get ahold of), as well as a really interesting one (linear tactics exist alongside trench warfare, cavalry alongside widespread use of artillery). In some ways it's one of the first late-modern wars and at the same time one of the last early-modern ones. Lots to sperg over. Same applies for WWI but it is sort of overshadowed by WWII a lot.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 14:19
|
|
|
The reason Trump won the GOP primary is that he was an in-your-face racist and sexist authoritarian rear end in a top hat. That wasn't a bug, it was a feature - THE feature, in fact. He openly promised the GOP base what the "establishment" candidates would only hint at but never gave them. The reason Trump will lose the election is that the general electorate isn't the GOP primary electorate. If all women, all minorities, and even most white men who aren't old and/or uneducated hate the poo poo out of you, you can't win nationally. If you trot out a watered down Trump you just get a generic Republican of the sort that we just saw get rejected by the Republican base in favor of Trump. But the kind of nutbar who can hijack the GOP base to win the primary like Trump just did will be a huge loser nationally.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 14:26
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:Hi, you don't understand what the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation is trying to accomplish, you sound really stupid, and you should shut up, now. Why? Many of the investments by the trust are with companies that seem to exploit people. For instance, BP and Exxon. And why is it stupid? Propping up a system so that you can do good is fine when you have to make compromises. But these people are the richest on the planet, you would think they could invest into things that are not as bad/ give relief. That and the stopping funding to planned parenthood because of "abortions". I mean if you believe that that is okay for private people to do then am not going to disagree, but I do think that it's short sighted . I am not asking questions to catch you in a trap and go "aha!" but asking as to why some of these investments seem somewhat questionable and why there is not a larger attempt at changing the charitable sector.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 14:28
|
|
|
Additionally Romney was the essence of a watered down, boring, out of touch Republican so you had the backing of Serious Republicans along with the rabid Obama hating base and he got beat. That was without telling every minority that they have no place in the GOP. I think the only way that the Republicans get back in the game nationally is with a Trump styled fascist that is able to hide it well enough that the media can pretend he's a good guy and is smart enough to actually run a campaign. Luckily for us I don't think that person exists or at least hasn't risen to prominence yet. Also the clock is ticking on white people since Trump has probably poisoned the well with younger minorities for a long time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 14:31
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/politicalwire/status/768441705238519808 I have in my hand a list of 205 lesbians in the state department
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 14:37
|
|
|
zoux posted:https://twitter.com/politicalwire/status/768441705238519808 Is this a joke? I honestly can't tell.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 14:38
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:Why? Many of the investments by the trust are with companies that seem to exploit people. For instance, BP and Exxon. Worst case, they funnel the results of unethically earned capital to good uses, instead of directly into some other billionaire's pocket. It's dumb to worry about.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 14:38
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:Yeah do Civil War re-enactors ever re-enact, say, Cold Harbor? I prefer the battle of Franklin.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 14:45
|
|
|
zoux posted:I have in my hand a list of 205 Jesus this guy is mad about lesbians. theflyingorc posted:Investing in a large company does very, very little to equip them to perform unethical acts. Exxon wouldn't suddenly stop everything bad they do if the foundation wasn't involved with them. True, but doing so in order to get the best return (as I quoted) is a bad idea because it helps to entrench bad behaviour and the ideal of it. I mean it does skirt close to vegan people saying that all people who eat meat are complict in animal creulty, but I am not sure that isn't accurate. The fact that it is still going to any billionaire (even if they want to do good) instead of into infrastructure and other good works in other nations is a bad thing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 14:46
|
|
|
Radish posted:Additionally Romney was the essence of a watered down, boring, out of touch Republican so you had the backing of Serious Republicans along with the rabid Obama hating base and he got beat. That was without telling every minority that they have no place in the GOP. The Republicans need plausible deniability on bigotry to compete nationally, but open bigotry is the quickest way to win the GOP primary. The situation is inherently self-defeating. The GOP has reached the point where viability in their nomination process and viability in the national race are almost diametrically opposed concepts. Hypothetically, if the GOP was able to jettison the stink of race hate, religious fanaticism and creepy sexism, they could probably rule as a center-right party for 100 years. But to do that they would have to abandon what has been their base since the GOP absorbed the Dixicrats in 1968-1972... and that base still puts then in power in a huge number of state and local elections. Crowsbeak posted:I prefer the battle of Franklin. The Battle of Nashville owned, but 2016 Nashville is in the way of any kind of re-enactment.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 14:48
|
|
|
I heard that the interns at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation steal pens and college ruled notebooks out of the supply closet for their own personal use. Burn it to the ground.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 14:48
|
|
|
You guys talk like trump is the authoritarian candidate when hillary is letteraly a pro war on drugs, pro mass incarceration racist warmongerer.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 14:50
|
|
|
smoke sumthin bitch posted:You guys talk like trump is the authoritarian candidate when hillary is letteraly a pro war on drugs, pro mass incarceration racist warmongerer. whoa, a post from 1993!
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 14:53
|
|
|
Letteraly.
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 14:53
|
|
|
zoux posted:https://twitter.com/politicalwire/status/768441705238519808 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavender_scare
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 14:53
|
|
|
smoke sumthin bitch posted:You guys talk like trump is the authoritarian candidate when hillary is letteraly a pro war on drugs, pro mass incarceration racist warmongerer. You should do like your username and  .
|
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 14:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 20:14 |
|
|
smoke sumthin bitch posted:You guys talk like trump is the authoritarian candidate when hillary is letteraly a pro war on drugs, pro mass incarceration racist warmongerer. Well, I am as well. Ann Coulter had a book about how great Trump is come out this week. She's not happy. https://twitter.com/SopanDeb/status/768447480040198144 zoux fucked around with this message at 14:59 on Aug 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 24, 2016 14:54
|
|