It didn't seem like you to be implying that sort of thing, which is why I phrased it in terms of what I am used to seeing (rather than ascribing such motives to you). Thanks for the clarification!
<[email protected]> On Thu, Sep 2, 2021 at 12:56 PM uǝlƃ ☤>$ <[email protected]> wrote: > Sorry. I didn't mean to imply that I'm confident in the concept of > progression. I'm not, as my rants against concepts like the singularity and > risks of fascism in the US *should* indicate. I don't think anyone's better > off, despite the empty rhetoric of Pinker et al. > > But I do believe in dynamism. The world today is very different from the > world of yesterday. To think otherwise would be a bit foolish, I think. > And, along with that, the *modes* of behavior of yesterday will mostly not > apply today. ... "mostly" is an important, and purposefully vague, part of > that sentence. I have no idea what modes translate across time (or space) > and what modes do not. That's one of the sources of my pluralism and > pragmatic rejection of monism. > > As for the particular of access to hot springs. I think it's kindof > offensive for us to assume we should be able to pollute nature at will. > Sure, the fittest and richest amongst us will always be able to pollute > everything, toss cars into space, shit on Mt. Everest, etc. But if there > are limits to access, it seems perfectly reasonable to me. I can't do as > many pull-ups as I'd like. And Dave can't navigate to hot springs. Big > deal. Get over it. > > > On 9/2/21 9:45 AM, Eric Charles wrote: > > I'm interested in what's behind that "obsolete" and "left behind" talk. > Usually I see that kind of language in a Progressive context, where it is > used to indicate that things are moving in The Right Direction, and that > they are Better Now than they were before, and that the people hurting > and/or complaining just don't appreciate - gosh darn it - how much better > off they are. > > > > Workers complaining that OSHA codes make it harder to electrocute > themselves to death; fire codes making it harder for Mrs. O'Leary's cow to > torch a whole city; etc. > > > > Is that what is happening in these situations? Or is it more like a > bunch of automatons on a restless random walk, while some other > automatons want to stay where they are? > > > > Where does: Making it harder for disabled people to access hot springs > on public land fall on that spectrum? > > > > > > <mailto:[email protected]> > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 2, 2021 at 10:50 AM uǝlƃ ☤>$ <[email protected] <mailto: > [email protected]>> wrote: > > > > Well, I do feel pity for Dave and the obsolete people/modes being > left behind. Nostalgia is difficult. On his deathbed, with so much time to > sit and think about dying, my dad finally admitted that his "type A > personality" was an artifact of the circumstances within which he was > reared ('30s). And it wasn't at all successful under the > circumstances/times in which me and my sister were reared. My sister took > something more like Marcus' stance, an unvarnished "get with the program". > I took a more apathetic stance, "you're gonna to die soon, anyway, at which > your pain will end." > > > > I feel the same way when I see lions at the zoo, once glorious > masters on the Serengeti, now pathetic creatures burdened with claws and > teeth and nobody to fight with. It's truly sad. But it's also terrifying to > me. Am *I* capable of recognizing the signal when it comes my way? Or am I > destined to be a scared little snowflake, hiding in my nostalgia? ... > aggrieved, petulant, and burdened with my teeth and claws? > > > > I took a morning walk to downtown Olympia right after the pandemic. > I walk/run around 6am. As I was returning, walking, a man in a black > gaiter, sunglasses, and black hoodie, covered so well I couldn't see any of > his flesh ... hell, I don't even know if it was a man. Was walking toward > me. I didn't think much of it at the time. There was a new building across > the street with some weird structure (e.g. a kitchen on the 1st floor with > no other rooms attached ... WTF?). So I crossed to peer through the various > floor to ceiling plate glass windows to see if I could figure out what it > was for? > > > > When I was done peering into the windows, I noticed the man on the > other side of the street, stopped, staring at me. That scared me. Did he > intend harm? Was he offended that I crossed the street? Should I go back > across and say something? ... well, a couple of women walked past me > audibly wondering what this building was for and that distracted me. I > talked to them for a minute. And when I looked back the guy was gone. > > > > Have I become just like the scared little old lady that lives next > door? Afraid of progress? Afraid of diversity? Scared of my own shadow? I > honestly don't know. > > > > > > On 9/2/21 7:22 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote: > > > The signal to the welfare rancher is “Find a new line of work and > quit your whining.” > > > > > >> On Sep 2, 2021, at 7:05 AM, Eric Charles < > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > wrote: > > >> > > >> > > >> "The fact that you agree with the policies and actions does not > mitigate the harm caused." > > >> > > >> This seems to be a recurring theme in conversations I am having > recently, in several venues. I make a factual claim about damages caused by > a policy/action/decision. Someone objects to the factual claim because they > agree with policy/action/decision. I'm never quite sure where to go in the > conversation after that. > > >> > > >> Like, I saw someone post, non-sarcastically, a meme claiming that > Biden's withdrawal from Afghanistan was more peaceful that Trump's final > days in office. When I pointed out how obviously wrong that was, the > otherwise-sensible-seeming person couldn't do anything but insist that > withdrawing was the right thing to do. Like... come on man... I get that... > but what does that have to do with pretending things went well, or were > "peaceful"?!? > > >> > > >> So, like... yeah... you might agree with restrictions on the uses > of public lands... but that doesn't mean you need to pretend it has no > negative consequences for individuals. Just own that those harms will > happen, as part of your supporting the policy. > > >> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Wed, Sep 1, 2021 at 8:09 PM Prof David West < > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto: > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote: > > >> > > >> __ > > >> Marcus, you seem to miss my point; perhaps just baiting me. > > >> > > >> Honors at Highlands: this was part of a policy, stated > publicly at a Board of Regents meeting, "Highlands exists to provide > degrees to Hispanic students that could never obtain one at any other > university. Honors degrees, curricula, and courses are racist reasons that > students from northern New Mexico cannot succeed at other universities and, > as such, cannot be tolerated at Highlands." > > >> > > >> Posters: woman in question was a 30+ year old grad student > (we shared the same advisor). The posters were in my office for my > enjoyment, purchased at the university bookstore. Meeting was held in my > office at her request. They were prints of Dali work considered "great > art." The human figures are totally androgynous as well as being distorted > in typical Dali style. Her motive for filing the complaint was, she stated > in an email a year later, to discredit me with our advisor who she thought > showed a preference for my work over hers. The HR office, because of their > "enlightened liberal policies" accepted her complaint on its face, no > investigation; as the same policy stated one was not needed because, as a > male and academic staff, I had no defensible position to consider. > > >> > > >> Ranchers: this particular family took 'stewardship' seriously > and made hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of improvements to public > land. but my point is simply that bureaucrats, kowtowing to liberal > environmental lobbyists set policy without regard to any 'facts on the > ground' or any science, simply on liberal philosophy of how things "should > be." > > >> > > >> Access: I too am a taxpayer. There are some very nice hot > springs on BLM land near by. They are maintained and upgraded by a > volunteer public group (pretty informal, word of mouth kind of stuff). > Being old and feeble, my access is increasing dependent on the use of an > ATV. BLM policy dictates constant reduction of motorized transport on that > land, so it will not be long before my access is de facto denied. This is a > personal example of a "woke" policy on increasing wilderness designations > thereby denying access to elderly, handicapped, and otherwise marginally > abled. > > >> > > >> You asked for examples of liberal actions/policies that > caused harm, to me specifically, but by implication in general. These are > tangible examples. The fact that you agree with the policies and actions > does not mitigate the harm caused. > > >> > > >> davew > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Wed, Sep 1, 2021, at 4:33 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote: > > >>> > > >>> Welfare ranchers, indeed. The rest of us have to > constantly modernize our skills.. But freeloading off the public land and > environment that’s “multigenerational” and must be preserved? Why? > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Marcus > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> *From:* Friam <[email protected] <mailto: > [email protected]> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto: > [email protected]>>> *On Behalf Of *Frank Wimberly > > >>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 1, 2021 3:17 PM > > >>> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group < > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>>> > > >>> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Liberal dilemmas > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> I owned 40 acres in Torrance County, NM which was adjacent > to a national forest. Ranchers were charged $1.21 per acre per year to use > the NF land for grazing. I could have made $48 per year by charging a > little less than the feds. My property taxes were $40 per year. > > >>> > > >>> --- > > >>> Frank C. Wimberly > > >>> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz, > > >>> Santa Fe, NM 87505 > > >>> > > >>> 505 670-9918 > > >>> Santa Fe, NM > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> On Wed, Sep 1, 2021, 1:50 PM Marcus Daniels < > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto: > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote: > > >>> > > >>> Dave wrote: > > >>> > > >>> < More significant: I have had my curricular materials > censured and have had my job threatened on a number of occasions because it > was deemed inconsistent with liberal values. Ironically, many of these > events occurred when I was teaching at a Catholic university where I could, > with impunity, challenge religious orthodoxy, but not liberal woke > snowflake orthodoxy. I was once censured by the University of Wisconsin HR > department because a female student filed a sexual harassment complaint > because I had a meeting with her in my office where I had three Salvador > Dali prints on my wall and "she was forced to look at breasts the entire > meeting." Her complaint was upheld because neither the content of the Dali > prints nor my intent or rational for having them in my office mattered — > only her subjective feelings. At Highlands I was forbidden to offer Honors > courses or any opportunities to earn extra credit in a class by tackling > extra hard problems (these were software > > >>> courses) because doing so was racist and unfair — simply > because more non-Hispanic students obtained the extra credit or the honors > designation. > > > >>> > > >>> So the university had the expectation that before > advanced classes could be offered, there needed to an unbiasing of the > candidate pool for those classes by adequately training everyone (every > demographic) that was potentially feeding in to them? Ok. If the > university wants to do this, or incentivized to do this, it is really just > a matter of private/public strategy. If you don't want to work for a > university that has this "fair" strategy, then don't. As for subjecting > young students to strange imagery, I can see why one would not want to do > that. Just as it would strange for a female professor to dress like a > hooker. Organizations can have dress codes. Don't be a fool, > universities are just another kind of business. You mess with the > business, you will have a problem. It would be better if your department > heads were "upstanders" and just said, "Hey Dave, how is this art helping > your students?" > > >>> > > >>> < Not personal, but a relative: multi-generational ranch > with Federal grazing right. Hundreds of thousands of dollars over the years > were spent enhancing the Federal land, containment ponds for water that > reduced erosion and flash flooding without diminishing runoff contribution > to watershed; planting of native grasses, elimination of deadwood, etc. > etc. End result was the ability to safely and sustainably graze X number of > cattle. About five years ago, BLM issued a new policy dictating the maximum > carrying capacity of Federal lands. The math was based on lowest common > denominator. The policy was, at the behest of preservation groups, written > with the specific intent to minimize and eventually eliminate the use of > public lands for grazing. (Also mining and motorized recreational vehicle > use.) Bottom line, allotment was taken away because it violated the numbers > — not because there was any evidence of actual harm. > > > >>> > > >>> I'm a taxpayer. Why should I want off road vehicles or > cows on federal land? I don't care about either of those things. This is > a weird entitlement that these folks have in mind. As far as I was > concerned the Bundy principals in Oregon deserved to be met by A-10s. > > > -- > ☤>$ uǝlƃ > - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam > un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ > archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ >
- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
