Paleo And Politics page 20

[Him]

If everyone has their own The Man, then groups with completely different goals can work in direct opposition while equally engaged in fighting The Man. That seems to render Rojo's point (X isn't fighting The Man, Y is!) moot and/or outright wrong. The claim that Occupy is fighting The Man doesn't reduce the fact that Libertarians are fighting The Man, and wouldn't even if Occupy and Libertarians were in complete opposition (which would be a gross oversimplification).

[Scott F]

Common sense would have you eating a low-fat diet. Your "common sense" is internalizing the values of your rulers. That's ok, lots of people are fooled. But to pretend your "damning-the-man" is ludicrous.

Common sense about human evolutionary diets is what lead me to the premise of why we should possibly eat a primal/paleo style diet. Your definition of "commons sense" is different from most anyone else. Common sense (not popular political opinion) is how one science theory replaces another.

[Rojo]

Common sense about human evolutionary diets is what lead me to the premise of why we should possibly eat a primal/paleo style diet. Your definition of "commons sense" is different from most anyone else. Common sense (not popular political opinion) is how one science theory replaces another.

Common:
1. belonging equally to, or shared alike by, two or more or all in question: common property; common interests.
2. pertaining or belonging equally to an entire community, nation, or culture; public: a common language or history; a common water-supply system.
3. joint; united: a common defense.
4. widespread; general; ordinary: common knowledge.
5. of frequent occurrence; usual; familiar: a common event; a common mistake.

I would say that encapsulates the low-fat paradigm most people struggle under.

[Rojo]

If everyone has their own The Man, then groups with completely different goals can work in direct opposition while equally engaged in fighting The Man. That seems to render Rojo's point (X isn't fighting The Man, Y is!) moot and/or outright wrong.

Except the black block was literally fighting the Man. Do I have to type that again?

And FTR, I don't commend black block tactics (which isn't really Occupy, but an adjunct). I just feel I should point out the above.

[Cryptocode]

The quest for efficiency and problem solving is what caused previous societies to eventually collapse

Joseph Tainter - The Colapse of Complex Societies

https://www.google.com/search?q=coll...iw=320&bih=416

There's 7 videos

Thank you very much, Scott. That was an excellent presentation. It combines history, peak energy, and economics. I'd recommend everyone listen to it.

It also presents the first rational explanation for the change in the culture of business that I have heard. That the increasing complexity of production requires an increasing control and complexity of control of the behavoir of humans. And it is that 'increasing control' is one of the factors, and a necessary factor, that is involved in bigger Gov't, bigger businesses, bigger organizations in everything.

Which Libertarians greatly dislike.

[Primal Moose]

Except the black block was literally fighting the Man. Do I have to type that again?

I didn't know Mom and Pop stores were part of "the man". Wow...God bless the black block. I guess we should be thanking them for smashing their windows. Those evil Mom and Pop stores! Damn them all!

[Him]

Except the black block was literally fighting the Man. Do I have to type that again?

No. They were servants of The Man, agent provocateurs, literally fighting to discredit the Occupy movement. That's why, amidst the rest of their violence, they were doing things like attacking citizens who were filming the Black Block's uniformed peers. It's a well established tactic that works quite well when authority wishes to discredit protest movements and create a pretext for escalated use of force.

??

[Rojo]

No. They were servants of The Man, agent provocateurs

That may be, like I say, I don't support their tactics.

And if they were provocateurs, it only strengthens the case that Occupy was the bigger threat to government.

[Him]

That may be, like I say, I don't support their tactics.

And if they were provocateurs, it only strengthens the case that Occupy was the bigger threat to government.

Only if you assume there weren't similar provocateurs embedded in the Tea Party (e.g. absurdly caricatured racist plants). That would be a naive assumption.

[sakura_girl]

Many systems have linkages even though they are not explicitly linked. Is that what you are thinking of? For example, if the people who buy from Toyota dealers also buy European toys that's a pretty direct link even though those two industries have no explicit linkage. If Toyota dealers and the European toy industry use the same (or exchangeable) currency, that's a less direct but still relevant link. It's hard to completely uncouple systems that are tied together by something in common like that. That's why ideas like "rising tide", "trickle down", et cetera end up being so popular and so contentious.

Yes.

Stripes can be an indicator, but indicators are not the same as what is indicated.

I think this is what I meant by everything interlinked in the system, and you can't see the direct relation between two completely separate things. Although the sticker is not going to make the car go faster (causality), it is definitely somehow related (correlation). I think everything is correlated, and our current level of analyses have only dug past the first layer. We have never measured a very long-term correlation of a tiny variable to another tiny variable before, and our technology nowadays is beginning to help us understand that first layer. E.g., we just now found out, after having experiments with more sophisticated technology and information proliferators, that high bad cholesterol is correlated with heart disease. Maybe in 100 years, we'll find out that high bad cholesterol and low bad cholesterol are correlated with heart disease evenly, and that high bad cholesterol killed you immediately with heart disease and low bad cholesterol killed you slowly with heart disease AND causes you die a slow, painful death, no matter what (another correlating factor!). I know it's a bit ridiculous, but I'm trying to get the point across that it's neverending how much you can correlate together if you had the data/technology, whether or not something is determined immediately to you and if you choose to care about it if that is what you personally value.