|
|
If you can’t break it, it isn’t fixed.John Lanchester wrote an essay which is to appear in the London Review of Books. Anyone wishing to help in the synthesis of the 300 has a duty to read it in its entirety. Posted by Søren Renner on Friday, March 16, 2007 at 12:43 PM in Comments:2
Posted by Fred Scrooby on March 16, 2007, 04:56 PM | # Soren, why aren’t chloroplasts, shellfish, and the oceans buffering increases in atmospheric CO2? Do you support laws mandating reductions in CO2 emissions from human activity? 3
Posted by onetwothree on March 16, 2007, 05:54 PM | # There have been attack on SUV dealerships, in which numerous vehicles have been damaged/burnt: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,95447,00.html I’m not very fond of SUVs/light trucks myself—they represent a willful misallocation of funds, at the minimum. Next entry: Happy Jethro Tull Day! Previous entry: Why “The Political Compass” Is Inherently Vectorist and How to Correct It |
|
Existential IssuesWhite Genocide ProjectOf note
Recent CommentsAlso see trash folder. Bangalore Business School commented in entry 'Kinship and Fertility' on 02/08/12, 01:51 AM. (go) (view) anon commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/08/12, 01:42 AM. (go) (view) Rusty commented in entry 'Will someone arrest, and prosecute, this fine lady?' on 02/08/12, 12:40 AM. (go) (view) daniel commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/07/12, 11:41 PM. (go) (view) Ivan commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/07/12, 11:16 PM. (go) (view) uh commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/07/12, 11:03 PM. (go) (view) Ivan commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/07/12, 10:58 PM. (go) (view) Ivan commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/07/12, 10:53 PM. (go) (view) uh commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/07/12, 10:52 PM. (go) (view) uh commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/07/12, 10:17 PM. (go) (view) uh commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/07/12, 10:12 PM. (go) (view) anon commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/07/12, 09:49 PM. (go) (view) daniel commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/07/12, 09:15 PM. (go) (view) Graham_Lister commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/07/12, 08:59 PM. (go) (view) Ivan commented in entry 'Bowery Goes Stark!' on 02/07/12, 08:59 PM. (go) (view) uh commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/07/12, 07:32 PM. (go) (view) uh commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/07/12, 06:54 PM. (go) (view) Marlowe's Ghost commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/07/12, 06:49 PM. (go) (view) Graham_Lister commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/07/12, 06:49 PM. (go) (view) Hulya Yadsan-Appleby commented in entry 'A reply to Peter Hitchens' on 02/07/12, 06:42 PM. (go) (view) uh commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/07/12, 06:30 PM. (go) (view) J Richards commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/07/12, 06:20 PM. (go) (view) J Richards commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/07/12, 06:14 PM. (go) (view) uh commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/07/12, 06:11 PM. (go) (view) Graham_Lister commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/07/12, 05:53 PM. (go) (view) uh commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/07/12, 05:53 PM. (go) (view) Marlowe's Ghost commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/07/12, 05:47 PM. (go) (view) Graham_Lister commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/07/12, 05:33 PM. (go) (view) uh commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/07/12, 05:31 PM. (go) (view) uh commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/07/12, 04:50 PM. (go) (view) Graham_Lister commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/07/12, 04:41 PM. (go) (view) dc commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/07/12, 04:30 PM. (go) (view) Graham_Lister commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/07/12, 04:20 PM. (go) (view) Marlowe's Ghost commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/07/12, 04:00 PM. (go) (view) J Richards commented in entry 'The communitarian critique of liberalism left and right' on 02/07/12, 03:39 PM. (go) (view) Recent Posts
General NewsScience NewsScience CategoriesAll CategoriesThe WritersEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer; the hashes link to authors' homepages. LinksEndorsement not implied. Controlled Opposition Crime General
Immigration
Islam Jews
Nationalist Political Parties
Science Whites in Africa |
Posted by James Bowery on March 16, 2007, 02:22 PM | #
This gets back to what I think I’m going to start referring to as Actuarial Genetic Interests (which is a more general term than what I previously discussed as actuarial EGI).
The debate over global warming has many of the same attributes as the debate over ethnic genetic interests. There are claims on both sides of benefits vs costs. Vectorists claim that heterosity produces all manner of wonders through (fill in the latest sophistry). Racialists/separatists/true conservatives/etc. claim that our natural heritage of nations and cultures is at unnecessary risk in a relatively meaningless experiment in technologically amplified panmixia. Global warming Cassandras are much like us—they are claiming that our natural heritage is at unnecessary risk in a relatively meaningless experiment in technologically amplified CO2 (and other greenhouse gas) generation.
If there were rational reinsurance networks operating with respect to global application of technologically amplified panmixia and greenhouse gas generation, premium would they charge those who put the rest of us at risk via these practices? How would they go about calculating it? In what “currency” would it be reasonable to “pay the premiums” and “pay out the indemnifications”?
I believe the Actuarial Genetic Interests approach can unify a great many facets of our human dilemma under a single scientific, business, economic model of rational values and retrieve from the leftist loons the moral high ground.