This seems right to me, Pamela,
It also seems appropriate to learn the history of Weimar better, and I don’t
know very much about it.
A key point seems to be that the Germans didn’t suddenly wake up in the 1930s
and decide to adopt a totalitarian state and exterminate millions of people,
drivi
Roger, hi,
It isn’t a databse of local governments, but there is such an effort for local
NGOs which grow out of thoroughly-understood problems, and which have
non-nonsense urgent motives to solve the problems. Paul Hawken has a book
summarizing part of this, and I believe there is a database
On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 2:56 PM, glen ☣ wrote:
>
> We could try a parallax approach, though ... divide the whole into parts
> by multiple (different) methods (state, county, demographic, ...) and use
> something akin to Kullback-Leibler to constrain a set of "common models",
> perhaps in the conte
I'd agree. Like with Gillian's recent comment about basic needs satisfaction,
a common problem in all of this is the [in]accuracy of self-reporting. This
video states it well enough:
Why Socrates hated Democracy
https://youtu.be/fLJBzhcSWTk
"I cause you trouble and go against your desir
"Regardless (unlike typical proportional representation systems), the ways
should be based on data taken (via methodologically well-founded measures) from
the world, not arbitrarily justificationist ideas farted out by our minds."
I reckon that states' rights are really about allowing for more a
It still seems clear to me that the problem lies in the (overzealous)
attribution [*] of systemic properties based on flimsy or nonexistent patterns
in the collection of individuals. The (false) attribution of consensus is
similar to that of a political mandate after winning an election. This
