• The Road to 2020 - American Elections

    And usually the real energy comes from them being so annoyed about liberals and leftists. That's the trick that Trump has: it isn't so much about what Trump has done (which isn't much), it's the fact that Trump annoys so much the left. That's what get them to be so happy about Trump. Other Republican candidates don't get leftists so angry.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    Presidential debate. One of these guys will have the power to destroy the world. We can't be bothered to talk about that, and neither can they.Hippyhead
    In any way, the whole debate was not very presidential.
  • The Road to 2020 - American Elections
    except for the fact that the person who all conservatives are rallying behind is a man who embodies the exact opposite of the things they claim to believe in.Mr Bee
    I don't think that all conservatives rally around a man who embodies the exact opposite of the things they claim to believe in. Just as not every person who sees himself or herself as a liberal was rallying around Bernie.
  • Brexit
    Tourists don't stay, and they also tend to be wealthy, respectful and support local businesses.Tim3003
    And if they would not be so, people would be against them. You can just imagine if the those tourists wouldn't spend a dime, but on the contrary would be begging on the streets. It wouldn't matter if those beggars would just stay a while and be replaced with others. You could briefly notice this during the German unification when the border between the East and West collapsed. The Easterners were naturally interested to see West Germany, but weren't the typical wealthy tourist. They filled the tourist attractions but ate from their own meager lunchboxes and didn't spend as normal tourists for the simple reason as they came from a socialist country. The West German shopkeepers etc. weren't enthusiastic about it. Hence, Mexicans wouldn't tolerate American spring breakers, if those youngsters wouldn't create income. And neither the Spanish wouldn't tolerate northerners on their beaches if it wouldn't support the local economy.

    I see today Boris has marked out our lack of brickies, welders and butchers; and there are calls for the govt to lower the immigration restrictions for these occupations post-Brexit.Tim3003

    Yes and there are approx 120,000 vacancies in the social care sector and about 40,000 nursing vacancies, not to mention all the crops which need harvesting.Punshhh
    Especially the health care sector is the area where the country with higher wages becomes a magnet for health care professionals as they are in a permanent shortage as the population gets older.

    Also, the simple fact is that in a prosperous society there simply are jobs that people won't take. Especially here where there is a tight social security net and welfare state: you will get perpetual unemployment benefits, the state will pay your rent and hence provide housing. People will start calculating if it's really profitable to work in a crappy job and have less free time, yet have exactly basically same amount of money to spend. Fruit picking is a traditional example of this, as the job is too difficult for low priced robots to do.

    And finally it is a fact that much needed professionals are sought after everywhere. And if I recall correctly, at least in the 1990's if you could show that you invested enough pounds in the UK, you got your permit to immigrate to the UK immediately no matter where you came. Money talks.
  • Brexit

    One British historian, who has written about the history of London, said aptly about how Britons feel about foreigners, which can be generalized to all people: "As long as foreigners are seen to bring money to the community, they are tolerated in Britain".

    And this is true. Nobody hates the vast swarms of tourists as they bring money to the country, as they create jobs for the local population. Yet if the foreigners are seen to compete with the local population for jobs, immediately emerges a resentment against the foreigners which we call xenophobia (or racism, as that is so popular today). And worst of all, if foreigners seem to be literally stealing our wealth, it is likely we call them the occupiers, the enemy, and the young men are up in arms fighting them.

    The historian thought that the English, or at least Londoners hadn't change much from the sixteenth century and from the times of the Evil May Day riots (in 1517), when the scum of the Earth foreigners were the hated Dutch. When times are bad, foreigners are the perfect culprit.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    But not the long history of racism in the US, Lord no!Kenosha Kid
    How the war on drugs has been implemented can be argued as part of how systemic racism continues, but anyway...
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    You'd enjoy the report I linked to frank above. It's actually adjusting for economic variables in the context of police killings.fdrake
    I'll read that.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    Rereading your post, I saw a different claim. That instead of adjusting for the per capita percentages, "total offences charged" should be conditioned on for calculating whether there is a disparity or not in deaths due to use of lethal force by law enforcement. Outside of the issue of whether the causal chain:

    X is charged with an offence -> X is killed by police.

    actually makes sense as an explanation here, which is the modelling assumption underlying that conditioning. adjusting for that does make the numbers more in line
    Thank you reading and understanding my point correctly, and as this was done in a simple google search, it surely wasn't meant to be a thorough statistical inquiry. Only that where there is more crime, there are likely more police encounters and likely more excessive use of force and this should be taken into account.

    If race also influences whether X is subject to force in an offence charging encounter, it'll have an effect over and above the preferential sampling effect.fdrake
    And of course there also is the question if "total offences charged" has in itself already a bias that makes charges made more likely towards blacks than white, which could be the case. The question that comes up to me is how big role does the war on drugs have to play with this.

    Conditioning like that doesn't explain this kind of thing though, taken from the paper you referenced:

    Further, although force was employed in fewer than 4% of contacts for all racial/ethnic groups in 2008, blacks were nearly three times more likely than whites to experience any use of force during an LE encounter.
    What that encounter is might differ, but as I've said there's an obvious difference and there is a statistic that shows it.

    But at that point, we really need to start talking about models, rather than comparing data in a naive hatchet job way.fdrake
    Before models, best to understand underlying issues like the impact on war on drugs, as I mentioned already, or how broken communities really go into free fall in the US making a huge divide between the prosperous and poor communities. Poverty goes through racial lines still in the US.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    Please explain how that third statistic is in line.Kenosha Kid
    If deaths or prison sentences would have no racial bias, then the total offenses charged would be a good indicator in telling how many go to jail or how many are killed by the police.

    32% differs from 27% by 5%, which is noticeable, yet 38% (percentage of inmates) differs from 27% by 11%, which is huge.
  • Brexit
    Yes, but they leant him their support (the majority of them) on condition that he would get Brexit done. They will swing back behind a moderate Labour Party at the next election. So it was not for conservative policies (other than Brexit) that they voted that way, they held their noses when they voted.Punshhh
    And this tells a lot about how class based even British politics is. Because usually people who vote for a certain party are defined to be the supporters of that party. Not some people that are "just now" voting for them.

    In the UK it is particularly acute, the housing crisis has been developing for 40 years now with an end to any provision of social housing over this whole period. Not only prices being unaffordable, we have no kerbs on rental fees, which are strangling the young with debt. While many large properties have one or two old people living there. The young are really in a bad place financially and they are wary of trusting the Conservatives when they promise to solve the problem. Because they caused and presided over it for the 40 years.Punshhh
    Add there the quite rapid population growth and economic growth being concentrated on few larger cities.


    Yes, there is a deep split in the Labour Party between the moderates and the radicals, which keeps coming to the fore and prevents them getting into office. They need a strong leader to break this curse, Blair did it and many people hope that Kier Starmer can pull it off now. God knows it's needed now.Punshhh
    It is always the "extremist fringe" or the "traditionalists" that create problems to mainstream political party, which alienate a lot of people not closely attached to the ideological side of the party, be the parties either on the right or on the left.

    Yet the old class divide may not work so well today. Simply put, all parties need to evolve as the society evolves in order to exist in the long run.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    For reasons already given but seemingly ignored. This isn't the 80s anymore. You can't just ignore evidence and claim it's a mystery/non-issue.Kenosha Kid
    Based on statistics, the incarceration rates of blacks is the statistic that isn't in line. Likely here the biggest reason is the war on drugs (see the stats). Yet the percentage of offenses charged is quite close to the percentage of deaths due to use of lethal force by the police.
    Percentage of population: 63......13
    of total offenses charged : 69......27
    Deaths Due to Use of Lethal Force by Law Enforcement: 54......32
    Inmates in prison by race: 57.....38
  • Brexit
    Yes, that doesn't diminish my point though.Punshhh
    At least they didn't bungle up with economic growth when other countries in the West prospered. That would have been the thing.

    In the UK, the left right political divide has been, for the last half century or so, in line with a class divide.Punshhh
    This is actually similar to other countries, actually.

    Also the majority of the working classes have improved their circumstances over the last generation and become more middle class. But they are still held at arms length by the traditional privelidged classes by an ingrained, largely unconscious, bias and code. Often based on where people live, what schools and colleges they went to etc. This may be the same in other countries, I don't know, perhaps you can help me therePunshhh
    What makes the UK different is a deeper class divide than other countries, starting from even such things as the language/accent people use or even what sports they follow. British I think are very class conscious and not just the upper class. I think this might be changing though. And yes, it goes through party lines too this class divide. You could see this from Boris Johnson that he acknowledged humbly in his election victory that the conservatives had gotten "labor" votes from labor areas. Usually no politicians would make this kind of remark.

    The young grew up during this and are now impoverished by continuing inflation in the housing market, meaning only privelidged young can purchase property*, with the help of their parents.Punshhh
    This asset inflation is typical in many countries and a result of the economic and monetary policies implemented after the financial crisis all over the world.

    . This has resulted in an en-mass move to the left among the young, which is also enmeshed in the newly developed ideologies around combatting climate change and protecting the environment. Issues which are largely denied by the privelidged (largely over 50 years of age) establishment, in favour of more free market capitalism.Punshhh
    I think environmentalism broke through in the 1980's in other countries with Green parties. With tory and labor governments this might not have been so apparent in the UK.

    The problem with our recent election is that the alternative was possibly even more scary than the Conservative party. A Corbyn government would have been a radically left leaning government and there just aren't enough people in the population who could vote for that kind of radical change.Punshhh
    This might be the real bungle up in British politics. Indeed, it likely would have been a moment for the conservatives to lick their wounds after a long time as the ruling party go to the opposition after everything, but the labor party itself get carried away.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    The US is not a democracy, nor ought it ever aim to be.creativesoul
    This the argument that it's a Republic? I guess democracies are usually republics, even if some are technically monarchies.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    Factually, the former. White people die in police custody too. But black people particularly so. They are twice as likely to be killed than white people.Kenosha Kid
    And also twice as likely to be arrested, even more likely to be incarcerated and have higher crime rates, yet also poorer and higher unemployment numbers. So why the former?
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    I would concur. While the issues of racial injustice and the unaccountability of law enforcement officers are problems, and I'm glad that they are being discussed more and more, they are not the only issues. The economic issues are on the back burner. Justice reform has built bridges that socioeconomic reform can walk across... the time is closer than it was ten years ago when those underlying problems were not given due attention.creativesoul
    And that's why I think discussion is important. And yes, the obvious elephant in the room, the economic situation, is forgotten.

    My country doesn't have riots on the streets or similar problems as they now have in Sweden, yet I have to go just to the generation of my great grandparents, and Finns were killing other Finns in a civil war. I don't think my generation or the younger ones aren't much different from them. Social cohesion and respect for people who have opposing views is important for any democracy to function. And understanding that things can get really much worse and very quickly is important. When the worst happens, the vast majority of people can just be left thinking of what insanity has taken over the country and their fellow countrymen.

    In the US you already have the emergence of such an ugly divide forming up, and a spark can happen in country filled up with guns when a Kyle Rittenhouse type meets a Michael Reinoehl type in a protest filled with people. Will after a bloody shooting the discussion be more easy? Will reform happen or will it be the new President invoking the Insurrection act? I don't think so. Later people just want to move on and forget the whole dismal time.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    Sure, but I would ask myself whether those who use that type of language are actually interested in a discussion or if they're just more interested in venting.BitconnectCarlos
    Well, the Forum isn't a "safe space" and simply going away isn't an answer.

    Anyway, you do you. I can't help but notice that the insults here always seem to flow from the left to those on the right though.BitconnectCarlos
    Philosophy students are usually leftists. Yet increasing amount of members here are what would be called centrist or even on the right, I think.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    That's just not true. Focusing upon the racial injustice reform sheds light upon all sorts of things, including but not limited to, law enforcement issues like abuse of power/brutality.creativesoul
    I do understand your point. Yet how do you approach these injustices is important. Do you make accusations and divide the people (as happens) or do you make the case that the country simply should live up to it's values and try to find the broadest support to do so? I would argue that there is a dedicated effort to keep the people divided in the US.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    There is no absolutely no difficulty in understanding that Black Americans are disproportionally targeted by police numerous ways and that police have been militarized in American which effects all Americans regardless of skin color.Maw
    And I would argue on the way how to communicate the latter issue correctly is important. If we divide the people by race or income and say "the police works for you, not for me!", it's not hard to see that it will turn off some people who otherwise would agree with you that the police uses excessive force and starts confronting criminal suspects as enemy combatants, which is really a bad thing.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    Is your suggestion here that if police brutality is disproportionately aimed at black people specifically and other minorities generally, the correct thing to do is pretend it is aimed at white people equally? Is it so hard to see why that is racist?Kenosha Kid
    Is it really aimed? You really think that this isn't a problem in very poor white communities in the US?

    Blacks make up 13% of the US population yet of those people arrested each year, over a quarter (in 2018 27%) are black. So is this really an issue of police brutality being aimed at somebody or the police using excessive force generally when arresting people? I have said myself that yes, there is an obvious difference how the police approach suspects based on race, but is this really so huge that we can say that police brutality is aimed at a specific racial group? If so, what is the intent?

    If the real issue is that police uses excessive force and has a low bar to use deadly force, wouldn't the procedures themselves be worth to focus or do we look for a segment that the brutality is aimed at?

    Where there is disproportionately more crime you will find more contact with the police. And with more contact, there is the possibility of excessive force. Since it's an obvious fact that poorer communities have more crime than prosperous communities, you could thus also make the argument that police brutality is aimed at the poor. The statistics would support that. Yet defining this an issue of either racism or income or both doesn't actually focus on the obvious and that is how police operate, how they approach their job and how the legal system protects the use of excessive force. One is making a larger accusation on the society itself, which many people might have different views. I think this problem needs support from as big as possible segment of the population.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    You might want to just not engage with people who are talking to you like that. I, for one, don't.BitconnectCarlos
    When those interested in philosophy cannot exchange ideas with each other, all is lost. Sounds dramatic, but there's a truth to it.

    (And I still have confidence on the administrators following the rules of the forum equally with everyone.)
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)

    Then why not simply police brutality and what we do about it?
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    Police brutality does not apply to just blacks. Don't think anyone whose the least bit knowledgable on the subject thinks that it does. There's overlap though, and disproportion...

    Pointing out examples of white victims misses the point in much the same way that "All lives matter" does...
    So better to not point out that there are white victims too? Is even mentioning that some kind of dog whistle?

    Just as someone even referring to colorblindness is a racist? Yes, some racist can use the phrases. But what is wrong in trying to judge people as individuals and never judge as groups of people by race, nationality etc?
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    Fuck off you rat, you're the lunatic whose first response to having mentioned the riddling of an autistic boy with bullets as being BuT hE wAsNt BlaCk! Don't pretend to be above this shit when you perpetuate it.StreetlightX
    There's our Aussie moderator doing his job of moderating a Philosophy Forum.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)

    Did I say it's inflated or non-issue? No, absolutely not.

    It's quite apparent that with American police the racial profiling and how they differ in their response according to a suspects race is beyond comparison to many countries, for example (from a large number of examples) shown with how police approach in video a white man carrying a rifle and a black man carrying a rifle. (The white young male is stopped and asked what he is doing while the black man is ordered by gunpoint to hit the ground with more police patrols being deployed to the sight.) So yes, race is a factor. However the simple fact is that it isn't everything and race and racism doesn't explain everything.

    Just pointing out the bias towards blacks and thinking that this is an issue only with blacks and minorities makes the argument about police being racist, which leaves behind the fact that the police uses excessive force towards the majority whites too. Not so much, but still does. Similarly the system protects the police in these cases also. In a country so filled with guns the police simply resorts to lethal violence. Yet is behind everything just racism?

    The argument could be also made with income: that poor people are likely to be shot and rich aren't as usually, in every country actually, the "customers" of the police are indeed on average poorer people. Then accuse "the rich" and divide the people by simply their income level. If the people belong to one race, then the division could be made so.

    Yet in both cases, be it by race or by income, we are dividing the population into two groups where one is the victim and where one is the accomplice to police brutality as somehow the police working for one group and not for the other. As if it wouldn't be people in high crime areas that need good policing. We don't look at the issue as the police using excessive force and the legal system being biased and protecting the police as a problem for the whole country. We don't emphasize that that this can happen to anyone in and try get people to think of the others. The other people are privileged and it isn't a problem for them, so they somehow make it possible. And we hear everywhere dog whistles and see hidden racism. When one imagined part of the people are accomplices, then there is no need to seek allies or broaden support to get reforms. And that of course prevents large reforms of happening, when popular outrage isn't used to create a larger agreement on what to do. That there is less racism now than fifty years ago hardly matters.

    And does making those accusations on others that are fellow citizens help? No, but it keeps the citizens, the people, disunited. And that divide keeps the status quo of the present.

    I can assure you, nothing I say to you will have any effect whatsoever on American power structures.Maw
    Of course not, but perhaps I do get to understand your point.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)

    Many don't, that participate on the PF. (Even if I did spent few years in my childhood there and last time I was there was last year.)

    Yet that's the argument what people can discuss?
  • Brexit
    My take on it is that the economy has been in trouble since the financial crisis of 2008.Punshhh
    Uh...the World economy has been in trouble since the financial crisis of 2008, even if China and India have put respectable growth numbers.

    The Conservative party is heading for oblivion, which will allow socialists into office.Punshhh
    You did have elections just last year, didn't you? How did those go?

    I wouldn't say any party is heading for oblivion, as it just assumes that other parties will take their place without any effort. The political landscape and politics is far more dynamic and more complex than that in any country. If you think that younger generations are more leftist than older ones, well, they were so also in the 1960's and 1970's.
  • Coronavirus
    As the article pointed out, fighting Ebola etc. got them better prepared.

    I've noticed this being very important: the success stories have usually been countries that before have had a lousy response earlier epidemics, which put their politicians into a bad light and hence made them to take these issues more seriously.

    Perhaps in the US case one issue here was that the CDC did succeed containing earlier pandemics like the Ebola outbreak.
  • Amy Coney Barrett's nomination
    It's interesting. Trump's male picks all seem to be spineless, vicious, or both. The females, more a mixed bag.tim wood
    I thought that the appointment of Neil Gorsuch went easily by US standards. I may be wrong...
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    I can see how it would be difficult to consider two facts together if you have a walnut-sized brain.Maw
    You and others didn't get my point, but anyway, must be my walnut-sized brain.

    Yet hard to understand why this urge to divide people, to make an event that had widespread condemnation at first into a polarized issue. It only serves the present power structures to stay intact.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    My mistake. The university cites the killing of George Floyd in the same statement regarding the renaming to George square. I made a false connection.NOS4A2
    You're not the only one that made the mistake, some newspapers seem to have made the error also. The building is is next to George Square and hence it is named 40 George Square, which is right next to 50 George Square.

    Yet perhaps this is a great example of the "decolonization" of philosophy: Hume encouraged in a letter Lord Hertford to buy a plantation in Grenada and lent money to another person that did acquired plantations in the Caribbean. Hence David Hume seems to be the one of the ideological pillars of the slave trade by these acts, at least according to prof Waldmann:

    'His (Hume's) views served without doubt to fortify the institution of racialised slavery in the later eighteenth and early nineteenth century.

    'More importantly, the fact that he was involved in the slave trade is now a matter of record. He was not deferential to social convention and he was aware of the widespread denunciation of slavery by his contemporaries.

    'Anyone possessed of Hume's talents would recognise the obvious enormity of slavery. But Hume endorsed slavery; indeed, he justified it.
    (See article)

    Hume was indeed a racist, even if some scholars point out he was against slavery (see here). And just how widespread was the denunciation of slavery at that time, I'm not sure.

    How do these views effect the other things Hume said? After all, there's a huge quantity of non-interesting stuff that prominent philosophers and scientists wrote that we don't read and refer to. Yet the cheap but typical rebuttal in our time would be to disregard Hume "But he was a racist and I don't like racists". So off with the racist Enlightenment!
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)

    Well, I'm a Finn, so I shouldn't care either.

    Unfortunately Europeans will start mimicking the trends from the US, the good ones and the bad ones, because I guess there isn't anything else to do. What I'm worried that your shit show of politics will come to be my shit show of politics later.
  • The Road to 2020 - American Elections
    I trust we all realise that politics is long past convincing people of a vision and instead politicians pander to whatever voters want to hear so they get power to do what they want?Benkei
    They've always done that, especially the clueless ones. The duopoly situation in the US makes things different.

    Now what politicians want to do is to enflame the other side to attack them and portray to their supporters (and lure new people to their side) how much the other side absolutely hates the actual voters themselves. The best thing what happened to Trump (besides James Comey, which of course is now totally forgotten) was Hillary Clinton saying that Trump supporters were "basket of deplorables".

    Politician promising to do something is so lame, old school. Far better to portray other politicians hating you Benkei, what you think and how you live. It works like a charm, because it will activate you once some politician running for office "is really" against you.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)

    Right. You go with your condescending own echo-chamber...

    I'll assume that you didn't understand at all what I was saying and naturally didn't care at all.

    Well, if your really lucky, you can continue to enjoy your bickering even more on how evil and racist white Americans are if Trump wins the election.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    You realize an institution can both be systematically racist and excessively violent right? Or is this too big a thought for you?StreetlightX
    Concentrating on the systemic racism part veers the focus away from the fact that excessive violence happens without regard to one's race. Where was the white priviledge of Linden Cameron?

    Or do you think that this police officer was different from those other trigger happy policemen that have shot unarmed black people without any reason? Those were racists, but this guy was policeman was different, just inept to tackle the child, as the mother thought the policeman ought to respond?
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    Just another day of cops shooting autistic boys in the back. Threatened by someone more mentally stable than them, I guess.StreetlightX
    And the underlying reason was systemic racism?

    Or could we start calling this problem that the police is using excessive force in general and get's away with it in a biased judicial system?
  • Coronavirus
    . But generally out chief epidemiologist said from the beginning No lockdown. And the government listened to his department.Ansiktsburk
    Swedes here made a decision and didn't flinch as the British government did. And the Swedish went with that.

    But can one say whats right or wrong?Ansiktsburk
    After the pandemic we know.

    We are here having the second wave and both people and especially officials are getting really jumpy. Guidance and even possible regulations about using masks are getting more common. Until now, the Finnish street has looked a lot like the Swedish street. Yet the pandemic ought to blow out of proportions here if Finland should catch up the death toll of Sweden.

    Cities like Helsinki have now ordered the use of masks in public transports. Likely using masks will get to be as in the US here too.
  • Donald Trump (All General Trump Conversations Here)
    And that barely exists pace every FBI report on the issue since the mid 1990s. The FBI recognises that the threat of "right wing" domestic terrorism is much larger than that of "left wing" terrorism.Benkei
    Yet it acknowledges the threat.

    And as the FBI defines some animal rights groups and environmental groups as terrorist groups/criminal organization just as right-wing militias, the US authorities are quite unbiased and non-aligned in how they approach any group that thinks violence and breaking the law is justified. Which I think is a good thing. And which many staunchly partisan Americans hate, because for them only one side is a threat. This non-aligned approach is evident in the testimony of the FBI director Christopher Wray (from a year ago). He does admit that there are several terrorism investigation towards people that define themselves to be Antifa:

    Just to give an example how the FBI really follows this approach that director Wray above tries to explain to the partisan crowd on Capitol Hill, here's a quote from few years ago (from FBI webpage):

    In recent years, the Animal Liberation Front and the Earth Liberation Front have become the most active criminal extremist elements in the United States. Despite the destructive aspects of ALF and ELF's operations, their stated operational philosophy discourages acts that harm "any animal, human and nonhuman." In general, the animal rights and environmental extremist movements have adhered to this mandate. Beginning in 2002, however, this operational philosophy has been overshadowed by an escalation in violent rhetoric and tactics, particularly within the animal rights movement. Individuals within the movement have discussed actively targeting food producers, biomedical researchers, and even law enforcement with physical harm. But even more disturbing is the recent employment of improvised explosive devices against consumer product testing companies, accompanied by threats of more, larger bombings and even potential assassinations of researchers, corporate officers and employees.

    The various kinds of terrorists we have:
  • The (?) Roman (?) Empire (?)
    (I'll answer this separately as it is a bit different topic)

    Charlemagne was of course not French because this identity didn’t exist back then. He too had an identity problem: he was ruling romanized folks with the help of a Roman Church, but he was Frankish... so he worked on symbols, to help forge some synthesis here, like the EU bureaucrats do. And one such symbol he used was the emperor thing.Olivier5
    Yet the real issue is how to get the masses to love their new identity, not only the elite.That's the hard part as it doesn't happen with a decree or sharing your wealth and power with your cronies.

    The story of the Kalmar Union and comparing it to the United Kingdom tells a lot. The North European personal union lasted for some centuries until it broke up and simply was forgotten. Now is just thought as being a feudal oddity of the medieval times whereas nationalities like being Danish, Norwegian, Swedish and Finnish are the building blocks how we talk about history here. Yet if there would those rabidly nationalist and militant Kalmarists around, perhaps the union would have survived even to this day.

    And looking at the history of the British Isles, you can see just how much effort have to be made to create a common new identity and how really people take these things into heart. The Romans did it smartly by enlarging the identity of being Roman and being around enough time for people to relate to this identity, unlike let's say the Macedonians with their brief time in the sun.

  • The (?) Roman (?) Empire (?)
    Europe is trying to be more than a collection of rabidly aggressive self-centred microstates. European nationalism killed millions, least we forget. We are trying to become something different than a bunch of nationalist idiots. So of course we have an identity problem...Olivier5
    Oh yes, "never again" after WW2 was the true fighting call for the EEC/EU. And that's about it, apart from the vague idea of being the counter response to US supremacy and the obvious push from large corporations.

    You see, you actually also made the example of why EU is in such trouble: unable to create a larger pan-European identity, the EU then has taken into attacking those "rabidly aggressive self-centered microstates" that actually make it up. The inability to acknowledge that the union is indeed a confederation of independent states, again clearly shown with the response to the corona-pandemic, is one of the root problems of the EU. The EU has nothing else as an answer than more integration. It is so unconfident about itself that it thinks not having more integration will lead to an abrupt collapse of the union. And the idea that the EU is the only thing preventing Europeans to getting back to killing each other is simply ridiculous. Many European countries are totally capable of being peaceful with each other without an EU, so it's very foolish and actually condescending to think so.

    And this really is a tragedy, as the English have shown that creating new identity above the old national identity is possible. Being British was cleverly used to unified their defeated islanders to share a common identity (even if it didn't work with the Irish) and it has worked at least for now, which is an accomplishment. The total lack of using anything else than bureaucrats to advance the EU shows the short sightedness of those promoting the EU. So does the thinking that economic growth and prosperity would take care of this identity problem... especially when the common market hurts some countries like Greece and favors others like Germany.