Trump this!

[Dr Arslanagić]

The Economist

 

 

It is perilously hard to criticise Donald Trump without seeming to insult his voters

 

 

[boshoku]

brate... tupo

 

nego, da se ne zamajamavamo s ovim maoloumnim bazenom, za koga bi fiktivno glasovali

 

između ovo dvoje, moj i ide proneveveritelju.s frizurom

[iDemo]

brate... tupo

 

nego, da se ne zamajamavamo s ovim maoloumnim bazenom, za koga bi fiktivno glasovali

 

između ovo dvoje, moj i ide proneveveritelju.s frizurom

Ja bi odbelisticario - koga god da izaberu - ja sam u bonusu... 

[Eraserhead]

I Bernie zavalio samarcinu Musoliniju:

 

Bernie Sanders blasts Trump birther statement: 'This is pathetic'

[Budja]

Cekaj Erasere, je l Musolini, Putin, Hitler, sarlatan ili flip flopper?

Ne moze biti sve istovremeno.

Dogovorite se vise.

 

 

Ta zvaka o Hitelru je toliko neubedljiva bas zato sto je Tramp neko ko ima javnu istoriju pa je tesko ubeiti nekoga kako ce on sad da organizuje SA odrede da spartaju po Americi dom Falon mazi kosu.

 

A tome ne pomaze i hiperbolisanje njegovih izjava, te izdajnik a danas, vidim, i teorrista koji zeli atentat na Klintonovu.

[Takeshi]

evo analiticari kazu da je hilari u pravu, beli amerikanaci su rasisticka stoka 

 

"As a matter of statistics, it is probably true that people expressing racist sentiment ... constitute more than half of Trump supporters," he told CNN's Brooke Baldwin, channeling the details he provided in his column, published on Monday.

Speaking on "Newsroom," Milbank spoke specifically to Clinton's assertion that more than "half" of Trump's supporters display racist or bigoted tendencies, in the process quoting data as collected by the American National Election Studies.

"You actually can unpack those numbers," he said. "It's really quite shocking. Something like 62% of white voters have these sorts of sentiments, and by better than two-to-one, they vote Republican."

[kipo]

Sandersa jebala vještica, čitava Demokratska stranka zapravo, sad im svima liže dupe zarad višeg cilja. Koliko na ljestvici je to patetično.

[Zoon]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0BYqzdiuJc&feature=youtube_gdata_player

[iDemo]

cca 1989

 

[bigvlada]

[iDemo]

Moze samo kometa da ih spasi i to ako zvekne negde u neki studio za vreme TV-duela perspektivnih kandidata...

[Anduril]

Cekaj Erasere, je l Musolini, Putin, Hitler, sarlatan ili flip flopper?

Ne moze biti sve istovremeno.

Dogovorite se vise.

Ta zvaka o Hitelru je toliko neubedljiva bas zato sto je Tramp neko ko ima javnu istoriju pa je tesko ubeiti nekoga kako ce on sad da organizuje SA odrede da spartaju po Americi dom Falon mazi kosu.

A tome ne pomaze i hiperbolisanje njegovih izjava, te izdajnik a danas, vidim, i teorrista koji zeli atentat na Klintonovu.

 

Mozda se za promenu informises kako su ovi gore pomenuti ignorisani ili relativizovani (kao sto ti redovno radis) pre nego sto su dosli na vlast.

No, tu politicku glupost vec dobro poznajemo, posto je nesto slicno radjeno kad su Toma i Vucic stigli.

Jedini problem koji ja vidim da te relativizatorske failove obicno direktno iskusaju drugi...

[Budja]

Mozda se za promenu informises kako su ovi gore pomenuti ignorisani ili relativizovani (kao sto ti redovno radis) pre nego sto su dosli na vlast.

No, tu politicku glupost vec dobro poznajemo, posto je nesto slicno radjeno kad su Toma i Vucic stigli.

Jedini problem koji ja vidim da te relativizatorske failove obicno direktno iskusaju drugi...

 

Toma i Vucic: Hitler, Musolini ili Putin?

 

Upravo ti primer pokazuje koliko hiperbole i generalizacije i plasenje vukom ne pomazu vec da bi bolje bilo da se malo razmisli o uzrocima umesto da se kuka o posledicama.

 

 

Evo jednog ranta ludog Taleba (s kojim se, u dobrom delu ovog clanka, ne slazem).

Dobra je ilustracija sentimenta espertti vs. non-eksperti.

 

 

The Intellectual Yet Idiot

What we have been seeing worldwide, from India to the UK to the US, is the rebellion against the inner circle of no-skin-in-the-game policymaking “clerks” and journalists-insiders, that class of paternalistic semi-intellectual experts with some Ivy league, Oxford-Cambridge, or similar label-driven education who are telling the rest of us 1) what to do, 2) what to eat, 3) how to speak, 4) how to think… and 5) who to vote for.

But the problem is the one-eyed following the blind: these self-described members of the “intelligenzia” can’t find a coconut in Coconut Island, meaning they aren’t intelligent enough to define intelligence hence fall into circularities — but their main skill is capacity to pass exams written by people like them. With psychology papers replicating less than 40%, dietary advice reversing after 30 years of fatphobia, macroeconomic analysis working worse than astrology, the appointment of Bernanke who was less than clueless of the risks, and pharmaceutical trials replicating at best only 1/3 of the time, people are perfectly entitled to rely on their own ancestral instinct and listen to their grandmothers (or Montaigne and such filtered classical knowledge) with a better track record than these policymaking goons.

Indeed one can see that these academico-bureaucrats who feel entitled to run our lives aren’t even rigorous, whether in medical statistics or policymaking. They cant tell science from scientism — in fact in their eyes scientism looks more scientific than real science. (For instance it is trivial to show the following: much of what the Cass-Sunstein-Richard Thaler types — those who want to “nudge” us into some behavior — much of what they would classify as “rational” or “irrational” (or some such categories indicating deviation from a desired or prescribed protocol) comes from their misunderstanding of probability theory and cosmetic use of first-order models.) They are also prone to mistake the ensemble for the linear aggregation of its components as we saw in the chapter extending the minority rule.

The Intellectual Yet Idiot is a production of modernity hence has been accelerating since the mid twentieth century, to reach its local supremum today, along with the broad category of people without skin-in-the-game who have been invading many walks of life. Why? Simply, in most countries, the government’s role is between five and ten times what it was a century ago (expressed in percentage of GDP). The IYI seems ubiquitous in our lives but is still a small minority and is rarely seen outside specialized outlets, think tanks, the media, and universities — most people have proper jobs and there are not many openings for the IYI.

Beware the semi-erudite who thinks he is an erudite. He fails to naturally detect sophistry.

The IYI pathologizes others for doing things he doesn’t understand without ever realizing it is his understanding that may be limited. He thinks people should act according to their best interests and he knows their interests, particularly if they are “red necks” or English non-crisp-vowel class who voted for Brexit. When plebeians do something that makes sense to them, but not to him, the IYI uses the term “uneducated”. What we generally call participation in the political process, he calls by two distinct designations: “democracy” when it fits the IYI, and “populism” when the plebeians dare voting in a way that contradicts his preferences. While rich people believe in one tax dollar one vote, more humanistic ones in one man one vote, Monsanto in one lobbyist one vote, the IYI believes in one Ivy League degree one-vote, with some equivalence for foreign elite schools and PhDs as these are needed in the club.

 

More socially, the IYI subscribes to The New Yorker. He never curses on twitter. He speaks of “equality of races” and “economic equality” but never went out drinking with a minority cab driver (again, no real skin in the game as the concept is foreign to the IYI). Those in the U.K. have been taken for a ride by Tony Blair. The modern IYI has attended more than one TEDx talks in person or watched more than two TED talks on Youtube. Not only will he vote for Hillary Monsanto-Malmaison because she seems electable and some such circular reasoning, but holds that anyone who doesn’t do so is mentally ill.

The IYI has a copy of the first hardback edition of The Black Swan on his shelves, but mistakes absence of evidence for evidence of absence. He believes that GMOs are “science”, that the “technology” is not different from conventional breeding as a result of his readiness to confuse science with scientism.

Typically, the IYI get the first order logic right, but not second-order (or higher) effects making him totally incompetent in complex domains. In the comfort of his suburban home with 2-car garage, he advocated the “removal” of Gadhafi because he was “a dictator”, not realizing that removals have consequences (recall that he has no skin in the game and doesn’t pay for results).

The IYI has been wrong, historically, on Stalinism, Maoism, GMOs, Iraq, Libya, Syria, lobotomies, urban planning, carbohydrates, gym machines, linear regression, Gaussianism, Salafism, housing projects, and p-values. But he is convinced that his current position is right.

The IYI is member of a club to get traveling privileges; if social scientist he uses statistics without knowing how they are derived (like Steven Pinker and psycholophasters in general); when in the UK, he goes to literary festivals; he drinks red wine with steak (never white); he used to believe that fat was harmful and has now completely reversed; he takes statins because his doctor told him to do so; he fails to understand ergodicity and when explained to him, he forgets about it soon later; he doesn’t use Yiddish words even when talking business; he studies grammar before speaking a language; he has a cousin who worked with someone who knows the Queen; he has never read Frederic Dard, Libanius Antiochus, Michael Oakeshot, John Gray, Amianus Marcellinus, Ibn Battuta, Saadiah Gaon, or Joseph De Maistre; he has never gotten drunk with Russians; he never drank to the point when one starts breaking glasses (or, preferably, chairs); he doesn’t know the difference between Hecate and Hecuba; he doesn’t know that there is no difference between “pseudointellectual” and “intellectual” in the absence of skin in the game; has mentioned quantum mechanics at least twice in the past five years in conversations that had nothing to do with physics.

He knows at any point in time what his words or actions are doing to his reputation.

But a much easier marker: he doesn’t deadlift.

Not a IYI

Postscript

The IYI thinks this criticism of IYIs means “everybody is an idiot”, not realizing that their group represents, as we said, a tiny minority —but they don’t like their sense of entitlement to be challenged and although they treat the rest of humans as inferiors, they don’t like it when the waterhose is turned to the opposite direction (what the French call aroseur arosé). (For instance, Richard Thaler, partner of the dangerous GMO advocate Übernudger Cass Sunstein, interpreted this piece as saying that “there are not many non-idiots not called Taleb”, not realizing that people like him are < 1% or even .1% of the population.)

[theanswer]

Ovo sa poređenjem svakoga sa hitlerom je klasično boy who cries wolf, samo odmaže. A živ nisam dok nego od magičnog dvojca eraser i anduril ne povuku neku paralelu sa vučićem, tomom, ratovima 90ih na svakoj temi o spoljnoj politici

[Anduril]

Ovo sa poređenjem svakoga sa hitlerom je klasično boy who cries wolf, samo odmaže. A živ nisam dok nego od magičnog dvojca eraser i anduril ne povuku neku paralelu sa vučićem, tomom, ratovima 90ih na svakoj temi o spoljnoj politici

 

Moras biti prvo funkcionalno pismen (ili da barem citas pazljivo) da bi uocio da niko ne poredi sve one likove.

Radi se prosto o primerima populista koji su na pocetku potcenjivani i nista vise.

 

@ Budja

Racionalno gledano, trenutno ne postoji nikakav objektivni uzrok koji bi opravdao glasanje za Trampa.

Uzroci trenutne situacije su uglavnom lenjost (vecine) uz mrznju i glupost sto naravno nije nista novo a zove se mob rule.