If legislators are afraid of the President, should they not be more afraid of their constituents?
* in the event, it looks like it took them 4 years as well, 1988-1991, but somehow I doubt they were just telling themselves they'd sit around and wait for 2028...
soviet mil was a representative slice of soviet demographics.
US civilian enforcers: not so much. (Elsewhen- the antiVW movement "worked" because the same was true of the US mil)
I know/knew people who marched first in the CR and then in the antiVW movement.
One important piece of advice from their experiences: have plenty of people during your peaceful demonstration who are ready, willing, and able to eject provocateurs from your midst.
A related lesson from Airstrip One: just because someone is sleeping with you doesn't mean they're not an informant. Of course, if all you're doing is peacefully demonstrating, as you should be, even if they're looking for dirt as hard as they can, you can still screw their brains out with a clean conscience.
"Grothendieck got angry when they started pestering him. Justine recalled in an interview with Allyn Jackson: “The next thing we know, the two policemen are on the ground.” Grothendieck, who once practiced boxing, had single-handedly decked two police officers."
Indeed. It's a much older generation, but we have our share of immigrants from DZ as well.
Lucky for mathematics that the Avignon policiers were not accustomed to "self defence make me a sandwich"!
Someday I'll have to learn enough about sheaves to see if they can handle your cut from no-cut, where an initial commonality bifurcates into 有人理想 and 有人富翁.
> ...if the door is left open to voluntary conversion, so that anyone who wants to can come over to the winning side, the winning side will sooner or later convert almost everyone who is capable of making trouble. (In the language of Vilfredo Pareto, this would probably be termed "capture of the rising elite"; in the language of present-day Marxists, this would be described as "utilization of potential leadership cadres from historically superseded classes"; in the language of practical politics, it means "cut in the smart boys from the opposition, so that they can't set up a racket of their own.")
Rival ideological systems with their own pyramid schemes. High switching costs. So there you have fsckboi(?) knifing an MD(?) across the gap. While the winning side is...?
>Certain very elementary appeals can be made almost without reference to the personal everyday background ("cultural-historical milieu") of the person addressed
HN flamewars beg to differ.. (I note that ouestrous-prop would almost certainly flail)
flamewars (here as in persia) have the "former yugoslavia" dynamic, which is the opposite of his aims (unless in "black" form?). IIRC there's a bit in there where the radio/wire service equivalent is discussed as a strong temptation, which serious practitioners must take care to avoid.
(an example of high vs mid: in an anecdote from the 談談 part of the V 打打, the principal [high] mentions his capitalist counterparts directly, with bare names, but his translator [mid] felt the need to "correct" his names by throwing in all the usual epithets "running dog", "oppressor", etc., etc. into the english translation. This habit of "improvement" was not lost upon her counterparts, who later relayed it as an example of what not to do)
mid == clueless == interchangeable, and interchangeable means the only thing keeping them in the Outer Party is loyalty (partly demonstrated through diligent observance of the rituals). The principal was either in the habit of referring to people however he wishes, or perhaps he was even being accommodating and referring to his counterparts as they wished to be addressed; the translator was in the habit that one must always use the politically correct forms — to the point that the faithfulness to conditioning resulted in a betrayal of the translation.
"A translation is like a romantic partner: almost all are either beautiful, or they are faithful; rarely are they both"
Or are you all at the tender mercies of DHS? Are they at least under something resembling UCMJ? (NB: the Geneva Conventions only apply to uniformed* combatants, not internal matters)
separated at birth?
Department Ministerium
of für
Homeland Staats-
Security sicherheit
* with a command structure. Just wait until someone tries to AI-wash command responsibility!
(note for gsf: sorry, I hadn't understood what you meant by civilian enforcers until now! BTW, something Linebarger has that's missing from what I've skimmed of the current PSYOP FM series: a lucid description of the bright lines [at the time?] between war and murder, and what the requirements are for an insurrection to count as uniformed combatants for the purposes of Geneva Convention protections ... will get back to you later on Katyusha's descendants)
If the people wished to, could they not make it clear what the results of a primary would be, eg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dissolution_of_the_Soviet_Unio...
If legislators are afraid of the President, should they not be more afraid of their constituents?
* in the event, it looks like it took them 4 years as well, 1988-1991, but somehow I doubt they were just telling themselves they'd sit around and wait for 2028...