Comments by "Jake Johnson" (@ElectronFieldPulse) on "Kyle Hill"
channel.
-
@juslitor - Yep, the suffering was absolutely horrible. I won't condemn the US for dropping it, it was a complicated decision, but there should be no downplaying of the inherent horrific effects of the bomb. It tortures a vast amount of people. The lucky die instantly, the unlucky become burned beyond recognition, have skin fall off, and develop cancer like symptoms from radiation before they die. An absolutely brutal way to go. And it instantly starts that fate for tens of thousands of people. In the future, it could be millions from one bomb like the Tsar Bomba. As much as I don't want to be a pessimist, I still think nuclear weapons will be the end of us. All it takes is one mistake, and we are simply highly advanced apes, we cannot handle that kind of power.
104
-
81
-
13
-
5
-
3
-
@sovietmoose5624 - The US has quite strong legs to stand on. It's weird, when it comes to geopolitical analysis, you rarely get an objective and rational answer from a stranger. This is because nationalism is intrinsically linked with a lot of these topics. Pathos takes over instead of a more refined analysis.
So, while the US certainly has made regrettable decisions while possessing a less than perfect moral grounding. When I say this, many of the ardent critics of the US react with strong emotions. They will almost break their keyboard typing up the many "evil" things the United States did. It is usually the same list, the information is generally gleaned from social media. Just like the US, it is fertile breeding grou d for conspiracy theories and misinformation, weaponized or otherwise. But that is a topic for another day.
Anyways, on to my main point. Despite the picture you've no doubt constructed in your head, the US has done quite well on developing good morals within its society. The only way to check this is with comparative analysis. For all its faults, the US is the most powerful nation state the world has ever known. It's reach is staggering, and its ability to affect military operations anywhere in the world within mere hours is completely unmatched, in the present or in all of history. Given this information, coupled with the fact that the US was in a Cold War which regularly made people feel as if the deaths of hundreds of millions was an inevitable outcome, only a question of when. With this backdrop, the US has been remarkably restrained. All other empires of comparable size were far more brutal. The US gains its power through trade, which is a naturally mutually beneficial transaction. The US has even helped communist countries like China pull hundreds of millions out of poverty, which was partly made possible by th3 loss of a significant amount of manufacturing jobs in the US.
You take all this and then look at how the government treats its people. It gives them significant rights with a high standard of living. Compare this to China. Compare it to India. Compare it to a corruption laden country like Brazil. Only Japan is somewhat close in size while having a similar standard of living. The US I'd quite a bit more wealthy and powerful though.
Anyways, what I am basically saying is that the relative peaceful nature of US influence expansion is really quite unprecedented in the history of the world. This is what one would conclude after reading history and developing a cohesive framework which is supported exclusively with facts in their proper context. Notably, it is absent if any emotions which are so commonly associated with these discussions. I find people tend to pick a tribe. Similar to a football team. They defend their position because of group loyalty and other reinforcements based on emotional rewards. Notably, they do not defend it because they logically came to that conclusion.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@drew6524 - The problem with psychology is that it doesn’t have a lot of data backing up its methods. It is notoriously difficult to pin down exact mechanisms in the brain, and psychology rarely provides empirical evidence which proves their claims. It is more like taking a shot in the dark with common methods learned in school, and seeing if anything sticks. I went to a psychologist who said CBT was effective so I started researching it. From what I found, the behavioral part is far more effective than the cognitive part. It is really difficult to rewire neuronal pathways by just thinking, it is like trying to pain a boat from inside the hull. Behavior, which have far more reinforcements which can alter neuronal pathways, seems to be much more effective.
I haven’t ever met a psychologist who could quantify anything or provide specific biomarkers which indicate x,y,z. It is just a bunch of interpretation and largely guess work. Not trying to be snarky, but they call psychology a soft science for a reason. What is it, 50 percent of studies in psychology cannot even be reproduced once?
1
-
1