Comments by "bj0rn" (@TheLivirus) on "Intelligence Squared" channel.

  1. "Mr. Deutscher, what are your roots?" "I'm a Jew. Trees have roots, Jews don't; Jews have legs." Beautifully put haha.
    75
  2. Great discussion! Though they don't seem to agree on the definition of meritocracy.
    34
  3. Hitchens was such an inspiration! Still is.
    29
  4. "Yay, let's get together and smile about serious matters!"
    29
  5.  @mohammedphilonous6856  Make sure you aren't missing the point entirely before you throw insults around. He's just saying that an academic career is financially risky, so a safety net of a wealthy family probably increases the likelihood of making that career choice.
    11
  6. I feared this would be an opinion fest, but there was some scientific discussion in there.
    11
  7. Trust isn't won through persuasion, but is earned through honesty, transparency and demonstration of competence and good intent. This is what's lacking.
    11
  8. It works well! American sales are thriving.
    10
  9.  @mohammedphilonous6856  No he didn't. He said that financial safety net also plays a role, besides intelligence and effort. You are fighting a strawman.
    9
  10. 5:15 "If you take 100% iron, that's something that's brittle, heavy and so on. If you add 4% of carbon to it, you get something called steel." This makes me cringe. Pure iron is soft and formable, not at all brittle. Carbon steel contains 0.005% to 2.14% carbon and is generally harder and more brittle the more carbon it contains (heat treatment also plays a crucial role). Adding 4% will not result in steel, but in white cast iron, which is very hard and brittle. 4% is much more carbon than is soluble in the iron during solidification, leading to precipitation of coarse iron-carbide.
    8
  11. Hmm, good point. They discussed for over an hour without referring to anything specific he said.
    8
  12. Swedish academic here. All my BSc engineering friends earn more than me.
    8
  13. If you're repelled, like me, by the giggling about silly personal stories the first 30 min, I'll let you know it gets better. I think the source of the latest rise of nationalism was fairly accurately diagnosed. I hope european leaders listens to this and take a good (but hastily) thinker.
    8
  14. I agree on many of the issues Anand brings up. The problem is I don't trust in the system that has been set up to address it. It lack the essential signs of a healthy institution: self-interrogation, self-correction, accountability, transparency, etc. To the contrary, I sense that the cause has been corrupted by opportunists who utilize people's good will for nefarious ends. Trust isn't won by persuasion, but is earned through honesty, transparency and demonstration of competence and good intent.
    8
  15. Sandel has no objections to using merit as basis for allocation of jobs. His critique regards merit as basis for allocation of esteem, status, power, wealth, etc. A good salesman should be a salesman. But, perhaps we shouldn't assume that the salesman deserves all the wealth he is able to accrue, or that his profession makes him a better person than the man repairing his car.
    8
  16. It would be easier to take Kira seriously if she didn't stand in front of flags and introduced herself by pledging allegiance to them.
    8
  17. More relevant question: Can America heal Biden?
    8
  18. I think Lionel made the best case.
    7
  19.  @Luca-wm9er  I disagree. The issue is that there are many definitions and that they don't agree on which one they are talking about.
    7
  20. Scary isn't it!
    7
  21. What I was missing in their discussion was the impact meritocracy has on people's sense of self-value and how it can be made more compatible with a well functioning democracy.
    6
  22. Kira argues that the ultimate expression of sovereignty is for Ukraine to give away a chunk of it to EU and another chunk to NATO.
    6
  23. Contrary to meritocracy, aristocracy has tendency towards nepotism. A person, who is competent in part due to fortune, is more deserving than an aristocrat, who is incompetent in spite of fortune.
    6
  24. Joe Biden can heal America, but he won't.
    6
  25. Douglas makes good points, e.g. some cultures integrates less easily; there is surely an upper limit of how much immigration is manageable; and that the political class is generally arrogant and dismissive of the grievances of those who feel that this limit is surpassed. However, Elif has a point in that the rhetoric of Douglas and its implications may be counterproductive in managing the integration of those who are already here. It is quite telling that the idea that muslims by nature cannot peacefully coexist with western culture fits well into the narrative of ISIS propaganda. Division and alienation is their main recruitment tool.
    5
  26. The Rabbi has it right.
    4
  27. What's next? "Should we invade India?" "Should we nuke North Korea?" "Should we overthrow Poland's government?
    4
  28. Two parties with polarized views trying to obscure and manipulates facts in their favor as well as to appeal to the emotions of the audience. What a shit show. This would be much more interesting if you invited intellectually honest people who weren't only interested in proselytizing, but also of improving their own understanding.
    4
  29. Sandel opened the debate by explaining that having a competent surgeon is a good thing, and that this is not what he means by meritocracy.
    4
  30. It is undoubtedly in everyone's best interest that jobs are allocated to the people who are most fit for them. However, it is not obvious that certain jobs should render the people who hold them more deserving in other regards. Certain jobs naturally come with greater influence, yes, but are people in these position also more deserving of for example social status, financial compensation, special treatment, etc.? The use of incentives to attract people to jobs that need them is a practical means of allocation, not necessarily a measure of how deserving the person who holds the job is.
    4
  31.  @hankjones3527  Who taught you to repeat talking points so thoughtlessly? Bot?
    4
  32. Interesting discussion. Confirms Democrats is a sinking ship with a drunken captain.
    4
  33. Ideas are socially created, yes, but through the contributions of individuals. I'm not convinced by the truism that good ideas simply emerge out of putting a bunch of people in the same room.
    3
  34. Did anyone suggest the contrary?
    3
  35. Chairs debate regarding engaging aggressively with world's rising technofascist superpower, potentially initiating the last world war. Presents the question nonchalantly with a smirk, as if the debate regards Pepsi versus Coke.
    3
  36.  @evadebruijn  It's more of a scale than a true-false dichotomy. But it is ironic that while Americans tend to have strong belief in their meritocracy (wealth is deserved), their social mobility is quite bad relative to other wealthy nations. This accentuates the humiliation aspect outlined by Sandel: to hold individuals responsible for their bad fortune.
    3
  37.  @michaelpagan3914  His statement still wouldn't make sense, because you'd have to remove carbon from Pig iron to get steel.
    2
  38. Bankers, Capitalists, Media, Government, Education, Culture, etc. They all have a relatively small constellation at the top which holds most of the influence. Each respective elite has its own interests, but they often find common ground and cooperate.
    2
  39. Both advocates of Trump's presidency diagnose USA correctly and explain beautifully the background to Trump's success in the election, but they do not make a convincing case for expecting Trump to make USA particularly great. I think Trump has a firm and sincere idea of how to make USA great. The problem is that his idea is uninformed and naive; and he has no idea how to be president.
    2
  40.  @YJPRiddle  I think you mean market economy.
    2
  41.  Robert Campbell  True, Israeli Jews tend to have roots.
    2
  42. Anna Reed lost all credibility when she asserted that Russia sabotaged Nordstream 2. There is absolutely zero evidence of this and doesn't even make strategic sense.
    2
  43.  @GuillaumeTANNEUX  I'm not sure we disagree then, because my starting point was that good ideas are created socially. I'm just emphasizing the contributions of certain individuals, acknowledging the importance of their hard work, dedication and unique qualities.
    2
  44. 18:00 He suggests that believing the establishment has failed America is to endorse Donald Trump's thinking, which he previously called an infantile factious bigot. Smooth.
    2
  45. Clarissa did a great job in allowing the discussion to evolve way past the point of departure without devolving into irrelevance. She also contributed constructively with her perspective as a journalist. I really liked the fluid format of this discussion as opposed to a formal debate with a firm proposition.
    2
  46. The core of the problem is that the scientific process and education related to food, health and medicine has been corrupted by commercial interests and the agenda of supranational organizations. Trying to solve this issue by massive administration of appetite-reducing drugs sold by big pharmaceutical companies is perverse. What we need most urgently now is to fight back against the attempt by big pharma to capitalize on their profits from Covid-19 by capturing more regulation agencies and convincing governments to trade sovereignty for health.
    2
  47. Does he hit the nail on the head though, considering Lionel seems to suggest "they" don't really want to eraze inequality but to flip it around. Perhaps they are not talking about the same leftists?
    2
  48. "How do we restore trust?" It's quite easy actually. Serve the people by holding authority accountable. In other words: do your job. Stop running errands for the already powerful.
    2
  49. 22:40 "...to fight the cheap rhetoric of demigods and prop ... demagogs and propagandists." LOL
    2
  50.  @_Botao_  I was trying to describe my understanding of Sandel's perspective. I'm not sure I agree with him.
    2
  51.  @jarfuloflove7320  That's quite vague. The reason I'm asking is because such society is not simple to achieve in practice and leads to a number of paradoxes. Example: You are born into a world owned by others, immediately running into a conflict of your sovereignty versus their property rights. Should they have to put up with an unwanted intruder on their property? Perhaps they argue that you have to earn your existence by working for them. Say you accepted this and managed to accrue enough wealth to buy a small piece of land of your own. However, all land around it is owned by another person. This person does not want you to cross his property to get to or leave yours. Is this a free society? Can your parents violate your sovereignty, or should you be entitled to make all decisions and be fully accountable for them from age zero?
    2
  52.  @jarfuloflove7320  It seems simple as long as you are not thinking about it. I could keep providing examples of how your vague principles lead to contradictions and you'd keep adding more and more rules to your list. But that would be me doing the thinking for you.
    2
  53.  @paulmccarter908  How about anyone?
    2
  54. It seems ironic, yes, but it is well established that confidence and ignorance go hand-in-hand. It seems to follow that it is rational to offer more trust to humble forecasters than to confident ones.
    2
  55. Provide a link to a better discussion, please! (in english language or subtitles)
    2
  56. The target of intelligence squared is not to discuss different ideas but to multiply an idea by itself.
    1
  57. They all seem to agree that "populism" is a reaction to legitimate grievances. Their disagreement regards whether liberals have failed to address these grievances or whether they have failed to suppress the reaction. In my view, liberals have focused almost exclusively on suppressing the reaction while largely ignoring the grievances, a strategy which has turned out to fuel rather than quench the reaction. It's time to listen carefully to people's concerns and offer policy which address these in a more constructive and less volatile way than the populists do.
    1
  58.  @geraldoarnoldo6440  Happy to assist hehe.
    1
  59. Paraphrasing Kira: "The only solution to this war is that you give us all the weapons we demand so that we can exterminate Russians from our soil and cleanse our nation, culture and history of everything that's Russian." Ok, so after this genocide is complete, what will Kira do about the fact that Russia is still nextdoor to Ukraine? Will she demand that the national community unite behind Ukraine and wipe Russia off the planet?
    1
  60. Historical lessons: Putin evil and incompetent, west good and strong. Very profound discussion indeed.
    1
  61. Yeah, Trump is indeed the symptom of a failing system.
    1
  62. @Guillaume TANNEUX  That's a stretch. You seem to equate all contributions and interactions. By your reasoning, there is no need for that task group of handpicked individuals or that group of friends with a shared passion, because they already share room. Not all people choose to spend their time reading the greats and wrestling with difficult problems.
    1
  63. Can you elaborate?
    1
  64. 10:00 Yeah, I really don't think the kids or younger generations or the internet created this problem. Adults taught these kids to act in this way and built institutional structures to enable it. There has been an ideological push, driven by adults, to empower students.
    1
  65. I came here from the iqsquared debate "Parenting doesn't matter". Why wasn't this asian woman on that panel?
    1
  66. A leftist of the tribal/sectarian sort.
    1
  67.  @paulmccarter908  I think it means Anand holds views common among those who describe themselves as leftist.
    1
  68. ​ @paulmccarter908  Sure, but my impression is that Anand is not one of them. He seems to agree with and pay tribute to all of the core tenets. His disagreements regards mere strategy.
    1
  69. Then I think you would like the channel "neutrality studies".
    1
  70. ​ @jarfuloflove7320  Define free society.
    1
  71. Stories taking precedence over facts is one of the central problems of our time. This is really something to fight against, not to capitalize on. Manufactured virality, censor, persecution of whistleblowers and their publishers, search engine results manipulation, bots on social media, shutdown of news organization with contrarian views, for-profit fact checker organizations, news media oligarchs collaborating with politicians, cancel culture, policing of language, changes of dictionaries to favor political or corporate goals, etc. The last thing we need is more centralized control of narratives. What we need is to promote plurality of ideas, tolerance to opposing views, free exchange and dissemination of ideas, an independent academia which does not run errands for politicians or corporations, a independent media apparatus which challenges rather than serves power, a well functioning and accessible education system, etc.
    1
  72. Yeah, this is central to the problem.
    1
  73. How many sides are there?
    1
  74.  @jutsu1  Surely if Dems caused the division, they could also heal it. The problem is they have no plan or intention to. At best they'll put plaster on an infected wound so they don't have to look at it while it hopefully heals itself.
    1
  75. What is the larger threat to our democracy? Safe spaces on campuses or corporate control of media and politics?
    1
  76.  Accelerationist  It's not a dichotomy, it's a comparison. Perhaps you're trying to say that we shouldn't focus all of our attention on the largest threat? In that case I agree. But I can't help but feel that there is a risk of misdirecting the discussion. Corporate media happily direct attention to the fringe left movements at certain universities to keep the looking glass off of themselves.
    1
  77.  Accelerationist  As I said, it doesn't have to. Let's discuss the issues together, as part of the same problem.
    1
  78.  Accelerationist  Well, kinda. It is probably more accurate to say the issues overlap. One relates to exposure to diverse views through media and one relates to exposure to diverse views in academia.
    1
  79.  Accelerationist  Yes.
    1
  80. They make this more complicated than it is. The left needs to stop engaging people with artificial issues they make up and instead study and try to understand the actual concerns people have.
    1