The Centre for the Study of Governance and Society (CSGS) at King's College London examines how both formal and informal rules of governance operate and evolve, and how these rules facilitate or imperil peaceful, prosperous, and ecologically secure societies.
Liberal democracies don’t want to “bring” qualitative discourse or build anything. They have destroyed ethnic communities and now want new ways to control the discourse. If they wanted quality discourse just loosen up the speech restrictions in universities and online. But that is never going to happen as long as they are liberal democratic capitalist republics
Im separated but live in the same house with rules. Im Dutch so public assistance is not in my dna & a step back. Charity care. I just study and do holistic skincare on myself. Im observing.
I left the social work field in 2020. During that time, I observed avatars getting remote degrees free in psychology. No internship, no work in the field, no liscense but charging for counseling. The school social workers and teachers in my state dx trans anything and not qualified. Based on social work ethics they arent. Im just observing.
I may seek refugee status out of The US. Consequences of calling out publicly the corruption. I may. Russia may be accepting a few. I'd prefer a warmer climate. Not H$LL tho.
More than 30 minutes into his talk, Bryan is still yet to explicitly lay out his thesis and its building blocks. All he’s done so far is give out ChatGPTesque descriptions. And it turns out that Bryan never bothers to explicate the mechanism for his argument throughout the entire talk. Just surface level musings. Absolutely stunning.
Socialism is not state ownership. This is another dose of ignorance. Read Marx, he talked about the withering away of the state and abolition of the wages system. Where in the world has that happened. Lenin, in 1920 actually admitted that what had been created in Russia was not Communism or Socialism but something that should be called STATE CAPITALISM. That is from the horses mouth not its backside.
It's good to know that our American forefathers were not blinded by greed and exploitation of their fellow Americans. Also, that explanation of artists' work in the Q&A!
I'm surprised you didn't say anything about colonialism, including Great Geographical discoveries. As we know, colonialism created a flow of colossal amounts of “valuables”, including gold, silver and much more. And playing the role of “Chief”/Ruler formed in people in metropolitan countries a complex of “greatness” ("white superiority/supremacy"). China never colonized “overseas” territories and was closed to its own. I think for the Industrial Revolution in GB particularly that was a very important factor.
Well said- these Guilds at least had to demonstrate a tangible proficiency of what they represented, as opposed to the 'pay to play' credentialism of degrees.
The discussion of Hobbes condenses the thrust of "Hobbes and Republican Liberty." He's arguably the most methodologically rigorous intellectual historian and his work is really useful to me. I just tend to think he exemplifies a few problems in the field. If philosophers are almost entirely disinterested in context, his ""interventions in discursive contexts" approach tends to be almost entirely disinterested in the ideas themselves. Just to pick on two: Firstly, his insistence on the eschewal of influence, particularly philosophical influence - therefore, we cannot say Plato influenced some philosophers millennia later as that's disembodying them from the immediate context, except where we have knock-down textual support. But often philosophers make oblique references to past influence, especially in the form of aphorisms and epigraphs. Secondly, certain ideas in philosophy are perennial, and everyone would recognize them when they read them as a reiteration of Aristotle, Lucretius, Liebniz, whoever, etc. He's the best we have in the choices of Hegel, Strauss, or the completely unsystematic work of Isaiah Berlin.
The word "economy" has been hijacked by finance and trade and his meaning changed to the opposite of what it used to be. Likewise, the expression "representative democracy" is an oximoron. Likewise, the expression "freedom of religion" is also an oximoron. We do actually live in a Babel tower that prevent us to understand each other.
Loved both his books. Seeing Like A State. Against The Grain. We have much to learn from those people, who evaded the state, did not pay taxes and robbed from the elites.
For more details of the book, please visit: csgs.kcl.ac.uk/paper/economic-liberalism-and-the-developmental-state-hong-kong-and-singapores-post-war-development/ #hongkong #singapore #asia #politics
Information and statistics can be interpreted to match your viewpoint, which is neoliberalism and free, open markets. The most dramatic impact of the guilds was Protectionism, protection of the local workers, against competition based on lower prices stemming from lower cost of production... i.e. China etc.. the import tariffs of the 70s and before did exactly what the guilds did, protect the local products, and the jobs that are involved.. the result of abolishing them was the destruction of industry, loss of know-how, lower imcomes, unemployment, etc etc.. And no, free markets doesn't mean lower cost for the consumer, there are under the table agreements and geographical division of markets, as well as elimination of less powerful competition, by the large few corporations that obviously rule the world. As economic history proved, open markets lead to less competition, to cartels, and oligopolies.. in this environment, innovation dies at the altar of profit... it makes more money to produce aspirins with different tastes every year, than do serious research to cure cancer...
Andrew Bridgen in parliament should be promoted to Prime minister not thrown out, telling the truth is indeed a revolutionary act in globalist totalitarian Britain. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-zTgfqJUZ9Hw.html
I have listened to many of Quentin's conversations and lectures on RU-vid this is however arguably the best .... loved the Hobbesian take on theatre and socio-political life.
So absent counterfactual history (the Richard Evans view), no historian can consider the causes of any historical event. Remarkable that some schools of history strayed, conceptually, so far away from the 'but for' test for factual causation taught in every law school.
I enjoyed Anderson's talk. Very concise, illuminating and realistic. Taking into account the recent plunge in stock prices among the big tech companies, I believe Prof. Anderson has been vindicated that this wild speculation of technological utopia is based on wild exagerration. It's a pity most of these questions were so pessimistic and lacking transformative vision.
