![Avatar](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhexbear.net%2Fpictrs%2Fimage%2Fab794b43-3c3e-4c9a-9f4c-2058c23d3410.webp&w=3840&q=75)
![Avatar](/_next/image?url=%2Flemmy-icon-96x96.webp&w=3840&q=75)
EffortPostMcGee [any]
So are you saying that in your opinion, all nuclear reactors, which includes this one developed by this team of researchers and engineers, are unsafe because you’ve seen the careless disposition of other people in the workplace(s) that you worked in? What exactly about this qualifies you to make all the other claims you’re making?
But, why has no one pointed out the obvious chauvinism or overt racism in your comment? You are saying that no nuclear reactor designed thus far has been safe, and therefore this one made in China must also be unsafe, or that these scientists and engineers in China must be lying or over hyping the claims they are making. Concerning the technical limitations you are trying to gesture at, you can only come to the conclusion you are coming to if you think that there is something about China, or Chinese people, that forbids it from doing science and engineering better than wherever you come from. Concerning the only thing of substance you make a claim of knowledge for, you are saying that there is something about China or Chinese workers that forbids them from actually giving a fuck about their jobs as nuclear reactor technicians, scientists, and engineers, such that they strictly could not design safer processes or conduct themselves in an appropriately professional way better than wherever you come from.
Moreover, I don’t really understand why you think other people should listen to your perspective on the matter when you have put basically 0 effort within your comment to give any real justification. Essentially you are saying “I worked with these things, so just simply trust me.”
The part I’ve just never understood is why that is a necessary position to hold for a ‘leftist’ political project to be not derided as incoherent/inconsistent, given by the fact that many/a majority of leftist political projects both contain non-vegan comrades that contribute/have contributed greatly to building left politics and of which those projects have not/ are not making veganism a large priority in their political project.
Do vegans here and in other leftist places claim that the lack of their sufficient account for these two components is a factor contributing to why they have failed? Furthermore, do they believe that if current AES projects were to make veganism a priority, that this would weaken the influence of bourgeois thought and strengthen the revolutions occurring there? If so, that’s fine by me for vegans to hold that position, I just don’t really see then what distinguishes that from the same kinds of arguments that Ultra’s and Maoist’s make about past/current socialist projects and why it’s just veganism that can’t be derided for doing it.
The lower strata of the middle class — the small tradespeople, shopkeepers, and retired tradesmen generally, the handicraftsmen and peasants — all these sink gradually into the proletariat, partly because their diminutive capital does not suffice for the scale on which Modern Industry is carried on, and is swamped in the competition with the large capitalists, partly because their specialised skill is rendered worthless by new methods of production. Thus the proletariat is recruited from all classes of the population.
It comes from the Manifesto, where Marx talks about how this represents the beginning of the movement towards class struggle. Still, it seems very prescient to what is happening in the west.
CVN 71 is going to Bremerton for regularly scheduled maintenance: https://www.airpac.navy.mil/News/Article/2676116/uss-theodore-roosevelt-to-change-homeport-for-planned-maintenance-upgrades/
Not sure what CVN 72 is doing but they are in the US 3rd Fleet but their facebook page makes it seem like they’re just doing a training exercise probably to prepare for certification to deploy to the 3rd Fleet (the Pacific Fleet)
There’s many studies “proving” capitalism is the best system. Just because it’s in a study doesn’t mean it isn’t effected by the whole socio-political-economic context in which the study takes place. I don’t think there’s been any studies looking at the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th order effects of socialism but that didn’t dissuade you.
Yeah I think that this is a good point and I really needed to think about this when you pointed it out. I think for me at least there doesn’t seem to be a way to even really “study” this though. Plus I agree that anything that we would think would make progress for kids and their education should be investigated, but ultimately even if socialism fails, we will just simply move past that with whatever would come after it. However if we lose tons of knowledge on something that we could actually study before implementing… I guess I just see it as completely avoidable as opposed to knowing that socialism with always be smothered in the crib by capitalists and thus cannot be put under rigorous scrutiny to be judged on its merits until capitalism dies.
This entire educational system including homework, the “banking model of education”, is founded upon the idea that we can just force people to learn for ~10-20 years and then they’re good for the rest of their life when we should be restructuring society to provide the conditions for enthusiastic, life-long learning.
Super agree with this. I think there are lots of things we could be doing better, and all of them deserve to be looked at.
Well I believe that the default position is considered to be “homework good” for the same reason that the default position of many things is the status quo. It “works well enough right now” for the purpose that it is purported to serve and any improvements should come with studies that support that it is better with good methodology and examining the impact over multiple generations (in my opinion with regards to education).
That being said it certainly is possible that that is the case. Even more so I’d say that history likely supports that idea. But could it not be that and still be beneficial to the education of children in regards to the knowledge that we as a society are determining is important to pass on to our children? Further, if that doesn’t sit well with you, then could homework be reformed to not be primarily a coercive measure to make children learn in a society that doesn’t care about personal improvement and collective self-actualization and only seeks to exploit them? And if so wouldn’t that be a more fruitful pursuit than running to the support of a policy position over articles in the German equivalent of Vox news, that aren’t peer reviewed, and which hasn’t examined the social impact over generations of time to show that it will be a net-neutral in regards to our education?
Well there are a couple reason why I don’t need to provide that evidence
- I’m not advocating for any position about it. I’m granting that homework may be unhelpful for students who already don’t get the material.
- I’m asking for studies that study the 2nd/3rd/4th order effects on this which is entirely different from trying to attack JuneFalls post.
- JuneFall hasn’t provided any study, just a new article from Der Spiegel which is reporting on a study being conducted, with some preliminary results. But without any peer reviewed study published out of what TU Dresden is doing, Der Spiegel and the people they interviewed can basically say whatever they want and it still wouldn’t have any scholarly weight nor should it. I don’t know why I should be made to put in more effort just because of the content of my post I’ve said.
- " … for kids who already don’t get the material" is doing a lot of lifting, since I’m not sure if there are any studies which concern themselves with that issue in the affirmative or the negative, and definitely not over multiple cohorts spanning multiple generations.
Offering up my thoughts however, I’d also like to just mention that I think that isolating one aspect of the education process and assessing its value solely by that aspect is both lacking in a dialectical analysis and also deeply idealist due to the manner in which the advocates are discussing the issue (as a sole atomic item of consideration, without regard for the manner in which this issue is connected to other issues), so even if I could find such studies which support or deconstruct the position you are asking me to find studies for I would still have my criticisms of the deeply liberal way that these studies are conducted and so I wouldn’t include them in my response because I wouldn’t link to studies for which I disagree with their methodology even if it supports that.
Hexbears please stop linking news articles that “reference” studies for which are not actually linked in the article. Anyways do you know of any studies that have explored the 2nd, 3rd or 4th order effects of removing homework from schools? If that has not yet occurred (and I’m certainly not aware of any) then why would you even remotely want to support this as a policy position without pushing for that study first? Because it is definitely possible that removing homework “erodes” the knowledge base of our teachers over multiple generations and gradually erodes our understanding of the topics we wish to teach. We have seen that very dynamic play out throughout history before. It certainly merits further examination and a deeper study of the topic, however.