хорошее о савецком союзе

[mr_k_bx]

несмотря на то, что СССР был агрессивной и [seemingly] мощной империей зла, были в этом и положительные аспекты. Холодная война не давала западу леветь, сдерживала процесс, который в остутствие реальной страшилки потек бесконтрольно и вышел из берегов... как лесной пожар ))

Comments

[stargeizer]

About the second paragraph, I did misread your "scientists' sake" as "science's sake" -- my bad. Nevertheless, I was addressing your perception of my arguments: that I was presenting scientists as some kind of special interest lobby. Science for science's sake is and should be done, while "science for scientists' sake" is just plain nonsense. In the present situation, it's not (just) the scientists who suffer (although I do find your callous lack of sympathy here appalling), it's science. As a scientist myself, of course I care about my livelihood, but I also care about science as such, above and beyond that. In fact, it's just about the only abstract notion I'm emotionally invested in. If the current trend continues unabated, very soon only impact-based (as opposed to curiosity-based) research will be funded, and that will be the death of science, and with it -- the Western civilization. All that while China is investing vigorously in science and education, and is already beginning to gain an upper hand. So I'll keep ring the alarm as loudly and often as I deem necessary, thank you.

As for the rest, it's a pity you feel you're the only one capable of critical analysis around here, while your interlocutor is a propaganda-spouting zombie, but what can I do -- it's your right, and if you feel what I say is hate speech -- so be it. In fact, I'll even agree with you on that, because I find nothing wrong with hate speech if it' sincerely felt -- after all, it is free speech too. Whatever else the Bush administration was or wasn't, it certainly was hostile to science (while Clinton's and Obama's were not), and any enemy of science is my mortal enemy whom I will passionately hate -- which is my right.

[mr_k_bx]

is this the post that was lost?

Dima, let me try to cut some crap. No need to sell science to me. It is offensive you may think otherwise. I simply cannot accept your misread of the "sake" thing as a pure accident as you cannot seriously think I would support what you were arguing against (like I would attack pure and fundamental science)... I guess I have to convince myself that you don't see how your misread is based on an insulting and unfounded assumption... Otherwise, I'd have to come up with a reason, of why would you do that? Insulting me and twisting the argument by a guaranteed misrepresentation of my views?.. It is not rational, so it is emotional? Are you really hurt by me calling the left "levaki"? But I really dislike em, can you respect that? ))))))

As for ringing the alarm... and i want to be as mild as i can here... a greater good in my unprofessional and a non-scientist opinion can be done by presenting that case directly and with supporting evidence and proofs, without actual "alarm" at the expense of someone who has nothing to do with the "current trend"you speak of. Which I of course, for the lack of any evidence or discourse, find hard to believe... In terms of the metaphor you used: you can sound you alarm all you want but not in my head, it is private property and I don't like your alarms there ))))

That said, I would be more than willing to discuss these topics with you (as you must have tons of interesting insights in the matter) without messing it up with the unrelated political shit. And, should I say that? I thought no but guess yes was right: we are on the same side in this. So...

Further, I agree about your livelihood worries and so on, it's important but not in an impersonal theoretical conversation, sorry. As for the sympathy... I am sorry you cannot do what you really like even though you are qualified for it. As a person who cannot do what he really likes and not even qualified for it, I know it sucks... not as much but still... Btw, didn't you know "the deal" when you "followed your dream"?...

Actually... I don't fucking feel sorry for you, as a friend I feel proud that you stuck in there and became the real shit... So sorry, I forget to feel sorry for you sometimes, cause I keep on thinking that you are an achiever, not a loser who needs sorries ))))) I also envy you, I wish I could get so much knowledge in something as you have in math... I think it is obvious that i'd feel that, if this is not "my character" then I don't know what is....

And finally, you didn't give any facts about Bush. Nothing you said qualified as "critical analysis", so basically you just insulted me again without any reason. Making me suspect again that you are harboring some resentment toward me... for not being leftist? For not agreeing with something that doesn't sound convincing at all? Maybe you just find me unbearably arrogant? Then you will probably not going to believe me that I am trying my best to not be that, actually rewriting a lot to reduce the "might-be-perceived-as" arrogance content. But I won't be a pussy, not even for you )))

As for Bush (since you like discussing him so much)))): save for stem-cells I never heard of him obstructing any science in any actual way (stem cells shit sucks but if it's only one thing). So I wanted to hear the sources for your indignation with him. Something better that "hostile to science", a recollection of some actual hostilities. As it is now, it seems that it's just some words he said, not something he really did... If that's the case, then let's just agree to disagree and never speak about this again... it's just not worth it ))

[stargeizer]

So you've dug the stupid thing up, and for what -- to have your intelligence insulted on multiple levels! ))) I told you it was a stroke of luck it got lost -- should have stayed gone... Anyhow, I vote for not escalating this.

Just to set the record straight -- believe it or not, I was actually honest about the misread, didn't see it until you pointed it out (this ascribing of ulterior motives -- what do I possibly stand to gain from being coy?). It wasn't your views I was arguing against there: you said something like "when the public perceives science being done for science's (sic!) sake, it cuts the funding". My response was, well, the public is just plain wrong, and needs to have this explained to it. And btw, the mistake wasn't that fatal: after all, there can't be science without scientists.

I do respect your dislike for the left, as I hope you do my dislike for the right. I actually also dislike the left, albeit to a lesser degree -- i think I've told you so before. But these are matters of mere opinion. What can in principle be subject to rational discussion is the perception of reality: which side is dominating, or posing the greatest danger -- those matters are subject to empirical verification, at least to some degree. That said, I do feel a bit sore at you for constantly making a bogeyman out of the left -- that's just not the reality that I perceive: where is your evidence? )). But I certainly don't see any basis for conflict here -- like you said, it's just not worth it.

The alarm is going off in my head, I just can't help it, sorry. You don't have to listen if you don't want to, but if you can't shut it out of your head -- talk to your conscience! )))

Finally, thanks for the kind words. I am passionate about science, but I did not sign up for martyrdom -- it certainly didn't look that way in the beginning (and it shouldn't be that way, as I keep arguing so passionately at every corner). I'm surprised I've held out for as long as I have. Of course I'm worried about the future -- the curse of any intelligent life form -- but then I remind myself that it is no less uncertain for people in much more comfortable positions (I've seen examples). In my turn, I respect you enormously for going in that classroom without a bulletproof vest every morning -- that takes the kind of guts I will never have. I hope you derive at least some satisfaction out of it. Peace!