opinion

Opinion pieces from the left, right, and everyone in between.

"Talking Brook: 'Yaron Brook Show: Harvard & Race, Trump & Impeachment'"
Two topics tangle with each other in this offering of The Yaron Brook Show. The Students for Fair Admissions claimed that Asians had a quota, and the policies behind the politics of the Trump impeachment. Dr. Brook lasers in on the idea that Harvard is accepting smaller numbers of applicants even though a greater amount of students apply to go to the Ivy League university. Dr. Brook agrees that Harvard should have the right to have whatever system it chooses to use as a private school. He says that parts of the Civil Rights Act ought to be redacted out of the law of the land.
By Skyler Saunders6 years ago in The Swamp
Law Enforcement: Brutality and Bias
Since the beginning we as human beings have assessed the world around us in an attempt to understand the possible dangers and continue the life long struggle of self-preservation. During this time our minds have created what we call defaults about certain subjects, items and experiences. For example, if you find yourself tripping over that rug by the door multiple times, eventually you will either move the rug or be more conscious about stepping over it. This is the skill set of the unconscious mind, the power tool used to help us navigate our world seamlessly. But what happens when our conscious observations are built from lessons learned unnecessarily? What happens when what we subconsciously show as biased ends up offending someone? This is inevitable in a sense that we all learn and experience life differently. Thus, issues like racism are born and what seemed like innate fears are subconscious manifestations of our learned behavior. In today's society this issue rears its ugly head in a new light with the involvement of our law enforcement. With reports pouring in practically every day about a police officer who "brutally" shot and killed someone of color and social media being the center of our news source today, it's difficult to see both sides and whether or not our own "Protect and Serve" law enforcement is truly responsible for this. This is exactly what I am trying to understand and I hope I can help others see a bigger picture as well. Let it be known that I am in no way defending either side here, I am simply assessing the evidence and making an educated theory as to how issues like racism and police brutality have come to be and remain and also how they can be resolved.
By Genuine Kaeo6 years ago in The Swamp
"Talking Brook: 'Yaron Brook Show: Greta Thunberg & the Power of Moral Idealism'"
As a diver leaps into the watery deep, Dr. Brook jumps into the topic of climate change. He says that he will handle the new, youthful face of the environmentalist movement, Greta Thunberg, with respect. He says that he can do it with better temperament and judgment than the right and with more truth than the left. Dr. Brook finds that Greta is just a byproduct of the vicious lies taught in schools that the world is going to end “tomorrow.” From kindergarten, the ideals remain because most parents “don’t challenge [their child’s] teachers.” He’s correct about how the youth are hooked at a young age on environmentalist propaganda. Movies like Fern Gully: The Last Rainforest (1992) and Avatar (2009), and television animated series such as Captain Planet and the Planeteers (1993-1996) all serve to reinforce what is taught in schools to children.
By Skyler Saunders6 years ago in The Swamp
Political and Corporate Truthfulness
Political and corporate truthfulness. We have, in Britain, a trades description act that is supposed to ensure that all claims for a service or product are accurate and truthful. Advertisements for products often appear to avoid this concept; but it may be that everything is in the definition. For example water can be described as gentle and non abrasive, yet geologically it has been proven to wear through rocks. So a definition of water being non abrasive should include the comment, “within a time span of less than 20 years.”
By Peter Rose6 years ago in The Swamp
Politics and "Joined Up" Thinking
Politics, and “joined up” thinking. Why political objectives end up going wrong. Many politicians claim they have the answer to a nation's problems; some of the more ego-driven ones think they can solve all the world's problems. So, why after all this time are there still problems for just about everyone, maybe except the super rich, in the world? The reason is in that politics does not deal with reality. It does not involve thinking through all the cause-and-effect situations. Politicians consider a problem in isolation, and they come up with resolutions that may be good, IF they were isolated from the actual reality of the whole situation. At an absurd level, it is like solving the problem of water getting into a boat by making a hole below the water line, to let it drain out. The electorates, in modern democracies, elect people to solve problems. At least, that is the basic idea, but political parties have found all sorts of ways of getting their people elected, without even promising to actually solve real problems. The most common tactic is to call it a social fact of life, a problem, and promise to solve it. For example, socialists promise equality for all. They know, and every thinking person knows, that equality of opportunity is not the same thing, since equality of achievement will never happen; humans are too variable for that. Some are better at some things than others. So, the socialist bosses know that equality for all, including the lazy and the feckless, is never going to be worthwhile, nor even desirable. Yet, they get elected on this promise of equality for all.
By Peter Rose6 years ago in The Swamp
Talking Brook: 'Yaron Brook Show: Turkey in Syria & the Danger of Elizabeth Warren'
Like a juggernaut returning to war, Dr. Brook goes back to the battlefield of politics. Dr. Brook wants to start with foreign policy. The good doctor mentions that he did a show in December where he details President Trump’s decision to pull troops from Syria. Trump was being played and manipulated to leave Syria. Former Secretary of Defense James Mattis stepped down on information that related to this information. Dr. Brook says that mainly the Kurds supported in the wiping out of ISIS. The Iraq War saw the Kurds fight with the United States and continued that bond in that region. As the United States abandons the Kurds in favor of Turkey, he points out that the Middle Eastern country is moving towards totalitarianism.
By Skyler Saunders6 years ago in The Swamp
Nonsensical Priorities: Smoking
Now I do a lot of thinking, as I'm sure as many of you all do. But throughout my life I've looked at certain things and thought, that just makes no sense. Today I want to talk about smoking but more specifically the laws around smoking. My local hospital has published online it's status as a smoke-free site effective May 31st, 2017. This would mean smoking would not be permitted anywhere on the premise, within building or outside. We're currently in October 2019 and If I was to go down now and drive past the main entrance, I would see small groups of people sat/stood smoking. Many of these are actual patients too, which baffles me even more. How is one in hospital being treated for their health but going out to ruin their health even more whilst they're there? The NHS is already on the verge of a crisis and is in need of money and cost reductions. Treating patients who are by choice ruining their health more by smoking whilst being treated, only to come back possibly in the future to be treated for something caused by this smoking is frankly stupid. The cost of treating cancer patients for the NHS is around £5 billion and when you factor in other costs to society such as loss of productivity, this rises to an astonishing £18.3 billion. Cancer is a horrible illness and is a trial for all those suffering and their families and friends around them, but there's so much we can do to help prevent and reduce the amount of people diagnosed. Failure to enforce no smoking rules in public places such as hospitals doesn't make matters better, rather worsens them.
By Chief Mac7 years ago in The Swamp
Am I Ethical?
During my freshman year as a political science student, my academic adviser once lamented that most of the students in his Politics and Corruption course had a difficult problem recognizing a moral or ethical question. That was in 1973, barely a year after the Watergate break in.
By Tim Brunson7 years ago in The Swamp
The Worst Among Us Controlling the Narrative
(VLOG posted at the end for those who prefer to watch and listen rather than read.) Because the truth is, the good people would live peacefully and justly within any fair social and economic system we create.
By Eric Durland7 years ago in The Swamp
Regulation for the Sake of Regulation Is Just Populism
The 21st century can be called the century of regulation. The freedom of the market has become quite rampant thanks to technology, and the governments are trying their best to keep things under control.
By Giorgi Mikhelidze7 years ago in The Swamp
Real | Fake
In this era congested by deceit, trickery and double-dealing, sometimes it’s real difficult to decipher between what’s right and wrong, what is true and lie, what is real and fake.
By Shivani Singh7 years ago in The Swamp
Carbon Emissions Are a Political Issue
Carbon emissions—how do we know global figures are right? Carbon footprints—are they accurately measured? I have seen notes about how a company can gain a carbon footprint evaluation, by measuring the amount of energy they use; gas, electricity, diesel, petrol, etc. They measure the input of these to the company, and from this they calculate their carbon footprint. As an engineer I can see a few difficulties in getting accurate results, and I am certain any scientist will see variables that have to be allowed for, but it can be assumed this gives a comparative figure (not necessarily a scientifically accurate actual figure) for the company involved. But how are global figures arrived at? Does every nation tell someone how much gas and electricity etc. have been used? Who do they tell? Does anyone check this for accuracy? What happens to countries who do not supply accurate information? How about forest fires, volcanoes, wild animals, etc.? How are all the 60 million individuals in Britain, and all the billions round the world accounted for? Is it just by national energy consumption? If so how accurate are these figures? From Africa to Britain much heating can come from burning wood, how is this measured? Not all electricity generated is actually consumed, not all methods of consuming energy have the same efficiency ratios. At any given moment the amount of electricity generated from “green sources” varies relative to that generated by more conventional means. The electricity generated in nuclear power stations may have very unwelcome waste products, but it does not burn carbon-containing fossils, and so can not create a carbon foot print. Is this allowed for in national figures for carbon emissions? Is it in fact allowed for when a company calculates its own carbon footprint based on electricity use? If the only energy consumed by a business is electrical, and they can claim all their electricity is generated by nuclear power then they must have a zero carbon footprint.
By Peter Rose7 years ago in The Swamp