Eupathic Impulse

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

318 Excellent

About Eupathic Impulse

  • Rank
    abstract noun

Profile Information

  • Location Saarbrücken
  • Nationality Canadian
  • Gender Male
  • Interests My meaning.

Recent Profile Visitors

19,250 profile views
  1. Trump's Presidency: Is this the next domino to fall?

    I'm carrying coals to Newcastle by saying that Trump is worse than Obama, but Obama probably won't be remembered kindly by history. The Obama presidency ended up being about a futile attempt at preserving a ideological and political status quo that had already expired, making compromise after compromise with bad-faith players in the hope of preserving technocratic "norms" that never existed.  The Trump presidency is the "reward" for the Obama presidency.  Much better would have been to pre-empt the right and run a presidency devoted to overturning ideological norms, in the opposite direction.  But that would have been against Obama's entire discourse and style.  That's why he wasn't a good president.
  2. Trump's Presidency: Is this the next domino to fall?

      This is of course an excellent question, although @AlexTr is right and it really deserves another thread, which I may or may not participate in depending on demands on my time.  Unfortunately, this is one of those cases where US foreign/economic policy has had huge direct and indirect effects, helping to keep disconnected elites in power in Latin American countries to the detriment of economic justice and indeed, the overall livability of these countries.  Either the USA must drastically change its policy towards these countries or, if it must maintain those practices, accept much larger migrations northward.  (The other alternative being as you have seen here: punitive imprisonment of migrant children.)
  3. Trump's Presidency: Is this the next domino to fall?

      Among the things I despise is the refusal to admit to the moral consequences of what appear superficially to be "common sense" and "pragmatic" positions. I know that building a better world will require overturning a lot of what exists presently, so I hope I am never one of those who deal in false equivalence.
  4. Trump's Presidency: Is this the next domino to fall?

      Mobilizing is very good, the question is, whether the mobilization focuses on the underlying conflicts or on the symptoms of the conflict. One of the problems I have with the approach that many American liberals have taken is conflation of cause and effect and an excessive focus on superficial procedural conflict rather than the emotional and political/ideological underpinnings of the conflict.  Just like the refugee crisis in Europe, the US southern border is the type of conflict in which the reality of the situation defies any attempt at procedural fix or appeal to legal interpretation.
  5. Trump's Presidency: Is this the next domino to fall?

      Who said anything about legal or illegal here? From the perspective of Trump's supporters, crossing a border uninvited in a moral offense against them, a source of paralyzing fear; that's all that matters.
  6. Trump's Presidency: Is this the next domino to fall?

      The old chap did that? I don't come around these parts very often these days. It's so in character. I assume his Guatemalan neighbours (he must have these? He's best friends with every other ethnic minority, I'm given to understand) have assured him that it is normal in their culture to keep children forcibly separated from their parents by strangers.
  7. Trump's Presidency: Is this the next domino to fall?

      I appreciate efforts to curtail the enormously corrupt business of prison (especially, but not only, in the USA), although it will take more than forbidding for-profit detention centers, which are just the tip of the iceberg. There is an entire supply and procurement chain, down to the jobs for the guards, that also creates bad political incentives to expand the prison/detention/whatever population.    But it is not only venality, in a monetary sense, that is at issue. There is also self-aggrandizement, of course, and a deep ideological nucleus that has brought this about.  People move. Children move. If you want to stop them from moving, you have to punish them. The punishment must be severe enough to outweigh the cost/benefit analysis of moving.  In this world, that punishment must involve conditions one would otherwise consider to be torture.
  8. Trump's Presidency: Is this the next domino to fall?

      What they argued in court and what I wrote are not incompatible. To the court, they will argue that they don't have to give the basics of existence to small children in their power if they don't want to. To Congress, they will argue that if Congress does want to give the basics of existence, it should allocate more money to the camps. To DHS/ICE, they will say, take any new money and build more camps, but deny the basics to small children as a deterrence. If Congress denies them the money, they will say to their supporters in the public, "See? Even the Democrats don't really believe their own moral posturing, they won't give any more money to the children in the camps," and as you probably know, their supporters will eat it up.   It's all win-win for them.
  9. Trump's Presidency: Is this the next domino to fall?

    Part of the point of maltreating children in these camps is to demand that Democrats send more money to fund them, which will then be used to expand the detention camp system, which will then be individually underfunded leaving more children in squalid conditions, and so on.  The political benefits of this are vast: convincing the border control rubes that the invaders (children) are being punished for making them feel unsafe, sending money to their cronies, who charge rates per child far higher than expensive hotels, and so on.   What is happening to those children is what borders are for.
  10. Ceramic-coated cookware: safety and value

    I do most of my cooking on an induction plate in a large carbon steel wok and some stainless steel pots (all bought at discount venues), and I scrub out anything that sticks immediately after use. I don't own any non-stick cookware---I am normally somewhat skeptical about health scares ("gack! chemicals! away demonic molecules! back, I say!"), but I don't trust myself not to scrape at the Teflon with metal and then eat the Teflon, heh. However, I have been looking to expand my set of cooking instruments, even if I decide to get rid of most of my implements on leaving Germany.   Now...last week, Karstadt in Saarbrücken had an excellent sale on non-stick cookware...but ceramic-coated, not Teflon, by what is normally (apparently) an expensive make, Ballarini. Specifically, Ballarini Rivarolo induction-friendly cookware (iron bottom, aluminum layers, white ceramic coating, silicone handle). I thought, "aha! not Teflon, ceramic is the epitome of safe, right?" Bought two pans of different sizes. Allegedly, you can use metal implements on it without immediately scratching it, although it's not recommended.   So, I did some quick research after I got home: "ceramic-coated" is not literally ceramic but some sort of nanotech (normally for me, yay) spatter technology, and the health characteristics and durability vary with the make. There was an Israeli consumer report that found that one brand made in Korea and sold cheaply in Israel tended to release the non-healthy sort of heavy metals into food, but the more expensive kinds did not.   Thus:   1. Is anyone familiar with Ballarini products? I don't recognize the brand (not common in Canada and probably not the USA either). How do they rate compared to e.g. WMF?   2. Anyone have any experience cooking on ceramic-coated?   I also just bought a whole lot of ingredients to try out an interesting Chinese recipe with which I wanted to inaugurate the purchase, but have held off.