[ExI] Making Rationalizations is Superior to the Alternative
rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com
Sat Apr 18 04:40:19 UTC 2009
On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 8:29 PM, Lee Corbin <lcorbin at rawbw.com> wrote:
Who said *ANYTHING*
> about destroying anyone? How bizarre that you should choose
> that word.
### Let's not get hypocritical here. Expelling 6 million people does
involve destruction of lives on a large scale. They won't be accepted
abroad - there is no country in the world willing to accept 6 million
refugees. If you start rounding them up and fire up some crematoriums,
maybe a few hundred thousand will get pity visas in the US and other
places. Failing that, you could drop them off in international waters
and leave them to fight the currents. Have you thought about these
technicalities of your proposal - millions of innocent people rounded
up and either kept indefinitely in concentration camps or actually
killed, if you are serious about your "expelling"?
So yes, I stand by my accusation that you want to destroy the lives of
6 million innocent people.
>> When I challenged you to run the numbers and to explain how a 6%
>> minority with marginally higher procreation levels could become a
>> majority in 25 years, you didn't.
> What? This is a matter of numbers for you?
### Yes, it is a matter of numbers. Everything is a matter of numbers
for me. What matter is it for you?
Are you saying
> that if they were a 40% minority that would tip the balance
> in your thinking? This sounds misleading, to put it mildly.
> Are you really grappling with the issues? Why don't you
> give me some examples where you *would* expel some minority,
> and I mean *expel*, not "destroy".
### Don't accuse me of being a liberal hypocrite. If I was a Croat
with a 40% Serb minority and hundreds of thousands of armed and
organized militias killing hundreds of people a day, and there was no
chance of building a coalition of non-violent Serbs and Croats to
control the madness, I would support ethnic cleansing, i.e. offering
legal protection only to those who swear allegiance to a Croat
protection service, refusing it to Serbs, and ruthlessly killing
anybody proven to be involved with the militias, which over time would
produce movement of Serbs to Serbian majority locations while
concentrating Croats in their areas. If I was Shia and there were
Sunni death squads infiltrating from other neighborhoods, I would
support the idea of splitting the country into a Sunni and a Shia
No Lee, I am not a dumb leftist weakling or something. I do understand
that if there are insufficient resources (including time) to tell the
innocent from the violent, the lives of some innocent people will be
destroyed, unavoidably, and sweepingly destructive actions will
happen, one way or another. As a libertarian, I want to minimize this
destruction, and as a rational person I insist on having a
quantitative description of facts that allow predictive modeling of
the future. I am sorry to see it, but your proposal actually
deliberately seeks to destroy and is not based on facts.
I do appreciate your argument
> that according to you according to your numbers, the truly crucial
> "us becoming a minority" wouldn't be going to happen for some time
> (were I that hypothetical Frenchman I spoke of above). Indeed, the
> singularity might happen first.
### Good, so you admit your math isn't worth a damn. This invalidates
all else - if you build a chain of reasoning on quantitatively
incorrect data, the reasoning is invalid.
More information about the extropy-chat