21 thoughts on “Artistic Hackers

  1. \ Oh yes. But Putin is very neoliberal.

    Seriously? He is neoliberal as long as he isn’t the one to be hacked or suffer the slightest inconvenience.

    I read this post and saw red:

    http://www.germanjoys.eu/2017/06/why-mass-immigration-is-a-threat-to-civil-liberties.html

    What made me angry was:

    \In Sweden, a cabinet minister proposed that all young female children be checked for genital mutilation, even though this practice is limited almost exclusively to Somali immigrants.

    Just imagined myself being checked this way in childhood or early teens.
    After all, many girls are cut at age 10 and up; it hardly concerns only small children.

    Imo, there is nothing wrong with racial profiling, except the cases in which it’s uneffective. I would vote for the law checking immigrant girls and, in cases of genital mutilation, sending the entire family back home (*) … without any money earned in the new country.

    (*) If “home” means Syria or some other hell on earth, send them anyway. They had a chance to live with civilized people, but chose not to adopt civilized norms.

    Like

    1. “Seriously? He is neoliberal as long as he isn’t the one to be hacked or suffer the slightest inconvenience.”

      • Of course. His opposition hates him precisely because his policies are extremely neoliberal. He dismantled the manufacturing side of the economy completely. He has taken apart the welfare programs, defeated organized labor, welcomes uncontrolled labor migration, and supports his legitimacy through heavy investment into security, the military, and the police apparatus. He is the definition of a neoliberal globalist. His opposition opposes him on all this and nothing but this. It’s not Ukraine or the relationship with the US they are fretting about.

      Putin is Russia’s Hillary Clinton and Navalny is Russia’s mini-Trump in old worn-out shoes. Which is ironic given that Putin detests Hillary and likes Trump.

      Like

      1. Nobody in the West knows of Putin’s campaign of terror against Russia’s organized labor, for instance. But labor has been his main and most effective opponent. He ended up defeating it, for the most part, but the workers fought hard against him and it looked like they even might be successful for a while.

        Most people still can’t get out of the mindset that a former KGB agent should be some sort of a Commie liberal. And Putin is the exact opposite. He is as neoliberal as one can get.

        Like

    2. “Just imagined myself being checked this way in childhood or early teens.
      After all, many girls are cut at age 10 and up; it hardly concerns only small children.”

      • I’m not sure what’s so problematic about this. Girls go to an Ob-GYN, and there’s no damage in OB-GYNs noticing if there’s been mutilation or not and reporting the cases of FGM.

      Like

      1. Only very rarely does that happen in the UK, it’s not part of our healthcare regime. Not sure about Sweden though.

        Like

        1. I thought girls begin to go to the OB-GYN once they get their period. Which these days is moving closer to the age of 10. The first time I went was when I was just starting puberty. But I’m from a different culture.

          Like

          1. \ I thought girls begin to go to the OB-GYN once they get their period.

            Why? I have not gone then since I had no problems. I told my mother, she gave me pads, that’s all.

            If one wants to start taking pills, it doesn’t have to involve any exams either, as far as I know. You simply go and say “I want pills,” probably to one’s family doctor even.

            I am 99% sure cut girls of Somali immigrants never go to a Swedish OB-GYN, unless they are already married and pregnant. If Swedes want to find out which girls are cut by their parents, we’re talking about forced medical checks … for every girl in Sweden.

            \ The problem with those was that they were done in public.

            I have a problem with any forced exams, even if they are done in private. Especially when those exams are of an intimate kind.

            I would’ve been humiliated and furious to undergo such, especially in my teens.

            Like

      2. \ Girls go to an Ob-GYN

        When do”young female children” do that?!!! And show their genitals too?

        I think you are thinking about forced genital checks in FSU schools. Fortunately, they do not exist in Israel, and I have never experienced being forced to undergo such examinations.

        \ there’s no damage in OB-GYNs noticing if there’s been mutilation or not and reporting the cases of FGM.

        First, we aren’t talking about OB-GYNs reporting such patients, but about a law forcing all “young female children” undergo such checks, even if those young children would have never gone to OB-GYNs otherwise because of being healthy.

        Second, I doubt “there is no damage.” Cut girls would be afraid of going or even not permitted to go see a doctor because of the possibility of their families being reported. On the other hand, young cut women probably never go anyway. It’s not like they use pills with their boyfriends.

        Like

        1. “I think you are thinking about forced genital checks in FSU schools.”

          • The problem with those was that they were done in public. I’d have a huge problem with a public pelvic exam even at my advanced old age of 41, let alone when I was a kid.

          Like

      1. I’m afraid that just as the discussion turned into the interesting direction of neoliberalism, we will once again end up talking about cab drivers in Israel.

        Like

        1. I think you should put a tab called ‘Daily Israel News’ on the top of your page so that our resident Hasbaratron 2000 doesn’t need to steer every discussion in that direction.

          Like

          1. \ think you should put a tab called ‘Daily Israel News’ on the top of your page

            I was not talking about Israel, I read a post by an American living in Germany about civil liberties in EU and decided to share.

            This post looked like a “dead” comments thread, so I thought it was OK. And in the process, revived it. 🙂

            Like

  2. \ Putin is Russia’s Hillary Clinton and Navalny is Russia’s mini-Trump in old worn-out shoes. Which is ironic given that Putin detests Hillary and likes Trump.

    In reality, Putin and Trump are the greater neoliberals, while Hillary Clinton would try to do more than Trump to ease the transition to the new reality. For instance, I talk about health care, trying to help people left out of today’s economy, etc.

    \ Most people still can’t get out of the mindset that a former KGB agent should be some sort of a Commie liberal. And Putin is the exact opposite. He is as neoliberal as one can get.

    They do not know how the entire Soviet economy was stolen and put in a few pockets by people in power, do they?

    Found more in common between Trump and Putin – they both care only about their pockets, while Hillary and Bernie looked like somebody who cared more about “simple people.”

    I do not follow Russian news a lot myself, and would love to read posts about “Putin’s campaign of terror against Russia’s organized labor.”

    \ “Imo, there is nothing wrong with racial profiling”

    Leaving Israeli cabs aside, I would love to hear a true logical response explaining why such profiling is always wrong.

    If the problem is that Somali immigrants cut their girls, why pass a law that millions of native Swedish children must be checked too? It’s a waste of time and money.

    I am against being afraid “to call a child by his name” (Hebrew expression). If a specific group does X, lets deal with this group.

    Like

    1. Of course, Trump is a neoliberal oligarch. That’s a given. But he got elected on a successful use of anti-Neoliberal rhetoric. If he shared his real beliefs with the voters, he wouldn’t stand a chance.

      Like

    2. The problem with “a specific group does this” is that it’s never “every member of the group” or even “most people in the group.” Valuing the individual and defending individual rights is the foundation of liberal thought dating back to the 18th century. This is why there is the Declaration of Human Rights and not a declaration of the rights of group. Liberal thought is all about seeing people as individuals. You become a liberal when you learn to see past group affiliations and notice one single human being whom you equate to yourself. This is liberalism: everybody is a human being whose value is equal to myself.

      This way of seeing the world has its negatives and positives. In its extreme form it gave us neoliberalism which I hate. But liberalism (as opposed to neoliberalism) the greatest advance of humanity ever, in my opinion. And it has transformed the world for the better since it came into existence.

      This should have been a separate post.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.