And millionaire investment bankers / corporate raiders don't ever scam people? When poor people do it, it's criminal, when the wealthy do it, it's a free market.
if I got a penny for being justified in "Thats Marxism" behind a comment here, I'd be pretty well off. Legislative action is heavily dependent from people who are themselves heavily dependent on contributions, and are furtheremore constantly exposed to a mindset that values little more than personal property (Bush was able to forge an election without getting drawn into court and flogged. Imagine the outcry if he'd be caught stealing instead). And this is an observation straigh from "Marx for beginners".
The funny thing is that people seem to assume that just because you subscribe to any of Marx' observations (such as that share-owners earn money from other peoples work), they will assume you also share the stupid conclusions of his brutal pupils. Which is why people cringe as soon as someone tells them "Thats what Marx said" since they expect the FBI to kick in their doors the next night.
You might want to ask what "worked" means, and who is the judge of that. Here in Europe, the French Revolution and the declaration of human rights is seen as the "sine qua non" and central event which all modern notions of human rights, freedom and seperation of state and church are based on. Granted, there was much mutual inspiration between the American revolution and the French, but for Europeans its "Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite" that define the human quest for freedom, not the Declaration of independence.
Granted, first they ended up with a dictator (1794), then an emperor (1804), and then the royals they wanted to overthrow were restored forcefully by the other European powers (1815). But the ideas and changes broght by the French revolution provided lasting and led to the democratization of much of Europe in the next 150 years.
Of course you might want to lay blame for the Revolutionary Wars (Millions of dead, Europe laid waste) on the French, or maybe even blame them for the last Two World Wars (their reasons, amonst others, being nationalism and mass conscription, also an invention of the French revolution). However, one might with equal cause then blame the Germans (Hegel, Nietzsche, Marx) or the British (Imperialism). Europe didnt have the luxury of simply declaring itself independent from its rulers and exploring a Brave New World - it had to remove every single of those royal leeches or render them impotent by force. The US has been a great support and inspiration for Europe in the past two centuries, still we had to find our own way.
But judging over some longer timeframe, it worked, the French are today more free than they were in 1900 or 1789.
Oh, and there weren't "10s of thousands of people murdered" but 16,594. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution#Reign_of_Terror). But of course a lot of them were wealthy or gentry, this the outcry. Few bemoaned 20.000 people slaughtered in an average battle between two royals in a fight over a province.
Disclaimer: Am german, I hope the occasional spelling or grammatical error doesnt distract too much from what I am trying to say.
Shit, I remember reading about that in school. Latin class, to be specific - translating a section of Cassius Dio's Historia Romana about its construction. That alone tells you how incredibly old and overdesigned that thing is.
If you build something to last, its not overdesign, its good architecture. The concept of calulating the lifespan of a building is a very new and sad one, since it means you only build stuff that will make you "get your money back" before that time, preferrably within a generation. I know we cant have the old times back, but I am living in a city quarter that was built in the 1880s and most people in my town woul rather live in those "overdesigned" houses than the overprized concrete crap investors spray into the cityscape here. And, honestly, I would sincerely wish my government would build bridges and buildings that were designed to last, not to crumble after 50 years. What are we going to show our grandchildren? "And here was a building called 'the green mall' when I was a child, but when I was fourty they tore it down to build a school there, and now as you can see they are dynamiting that to replace it with an office building"? Regards
The idea of defining anything as being the norm for humans is actually offensive to me.
Proof again you can break into FBI or CIA, or you can talk about it, but you cant do both for very long.
This here explains it in some more words: https://www.infosecisland.com/blogview/14706-LulzSec-How-Not-to-Run-an-Insurgency.html#.TgNxjyifa2A.twitter
Since I'm at work, I dont have the appropriate quote, but Nietzsche extensively examined how reason is searving the desires (and the "will to power" in particular, of course).
Then, I am pretty sure it will be possible to find some prearistotelian thinker who came up with the same idea. Its not really a surprise.
Three years ago I would have happily signed up for such an adventure, even if it was one-way. To be part of that, oh wow. These days, with a wife and a child, I guess I'll envy those who go, but wont be amongst them.
So I dont thinnk there be volunteers lacking, Even though I dont know wether they ft the general requirements of mental stability to be locked up in a can for a year. Even the early colonists of the Americas expected to make some money and then return. And even in the Americas it was a three month voyage on a ship, not a year in space.
But hell, what a ride.
It really depends on the ressources I would be allowed to take with me. And of course on the realism of the assumption. Travelling back to the roman empire would probably wipe out 80% of humanity, considering the amouont of modern germs present humans carry around with them - and it also could mean a speedy death at the hand of some forgotten plague.
If I were allowed to bring some equipment with me, I'd bring a solar-powered battery charger, a digital camera, a laptop and some aspirin, someone with knowledge of arameic and greek and latin, a lot of gold coins and some guns, and would probably attempt to copy every scroll of the library of Alexandria I could lay my hands on. Securing the complete works of Aristotle would be enough, but salvaging a couple of thousands of scrolls, or ven more, from this lost treasure of human wisdom would not only make me rich, it would emply thousands of translators, historians, and philosophers for decades. It would change and refine and alter our view of the past, o philosophy, and solve a lot of historical puzzles.
Probably the burning of the library in 44BC was such a botched attempt, hm?
The second intervention I would attempt is not to "Kill Hitler" but comes close: Travel back to 1914 and create enough havoc that the Germans win the Battle of the Marne. the result?
Of course, all speculative, everything can still turn out terribly. ut it would sure be fun to try
Or I would just go back a couple of years and kick myself in the butt repeatedly fo breaking up with my ex.
Considering the absurdity of some patents granted in the past years, I seriously doubt that the number of paptens on file is a good indicator of technical prowess. It merely shows the strengh of the IP regime
For a saint...
or for Samuel L Jackson!
Now THAT would be a biopic of St. patrick even I as an atheist would want to see!
If computers take over (which seems to be their natural tendency), it will serve us right. -- Alistair Cooke