We have to pause now, because we have to have a whole new tweet thread on #AdamSmith and “savage nations,” because he’s going to keep using this kind of phrase, so we need to talk about it. #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
More from @AdamSmithWorks
The great thing about #AdamSmith is that when he's about to go off on a 65 page tangent, he warns you. Humans, we bring you the DIGRESSIONS ON SILVER! #OhLawdHeComin #WealthOfTweets
Oh King Edward III, it’s adorable that you think you can just decree that servants and laborers become permanently content with wages fixed at the rate they were at five years ago. https://t.co/NtOmttquJ3 (I.xi.e.2) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
He’s already digressing, and he can’t take a minute to share the menu from that famously magnificent feast with us? (I.xi.e.4–5) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
Super Important 18thC Vocab Geekery: When Smith says the price of the quarter of wheat wasn't “supposed to be < 4 oz silver” he doesn’t mean “shouldn't be.” He means “wasn't thought to be.” He’s not approving of fixed prices. (I.xi.e.7) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
So. Many. Wheat. Prices. (But really, Smith is talking about how much wheat it takes to buy a quantity of silver, NOT how much silver it takes to buy a quantity of wheat.) (I.xi.e.1–14) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
Oh King Edward III, it’s adorable that you think you can just decree that servants and laborers become permanently content with wages fixed at the rate they were at five years ago. https://t.co/NtOmttquJ3 (I.xi.e.2) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
He’s already digressing, and he can’t take a minute to share the menu from that famously magnificent feast with us? (I.xi.e.4–5) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
Super Important 18thC Vocab Geekery: When Smith says the price of the quarter of wheat wasn't “supposed to be < 4 oz silver” he doesn’t mean “shouldn't be.” He means “wasn't thought to be.” He’s not approving of fixed prices. (I.xi.e.7) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
So. Many. Wheat. Prices. (But really, Smith is talking about how much wheat it takes to buy a quantity of silver, NOT how much silver it takes to buy a quantity of wheat.) (I.xi.e.1–14) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
More from For later read
Humans inherently like the act of solidarity. We are social beings. We like to huddle up and be together.
They used this against us.
They convinced us that it was an act of solidarity to flatten the curve, to wear a mask for others, to take the vaccines for others,
and to reach #covidzero for others. They convinced us that this was for the greater good of society.
In reality, this couldn't be further away from the truth. They have divided us and broken the core structure of our society. They have dehumanized us with their masks.
They set us against each other into clans on opposite sides of a spectrum. They have turned us into aggressive beings fighting for our survival. Some of us fear harm from the virus, others fear harm from the vaccine, and yet others fear harm from the attack on our civilization.
We are all on a flight or fight mode. We are all operating under the influence of fear. We must collect ourselves and reflect on what has happened over the last year.
How is this for the greater good of society?
They used a tactical warfare strategy against us.
'Divide and conquer'.
We fell for it.
Now we must become aware of it and fight back.
We must reunite. We must find true solidarity to save our world. To free ourselves. To regain our autonomy.
They used this against us.
They convinced us that it was an act of solidarity to flatten the curve, to wear a mask for others, to take the vaccines for others,
If there was ever a time in our lifetime to be non-partisan and for citizens of all walks of life globally to unite behind the basic fundamentals of humanity, freedoms, liberties, human rights, sovereignty, autonomy, dignity, empathy and compassion: it is now. https://t.co/Fa3ieEq51x
— Kulvinder Kaur MD (@dockaurG) January 9, 2021
and to reach #covidzero for others. They convinced us that this was for the greater good of society.
In reality, this couldn't be further away from the truth. They have divided us and broken the core structure of our society. They have dehumanized us with their masks.
They set us against each other into clans on opposite sides of a spectrum. They have turned us into aggressive beings fighting for our survival. Some of us fear harm from the virus, others fear harm from the vaccine, and yet others fear harm from the attack on our civilization.
We are all on a flight or fight mode. We are all operating under the influence of fear. We must collect ourselves and reflect on what has happened over the last year.
How is this for the greater good of society?
They used a tactical warfare strategy against us.
'Divide and conquer'.
We fell for it.
Now we must become aware of it and fight back.
We must reunite. We must find true solidarity to save our world. To free ourselves. To regain our autonomy.
There is some valuable analysis in this report, but on the defense front this report is deeply flawed. There are other sections of value in report but, candidly, I don't think it helps us think through critical question of Taiwan defense issues in clear & well-grounded way. 1/
Normally as it might seem churlish to be so critical, but @cfr is so high-profile & the co-authors so distinguished I think it’s key to be clear. If not, people - including in Beijing - could get the wrong idea & this report could do real harm if influential on defense issues. 2/
BLUF: The defense discussion in this report does not engage at the depth needed to add to this critical debate. Accordingly conclusions in report are ill-founded - & in key parts harmful/misleading, esp that US shldnt be prepared defend Taiwan directly (alongside own efforts). 3/
The root of the problem is that report doesn't engage w the real debate on TWN defense issues or, frankly, the facts as knowable in public. Perhaps the most direct proof of this: The citations. There is nothing in the citations to @DeptofDefense China Military Power Report...4/
Nor to vast majority of leading informed sources on this like Ochmanek, the @RANDCorporation Scorecard, @CNAS, etc. This is esp salient b/c co-authors by their own admission have v little insight into contemporary military issues. & both last served in govt in Bush 43. 5/
This is an excellent report, and I'm glad to have joined the study group. The central focus on avoiding war is understandable--a US-China war would be catastrophic and should be avoided. But protecting Taiwan's security and prosperity requires doing more. 1/x https://t.co/P0Sg4LJcpV
— Bonnie Glaser / \u845b\u4f86\u5100 (@BonnieGlaser) February 12, 2021
Normally as it might seem churlish to be so critical, but @cfr is so high-profile & the co-authors so distinguished I think it’s key to be clear. If not, people - including in Beijing - could get the wrong idea & this report could do real harm if influential on defense issues. 2/
BLUF: The defense discussion in this report does not engage at the depth needed to add to this critical debate. Accordingly conclusions in report are ill-founded - & in key parts harmful/misleading, esp that US shldnt be prepared defend Taiwan directly (alongside own efforts). 3/
The root of the problem is that report doesn't engage w the real debate on TWN defense issues or, frankly, the facts as knowable in public. Perhaps the most direct proof of this: The citations. There is nothing in the citations to @DeptofDefense China Military Power Report...4/
Nor to vast majority of leading informed sources on this like Ochmanek, the @RANDCorporation Scorecard, @CNAS, etc. This is esp salient b/c co-authors by their own admission have v little insight into contemporary military issues. & both last served in govt in Bush 43. 5/
