한국당 김승희 “문 대통령 치매 초기증상”…사과 거부
--->문죄인의 치매 증상은 청와대가 확인해준 것이다. 자기가 통과시킨 자신의 기념관을 기억하지 못하는 건, 심각한 치매의 전조이거나 증상이다. 조속히 치료받아야 하고, 대통령직도 내려놓아야 한다.
---------------------------------------------------------
중국은 홍콩 못건드린다 쫄지마라
중국이 홍콩을 무력 진압하는 순간
대만과의 통합은 쫑 나는거임
원래 중국은 대만도 홍콩처럼 일국양제로 먹을려고 했으나
홍콩을 이런식으로 처리하면 대만 못먹음
대만은 전쟁으로도 먹을수 없음
미국이 국내법으로 대만보호를 법제화 해놔서
대만과의 전쟁 = 미국과의 전쟁임
대만인들 스스로가 중국과의 통합을 원하지않는 이상
무력으로는 대만을 먹을수가 없는데 홍콩을 강경진압하면
대만인들은 절대 중국과 통합 안할꺼임
그냥 홍콩인들 맘대로 자치하게 놔두고 막대한 경제적 이익을 챙기는게 낫지
지금 홍콩 망가트리면 회복 불가능임. 그냥 중국의 평범한 섬되는거임
황금알을 낳는 거위의 배를 가르는격
중국수뇌부가 그걸 모를리가 없음
홍콩 시민들은 쫄지말고 똘똘 뭉쳐서 버티면 승리한다/ 일베
--->위의 글이 합리적이긴 하지만, 중국은 지금 합리적인 지도자들이 아닌, 이데올로기에 사로잡
힌 사람들의 집단이 지배하고 있다.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
한국경제 진단, 수출, 자본이탈, 환율... 유일하게 탄탄하던 재정... 너마저...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some Chinese in America have a loyalty problem. I say to them, "Take your communist flags, your expensive cars, and especially your arrogance and leave this country."
미국 내의 일부 중국인은 잘못된 애국심을 지니고 있다. 나는
그들에게 말한다. "너의 공산당 기와 고급차, 그리고 너의 오만
을 모두 가지고 이 나라를 떠나라!"
-----------------------------------------------------------
As China’s Communist Party celebrates 70 years in
power, it faces a very big challenge: a worsening
economy that has left some people wondering
China’s best times might be behind it.
중국이 건국 70주년을 기념하고 있지만, 경제는 악화
되고 있다.
What’s different this time around is that young people have never experienced such a drawn out slowdown. And it comes as they face fewer job prospects and higher costs of living.
It’s a new unease that can be found across China, from the glittering business capitals of Shanghai and Shenzhen to more working-class places like Zhengzhou, an industrial metropolis of 10 million
In Zhengzhou, Wang Junda works on a short-term contract at a complex where Apple phones are made. He worries that he will never make enough. “Whatever you earn is never enough to match your spending,” he said
At a mall downtown, Wang Li is among a dozen bored shopkeepers who sit on lawn chairs and stools, watching shows on their smartphones while waiting for customers. “Nothing is good,” she said. “It’s not just this one type of business. Every kind of business is not doing so great.”
“Business is not good,” Cui Guowei, her boss, complains. “I’m so worried I have a headache.” He’s been running his business selling towels, water bottles and keepsake mugs for more than ten years but these days things are worse than before.
In Shanghai, Mengjie Wu and George Gao have a mortgage and loans to pay off and rising living costs. So they are considering putting off the ultimate act of consumption: their wedding. “We haven’t decided if we will do it yet because it is not a small cost. We won’t do it soon.”
These concerns pose an immediate challenge to China’s leadership, which draws its legitimacy from the wealth and confidence of the Chinese people
--------------------------------------------------------
U.S. imports from China fell 12.5% in the year
through August
미중 무역 분쟁으로 중국으로부터의 수입은 12.5% 줄
고, 멕시코와 베트남으로 수입선을 돌렸다. 이 여파로
중국은 경제적 침체를 경험하고 있다.
-------------------------------------------------------
Mike Shellenberger
"I love that you support the Green Deal," a woman told @AOC yesterday, but "it’s not going to solve the problem fast enough. We have to eat babies!"
You might want to dismiss the prank, but it was a brilliant & wholly-justified way to highlight the dangers of climate extremism.
환경 문제는 단시간에 해결하기 어려우니, 우리는 아이들을 먹어치워야 합니다.
In the video, a woman stands up at a town hall meeting hosted by @AOC and says, with an accent reminiscent of Borat, "We don’t have enough time! Too much pollution, so we have to get rid of the babies! That’s a big problem. We need to eat the babies!”
Afterwards, @AOC tweeted that the woman was "in crisis," but it was a prank, which was obvious to anyone familiar with Jonathan Swift's famous 1729 parody, "A Modest Proposal."
The most famous line in Swift's essay is, "A young healthy child well nursed, is, at a year old, a most delicious nourishing and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled; and I make no doubt that it will equally serve in a fricassee, or a ragout."
Swift satirically suggested that hungry Irish people should sell their children as food to the rich. He did so in order to mock what he viewed British heartlessness toward the poor generally and the Irish specifically.
One hundred years later, the 19th-century British economist, Thomas Malthus, made similar arguments to Swift's, but in all seriousness.
Malthus thought that there were too many poor people, particularly poor Irish people, and that the ethical thing to do was let them die.
Malthus wrote, “Instead of recommending cleanliness to the poor, we should encourage contrary habits, and court the return of the plague.”
Malthus was responding to a French writer named Marquis de Condorcet who, four years earlier, had published the “Sketch for a Historical Picture of the Human Mind.”
Condorcet argued that scientific and moral progress could be intertwined.
Greater knowledge and understand could lead to greater prosperity, freedom and compassion, but only if scientific progress were married to moral and political progress.
Condorcet's vision was humanistic. He thought humans could take control of their own destinies, without need for an external authority, whether god or Nature. His vision was universal: universal prosperity could be achieved, regardless of to race, nation, religion or sex.
Malthus argued that Condorcet’s vision of progress was unsustainable because it required falling out of balance with the constraints imposed by nature. Rising food production, he argued, would inevitably result in over-population and famine.
Malthus wrote, "The poor consequently must live much worse, and many of them be reduced to severe distress…. The power of population is so superior to the power of the earth to produce subsistence for man, that premature death must in some shape or other visit the human race."
He wrote, "A man who is born into a world already possessed, if he cannot get subsistence from his parents on whom he has a just demand & if the society do not want his labour, has no claim of right to the smallest portion of food, and, in fact, has no business to be where he is"
Malthus was making a utilitarian argument. If we let the poor reproduce they would just end up creating more suffering in the future.
The British government and media used Malthus’ ideas to justify the policies that led to mass starvation in Ireland from 1845 to 1849.
After World War II, environmentalists drew on Malthus' ideas to oppose development aid & cheap energy.
Cheap energy would lead to overpopulation, deplete scarce resources, and destroy the environment, prominent scientists in the West feared.
Humankind “would not rest content until the earth is covered completely, and to a considerable depth, with a writhing mass of human beings, much as a dead cow is covered with a pulsating mass of maggots,” a chemist, Harrison Brown, wrote in 1950 book The Challenge of Man’s Future
Brown was hugely influential. One of his protégés was John Holdren, President Obama’s science advisor. Brown proposed the breeding & sterilization of humans to prevent “the long-range degeneration of the human stock” but Holdren described Brown as “surprisingly modest."
Holdren argued that Western scientists, under the benevolent olive branches of the United Nations, needed to control “the development, administration, conservation and distribution of all natural resources.”
Anti-humanist ideas came full bloom in Stanford biologist Paul Ehrlich’s 1969 Sierra Club book, The Population Bomb, which depicted poor people in India as animals “screaming… begging… defecating and urinating.”
The United Nations embraced neo-Malthusianism in a 1987 report called “Our Common Future.”
Rather than move to fossil fuels, hydro-electric dams, and nuclear power plants, like rich nations had done, poor nations should instead use *wood fuel* more sustainably, the UN said.
“The wood-poor nations must organize their agricultural sectors to produce large amounts of wood and other plant fuels,” the UN-backed authors wrote.
The lead author of “Our Common Future” was Gro Brundtland, former Prime Minister of Norway, a nation which just a decade earlier had become fabulously wealthy thanks to its abundant oil and gas reserves.
Figures like Brundtland promoted the idea that poor nations didn’t need to consume much energy, which turned out to be howlingly wrong.
Malthusianism is almost always hypocritical.
맬서스주의는 언제나 위선적이다.
In 2014, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), sought to cut off US funding to poor nations seek to build hydroelectric dams.
"If Senator Leahy is so adamantly against hydropower," wrote a development specialist, "let him show his commitment by first turning out the lights of Vermont."
Today, while the Norwegian government produces natural gas in Mozambique and Tanzania, it is participating in a European push to prevent those same countries from building natural gas power plants.
Intellectual justification for restricting financing for cheap and reliable energy sources often comes from environmental scientists and advocates, including mainstream ones.
Last year the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued a report that rests heavily on the idea that poor nations can grow rich while using radically less energy.
“Pathways compatible with 1.5°C that feature low energy demand,” IPCC said, “show the most pronounced synergies and the lowest number of trade-offs.”
The IPCC repeated a widely-debunked claim that poor nations can “leap-frog” rich nations with solar panels, batteries, and energy efficiency.
IPCC는 가난한 나라들이 태양광, 배터리, 에너지 효율 등으로 부자나라로 도약할 수 있다는, 널리 거짓임이 폭로된 주장을 반복하고 있다. 그들은 심지어 나무나 똥, 에탄올 같은 바이오 에너지를 추천했다.
In truth, energy consumption is as tightly coupled to per capita GDP today as it was when today’s rich nations were themselves poor.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/10.1086/680317.pdf?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents …
IPCC authors even promoted “bio-energy” — the use of wood, dung, and ethanol — fuels incapable of lifting people out of poverty that also happen to have hugely negative environmental impacts.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
자신의 저서 <대중의 광기>에 대해 말하는 더글러스 머리
PODCAST 56: Douglas Murray talks about his new book The Madness of Crowds
Conservative intellectual Douglas Murray talks to Toby Young about the moral shortcomings of identity politics and the Marxist underpinnings of the Social Justice movement, both subjects of his new book The Madness of Crowds: Gender, Race, and Identity.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
댓글 없음:
댓글 쓰기