h/t Instapundit
... The problem with the advanced West is not that it's broke but that it's old and barren. Which explains why it's broke. Take Greece, which has now become the most convenient shorthand for sovereign insolvency -- "America's heading for the same fate as Greece if we don't change course," etc. So Greece has a spending problem, a revenue problem, something along those lines, right? At a superficial level, yes. But the underlying issue is more primal: It has one of the lowest fertility rates on the planet. In Greece, 100 grandparents have 42 grandchildren -- i.e., the family tree is upside down. In a social-democratic state where workers in "hazardous" professions (such as, er, hairdressing) retire at 50, there aren't enough young people around to pay for your three-decade retirement. And there are unlikely ever to be again.
...The notion of life as a self-growth experience is more radical than it sounds. For most of human history, functioning societies have honored the long run: It's why millions of people have children, build houses, plant trees, start businesses, make wills, put up beautiful churches in ordinary villages, fight and if necessary die for your country . . . A nation, a society, a community is a compact between past, present, and future, in which the citizens, in Tom Wolfe's words at the dawn of the "Me Decade," "conceive of themselves, however unconsciously, as part of a great biological stream."
Much of the developed world climbed out of the stream. You don't need to make material sacrifices: The state takes care of all that. You don't need to have children. And you certainly don't need to die for king and country. But a society that has nothing to die for has nothing to live for: It's no longer a stream, but a stagnant pool.
#2
Lest we fergit, MEMRI.ORG > RADICAL CLERIC + Most of Europe to be Muslim-majority by 2050, ditto America by 2070.
Don't see Secular Commies making too much headway in Muslim countries - I see Muslim, OTOH, making headway in Euro + Industrialized countries that Commies like.
Linda is 31 years old, single, outspoken, and very bright. She majored in philosophy. As a student, she was deeply concerned with issues of discrimination and social justice, and also participated in antinuclear demonstrations.
Which would you say is more probable?
(1) Linda is a bank teller.
(2) Linda is a bank teller and is active in the feminist movement.
If you chose the latter, you would be in good company. Despite the fact that having two properties is by definition less probable than having only one of those same properties, most people choose the option that includes feminism. Why? Because the description above doesn't suggest 'bank teller', but does suggest 'feminist'. Stephen Jay Gould, certainly familiar with the fallacy involved in this choice, nonetheless noted that "a little homunculus in my head continues to jump up and down, shouting at me -- 'but she can't just be a bank teller; read the description!"
Welcome to fast thinking, the part of our brains that quickly seeks similarities to patterns we already know. The fast brain works quickly. It operates on the What You See Is All There Is principle. And it often comes to wrong judgments that our slower, reasoning brain systems either acknowledge as wrong (but there's that little person in our heads jumping up and down) or -- worse -- rationalize.
Daniel Kahneman's Thinking, Fast and Slow is an account of the insights into decision making that won him a (respected) Nobel prize in Economics. The book is a useful guide not only to our day-to-day decision making but also to understanding how political campaigns succeed in the face of incoherent policies, lousy character on the part of candidates and repeated failures and broken promises.
Decision theory has long spoken of the 'utility' provided by various options under consideration. Different decision makers have different 'utility curves' which plot the increase in value a person perceives as some factor varies. For instance, the utility of earning $1000 more a year is expected to be much higher for an intern than for a corporate CEO -- the intern's utility curve for additional income is probably very steep, with each additional increment of income bringing significant additional utility. The CEO, on the other hand, might not even notice a difference.
Utility theory lies behind most schools of economics -- and behind the political stance of Ron Paul, among others. It assumes we can identify key factors of value, assess the likely outcomes of various alternatives and calculate factor*likelihood = expected utility. Rational people will, it is asserted, choose the option that they assess will have the most utility for them in any given situation.
But what if we don't in fact have a single utility curve for various factors -- or even have a single deciding self? What if, instead, we have at least two 'selves' that participate in every decision: one that is experiencing life right now and another that remembers a (reconstructed and often distorted) past?
Kahneman carefully describes a series of research results showing evidence for two evaluating / deciding selves in a wide variety of situations: assessing the pain of a colonoscopy during vs. after the procedure, responses to imagined loss or gain of money depending on the situation surrounding the loss/gain, anticipated vs. actually experienced regret and so on.
For example: you buy 2 theater tickets for $80 each, but when you arrive at the theater you discover they are missing. Do you a) use your credit card to buy 2 new tickets or b) go home? Would your answer be different if instead of having already purchased the tickets you went to the box office with $160 in cash to buy them there, only to discover that your cash was missing?
A lot of people are more likely to go home if the already-purchased tickets were lost or stolen than if it was cash that was gone. Cash, it seems, comes from a mental/emotional "general fund" category for most people, whereas if the tickets were already purchased, that money was perceived as already used up, as it were. And yet the financial impact of the decision should be the same in either scenario.
We are wired to fit details and new situations into patterns of salience (relevance to our current situation) and to overall order and meaning. Our fast thinking systems often get it wrong.
We're in an election year. The Occupy movement protests the 1% - but inevitably most will vote for Obama, who is more tightly aligned and more heavily funded by Wall Street than by any other candidate for many years. Newt Gingrich is at best a social and financial moderate -- but Tea Party voters see him telling it like it is and, well, What You See Is All There Is to the fast thinking part of our brains.
Kahneman's book is not a quick read, but it's worth the time and effort to understand how we and the other voters around us will actually make decisions not only in elections but for all aspects of our lives.
#1
My 'fast thinking system' immediately assessed the OWS participants as disgruntled Obama supporters who will vote to re-elect him anyway.
The 'fast thinking system' of Obama diehards seems to run along the lines of (1) anything Obama does or advocates is right (2) anything Obama opponents do or advocate is wrong and (3) Obama opponents are racist & [insert whatever pejoratives you like here]. Racial prejudice is a type of 'fast thinking system'.
We have many selves, and probably more than one kind of fast thinking system. In my younger days I had a fast thinking self that got me to do a backwards somersault after I stumbled running backward (as reported by witnesses). Years back I was working on my truck in my driveway & heard a series of small explosions I immediately interpreted as a string of firecrackers going off. Minutes later when half a dozen squad cars screamed by my house a slower thinking system I had in reserve told me I had heard a shoot-out between men with handguns.
"Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgment." This also applies to "Thinking fast & slow".
#2
AH, the modern Western world of antibiotics, vaccines, and increased longevity - coupled with outcome egalitarianism which is enforced by the welfare state, tax code, and hyperregulatory environment - has removed a lot of the cause/effect aspect from the human experience. In effect, pain and suffering and negative feedback have been removed from the loop. Without that, the ability of a lot of folks to learn and grow in wisdom - to gain the "experience" you mention - no longer exists.
This is compounded by the fact that a great many humans (perhaps a majority) are either genetically or otherwise incapable of distinguishing between visually compelling media and reality. The best example of this is the people who saw an actress who looked like Sarah Palin say she could see Russia from her porch and are absolutely convinced that Palin herself said it.
As many posters at this site and others have pointed out, there are loads of people who completely disconnect from politics for three years, eleven months, and three weeks of their lives and tune in to NPR or PBS or CNN to receive instructions on how to vote for president. They've made the "quick thought" choice that these are reliable places to receive guidance on this issue even though they haven't thought through the actual consequences of doing so, or analyzed the results of the last time they acted that way.
If there are no consequences to doing otherwise a huge chunk of humanity will choose the path of least resistance. If you've managed employees you can't help but have noticed this. Some people, either through nature, nurture, or a bit of both, are programmed to choose the easiest path even if it is blatantly not the best.
Quick thinking but not best thinking.
.
Posted by: no mo uro ||
12/25/2011 7:06 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Merry Christmas to all, especially those not at home, and thank you, lotp, for this Christmas present.
[Dawn] AN internal probe conducted by the US military into the events leading to the killing of 24 Pak soldiers in Mohmand ... Named for the Mohmand clan of the Sarban Pahstuns, a truculent, quarrelsome lot. In Pakistain, the Mohmands infest their eponymous Agency, metastasizing as far as the plains of Beautiful Downtown Peshawar, Charsadda, and Mardan. Mohmands are also scattered throughout Pakistan in urban areas including Karachi, Lahore, and Quetta. In Afghanistan they are mainly found in Nangarhar and Kunar... Agency last month has concluded that Pak military officers were provided the wrong information on the basis of which they permitted US-led NATO ...the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. A cautionary tale of cost-benefit analysis.... forces to strike. Yet American officials have not apologised. It is a sad indictment of the state of Pakistain-US relations that an apology cannot be issued for the deaths of soldiers in a direct, though perhaps unintentional, attack. From a distance, it is difficult to discern the reason for the US reluctance. Perhaps struggles inside the B.O. regime -- the State Department vs Pentagon, hawks vs doves, generals vs civilians -- based on arguments over the general approach towards Pakistain is the reason for the refusal to apologise. Or perhaps President Barack The campaign's over, John Obama doesn`t want his administration to look weak as he enters the presidential election cycle with low ratings and a rabid Republican cohort attacking him any which way it can. Still, the Pak expectation that an apology be tendered is legitimate, and domestic US compulsions or squabbles ought not to override the demand for one.
From the comments made by Gen Stephen Clark tasked with leading the US investigation, it was evident how the deep distrust that exists between Pakistain and the US affects ties at even the operational level. Military standard operating procedures may prevent the full sharing of information with even the strongest of allies. But there is a sense that what transpired in the border coordination centre, where the wrong target information was allegedly shared with Pakistain, could have been avoided if the level of distrust had been less between the two countries. Perhaps the US and Pakistain will have to work out fresh ways to share information at the operational level and factor in their deteriorating relationship at the strategic level. That soldiers should die because the two states don`t trust each other`s intentions is surely something that can and must be avoided.
The bigger picture remains the deteriorating ties between the US and Pakistain -- 2011 has been an annus horribilis in this context. If a worsening of relations is to be avoided in 2012 at least two things ought to happen. One, the US will need more clarity of purpose and a realistic direction in Afghanistan. Two, Pakistain will have to work with the international community, rather than against it, in determining a stable future for Afghanistan. If not, as happened in Mohmand, the real winner will be the Taliban, and that victory will be to Pakistain`s detriment.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/25/2011 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
#1
Give 'em the same apology Bluto gave after smashing the guy's acoustic guitar: "Uh, sorry..."
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
12/25/2011 1:08 Comments ||
Top||
#2
perhaps it's because Pakistain has not apologized for housing Osama in their military cantonment with impunity. Perhaps it's because Pakistain has not apologized for killing Americans via their Taliban puppets and arms supplied? F*ck em
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/25/2011 11:40 Comments ||
Top||
The fall of East Pakistain contained some early symptoms of what was to follow: the gradual decline of the state through isolation and dysfunction. The first symptom appeared in 1970 when the uprising started in East Pakistain. The state reacted by manifesting the following pathology: 1) it went into denial; 2) it developed a 'national consensus' around this denial; 3) it isolated itself in the international community; and 4) it developed the self-damaging aetiology of externalising internal contradictions on to external factors.
When the war in East Pakistain started, the world took notice of the mass movement behind the resistance to the Pakistain Army. A vast population started escaping into India - 9 million - but the numbers were denied by Pakistain in an obviously incredible 'military estimate'. Then West Pakistain drummed up nationalism and showed that the nation was 'united' against the uprising. Then it condemned the world for siding with India that had 'caused the uprising through a conspiracy'. Pak textbooks still say India was never reconciled to the creation of Pakistain and broke it up through an invasion in 1971.
The first symptom appeared in 1970 when the uprising started in East Pakistain. The state reacted by manifesting the following pathology: 1) it went into denial; 2) it developed a 'national consensus' around this denial; 3) it isolated itself in the international community; and 4) it developed the self-damaging aetiology of externalising internal contradictions
Isolationism is bad for all states and puts them morally in the wrong even if the cause is noble. Even superpowers cannot bear the pressure of international isolation. Pakistain today is internally united - against the US plus the world - and this benefits the Army as it goes into another war of impossible odds. Pakistain is still externalising its internal conflict and blaming it on America, India, and for good measure, Israel. The Army is taking it down another road of disaster fighting two powers it cannot win against, India and the US. East Pakistain is happening all over again. Today there is no Cold War to rescue us. (In 1971, even Cold War netted us no backers, except for the US, which warned off India from a coup de grace strike on West Pakistain.)
The Army is repeating the same mistakes: undermining democracy at home, favouring terrorism and ignoring the global suspicion of its complicity with its non state actors. At the level of strategy, it is worthwhile to remember what an army officer wrote after the East Pakistain debacle in a book titled The 1971 Indo-Pak War: A Soldier's Narrative (OUP 2002). The author, Major General (Retd) Hakeem Arshad Qureshi, commanded the SSG (Commandos) and commanded an infantry battalion in East Pakistain in 1970-71, was a POW in India after the war, and later commanded Pakistain Rangers as director-general, before retiring in 1990.
He points to the flawed doctrine that the defence of East Pakistain lay in West Pakistain. (Replace this with 'defence of the Western border lies in the defence of Eastern border', which neglects both the Tribal Areas and Balochistan ...the Pak province bordering Kandahar and Uruzgun provinces in Afghanistan and Sistan Baluchistan in Iran. Its native Baloch propulation is being displaced by Pashtuns and Punjabis and they aren't happy about it... where terrorism is embedded.) No effort was made to augment the defence of East Pakistain to gain time before the counter-offensive against the enemy could begin from West Pakistain.
Major General (Retd) Hakeem Arshad Qureshi's central argument was that internal issues cannot be brushed under the carpet and lack of resources ignored. He insists that all strategy should be based on an assessment of Pakistain's resource-base. Pakistain cannot secure itself unless it is economically strong. He recommends 'lying low' even if it takes us 50 years to develop as an economically independent and sovereign state. Today of course the only way we can do this is by linking up with two neighbours with high growth rates: India and China. Instead the Army - with full national consensus - is taking on the international community led by the US. Even those who hate the US as much we do are not on the same page with us.
Philip Bobbit in his book, The Shield Of Achilles: War, Peace and the Course of History (2002), states: 'The strategic thinking of states accustomed to war does not fit them for peace, which requires harmony and trust, nor can such thinking be abandoned without risking a collapse of legitimacy altogether because the State's role in guaranteeing security is the one responsibility that is not being challenged domestically and thus the one to which it clings'.
A nation's self-portrayal is its nationalism. As early as 1980, the United Nations ...an international organization whose stated aims of facilitating interational security involves making sure that nobody with live ammo is offended unless it's a civilized country... held a conference on the purely subjective nature of nationalism and its function of internal exclusion and external aggression. In Europe, nationalism has been exposed as a myth-making function of the state that leads to epochal wars. As a touchstone of legitimacy, however, it permanently endangers the security of the state, either by a similar nationalism in the neighbourhood or by reason of the neighbour's response to the aggressive nationalism of the state. Strategy is nothing when not coupled to the resource base and internal cohesion.
Al Qaeda in Pakistain is sensitive to its resource base and constantly kidnaps rich people for ransom and robs banks through its Punjabi Taliban proxies. But Pakistain's strategy is wedded to an unrealistic mission statement because the kind of material support it needs is not there. The 'epochal' war with India, begun in 1947 and still going on, adds to the pressures that the state has to bear to merely survive. If the state is relatively small it must carefully determine who the enemy is and how 'conquerable' it is, given the resources of the state. If the status quo is not to the liking of the state with a limited resource-base, then anti-status quo policies have to be politically framed, not militarily.
The Army has based its strategy on ghairat which it conflates with illusory sovereignty. The nation follows the Army's lead - which reminds us of East Pakistain. The Army put the world at risk through jihad and its consequence: international terrorism. Jihad has virtually destroyed Pakistain's internal illusory sovereignty by conceding con-dominion to the jihadi militias fighting India and its new ally the US in Afghanistan. Pakistain's external illusory sovereignty has also been destroyed by the tendency of jihad to farm out the formulation of strategy to its commanders in the field. Pakistain's strategy towards Iran, Central Asia and Russia was effectively formulated after 1996 by the Taliban capos. It is happening once again.
Today Pakistain's internal illusory sovereignty is under challenge by Al Qaeda. Its external illusory sovereignty is at risk from the isolationism embraced by the Army and the 'national consensus'. As outlined in Mark Duffield'sGlobal Governance and the new War, the 'liberal' world dominion today links development to security and finds in the process of exclusion - (through language policy in East Pakistain and Blasphemy Law in Pakistain) - under nationalism a cause of internal chaos and external war.
What happened in East Pakistain was caused by this process of 'exclusion', which first produced internal chaos, then triggered war with India. One must keep in mind that General Yahya's action in East Pakistain was 'propelled', if not 'forced', by nationalism in West Pakistain. That nationalism is still alive and has become complicated by jihad and its global outreach in total negation of the nation-state. The state has become dysfunctional and, once again unmindful of the narrowing resource-base, Pakistain is faced with wars it cannot win.
Pakistain has taken on America today because of its flawed view of India as an eternal enemy. Without a strategy that could be understood and supported by the world, Pakistain wants Afghanistan left open to a repetition of what it did there after the exit of Soviet Union in 1991. The world could not understand the strategy of the Pakistain Army in 1971 and abandoned it. It is today worried about Pakistain's path-dependent syndrome of plunging into wars but is compelled to focus on the global threat of Al Qaeda embedded in Pakistain with its variety of affiliates whom Pakistain says it will not fight 'because they are our brothers'.
#2
Pakistan is a collection of places and ethnic groups no one else wanted.
Posted by: Bill Clinton ||
12/25/2011 1:26 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Is that the F3 macro you're using, Bill Clinton?
There's a lot more to the history and identity of Pakistan than that simplistic refrain you've adopted. It's a dangerously failing state, one which may well plunge us all into a much bigger conflict.
Lord Nazir on Altaf Husain
Quoted in Nai Baat British Pakistani member of parliament Lord Nazir said that MQM leader Altaf Husain had been working as an agent of Indian secret agency RAW and that PPP leader Dr Zulfiqar Mirza will not leave the UK without proving the guilt of Altaf Husain.
Imran Khan's 'chchittar'
Quoted in daily Express Imran Khan said that he could not help meeting the American ambassador Munter after he simply barged into his house in Islamabad. He said because of the scandal arising out of this meeting that next time the US ambassador comes to his he will drive him with his shoe (chchittar).
Mansoor Ijaz is Qadiani!
Daily Nawa-e-Waqt made the discovery that rascally American conspirator Mansoor Ijaz was a Qadiani serving the CIA for the past 20 years while travelling in his own private jet. His father was related to the Nobel Laureate Dr Abdus Salam while his grandfather was one of the inside circle of the founder of the faith.
Jamali goes prophetic like Pagaro
Reported in Jinnah former prime minister and old PMLQ leader Zafrullah Jamali predicted in the tradition of Pir Pagaro - whose predictions never come true - that the PPP government will pack up before December 25, 2011, because of the NATO invasion and Husain Haqqani memo. In answer to him, PPP leader Fakhr Imam stated that there were no legitimate signs of the government going and that he was surprised at Jamali's prediction which he thought was an attempt to become another Pir Pagaro.
Hanif Abbasi accuses Imran Khan
Writing in Jang funny columnist Ataul Haq Qasimi said that PMLN leader Hanif Abbasi had disclosed that Imran Khan in 1987 had written an application to chief minister Punjab Nawaz Sharif for a plot in Lahore. He got two plots for free on the pledge that he had no plots in his name and that he will not sell the new plots. Yet Imran Khan owned a plot in Zaman Park where he had his house and then he sold the plots thus acquired. (Imran Khan's reply was that Nawaz Sharif had asked him to write the application so that he could officially give him the plots which he did and sold the plots thereafter and donated the money to Shaukat Khanum Cancer Hospital.)
Shaukat Khanum Trustees get big salaries
Columnist Ataul Haq Qasimi wrote in Jang that Hanif Abbasi had also accused Imran Khan to including his family members in the Shaukat Khanum Trust giving them Rs 40 lakh every month as salaries. He accused him of confessing to gambling in his book whose British edition showed Kashmir as part of India. (Imran Khan replied that he was taking legal action against Hanif Abbasi to get him to prove that salaries were given to Trustees. He said the Kashmir misprint was removed later and that the betting was not in fact gambling because it was legal based on honest professional prediction.)
Veena Malik in 'trubbel' again
Daily Jinnah reported that Pakistani filmstar Veena Malik had posed nude for an India magazine while carrying the tattoo saying ISI on her arm. Veena Malik replied that he photo was 'bold' but not nude. The tattoo of ISI probably showed her loyalty to Pakistan and its most honourable agency. Veena Malik's father was also offended by her exposure and reprimanded her for going too far and regretted that she was his daughter: 'Kash who meri beti na hoti'. He said his entire family was very religious. Mashriq reported that the Taliban were so upset by Veena's photo that they sent her a death threat.
Mushahid and Sheikh Rashid back in PMLN?
Daily Pakistan reported that PMLQ leader Mushahid Hussain and Sheikh Rashid of Awami Muslim League were getting ready to return to the embrace of PMLN because Punjab Law Minister Rana Sanaullah was working very hard on Nawaz Sharif to get them back against the PPP.
Our latest 'Aslambegism'
World famous military strategist and ex-army chief of Pakistan Aslam Beg told Nawa-e-Waqt that NATO's attack at Salala in Mohmand Agency was staged by the Americans to get some Taliban terrorists freed from Pakistani jails as the Taliban are not against the US but in secret allied with it.
Oh my.
He said Pak Army had surrounded warlords Waliur Rehman and Fazlullah and the NATO attack was aimed at helping them.
If women drove cars in Saudi Arabia
Daily Mashriq reported that after Saudi Arabia relented and gave permission to Saudi women to drive cars a famous Saudi Islamic scholar told the Saudi religious council that the consequences of this permission would be: women will start selling their bodies, they will start seeking divorce from their husband and they will start doing obscene acts (fuhush harkaat).
Veena Malik offends the nation
Daily Pakistan reported that there was widespread emotional storm in Pakistan over the news that Veena Malik had posed nude for an Indian magazine and ruined Pakistan's honour for a few pennies. She was named Zahida Malik and wore burqa from class three till college but took off everything in India. Indian film producer Mahesh Bhatt said he would defend Veena Malik and give her full chance to clear her position. He said Veena should not consider herself alone because every Indian was on her side.
Obama takes revenge for his blackness
Columnist Tanvir Qaiser Shahid wrote in daily Express that when slaves become masters they behave worse than their tormentors. President Obama was from a community that had suffered cruelties at the hands of white Americans
A common mistake -- President Obama was not from the community, but grafted himself upon it.
but he was now being cruel to the Muslims of Pakistan as US and Nato invasion kills innocent Pakistani troops at Salala checkpost.
Mangal Bagh gives Islamic punishment
Reported in daily Express family members of a man killed in Bara fired on the accused after he confessed to having killed their son. The son had gone to Bara to get her sister in law to come home when the father of the bride knifed him to death. Lashkar-e-Islam the terrorist organisation which rules Khyber Agency organised the punishment under Islamic Law.
Haqqani made envoy on Billa's advice
Daily Mashriq reported that prime minister Nawaz Sharif wanted to get rid of his aide Husain Haqqani in 1992 and did not know what to do. Haqqani was asking for an important post which Nawaz Sharif was not willing to give him. At this point ex-ISI officer Brigadier Imtiaz Ahmed alias Brigadier Billa known for the highest IQ known in spies,
There's a regular program for measuring the intelligence of spies for comparison purposes? Doesn't that reveal them?
advised him to send him as ambassador to Sri Lanka which he did.
Raymond Davis's curse
Reported in Nawa-e-Waqt the family that Raymond Davis paid blood money to had gone berserk after coming into a lot of money. The boy whom Davis killed was Faheem and the blood money was paid to his brother Akram who has recently divorced his second wife after giving her a thrashing and has married a third one in addition to moving into a new house.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Mohmand
Punjab
Lord Nazir on Altaf Husain
