Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. Alzoc

    General news thread

    Yes I know that for Americans State intervention is generally seen with distrust a priori, while on the contrary Europeans tends to ask the State to regulate sensitives issues with all the power it wield. That's one of the major difference between our societies.
  3. Sturgeon

    General news thread

    Trump isn't extreme politically. Every single one of his planks is something that was in one of the two mainstream parties 10-20 years ago. And what happens if one of your parties consolidates power, hmmm?
  4. Alzoc

    General news thread

    That's the main difference between the French and the American institutions. The US does it down-stream with overall pretty strong check and balances. But given the current American society and mode of election it is possible to elect rather extreme candidates: Trump happened. The French system have much weaker checks and balances but the institutions and the election mode make it virtually impossible for extremist parties to get to the power. The only way that would happen is that over 50% of the population vote for said extremist which is unlikely since we have much more political parties than in the US. If they get elected in that case we would only get what we deserved for having elected an authoritarian.
  5. Sturgeon

    General news thread

    Yeah and what's the benefit? That's the part that's really unclear here. Another thing is even if you try to spruce it up and rehabilitate the image of the policy here, it's still a case of nanny stateism (um, why is the government tracking the mental health of its citizens???) which I realize is something a lot of Euros are OK with but hooboy not us Yanks.
  6. Oedipus Wreckx-n-Effect

    General news thread

    By definition, sadly, it does. Because depending on party power structure the time, job security could be at stake.
  7. Oedipus Wreckx-n-Effect

    General news thread

    Do you understand what a failure mode analysis is? You build a perfect system but you still need to know what happens if it fails. All I'm saying is that if this system fails (worst case), and is corrupted by a regime that does not fall in line with your best interests, then what? I know you have trust in the system. That's not what I question. I question whether or not a worst case failure analysis was done. Because if it was, the system would at the least have some sort of checks/balances. And if the risk assessment done properly then the system would not ever be brought online Subjective approaches like this are fine until they suddenly get turned on you. What if tomorrow, this government says that your contributions to this forum are Haram? Then you get evaluated, as per the law. And they find you unfit. And thus you get put on a list. You could lose your job due to societal pressures. Etc etc. It's just a risk measure we as Americans no do not accept.
  8. Alzoc

    General news thread

    That argument is the same as saying that because X engineer working in nuclear safety is payed by an electricity company, his words have to be automatically dismissed because he has to be a dirty lobbyist (disregarding that this person probably have family and friends as well and that he has no interests of lying to let the central leaking). Yes judge and public servants are payed by the State, doesn't mean that they are automatically politically biased. It's a very worrying possibility, just like the engineer could be a lone greedy bastard. Doesn't mean it is the case. In the end it is all about wether or not you trust your institutions (which is again not the same as the government which won't be there anymore in a few years).
  9. Sturgeon

    General news thread

    Well, you who trust your governments will get exactly what you deserve lol. Yes? And? It makes it much harder to pack a court for your own ends. Our most powerful executive in history, FDR, tried and failed to pack the court to his own ends. Seems pretty robust to me. Trump may get lucky and get an unprecedented 3 SCOTUS nom. Unprecedented, and that's still only a third of the court. So the system is pretty damn isolated from politics (though it doesn't seem like it right now because the Dems are shitting their pants over Kavanaugh).
  10. Oedipus Wreckx-n-Effect

    General news thread

    Justice? It's the government, man. The government decided, by virtue of committee, that what you said is badspeak. And thus the government assigns a government sponsored psychiatrist to assess you in a government controlled setting. Under the evaluation, you are deemed either fit or not. There is so much subjectivity in this course and law that it is absolutely impossible to NOT make comparisons to dystopian fiction.
  11. Alzoc

    General news thread

    Precisely my point. You are all arguing wether or not there is a political drive behind those accusations, and wether or not Justice is really independent from the Executive or that it's public servants are overly politized. ffs the whole thing have became so polarizing that it's almost comical! Never said so, and that's why counter-power exist. They are different ways to do it with each their flaws and advantages. The way your supreme court work strike me as weird for example: The chief of the Executive nominating judges in your highest court?? Granted he need some sort of validation from the legislative power, but in a case where the President have a majority in congress and that those judges drop like flies (because of their ages of whatever) you could have your highest court overwhelmingly Conservative or Democrat for decades!
  12. Sturgeon

    General news thread

    Oh right, and Justice is incorruptible and can't possibly be used for political ends. Wait...
  13. Sturgeon

    General news thread

    Yes? And are all Americans standing up throwing a Trump salute and going "the government must know best, everything will be fine", or are we having a fucking apeshit moment over it?
  14. Alzoc

    General news thread

    Yes and that's totally irrelevant to the topic as I (tried, probably my poor English) said. I was referring to all the fuss happening on the other side of the Atlantic regarding the alleged Russian collusion (among other things).
  15. Oedipus Wreckx-n-Effect

    General news thread

    Yeah, it's ok because it's just the law. Makes perfect sense, Because law is perfect. The issue I have is that a government can force a psych eval. There is literally no guarantee that this eval will be nonbiased. I can imagine how our radical left would weaponize that shit at the drop of a hat. It's a wet dream for them. Especially given that psychology as a soft science exists in an academic vacuum. They wouldn't bring small business owner psychiatrists into the fray, that's for sure. So yes it's the law but it's a fuckin stupid law.
  16. Sturgeon

    General news thread

    We're on only our second republic and we've made it last nearly 230 years thankyouverymuch.
  17. Alzoc

    General news thread

    Say the pot to the kettle And you are comparing political regimes with political systems.
  18. Sturgeon

    General news thread

    Which, presumably, is why yours has been screwed what, five or six times now?
  19. Alzoc

    General news thread

    Well the corpus of laws which require those psych evals is centralized around child protection. What she is accused of have nothing to do with her opinion, simply that she published violent images degrading Human dignity in a place where any children can reach. She used to be a lawyer so she ought to know the law, which IMO makes it even worse since it mean she knowingly broke it. She got caught, the law is applied as it is, there's nothing more to it. Psychiatric exam sound humiliating, but in the end it's just a routine exam to asses your mental health just like you could do a check-up to asses your physical health. Plus she has all the rights to show the results of said exam to another physician if she find that the first results are wrong. I trust the judiciary power to be independents from politics and that the physician examining her will report things as they are. If in a democracy, the population lose that trust (regardless if there are good reasons for that) in their judiciary system, that democracy is pretty much screwed.
  20. Today
  21. Sturgeon

    General news thread

    Dude, forcing people to get psych evals because of tweets they made (especially ones as uncontroversial as Le Pen's) is straight out of 1984. It's a bizarre appendage and an abridgement of true freedom of speech (versus what I've come to know as "European" freedom of speech, which is you can say whatever you want as long as the government is OK with it). Even if, as you claim, she'll be found sound of mind, that doesn't change the fact that it's a massive human rights violation.
  22. Alzoc

    General news thread

    I didn't expected any other reaction from our fellow murricans ^^ Keep living in the US and I'll keep living in Europe and everybody will be happy. We already had this conversation, the US seem bigot, libertarian (which isn't a compliment) and with a tendency to blow any insignificant event out of reasonable proportion when seen from Europe. And Europe seem authoritarian and borderline socialist (with the negative connotation you have in the US) plus other bad stuff I forgot when seen from the US. (ofc those are over generalization) Don't worry I find the US society just as distasteful as you might find European societies. Working in the US for a few year sure, settling there certainly not^^ Back on topic, I just gave the legal basis behind the decision. Do whatever you want with it^^
  23. Sturgeon

    General news thread

    EuRopE hAs FrEeDoM oF sPeEcH u GuIs
  24. Mighty_Zuk

    Syrian conflict.

    NEWS that Russia is not pleased with IAF's report and request a new one instead.
  1. Load more activity
×