Darwinian competition among small states only lets you compare their local effectiveness, when the question is how they affect the world.
-
-
Replying to @MemberOfSpecies
@MemberOfSpecies Why is that "the question"? Is globalism the substitute axiom for moral universalism?4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MemberOfSpecies
@MemberOfSpecies If entropy dissipation is 'success' (surely yes), then it tends very strongly to be an intrinsically localized phenomenon.1 reply 1 retweet 5 likes -
Replying to @UF_blog
@MemberOfSpecies Universalist utility evaluation might seem intuitively fair, but the only radical realization of 'fairness' is heat-death.6 replies 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @MemberOfSpecies
@MemberOfSpecies It's not quite that because "a politics helping the average person" is essentially hallucinatory. You get communism instead4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MemberOfSpecies
@MemberOfSpecies The key point I think you might still be missing: Fragmentation is the SUBSTITUTE for universalist argumentation.1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @UF_blog
@MemberOfSpecies "How do we make a good universalist case for fragmentation" is getting it wrong (and will always fail, because entropy).3 replies 0 retweets 1 like
-
-
Replying to @MemberOfSpecies
@MemberOfSpecies I'm using 'universalist' in the most naive sense possible -- the assumption of (potential) application to all.0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.