On 28/04/24 21:32, Paul Wolff wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Apr 2024, at 09:52:34, Bertel Lund Hansen posted:
>> Paul Wolff wrote:

>>> Modern societies seem to be solving it all by themselves - I
>>> think South Korea is the extreme case:
>>
>> Try "modern, rich societies".
>>
> I suppose I presumed that a properly modern society would also be
> rich.

Modern rich societies got their wealth by stripping the resources of the
poor countries, which reduced their chances of improving conditions. For
the next few centuries, at least, the vast majority of the world's
population will continue living in grinding poverty.

--
Peter Moylan http://www.pmoylan.org
Newcastle, NSW

On Mon, 29 Apr 2024, at 07:41:33, Peter Moylan posted:
>On 28/04/24 21:32, Paul Wolff wrote:
>> On Sun, 28 Apr 2024, at 09:52:34, Bertel Lund Hansen posted:
>>> Paul Wolff wrote:
>
>>>> Modern societies seem to be solving it all by themselves - I
>>>> think South Korea is the extreme case:
>>>
>>> Try "modern, rich societies".
>>>
>> I suppose I presumed that a properly modern society would also be
>> rich.
>
>Modern rich societies got their wealth by stripping the resources of the
>poor countries, which reduced their chances of improving conditions.

By exploiting the resources that they identified and, yes, used. England
began to become rich by exploiting its own sheep for their wool. Then -
well, we get back to all sorts of arguments about who "owns" what of the
planet's natural wealth, and who was motivated and competent to do
something about that wealth.

>For
>the next few centuries, at least, the vast majority of the world's
>population will continue living in grinding poverty.
>
Now you'll have to explain what you think qualifies as "grinding
poverty". Is that the way humans have lived for the past hundred
thousand years, or something worse? These days, poverty may be measured
by ease of access to Spotify by an Internet connection. In those modern
(and rich) societies, of course.

I think that people most probably assess their resources by comparison
with those of their neighbours, wherever they live. Poverty isn't an
absolute thing. It's relative. I wonder whether the average Russian
lives in poverty when looking at the fabulous wealth of Russian deputy
defence minister Timur Ivanov (now on trial for fabulous corruption).

This is arguably on-topic here: what is poverty, in English usage?
--
Paul W

* Paul Wolff <UABZoz1IOtLmFAYR @wolff.co.uk> :
Wrote on Sun, 28 Apr 2024 23:54:00 +0100:
> On Mon, 29 Apr 2024, at 07:41:33, Peter Moylan posted:
>>Modern rich societies got their wealth by stripping the resources of the
>>poor countries, which reduced their chances of improving conditions.
>
> By exploiting the resources that they identified and, yes,
> used. England began to become rich by exploiting its own sheep for
> their wool. Then - well, we get back to all sorts of arguments about
> who "owns" what of the planet's natural wealth, and who was motivated
> and competent to do something about that wealth.
>
>>For
>>the next few centuries, at least, the vast majority of the world's
>>population will continue living in grinding poverty.
>>
> Now you'll have to explain what you think qualifies as "grinding
> poverty". Is that the way humans have lived for the past hundred
> thousand years, or something worse? These days, poverty may be
> measured by ease of access to Spotify by an Internet connection. In
> those modern (and rich) societies, of course.
>
> I think that people most probably assess their resources by comparison
> with those of their neighbours, wherever they live. Poverty isn't an
> absolute thing. It's relative. I wonder whether the average Russian
> lives in poverty when looking at the fabulous wealth of Russian deputy
> defence minister Timur Ivanov (now on trial for fabulous corruption).
>
> This is arguably on-topic here: what is poverty, in English usage?

https://www.thehindu.com/business/Industry/jp-morgan-ceo-praises-modi-says-he-took-400-million-people-out-of-poverty/article68101889.ece

The new definition of coming out of poverty seems merely to be digital
inclusion and tracking under the global banking system, and having
access to credit (which seems to be a word for debt). (as you hinted
above this is now tied to technology and banking indices). Once
registered into this system poverty can be defined in any old way based
on any indices which are convenient to this global system.

On Sat, 27 Apr 2024 13:14:13 -0400, Rich Ulrich
<rich.ulrich@comcast.net> wrote:

>>Can you not imagine a situation where more than one state's view on
>>an event may be relevant, and that plurality of views do not align?
>>
>
>Trump's drone strike that killed Suliamani has a Wiki entry,
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Qasem_Soleimani#Legality
>
>It feels like an assassination to me, more than an execution.
>"Murder" seems like an over-simplification, but might apply.

How would you classify Obama's murder of Osama bin Laden?

It could hardly be an execution, because there was no trial.

It's seems more like an assassination to me.

--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

On Mon, 29 Apr 2024 05:33:05 +0200, Steve Hayes
<hayesstw@telkomsa.net> wrote:

>On Sat, 27 Apr 2024 13:14:13 -0400, Rich Ulrich
><rich.ulrich@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>>Can you not imagine a situation where more than one state's view on
>>>an event may be relevant, and that plurality of views do not align?
>>>
>>
>>Trump's drone strike that killed Suliamani has a Wiki entry,
>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Qasem_Soleimani#Legality
>>
>>It feels like an assassination to me, more than an execution.
>>"Murder" seems like an over-simplification, but might apply.
>
>How would you classify Obama's murder of Osama bin Laden?
>
>It could hardly be an execution, because there was no trial.
>
>It's seems more like an assassination to me.

Not a trial? Okay, but not comparable in other respects.

Bin Laden was declared/considered a criminal and outlaw under
some sort of international rules, and was in hiding, avoiding arrest.

Soleimani was the 2nd or 3rd highest official of Iran, traveling
in a limosine on a public highway on the way to meet a high
official of Iraq. The Wiki page mentions separate concern about
the other people who were killed by the strike.

--
Rich Ulrich

Paul Wolff wrote:

>>For
>>the next few centuries, at least, the vast majority of the world's
>>population will continue living in grinding poverty.
>>
> Now you'll have to explain what you think qualifies as "grinding
> poverty".

I'll try: Not having food every day.

Am I close?

--
Bertel
Kolt, Denmark

* Rich Ulrich <u79u2j16ij0jdg9ue9n18g9dp0m9023j4n@4ax.com> :
Wrote on Mon, 29 Apr 2024 00:49:48 -0400:

[osama]
> Not a trial? Okay, but not comparable in other respects.
>
> Bin Laden was declared/considered a criminal and outlaw under
> some sort of international rules, and was in hiding, avoiding arrest.
>
> Soleimani was the 2nd or 3rd highest official of Iran, traveling
> in a limosine on a public highway on the way to meet a high
> official of Iraq. The Wiki page mentions separate concern about
> the other people who were killed by the strike.

Anyone remember who the victim was in a precision execution carried out
by a robotic assasin (a mounted gun with a camera, placed in a parked
truck) which got him when he was driving past but left his co-passenger
(I think his wife) seated next to him alive?

(maybe the victim was a "nuclear scientist" and the [extra]judicial
executioners were the idf?]

memo to self
* In <m3wmog4eb2.fsf@leonis4.robolove.meer.net> :
I Wrote on Mon, 29 Apr 2024 16:38:01 +0530:

> * Rich Ulrich <u79u2j16ij0jdg9ue9n18g9dp0m9023j4n@4ax.com> :
> Wrote on Mon, 29 Apr 2024 00:49:48 -0400:
>
> [osama]
>> Not a trial? Okay, but not comparable in other respects.
>>
>> Bin Laden was declared/considered a criminal and outlaw under
>> some sort of international rules, and was in hiding, avoiding arrest.
>>
>> Soleimani was the 2nd or 3rd highest official of Iran, traveling
>> in a limosine on a public highway on the way to meet a high
>> official of Iraq. The Wiki page mentions separate concern about
>> the other people who were killed by the strike.
>
> Anyone remember who the victim was in a precision execution carried out
> by a robotic assasin (a mounted gun with a camera, placed in a parked
> truck) which got him when he was driving past but left his co-passenger
> (I think his wife) seated next to him alive?
>
> (maybe the victim was a "nuclear scientist" and the [extra]judicial
> executioners were the idf?]

"Neither his wife nor any of his security team were harmed in
the attack, which was carried out using a hyper-accurate
automated weapon in order to protect civilians from collateral
damage."

-- https://www.thejc.com/news/world/truth-behind-killing-of-iran-scientist-dhrzqyei

Location Absard, Damavand, Iran
Coordinates 35.39.0.04N 52.10.2.89 E
Date 27 November 2020
Target Mohsen Fakhrizadeh
Attack type Political assassination
Weapons Firearm, car bombing

Later, a contradictory account emerged, when the Fars News
Agency reported that no gunmen were present, and that only a
remote-controlled machine gun mounted on a Nissan was used in
the attack. IRGC Deputy Commander-In-Chief Ali Fadavi said
that the weapon was equipped with a camera and utilized
artificial intelligence and facial recognition to target
Fakhrizadeh. In this account, Fakhrizadeh, possibly not
recognizing gunfire, exited his vehicle after he believed it
struck something. The automatic gun "controlled by
satellite" then struck him thirteen times from a distance of 150
metres (490 ft). According to Fadavi, who
claimed that Fakhrizadeh actually remained seated in his car,
the gun was so accurate that not a single bullet struck his
wife, who was seated next to him.

-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohsen_Fakhrizadeh

Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:

> On 26-Apr-24 14:45, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> > Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 25-Apr-24 8:37, occam wrote:
> >>> On 25/04/2024 09:32, Steve Hayes wrote:
> >>>> On Wed, 24 Apr 2024 15:52:01 -0000 (UTC),
> >>>> wollman@hergotha.csail.mit.edu (Garrett Wollman) wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> In article <ph2h2jhstdmu3hu76m21bjg0gjdunmaioh@4ax.com>,
> >>>>> Steve Hayes <hayesstw@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> In MyE "murder" means the intentional killing of any human being, for
> >>>>>> any reason.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> "Assassination" is murder for a particular reason, relating to the
> >>>>>> office a person holds. To be assassinated is to be killed in one's
> >>>>>> official capacity rather than in one's personal capacity.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I'd make a similar distinction with "execution". An execution is
> >>>>> murder authorized by a state; by definition, non-state actors cannot
> >>>>> execute people.
> >>>>
> >>>> Indeed.
> >>>>
> >>>> Imprisonment (or should one call it inmateisation nowadays?) can also
> >>>> be an execution, if it is done in execution of a court sentence.
> >>>>
> >>>> Wills are also executed.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> And characters are assassinated.
> >>
> >> Which brought to mind:
> >>
> >> "The day of the Jackal" - but De Gaulle survived due to his habit of
> >> kissing men on the cheeks.
> >>
> >> (Sorry if that's a spoiler for anyone.)
> >
> > Who cares? it is historical -fiction-,
> > not having anything to do with any actual events.
> > Only the initial setting, with the OAS attempting to kill the Gaulle
> > actually happened.
> >
> > You may as well consult 'Allo 'Allo
> > for information about the French Resistance.
>
> ??
> In responding to Occam's "characters are assassinated"
> I was referring to a character (in a book - later a film) who was
> (almost) assassinated.
>
> Some people do care very much about spoilers that might ruin a thriller
> for them.
>
> After all, no-one would go to see "The Scottish Play" if they already
> knew that M****** dies in the final act.

It is the information about De Gaulle surviving
because of his habit of kissing men on the cheeks.

De Gaulle is one of the most attempted on persons in modern history.
He survived more tham 30 attempts. (the precise number is not known)

There were much better reasons for his survival,

Jan