#metoo critics
1. they counter unproved accusations with presumption of innocence, 2. they point to an increase culture of victimization, 3. the problem is not the clear cases of harassment, which are wrong and illegal, but to subtle forms where is up for the accuser to "interpret" behavior that may not be meant as such, by the supposed perpetrator. 4. criticism to the #metoo, has come from women in France, with the motto "freedom to offend",
climate change critics
1. the problem of failed predictions. 2. disagreement: from 500 scientists, disagreement from Finland scientists, here, from a reputed MIT scientist, + this one + this one + this one, + the founder of Greenpeace on CO2, physicist Nir Shaviv explains how climate change became accepted + Nobel Physicist Ivar Giaver, 3. the failure of renewable energy in Europe. 5. the stubborn problem of mitigation vs. economic growth (China, India and Brazil are now the "big polluters"), 6. why is nuclear energy never addressed as more successful than renewables? + (this one from forbes), 7. the problem of reversing economic gains vs. social instability as result, 8. the tension between mitigation and adaptation, 9. unforeseen problems of climate engineering, in terms of unintended consequences. 10. finally address the unqualified acceptance of these ideas through panic and apocalypticism for political gain.
same sex marriage critics
1. these critics are neither religious fanatics, nor homophobes, 2. they're traditionalists, who make a case for the advantage of the man/woman nuclear family, which evolved as a natural process during millennia, with the purpose of human procreation and social cohesion. they believe such an important social institution shouldn't be tweaked for social upgrading purposes. 4. traditionalists take into account the weight of traditions as a counterbalance to quick, untested cultural changes exacted since the twentieth century (with little time for the slow, incremental test needed in the social sphere).
socialism critics
1. they are economic libertarians, 2. socialism as planned economy has failed in the URSS, the Eastern Block (during cold war). Also in Latin America (Cuba & Venezuela), and North Korea. 3. if we're talking about socialism-a-la-northern countries (citizens are taxed about 60% of their income for government programs). 4. even in 3. the differences between a country like Denmark and Sweden the USA are huge: a) Denmark, Sweden, Norway are very homogeneous societies with small populations, b) the cultural makeup of northern cooperation is quite different from the cultural make up of competition in the America (cultural habits are quite important when factoring untested policies). 5. the market, as a supervinient structure of free agents pursuing their own gain, is a better option than centrally planning the economy. why? 5. the libertarian argument again: why leave the fundamental wealth/making decisions of your life in the hand of bureaucrats? important critiques against: ludwig von mises' socialism an economic and sociological analysis, f. a. hayek's road to serfdom.
abortion pro and con
here is a good pro and con link with clear points,
here is a good link from a medical perspective,
here is a middle road argument: pro choice doesn't mean pro abortion,
here's a ok Britannica link,
here another pro-abortion link,
No comments:
Post a Comment