"The French emperor was certainly a murderous and narcissistic psychopath..."
Being despotic and egotistical pretty much comes with the territory for any conqueror (or would-be conqueror), but I think "narcissistic psychopath" might go too far. He seems to me the least psychopathic of his fellows (Alexander, Caesar, Temujin, Hitler...) and the one who actually did the most good during his reign. Certainly he was Good For The Jews, which (at least in my family's considered judgment) was the most important thing.
The Enlightenment and the Revolution and the general cultural atmosphere were good for the Jews, IMO, in Germany and Austria as well as France, and Napoleon participated effectively; and Romanticism was very bad.
What's special about Napoleon is how he really had the intelligence and organizational skill that most of them claim, which maybe Augustus alone shared (Hitler didn't and I don't think Putin does, let alone Musk). Also he was a truly inspirational politician. Maybe the compromise position would be that he got too high on his supply and turned bad over time, out of hubris. I'm with Beethoven that he shouldn't have made himself emperor, and he clearly shouldn't have invaded Russia. What always shocks me reading is the recklessness with the troops, signing them up by the hundred thousand at a clip for every new campaign and cheerfully sending them to death.
Inexcusably ruthless and reckless with the lives of the "rabble," definitely.
I sort of remember a quote where he said something like "I never controlled events; I swam with the current, and what success I had was due to knowing not to swim against it," which is the kind of thing a pathological narcissist wouldn't admit, even to himself.
To the extent Romanticism is tied to Nationalism as we now understand it, it brought about an "innovative" reason for anti-Semitism (we were not of the Volk), but Enlightenment thinking was not innocent either, as Voltaire's comments on the Jews testify.
I hope someone is able to do a deep dive into the Adventures of DOGE from the lasr few weeks. The head of a Commission (and what regulations or laws define the makeup, scope, and authority of a Comission, and if relevant was any of that done?) and a group of civilian programmers violated a host of policies and procedures, and likely a handful of laws to take control of many critical systems and related databaases. And no visible pushback of any kind. Who was supposed to enforce those policies and procedures, and did they simply aquiesce or under orders?
And the layoffs. Other than a direct Presidential order, Musk has no authority to fire or lay anyone off. Were those orders given, or did people just go home after the programmers locked them out?
I guess I'd like to know what regulations and laws were ignored and why it was so easy to ignore them. Was it really as simple as the magic phrase "because the President says so"? I get that Democrats think voters don't care about abstract problems like foreign aid and databases, and they're not wrong, but the total collapse of the Executive branch by and idiot and a bunch of hackers is going to be a huge problem.
One thing they’re successful at is the Musk technique of “move fast and break things”. Nobody can keep up. I don’t even have a decent drafts file to build from. I’ve been just doomscrolling with radio or TV providing background noise, like anybody else, falling apart with each new story and recovering to find three new stories. Hopefully they’re starting to run out of ideas. This week’s foreign policy debacles suggest it could be happening.
They really don't have things you can describe as ideas, just goals. And Occam's Razor says the main goal is to break things. I wish I could remember where I read this story: I asked him how he could make radios so cheap. He said "I buy a radio, then I take a part out. If it keeps working, I take another part out. When it stops working I put that part back in, then I copy that radio".
Executive departments suffering executive action. Really makes perfect sense from that viewpoint. Congress, unwilling to act AT ALL, (except toss a few cabinet acquiescences on the fire).
The Republican party. Its the Republican party that controls Congress, and it is the Republican party choosing to not assert its authority or responsibility.
This is important because when things blow up real good, the Republican party is going to recite Jake Blues' speech to his girlfriend at the end of The Blues Brothers word-for-word, and probably get away with it, just like Jake.
"The French emperor was certainly a murderous and narcissistic psychopath..."
Being despotic and egotistical pretty much comes with the territory for any conqueror (or would-be conqueror), but I think "narcissistic psychopath" might go too far. He seems to me the least psychopathic of his fellows (Alexander, Caesar, Temujin, Hitler...) and the one who actually did the most good during his reign. Certainly he was Good For The Jews, which (at least in my family's considered judgment) was the most important thing.
The Enlightenment and the Revolution and the general cultural atmosphere were good for the Jews, IMO, in Germany and Austria as well as France, and Napoleon participated effectively; and Romanticism was very bad.
What's special about Napoleon is how he really had the intelligence and organizational skill that most of them claim, which maybe Augustus alone shared (Hitler didn't and I don't think Putin does, let alone Musk). Also he was a truly inspirational politician. Maybe the compromise position would be that he got too high on his supply and turned bad over time, out of hubris. I'm with Beethoven that he shouldn't have made himself emperor, and he clearly shouldn't have invaded Russia. What always shocks me reading is the recklessness with the troops, signing them up by the hundred thousand at a clip for every new campaign and cheerfully sending them to death.
Inexcusably ruthless and reckless with the lives of the "rabble," definitely.
I sort of remember a quote where he said something like "I never controlled events; I swam with the current, and what success I had was due to knowing not to swim against it," which is the kind of thing a pathological narcissist wouldn't admit, even to himself.
To the extent Romanticism is tied to Nationalism as we now understand it, it brought about an "innovative" reason for anti-Semitism (we were not of the Volk), but Enlightenment thinking was not innocent either, as Voltaire's comments on the Jews testify.
right
Huh. Thanks for this.
I hope someone is able to do a deep dive into the Adventures of DOGE from the lasr few weeks. The head of a Commission (and what regulations or laws define the makeup, scope, and authority of a Comission, and if relevant was any of that done?) and a group of civilian programmers violated a host of policies and procedures, and likely a handful of laws to take control of many critical systems and related databaases. And no visible pushback of any kind. Who was supposed to enforce those policies and procedures, and did they simply aquiesce or under orders?
And the layoffs. Other than a direct Presidential order, Musk has no authority to fire or lay anyone off. Were those orders given, or did people just go home after the programmers locked them out?
I guess I'd like to know what regulations and laws were ignored and why it was so easy to ignore them. Was it really as simple as the magic phrase "because the President says so"? I get that Democrats think voters don't care about abstract problems like foreign aid and databases, and they're not wrong, but the total collapse of the Executive branch by and idiot and a bunch of hackers is going to be a huge problem.
One thing they’re successful at is the Musk technique of “move fast and break things”. Nobody can keep up. I don’t even have a decent drafts file to build from. I’ve been just doomscrolling with radio or TV providing background noise, like anybody else, falling apart with each new story and recovering to find three new stories. Hopefully they’re starting to run out of ideas. This week’s foreign policy debacles suggest it could be happening.
They really don't have things you can describe as ideas, just goals. And Occam's Razor says the main goal is to break things. I wish I could remember where I read this story: I asked him how he could make radios so cheap. He said "I buy a radio, then I take a part out. If it keeps working, I take another part out. When it stops working I put that part back in, then I copy that radio".
Executive departments suffering executive action. Really makes perfect sense from that viewpoint. Congress, unwilling to act AT ALL, (except toss a few cabinet acquiescences on the fire).
The Republican party. Its the Republican party that controls Congress, and it is the Republican party choosing to not assert its authority or responsibility.
This is important because when things blow up real good, the Republican party is going to recite Jake Blues' speech to his girlfriend at the end of The Blues Brothers word-for-word, and probably get away with it, just like Jake.
I'm thinking that if Trump is shot dead, the shooter should just present this maxim as his sole defense.
Fair. Really uncomfortable shoes'll do that to ya.
Not to be confused with the "soul defense," which would be "God commanded me, on peril of my immortal soul."
GIVE IT UP FOR THE GODFATHER OF SOUL!!!!
That photo is terrific!
https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/286239
Trump as Ubu Roi, definitely.
Merdre!— as our own Père Ubu remarked.
Hey, that guy looks familiar! Merdre!
And now His Magasty has oafishly blamed Ukraine for starting the war, presumably so’s he can move seamlessly to throwing in with Russia.
"After us the Savage God."
"The Savage God is after us."