I guess they're trying to insinuate that there's a conflict of interest because he worked for a government agency and Wikileaks leaked documents pertaining to that government agency.
But, like... That would be like saying no judge could oversee the case of someone who attacked a courthouse because they work for the same legal system. That would be a real loophole in the law if by breaking the right ones, you just couldn't be tried anymore.
There has been a movement for a long time, going back even to ancient civilizations finding things from ancient-to-them civilizations, to preserve art. But this is a faulty premise in its essence. Art is, in modern terms, a snapshot. A picture. It is a piece of its culture captured for only a moment. Without context, art is nothing or, even worse, something it was never intended to be. And as such, truly preserving it is impossible, and the act of such destroys the piece in a far more egregious manner than time ever could.
As an image for this post, I chose the Ecco Homo held in a sanctuary in Borja, Spain which was made famous for its faulty restoration. But while this is a literal destruction of a piece of art during an attempt at restoration, it isn't at the heart of that of which I speak. Because this is what happens to the soul of a piece of art when you take it out of its cultural context. And in a more literal sense, this is what happens to art whenever we try to preserve it. There are few if any pieces of art from dead cultures on display that have not been restored to some extent. Ones open to the environment, like the roof of the Sistine Chapel, are regularly touched up to preserve what some new artist thinks they should look like. Every act of preservation is a reinterpretation, an adulteration using someone else's skill to try and mimic the original. Which is, of course, impossible to truly do. And it creates a layer of falsehood that covers the original work and tarnishes its purity.
Rather, art is a symbol of its time, a culture that will inevitably fade. In accordance with this, the art itself too should fade and decay the same way that its context did, the culture it captured did, and the artist who made it did. Be that film or statuary, painting or architecture, the preservation of art is the violation of that same art. Returning to it outside of the context of its creation only causes us to misunderstand the piece, to project our modern sensibilities on it. Every time we observe a piece of art from a dead culture, we are doing with our minds what those who sandblasted the statues of ancient Rome and Greece did. We are forcing our sensibilities on them with no ability to truly understand what they once meant to the people for whom they were made.
Attempting to preserve art is only hastening its obliteration and creating obscene forgeries that claim to have the same value as their progenitor. Any piece which has been preserved, especially through restoration, gives those observing it now a false idea of what the piece truly was, in both the spiritual and material sense. But more egregiously, as art is an expression of an idea born of a person or people within a certain culture existing in a certain place at a certain time, as those elements are lost, the truth of the art is also lost, causing any attempt to preserve the piece just an extension of misinterpretation and misunderstanding of the artwork which can be twisted in uncountable ways. Therefore, art should not be preserved but rather allowed to die its noble death naturally as time and tide dictate.
Would you be more comforted to know you weren't alone?
I can almost understand the Personal Liberties Libertarian, which I think is what the philosophy was originally supposed to be about. But we often see Corpo-National Libertarians or Totally-Not-An-Anarchist-I-Swear Libertarians, and both of those are baffling to me.
The alternate history where Caeser spent the end of his life in horny jail.
Yeah. If this hadn't been banned already in Canada, it makes me wonder what other laws I just assumed were common in Western republics and democracies actually aren't.
THAT HITS HARD, RIGHT HERE, IN MY EMOTIONAL PROCESSING UNIT.
Most people don't actually know what logic is. I would ask him to define logic to see where he's coming from. Because most people either don't have a definition or if they do it's different than the one the person they're talking to has. But to do that, you'll also want a definition you could explain to someone else going into asking the question.
I agree with you. But it's important to still point out and want to fix problems even in the "better party." We can't simply be accepting of "be less bad." We need to always strive to improve. And weakening the connections between Wall Street and Washington is a big progressive goal that the old guard of Democrats have directly opposed.
Does the bill specify who they're going to be paying the money to, though? Because an infrastructure bill saying we're going to spend a certain amount of money on these projects can predict changes in certain industries, but being on a committee and saying, "We're going to hire this specific company with this huge government contract to do this work," can tell you exactly what company is about to have a huge boost to their value.
Well, time to fill my life with meaningless debauchery, because it's not like there's a future to plan for.
Cross-posted from user [email protected]
Also, I really want a sloth plushie waving a bi flag now...
No. I think the whole community has only had three deleted posts, two of which were spam. But I could have tried to encourage what members we have more by taking some initiative and sharing memes, starting discussions, things like that. I've seen other mods who helped grow their community in that way, but it's not what I'm built for at the best of times.
I do thank you for the words of encouragement, though.