Peter Singer's philosophy is vile, and an example of what generates so much mistrust of our higher educational systems. He's brilliant, intellectually speaking, and his logic is sound. It's his presuppositions that lead to his monstrous conclusions.
In this article he notes that, "There have been many critics of my views about euthanasia for severely disabled infants."
Yes, Mr. Singer there are and always will be.
http://www.jpe.ox.ac.uk/papers/twenty-questions/
Good article.
One of the area where I would disagree with the authors is in my belief that some amount of what they would deem "economic protectionism" is needed. To be free, a nation must produce its own food and energy supplies and have the industrial and technological base required to ensure its independence from other nations. In fact, to the extent that certain nations lack these capabilities, one would expect their support of transnational and globalist policies to be stronger than that of nations which do have these capacities (i.e. for true independence).
A second observation would be that it is likely Americans' increased willingness to identify as "global citizens" is tied to the breakdown of both the nuclear and extended family. If the nation itself represents an extension of familial bonds, and an increasing number of people come from non-nuclear and/or dysfunctional families it would follow that nationalist sentiment would wane as a result.
https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2017-02-20-0000/donald-trump-inauguration-speech-and-nationalism
Another item for future comment...
https://thepointmag.com/2017/politics/the-substance-of-things-hoped-for
The madness of attempting to make sense of the world lies in the fact that much of the world does not "make sense".
That is to say, less tautologically, that the world is broken and unless one's view accounts for this, the world will not make sense. This is why economic theories from the left and right collapse when translated from theory to practice; why political systems fail to fulfill their promises of security and prosperity; why religion does not bring internal or relational peace; why mutually beneficial relationships dissolve; and why even ambitions completely within the apparent ability, power, and means of an individual go unfulfilled.
http://all-that-is-interesting.com/pacific-islanders-ancestor
Tedious. All humans have a common ancestor.
It's interesting researching our genetic past, but declaring one group of people as being from a different species is... Specious. Especially since we know modern humans have both Homo Sapiens Sapiens and Neanderthal DNA. Human beings are human beings, and some of this talk fuels true racism by giving it a "scientific" basis.
