As a TS woman do I stand a chance against men?

Discussion in 'General Martial Arts Discussion' started by Maryreade1234, Aug 14, 2019.

  1. David Harrison

    David Harrison MAPper without portfolio

    Yep, all other colonial experiments that I can think of were made up mostly of an in-group base. I can't think of any other than the US that went for the "give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free" approach to immigration.
     
  2. David Harrison

    David Harrison MAPper without portfolio

    But even with all that, still has been the most culturally diverse nation.
     
    Last edited: Aug 26, 2020
  3. Dead_pool

    Dead_pool the merc with the mouth MAP 2017 Moi Award

  4. David Harrison

    David Harrison MAPper without portfolio

    I said has been. I was thinking of the 19th Century.

    Also, and I wasn't clear about this, but I was also talking about ethnic and linguistic diversity due to mass immigration and colonisation.

    Immigration and Language Diversity in the United States
     
  5. Mangosteen

    Mangosteen Hold strong not

    I think Brazil is the closest comparisom
     
    David Harrison likes this.
  6. Dead_pool

    Dead_pool the merc with the mouth MAP 2017 Moi Award

    Still 85th on the list, perhaps it's one of the biggest countries to also have a large ethnic group though.

    Although I wouldn't catagorise the current administration as being welcoming to immigrants, unless it's to do low level demeaning jobs that no-one wants to fill domestically. Like being the wife of Donald Trump.....
     
    Mangosteen likes this.
  7. Mangosteen

    Mangosteen Hold strong not

    I was really just considering states that have had immigration and are colonially settled and still in existence (as opposed to say British colonies in Africa that no longer exist).

    If we were to go by that list then referencing Alexander Harcourt "Humankind ", west Africa is super diverse.
    So the cooperative development's of ECOWAS and the recent restoration of democracy in the Gambia by a United west African union is an awesome and uplifting development.
     
    Last edited: Aug 26, 2020
    Dead_pool likes this.
  8. Southpaw535

    Southpaw535 Well-Known Member Moderator Supporter

    Haven't got time to read the last page, sorry if this has been mentioned.

    Speaking of "we compete its the state of nature" etc etc, it's worth noting that even at the largest scale of organisation, countries, the traditional Realist view that international relations is just countries trying to out compete each other is very much out of favour with modern international relations scholars. The idea of the base state of nature for humanity and countries being raw competition and power is the only tool etc is very much outdated these days
     
  9. Dead_pool

    Dead_pool the merc with the mouth MAP 2017 Moi Award

    What is the modern preferred view on how countries interact?

    Does it differ according to the country ?

    So ideally it's this, (insert example) but some countries it's just this, (insert less fluffy example) because Putin doesn't play nice?
     
  10. Botta Dritta

    Botta Dritta Valued Member

    Must have changed since my day (Uni 18 years ago) because the Realist IR position was pretty much the default position for all modern nation states. The Realist classical position of Thucydides and Machivaelli through to Hans Motgenthau, the whole 'drive to power and the will to dominate' schtick was of course outdated by the late 20th century, but the default position was that in an anarchic international system the lack of clarity of intention by state actors leads to States adopting selfish self interest by default, with the discussion around how international organisations can mitigate states perceptions of ill intent being the big arena between Realists and Liberals. I would have thought with Brexit, Trump, Putin and China that the Fukuyama's whole End of History song and dance for the rise of the Liberal west would have taken a battering. (I liked the idea of Democratic Peace Theory, but my head led elsewhere)
     
  11. Botta Dritta

    Botta Dritta Valued Member

    Neither do I but I think its been in humanity long enough to be I think fundamentally ingrained in us by now, But i'm not an anthropologist so I'll defer opinion.

    As for Sport, I'm looking more at things like the Wenlock Olympics, Baron de Corbetin. There's definitely a kind of ethos from that era that pervades the DNA modern sports to this day.
     
    David Harrison and Dead_pool like this.
  12. Botta Dritta

    Botta Dritta Valued Member

    I see what you did there...but no....please no...lets leave Jordan Peterson out of this thread....(Dead Pool with manic smile a match and a Jerry can of gasoline to get the flames going) :)
     
    Dead_pool and Mangosteen like this.
  13. Dead_pool

    Dead_pool the merc with the mouth MAP 2017 Moi Award

    Haha, I don't know what you mean! (Wink)
    Anyway I've heard his daughter is remaking the classic film weekend at Bernies, with her russian pornographers boyfriend and a subscription based model, I wonder who will play Bernie?

    And more importantly, I hope they're all cleaning their rooms!
     
  14. Southpaw535

    Southpaw535 Well-Known Member Moderator Supporter

    I'm being a bit cheeky since Constructivism is very much in vogue and that can still basically say states are Realist. It is worth noting though that Meirsheimer himself has released a paper where he basically introduced a form of constructivist realism so even the current godfather of Realism is shifting, somewhat reluctantly, away from such a narrow view.

    As I say to Botta Dritta, I'm being a bit cheeky. So the current dominant, or at least strongly growing, theory is Constructivism which at its core basically says that states interact with each other based off of their own norms and perceptions. They counter realism (states are driven by power and in permanent, suspicious competition for safety and dominance) by saying it is far too narrow and simplistic. For what its worth I agree. Most people I went to uni with loved it because its the first theory we learnt and because the simpleness is quite comforting. However, saying power is the only thing that matters ignores the human element to IR and tries to basically break the entirety of human interaction down to a really simple, basic formula.

    The immediate counter point to the is the EU. It flat out can not be explained by Realism. Even with Brexit thrown in, if anything it seems to have brought the other countries closer together.

    For a more robust example: Realism says that states balance power against one another. If one becomes stronger, the others will automatically seek more power to address the balance and this is a fundamental core concept of Realism. This is definitely true with America and places like Iran. Iran builds a nuke tomorrow, America will have a lot to say about it. But if the UK announces a brand new replacement for Trident, America isn't really going to care because we're allies and it doesn't consider the UK a threat. If Realism was true, the US wouldn't differentiate. A power gap must be addressed no matter from who. Constructivism says they can act differently because how they interact with individual countries depends on their perspective of them. The UK is culturally similar, has relatively shared norms, and has years of being a close ally. Iran is a different culture, different religion, is a power challenger in the Middle East, and quite openly hostile to the US so America acts and reacts very differently.

    If that makes sense?

    So yep it very much differs by country.

    So while I'm being a bit disingenuous since IR can very much still believe that countries can act selfishly and in competition, and that lacking any other information they will revert to that, it has moved away from saying that is a fundamental, unalterable fact of nature. I noticed what seemed like some people using countries and IR as proof we will naturally compete but IR at the moment doesn't think that's necessarily true. We definitely can, and obviously we still are, but its not a given.
     
  15. Dead_pool

    Dead_pool the merc with the mouth MAP 2017 Moi Award

    ^ thanks for the input.


    I have many questions, but I'll wiki the terms incase it's obvious, which I'm thinking it will be.
     
    Southpaw535 likes this.
  16. Southpaw535

    Southpaw535 Well-Known Member Moderator Supporter

    Dude I spent 4 years at uni learning all this to never, ever get a chance to apply it. Ask away by all means!
     
    Pretty In Pink and Dead_pool like this.
  17. Smitfire

    Smitfire Cactus Schlong

    Well this thread has gone to some very interesting places.
    I don't understand those places but they are interesting.
     
  18. Botta Dritta

    Botta Dritta Valued Member

    Well the counterpoint to that is that you could argue the the treaty of Rome was a fundamentally realistic project at least in its inception. The EEC treaty on trade was all very progressive Trade brings peace and "ever closer union" etc But the other less known treatys EURATOM and The European Coal and Steel Community ECSC were fundamentally realist: evcen in 1957 memories of WWII were still raw. How to prevent another war? Make sure nations are bound into a system where the raw materials to start a war at that time : Coal and Steel and more vitally at that time Nuclear fissile material that could be weaponized was all above board. Neither France or Germany could gear up for war without the other nation getting wind of it. Thus the main problem with nation states - mistrust in an anarchic environment was eliminated. You couldn't gear up for war and if you did the juicy carrot of Trade suddenly vanished as well. The EEC/EURATOM/ECSC initially was weaponized selfishness that acted against a nations worst instincts. Pure Genius really. The EU is different beast from its predecessor, but shares many of the same instincts. The whole getting the UK to sign up to a level playing field in in the same ball bark: make sure the UK can't start belligerent economic actions without the EU having early warning of this. They don't want to secoind guess UK intentions as regards to standards.


    Sorry....I also suffered four years of this in the past. Ah those hyclon seminars where blazing rows over the nature of state intentions! Staring down your fellow students for daring to suggest that Michels Iron Law Oligarchy wasn't gospel truth... Sorry fellow MAP members. I've totally derailed this thread.
     
    Southpaw535 and David Harrison like this.
  19. David Harrison

    David Harrison MAPper without portfolio

    It went off the rails long before that!
     
  20. Dead_pool

    Dead_pool the merc with the mouth MAP 2017 Moi Award

    Has anyone looked at game theory in regards to inter national relations?

     

Share This Page