Sample Essays The best way to improve your writing is to read good writing. You are already doing that in your English class; we have provided you with a list of notable memoirs by celebrated authors. These essays were chosen for their clarity, originality, voice, and style.
Posted on February 23, by Scott Alexander [Content warning: Discussion of social justice, discussion of violence, spoilers for Jacqueline Carey books.
This post was inspired by a debate with a friend of a friend on Facebook who has since become somewhat famous.
Andrew Cord criticizes me for my bold and controversial suggestion that maybe people should try to tell slightly fewer blatant hurtful lies: And then complain about losing rather than changing their tactics to match those of people who are winning.
That post [ the one debunking false rape statistics ] is exactly my problem with Scott. It honestly makes me kind of sick. In other words, if a fight is important to you, fight nasty. If that means lying, lie. If that means insults, insult. If that means silencing people, silence. But in a way, that would be assuming the conclusion.
Then if the stress ends up bursting an aneurysm in his brain, I can dance on his grave, singing: I mean, he thinks that sexism is detrimental to society, so spreading lies and destroying people is justified in order to stop it.
I think that discourse based on mud-slinging and falsehoods is detrimental to society. You know who got things done? Why not assassinate prominent racist and sexist politicians and intellectuals?
Unless you do not believe there will ever be an opportunity to defect unpunished, you need this sort of social contract to take you at least some of the way.
Bullets, as you say, are neutral.
In a war, a real war, a war for survival, you use all the weapons in your arsenal because you assume the enemy will use all the weapons in theirs. Because you understand that it IS a war.
There are a lot of things I am tempted to say to this. You can get most of this from Hobbesbut this blog post will be shorter. Suppose I am a radical Catholic who believes all Protestants deserve to die, and therefore go around killing Protestants.
So far, so good. Unfortunately, there might be some radical Protestants around who believe all Catholics deserve to die.
So we make an agreement: So then I try to destroy the hated Protestants using the government. I go around trying to pass laws banning Protestant worship and preventing people from condemning Catholicism.
Unfortunately, maybe the next government in power is a Protestant government, and they pass laws banning Catholic worship and preventing people from condemning Protestantism. No one can securely practice their own religion, no one can learn about other religions, people are constantly plotting civil war, academic freedom is severely curtailed, and once again the country goes down the toilet.
So again we make an agreement. Like maybe the Protestants could stop saying that the Catholics worshipped the Devil, and the Catholics could stop saying the Protestants hate the Virgin Mary, and they could both relax the whole thing about the Jews baking the blood of Christian children into their matzah.
Rationalists should win, so put the blood libel on the front page of every newspaper! I know of two main ways: Reciprocal communitarianism is probably how altruism evolved.The very rich come under attack, as inequality becomes increasingly intolerable.
Patriarchy is also dismantled: “We almost forgot to mention the extent of the law of equality and of freedom in. And if anyone can figure out decent ways for a Robin-Hanson-ian em-clan to put together a similar sort of internal legal system for its members, and can describe how cultural-evolutionary pressures would lead em-clans to tend towards any particular systemic details, I would love to read about it.
During the pre-Columbian period, many city-states, kingdoms, and empires competed with one another for power and prestige. Ancient Mexico can be said to have produced five major civilizations: the Olmec, Maya, Teotihuacan, Toltec, and Aztec.
The Business of War. By Wade Frazier. Revised July Introduction.
The Business of War. The "Good War" Brown Shirts in America. A Brief History of Western Anti-Semitism and the Holy War .
Transcript of Was the United States justified to going to war with Mexico? So in conclusion, the Mexican-American war was started by three reasons. The Americans wanted to expand their land, Polk used propaganda to bring the war, and there was an aurgument over slavery. But the question still rings.
In , an unsigned article in a popular American journal, a long standing Jacksonian publication, the Democratic Review, issued an unmistakable call for American expansionism. Focusing mainly on bringing the Republic of Texas into the union, it declared that expansion represented “the.