2020 POTUS ELECTION THREAD

[aurelius]

I read something theorizing that the excess of males in China (due to the one child policy and the desire of many that the one child be male) could cause them serious problems too.

Turns out the secret to world peace is women nagging men during the prime of their lives. Who knew? *kidding

[Philbert]

Married young men don't have enough spare energr to be militant revolutionaries. They're too tired form getting nagged and from the kid waking up last night (also kidding)

[Culican]

Angry Young Men Are Making the World Less Stable Gender imbalances can fuel conflicts and revolutions, according to some analysts.

There’s a close relationship between surging populations of young men and “revolutions, wars and upheavals,” argue Ajay Kapur, Ritesh Samadhiya, and Umesha de Silva. The Bank of America/Merrill Lynch analysts cite “civil war in medieval Portugal (1384), the English Revolution (1642-51), the Spanish conquistadores ravaging Latin America ... the French Revolution of 1789, and the emergence of Nazism in the 1920s in Germany.”

"When there aren’t enough jobs to employ the supply of young men, that can galvanize conflict, argue the analysts—as can stagflation, rising income inequality, unaffordable property, and other problems facing emerging markets. Particularly if they’re unmarried, these young men have less to lose by banding together and committing crimes, unrest, or violence."

[Skander]

:

Seriously though. Read a piece that linked civil unrest to men between the ages of 18-40 that essentially are not raising families. The piece linked societies that allow polygamy (rich men take all the women), to Middle Eastern terrorism (high unemployment is leading to low marriage rates), to divorce in Western countries.

I can't imagine the polygamy thing has a very big effect except at the margins (but you get 20 extra orientalism points for saying it). The biggest issue is social custom expects the groom to take on significant expenses prior to marriage - at least providing a fully furnished place to live, gifts of gold, among Muslims a very expensive "mahr", etc. - which tends to preclude marriage until a man has established himself, usually by his late 20s/early 30s, if he's lucky (often to a woman in her early 20s) Starving artist style marriages are very very rare. So it's not generally a "supply of women" issues, it's a "need to get the scratch together to marry" issue, which in my somewhat limited experience crosses across religious lines, but is impacted heavily by bad economies, and means you have a bunch of frustrated 20+ year old men.

[aurelius]

I can't imagine the polygamy thing has a very big effect except at the margins (but you get 20 extra orientalism points for saying it). The biggest issue is social custom expects the groom to take on significant expenses prior to marriage - at least providing a fully furnished place to live, gifts of gold, among Muslims a very expensive "mahr", etc. - which tends to preclude marriage until a man has established himself, usually by his late 20s/early 30s, if he's lucky (often to a woman in her early 20s) Starving artist style marriages are very very rare. So it's not generally a "supply of women" issues, it's a "need to get the scratch together to marry" issue, which in my somewhat limited experience crosses across religious lines, but is impacted heavily by bad economies, and means you have a bunch of frustrated 20+ year old men.

Here is some reading to help with your imagination on the economic and social impacts of polygamy:

Wherever polygamy is widely practised (in South Sudan, perhaps 40% of marriages involve multiple wives) turmoil tends to follow. The 20 most fragile states in the world are all somewhat or very polygamous. Polygamous nations are more likely to invade their neighbours. The polygamous regions of Haiti and Indonesia are the most turbulent. One London School of Economics study found a strong link between plural marriage and civil war. How come?

Polygamy nearly always means rich men taking multiple wives. And if the top 10% of men marry four women each, then the bottom 30% cannot marry at all. This often leaves them not only sexually frustrated but also socially marginalised. In many traditional societies, a man is not considered an adult until he has found a wife and sired children. To get a wife, he must typically pay a “brideprice” to her father. When polygamy creates a shortage of brides, it massively inflates this brideprice. In South Sudan, it can be anything from 30 to 300 cattle, far more wealth than an ill-educated young man can plausibly accumulate by legal means.

https://www.economist.com/the-economist ... -civil-war

I consider it self-evident that if 20-30% of men cannot marry because there is not enough available women and the majority 40-50% of men are having to pay exorbitant brideprices they cannot afford a society is going to have serious problems.

[Skander]

I can't imagine the polygamy thing has a very big effect except at the margins (but you get 20 extra orientalism points for saying it). The biggest issue is social custom expects the groom to take on significant expenses prior to marriage - at least providing a fully furnished place to live, gifts of gold, among Muslims a very expensive "mahr", etc. - which tends to preclude marriage until a man has established himself, usually by his late 20s/early 30s, if he's lucky (often to a woman in her early 20s) Starving artist style marriages are very very rare. So it's not generally a "supply of women" issues, it's a "need to get the scratch together to marry" issue, which in my somewhat limited experience crosses across religious lines, but is impacted heavily by bad economies, and means you have a bunch of frustrated 20+ year old men.

Here is some reading to help with your imagination on the economic and social impacts of polygamy:

Wherever polygamy is widely practised (in South Sudan, perhaps 40% of marriages involve multiple wives) turmoil tends to follow. The 20 most fragile states in the world are all somewhat or very polygamous. Polygamous nations are more likely to invade their neighbours. The polygamous regions of Haiti and Indonesia are the most turbulent. One London School of Economics study found a strong link between plural marriage and civil war. How come?

Polygamy nearly always means rich men taking multiple wives. And if the top 10% of men marry four women each, then the bottom 30% cannot marry at all. This often leaves them not only sexually frustrated but also socially marginalised. In many traditional societies, a man is not considered an adult until he has found a wife and sired children. To get a wife, he must typically pay a “brideprice” to her father. When polygamy creates a shortage of brides, it massively inflates this brideprice. In South Sudan, it can be anything from 30 to 300 cattle, far more wealth than an ill-educated young man can plausibly accumulate by legal means.

https://www.economist.com/the-economist ... -civil-war

I consider it self-evident that if 20-30% of men cannot marry because there is not enough available women and the majority 40-50% of men are having to pay exorbitant brideprices they cannot afford a society is going to have serious problems.

I guess my main point was with respect to "middle eastern terrorism" you mentioned in the OP. In the Arab areas I'm familiar with, polygamy is an unlikely driver of marriage problems in comparison with economics and general social practice. I've never heard anyone link mahr rates to polygamy, rather it's mostly an issue of "keeping up with the Joneses." Also much terrorism is performed by middle class people who probably could marry if desired. I have heard Moroccans think Saudis are assholes cause they do sometimes sweep in to marry poor woman, but everyone thinks Saudis are assholes. But I'm not an economist, nor can I read past what you pasted from that article, so who knows if their economist theory not situated in larger cultural or political knowledge is accurate.

[aurelius]

I guess my main point was with respect to "middle eastern terrorism" you mentioned in the OP. In the Arab areas I'm familiar with, polygamy is an unlikely driver of marriage problems in comparison with economics and general social practice. I've never heard anyone link mahr rates to polygamy, rather it's mostly an issue of "keeping up with the Joneses." Also much terrorism is performed by middle class people who probably could marry if desired. I have heard Moroccans think Saudis are assholes cause they do sometimes sweep in to marry poor woman, but everyone thinks Saudis are assholes. But I'm not an economist, nor can I read past what you pasted from that article, so who knows if their economist theory not situated in larger cultural or political knowledge is accurate.

So you don't really know what you are talking about in regards to polygamy and its impact on a society that practices it. You just want it to be known that Middle Eastern terrorism is...something. It is unclear what your actual point is. And that Moroccans think Saudis are assholes. Good for them? But cool story bro.

Overall, I have no idea what your tangent has to do with the practice of polygamy destabilizing society. Which was just a premise to support my point: that societies that have a large portion of men between 18-40 not fully utilized have problems.

By the way, I did not posit polygamy is the cause of Middle Eastern terrorism. Let's check the tape: polygamy (rich men take all the women), to Middle Eastern terrorism (high unemployment is leading to low marriage rates), to divorce in Western countries. Yep. I did not.

[mikeylikey]

The correlation is pretty apparent, but the causal relationship might work the other way round I.E. those countries with the shit economy and backwards culture which foster desperation and terrorist ideations also happen to be the ones most predisposed towards polygamy.

[aurelius]

The correlation is pretty apparent, but the causal relationship might work the other way round I.E. those countries with the shit economy and backwards culture which foster desperation and terrorist ideations also happen to be the ones most predisposed towards polygamy.

As you mention: the only places that practice polygamy do not have competitive global economies by any stretch of the imagination and are mired in civil unrest. But what came first? I think that human systems, which are based on subjective beliefs, are far too complex to pull out just one element as a cause. We often discuss things in those terms because it is easier. IMO: the best we can do is look at a bunch of human systems and make correlations.

Terrorism has existed in multiple cultures with and without polygamy. Place that 'produce' terrorism have inefficient economies and high wealth inequality. In the case of polygamy the market for wives becomes distorted and the family unit that most of society is based on is compromised. Which is why most modern societies have rejected polygamy. It is inherently unstable. The evolution of human societies over time have prioritized stability above all else. People will accept tyranny for stability.

[Wilhelm]

Trump spittin' truth -

“Every time she criticizes me, she uncriticizes me about 15 minutes later.”

— Former President Donald Trump, quoted by The Hill, on his former U.N. ambassador and possible 2024 Republican presidential candidate, Nikki Haley.

[mikeylikey]

Are those cyber dudes in Arizona ever gonna tell us how many votes Biden actually stole with the bamboo ballots from ChiyNah?

[Hiphopapotamus]

Are those cyber dudes in Arizona ever gonna tell us how many votes Biden actually stole with the bamboo ballots from ChiyNah?

Wasn't SCOTUS supposed to just 're-instate' Trump in August?

[BostonRugger]

Issa coup

[mbasic]

Issa coup

mostly lookie loos

[JonA]

I like how some of them come in through the window, even though the door was open. They must have gotten tired of waiting in line in an orderly fashion.

[mbasic]

I like how some of them come in through the window, even though the door was open. They must have gotten tired of waiting in line in an orderly fashion.

the AI/facial recognition cameras are always aimed at the doorways

you always go thru an open window if available when storming a capitol building or embassy

[JonA]

I like how some of them come in through the window, even though the door was open. They must have gotten tired of waiting in line in an orderly fashion.

the AI/facial recognition cameras are always aimed at the doorways

you always go thru an open window if available when storming a capitol building or embassy

Also, door is clearly labeled "Exit" and they are still entering. These people obviously have no respect for American institutions.

Where are the Walmart greeters when you actually need them?

[mikeylikey]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... story.html

A Republican-commissioned review of nearly 2.1 million ballots cast last year in Arizona confirmed the accuracy of the official results and President Biden’s win in Maricopa County, according to a draft report prepared by private contractors who conducted the recount.

The draft was obtained by The Washington Post late Thursday night in advance of a planned public release of a final version on Friday.

The ultimate findings will cap a costly and drawn-out recount launched by the GOP-led Arizona Senate that had been championed by former president Donald Trump and kept alive false claims that fraud tainted the election in the state’s most populous county. The process was pilloried by election experts who warned that the methods used by the firm hired to run the review were sloppy and biased.

After nearly six months and almost $6 million — most of it given by groups that cast doubt on the election results — the draft report shows that the review concluded that 45,469 more ballots were cast for Biden in Maricopa County than for Trump, widening Biden’s margin by 360 more votes than certified results.

Obviously, the QAnon guys who did the audit have been compromised by Biden and Hillary. Fake news. SAD!



Now, of course what's funny is, all the people on the left, and the non-Trumpists on the right, who have been saying this recount was bogus and you shouldn't trust any numbers that come out of it are going to suddenly be totally fine with the numbers that actually came out. And sadly, that about-face will end up serving to reinforce the delusions of the conspiracy theorists.

[aurelius]

Now, of course what's funny is, all the people on the left, and the non-Trumpists on the right, who have been saying this recount was bogus and you shouldn't trust any numbers that come out of it are going to suddenly be totally fine with the numbers that actually came out. And sadly, that about-face will end up serving to reinforce the delusions of the conspiracy theorists.

I think the reality is this: there were already 2 or 3 official audits completed. The issues with the partisan audit are well documented. They were never going to disagree with the official audits. Too obvious and they would have to defend it in court. What they will do is allude a bunch of conspiracy theory stuff so that Trumpers and Republicans can use it as a smoke screen to continue this #stolenelection.

[Philbert]

Issa coup

Is that a blind man in a red hat with a white cane crossing the screen with his hand on red jacket's back at 15-20 seconds?