For earlier generations, to see why just look at the New Deal housing maps where the federal govt redlined just about any neighborhood of with a concentration of immigrants -- even German, Poles, etc -- or significant use of languages other than English in public.
A bit earlier, my grandparents on one side were kids in recently-arrived German speaking households during World War 1, when the country became actively hostile to the use of the German language (more so in WW1 than WW2, actually)
They and their generational cohort could flip into German at home (e.g., argue w/o the kids following it), but I don't think they made a major effort to teach it to my parent's generation
To be fair my view may be colored by my own dad who, bless his heart, is not an especially curious or culturally adventurous guy. Maybe his peers in the community were more interested in learning the old language, but in general I think not a lot.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
"uniformed military can't comment on military policy bc that's political" is just now how it works
Whether to buy a new ICBM is a very contentious political, even partisan issue, and yet @US_Stratcom and official USAF accounts tweet in support *constantly*.
Well, 19,516 pages later, replaced the laser printer I bought soon after starting at NWC in 2007 -- with more or less the same thing. I guess Brother found if you square off the corners it can print 50% faster, or maybe it's that Moore's Law thing
Fwiw the old printer was still running great. But needs toner ($99) and the drum will wear out on the next toner cartridge too, whereas a brand new one is under $200🤷♂️
COVID data: I figure I averaged 1,200 pages/yr in normal years, but about 3,500 the last 12 months, which coincidentally, is about the same number of miles I put on my car from March to March.
To elaborate #2, EMP is the *perfect* "Prepper" scenario. Society collapses and modern conveniences are gone. But everything else is fine -- no firestorms, no plague, no radiation sickness, sunlight not blocked by asteroid dust / volcanic ash / nuclear soot, etc 2/
EMP essentially resets the world to frontier life in 1850, they imagine, where brawny manly skills like shooting game, chopping firewood, carpentry and blacksmithery, chasing off rustlers, etc are what counts 3/
US trying to cause political change in Russia is a fools errand and I largely agree w @DanielLarison and @EmmaMAshford a democratic govt could have similar security interests, but, one w more popular legitimacy might be better on not subverting *other* democracies 1/
Putin's govt has an interest making democracy as a concept appear unstable, weak, ineffective, promoting the notion that there is no "objective" truth to be found, supporting illiberal national & transnational groups, and against anti-corruption and financial transparency 2/
It's possible that if NATO had not expanded, Putin's govt wouldn't care about any of that. I'm dubious. They'd still have popular legitimacy doubts (and would have *less* of a nationalist card to play), and they're interest in personal kleptocracy would be similar 3/
Thread. Q-promoting former high-ranking intel officials, but who like Flynn mostly left on bad terms, include Michael Scheuer, Bill Binney, Kevin Shipp, Larry Johnson, Ed Loomis -- several praised as Bush-era whistleblowers by liberals but now in deep with Dem-hating Q groups 1/
Read the thread. Lots of names familiar to me from their intel work or their whistleblowing 10 to 30 years ago, but who I had no idea were now in the Q stuff like Flynn 2/
A number are linked to a weird group "International Tribunal of Natural Justice", founded in 2015 in part to combat what they claimed was a global elite conspiracy of child sex trafficking, but also just grifting by representing themselves as legit and charging fees 3/
Good article illustrating downside of giving the military (including @SpaceForceDoD) broad roles in space, especially Moon and other bodies -- very quickly runs into Outer Space Treaty problems, and pushes away potential international partners
I buy that DARPA's intent is to promote general-purpose tech for the use of lunar resources, with the intent of it being available to civil/commercial use too. And only indirectly military, like possibly producing fuel to send to a recon satellite in high orbit 2/
But, the ambiguity of the OST and the sensitivity of the "militarizing space", let alone "militarizing the Moon" debate mean this research grant program faces far more controversy than it deserves, or would have as a NASA, NSF, or Commerce Dept program 3/