You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Lumifer comments on [Link] A rational response to the Paris attacks and ISIS - Less Wrong Discussion

-1 Post author: Gleb_Tsipursky 23 November 2015 01:47AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (275)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Lumifer 23 November 2015 06:34:04PM *  3 points [-]

I think it depends on the quality of the nation-building that happens afterwards.

Why would the answer be any different from "the usual"..?

militarily defeating IS counts under the "benefits" column of the analysis - as a pure point of rationality - even if the cost is too great.

True. And just as true for North Korea.

Comment author: VoiceOfRa 23 November 2015 11:49:36PM 1 point [-]

And just as true for North Korea.

ISIS doesn't have nukes and isn't being implicitly backed by a neighboring superpower.

Comment author: The_Jaded_One 23 November 2015 07:17:30PM 1 point [-]

Why would the answer be any different from "the usual"..?

The neoconservative attempt at nationbuilding in Iraq may, in fact, count as "worse than usual" for this purpose...

Comment author: Lumifer 23 November 2015 07:24:00PM 1 point [-]

Actually, are there any positive examples of Western nationbuilding after the poster children of post-WW2 Japan and Germany? I don't know if South Korea would count, but for clarity let's take the last 50 years. Is there anything?

Comment author: The_Jaded_One 23 November 2015 07:43:24PM 0 points [-]

The French intervention in Mali comes to mind. Sierra Leone also. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_military_intervention_in_the_Sierra_Leone_Civil_War#Impact

Comment author: Lumifer 23 November 2015 07:58:14PM 2 points [-]

That's not nationbuilding. That's just old Western powers keeping their former colonies from disintegrating into failed states. You can also read it as picking a side and propping it up with military force.

If Mali is a successful example of nationbuilding, thank you, I'll pass.

Comment author: The_Jaded_One 23 November 2015 08:24:32PM 2 points [-]

They both look better than Afghanistan though.

Still, I think you are correct to be pessimistic here. Nation building is a task which we really are pretty clueless about, sometimes because political correctness forces bad epistemological habits onto us.

Comment author: bogus 23 November 2015 11:20:26PM 1 point [-]

keeping their former colonies from disintegrating into failed states.

Um, "not disintegrating into a failed state" is a pretty clear prerequisite to any sort of sustained social/economic development (what you apparently mean by 'nation building'). This may be somewhat sobering for a few advocates of pure anarcho-capitalism, but is not really a surprise to anyone else.

Comment author: Lumifer 24 November 2015 12:59:42AM 0 points [-]

any sort of sustained social/economic development (what you apparently mean by 'nation building')

Nope.

Try again.

Comment author: VoiceOfRa 23 November 2015 11:51:46PM -1 points [-]

That's not nationbuilding. That's just old Western powers keeping their former colonies from disintegrating into failed states.

If France and the UK do that to their former colonies in Syria and Iraq, it'll be a significant improvement over the status quo.

Comment author: Lumifer 24 November 2015 01:01:57AM 0 points [-]

Maybe yes, maybe no, but they are probably not able and certainly not willing.

Comment author: VoiceOfRa 25 November 2015 01:55:01AM 1 point [-]

How about a rationalist article encouraging them to become willing rather than the "let's not alienate muslims" idiocy Gleb wrote?

Comment author: Lumifer 25 November 2015 03:18:52AM 0 points [-]

Encourage who? M.Hollande? X-)