resist1984 @resist1984@social.privacytools.io

@Steinar That's a CF link unsuitable for public sharing, so I'll read this instead: https://web.archive.org/web/20210407193914/https://thebaffler.com/salvos/all-effd-up-levine

@0 @Br0m3x @Steinar we know Germany has done well as a whole under Merkel. Can you find an article on a local gov in Germany that did exceptionally poorly because of Merkel's leadership?

@Br0m3x @Steinar @0 So the question is, what should Merkel do if some local nutters in a right-wing village demand more resources from the feds as a result of their own neglect in regulating? Do the feds let the irresponsible local govs suck more resources than the rest?

@0 @Steinar @Br0m3x Not sure about Germany, but the US demonstrates how foolish many local governments can be in pockets of right-wing communities on the fringe where anything goes even when hospitals are ram-packed. Federal govs are better informed and it's the feds who have to manage nationwide resource allocation which includes irresponsible communities.

@Br0m3x @Steinar @0 So capitalism has proven to fail to solve the problem. Regulation is the only viable means.

@0 @Steinar @Br0m3x It comes down to false advertising because the shop deceives people into thinking the shop is safe by posting "masks required". A socially responsible regime takes action in this case. If I get covid in such a case, how can I sue the store for damages if I can't prove beyond reasonable doubt that an unmasked customer transmitted it to me?

@Br0m3x @Steinar @0 W.r.t #covid19, it's not the government that's invasive, it's some "me-first" individuals who reject science. E.g. a shop posts "masks required", which signals to me it's a safe shop to enter. Then I get in there and someone without a mask stands next to me in line, breathing down my neck because the shop doesn't have the guts to kick people out. It's false advertizing at least.

@Steinar @0 @Br0m3x there's always individual variation, but there are also patterns that would be short-sighted to ignore. E.g. studies show that women are likely to die of a treatable heart condition because they are less likely to seek help, because they have a propensity to feel guilt over burdoning the health system. We don't ignore that study and say "individuals differ".

@0 @Br0m3x @Steinar Anyway, the point to my post was that the OP was Angela Merkel is being accused of betrayal, when in fact she came out ahead in this study. It would be a betrayal for Merkel to /not/ protect the people.

@Steinar @Br0m3x @0 Where the study is most useful is in countering the conventional wisdom myth that men are better equipped for national security, a myth that prevents female individuals from getting due consideration when the reality is more of an inversion of that. I believe women are /less/ likely to send soldiers into war, which is important for a trigger-happy country like the US.

@Br0m3x @0 @Steinar 194 countries were looked at so the study is comprehensive. But yes when talking about a specific country you'd have to be mindful. There are some rare tribal cultures where women have the macho role, do the hunting, while men do the gathering and childcare, which may invert this. https://web.archive.org/web/20210414122419/https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3617953

@Steinar @0 @Br0m3x Culture is certainly a big factor, and it would be wrong to disregard it. Machissimo & risk attraction attributes work against male leaders no matter where in the world they are. Is a German male more likely to have those attributes than a German female? I believe so.

@Steinar @Br0m3x @0 That is a factor, among others. https://hbr.org/2020/12/research-women-are-better-leaders-during-a-crisis