Standpoint epistemology
Needing something is not automatically a right to have that something. That applies to everyone, not just everyone except Donald Trump.
Donald Trump has again proposed annexing Greenland, after Denmark’s leader urged him to “stop the threats” over the island.
Speaking to reporters, the US president said “we need Greenland from the standpoint of national security”.
We need a lot of things from the standpoint of a lot of things, but that doesn’t mean we get to have them, nor does it mean we get to take them by force.
Denmark’s Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen had said “the US has no right to annex any of the three nations in the Danish kingdom”.
Frederiksen added that Denmark “and thus Greenland” was a Nato member and covered by the alliance’s security guarantee, and said a defence agreement granting the US access to the island was already in place.
The Danish prime minister released her statement after Katie Miller – the wife of one of Trump’s senior aides, Stephen Miller – posted on social media a map of Greenland in the colours of the American flag alongside the word “SOON”.
The Danish ambassador to the US responded to the post by Miller – a right-wing podcaster and former aide to Trump during his first term – with a “friendly reminder” that the two countries were allies and saying Denmark expected respect for its territorial integrity.
But right-wing podcasters know best. We are mere tenants in their world.
The Trump administration’s recent move to appoint a special envoy to Greenland prompted anger in Denmark.
Greenland, which has a population of 57,000 people, has had extensive self-government since 1979, though defence and foreign policy remain in Danish hands.
While most Greenlanders favour eventual independence from Denmark, opinion polls show overwhelming opposition to becoming part of the US.
Trump does not care.
Watch for US forces to start bombing alleged “cryoterrorists” in international waters, coming from Greenland in small powerboats.
From what I understand, DTjr is seeking mineral rights interests in Greenland, so as to keep himself stocked up with cocaine for the rest of this life. When Trump expresses an interest in something that seems otherwise unnecessary, look for a financial connection somewhere.
YNNB#1 I suspect we shall learn that the Greenlanders have been training whales & seals to carry drugs over to the USA.
Probably that’s right. A question that never seems to get asked by journalists and politicians is where the money comes from that drives the international drug trade. The answer is perfectly obvious, but as people don’t like the answer they don’t ask the question. The money comes from the pockets of the people, mainly in North America and Western Europe, who buy the stuff. No demand, no supply. The chaps in Colombia who grow cocaine wouldn’t bother if chaps like DTjr didn’t buy it. Here in Marseilles, very much a centre of drug traficking, the police are beginning to show an interest in the people in the more comfortable parts (where I live) who buy drugs, but they’re being far too timid about it. Probably the local equivalents of DTjr’s father don’t want their sons to be hauled off to prison. It’s much easier to blame everything on illegal immigrants from Algeria.
At the turn of the century I was very much involved in metabolic regulation, and found that the law of supply and demand works almost perfectly in healthy organisms. When you have as much glucose 6-phosphate as you need for your immediate purposes you don’t make any more, because the supply is inhibited when the demand is low. [If you can bear it, see Hofmeyr and Cornish-Bowden (2000) “Regulating the cellular economy of supply and demand” FEBS Letters 476, 47–51]. Put simply, regulation according to demand works; regulation according to supply doesn’t, but politicians refuse to believe that.
YNNB #1
Were “cryoterrorists” responsible for the sinking of the Titanic?
[…] a comment by Athel Cornish-Bowen on Standpoint […]