Blondə

Republican House Candidate Posted IRA Cosplay Video The “gunfluencer” turned Texas Republican congressional candidate Brandon Herrera posted to YouTube a video in which he wears a balaclava, fires an Armalite rifle, uses Irish stereotypes while joking about the IRA, and says he “fucking hate[s] the British.”

“I’m not doing it because I like or support the IRA,” says Herrera, now 28 and a candidate for the Republican nomination in Texas’ 23rd U.S. House district, in the video posted on March 17, 2023—St Patrick’s Day—and titled “The AR-180: The IRA’s Lucky Charm.”

“They were pretty heavily socialist. Of course they really hurt a lot of innocent people sometimes. I’m not doing this video because I like the IRA or I support them. I’m doing this video because I fucking hate the British.

“Guys, I’m kidding, I’m kidding. Mostly.”

On Tuesday, Herrera will face incumbent Tony Gonzales in a primary runoff.

Gonzalez, a U.S. Navy veteran, has represented the district, an agricultural swath of south-west Texas and parts of San Antonio, since 2021.

Texas 23 includes Uvalde, where 19 children and two teachers were shot dead in May 2022 at an elementary school.

Gonzales’ vote for gun control reform in the aftermath of the massacre has helped make him a target for far-right attacks. Matt Gaetz of Florida and Andy Biggs of Arizona are among far-right members of Congress now supporting Herrera. The actor Matthew McConaughey is among figures supporting Gonzales.

Speaking to The Daily Beast, Aidan McQuade, from Northern Ireland and a former director of Anti-Slavery International, the world’s oldest human rights group, condemned Herrera for displaying “jaw-dropping stupidity” in his IRA-themed video.

“It is quite an achievement to make a video of which the anti-Irish stereotyping is the least offensive part,” McQuade said.

Other remarks by Herrera in the video include a promise to get “belligerently drunk” to celebrate St Patrick’s Day and, “The IRA [were] very famously unhappy for a certain group of folks going after their Lucky Charms,” a reference to famous ads for a U.S. breakfast cereal featuring a leprechaun character.

Over footage of a gun jamming, meanwhile, Herrera says: “This is why Ireland isn’t free.”

McQuade said: “From a historical perspective it is jaw-droppingly stupid to suggest that the course of the Troubles could have been changed with a more dependable Armalite.

“From a human perspective, Herrera’s attitude to violence seems that of an adolescent video-gamer blissfully ignorant of the trauma that war inflicts on a society, and the unending grief of victims’ devastated families.”

The Armalite assault rifle was an American gun that became synonymous with the Provisional Irish Republican Army or IRA, the dominant republican terror group during the Troubles, the period of violent unrest in Northern Ireland and mainland Britain from 1968 to 1998.

The accepted death toll from the Troubles, established in the book Lost Lives by authors David McKittrick, Seamus Kelters, Brian Feeney, Chris Thornton and David McVea, is 3,720. The Provisional IRA killed more than 1,700 people–hundreds of them civilians. According to Ulster University, a college in Northern Ireland, more than 47,000 people were injured in shootings, bombings and other acts of violence.

McQuade grew up in South Armagh, on the border between Northern Ireland and Ireland, during the Troubles, seeing violence close up. A former winner of the BBC’s Mastermind quiz show, answering questions about the Irish independence leader Michael Collins and the U.S. president Abraham Lincoln, McQuade is now an independent human rights consultant and the author of historical novels including Some Service to the State, set in 1925, an earlier period of Irish civil strife.

McQuade added: “Coming from a comedian, as Herrera attempts to be, such attitudes would be tiresome. But coming from someone who hopes to be an elected representative such callous and facile thinking is inexcusable.”

Also known as the AK Guy, Herrera has more than 3.4 million followers on YouTube. His videos have courted trouble before. Earlier this year, in response to a video in which Herrera fires a German World War II submachine gun (which he calls “the original ghetto blaster”) and goose-steps while an associate wears a German uniform, Gonzales branded his opponent a “known neo-Nazi.”

Herrera denied the charge, saying: “This is the death spiral ladies and gentlemen. He has to cry to his liberal friends about me, because Republicans won’t listen anymore.”

Herrera has also attracted criticism after joking about suicides among military veterans and previous links to neo-Confederate groups.

His IRA-themed video runs more than 19 minutes. It includes discussion and demonstrations of different versions of the Armalite rifle and is scored by a version of “Come Out Ye Black and Tans,” a rebel song attributed to the Irish writer Dominic Behan.

Herrera says: “Today’s topic for our range video is the AR-180, aka my little Armalite.”

“Little Armalite,” sometimes known as “My Little Armalite,” is another Irish rebel song.

Herrera’s campaign manager Kimmie Gonzalez responded to an email from The Daily Beast but did not offer comment on the video or McQuade’s response.

A representative for Gonzales did not respond to a request for comment.

Chris Harris, vice-president of communications for Giffords, a gun control group founded by Gabby Giffords, a former Democratic congresswoman who was shot and seriously wounded while in office, said: “Brandon Herrera is reckless and dangerous. He gleefully promotes violence and extremism.”

People like RFK, Jill Stein, and Cornel West run for president as a grift. I don’t know who the libertarian candidate is this year, but it’s the same deal. They raise money to a small degree from a handful of true believers (those those people usually can be conned into providing free/cheap labor), and mostly from donors who are looking to fund spoilers. In some swing states, it’s a game of inches, and even getting 3% voting for a third party candidate makes it a win for your candidate.

I have no idea where the disconnect is. I don’t care that the paintings are by W, I’m pointing out that they’re amateurish and that if they weren’t by W they wouldn’t be exhibited. It has zero to do with my artistic judgement being informed by knowing the artist.

I don’t actually listen to MJ very often, although I do enjoy his music and appreciate his contributions to both music and dance. I do tend to avoid work by people like Weinstein, Spacey, and Joanne Rowling because I would prefer not to contribute even incrementally to their income or the perception of public support.

But in particular, as someone who does not believe in free will, I don’t believe in the idea of culpability. I believe that if you physically recreated W’s brain in perfect detail and put it into someone else, you’d get the exact same outputs to the exact same inputs. Even if you want to include some kind of randomness from quantum effects, that doesn’t make for free will, it’s just randomness. That’s the opposite of free will.

So although it might be a natural reaction from me to hate W or Trump or Hitler, I try to remind myself that it’s all neurophysiology and neurochemistry (plus other aspects of physiology) as informed by factors such as learning and genetics.I can pretty much guarantee that, were we to do neuroimaging on Trump’s brain, we’d find a hypertrophic amygdala and a hypotrophic prefrontal cortex. Simplifying a bit, you can think of those as the primitive fear center and the rational consideration parts of the brain. No one with that kind of neuroanatomy is going to behave in a rational and controlled manner, especially under stress.

I might hate the harm they cause and want to prevent it, but there’s no “self” inside of them for me to hate.

To be clear, I explicitly stated that I wasn’t saying it’s not art. It is art, and I am all for people embracing their creativity. I think more people should be painting/sculpting/playing music/etc., especially in retirement. What I’m saying is that as much as someone might get a kick out of playing Wonderwall doesn’t mean they should be getting a public concert at Epcot.

Although if I was in the neighborhood I’d probably pay $15 to see Dick Cheney play a self-taught version of Wonderwall if he was also singing.

I didn’t say “hang it on my fridge,” I said “hang it in my restaurant.” It’s not like a five year old, but it’s like a high school student. You can look at his paintings online and see how he developed over time.

I’m not discrediting it - I’m saying it doesn’t have great vision, great technique, or innovation. He’s been doing this for ten years, and he is still at the level of “That’s great! Keep practicing!”

It’s fine though. Painting is a great hobby. I don’t have a problem with him painting, and I don’t have a problem if his political loyalists want to imbue them with some value. I read a fun article from about a decade ago intentionally overanalyzing his shower-selfie painting.

What I am saying is that there is nothing special about his paintings except the fact that he’s the one who painted them. I’m not comparing W to Hitler, but Hitler’s paintings were also pretty bad, and the only reason why anyone looks at them today is because they were painted by Hitler.

I’m not going to say it’s not “art,” but this is basically the level of sophistication that parents get from their kid to hang in their diner. If this was actually painted by anyone who wasn’t the ex-president, it wouldn’t be noticed by anyone, much less exhibited.

I do this for a living. Seasonality as a generic term refers to temporally periodic signals but can even be extended to talk about non-temporal aspects of a signal. The same math used in areas like econometrics to remove periodicity in annual data can be applied to multiple domains. The main motivation to removing or isolating periodicity is to allow for investigation into the underlying phenomena, or to allow the investigation of the sources of periodicity independently of other drivers. In every case, though, seasonality is an acceptable term in everything I’ve written, read, and worked on.

This is seasonality.

Seasonality is a characteristic of a time series and refers to periodic and generally regular and predictable changes that occur over a year.

To make it more generic, drop the “over a year” and just refer to the periodic signal over time idea. You can find additional signals by how you bin the data, eg monthly or day of week.

I was involved in discussions 20-some years ago when we were first exploring the idea of autonomous and semiautonomous weapons systems. The question that really brought it home to me was “When an autonomous weapon targets a school and kills 50 kids, who gets charged with the war crime? The soldier who sent the weapon in, the commander who was responsible for the op, the company who wrote the software, or the programmer who actually coded it up?” That really felt like a grounding question.

As we now know, the actual answer is “Nobody.”

A 1971 Chrysler Newport.

The thing was a boat. You’d hit a bump in the road, and the car would act like you crested a wave and bob front to back a few times. It was wider than most pickup trucks and probably heavier. Not only could it not fit in most parking spots, it could hardly fit in some lanes. Required leaded gas, which was getting hard to find at that point. If you needed to go uphill you had to build up speed because you would slow down, even with the gas pedal floored.

The best part is that when I finally brought it in for service, the mechanic came out and said “You’ve been driving that thing??” Three out of four motor mounts had broken and the last one was about rusted through.

It did have an 8-track though, and came with a bunch of Elvis tapes.

I hated Elvis, but did manage to find an 8-track of Peter Paul and Mary.

I kind of close with that thought. A “good idea” in evolutionary biology is one that leads to reproductive success. Obviously, it’s possible to have so much reproductive success that you overrun the carrying capacity of your environment. That doesn’t happen as often when we’re looking at them in their natural environments - because species and environments co-evolve, and so each adaptation has time to be matched by other adaptations.

It’s always tempting to look backward through time and interpret a direct causal development from the bow and arrow to industrial manufacturing and spaceflight. But we can see by looking at all of the different societies and cultures around us that any particular path isn’t dictated by the human brain per se. The Yanomami and the Yoruba are populated with people exactly as intelligent as in any other human society. They are adaptable and clever, but never developed mass manufacturing or rocket technology. There are countless other civilizations that arose, gained a high degree of sophistication and power, and then disappeared while others have survived.

I do not believe in free will. That means I believe in strict causality. If you wanted to argue that the development of modern western political economies are a direct result of the Enlightenment, and the Enlightenment itself was a direct result of the world of ideas that came before it, you’d find a sympathetic ear (although I do believe that determinism is different from predictability, and that this complex system we call our society is more complex than any individual just as a human is more complex and less predictable than an ant).

In any case, it’s possible the “lethal mutation” that might lead to our demise (along with a good swath of the rest of life on earth) might have been a techno-cultural mutation rather than a biological one.

Those are very good questions. First, I was distinguishing between multiple types of intelligence, rather than ranking them. However, there are several aspects of human intelligence that we’d probably be justified in saying something like “By these metrics, humans are more intelligent than any other species on the planet.” Those include the sophistication of technology, the amount and complexity of of information exchanged between persons, the ability to learn, and so on. Other animals can learn through accident or experimentation and adopt a new behavior. Some even exhibit social learning, as when a troop of baboons learned to wash their food by observing the matriarch, who had discovered it on her own. Most other species have languages, whether vocal, visual, or chemical. But most learning occurs over evolutionary time rather than at the individual level, and most of those languages are fairly hard coded.

The answer is definitely yes for the second question, with the eusocial animals like ants and bees being the obvious examples. The queen is not the “brain” of the colony. She is more like the reproductive organ. The brain emerges from of all the ants collectively interacting with each other and the environment. I agree with EO Wilson that humans are also eusocial, and so by extension carry out collective computation - information processing and learning - at the social level using what we might think of as an emergent brain layered on top of your individual brains.

Evolutionary biologist here. I think it’s highly unlikely.

It has taken about 4 billion years for intelligent life to have appeared on our planet (if you include the earth forming part), or 3.5 billion years (if you include when life first formed) to get our first “intelligent life.” By intelligent life here, I’m talking about technology in tool using and civilization building, to be clear. It’s a label I’d apply to our many of our ancestral and most closely related species. I believe much of life on earth is intelligent to the point of having things like theory of mind (the knowledge that one is a thinking individual interacting with other thinking individuals), including some birds and octopuses. The birds and octopuses part is important because it means that ToM evolved multiple times independently. That means that a) it’s a “good idea” (it has potentially significant adaptive value) and b) it’s possible to discover it along multiple pathways. Take eyes for example. Last time I looked, we believe eyes have evolved independently at least 24 times. They also exist at every stage of complexity and in a very wide variety of forms, and even something as as simple as being able to tell light from darkness has value.

However, in that 3.5 billion year history, intelligent life evolved exactly once, from a single line of descent. Intelligence such as ours is obviously a good idea. We went from being relatively unremarkable hominids to being the dominant life form on the planet, for better and for worse. Evolution is not moving all species to intelligence. Humans aren’t the point of evolution, any more than sharks or jellyfish are the point of evolution.

When such a manifestly good idea only evolves once, from a single line, the conclusion is that it’s pretty difficult to evolve. It might require a chain of preliminary mutations, or a particular environment. Being hominids, for example, we can make tools and carry fire, which dolphins and octopuses cannot. Of course, there are other hominids out there who do not do those things, and they’ve been around for millions of years. Depending on where you want to start the clock, they’ve been around for about ten times longer than modern humans - about 400k years, give or take. And the technology and civilization part has only been around for the last tenth of that, and has to evolve along its own, non-biological selection - and even those things differ wildly between different places and cultures. And even will all that, it’s become increasingly obvious that this might be a terminal mutation as the very drivers of our short term success may lead to our extinction.

I believe that extra-solar life probably exists. Whether it exists as bacterial mats or multicellular life, whether it’s discovered its own form of photosynthesis or has some other way of gathering life from its environment, whether it draws a distinction between its informational (eg, dna) and physical components - I have ideas but obviously no data.

In any case, that’s why I don’t believe that anyone has ever seen an extraterrestrial-origin ufo. I don’t believe the universe ever was nor will ever be teeming with civilizations.

All of that said, though, we’re dealing with an n of 1. We can make the best inferences possible based on what we can observe, but I would be delighted to be proven wrong tomorrow. I’m a sci fi nerd - I want there to be aliens. Even the discovery of a bacterial mat would revolutionize biology.

Thanks!

I have always loved the OED. As a kid I used to sit in the library and just read it. It was always a dream of mine to buy my own copy and just have it the way people used to have encyclopedias.

That’s exactly my perspective.

I came of age with the birth of the web. I was using systems like Usenet, gopher, wais, and that sort of thing. I was very much into the whole cypherpunk, “information wants to be free” philosophy that thought that the more information people had, the more they could talk to each other, the better the world would be.

Boy, was I wrong.

But you can’t put the genie back into the bottle. So now, in addition to having NPR online, we have kids eating tide pods and getting recruited into fascist ideologies. And of course it’s not just kids. It’s tough to see how the anti-vax movement or QAnon could have grown without the internet (which obviously has search engines as a major driver of traffic).

I think you’re better off teaching critical thinking, and even demonstrating the failings of ChatGPT by showing them how bad it is at answering questions. There’s plenty of resources you can find that should give you a starting point. Ironically, you can find them using a search engine.

That was amazing! I can’t believe this is the first time I’ve seen this.

“Every customer should be greeted when they walk into the store.”

The singular “they” is traditional in English - it is very much proper English and has been around (iirc) since the 17th century. It’s only a big deal now because conservatives want to make gender a factor in elections.

The difference is that Elon would have said “And we can do this today!” back in 2017.

“No stupid questions” is intended to be a topic, not a challenge.