In unsealed court papers, Weinstein suggested Jennifer Aniston should be killed for complaining about him

Having Jennifer Anison whacked hardly would have diminished his chances of ruination and spending the rest of life behind bars. Something like 90 women came forward against Weinstein, many with more serious allegations than what he did to Aniston.

10 Likes

Scumbag. I’m actually surprised that he hasn’t already upped the sympathy by adding on a wheelchair and oxygen bottle.

3 Likes

And with the power of wealth and connections, anything becomes much more possible and, therefore, actualized.

2 Likes

He got to use the walker in court because his lawyers said he needed it. If he wants any kind of support or mobility device that could conceivably be used as a weapon in prison I think he’s going to need a prison doctor to order it. Otherwise any tough guy in lockup for a violent felony could claim he needed a heavy-duty cane for his bum knee.

4 Likes

I agree with Bob.

2 Likes

I’m just referring to his public appearances; see “Vincent Gigante”.

1 Like

and prison doctors are consistently obliged by their employers to provide the worst healthcare in the country

4 Likes

True. While the violent death of anyone of them might’ve been used as a strong arm attempt to silence them all, that sort of thing generally is a more organized crime approach to things. Perhaps the reason he didn’t (presuming he COULD) is that there were so many people speaking out that it made it pointless.

Safety in numbers.

2 Likes

Two words… “Ed Kramer”

1 Like

Or, you mention it to a couple shady billionaires who might know someone and see what shakes out.

that’s the thing about extreme wealth. The abiulity to live your dreams often means having the ability to make others live their nightmares.

4 Likes

That is not my understanding. Here is William Manchester, from A World Lit Only by Fire:

Niccolò Machiavelli has been slandered. Machiavelli was a principled Florentine and a gifted observer of contemporary Italy; his concise Il principe reveals profound insight into human nature and an acute grasp of political reality in the scene he saw. Nevertheless, because of that very book, he has been the victim of a double injustice. Though he was only analyzing his age, later generations have not only interpreted the work as cynical, unscrupulous, and immoral; they have turned his very name to a pejorative. In fact, he was a passionate, devout Christian who was appalled by the morality of his age.

7 Likes

That’s actually in line with the Prince being backhanded and satirical in its depiction of autocratic behavior. It is actually decrying it, not being an instruction manual for it.

10 Likes

It wouldn’t at all surprise me if they prefer to stick to shady PI stuff just because the risk/reward is better; but the sort of guys he was known to have on retainer aren’t a group that I would be terribly sanguine about assuming are incapable of a discrete murder or of keeping their mouths shut about it afterwards.

4 Likes

“Though he was only analyzing his age, later generations have not only interpreted the work as cynical, unscrupulous, and immoral; they have turned his very name to a pejorative. In fact, he was a passionate, devout Christian who was appalled by the morality of his age.”

I expect satire to be deliberately backhanded and satirical – Satyricon, A Modest Proposal, Snow Crash. Between the work itself and the author’s biography, it’s plain that some authors are satirists, who write with deliberately satirical intent. (Indeed, does any style of literature feel more deliberate, more manipulative of the reader, than satire?)

This does not apply to Machiavelli, in my view: Il Principe is a thoroughly serious work, devoid of satire.

If you see satire, then I agree that modern interpretations include satire. But Machiavelli the man was no satirist.

Here is a relevant passage from Wikipedia:

Concerning the differences and similarities in Machiavelli’s advice to ruthless and tyrannical princes in The Prince and his more republican exhortations in Discourses on Livy , few assert that The Prince , although written as advice for a monarchical prince, contains arguments for the superiority of republican regimes, similar to those found in the Discourses . In the 18th century, the work was even called a satire, for example by Jean-Jacques Rousseau

6 Likes

I find it fascinating that again Hachette is back in the conversation about men & moral turpitude.

2 Likes

In the 18th century, the work was even called a satire, for example by Jean-Jacques Rousseau

See! Rousseau agreed with me! I trust his opinon there.

7 Likes

Enough of your logic! It’s high time someone took Rousseau down a peg or two, and Voltaire is just the man to do it!

The first to criticize Rousseau were his fellow Philosophes , above all, Voltaire. According to Jacques Barzun, Voltaire was annoyed by the first discourse, and outraged by the second. Voltaire’s reading of the second discourse was that Rousseau would like the reader to “walk on all fours” befitting a savage.
Wikipedia (“Wikipedia … always with the Wikipedia.”)

It’s like my Daddy used to say: “My ancestors didn’t fight in the Enlightenment for nothing!”

9 Likes

Voltaire is good for you. Like kale, just more palatable

8 Likes

‘We do not execute . We do not massacre . We never, you may be very certain, we never torture . We have no truck with crimes of passion or hatred or pointless gain. We do not do it for a delight in inhumation, or to feed some secret inner need, or for petty advantage, or for some cause or belief; I tell you, gentlemen, that all these reasons are in the highest degree suspect. Look into the face of a man who will kill you for a belief and your nostrils will snuff up the scent of abomination. Hear a speech declaring a holy war and I assure you, your ears should catch the clink of evil’s scales and the dragging of its monstrous tail over the purity of the language.
‘No, we do it for the money.
‘And, because we above all must know the value of a human life, we do it for a great deal of money.
‘There can be few cleaner motives, so shorn of pretence.
Nil mortifi, sinelucre . Remember.
No killing without payment.’

Terry Pratchett, Pyramids

13 Likes