Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Politics

Donald Trump's 'Nuclear' Uncle (newyorker.com) 148

Posted by EditorDavid from the nuclear-nephew dept.
An anonymous reader writes: In 1936 a reporter watched Donald Trump's uncle John, an MIT professor of engineering, as he was struck by two high-voltage sparks while demonstrating the grounding of an new X-ray machine which could generate a million volts of power. And immediately after Nikola Tesla's death in 1943, the FBI called John G. Trump to review the scientific papers Tesla left behind, according to a new article in The New Yorker. They joke that now John's nephew Donald "seldom sounds as ungrounded as when he invokes Professor Trump, the younger brother of his father, Fred," while campaigning for president. But while comparing the candidate's statements to the historical record, they conclude that "John Trump really does seem to have been a brilliant scientist," noting that he performed both radar and short-wave research for the allies during World War II and helped design medical X-ray machines.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Donald Trump's 'Nuclear' Uncle More

Donald Trump's 'Nuclear' Uncle

Comments Filter:

  • Chaotic Systems (Score:2, Insightful)

    by BitZtream ( 692029 )

    Trump is surely a very intelligent person.

    However, a lot of things go into making us who we are by the time we get to his age, and even the tiniest of silly little things 40 years ago can cause an otherwise intelligent person to pick up some silly and outright wrong logic.

    Its all a matter of perspective and his has simply had some bad data feeds which resulted in him becoming what he is today.

    The man is not stupid and he is not 'wrong' in every way. He is wrong IN A WHOLE BUNCH OF IMPORTANT WAYS, but not

    • Re:Chaotic Systems (Score:5, Insightful)

      by BitZtream ( 692029 ) on Saturday April 09, 2016 @10:05AM (#51874451)

      Before the replies about it come in, you do realize the point of posting this on the slashdot front page was to get page views as people ranting about Trump and the political flame wars that follow.

      At no point did anyone involved in posting this story actually give a fuck that Fred Trump was a major asset to our species. Lets remember where we are and stay focused.

    • The man is not stupid and he is not 'wrong' in every way. He is wrong IN A WHOLE BUNCH OF IMPORTANT WAYS, but not every one.

      Replace the word Trump in this post with Clinton, Sanders, YourLastName and it still applies all the same.

      That is only because everyone has their own points of view and opinions on things and most people tend to think that anyone who feels differently than them must be "wrong".

      All of those people are foolish, because if you cling to your opinions that tightly, then you'll defend them even if presented with hard evidence that you are mistaken.

      You are not, or perhaps should not be, your opinions. Most of us believe what we do because of how we were raised and what we were taught.

      Most people are not really aware

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Try a million watts of power, but more likely, a million volts of potential.

    • Re: (Score:1, Offtopic)

      by Idou ( 572394 )

      even the tiniest of silly little things 40 years ago can cause an otherwise intelligent person to pick up some silly and outright wrong logic.

      My observation is that an easy life of wealth and privilege has an almost 100% probability of creating a piece of shit human being. . . You don't have to wait 40 years, either. Donald reminds me of a couple of guys I new back in middle school. . .

      • My observation is that an easy life of wealth and privilege has an almost 100% probability of creating a piece of shit human being

        We all have easy lives of wealth and privilege compared to our ancestors of a few generations ago. What does that make us?

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Idou ( 572394 )
          It is a very simple difference. . . is your life easier because of technology that everyone has access to or because you can afford to shit on others and surround yourself with yes-men?

          Some types of lifestyles can really fuck you up in the head. It is like child acting stars. . .

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by hey! ( 33014 )

      I have no way of telling whether he's intelligent or not; what I do think is that he's insecure and defensive. It's often the case that people perform below their intellectual capacity simply because they're immature.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      How many refugees can we sign you up for? Illegal aliens? All of their financial, legal and medical needs will be met solely by you.

      What's that? You want everyone else to take on this burden instead of you?

      Then please don't proselytize at me about how I'm wrong for not agreeing to this burden so you can earn XP to move up the progressive stack on tumblr.

    • Re:Chaotic Systems (Score:5, Insightful)

      by wallsg ( 58203 ) on Saturday April 09, 2016 @11:23AM (#51874755)

      What's really sad is that now you don't have "opponents", you have "enemies".

      Ronald Reagan and Tip O'Neill were two men with diametrically opposed beliefs and politics, but they did not hate each other. They were opponents, not enemies. They respected each other and were friendly, though not really the "friends" that some people see in the glow of nostalgia. They both believed in doing the best thing for the country and each knew that's what the other was trying to do too. They just had opposing views of what was best.

      That doesn't happen today. People seem to believe that things are a zero-sum game where the only way they can profit is to take from you and the that only way you can profit is to take from them. If they won, then you lost. Nothing is a Win-Win. You must crush your enemy. (And probably drive them before you so you can hear the lamentations of their women.)

      When asked about what "enemies" she'd made in her political carrier that she was proud of, one of Hillary's answers was "the Republicans." (The Republicans aren't much better, unfortunately.) Now why on Earth should anyone who considers themself a Republican have any trust in or respect for someone who says that you and they are "enemies"? Even crazy Uncle Joe [Biden] doesn't consider Republicans as "enemies" (though I doubt they're the "friends" he claims they are).

      • Can you really blame her, though?

        Because it really isn't about her. Like a lot of other people, I used to think it was (at least in part). That was one reason I thought Obama would be the better choice in 2008, because he wouldn't have the baggage of all that vitriol from the Clinton years. But then he was elected, and guess what - we just got more of the same, despite his repeated efforts to offer just about any concession short of capitulation. You can argue that the demonization and demagoguing didn't

      • What's really sad is that now you don't have "opponents", you have "enemies".

        Ronald Reagan and Tip O'Neill were two men with diametrically opposed beliefs and politics, but they did not hate each other. They were opponents, not enemies.

        Funny thing about enemies is that the reason they hate each so much is usually because they are so similar.
        When I went to school, you'd end up on detention with the guy you had a fight with, and by the end of it you were usually mates. Something about being stuck in a room without all the external bullshit, peer pressure, cultural expectation etc, makes you actually see a person for who they are, ie just like you.
        It'd be interesting to force the two party leaders into a big brother style share-house for

    • Re:Chaotic Systems (Score:5, Interesting)

      by quantaman ( 517394 ) on Saturday April 09, 2016 @12:42PM (#51875189)

      Trump is surely a very intelligent person.

      I don't know about this.

      Scott Adams seems to think Trump is a "master persuader" [dilbert.com] and I do agree he seems to have some genuine talent to appeal to his base that other candidates lack but I don't think it's necessarily intelligence.

      I really think the core of his appeal is just saying the first thing that comes to mind and not care about offending people. That's why he's able to come up with memorable insults (or uncommon yet popular policy positions), it's because he's saying the things everyone has noticed but hasn't said out of politeness or practicality. I think the reason we haven't seen other people use this strategy is the problem he's hitting now. Offending so many people creates a ceiling of support and it's really tough for him to get more votes (or have a future in politics if that were his career).

      As for his intellect in general, I think he's at least average intelligence, he did get a university degree and probably became pretty competent in real estate and some aspects of business, but otherwise I don't see any evidence of high intelligence, especially not in what he says.

      The fact he shares 25% of his genes with a smart physicist is an interesting tidbit, though it doesn't really mean he's smart himself.

      • The fact he shares 25% of his genes with a smart physicist is an interesting tidbit, though it doesn't really mean he's smart himself.

        I think, when we talk about genes, it is always worth remembering that we share some ninety-odd percent of our genes with the (other) apes; apparently, 25% is how much we have in common with a banana (unless this is an urban myth). The point being that 25% is not a lot.

        Trump may well be highly intelligent - low intelligence means you probably stay ignorant most of your life, high intelligence enables you to learn how to avoid taking in facts that you don't like. This kind of selective ignorance is what I ca

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Do not confuse the Trump you see on TV with who he really is. That is a fabrication. He says crazy off the wall things to draw attention to the fact he wants to negotiate. He has written whole books on the fact he likes to do that.

      He is making you think past the sale with anchoring. It is a sales technique.

      Take for example his 'i am going to build a wall'. It is ridiculous and stupid on all levels. It is plainly stupid, he knows it. However it makes you think what could we do to stop the wall what so

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by tnk1 ( 899206 )

        I think you're entirely correct.

        The problem is, as Reagan also found out with his nuclear brinksmanship, is that not everyone understands what you mean, and they expect you to do exactly what you say you are going to do.

        Brinksmanship and hard negotiation is just as effective in politics and diplomacy as in business, but there are dimensions to it that make it incredibly dangerous.

        While Trump thinks he's negotiating for a better deal, the people who are turning out for him are loading up with spades and rifl

  • Meh (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 09, 2016 @10:04AM (#51874445)

    Volt isn't a unit of power..

  • Good people can have relatives who are bad people. Smart people can have relatives whoa re dumb people. It might be interesting to minimally note that John Trump was in fact a decent scientists, bu it says absolutely zero in any direction about his nephew. Donald Trump's repeated invocations of his uncle as evidence that he has "good genes" is however decent evidence of how Donald Trump thinks about himself and the world, and it isn't pretty.
    • Not sure what you're implying here, but you would have a very hard time convincing me that, somehow, Donald Trump is not an intelligent and decent person. Despite some of his wacky outbursts, he is in no way unfit to be president of the US, and might be exactly what this country needs right now.

      • Re: (Score:1, Troll)

        by JoshuaZ ( 1134087 )

        Not sure what you're implying here, but you would have a very hard time convincing me that, somehow, Donald Trump is not an intelligent and decent person. Despite some of his wacky outbursts, he is in no way unfit to be president of the US, and might be exactly what this country needs right now.

        I don't know about intelligent or not, since that's very hard to judge, but he's ignorant, not at all decent, and wildly unqualified to be President. He doesn't know about basic aspects of US military and foreign policy, like the nuclear triad which combines with his terrible ideas about using nukes as a serious threat instead of conventional troops. This combines with his general deep misunderstandings of basic issues in international relations http://www.vox.com/2016/3/28/11318722/trump-foreign-policy [vox.com].

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by quax ( 19371 )

        "Wacky" that's one way to put it.

        Running on a platform that promises to round up all illegal immigrants while having profited from them certainly seems wacky.

        http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us... [nbcnews.com]

        https://www.washingtonpost.com... [washingtonpost.com]

        • I disagree. I do not think a desire, plan or action to make illegal immigrants accountable to US immigration laws is at all wacky.

          In fact, it's a great idea. Just ask Mexico among the many other nations that have strict immigration policies.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by quax ( 19371 )

            It's one thing to guard your borders, i.e. "the Trump Wall", but he also promised to expel all illegal immigrants. The kind of intrusive control required to round up all illegal immigrants in the US will create a police state.

            Be careful what you wish for.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by dave420 ( 699308 )

            There is a difference between a strict immigration policy and an impossible-to-access immigration policy, which for the vast majority of Mexicans is precisely the policy the US has. Assuming all strict immigration policies are the same is naive beyond belief, and probably one of the reasons positions like yours get some degree of ridicule.

    • Indeed. The worst most heinous criminals of history can have very decent relatives [wikipedia.org].

    • Smart people can have relatives whoa re dumb people.

      I'm reminded of that every time my tea party relatives in Idaho send me another news item from the right wing echo chamber. Then again, I'm one of the few in my family who has a college education.

  • Anti-Trump insults masquerading as "jokes". (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 09, 2016 @10:09AM (#51874467)

    Can we please stop with the submissions that contain anti-Trump insults disguised as "jokes"? There was just one a few hours ago [slashdot.org], for crying out loud!

    Look, I don't support Donald Trump, and I don't particularly like his policies. But the last thing I want to read when I come to Slashdot is some snide swipe at him.

    He clearly represents the views held by a lot of Americans, perhaps even the majority of them, even if they can't come out and admit this publicly. He will likely be the next president.

    If it weren't for that pathetic, childish jab at Donald Trump, this would be a really interesting submission about a very interesting scientific figure from history. But that stupid partisan attack ruins the submission.

    Please, Slashdot, can we stop with this nonsense? Can we have objective submissions that aren't peppered with anti-Trump messages?

    • Re:Anti-Trump insults masquerading as "jokes". (Score:5, Informative)

      by Xabraxas ( 654195 ) on Saturday April 09, 2016 @10:16AM (#51874495)

      He will likely be the next president.

      Not likely buddy. Whenever I hear this I am reminded how the average American is not very dialed into politics. Trump is underwater nationally in likability in EVERY demographic. 70% of women won't vote for him. That is devastating in itself. I'm guessing this is one of the reason's he generates so much conversation. There are a lot of people out there who think this is more than a sideshow and they need to be brought to reality. This is JUST A SIDESHOW. Unless Trump wins 1237 delegates he WILL NOT be the nominee. It's not going to happen. I think he will have a tough time getting the necessary delegates now that the establishment is getting behind another guy who will never be president.

      • Actually, the GOP has discussed options to not recognize Trump even if he hits the delegate criteria.

        The GOP ultimately has control of who they want, and they don't have to recognize the voters, just like the electoral college for voting in the President.

        It's an oligarchy, and voting is mostly a farce. "Here are a few candidates we're ok with, you can pick between them. Oh, you want someone else? Nope."

        • Tell Us More, Mr 1% (Score:1)

          by Anonymous Coward

          I assume you already discussed a hit job, a honeytrap, a fat bribe in order to remove Trump, eh ?

          Let me tell you one thing: If you manage run over the interests of the people one more time, the Final Outcome will be much, much, much more worse than Trump. You better accept this as a healthy correction of your corruptness.

        • Old dead white men (Score:4, Informative)

          by thinkwaitfast ( 4150389 ) on Saturday April 09, 2016 @12:25PM (#51875091)
          George Washington makes the case that "the alternate domination" of one party over another and coinciding efforts to exact revenge upon their opponents have led to horrible atrocities, and "is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism." From Washington's perspective and judgment, the tendency of political parties toward permanent despotism is because they eventually and "gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

      • If he becomes candidate, he has managed one thing: showing to the world what an unfair and outdated system the US parties have for selecting their nominees. I mean common, in some caucuses they even tossed coins in order to find out whether this caucus voted for bernie or for hillary. And every time the result was hillary, how big is the chance for this?

        Australia has a very good system, they force people to vote. Democracy shouldn't be about who can get the most angry people behind them.

        • Hillary can do that for us, too.

          It's her fricking turn, just like it was Bob Dole's turn. We can hope it turns out as well for her.

        • If he becomes candidate, he has managed one thing: showing to the world what an unfair and outdated system the US parties have for selecting their nominees.

          That was already proven when the Supreme Court decided to 2000 election.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by tnk1 ( 899206 )

            The Supreme Court already legislates. I see no reason that they shouldn't also determine who the President is.

            Anyway, if you look into how they did contested elections in the past, the Court ruling seems positively aboveboard in comparison.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Livius ( 318358 )

        With a few lunatic fringe exceptions, no-one thinks Trump is a good candidate. But to certain voters, he seems like the only one interested in their issues, even though his 'solutions' are obviously terrible. Counter-intuitive though it may be, the candidate with the bad policy wins against the candidate unwilling to address the issue at all.

        So, it depends who he runs against.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by FlyHelicopters ( 1540845 )

      Please, Slashdot, can we stop with this nonsense? Can we have objective submissions that aren't peppered with anti-Trump messages?

      Probably not. How about we have a few that swipe at Clinton to even things out?

      ---

      What is sad about the whole thing is that I objectively can find good things about each person on each side, and bad things about each person on each side.

      None of them are the Devil Incarnate, and none of them are the second coming of Jesus.

      Yet to listen to the supporters on either side, you'd think that was so.

      ---

      But this is why I can't be President, even if I think I'd do a great job. Because my first task would be to sit

      • Whats sad is i find the far right alot more accepting of different ideas than the left. I can tell a right wing conservative that i like smoking weed and support health care and while they might disagree with me, most likely wont insult me. I tell a left wing liberal i support the 2nd Amendment and own a semi automatic rifle and they literally tell me they wish my whole family would die.

        • Whats sad is i find the far right alot more accepting of different ideas than the left. I can tell a right wing conservative that i like smoking weed and support health care and while they might disagree with me, most likely wont insult me. I tell a left wing liberal i support the 2nd Amendment and own a semi automatic rifle and they literally tell me they wish my whole family would die.

          I wish I could disagree with you. I can't, I've seen that too.

          Still, I've also seen right wingers who have no flexibility as well, so it isn't exclusive to the left.

          ---

          Another example of the left...

          "A woman's right to choose!"

          Except...

          When it comes to what to feed her child or medical decisions such as vaccines. So a woman has the right to choose to abort a child, but can't choose to not give that child injections.

          Hypocrites. :)

          • Oh i have seen plenty with no flexibility. Alot on the right are dumb as bricks, especially when it comes to science. But i have only really seen threats and insults hurled from the left. Dont even get me started on their "ist" that they love throwing around. I also get called all sorts of things for not supporting illegal immigration or blaming all white people for the ills of man, and being hispanic while doing so. ACCEPT EVERYONES VIEWPOINTS UNLESS THEY DISAGREE WITH OUR OWN.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by dave420 ( 699308 )

            It appears it's not actually hypocrisy, just you not understanding the position. If you don't understand it, it's not unreasonable that you would deem it hypocritical even when it's nothing of the sort. The "woman's right to choose" is referring to women being given the choice of what happens to their own bodies, not the bodies of their children. It's about women being able to abort should they want to, not whether they can give their children vaccines.

            I wonder what else you have completely ass-backwards

            • The "woman's right to choose" is referring to women being given the choice of what happens to their own bodies, not the bodies of their children.

              Ahh yes... except you of course completely and totally miss it...

              I fully support a woman's right to choose what to do with their own bodies.

              However, the child inside them is not part of their body, they are just providing it a home.

              Killing that child is not acceptable.

    • Look, there is little sensible to do with the US presidential election than to mock it and its protagonists. It's not like it matters which of the muppets are going to win, so let us at least have fun with it, ok? It's not like we get anything else out of the whole shit.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Livius ( 318358 )

      How is this "anti-Trump"? It's one of the least negative things I've seen associated with Trump's name since whenever his last business failure was.

      Though, of course, that's because it's about a different person and not *about* Trump in any way.

    • Yes. I'm so sorry. http://i.imgur.com/D6KCTL7.gif [imgur.com]

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

      Look, I don't support Donald Trump, and I don't particularly like his policies. But the last thing I want to read when I come to Slashdot is some snide swipe at him.

      Especially when it's not direct family. I mean, really, you can say the Trump family made their money running a brothel, which is being resurrected in Canada [www.cbc.ca].

      Yes, Frederick Trump (Donald's great-grandfather) made their fortune running brothels, hotels and restaurants [wikipedia.org].

      So now you know where the Trump family fortune came about. Uncle? Nah. Direct f

  • Few people in his age group understand social media.

    Trump on the other hand wields Twitter like a sword with the precision of a scalpel.

    Must admit I thoroughly enjoyed when he used these skills to eviscerate the Republican establishment.

    Have no opinion on his overall intelligence, but obviously somebody must have gotten under his skin to cry uncle like that.
       

    • People like Trump don't twitter. They got their people for that.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by quax ( 19371 )

        That's where you are wrong. And there is first class analysis available to back that up, because he has a remarkably unique style, that allows to identify the tweets penned by the 'master' himself:

        http://talkingpointsmemo.com/e... [talkingpointsmemo.com]

        • So ... we know that all his tweets have been written by the same person? It's impressive, someone really deserves a raise.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by quax ( 19371 )

            It's a style that echos his rhetoric and speechifying to a T. He probably doesn't type them himself, but if he's not the originator, than he found himself a perfect mini-me.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      "I thoroughly enjoyed when he used these skills to eviscerate the Republican establishment."

      I'm enjoying it very much myself. Most people are pissed at Trump because of the racist/sexist trolling. The irony is Trump is neither a racist or a sexist. All he has done during this election cycle is vocalize in plain language the innuendo that the Republican party has been communicating via dog whistle for the past 8+ years.

      Just because he says something doesn't mean he means it. Anyone capable of independent cri

  • By way of Exploding the Telephone (highly recommended) I was reading Trump's Nuclear Experience [slate.com] just yesterday, which reprints a 1987 interview between Rosenbaum and Trump, in which uncle John plays a critical role.

    "He told me something a few years ago," Trump recalls. "He told me, 'You don't realize how simple nuclear technology is becoming.' That's scary. He said it used to be that only a few brains in the world understood it and now you have a situation where thousands and thousands of brains can easily

  • It skips a generation.

  • "John Trump really does seem to have been a brilliant scientist," noting that he performed both radar and short-wave research for the allies during World War II and helped design medical X-ray machines.

    This is about as relevant today as the much publicized [google.com] history of George W. Bush's grandfather "dealing with Nazis".

    WTF, are we preparing for a round of "Jeopardy" or something? I'll be happy to see Trump on my ballot come November, but his uncle has nothing to do with it.

  • So Donald Trump's father got the bully gene and not the brilliant gene. That explains a lot.

  • I have to give it to you USA:ians, your elections keep getting more and more entertaining. Remember Bush v.s. Gore? What a sleeping pill.

    My predictions for the next few presidencies:

    Clinton/Clark 2016
    Clinton/Clinton 2020 (Hillary/Bill)
    Palin/Trump 2024
    Clinton/Clinton 2036 (Chelsea/Hillary)
    Musk/Superhuman AI 2040
    Superhuman AI 2.0/Mecha-Rumsfeld 2044
    Lord Rumsfeld 2048

    (Assumes slight reinterpretations of the constitution with regards to eligibility for foreign-born citizens and death robots.)

Slashdot Top Deals

Technology is dominated by those who manage what they do not understand.

Close