Am I crazy, or do post-pile-on, post-death-threat “I’m so so so sorry and promise to make myself as small as possible and defer to my betters” posts sometimes sound like the statements they make hostages read in front of the cameras?
A bit. Hadn’t realized before this that the OP had blocked me, had to do my usual work around to see if they’d deleted or blocked.
Honestly, these sort of gushing “I’m sorry for not being sufficiently woke” posts gives me some degree of schadenfreude, though it is a little bit sad that people seem to be afraid to take the Michael Tracey/Fredrick DeBoer route in terms of not backing down in the face of public pressure.
Is it really the correct route? I’m unsure.
Maybe the correct route is to bow and scrape, wait several months, then go back to doing exactly what you were doing before.
In retrospect, it looks like Mic’s commitment to social justice was never that deep — which surprised and disappointed many of the young ideologues who went to work there. (The Outline spoke to 17 current and former staffers who requested anonymity due to nondisclosure agreements.) Mic chanced upon the social justice narrative, discovered it was Facebook gold, and mined away. Now the quarry is nearly dry.
whoever drank that particular flavour of neoliberal koolaid deserved it
Oddly I haven’t missed them. Hell, I didn’t even notice their absence.
I noticed they were gone because Mic actually had me blocked here
Every so often I’d try to comment on some long discussion and I couldn’t because the OP was a shitty Mic article
I was blocked also, but their pandering shit kind of blended into the rest of tumblr I guess.
In a sense Tumblr stole their thing because any self-loathing hubris filled tween could write for them.
Wait a second don’t bury the lede, Mic blocked people on tumblr (as a way of making sure the reblog chains of their official ports-to-tumblr never went through ancaps and were more hugboxy) ??
One more thing I didn’t realize could happen until someone broke a norm and it looked obvious in retrospect. 2017!
Yes, this is fascinating! And I say this as someone quite averse to Anarcho-Capitalism.
Basically every benefit we give to the working poor ends up being an indirect subsidy for business - see, for example, employers telling their employees how to obtain food stamps.
One of the complaints about a wage subsidy over a higher minimum wage is that it will just be captured by employers, who will pay their employees less by that amount. That’s also potentially true of a basic income, and with a minimum wage, employers may opt to gain non-monetary compensation (e.g. terrible hours).
Now, here’s where the limits of my economics education probably show a bit, in that I’m not familiar with the literature on how, empirically, this works out. (Maybe @xhxhxhx can chime in.)
I realized that this is actually related to the marginal productivity of labor - how much revenue (and thus, potentially, profit) does each additional employee bring in, across the whole economy? There are limits to this based on the amount of equipment/capital needed for a marginal employee or marginal hours, including facility size, as well as the potential customers it might bring in (e.g. why haven’t they hired additional labor already?).
The reason for this is that to determine the leverage of a low-wage employee under a wage subsidy system, we need to know how many potential jobs our wage subsidy can create, and at what quality. How easy is it for an employee to just walk right out of the store, walk right in to another store, and get a new job? Even if the pay is somewhat lower, this creates a much stronger incentive against bad hours, bad bosses, and unsafe practices, about which employees will then either demand higher pay, or just tell the employers to knock it off.
However, that increase in leverage only occurs if enough potential jobs emerge, and this is more or less an empirical question.
The greater the marginal increase in the number of jobs per marginal decrease in minimum wage prior to subsidy, the more of the subsidy that will be captured by the workers. However, if cutting the minimum wage creates no new jobs, then leverage doesn’t change much at all and employers capture the majority of the subsidy.
If the leverage is high enough, wages may even be driven higher than they were prior to the subsidy, depending on employer margins that they were exploiting leverage over against employees.
However, since employers capturing part of the subsidy is potentially true for all subsidies for the working poor, even rental vouchers or healthcare, it has to be compared with other alternatives (such as basic income).
(For my preferred implementation, the accompanying decrease in minimum wage should be lower than the wage subsidy, and the wage subsidy should be paid directly to the employee, thus at least not resulting in a decrease in effective income even if the entire subsidy is captured.)
like if i see an ad on facebook most of the time i don’t wanna click on it but at least i generally believe there is probably a real product that they want to sell me
if i see a tumblr ad for like, a watch, my alief is that they 3d rendered the watch and it literally doesn’t exist
how do you make ads this bad! i can’t believe they’ve sunk to “literally failing to convince me that they’re marketing a real thing”
If I see a tumblr ad for a “watch”, I’d just assume that it’s an alien tentacle-frog infiltrator psychically releasing spores into my brain to disguise itself as a watch. This is my opinion of tumblr ads. None of them are from this world, none.
1) maybe nobody buys tumblr ads because they know we don’t buy things based on ads, but tumblr still has to make it look like they have ads in case anyone *does* want to buy some useless spam propaganda, so they make their own fake ads which no one will click on?
2) the only people clueless enough to buy tumblr ads are also really terrible at advertising (i once had one trying to sell me “TANKS. Sturdy, reliable, durable. London area.” no image of what sort of tanks)
possibly both
Also I’ve seen NASDAQ ads here? Legit ones, not uncanny-weird ones. Wtf. How did they decide this was right channel to advertise in, what are they even trying to sell or achieve, what.
At one point Tumblr really wanted to sell me B2B software. There are good marketing departments advertising on Tumblr, but they do it by getting actual Tumblr users to shill for them. The actual adroll stuff is like a cry for help from someone who faked their way into a job interview by pretending they had 10+ years of marketing experience.
I think part of the problem is that they’re mostly not marketing real products that people might conceivably want. I could do a better job than some of these guys, although I admit “Are you investing in the right kind of Asia?” is a lot more innocuous than some of them.
One of the reasons I enjoy writing standalone novels is that it allows me to tell stories that have a beginning, middle, and an end. Series fiction is, almost universally, stuck in the second act by its very nature.
ACT ONE: Peter Parker gets bit by a radioactive spider, gains superpowers, learns a lesson on personal responsibility.
ACT TWO: Spider-Man struggles to fight crime and redeem himself in his own eyes and the eyes of the city he defends.
ACT THREE: Spider-Man learns to balance his obligations as both a superhero and an ordinary man, gets married, has some kids, stops being such a sadsack.
Yes, it’s that Act Three that’s the problem. It NEVER happens. It was never intended to happen. Spider-Man is stuck in that second act, and he will never actually get out of it. This is why he’ll never have a successful marriage (even when married to his beautiful dreamgirl who is both understanding and a supermodel), he’ll always be an outcast (even while a prominent member of The Avengers, his world’s preeminent superhero team), and why he’ll always be broke (did I mention his wife was a successful supermodel?), and always ALWAYS debating whether or not he should even be Spider-Man in the first place (regardless of how many times he has saved New York and the world).
I actually think this is why I’m wary of trying to get into some of the longer-running comics series. I mean, when I read something, I’m almost invariably reading it for the characters; I want to see who they are, what they struggle with, how they deal with those struggles, and how their story turns out. I want good, solid character arcs! And the thing about arcs is that they have to have a beginning and an end–otherwise they just loop back around and… become circles. (I think. My grasp of geometry is a bit fuzzy.) And circular characterization is just not something I’m interested in.
(I mean, seriously, Bruce Wayne is never going to get a happy ending, unless it’s in an animated/movie ‘verse or some kind of Elseworlds ‘verse. For that matter, he’s never going to get a sad ending. It just isn’t gonna happen, because DC will never let his story end. Sure, he can have character development arcs within his ongoing series, but… well, we can’t have too much of that either, because heaven forbid he ever move too far away from his broodiness and angst-ridden-ness! No, any “character development” he gets will a) make him even darker and grimmer–and eventually you have to wonder just how much more grimness this guy can take before he goes completely bonkers [I will not turn this into a rant about Damian’s death, I will not turn this into a rant about Damian’s death…]–or b) it will eventually be overturned in favor of the more profitable and comfortable status quo. This is why I have next to no desire to pick up any of the mainline Batman titles, past or present, even though I love the Batfamily.)
This is pretty much why I gave up on the old comic series too. I like to pretend that X-men ended with the Dark Phoenix storyline.
this is exactly why i like comic books. as far as i know, most fiction has beginnings and endings, but long running comic books are one of the big exceptions when it comes to endings (the others that come to mind are i guess finnegan’s wake and dhalgren). the characters get explored endlessly, their past isn’t set in stone, everything reflects society, stuff like that. there’s of course lots of bad comic book arcs out there but the good ones are really good, seamlessly tying together things from disparate parts of a character’s decades of history. but it’s interesting to me how the entire character’s history can change as the plot moves forward (i.e. through retcons). i get why people don’t like retroactive continuity but i think it happens all the time in both myth/folklore and in reality (i.e. our interpretation of history is updated).
but i also get why people don’t like this aspect of it. the idea of fiction that lasts for decades and decades is amazing to me tho
So I definitely don’t mind the length, or the retro continuity. What bugs me about the comic stories is that they don’t have endings they’re heading towards.
Like, I’m happy to read four million words on one subject. (My favorite fiction is the Wheel of Time). But I’d like the sense that there’s an ending, that people will get to a conclusion, that they’ll be allowed to be happy.
Honestly, my biggest problem is with the continual regression. I want to read stories about adults behaving in an adult manner; about good people making good decisions. I’m potentially willing to read stories that start out with characters who don’t make good decisions, but only as a road up to emotionally stable people being good. And comic books never get there because they keep doing the same character arc over and over again.
This is why I love fanfiction. It’s the best of both worlds – writers can explore every possible variation of characterization, plot and genre, readers can enjoy some more of what attracted them to the original story, and characters don’t have to be artificially stunted or stuck in an endless loop of reversible development.
Interesting idea: Alternate timelines/universes- similar to the non-canon-ness of fanfics- allows the same effect of endless stories that comics want (i.e. repeatedly producing content for and making money off the same title), while allowing stuff to wrap up. An example that comes to mind is the Fate series, which produced at least 6 different conclusions in the very first installment, but has produced like 10 different series since then- although I think those are mostly prequels and side stories, only one or two alternate continuities. Still, the idea could work: keep adding branches to the VN, telling different possible outcomes. This would also allow new fans to get into it without committing to 4 million words, while still having plenty of content for dedicated fans.
I suppose the constant reboots that TV adaptations of comics keep doing is essentially a way of doing this, although they don’t tend to actually use it for concluding their stories, nor for systematically exploring different ways things could have gone.
Eyeballing the results of this study, things that don’t affect whiteness of a school: racism, history, geography, or media attention to racism.
Things that do: how technical is it?
Don’t Filipinos count as Hispanics for legal purposes?
That’s… actually a good question.
As for technical schools drawing more white people (and Asians), that sounds like something closer to persistent cultural problems earlier in the pipeline.
when you announce your vision of america’s future as a little aryan kid less than two weeks after helping nazis throw a death rally because you’re a little eichmann
given the white supremacist line of protecting a “future for white children” this is.. chilling
people in the tags: no, this is not “bad optics.”
it’s called a dog whistle, and one made by a guild of lawyers that exploit plausible deniability for a living.
gothhabiba is right. they didn’t put up a visual depiction of the 14 words with the nazi’s discursive shield of “free speech” on an aryan-looking child on accident.
go look at their tweet and see who’s upset (stupid liberals), who’s not surprised or expressing suspicion (the left) and who’s rejoicing (the nazis).
perhaps a small part of it might be that unlike, say, the Trojan War or King Arthur, Harry Potter, is, due to copyright-and-canon culture, unimprovable. I mean, fanfiction exists, but it's secondary and can't supersede the earlier versions of the myth
this is bad but you don’t see the read another book people saying it’s bad
I was in a crowded place when a fire alarm started going off. There was the typical beeping and flashing, complete with the tinny voice on the intercom saying “there is a fire emergency, please evacuate, avoid using elevators” in between beeps. It probably wasn’t a big deal but I got up to leave the building because that’s what you do and then I noticed everyone else was staying where they were. They were eating and chatting like everything was normal, people were even entering the building unfazed and continuing on to their destination. So I stuck around for a few minutes just to see if anyone else would act like there’s a fire alarm on and nobody did.
We have fire drills regularly at work and the way they ended up having to do it is that every floor has two People Who Get In Trouble If The Fire Drill Doesn’t Go Right, and those people have to run around hassling everyone into obeying the actual rules because if not they’ll get in trouble.
This works pretty well, but even when it goes flawlessly, nobody really evacuates in order to drill in proper procedure, or out of fear of dying in a fire – they just don’t want to get into an argument with the designated fire drill busybodies. I feel like this probably has implications for social policy more generally, but I haven’t figured out exactly what yet.
I just read the newest of the recurring Bleeding Hearts Libertarian “Say, it is really awkward that so many neo-confederates and Nazis are connected to the libertarian movement, isn’t it?“ article.
These articles are almost always really bad, the poster doesn’t even approach the connection, saying the standard “libertarians believe in cosmopolitanism“ line. I can see that some of them in the comments
(Protip: never read the comments) think the connection is the free speech thing, I will say that the free speech thing can annoy some leftists and there’s always a suspicion of hypocrisy there but it’s not the core connection leftists see between libertarians and fascists.
The best short version of that core reason is expressed ,“Libertarians become Alt-Right at the moment they realize that
maintaining present property relations in the future will require
genocide.” (And some shit about being able to exclude races/sexualities you don’t like) I can see people dance around it in the comments with the usual Charles Murray shit and implying that libertarianism is dead once the US becomes truly multiracial.
What bugs me is that him and so many of the bigwigs can’t even approach the refutation of the real connection, he says some “oh we’re not the same” shit but he totally fails to distance himself from the actual problem. It gets to the point that I’m not even sure they can conceive of it. If I was an asshole, I would say that this is why he’s not alt-right yet.
I would say that’s roughly the relation, although Libertarianism/Anarcho-Capitalism aren’t really the current property relations - they aspire to become the property relations.
And they don’t actually require genocide, but they would require closed borders or separatism. Libertarianism and Anarcho-Capitalism fundamentally require sufficient cultural belief or social power mass in order to be implemented.
Forbidden racepol writers have analyzed how long it takes immigrant groups to go from wanting higher state intervention than the local mean to wanting something closer to the local mean in America, and from what I recall, we’re talking generations. (Cultural, not genetic.)
So the hard economic rightist has two options - create or modify a state such that the population is majority economic rightist and stays majority economic rightist (strict borders), or abandon democracy.
Of course, I’m not a Leftist so I don’t see it in some of the same collective intergenerational ethnic justice terms about the evils of Capitalism. Collective intergenerational ethnic justice, after all, is the basis of many an “ethnic tension” random violence feud.
Fortunately I’m not a Libertarian, either. I want better government intervention.
if red pill ideology is all about taking an honest look at human behavioural characteristics driven by evolution and leveraging those drives to achieve happiness then you would expect that by symmetry “red pill women” would be all about how to maximize female reproductive fitness at the expense of men-
haha no it’s focused on how to suppress feminine nature and “minimize negative characteristics like sexual manipulation” in order to be a better wife
The thing you describe as “red pill women” already exists and is called feminism. “Red pill” is most accurately modeled as the inverse of feminism, which reverses feminism’s prescriptions for men and for women, giving us exactly what you observe above.
I just find it hilarious how we’ve circled back to a point where feminism is considered to be the purest expression of the essential nature of womanhood and traditionalism is a strange modern invention to subvert the natural order.
like there’s critique of capitalism in nazism but it’s self-contradictory and does not mesh with the whole ‘the weak need to fear the strong’ thing, so they skip over it and go “but the problem really is the jews”, hello false consciousness
Honestly, reading one of Hitler’s speeches, it seemed the “weak need to fear the strong” thing was a bit weirder than that.
Great Ppl make the nation great
To have more Great Ppl, we need to have more population, and to heck with resource conservation thru limiting population growth
Instead of saving our land, we’ll invade other places, kill their people, and take theirs
Which, you know, what the fuck. It’s very nation-as-organism in one of the worst ways possible, and so weak fearing the strong is also in those terms.
What gets me is that if you’re going to be an evil eugenicist, you have a lot more options that don’t require endless invasions and expansions.
By the way, I’ve tried telling Republicans that calling everything they don’t like “Socialist” is probably partially responsible for the rise in positive associations with the word “Socialist” in Millennials.
This isn’t really a left-wing limited phenomena. It’s probably a kind of collective action problem in which individuals and individual uses of the word can accrue benefit, even though long-term it wears out the meaning.
So Millennials are associating “Socialism” with high-functioning welfare capitalist states, rather than say, the Soviet Union, or less dramatically, Venezeula.
Some people have noticed people who are actual Fascists and hate Jews saying “hah, the Left calls everyone a Nazi!” even when they fit the bill pretty well.
This is a form of camouflage enabled by calling too many people Nazis, and the self-aware ones know they’re doing it.
Man, guy saying we need a “revolutionary mass movement” to counter the influence of white supremacists on behalf of a supermajority of Americans…
Yeah buddy, I don’t see you supporting that for any other issue there’s a supermajority of American support on. One of the tricks with Trump is that a chunk of the stuff he says that sparks outrage and incredulity is stuff with majority support.
I can’t help but be concerned that a “revolutionary mass movement” would be far worse. Likely to overturn the Bill of Rights, massively restrict speech, or attempt to implement (and then botch) Socialism. If it comes to that, it’s time to break up the Union.
Congratulations! In an effort to be interesting and unique, you have rendered yourself as boring and predictable as possible — how do you plead? Hey stop photoshopping vaporwave succ memes for a second and listen to me
No.
This isn’t me criticizing you as a human being or trying to make fun of you or anything but an earnest question: what the hell does any part of your description mean? Can you give me an example of how your political stances apply to the real world in a non hypothetical sci fi genre way I can’t picture it
I will answer this question when I have access to a Real Computer, which will be a while.
The culture war mentality is: “Everything bad causes and is caused by everything else bad. Everything good causes and is caused by everything else good.“
Culture warriors do not only want to get popular people to join their cause, they also push unpopular people to join the other side. You can do both at the same time by accusing unpopular people of being on the other side. When they defend themselves, you can crucify them for disagreeing with the good people. When they don’t defend themselves, they must do a purity ritual (http://raggedjackscarlet.tumblr.com/post/156092750438/funereal-disease-misanthropymademe) to escape scrutiny. Name other witches so you won’t be burned at the stake!
Popularity is not the be-all-end-all, but the currency. You can cash in on your popularity. You can also gain more popularity for yourself and cash in on the unpopularity of others by forcing them to either disagree with you, highlighting your difference from the unpopulars, or to agree with you, which you can spin as their submission.
Many of the stranger outgrowths of twitter mobs, The Discourse, hot takes and thinkpiece culture do not directly pick on the uncool kids to elevate the cool kids, but stake out territory for the cool kids to claim. Uncool kids have 48 hours to vacate he premises until they are no longer allowed to have the cool opinions.
The thing is, I don’t think what the racial nationalists want is racism as a terminal value. I think for most of them, there are other things that they want, and they see having an [ethnicity]-only country as the only practical or effective way to achieve these things.
This is why I believe most of them can eventually leave racial nationalism, if we work towards making the conditions right, which requires a bunch of stuff we should be doing anyway even if there were no racial nationalists.
We’ve all seen various Leftists denouncing “Nationalists and their dumb wars.” While it can be tempting to argue the point regarding past interventions, the future of Nationalism must lay in the future, not the past.
It’s important, in attempting to define a new form of Nationalism, to understand that dumb wars don’t just have a price paid in blood and treasure, but also in the national spirit. Dumb wars undermine and destroy Nationalism.
Nationalism is not only an ideology, but it’s also a form of ideological or political capital. The will of the people to support the government and fight on behalf of the country, while necessary to secure the national defense, is an exhaustible resource. It is very precious, for without it there cannot be a nation. Therefore, in addition to acting to promote it, we must also act to conserve it. A nation that can rise up as one in military response has far greater power and sovereignty than those with only fragmented support, as both its threats and defense are more credible.
Propaganda cannot be the answer, as truth has odds of coming out eventually, since it is less in conflict with reality. And it was some truth or another that lead many of us to become Nationalists in the first place.
Think about it. Suppose you get into some dumb, unwinnable war in the middle east or southeast Asia. In order to pay for the war, you have to raise taxes (if not now, then later), diverting resources from the civic goods those taxes might have paid for. To get the necessary manpower, you must either create a draft, which creates opposition to the draft and thus empowers internal opposition and counter-culture, or your have to raise taxes higher and send some of your most loyal men to get shot at.
Then the history comes along later and says that not only was the mission not a success, but you didn’t even get any resources out of it for the country.
Not only does this make people less likely to sign up for or provide material support for the nation’s wars, but they may come to believe that the nation is bad and turn against Nationalism itself.
How much less powerful would left-wing anti-Nationalists be without the Iraq War? How much less powerful would they be without the Vietnam War?
On top of this all, it may end up preventing the country from having the ability to fight wars in ways that it can win. Having sowed substantial doubt about the virtue of the nation’s military action itself, it will be harder to obtain the necessary political will for the required partial cultural conversion needed to ensure the invaded territory is permanently no longer an enemy.
(Of course, there are other factors that can lead to declines in Nationalism, even in countries with less substantial military adventurism. But those must be addressed separately.)
i don't know who else to complain to about this but everydayfeminism just posted an article saying trumpcare was inevitable and we should all be focusing on 'ancestral medicine' instead, including asking our ancestors for healing and going outside more (while being careful not to culturally appropriate of course) and i'm just... honestly floored? some of the stuff that has crept into the 'mainstream sj' collective consciousness is so unbelivable i wanna die
Trying to put a few more of my scattered thoughts on this “hardcore civic nationalism“ thing just so I can synthesize what I’ve seen.
I think this group has a complicated relationship with immigration. There is this abstract sense with which they are pro-immigration because part of being a good nation is having people, but it depends on those national cultural institutions being strong. They are in favor of cultural institutions being strong in part so they can allow immigration, there’s this very assimilationist thought here. They have some opinions on what that national cultural thought should be, but it’s more critical that the thought exists than the precise details of that thought. You can synthesize the idea of their nationalism there, it’s sort of “our nation is so great that other people want to join it”
I sort of mentioned the rightward edge because I needed to separate them from ethnic nationalists, but there is a leftward social democratic leaning edge too. The public works aspect provides opportunities to help people build a society while making sure nobody goes hungry, they’d take unemployment seriously, and anti-racist measures are both good in themselves and perfectly reasonable as methods of building national cohesion. Conceptually, you can sort of view this national culture thing as reducing the need for hierarchy, instead of having society conceptualized by you serving your boss, priest, or husband, everyone serves the national idea and we are all nominally equal. So this can be thought of and constructed as egalitarian.
That is all pretty reasonable, though alternatively under immigration, a nationalism which believes in national cultures and accompanying law bundles can view immigration as matching people according to desired legal/cultural configuration. Therefore, for it to make sense, some level of immigration/emigration should exist, though not necessarily for major net growth.
The thing is, I don’t think what the racial nationalists want is racism as a terminal value. I think for most of them, there are other things that they want, and they see having an [ethnicity]-only country as the only practical or effective way to achieve these things.
This is why I believe most of them can eventually leave racial nationalism, if we work towards making the conditions right, which requires a bunch of stuff we should be doing anyway even if there were no racial nationalists.
What are beliefs common among "hardcore civic nationalists"?
They’re skeptical of globalization in general just like the other
anti-establishment groups, and tend towards anti-interventionism. They’re
generally in favor of public infrastructure and public projects, but
have mixed thoughts on welfare. Assimilation and the
act of building the national culture are a big deal, that affects their
views on immigration which can be flexible depending on their view of circumstances. Seem to shun ethnic nationalism, I get the
impression that some of them on the rightward edge do buy into some form of bell curve stuff
but they’ve decided it’s basically not terribly important, if somebody
isn’t highly intelligent there’s a lot of work to be done that doesn’t
require high intelligence to do. Neither especially pro or anti-market, I think they tend towards “not too afraid of public spending or taxation but somewhat anti-regulation.“
And you can sort of see that
as a third way, it’s the recognition that you depend on the people and
environment around you and therefore you can’t really get away from this
concept of the common good and improving society, but skeptical of
taking it too far. “selfish collectivism“ might be a somewhat trollish way of
putting it. Class-wise I think the people I’ve seen with it are educated professionals, I think this sort of inherits from “Rockefeller Republicans“
@mitigatedchaos, you are sort of close to this but you’re not a central example. This is pretty much random disconnected things I’ve found off tumblr, there isn’t really a big repository or central hub of this that I can think of. I mean, I’m not even honestly sure this is a real ideology or something I’m putting together in my head from people I think speak similarly but who don’t actually agree with each other.
I can’t be the only one that has noticed that modern collective intergenerational ethnic justice incentivizes having wiped out conquered peoples to the last man, woman, and child, because then there is no one to initiate the “lawsuit”.
How many cases do we have of that, and how did it actually work out relative to leaving a small or moderate amount of people alive?
There are other options, which include inter-marrying/etc until there is not enough difference to tell, and thus the equivalent of a lawsuit cannot be pressed, but often this is not very nice, either.
But basically, until recently, just about every ethnic group did some combination of these two in order to obtain and control territory, from what I can tell, with few exceptions. And of course, we’re not likely to hear much about the guys that got wiped out, as they’re no longer around to protest.
You know that Tumblr “Anti-Nazi” FAQ post that ends with “what if I thought I was punching a Nazi, but it was actually just a white dude with a shitty haircut?” “Run.”?
I said that was a terrible idea, but I didn’t expect it to get quite so literal.
Of course, in this environment, who knows if this is real, but this is basically what one would expect. The most punch-happy are going to be the least controlled about who they punch.
Sometimes I worry that everybody, including me, EA’s, silicon valley, the media, and so on should be more concerned about climate change than we actually are.
the most effective thing to be doing at any given moment is trying to take over the world
When are we going to get the North American release date for Aloha Argumate-Senpai!: Discourse Beach and the Emoji no Shoujo Unicode-San supplement? The fan translations are pretty terrible, unless you *intended* to write "that cat is Neoreaction! Slay!" for Yud-chan.
I really hope I never understand all of those words.
I can’t be the only one that has noticed that modern collective intergenerational ethnic justice incentivizes having wiped out conquered peoples to the last man, woman, and child, because then there is no one to initiate the “lawsuit”.
wait wait, is this Ayn Rand having a harem, or a harem of Ayn Rands? I don’t know that much about the people around her except that they were cliquey or something
Scott Adam’s “It’s going to be embarrassing to be anti-trump six months after inauguration“ is funny, but thinking back I saw a fair amount of that type of stuff. People really seemed to think the infrastructure stuff was going to happen, not just on the right, there’s this cluster of anti-establishment centrists that weren’t terribly pro-trump as a person but really seemed to hope something would happen.
As one of those centrists, I should not have overestimated the competence of the Republican Party just because the Democratic Party is stupid. Ofc, I didn’t go proclaiming it to the hills because I always figured it might not happen. He still has a few years left to accomplish this, though.
Didn’t we predict this would happen. They’re coming for your history and nothing is safe from being declared bad and worthy of destruction.
Yes, but there’s a difference.
This will never happen.
This pastor can go gently caress himself.
People are acting like they haven’t been saying this shit for years already.
This rhetoric is as old, if not older than, the Black Panther Party. Treating it like something new just means you’ve been ignorant up til now.
People are acting like white nationalists are just now popping back into existence, as if their dumb marches hadn’t been going on the entire time, and that this is an emergency and we must give social license to left-wing vigilantes to attack people outside of the law. Though in fairness, the confederate statues hadn’t gone anywhere for years, and now they’re being removed in many places.
I’d like to see you and rtrixie make a bet on this.
You’re inaccurate, but only by half.
Left-wingers and American Liberals have been talking about white nationalism, white nationalists, and far-right extremists for years now. They were talking about it all through the Bush and Obama presidencies, as were the FBI and Department of Justice.
They’ve just grown and gotten so big recently that now the right-wing can’t ignore them anymore, so now they have to acknowledge it as well.
I lived through the Bush and Obama presidencies, and the left-wingers and liberals I knew were not doing this “OMG NAZZIS!!” thing at this level. Obviously, some of them ran around calling GWB a Fascist, which is part of why I don’t treat their outrage on this as serious, but it wasn’t lit up like this. There are a bunch of things they won’t actually do that they’d need to do for me to respect their outrage again.
Er, since when is Google 'free' unless your library's easily accessed? The electronics that support Internet access & research (much less proper cross-referencing) don't spring from thin air. Sometimes people are simply not given the time & energy (mental or physical) to keep up. Doesn't mean it's OK to generalize or interrogate any affronted individual, but holy crap does this 'absorb everything by osmosis' approach not work for anyone who can't run the treadmill all day every day.
…someone who understood what i was trying to say, omfg
and also like… do people know what to Google? I do, but that’s because I’ve already been in SJ circles
I mean, like, I haven’t actually Googled “things that offend POC” (and wouldn’t) but I can easily imagine that it, or queries like it, might return exactly the sorts of result SJ types would not want un-woke-yet wypipo reading.
So it’s… my problem is it seems so much like advice from inside the circle. And… dude, we have a country to save. We need to be talking to people outside the circle, getting them to come in. And that means not setting up barriers like “don’t talk to me unless you are THIS woke”
Didn’t we predict this would happen. They’re coming for your history and nothing is safe from being declared bad and worthy of destruction.
Yes, but there’s a difference.
This will never happen.
This pastor can go gently caress himself.
People are acting like they haven’t been saying this shit for years already.
This rhetoric is as old, if not older than, the Black Panther Party. Treating it like something new just means you’ve been ignorant up til now.
People are acting like white nationalists are just now popping back into existence, as if their dumb marches hadn’t been going on the entire time, and that this is an emergency and we must give social license to left-wing vigilantes to attack people outside of the law. Though in fairness, the confederate statues hadn’t gone anywhere for years, and now they’re being removed in many places.
I’d like to see you and rtrixie make a bet on this.
Er, since when is Google 'free' unless your library's easily accessed? The electronics that support Internet access & research (much less proper cross-referencing) don't spring from thin air. Sometimes people are simply not given the time & energy (mental or physical) to keep up. Doesn't mean it's OK to generalize or interrogate any affronted individual, but holy crap does this 'absorb everything by osmosis' approach not work for anyone who can't run the treadmill all day every day.
…someone who understood what i was trying to say, omfg
and also like… do people know what to Google? I do, but that’s because I’ve already been in SJ circles
I mean, like, I haven’t actually Googled “things that offend POC” (and wouldn’t) but I can easily imagine that it, or queries like it, might return exactly the sorts of result SJ types would not want un-woke-yet wypipo reading.
So it’s… my problem is it seems so much like advice from inside the circle. And… dude, we have a country to save. We need to be talking to people outside the circle, getting them to come in. And that means not setting up barriers like “don’t talk to me unless you are THIS woke”
