@argumate: “Autism is primarily caused by anime.”
You’re shitposting, but the reverse causality and a selection effect (because anime telegraphs emotions like the landing strip for an aircraft carrier) for unusual neurotypes are entirely possible.
“My nation, why would I care for that? I was only born there!”
And raised there. And educated there. And cultured there.
You’ll defend yourself? You and what army?
Oh, you don’t have an army. The country does. Fancy that.
“How ignorant,” you say, to want to defend or identify with the place with people like you, who speak your language, practice your culture, are bound together for the common welfare and common defense. You know, your home.
Not all homes are good homes, but that doesn’t make homes in general bad.
That doesn’t mean it’s necessary to go to certain extremes, but if you don’t see the appeal of nations, if it looks like only flag-waving to you, you might be a fish breathing water and wondering about the validity of ponds.
Is not, practically, Atomic Individualism the idea that individual with culture X (N+1) behaves identically to individual with culture X (N)?
That proof by induction does not work. Culture is molecular, and what we care about is chemistry, not physics. Metaphorically, of course.
“Well if your culture is so strong it would survive-”
Let me get a baseball bat and smash that guy’s computer. If his computer is so strong, surely it will survive getting hit with a giant metal stick.
What’s that? Computers are complex and expensive and only strong in a sort of economic-utility sense that has nothing to do with physical strength?
Why gee, could it be when Nationalists are talking about the importance of culture, they aren’t talking about pure replicator power, but rather something that’s ‘strong’ more in an economic-utility and social technology sense?
Who would have possibly guessed that?
Turns out HITLER was the time traveler
Yeah, why do you think they made time travel illegal? Because they have some idea what they’re doing and adequately plan for the future?
Fuck no. It’s because the entire Prime timeline was rendered completely inaccessible by one guy who has since spread to 1,489 other timelines, probably over 1,600 by now.
Every time you travel to the past a new world is created. You can never re-enter your own past and change it. You can only make a new one.
Because of Hitler, our original past was lost to us and is now unknowable. He’s the first time traveler, and the greatest criminal in history.
I’m not entirely against the idea of prisoners working on things - the question is, who benefits?
If exclusively the prisoners benefit and the state/corporations only benefit from a resulting reduction in crime, then it does not encourage high levels of incarceration.
If corporations or the state legislators benefit, it encourages high levels of not only emotionally-punishing but also counter-productive imprisonment that harm not only inmates, but also most everyone else who isn’t a crony.
Or at least have them training rescue dogs or repairing fire-fighting equipment or something that is more like a charitable social good.
I mean, if we had prisoners farming vegetables that were only served to the prisoners at the prison, I don’t know if it would reduce recidivism, but no one would be giving kickbacks for it!
“They weren’t slaves because criminals aren’t people” is missing from this
“Hey guys,” they said, “let’s have prisoners perform barely-compensated labor. No way this will have bad incentives that encourage increased rates of incarceration.”
I mean if we’re even going to entertain the idea of minimum ages for shit like voting and serving office we should have to consider maximum ages too.
Disagree. Children can’t vote because 1) biologically incapable of making good decisions yet 2) parents are legally allowed to punish them for voting incorrectly.
Voting because of old age can only be a problem because of stuff like dementia, and then you’d have to disenfranchise all people who are not mentally capable of voting.
what’s currently being done if is a person is mentally incapable of voting, a handler votes for them, which is okay because handlers will probably trend towards voting for candidates that help people who are mentally incapable
we need to encourage more people to vote not disenfranchise them
I’m saying the opposite. Since we won’t consider maximum ages, why are we considering minimum ones? Just let children vote. “Biologically incapable of making good choices” is exactly the same argument for taking away the vote from old people with dementia or the mentally ill.
So what you’re saying here is just a roundabout way of suggesting we should disenfranchise the literally demented and the mentally ill.
And of course, taking your other reply into account, I, too, value the power of soft authoritarian technocratic dictatorship.
Unless, of course, you are suggesting that because some limits are not present due to the dangers in imposing them, other limits which already exist and aren’t particularly dangerous to enforce should not exist?
Might I suggest that the lack of wide support for this policy by a group which consists entirely of people who were once teenagers might not be quite the same thing as the other two examples?
I have no idea what you’re talking about. Why are rationalists so impenetrable?
I’m saying let children vote.
Am I a Rationalist? Hmn. Anyhow, Actually, banning the literally demented and the literally delusional from voting would improve voting quality. The reason it isn’t done is because political operatives, who are terrible people, would immediately begin trying to classify all opposition as either senile or demented regardless of whether they actually are. (See also: how ‘gently’ politicals have handled the word “Nazis”.) This does not hold in the case of children, as there is a fairly defensible line which is applied to all children, and thus political operatives cannot race to classify all their enemies as children in order to disqualify them.
So no, don’t let the children vote.
Not even for school board? Schools have basically no incentive to value students’ day-to-day interests and so will do stuff like block every bloglike website even during lunch hours.
Then again, student-elected officials decided to host lunch concerts and put loudspeakers by the library windows close enough to shake them.
Not even for the school board, but gradually increasing levels of democracy, like gradually increasing levels of alcohol, might be appropriate in some way.
When I was a teenager, I campaigned against my high school’s ban on digital audio players, which were not actually a problem. The question is, how do you separate out high schoolers doing away with bad restrictions and high schoolers doing the school equivalent of looting the national treasury (in this case, running at cross-purposes to education)?