1.5M ratings
277k ratings

See, that’s what the app is perfect for.

Sounds perfect Wahhhh, I don’t wanna

@ranma-official

I’m not the biggest anarchist either, but anarchism is really important for the same reason libertarianism is: you need people constantly questioning “do we really need this regulation?” and nitpicking everything you do or you just cede a bunch of power to the state for no reason and won’t get it back.

Oh, I came around to a view not so different from that one a few years ago.  The vast majority of states are not so… let’s call it “technocratic” as to say “let us regularly prune regulations that are ineffective and put mandatory sunset provisions into all of our laws”.  Nor, for that matter, is the typical government as careful as it should be about making laws in the first place.  And quite frankly, the typical voter isn’t going to make them behave like that.  So it’s useful to have Anarchists and Libertarians around.

I just still don’t like Anarchism, even if it’s useful.  Of course, you won’t see me calling for punching, firing, doxxing, etc Anarchists.  Sometimes you might see me argue with them on the Internet.

anarchism politics ideology

More you might like

Although, if anything, that post about healthcare costs is perhaps a better summary of my current politics than any.

Efficiency - in government, in the private sector, anywhere - doesn’t just mean some nice bonus that lets rich people we don’t care about have more sports cars.  

As efficiency and production increase, you stop having to triage.  If one unit of sovereign services costs $1.00 to deliver and you have $1.00, then you can purchase only one unit.  If one unit of sovereign services costs $0.50, then you can purchase two.  

If there were two of you and you collectively only had one dollar to spend, then in the first case you have to fight about who gets that one unit of sovereign services, and in the second case you don’t.  

The adequate planning of cities and efficient distribution of resources are absolutely vital.  Surplus regulations don’t just have a cost in corporate bureaucrat annoyance, but in bus stops.  

Private property, government regulations, wealth redistribution… these are tools, not moral imperatives.

Now I know many people would say “sure, but my politics is about using them correctly as tools,” and for some people that’s true.  But a lot of the time that’s not what we see in practice.

So the great question, I think, is how we can make systems of governance better, to promote better and more accurate approaches to policy that more effectively accomplish what will benefit people.

politics national technocracy ideology my politics

Ideocube™ Ideology Partition System™

Because the Political Compass is so 20th Century!

Tired of the old 2-dimensional political compass and its stale oh-so-last-decade memes?  Mitigated Chaos Blog, LLC presents our new, patented, Ideocube™ Ideology Partition System™!

Designed using Science™ and close consultation with Political Experts*, the Ideocube™ launches politics into another dimension!

Our proprietary Tri-Color system allows the expression of over 16 Million unique Political Identities using our licensed Web Color systems on many modern internet browsers, enabling precise establishment of political alignment even within text-only mediums1.

Ideocube™ is perfect for decorating the home, convincing yourself of the righteousness of your political ideas, and training machine learning systems to recognize 3-dimensional shapes describing the political positions of common political parties. Ideocube™ makes a great gift for your nemesis or partner, and is available in a wide variety of packages and formats, including Ideocube™ Adoraboot™ and Ideocube™ Antarctic Blast™.

Ideocube™: It’s Exactly What You Didn’t Know You Were Looking For!™

1Requires support for Text Color by weblog manufacturer.

* As defined in Uniform Blog Insurance Code 1583, subsection 4.

shtpost visual shtpost politics the mitigated exhibition this is a joke mostly what even is this blog
mutant-aesthetic
mutant-aesthetic

I actually wonder if the Alt-Right changed their message to focus more on exit rather than revolution, how the public attitude towards them would change. Like, if their fundamental thesis was something along the lines of this:

“In order to secure the existence of our people and a future for white children, we would like to have our own Amish/Indian sort of deal where we can peacefully withdraw from a society we find repulsive.”

Obviously by and large it would still be offensive to hardcore lefties and true believer progs, but how would it impact the moderates, the average joe? What about the free speech/gamergater/cultural libertarian crowd? Certainly it wouldn’t make them more willing to adopt the alt-right’s white nationalism, but would the idea of giving these people an exit from modernity be seen as more reasonable than them wanting to take over the US and make it a white ethno-state?

mitigatedchaos

What you have to understand is that everyone in politics is incompetent and ideology-huffed.  In part, because if you aren’t, it’s hard to derive enough motive power.

So, while “White People Reservation” is an order of magnitude more achievable, and two or three orders of magnitude less damaging than “make the US into a white ethno-state,” they aren’t going to take it up as their rallying cry.

politics torches in the night
bambamramfan

Liberals who aren’t liberal enough

mitigatedchaos

<various posts>

<bambamramfan discussing lackluster enthusiasm among people for Liberalism vs harder ideologies>

I think part of the challenge here is that Liberalism has to ignore certain truths, which, like the careful balance of an immune system, is okay when an animal is healthy, but becomes a serious problem when it becomes unhealthy.  So yes, there are ideological contradictions, but those only come out when the system is under stress.

Genes matter.  Even just the difference in lactose tolerance can make a difference in some cases (though not much in the developed world), even if the other stuff is heavily confounded and is probably more driven by the environment than by genetics.  

Culture matters.  Not everything that is bad is outside the realm of culture.  FGM is cultural.  Cultural tolerance as a virtue is cultural.

Religion matters.  The content of the instructions in a religion has an effect on the behavior of religious adherents, much like the content of the Communist Manifesto has an effect on the behavior of Communists.

Atomic Individualism is not what humans are “designed” for.  We actually have to live in societies and cannot all hole up into libertarian autarchic fortresses which are immune to changes in the broader society’s culture and ideology.

When the various groups under Liberalism are sufficiently close, this can all be glossed over, and generally is in order to suppress racism, xenophobia, and so on.  The typical example of violence driven by fighting about genes/culture/religion attacks someone who hasn’t done anything personally.

However, the same ideological tools used to suppress this bad behavior also prevent dealing with larger risks that loom on the horizon.  You cannot have someone saying “Liberalism, except for Islam” - though I’ve seen someone say it quietly - even though the rise of various Ethnonationalists and Nationalists in Europe would probably not be happening if Europe had taken this stance.

Source: onecornerface ideology liberalism politics

@bambamramfan

To be sure, but we have to decide whether we think those tactics are just strategically ineffective, or actually ethically wrong. If you try to say “both”, then you’re going to face some hard choices on the day it looks like a nasty tactic can get you a victory (and that day always comes.)

Well, there is not only a question of effectiveness and morality, but there is also a question of trust.

Brutal tactics can backfire, but they can also work.  And there are times and places that even I might be willing to engage in those tactics.

But those tactics are costly, and there is far too much temptation to use them in situations where it is not warranted - in part because political ideologies thrive on a siege mentality and treating themselves as the underdog, even when they are actually quite popular or are even in the middle of going Full Overdog and bulldozing everything and everyone in their path.  

A lot of actual, literal Nazis had to be shot during the second World War to put an end to the Nazi regime.  Since the alternatives were worse, I would say it was correct - and perhaps even praiseworthy - to do so.  

However, lots of people have been tricked into killing and dying for terrible political ideologies over the years, so my bar for when to use these sorts of tactics is a lot higher.  And, here’s the trust part - I don’t trust the kinds of people who are hyped about this latest punching incident to keep that bar high.  And ironically, exactly the sorts of people who are saying “hey, wait a minute” instead of cheering are the people I would trust more on when to initiate political violence.

If we could actually have a nice clear line at “it’s okay to punch people who openly call for genocide or certain genocide”, that might be okay.  But let’s be realistic.  That isn’t going to happen.  Politicals will deliberately blur the boundaries in order to be allowed to punch people they want to punch.  They already distort definitions of words like “violence” and “racism” for their own ends.  There is no reason to believe they would stop.  …and then the counter-punching would begin.

Thus I’m stuck opposing punching Nazis even though under other circumstances I might permit it.

politics ideology
mutant-aesthetic
twitter.com

Julian Assange 🔹 on Twitter

“10/ Here's Singapore's long term prime minister Lee Kuan Yew:”
a-sleepygoldenstorm

What neither side of US politics wants to admit: the promotion of identity politics combined with the declining white super majority has led to turbo charged white identity politics. Since Dems catered for non-white identity politics, Trump and the GOP took hold of white identity politics.  

Most countries that do not have a 70%+ super majority ethnic group have ethnicized electoral politics.

mitigatedchaos

Yes, my fear is that Lee Kuan Yew is right.

Source: a-sleepygoldenstorm politics torches in the night racepol

Anonymous asked:

Current feeling: the slow-onset realization that a well-written insight porn blog vaguely in line with your ideology is in fact in a quantum superposition of passing and failing the Intellectual Turing Test: either they're legitimate, but they're literally insane and believe in a fundamentally broken and incomplete version of your ideology, or they are a hatefully-but-painstakingly-crafted satirical troll persona of someone on the opposite end of the ideological spectrum from you.

Pick the response you prefer the best:

You see, that’s the secret, anon, my dear.  We all believe in fundamentally broken and incomplete versions of ideology, for we are all broken and incomplete people.  As for those fortune favors, we heal our wounds with gold.

If this blog is of a broken and insane version of an ideology, just what ideology is its complete spiritual whole?

A-are you @mailadreapta?? I-Is this about @wrathofgnon??

I’m not WrathOfGnon, I swear!

I have valid release forms for all the models that appear in my insight porn blog.

My lawyer has advised me not to say any more on the matter.

Weaponizing the Statue of Liberty as a political policy is just a discourse lightning rod to distract the Media while the real work of altering zoning laws at the national level is undertaken.  Also remember to check for the #shtpost tag on any post on this blog.

At any rate, I lack the energy to craft an entire blog out of spite.  Usually, on an emotional level, I take anyone seriously until they piss me off enough, at which point I just don’t care about their opinions anymore.  Grudges take too much energy.

anons asks politics victory for national technocracy

@ranma-official 

We’ve got a group that’s too ideology huffed and/or moronic to get rid of the welfare cliff, that wants no caps on lifetime healthcare payouts, that is likely to completely botch a single-payer healthcare rollout and thereby utterly trainfuck almost 1/5th of the US economy, and so on…

And we have a group that is too stupid and/or ideology-huffed to realize that welfare doubles as a form of riot insurance, that can’t get rid of the welfare cliff because they spend their scarce political capital trying to abolish welfare entirely, and which routinely cuts taxes and fails to adequately fund infrastructure in ways that somehow make the entire process more costly.

Overall, this is an obstacle to good policy.

If people in general were somehow able to hold the position that economic growth/efficiency/etc were absolutely vital and also how we can afford to have nice things for our poor, and as such we cannot just encourage people to do whatever they want (and yet should balance that according to actual harms), then we’d see something that was on balance less stupid (IMO).

Doing otherwise is why we have the situation with rising rents because there aren’t enough housing units, because various regulations make it more difficult to build housing units and not just for actual safety reasons, and this is decried as the fault of oppressive white cishet techies somehow.

And like, I’m sure you disagree with my proposal to issue healthcare vouchers, or think a higher minimum wage is preferable to wage subsidies, but I’d imagine you’d take all of that over a ‘solid’ GOP platform without that much hesitation.

politics
ranma-official
theonion: “SAN FRANCISCO—In an effort to reduce the number of unprovoked hostile communications on the social media platform, Twitter announced Monday that it had added a red X-mark feature verifying users who are in fact perfectly okay to harass....
theonion

SAN FRANCISCO—In an effort to reduce the number of unprovoked hostile communications on the social media platform, Twitter announced Monday that it had added a red X-mark feature verifying users who are in fact perfectly okay to harass. “This new verification system offers users a simple, efficient way to determine which accounts belong to total pieces of shit whom you should have no qualms about tormenting to your heart’s desire,” said spokesperson Elizabeth James, adding that the small red symbol signifies that Twitter has officially confirmed the identity of a loathsome person who deserves the worst abuse imaginable and who will deliberately have their Mute, Block, and Report options disabled. “When a user sees this symbol, they know they’re dealing with a real asshole who has richly earned whatever mistreatment they receive, including profanity, body-shaming, leaking of personal information, and relentless goading to commit suicide. It’s really just a helpful way of saying to our users, ‘This fuck has it coming, so do your worst with a clear conscience and without fear of having your account suspended.’” At press time, Twitter reassuredly clarified that the red X was just a suggestion and that all users could still be bullied with as little recourse as they are now.

Source: theonion queue
See this in the app Show more
Top Photos