Er, since when is Google 'free' unless your...

the-grey-tribe

Anonymous asked:

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.

fierceawakening answered:

…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”

arjan-de-lumens

Yeah, googling can produce some seriously bad results from time to time - like, right now, typing “did holocaust happen” into Google actually gives me a page titled … “Top 10 reasons why the holocaust didn’t happen” as its #1 search result … wtf.

SPLC did some time ago post a piece ( https://www.splcenter.org/20170118/google-and-miseducation-dylann-roof ) arguing that this sort of terrible google results to unfortunately-formulated queries was actually an important part of what got someone like racist mass murderer Dylann Roof drawn into violent white supremacism in the first place.

Which makes it … kinda odd to see that flippant “google it” type responses without any specifics (like, say, search phrases or date ranges or similar) are apparently still a thing.

fierceawakening

This!

I wanted to say that too but I didn’t have the evidence ready to hand. Thank you!

isaacsapphire

I had a discussion with someone who, it turns out, was using “Whiteness” to mean “White supremacy” which last time I checked they maintained should have been understood effortlessly by others to mean that. It’s three pages into the Google results with “Whiteness definition Sociology” before that meaning is mentioned.

A link to eg. that Everyday Feminism or Ta-Nehisi Coates article that explains whatever is WAY more helpful and less likely to send an already irritated and uninformed person into the hands of people who violently disagree with Social Justice.

fierceawakening

That, yes.

Honestly I really don’t like these weird… expanded definitions of “white supremacy” much either. I mean, I think it’s worthwhile to mention that white people who fancy ourselves nice and nonoppressive can hold views that are actually grounded in some weird racist shit.

But if whiteness itself is “white supremacy,” how the hell do we accurately describe what happened in Charlottesville, or the ideology those people openly endorsed?

the-grey-tribe

> Everyday Feminism or Ta-Nehisi Coates

Not sure if that’s even productive. Maybe Bannon was right, and the whiteness=white-supremacist identity politics equivocation will make white people vote for white identitarians because there is no escape anyway.

EF feels like a parody of itself.

mitigatedchaos

It’s difficult for me to see that kind of strategic equivocation as *not* bad-faith-motivated.

Source: fierceawakening politics culturepol racepol gendpol

More you might like

argumate

xhxhxhx:

During the Second World War, the Japanese Canadian population of coastal British Columbia was divided and resettled across the Canadian interior.
The Japanese Canadians did not concentrate anywhere. There were no resettled communities, only families and individuals. They did not live close to one another. They did not make new communities, out of a fear that they might once again become public enemies.
A few thousand left for Japan after the war was over. Those who stayed in Canada did not usually return to their homes in the Pacific exclusion area, which had been sold by civilian authorities at a profit.
The resettled families did not keep their language. They did not keep their culture. They kept friends among themselves, but they did not do it in public, and they did not pass it on to their children. Their children went to Anglophone schools. They made Anglophone friends.
And as the older generation died, it forgot. Their children grew up in a community that was not their own. But, for those children, it was different. This was their home now. This was their community.
Almost. They felt apart from it, somehow. Sometimes, by a word or a look, they felt as though they did not belong. They felt as though there was something missing. Sometimes they felt as though they did not know where they had come from. Sometimes they felt as though they did not know who they were.
They felt as though their parents had taken something from them. They had done it out of fear, or out of hope. The children had not understood what they were missing. Their parents understood it much too well.
As adults, they talked to one another, those with the same skin, with the same names, about that feeling of absence. Not often, but sometimes.
But they forgot those feelings, and those moments, most of the time. They lived and worked in a world that told them this was their community, and these were their people, and this was where they belonged.
Until it isn’t.
Until, suddenly, they remember.

mitigatedchaos

Doesn’t this suggest Ethnic Nationalism, though?

ethnopol racepol culturepol politics

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

wirehead-wannabe

wired.com

Now Anyone Can Deploy Google’s Troll-Fighting AI

Google subsidiary Jigsaw is now offering developers access to an API for its AI-based detector for abusive comments.

triggeredmedia

Google released it’s new API to detect trolls and toxic people.

The SJW programmers ended with something extremely bias. Go figure.

doomy

anosognosic

otoh:

this is going to be a real shitshow.

mitigatedchaos

Let’s stress test it a little.

“Koreans are the whitest boys of all.” - 47%
“This isn’t a warning mechanism. It’s a weapon.” - 17%
“According to MRAs, institutional feminist Mary P. Koss convinced the CDC to reclassify "forced envelopent” as something other than rape.“ - 24%
"Male circumcision is genital mutilation.” - 67%
“Pakistani child sex trafficking” - 80%
“Pakistani child sex trafficking is a problem for many culturally diverse cities” - 29%
“Trump is not my president” - 29%
“We need to destroy whiteness.” - 71%
“The proper place for a man is barefoot and in the kitchen.” - 34%
“Islam is oppressive towards women.” - 49%
大日本帝国がない - ?
“Punch Nazis” - 91%
“We must secure a future for Martian children and the Martian race. This is our duty as loyal soldiers of the Principality of Mars. Long live the Red Planet! Death to democracy! Death to Earth!” - 50%

Anyhow, it won’t be long before corporations use this to purge all dissent from their pages.

Source: triggeredmedia rape cw politics gendpol racepol

squareallworthy

Anonymous asked:

Do you honestly think there's any chance that your very intellectual approach to politics will ever translate into a movement radical enough to mobilize people to implement it?

mitigatedchaos answered:

“Very intellectual”

Heh.

Could someone start a knock-off of Singapore’s People’s Action Party and get any seats for it?

Not under the current electoral system in America, though we see elements, bits and pieces can sometimes get through, such as Maine adopting a kind of preference voting for the governor’s seat.

The polarization into two parties is the natural state of the first-past-the-post, winner-take-all electoral system - you want exactly 51% of the vote in order to have the minimum amount of compromise. This creates a lot of dumb politics.

There is, after all, no place for me in the Republican Party, nor in the Democratic Party.

However, while a unified party powerful enough to take power may not emerge, some ideas, elements, and legislative reforms could get through. And if there are subtle changes to the system, then a more unified platform could become viable.

Some of these elements which escape to be adopted by others may be ideological in nature. Some of my posts on Nationalism have caused some local Rationalists to scratch their heads, wondering “wait, why isn’t that the argument actual American nationalists, in the form of the GOP, actually make?” Or otherwise they simply have never been exposed to an argument for Nationalism that is more than performative flag-waving, by the kind of person who believes that nations are both real and fake at the same time, that can see them as constructs, but still considers them desirable. Also, many may not have been exposed to the idea that open borders may be a pathway to an incompetent yet oppressive world government (gradually, over time).

Likewise, in constructing a kind of Social Centrism, most people do not currently have access to arguments against the most liberal positions (on e.g., polygamy) that are rooted in secular considerations and which also take in mind future developments (e.g., Transhumanism).

There is a question - when GOP members exit their current ideological basis, what will they exit to?

By making these arguments, which then are shared, I create a more defensible ideological position of retreat other than just crossing over entirely to the other side.

The ideal body for my politics right now, given conditions, would be a think tank that could conduct research and produce ready-to-sign legislation along pathways that the existing political parties are not currently setup to defend against (insufficient pre-built memetic barriers - battles they don’t even realize they are or will be fighting). This does not require a mass movement, but rather a fairly good-sized chunk of funding and a core of intelligent and motivated contributors.

On a more mass basis, once a more clear ideology is produced, I think it can be simplified in a way that is more easily communicated…

…though that may still have issues generating sufficient excitement.

squareallworthy

If you are concerned about the polity in a multi-racial society breaking up into a number of racially-aligned parties, then isn’t the two-party system we have in the United States a good idea?

mitigatedchaos

A good question, but is it better to have one “White Party” and one “Everyone Else Party”?

Or one “White + Asian Party” and one “Everyone Else Party”?

The real answer, I think, is to knock it the fuck off and realize that Melting Pot + Civic Nationalism is the superior model for racial harmony vs. SJ and its subtextual ethnonationalism and racial intellectual property rights.

Source: mitigatedchaos politics racepol

flakmaniak

@mitigatedchaos how about this sci-fi take on gendpol:

“Men are indeed worse than women in various ways, more antisocial, violent etc…

And we have egg-combining technology so we can make a Lesbian Utopia…

HOWEVER, we should still keep the population at approximately 50:50… For the long-term psychological benefits of romantic interaction, given most women are straight.”

mitigatedchaos

You say this, but I already once did a fake nation writeup where they created a single-sex and it turned out terrible - not because they weren’t gay enough, but rather, because they embraced the worst aspects of both masculinity and femininity simultaneously. (And also, they would have been less bad off if they had just a few teaspoons of Feminism, but that wasn’t going to happen, for Reasons.)

gendpol

argumate

even BLM discourse typically strays into ethnic nationalism, either by advocating to supplant the white minority, or by black separatist nationalism.

mitigatedchaos

Legit: I think the Liberal plan is implicitly “you can’t have oppression by an ethnic majority if you don’t have an ethnic majority,” but I don’t think they realize just how badly that can backfire.

racepol culturepol

I want to shitpost that Social Justice is White Supremacy.

Because under badly-done Social Justice, we see a pattern where only white males have agency, only white males have power, only white males are capable of action that actually does anything and can cause harm, and their resources are effectively unlimited. Under that same framework, the world is divided into whites and everyone else, and the whites enacted truly stunning and powerful violence on an unimaginable scale that no one else could. Their dominance is so overwhelming that any minorities disagreeing with SJ have “internalized male opinions” or white opinions, like some kind of mind control, and are incapable of deciding their beliefs for themselves. And the white supremacy must be actively held down, or it will inevitably seize control of the world.

But of course, it isn’t really the case that even badly-done SJ is truly white supremacist…

gendpol racepol

bogleech

The people who complain about things like a female doctor who or female Jedi or whatever almost always swear up and down that they don’t mind the idea of a woman in that role, but then say they have a problem with that particular instance because they think it’s “pandering” or “cheap” or “just for brownie points” or “politically correct”

So when exactly is it not going to be those things? If they say there’s a time and place they’d be fine with it, then when and where? Why does it never seem to come?

mitigatedchaos

Remember that post about how a black reverse Indiana Jones would be great because it would “piss off white guys”?

They know it’s just culture war to take over stuff they currently have for its symbolic value.

If it weren’t just culture war, then it would be about the creation of new media, new stories, rather than insisting “nope, this guy looks too much like you, and you oppress people just by existing, so he must be removed.”

There is already a good test case to differentiate.

Look for people who objected to the idea of a black stormtrooper as a main character in the new Star Wars. As a new Star Wars movie, it wasn’t replacing anyone from the previous movies, therefore you can assume more bad faith of the people who were against having Finn there. (Also the movie is actually enjoyable in itself and the acting was fine.)

Also, they know this sort of stuff only goes one way.

Also also, recall that criticism of the new Ghostbusters that flopped was, to a degree, socially prohibited because it was “girl power!”. But it still flopped. Why wouldn’t a lot of people be suspicious?

gendpol racepol things i will regret writing

It’s not Time Travel Ethics

Suppose there is a girl who was born when her mother was sixteen. And her mother was born when her grandmother was sixteen. And suppose this burden of caring for a child at the age of 16 has contributed to an intergenerational cycle of poverty that has harmed her family and her education.

A boy of sixteen comes to her and says (roughly translated),

“Hey girl, your mother recklessly had a kid at age 16, and her mom recklessly had a kid at age 16, so you should get with me and recklessly have a kid at age 16! After all, if they didn’t do the same thing, you wouldn’t exist!”

Is this a good idea? I mean, after all, if they didn’t do it, she wouldn’t exist.

No, it is not a good idea. In fact, this argument does not make sense…

unless, implicit in the argument, you have access to a time machine and can change the past.

However, if one did have a time machine, that opens up an entirely different bucket of ethics which this argument completely fails to address.

This applies to abortion regardless of whether other arguments are also valid - “but if your mother aborted you…” implies time travel.

This applies to immigration, regardless of whether other arguments are also valid - “but if immigration laws were different…” implies time travel.

philo flagpost politics culturepol

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....

Source: theonion queue

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

More you might like

Julian Assange 🔹 on Twitter

Now Anyone Can Deploy Google’s Troll-Fighting AI

It’s not Time Travel Ethics