1.5M ratings
277k ratings

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

Sounds perfect Wahhhh, I don’t wanna

Anonymous asked:

Is cousin marriage for one generation bad beyond the genetic and possible tight family control aspect?

Well, see, here’s the thing.  White people (broadly) have been largely not-marrying-their-cousins for a while now, and they live in societies in which cousin marriage is fairly taboo.  So when white people marry their cousin, it typically is a one generation thing, preventing a whole bunch of snowballing consequences.

I’m sure it seems otherwise on this blog, but I actually don’t have a strong disgust reaction towards cousin marriage.  And if we continued to see rates around 1%, I wouldn’t really care.

But some populations have cousin-married at much higher rates, for much longer times.  So one generation of cousin marriage for them isn’t the same as one generation of cousin marriage for other people.

It isn’t “too late.”  Humans are resilient.  We just have to have them stop doing it now.

Since we don’t have the full lineages of everyone, and I don’t want to go by other categories, I’d rather just throw the (very tiny) baby out with the bathwater and ban it for everyone.

Also, a big chunk of the tight family control aspect is cultural transmission.  So now I’ll have to actually make that post about cultural transmission (generally) at some point, seeing as some things like FGM are cultural so cultural transmission isn’t all nice things like ethnic foods.

gendpol politics social centrism ban cousin marriage anons asks

Anonymous asked:

What seriously separates cosmopoli from ethnonational states? And what seriously makes them worse? Their lifetimes seem comparable to me, especially given that most countries didn't experience a national awakening until kings started consolidating feudal conglomerations towards the dawn of capitalism.

You don’t need a pure ethnonational country, though that can cut down on certain bullshit like what’s happening between the Buddhists and the Muslims in Myanmar.  (Hint: It isn’t solely a story of purely poor, innocent Muslims, but one of those cases of cyclical retaliatory ethnic violence.)

The chief question is, are you willing to do what it takes to make that cosmopolitan polity not descend into retaliatory ethnic violence, potential ethnic predation, and ethnicity-aligned political parties?

Like, if you’re not willing to do that, then what you get is ethnic violence.

If you look over at what’s happening in the British cities, with the child sex trafficking, and grooming, and so on, and not only are you not willing to slam down the iron hand of the state to stop it dead in its tracks, but you won’t even stop them from marrying their cousins at rates way above what is normal or even healthy (Wikipedia, wrt ethnic rates of cousin marriage and assoc. issues in UK, etc), then you don’t really have what it takes to make a cosmopolitan polity work.

And if you don’t have what it takes to make a cosmopolitan polity work, then an ethnic polity is a safer choice.  

This is somewhat disguised by the fact that not all cultures are equally destabilizing.  You can pretend, for a while, if the underlying conditions are right, and succeed by accident.

Additionally, cosmopolitan vs ethnonationalism is a continuum, not a binary.  Well actually it’s a multidimensional space, not a continuum.  But you get the idea.

nationalism politics anons asks

Anonymous asked:

No one who has seriously thought it through believes the dakimakura rumour. After all, why would a chronofelon settle for a mere image?
image

By 2056, every Wikipedia page of any figure of note, from George Washington to clerks for the Song Dynasty, has one of these as the primary image on the page instead of, you know, a painting or photograph.

Disney bought the rights in 2077 and manufactures a line of branded, family-friendly (by 2077 standards) androgynoids.

It makes dakimakura seem quaint in comparison.

Don’t blame me.

This is the future you people chose.

anons asks chronofelony shtpost augmented reality break mitigated future

Anonymous asked:

But Miti, how are your anons supposed to optimize our asks for creepiness and/or offensiveness if we don't know your race and gender? Won't you think of the anons?

Ugggh.  Who do you think you are, Google?

Come back when you’re a multinational corporation physically embodying the threat of a societal panopticon in order to more efficiently sell Authentic™ skinny mom jeans to hipsters, loser.

anons asks shtpost this is a joke

Anonymous asked:

Tbh I really like your politics but find your writing style and incessant self-meming insufferable.

The memeing (#augmented reality break, #chronofelony, #the year is, etc) serves several purposes…

  1. Provide a break from the politics for people that do like it (which is some of them - the guy tagged in the last post about a children’s rhyme on the cybersecurity of cybernetic augmentations almost immediately liked it)
  2. Lower the tone of the blog from Serious Politics into something more playful (and more closely matching my actual energy/focus/seriousness levels)
  3. Obscure my race and sex, which both constitute potential Discourse Attack Surfaces
  4. Fuck over certain kinds of blog attacks by pre-establishing a range for spontaneous tone-shifting.  Various bad-faith social attacks do not deserve a serious response, but regular counter-attacks are too much effort, too, and silence isn’t always appropriate.  The meme persona is an option for twisting and distorting these attacks into something that their authors did not intend and against which they do not have pre-existing defenses.  (Some people put warding symbols on their blogs for this instead.)  

As for the writing style, it is what it is, you either read it or you don’t.

If you only want the actual serious stuff, I recommend the #flagpost and #policy tags.

anons asks politics

Anonymous asked:

I think abstract art suffers from getting associated with postmodernist putting-a-toilet-in-an-art-gallery type stuff, as a class marker of insufferable douchebags.

Yes.

What is visual art about?  At its barest - color, shape/form, composition…

Abstract art, when it is good, is about these things, the far end of a continuum of realism vs abstraction.

And I think a lot of the pushback really is about seeing some kinds of art as a scam, defined totally by the artist’s popularity.

anons asks art discourse

Anonymous asked:

"God is omnipotent" clearly can't mean "God is unrestrained in His actions", I mean just look at Jesus. Why would God go through all that faff with immaculate conceptions and virgin births and whatnot if He didn't have to? Maybe God has to play by some ruleset unkown to us to keep the universe running. Thinking of it like an engine, you can't leave off, say, the intake valves to get better flow into the cylinder even if you're designing from the ground up. That's my theory, anyways.

“Our paper defines ‘omnipotent’ as ‘possessing the maximum possible administrative rights within the boundaries of the simulation-’”
- Anon-kun et al, Boundaries of the Infinite, Tumblr Journal of Experimental Philosophy Vol. VII, 2017

My steelman estimate is that, if we posit a capital-G God, even said God cannot skip steps in computation - that is, in order to find the end of existence, He must imagine it in sufficient detail such that he effectively creates it.

Of course, that still leaves a lot more room for patching and interventions, so my real estimate is that there is no God, or if there is a God, God does something like create every possible reality or some very large subset of possible realities.

anons asks the wooden steeple

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?

“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.

anons asks politics national technocracy victory for national technocracy flagpost
Top Photos