Oceans Yet to Burn

[Oceans Yet to Burn]

[elementarynationalism]

JUST GAVE MY KIDS SQUIFFY EYES, A DOUBLE DIGIT IQ AND A CLEFT LIP.

#sorrynotsorry

[mitigatedchaos]

I FUCKING CALLED IT! THEY’D RATHER NORMALIZE COUSIN MARRIAGE THAN BE ACCUSED OF “RACISM”

[slartibartfastibast]

Dude, if they don’t mind normalizing rotherham-style child trafficking, they definitely won’t mind a manyfold increase in birth defects.

[mitigatedchaos]

Not less than three months ago, US dem party members themselves told me this would not happen.

Now I must continue my experiment by hunting down the original tweet and seeing if they decide that wanting to prevent cousin marriage was racist all along.

[cromulentenough]

@rapid-apathy

It’s not part of islam in the sense that islam says you SHOULD do it, but it’s part of it in the sesne that islam says you’re ALLOWED to do it.

The rule is there’s a list of people you CAN’T marry, and anyone not in the list you’re allowed to marry, and the list doesn’t include first cousins in it.

marrying first cousins isn’t islamically preferred or anything like that.

[mitigatedchaos]

Which means it might be possible to stamp out if the Left don’t backstab the rest of us on it.  

Cousin marriage is the bad for integration, bad for women, bad for children, and bad for the health service.

Also, update: It seems that the program is real.  Let me know if any of y’all have watched it.

[Oceans Yet to Burn]

“Cats lack loyalty to the family and the state,” she said. “Dogs are the true right-wing animal.”

It wasn’t long before the BuzzHuff article appeared…

[Oceans Yet to Burn]

[elementarynationalism]

JUST GAVE MY KIDS SQUIFFY EYES, A DOUBLE DIGIT IQ AND A CLEFT LIP.

#sorrynotsorry

[mitigatedchaos]

I FUCKING CALLED IT! THEY’D RATHER NORMALIZE COUSIN MARRIAGE THAN BE ACCUSED OF “RACISM”

[slartibartfastibast]

Dude, if they don’t mind normalizing rotherham-style child trafficking, they definitely won’t mind a manyfold increase in birth defects.

[mitigatedchaos]

Not less than three months ago, US dem party members themselves told me this would not happen.

Now I must continue my experiment by hunting down the original tweet and seeing if they decide that wanting to prevent cousin marriage was racist all along.

[Oceans Yet to Burn]

[elementarynationalism]

JUST GAVE MY KIDS SQUIFFY EYES, A DOUBLE DIGIT IQ AND A CLEFT LIP.

#sorrynotsorry

[mitigatedchaos]

I FUCKING CALLED IT! THEY’D RATHER NORMALIZE COUSIN MARRIAGE THAN BE ACCUSED OF “RACISM”

[Oceans Yet to Burn]

[mutant-aesthetic]

@lets-talk-about-politics replied to your link: Politico: I Found HanAssholeSolo’s anti-Semitic…

So this backlash, the death threats, the intimidation, the violence, all of that is justified?   

The backlash in terms of people rightfully decrying CNN and raising cain, I think that’s a very good thing. Obviously the more extreme response I don’t condone, much in the same way I don’t condone a bear eating the drunk moron who tries to wrestle it. But much like trying to wrestle a bear while shitfaced, trying to police public discourse in the age of the internet has consequences, and reporters are not magically immune to the consequences of their extremely poor decisions.

We teach people that freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences. We seem to forget, however, that the same thing applies to freedom of the press.

[Oceans Yet to Burn]

mercurynews.com

Big Sur coast has grown 13 acres from new landslide

From air, scientists shoot three-dimensional images of our sudden growth spurt — an exhilarating event for a state used to watching its edges erode.

[collapsedsquid]

You know what that means.  It’s time to homestead!

Or wait, can I homestead, or does this new land belong to the owners of the mountains it fell from?  Dammit, this homesteading stuff is so confusing.

[mitigatedchaos]

“That isn’t how dirt works,” the Statist said.  “’Land’ is just a useful abstraction for the unsubmerged surface of a volume of minerals on a planet.”

“This here is my land!”  The man objected, as the cliff crumpled behind them, sliding into the sea.

[Oceans Yet to Burn]

[feels-by-the-foot]

Probably because when Trump said it, he was explaining how America could be made better. 

You seem like one of those people who thinks that America is terrible no matter what. 

[klubbhead]

Also, the slogan was LET’S MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN and not AMERICA SUCKS, huge difference.

[ranma-official]

just to qualify: america does suck

[mitigatedchaos]

Nah.

But it isn’t living up to its (enormous) potential.

[squareallworthy]

Is there any country currently living up to its potential?

[mitigatedchaos]

Some countries are closer than others. America, as a continent-spanning superstate with abundant natural resources and a major high tech imdustry, has more potential than other countries, and thus has a bigger gap to try to live up to.

[Oceans Yet to Burn]

[ranma-official]

one example of Americans’ cultural obsession with people getting things they don’t deserve (I think it’s partially @bambamramfan’s favorite Lacan stuff but not fully) I want to bring up is indeed healthcare related

when you bring up the topic of universal healthcare, people insist that universal healthcare is bad actually because it covers people who are fat and people who smoke. not necessarily that they’re a drain on the system to such an extent that they’ll break it, but that these people negatively impacted their health and will benefit nonetheless

there’s a lot of counterpoints you can make here. what’s a decision that ruins your health that means you need to go bankrupt because of hospital bills? Moving to a city and breathing poisonous air? Buying a car? Serving in the military?

Isn’t that just an intentional slippery slope towards “pre-existing conditions” nonsense?

Doesn’t free healthcare also cover free dietology advice so people don’t become fat in the first place?

Isn’t it absurd to think the only reason people don’t become fat or take up smoking is the expensive hospital bills, or that it even factors into the equation?

but honestly I want to focus on this ridiculous assumption that the real problem with healthcare is making sure people who access it “unfairly” stop doing so, and breaking the system completely to spite them

[ranma-official]

and honestly I’m no HAES blogger, but if you think that people reading wikihow guides to stiching their own wounds in order to avoid going to the doctor, number one bankruptcy cause being hospital bills, and hundreds of thousands dying from preventable causes is optimal because some of them are fat, your view has some glaring issues

[mitigatedchaos]

This is partly an intuitive normie understanding of the free rider problem and incentives.

The issue is that while normies are picking up on a real issue, normie understandings are all running at level N=1. There are ways to manage the incentive issues, but only at higher levels of contrarianism/synthesis.

Also, I really ought to dig up that article showing that the effects of the US being some weird mix of developed and underdeveloped impacts the costs of healthcare. It may be a tougher nut to crack than it looks. (But man, would I love to save 5% of GDP.)

[Oceans Yet to Burn]

[mitigatedchaos]

@collapsedsquid

As far as I can tell, even though uneven exchange of trade between nations means that someone, somewhere must be taking on debt or selling off assets, only Nationalists actually care about the trade deficit.

The Left in general would prefer to see the end of nations, and want “reparations” to go to “brown people” from the developed countries for the sins of colonialism.  (Never mind the colonialism of their own movements.)  

The Liberals also want an end to nations, and everyone singing along happily together, but under Capitalism.  Also they really are individualists, so they don’t think countries have a ‘right’ to hang onto their wealth.

The Capitalists like it because, aside from making the money themselves, weakening nations and loading them up with debt messes with the state’s abilities to regulate their behavior and make them do things like quit using child labor.  Further, weakening nations weakens the states themselves, but most people cannot see this.

“Global trade, but we don’t keep a net trade deficit or surplus across the total of our trade with all nations” would likely be beneficial to American workers, but who cares about that?

[collapsedsquid]

Are you so sure nationalist elements are opposed to this?  It’s the other side of the account you want to pay attention to, the capital account. It’s about America’s role as the global hegemon.  Having the US dollar as the global reserve currency means that the US can use to enforce it’s will.  Nations stockpile US dollars to fend off the IMF.  It’s about increasing the desire of others to hold US assets. The trade deficit is the result of decisions the US has made to increase it’s national power since the Second World War.

[mitigatedchaos]

It depends a lot on what US assets they’re holding.  In general, to maintain sovereignty, you don’t want foreigners owning all of your real estate and other assets unless you’re planning to purge their ownership without compensation later.  If they own your physical dollars, that may not be as big of a deal, since you can unilaterally change your currency if necessary, leaving them with piles of worthless paper. (That and, of course, significantly strengthening China is not a good long-term plan for American hegemony.)

Although, this does make me curious based on the level of implied competence in the ruling elites’ actions based on your evaluation, what do you think the purpose of the Iraq War was?  The purpose of the Euro?

Though, to refine the previous statement, it isn’t that all Nationalists want to balance the trade deficit, but rather I think most people who want to balance the trade deficit are going to lean Nationalist (prioritizing the nation’s workers over capital or foreign workers).

[Oceans Yet to Burn]

@collapsedsquid

As far as I can tell, even though uneven exchange of trade between nations means that someone, somewhere must be taking on debt or selling off assets, only Nationalists actually care about the trade deficit.

The Left in general would prefer to see the end of nations, and want “reparations” to go to “brown people” from the developed countries for the sins of colonialism.  (Never mind the colonialism of their own movements.)  

The Liberals also want an end to nations, and everyone singing along happily together, but under Capitalism.  Also they really are individualists, so they don’t think countries have a ‘right’ to hang onto their wealth.

The Capitalists like it because, aside from making the money themselves, weakening nations and loading them up with debt messes with the state’s abilities to regulate their behavior and make them do things like quit using child labor.  Further, weakening nations weakens the states themselves, but most people cannot see this.

“Global trade, but we don’t keep a net trade deficit or surplus across the total of our trade with all nations” would likely be beneficial to American workers, but who cares about that?