aqouta
No bio...
Friends:
User ID: 75
aqouta
2d ago
I'll drop my take in the interest of breaking that 1000 post mark. I am not a big fan of this, I do not like Trump or the deranging effect he has on politics and wish for him to be defeated the normal way. That said he's probably guilty of this and more likely guilty of the documents case.
I long even more than before for an end to the Trump era. I miss the ability to have actual substantive discussion between the parties that aren't dominated by a rehashing blow by blows of nationally embarrassing stories. The president should be above these kinds of thing. I understand the slippery slope of letting petty scandals give your enemies a veto over who you can rally behind but can it at least be made hard? Would that be so much to ask? That a candidate not actually cheat on his wife with a porn star such that the legality of hush money paid needs to be debated? Surely that bar is low enough.
The toxic Israel Palestine debate where the protestors chant inane slogans at the decrepit president that stands behind Israel no matter what is a breath of fresh air because as stupid as most of the narratives are at least they're about the conflict.
Some have noted that we're already almost into June and it doesn't really feel like a race is on yet. A normal outcome of having two relatively uncontested primaries after two hotly contested elections in a row but even with things not yet ramping up I'm already exhausted. A feeling I think I share share with our two presidents both born in the 40s before disposable Diapers and the Transistor and Color TV.
I don't have a great way to wrap this comment up, or this election. It's probably going to be pretty consequential who wins but I feel like I'm holding my breath until 2028 election.
aqouta
2d ago
The Palestinians were in Mandatory Palestine peacefully living their lives and doing their thing when hundreds of thousands of Jews invaded their country, formed a fifth column, and declared independence at gunpoint.
One of the most interesting thing abouts this conflict that I've had the pleasure of learning since I too like @Folamh3 have taken to catching up on the history is how much you can tell about someone by how they read the tea leaves on this conflict and decide to characterize events. There is enough back and forth over many years that one can justify just about any framing and find facts to fit the pattern. The story to you starts with as some sudden wave of hundreds of thousands of Jews all at once showing up, in a place where there was some kind of coherent community to even betray.
aqouta
3d ago
Then why the constant talk about appeasement and Hitler, if not to get people psychologically ready for a war?
The appeasement of Hitler is just the most recent example of appeasement not working and people keep suggesting that Russia should be appeased by letting them take over Ukrainian territory. You'll note that after Hitler was stopped the rest of the west did not colonize Germany and it still exists as an influential independent country in good standing.
The United States does many things that are not rational. The invasions and occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, for example. Both were unsuccessful in the long term and huge wastes of resources. But, nevertheless, the Americans reasoned themselves into doing these things.
These were not wars of conquest nor was proximity to NATO countries a major factor.
Maybe it will happen, maybe not. Maybe it won't go as far as hot war, maybe it will. But, when I see so many people calling here and elsewhere for dramatic escalation, saying Putin is the next Hitler, calling any move for de-escalation "appeasement", drawing maps of a partitioned Russia, yes, I think the west wants war with Russia. Even knowing it would be stupid.
I'm just not really interested on whether we've hurt Putin's feelings because after he invaded neighbors unprovoked in a war of conquest he gets compared to the last guy in Europe to invade his neighbors in wars of conquest. It doesn't somehow retroactively justify the whole invading your neighbors in wars of conquest thing. You don't get to act like an unhinged lunatic because you're concerned that people around you might treat you like an unhinged lunatic and then pretend your subsequent treatment justifies your behavior. when you escalate and have all the ability in the world to de-escalate you can't call the people you're currently invading unreasonable for not de-escalating, this isn't even behavior we'd accept in our toddlers.
All Putin and Russia need to do is get the fuck over themselves and step out of the 20th century. The whole high school bully act was lame after you graduated and decades on it's just pathetic.
aqouta
3d ago
Until he started invading places caring about Russia was something that got you literally laughed at in US politics. And that some people hate him does not at all imply any kind of invasion. There is zero interest in the west to occupy Russia. Get rid of Putin so he stops fucking around in Geopolitics? Sure. But what is the upside to invading and occupying Russia? Why would anyone bother even if it were realistically possible?
aqouta
3d ago
I'm trying to understand how you and other people on this forum think the war will end. I suppose a frozen conflict like North Korea/South Korea is possible and if you're advocating for that I can accept it's a reasonable position.
Hard to make predictions like that. Some chance Russia eventually grinds through ukraine and wins. Some chance Ukraine expels Russia outside of its pre war border and putin walks it off. Some chance Putin kicks the bucket in the near term naturally or otherwise and then it's hard to predict but seems unlikely a predecessors decides to bother trying to finish the job.
aqouta
3d ago
I wouldn't be willing to condone firing a nuclear weapon into Russian territory. But supplying Ukrainians with weapons is not even in the ballpark of when we start talking about "any cost", those are the minimum table stakes.
reclaim Ukrainian territory.
You're trying to change the frame. There is no such offer where Ukraine draws new borders and returns to peace with Russia, It's fictional and the Putin's equally fictional Casus Belli remains, no serious person would trust a peace agreement he has already broken.
aqouta
3d ago
It's just not really reasonable to call people who support the defense of a nation "pro war". If someone attacks me after making it clear they want to kill me I am not pro-fighting when I defend myself. People who support me defending myself are not pro-fighting. It's unreasonable to demand I or the people supporting me should allow the person attacking me to merely severe a limb or two despite them at no point actually making any sign they'd stop after doing so. There is precisely one pro-war faction and it's the one that started the war and could end it at any time, attempting to frame it otherwise is an absurdity.
And yes, we do have some obligation here, Ukraine get rid of its nuclear capabilities under the promise that this would not be allowed to happen. Where Ukraine goes so does nuclear non-proliferation and frankly and kind of mantle of justice.
aqouta
3d ago
NATO forms a bright line that Russia knows it must never cross. Here is a map of NATO. Russia is encircled and powerless: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Member_states_of_NATO#/media/File:NATO_32_Members.png
What on earth is the fear here? Are we seriously still entertaining the idea that the west wants to invade Russia? For what possible reason? NATO doesn't expand by rolling tanks into its neighbor's territory, it expands by offering protection from Russia which does appear fond of the whole rolling tanks in approach.
aqouta
3d ago
I don't understand how it's possible for you, or anyone, to believe this. Insofar as any conflict in Israel is a "war of choice," the people making that choice are, and have been, Muslim Arabs, whether inside or outside of Israel. For generations, now. If Palestinians stop fighting, there will be no more fighting. If Israelis stop fighting, there will be no more Israel. The commitment of Hamas, its handlers abroad, and most of the people living under its rule is the eradication of Israel. They have never accepted any of the compromises offered to them for more than a handful of years, during which time they have always been sharpening their spears for their next attempt.
Agreed, There seems to be some kind of narcissism shared by both the left and right anti-israel contingent that if America withdrew support that Israel would need to come to some kind of agreement with the Palestinians. This is as strange a belief as that any of the other massacres in the region couldn't have happened without American involvement. Israel won wars before American involvement and would win them afterward, more brutally and with more casualties but they'd win them.
aqouta
9d ago
Is there really a culprit? A crime? I don't know the tone of the comment over there, maybe it was totally mocking, but I also don't really share the fear that someone might notice us anymore. We're not on reddit, we are free of the gigajanny's tyranny.
aqouta
13d ago
I think you're onto something with underdog victory being a guiding principle among progressives. It's why they can't accept any framing that they are actually in power. I think shooting this particular victim complex is also one of the genuinely new things about the Trump right as well, it's a very useful combination of memes to have for motivating a group.
In a more formulaic and low stakes corner of the culture War Ubisoft has announced "assassin's creed Shadow". The series is known for offering open world exploration set in various historical locations and times from the Nordic to ancient Egypt. This installment is appearantly a popular fan request in being set in fuedal Japan.
The culture War angle is that the game has two main characters, a female assassin and a disputed historical black warrior named yasuke. Now I haven't played one of these games in over a decade and am not particularly invested in this title but the response has been a fairly clean case study in marketing by controversy and I think it might be worth dissecting.
In my corner of the web I first learned of the game's existence from the preemptive "man, racists right wingers are going to hate this" posts. And indeed if one looked it was not hard to soon after find right winger racists filling their niche in this tired dance. One can always find bad takes that isn't what is interesting about how this kind of thing develops.
A trap seemed to be set, I don't know which end first broached the topic of "historical accuracy" but because it took the form of what legitimate criticism might look like the culture War quickly fell into a groove of progressives defending the historical existence of yasuke being a real samurai and pointing to other popular media depictions of him as well as pointing out that the assassin's creed series includes other widely disputed historical claims like Benjamin Franklin's possession of a magical golden apple. The anti-progressive backlash is in a hard place because I think there is something legitimate there but the shape of the discussion is not condusive to making the argument.
I think most of the anti-progressive front probably doesn't have an issue with a black sumurai in a game made by people they trust to have making awesome games as their first master. There's something itching in the back of the head of the backlash crowd that the reason we have yasuke isn't because a black guy in Japan makes for interesting segments of blending into crowds but because the people making the game have an anti-majoritarian view. The same thing that gave us yasuke is what motivates someone to put on a "fuck white people" shirt.
This is a feature of the culture War I'm seeing more and more. Proxy battles that few people care deeply about but have features that make them better or worse to do battle on. This game seems like favorable terrain from the woke angle and it's tempting to just give them it but I understand the impulse to fight on the terrain anyways.
aqouta
14d ago
I never know what to do with the religious aspects. My feel is that they influence on big picture things like why the zionists picked that area in particular and they have a special part in making Jerusalem hard to make work with partition plans but most of the time when we're evaluating just resolutions it doesn't seem that important because we're analyzing it from a secular lens.
I don't take super strong sides on the conflict. It seems to have been a game of tit for tat that the Palestinians have always kept playing despite being very bad at it.
The present ruling population of Israel mostly moved to that territory in the late '40s, and from the start has continued violently expelling the ancestors of present Palestinians from their homes to acquire their land for themselves.
This is not a reasonable summary of events. I'll give a slightly more broken down version from my understanding, if I got something wrong let me know and I'll probably update it:
- There were always some Jews in that region
- The Jews are having a bad time as minorities basically everywhere they are and recently had an attempt at genocide committed against them so they are anxious to establish a state where they are the majority.
- the Ottoman empire needs money so they establish the right of land ownership and a number of Arabs end up living as poor tenants under absentee Arab landlords
- Jews buy up ~5% of this land and kick the tenant Arabs off this land (I do think this was a wrong committed but not terribly out of step with the morality of the time) They set up kind of leftist Kibbutzim on this land
- The Ottoman empire collapses and Britain takes over the area which is now called Mandatory Palestine which includes bits of modern day Jordan and Syria. The Mandatory system is kind of where Britain rules for a while and after the mandatory period ends they intend to draw up state lines and hand the reins over to whatever state(s) form.
- There are some small scale Massacres of jews leading to the jews forming some militia like groups, the largest of which is mostly reasonable but there was at least one smaller militia that did its own massacres.
- Tit for Tat escalations continue the brits are pretty unhappy with the whole thing
- Mandatory period is supposed to end in 1948 but a single peaceful state doesn't seem like something either the Arabs or Jews of the region are interested in.
- 1947 there is a UN plan to establish two states Palestinians don't send representation and deny the legitimacy of the plan.
- Israel is declared a state and surrounding Arabs immediately attack.
- Israel surprisingly wins the war and takes lands beyond even the 1947 proposed borders, many Arabs are expelled at this point and this is what is referred to as the Nakba.
- at the same time as Arabs are being Expelled from Israel the Jews are being expelled from the surrounding Arab nations and mostly going to Israel.
- From then to today a pattern repeats of Israel very obviously wishing it could take over the whole region and expel the rest of the Arabs but they never actually need to instigate this because the Arabs in the region reliably attack them and provoke retaliation.
I'm left thinking there isn't a clear "good team" here, the Palestinians did get screwed over but usually in ways where they were at least somewhat to blame. Israel's settlements in the west bank are really ridiculous and should probably be dismantled. It's true that Israel isn't giving Palestinians full autonomy in their region but this is understandable given than Palestinians are nearly constantly lobbing rockets at Israel. Israel seemed, at least before Oct 7th, to be willing to go down a de-escalatory path but the Palestinians Seem totally unwilling to walk that path instead harboring the delusion that they're going to some day expel all the Jews and take all the land.
Given this I will say I do mostly side with the Israelis. They're more western and seem to at least attempt to minimize their atrocities in a way that I don't expect the Palestinians to do. A war where Palestinians were wearing the shoes of the Israelis would be an actual Genocide.
aqouta
16d ago
That'd need to be some strong cause, or maybe you could at request give 1.1x the rate to the general tax fund so you'd need to really want to spite them.
aqouta
16d ago
This really does seem totally out of step with how corporate jobs work in my experience. The people who do the janitorial work in my mega bank are almost all contractor immigrant and there is no existing track for them to become direct employees, they'd apply through the external portal like anyone else. I don't know a single person who's career looks anything like what you're suggesting younger than 55. Furthermore the people complaining about having trouble getting a job have usually studied something and want to work in that field, you just don't take a finance degree through the mail room, which as far as I know doesn't even exist anymore, into an associate role, it wouldn't be seen as relevant experience.
aqouta
16d ago
Worst case, if we accept that males are likely to make more money over their lifetime than females, there's a bias towards having male children.
Could have some of the daughter's share of income from her offspring flow to her mother. Should be some mathematical way to make this work out.
It certainly places the children in a situation where they may decide to earn less salary since some portion of it is being taken away from them with no promise of return.
If this were the case it'd already apply to social security. And, frankly, I would be surprised if a large number of men would be that resentful of a formalized way to discharge their financial obligations to their parents. I'm reminded of Scott on how pledging to give 10% actually resolved a lot of his anxiety of whether he's doing enough.
aqouta
16d ago
Like what? In essence this already happens in a round about way through social security.
aqouta
16d ago
I think to make this proposal make sense, it would be simpler to say that the male whose sperm produced the child she's caring for is on the hook to pay her for her work caring for the child. Rather than the government taking the male's money via taxes and distributing it to women as some kind of subsidy just give her a direct claim to the guy's money as compensation.
Surely the play is to give her a portion of her offspring's income, no?
Your conclusion doesn't really follow form your evidence. If the US government creating a panel to discuss something is enough to steer your opinion on how the future will go then you're destined to be very wrong about a lot of consequential things. Maybe I'm missing something, can you elaborate on why this updates you toward AI doom being a nothingburger?
edit: to be honest, if you think this says anything whatsoever about the risk from unaligned AGI it's pretty much conclusive proof you never understood, probably because you didn't try, the arguments for it.
aqouta
1mo ago
The other end of this liminal space between rock and hard place is that the same people who intend this rule also don't want shelters built.
aqouta
1mo ago
It sounds like what Faceh is after is a presumption of innocence when handling transactions. The banks wouldn't need to prove the transaction isn't part of a crime, just process them. Now, how that squares with the normal fraud screening banks do is another question.
aqouta
1mo ago
To my understanding the consumers of hypnosis porn are indulging in the fantasy of they themselves being hypnotized. Something about giving their ego the justification to fantasize about indecent acts with plausible deniability.
And during the ottoman empire land ownership was created, given to Arabs, some of which became absentee landlords(often by tricking the people who lived there into thinking the land rights were a scam) and later sold some of that land to the jews who moved in and kicked the Arab tenants off the land they bought. Hundreds of thousands of jews didn't show up out of no where, that's not an accurate paraphrasing of what hat happened and the details matter. The ottomans were in no way the same people as the Arabs in the land that they ruled over.
I'm not even fully on the side of the zionists but your description is cartoonishly one sided.
More options
Context Copy link