@ActuallyATleilaxuGhola's banner p

ActuallyATleilaxuGhola

Axolotl Tank Class of '21

1 follower   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 08 09:59:22 UTC

				

User ID: 1012

ActuallyATleilaxuGhola

Axolotl Tank Class of '21

1 follower   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 08 09:59:22 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 1012

The degree to which Americans accept their untouchability and superiority over the Chinese as the norm, and flinch when this assumption is punctured, is just astounding and unsettling. This NBA story would be a nothingburger, if not for the implicit «wait, those yellow monkeys got an Imperial Citizen to bend the knee?» gasp.

This just sounds like a childish sneer. I'm no fan of the GAE but until recently it was completely normal to believe that your tribe or nation was superior to others. I do think America is better than China in pretty much every way that matters and that American people are for the most part better than Chinese people, mostly because China is so damaged. Applied Marxism and government thuggery really did a number on the (mainland) Chinese. Their culture and morals are degraded. Not just different, but degraded. So yeah, I do find it disgusting when American companies kowtow to Chinese pressure, in the same way one might be disgusted at anyone acquiescing to the demands of the Japanese Empire, or the Nazi State. Perhaps you feel the same about Putin.

It's okay to approve of this, but please stop the underdog act.

Americans can't do this because they haven't woken up to the reality of what China is like. I still hear people tell me about the "huge" "middle class" in China (lmao), how only the government is bad and they're just like us, etc. etc. So they have to invent a story for themselves so they don't feel like they're "punching down." But we are punching down, and we should be. Along with the rest of the West.

I don't really understand the concerns scattered throughout this thread about Musk suppressing criticism of his companies. The problem with pre-Musk Twitter censorship was that it was aligned with most other large platforms censorship policies, making it genuinely difficult to discuss or mention and handful of tabooed topics with more than a small audience. I don't think Google or Reddit employees (or for that matter, the employees of Twitter itself) have the same zealous ideological commitment to defending Musk's business interests that they do for Stopping Hate and Protecting Trans Kids and Black Bodies, and in fact many seem hostile to Musk. So I doubt he would be able to censor criticism successfully even if he wanted to.

And secondly, why would he want to? People have been shitting on him and his companies for years and it doesn't really seem to have mattered. He's recently positioned himself as pro free speech. Why would he (1) contradict his stances and lose a bit of moral high ground in order to (2) censor criticism that doesn't really affect him, only to (3) fail at censorship because his underlings hate or are apathetic toward him? None of that makes sense.

Would you rather live in a socially conservative Denmark or a [insert you favorite ideology] Guatemala?

You and me both, man.

Fair enough.

"Studies show" isn't the be all end all of certainty (effectiveness of parachutes, etc). It's an open secret that Indians in management at many large tech firms in America preferentially hire other Indians to such a degree that entire departments become Indian, often of specific castes (probably eliding some nuance here but I'm sure some of our resident Indian longposters will show up to nitpick).

How many studies on Indians preferentially hiring other Indians are there? A quick search came up with a ton of studies about Indians and Pakistanis getting discriminated against but zilch on Indian nepotism in U.S. tech hubs, so by your standards anyone who disagrees ought not trust their own lying eyes. Studying hiring practices of brown people (Indians) that disadvantage mostly white and Asian candidates in gauche so it is just not done.

So it goes with overrepresentation of Jews. Can you imagine a serious academic discussion about the topic, not to mention any affirmative action to correct the I can't because it would be immediately rejected, the researcher blacklisted as an "anti-Semite" (what does that even mean anymore), and discussion in the public fear quashed.

Here's the part where I have to prove my bona fides lest I get accused of being a 4chan pol poster. I don't think there's an international Jewish conspiracy or even a national one. The vast majority of Jews don't coordinate outside of their immediate networks, just like most people. There is however a "perfect storm" (for lack of a positive term) of factors that lead to Jewish overrepresentation. Like Indians, Chinese, Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, and many other communities with a strong group identity, they feel warmly towards and elevate their own (this is a good thing IMO). But, they also have a siege mentality that strengthens these feelings, cultural traits that happen to make one more successful in the modern information age, and higher IQs on average.

So there's no mass Jewish conspiracy, it's just a lucky confluence of genetic and historic factors, but AA proponents are still hypocritical for ignoring it, and whites should not be scolded for Jewish success by statistically aggregating the two.

And finally (and perhaps most controversially) the suppression of any "noticing" of this fact is extremely creepy. Wouldn't most people be concerned if there was massive overrepresentation of Scientologists, or Iranians, or [insert your favorite identity group] in positions of power? It would demand an explanation.

surgeons were much more of a mixed bag and good ones could be very good given the technological limitations of the day.

And worst case, if they botch your amputation, you get a discount on your next haircut.

This is almost certainly true. In my experience, they compare their WEIRD acquaintances with WEIRD-mindcolonized non-Westerners and conclude that because everyone cares about Ukraine and climate change and reads and agrees with the NYT, regardless of nationality or race, we must all be the same on the inside. Next time you talk to someone who has "lived in China" or "worked in Tokyo for 5 years" consider that they may have never left their foreigner bubble or, even if they have, they spent time around non-Westerners who were Western-educated and, importantly, were the kind of people who preferred to hang around with Western foreigners.

Did they want western-style atomizing individualist freedom in the first place?

There is freedom in social obligation and in existing in a definite hierarchy. You are free to focus on things in life outside the culture war, freed from an obsession with the political that has seeped into every aspect of western life, even into the formerly sacrosanct household, poisoning the most fundamental human relations (man/woman, parent/child).

Likewise there is a sort of slavery in western "freedom." Slavery to vice born of anomie. Nothing matters, all choices and lifestyles are equal. Many people experience a sort of analysis paralysis and just choose the past of least resistance. Not to mention the nigh-mandatory participation in politics; as they say, you may not be interested in it, but it is interested in you, and it's not going to leave you alone (and some true degenerates engage in it willingly, even spending their free time furiously refreshing a certain CW thread...).

Consider that your definition of "freedom" is one among many.

FWIW I remember this blood clot story floating around as far back as mid-2020. I don't doubt it's true, but I feel like someone would've made hay with this by now if it actually proved anything of consequence.

China didn't have protestors trying to storm Zhongnanhai last year, China doesn't have homeless people with 18 prior arrests raping joggers in their richest, most prestigious city.

While it's been a decade since I've lived in China, I just have to disagree with this. Living in China and talking to Chinese people opens up a vast pool of "common knowledge" that is just not available to Westerners since it's not reported in the media and since there are a lot of pro-Chinese westerners in China or Westerners who are (rightfully) afraid of posting anything critical of the govt online. There is a shit ton of stuff that happens in China that you'll never hear about. Most of what happenes, actually.

Homeless dudes might not rape you in the park in China (though then again they might, if you are one of the non-persons living in a slum or migrant laborer camp!) but a well connected person like a school principal, police officer, etc very well might sexually assault you or your daughter, multiple times, and there'd be nothing you could do about it. For extremely obvious reasons this stuff never gets reported -- most people just STFU about it to avoid any retaliation. Another example -- you might also get your ass kicked by local thugs who pay money to the cops, and nobody will ever hear about it. You could also get defrauded or robbed, and the cops are either too apathetic or again, on the take, so nothing will be done.

All of that to say, don't believe that China is some sort of "law and order" society. It is, but in the same way the late stage USSR was. The laws exist to protect and advance the interests of the powerful, and crime statistics serve to burnish the country's image, not to actually document how much crime is taking place.

But aren't we forced to conclude that it's safer for your average middle-class person than the equivalent US city?

It's apples and oranges. First, "middle class" in the way that Americans would understand it is ridiculously infinitesimal proportion of the overall population. Not based on income parity, but on the trappings of a middle class lifestyle. By almost all standards the vast, vast majority of Chinese, even city dwellers in "tier 1" cities, are still living in poverty.

Second, there's almost certainly less random street crime in China, but that's because the local/provincial/national government has a monopoly on crime. It's like living in cartel-controlled territory, you're not gonna get mugged by a freelancer, but if a cartel member wants your car or your wife or whatever, you're fucked. Which leads to my next point...

Even so, could they really cover up 75% of crime, the minimum they'd need to be on par with the US?

I don't know, but maybe! A lot of people report crimes in the U.S. because there's string faith in the police and justice system (well, until recently perhaps). To extend the above metaphor, who are you going to call when you get your ass kicked by a cartel member? The police? lol! So the crime that was committed against you never officially happened and it doesn't end up in the stats, along with the vast majority of crimes. Look at our low crime rate! Obviously the metaphor doesn't work completely because cartels do have to vie against the police and federal govt for power, but in a place where the government is essentially just one large corrupt mafia, there's no such need. And we haven't even gotten into how Goodhart's Law affects crime statistics if your party boss has tasked you with reducing X crime by Y percent, it's an open secret that official stats are often tweaked or fabricated.

We had those rape gangs in Britain who were somehow hidden for 20 years.

This is IMO analogous to my example above in that the city government and police force were in cahoots to cover this up for two decades. Only imagine that there are no independent journalists or disinterested higher levels of government to blow the lid off the systematic abuse, and in fact you're liable to end up imprisoned or dead if you dare try to expose thr powerful people behind the coverup.

But generally, people getting raped by strangers, getting their catalytic converters stolen or having a high-profile politician's house broken into by some weirdo - that's more obvious. People notice murders, they notice drug-addicts in the streets, broken glass and so on.

The Chinese government has a tremendous amount of control over the online narrative and complete control over traditional media. You and your neighborhors might notice that there are more killings of robberies, but if state finds that fact embarrassing, good luck getting the news out. I'll concede that in the tier 1 cities (esp Shanghai and Beijing) they are much more likely to actually keep the streets safe, but for the other 99.9% of China where there are fewer foreigners and the population is less Westernized/internet savvy, almost anything could be going on.

But nobody in the West thinks or acts this way, and the laws are contrary to it. For example, pedophile lifestyles are not considered to be equal, and people very frequently act as though they think that things matter.

Pedo lifestyles are outside of the Overton window but only for the time being. There's no magic principal limiting the endless expansion of rights and tolerance. It'll never happen, and when it does, you bigots will deserve it.

people very frequently act as though they think that things matter.

I think you know what I mean, but in case you don't:

"You do you"

"Speak your truth"

"lived experience"

Just a few popular phrases in the current zeitgeist that demonstrate our society's relativistic outlook. You can care about saving the whales, or global warming, or whatever, but if you claim that your cause is the _most important _ and that others must get on board, you're an asshole who needs to mind his own business. However I won't deny that recent progressivism seems to be bucking this trend.

Even people in such a thoroughly politically apathetic and nihilistic country as Russia found that politics was interested in them once they found that they or their children were going off to be under fire in the cold mud of Ukraine.

What? This isn't what I'm talking about at all. This example stretches "political" to meaninglessness. People have suffered from war since people began living in cities, are you trying to claim that a 12th century German peasant lived in a world as politicized as that of a 21st century American?

I think you've replaced 'freedom' with 'a good life.'

I'd rather have a good life than freedom, and I expect just about anyone who is not pathological in some way would want the same. I doubt that third world farmers who are already living good lives are pining for corrosive American-style freedom to be imposed on their families and communities.

But it's fair to note that if you want to go be Amish as a first worlder that option is available to you.

Could you explain what this is supposed to mean? Why would someone need to do that? I live a modern house. I'm in a monogamous relationship with my wife and we both occupy traditional gender roles. We spend most of our time raising our three kids, doing chores, playing music, and doing active stuff outside. We attend weekly religion services. Etc etc. I guess this was some gotcha along the lines of "if you like the Taliban so much why don't you go live like them by giving up the trappings of modernity and living with the Amish," but I can live a traditional life without doing that.

I don't think this is a very charitable response. I said

There's no magic principal limiting the endless expansion of rights and tolerance.

I didn't say that leftists today secretly desire to legalize pedophilia. I imagine that many of them would be shocked and disgusted at the idea. But normie leftists in the 70s would have been shocked and disgusted by gay marriage and PDA, and leftists in the 90s would have been shocked and disgusted by puberty blockers and the trans movement today. You can't tell me the slope isn't slippery when we've been sliding down it my entire life.

This is where a lot of people would bring up consent, but it too has proven slippery and malleable. How can it be true that children are incapable of consent, but at the same time they're fully capable of deciding their gender identity and demanding drugs that cause irreversible physical and psychological changes? Sex between a minor and an adult also seems to often cause irreversible changes to the psychology of the minor. For the time being we still refer to those changes as "damage" but I don't see a solid reason why given the way things are heading.

(if you want to reply: "wHY yOu dEFeNd pEdOS? dIe pEdO sCUm"!, thanks for proving my point)

Can we not do this on The Motte?

While I mostly share your feelings, some more classic(?) styles of dance like swing or line dancing can be laid back and fun, more of an opportunity for everyone to get together and have a good time rather than a status competition.

This sound really similar to the "cities are IQ shredders" argument. IMO the only way to fix this is by gov't fiat since the benefits from incentivizing eusocial/high IQ people to reproduce accrue to a society as a whole over a long time period rather than to a specific company or individual, and so they are not selected for in a liberal, capitalistic, relatively hedonistic society.

This rather undermines the line:

corrosive American-style freedom

Doesn't it?

Not at all. It takes quite a bit of effort from my wife and I to keep harmful influences out of our home, and it's only going to get harder as our kids get older.

I wasn't specific enough in my post. No need to tell me to "have fun being compared to Ceaușescu." I don't think it's a good idea for the governments in present day western democracies to try to implement pro-natal policies for exactly the reasons you described in your post. These policies wouldn't address whatever phenomena are causing men and women to delay or forgo having children. You would first need to fix those issues. What I was trying to get at in my previous post was that even if you fixed those issues you wouldn't be able to rely on the market or individuals to encourage high IQ people to reproduce. Individuals (absent religious belief, and sometimes even with it) and the market have short time horizons. You would need a state, a church, or some institution with deep and secure foundations to invest in something that will only show dividends after several human lifetimes.

What utility could be gained from hearing them speak, other than finding out what it is that their handlers want you to believe?

Pretty much this. I'd like to see whether Australia has its own state narrative or whether it just has one derived from Turbo-America's narrative. But first I'd like OP to write up a summary of the interesting bits (pinging @magic9mushroom). As a Motteposter I can stomach 80,000 word manifestos with ease but I'm allergic to any video more than 3 minutes long.

I've already seen several articles warning about/laying the groundwork for this (depending on your perspective). Google "red mirage."

I think it must have been something last minute because making a half-ass announcement like that is burning some credibility, as well as a wasted opportunity to be the first to maneuver and scare off his political rivals in the GOP.

I'm not so sure. There's a reason that "two more weeks" is a flippant meme used frequently against MAGA people, Q believers, and low-information dissident rightists. The ecosystem of grifters that has sprung up around these people is practically always promising some big revelation ("trust the plan," "tick tock," "release the kraken," etc.) and it never fails to reel in and rile up the true believers and hardcore partisans.

This just seems like more Trump showmanship:

"Coming straight to your living room this November... an exclusive sneak peak of The Trump Saga, Part 3... The enemies of America and Freedom shall tremble... Libs shall get owned... Mysteries shall be revealed... Tuesday, November 15th...at 8 PM Central... America Shall Be Made Great Again... Only on Truth Social."

People eat this stuff up.

Can you briefly expand upon why? I only vaguely know who he is. I've seen him in TV a few times as a talking head but that's it.

What's with the extreme Polish seething relative to other post-Soviet states? The most irrationally hateful anti-Russian posters I see online are Polish. Many Eastern European countries suffered under the Soviets, but AFAIK there wasn't anything uniquely awful about Poland's experience? Perhaps "Russian Oppression" has just become central in their national historical narrative in a way that it has not in other Eastern European countries? Like slavery for Black Americans, the Japanese occupation for Korea, the "Century of Humiliation" for China, etc.

Have you been paying attention to Eastern Europe? At all?

Did you read my comment? At all? Climb down off the righteous indignation. I asked:

What's with the extreme Polish seething relative to other post-Soviet states?

Key point being "relative to other post-Soviet states." Many Eastern European countries have unresolved border disputes. So what? That doesn't explain at all why I have observed Polish posters writing way more genocidal, warmongering stuff towards Russians compared to other former Eastern bloc nations.