Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
No bio...
User ID: 297
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
23m ago
On what dishonest leftist planet
insane leftist sophistry and blatant lies.
Well, thank you for perfectly illustrating what I've been saying, I guess. Look, you can believe you have an absolute grasp on the truth and anyone who disagrees with you is an insane evil liar, but while I was inclined to let this go as badly-argued overheated rhetoric, throwing a little Mein Kampf quote in there for extra-culture warring makes me think you're just trolling. Knock it off.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
1hr ago
Do you believe your in-laws literally want you dead and your daughter transed?
I suspect not. (If you do- well, I don't know what to say except that must make things tense at Christmas.) This is the problem with such absolute statements.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
1hr ago
I specifically outlined "these are the things I'm uncertain of", "these are the things I'm certain of". What part of that makes you think "this is a person who thinks maximally ICEpilled chud takes, and needs to be deprogrammed"?
I don't. I didn't say that about you (nor have I "called out" anyone specifically). I specifically noted that you recognized the uncertainties (and I avoided getting into where I disagreed with you on specifics).
idk how to tag a user, sorry
@ in front of their username.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
1hr ago
If you could unironically put one of those signs in your front yard which says "In this house we believe," then it is highly likely you are a Leftist. I haven't paid specific attention to your posts so I don't know if I would call you a Leftist.
I definitely would not put one of those signs in my yard. But I know who people who would and do, and while they make me cringe, they are not evil.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
1hr ago
Are you disputing that broad swathes of people on both the right and the left are inconsistent, complaining that you think it's against the rules (or should be) to say broad swathes of people on both the right and the left are inconsistent, arguing that only one side is inconsistent and demanding evidence that the other side is also inconsistent, or just asking permission to try to gotcha someone?
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
1hr ago
Look, you drive a car directly at a cop while they're yelling at you to stop, you're gonna get shot.
Agreed. And?
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
3hr ago
I hope you don't think I'm a mindkilled Trump-loving lesbian-hater or whatever slamming my keyboard. This just doesn't seem like a tribal split thing; it's a case where actually, the truth of the matter has extremely strong video evidence, and one tribe chooses to ignore that.
What is the truth you are so confident about? That she wasn't there accidentally? That she was trying to kill the ICE officer? That there was no misconduct or poor judgment? You're sure? Really, really sure? 100% sure?
You do seem to recognize the uncertaintiess, whether or not our conclusions are the same. (And you don't even know what why my conclusions are. Hell, right now I'm not sure what my conclusions are.)
My point is that I believe the majority of people commenting, and currently making earnest statements about how certain they are about the truth, would argue the exact opposite position, given the same evidence, if the tribal polarities were reversed.
In other words, everyone who says they are looking at the available video evidence to try to come to an informed conclusion--
I don't believe them*.
(FWIW, I mostly didn't believe anyone was even attempting to be honest during the Floyd and Rittenhouse cases either. I believe them even less now.)
(* "Them" meaning the vast majority. Not literally every single person with an opinion. Go ahead and assume you are an exception.)
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
4hr ago
How are you defining "left"? By the standards of the Motte, I am on the left. (I'm more likely to vote Democrat than not, I don't like Trump, I think *-isms are bad, etc.) So does this make me "evil" or do I not count because I'm sufficiently gray? (Go ahead and call me evil if you insist, I am genuinely trying to figure out how you are modeling other minds.)
Personally, I'm fine with Leftists posting here since (at least for now) they cannot engage in their usual tactics of shouting down their opposition
Okay, but that necessarily means we don't let you shout them down either.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
4hr ago
Yes, this is what happens when "My outgroup is evil" is straight up not allowed.
So let me ask you two genuine questions (and to forestall any objections or claims that I am trying to "bait" you-which I have never done, contrary to your repeated assertions- I swear that even if you take this opportunity to insult me in whatever fashion you wish, I grant you immunity):
-
Is it your genuine sincere belief that every single person identified as being "on the left" is an evil liar? That it's literally impossible for anyone to be a Democrat or a liberal and sincere and well-intentioned?
-
If we allowed some of those anti-MAGA posters who wander in to post like you do, would you be okay with that, or are you explicitly advocating we make the Motte a "leftists fuck-off" space?
Because the point of not allowing people to just post "My outgroup is evil" is not that no evil people exist or that you cannot believe your enemies are evil. The point is that if people just post how much they hate their enemies with no nuance, context, or argument, we will just have people screaming at each other and competing for who can sneer most dramatically - unless we are just all circle-jerking each other about who our enemies are.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
5hr ago
Mods are, in fact, allowed to have opinions about posters and posting quality, and while generally the caliber of discussion here is higher than most places on the Internet, you're kidding yourself if you think the same bad habits seen on reddit and X aren't also present here.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
5hr ago
In the rush to post
That is exactly the problem, writ large.
stop the retarded paranoia
Don't do this.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
5hr ago
Yes, I have seen that narrative. "Good was there accidentally" I guess is arguably included in option (f) but I considered it unlikely. Even taking it as a given that she was there intentionally, my point stands.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
6hr ago
I don't find this video particularly clarifying.
I am generally avoiding the discourse around this because I find it so tiresomely tribal and bad-faith on all sides. Rightists screeching that of course Good had it coming for (rationalizations/justifications-but-basically-because-she's-Other-Tribe), leftists screeching that this was murder because (ICE-is-fascist).
It's remarkable that people can look at very short video clips and conclude very firmly and confidently what was in the minds of both the driver and the ICE agent(s). I've watched all the videos from various angles and I have opinions, but I do not think anyone can honestly claim they know what the intentions, state of mind, or even level of awareness of any of the parties involved was. I think it's entirely possible that any of the following could be true (though I have opinions about their relative probability, I do not believe anyone who claims certainty, I think you're just matching your priors to a convenient conclusion):
(a) Good was intentionally trying to run the ICE agent over.
(b) Good panicked and hit the accelerator without thinking.
(c) Good was just trying to drive away and didn't even register there was an agent in the way.
(d) The ICE agent legitimately believed he was in mortal danger and shot someone he thought was trying to kill him.
(e) The ICE agent was a poorly-trained thug who shot a woman who defied his authority.
(f) This was a tragedy with no bad guys, Good panicked in a situation she shouldn't have been in, the ICE agent reacted on an adrenaline dump.
(f) Other variations.
Before your knee flexes and you start slamming your keyboard to argue any of these points, read again what I said: all of these are possible. I am not saying they are all equally likely. But if you say no, (a) or (b) or (c) or (f) are impossible or implausible, you're not being honest. You don't know. You can't read anyone's mind and you can't analyze what was going in in a split-second of video from "eye contact" or a swerve or which direction someone jumped or what someone shouts or mutters.
I have concluded that almost everyone (including our Motte effort-posters) forms a conclusion based not on actually trying to analyze videos and consider evidence, but rather, how they feel about ICE, ICE protesters, immigrants, and Trump. You probably think it was a good shoot if you hate immigrants and lesbian protesters, and you'd think it was a good shoot if there was video of the ICE agent literally walking up behind her and shooting her in the back of the head. You probably think it was a bad shoot if you hate Trump and ICE, and you'd think it was a bad shoot if there was video of Good shouting "I'm going to kill you!" before gunning it straight at a group of ICE screaming for her to stop.
Two observations about this particular video:
- I am pretty sure you can hear one of the agents muttering "Fucking bitch!" immediately after shooting. Make of that what you will. (Yes, yes, stop slamming your keyboard, it doesn't deserve the abuse- I agree that "Fucking bitch" is a fairly normal reaction if you think someone just tried to run you down. It's also a fairly normal reaction from an asshole power-tripping after some Karen shouted at him. Choose your screen.)
- As to people claiming it's AI, it doesn't look like generative AI to me, but we're quickly approaching the point where no one will be able to make statements like that with any certainty either.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
1d ago
This sarcasm does not further the discussion.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
1d ago
You'd be surprised how many Motte Karens there are.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
1d ago
I just warned you, and I also banned @satanistgoblin for similar low-effort sarcastic sneering.
Your record is not as bad as his, but it's getting there. You at least have AAQCs as a mitigating factor, but I still think you need to go take a breather for a day. This case seems to be getting everyone amped up. Come back less emotional.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
1d ago
This is pure culture warring. If you want to make an earnest argument for accelerationism, do so, but this is just "Ha ha more flames!"
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
1d ago
Your low-effort, sarcastic, disingenuous comments are not appreciated and contribute nothing.
You've been warned repeatedly and told consequences would escalate. Your pattern seems to be, ramp it up until you get a tempban, then disappear for months before you come back to start the cycle again.
The cycle ends now. Permabanned, pending discussion with other mods.
I notice you haven't reported her post.
What, specifically, do you think was against the rules?
ETA: To expand on this, @2rafa's comment was belligerent (in a general, undirected way) and arguably "mean." She wasn't attacking anyone personally (except maybe the woman who was killed) nor explicitly saying anyone should die. The implicit message is definitely that the woman deserved to die, but people say "Such-and-such is antisocial behavior and people who do it deserve what's coming to them" quite often. IMO it was heated (and did draw some reports) but then, so was @Chrisprattalpharaptr's response (which also drew reports).
Generally speaking, this comment thread is turning into kind of a trainwreck because everyone is rushing out their most belligerent hot takes.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
1d ago
Well then you'll love this. You have one of the longest mod records here. You are one of those users whose list of warnings and tembans (with zero AAQCs) requires the scroll button. You have been told specifically to knock it off with the ankle-biting "Waaaah! The mods are leftist and biased!" whining.
Basically, everything I told you before.
Because it's been a while, and because we generally dislike banning people for attacking mods or criticizing moderation (even when they really, really deserve it) I am not permabanning you. But you can take a month off, and if you don't come back, I doubt you will be missed.
For everyone else:
Here's yet another tedious exchange we have all the time on the Motte:
Culture Warring Poster: "I HATE MY ENEMIES! BOO MY ENEMIES! MY ENEMIES SUCK! CAN WE KILL MY ENEMIES?"
Mod: "Don't talk like that. This is not what the Motte is for."
Tiresome Anklebiter: "But I agree with him! His/my enemies do suck! Obviously the mod sympathizes with my enemies!"
If you haven't internalized the idea that we discuss the culture war (and the multifarious ways in which your enemies suck) but this isn't a place for rallyng the troops or consensus building, let alone talking about how much you want to curb-stomp your enemies, then you are being intentionally obtuse.
Fwiw, IMO @sulla's post would have been okay until the last paragraph.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
2d ago
This is only partially true.
The goal was to disrupt federal employment as something people think of as stable and secure. The administration knew that they had to do something damaging enough that the next administration can't just undo it in the new president's first month in office. This has certainly been accomplished. Many of the "voluntary" reductions were because of the fear of imminent layoffs and the administration making it clear that those who didn't take the deal would be facing involuntary termination.
The assumption that federal employment is stable and secure (let alone a "sinecure") is no longer valid.
The deal feds used to implicitly be offered was lower pay and benefits in exchange for stability- layoffs were very rare and of course being terminated is difficult (though not as difficult as some people think). Now they get lower pay and benefits, and the current administration has made it very clear they want to get rid of as many of them as possible and will do what they can to accomplish this. They may or may not be successful, but the intention was to go right for the feds who had the attitude last time that they could just wait Trump out.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
2d ago
Is this an argument? A rebuttal? Or just a low-effort grunt?
but they get huge pensions
The old pension system which only boomers have was fairly generous (though still not "huge"), but the current one gives you at most 33% of your highest annual salary after 30 years of service, and requires around a 6%4.4% contribution.
stable employment
Have you been paying attention to Trump's second term?
top tier healthcare packages
Feds get access to Blue Cross/Blue Shield and Kaiser and a bunch of other health plans, but generally not "top tier" ones (or if they take the top tier it's very expensive). The government pays an employer contribution but it's not like feds are getting free or executive-level health care.
and other perks
Nothing that isn't pretty standard (and often better) in private industry.
I'm reluctant to answer both because clearly you want to use it as a litmus test, and because I don't want to start a Rittenhouse subthread, but as I said at the time, I think he was a twerpy hero-wannabe who didn't need to be there, but in the situation he found himself in, he acted in self-defense.
More options
Context Copy link