ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
No bio...
User ID: 626
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
2hr ago
When they go after people leaving skid marks on rainbow crossings, is it because LGBT activists are so violent?
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
3hr ago
Why are the other ones worse than this one? Also, is this the final verdict on whether this sort of thing is ok? No one is going to flip out anymore, if you pin that sort of thing on a left-winger?
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
3hr ago
At worst, they’re an emotional vortex that will suck you in and spit you out.
+1 on this @Skulldrinker. Speaking of spergs, we seem to have a built-in magnet for these kinds of people, and many of us had to learn the hard way to ignore it. Be one of the smart ones that learns it from others, instead of doing it the hard way.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
15hr ago
What is the breaking point? At what point does the logistics, infrastructure, and labor fail to support the bloated mass of the new? At what point will the cultures, artists, and creativity of Europe be crushed under a mass of a billion immigrants, a throng of unproductive mouths to feed? Will it go out in a bang or a whimper? Will it evolve and find a new way to thrive, or will it be absorbed and cannibalized into something unrecognizable?
I hate to break it to you, but the call is coming from inside the house on that one. The immigrants don't care either way for this stuff, and "artists of Europe" are, among others, the ones leading the way here. I used to think there's a breaking point, that someone at some point is going to see things are not working the way they're supposed to, but at this point it seems clear that this is what our elites want, so this is what we'll keep getting.
Depends what you mean by "restricted". Once we're that situation, it's not particularly realistic for A's to restrict B's, so it's all rather abstract. I'd say A's have a valid grievance if they're made to feel unwelcome by B's, but not the other way around.
By the way, this isn't what happened either. The mechanism for the change was not democratic, nor was it about letting people voluntarily decide who'll interact with who.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
16hr ago
I guess I'm going full-schizo, but it just looked weird to me.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
16hr ago
They're free to create their own, but what does that have to do with what we're discussing? It's not what happened.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
17hr ago
It's about who was there first. If some Black Hebrew Israelite hobby club wants to keep whitey out, I'd hardly be offended.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
18hr ago
That's a good point. Even with politics out of the picture, nerdy spaces are fundamentally different in that way, and I remember that particular feature of them being directly attacked as "gatekeeping".
Wait... @Tomato, I just reread that other thread, it doesn't make any sense over there either. Is "vibes are at an all time high" something y'all are trying meme into existence*? If so can you stop doing it here? In my book, this makes you no better then that dude who's spamming AmRen links through "criticizing white nationalism".
EDIT: *) Nevermind, I re-checked the results of that search and only the first one is about Kamala. Still, am I the only one who find the whole "we're all in bubbles, the vibes in my bubble are at an all time high" somewhat hamfisted into either thread?
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
19hr ago
Oh my god... this changes everything...
Excuse me sir, this is a democracy. Why would a politician let their rival get the credit?
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
23hr ago
That's a very interesting point you're making, though I think it made more sense in the other thread than here, and repeating it makes me think this is itself some sort of a psyop... But anyway, yeah, I think back in 2016 it was easier to stick your figer in the air, and tell which way the wind was blowing, even with all the aglorithms and social media bubbles. Today's Internet is so fake it feels like you never know what is real, and what is someone's marketing campaign.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
23hr ago
Yeah, there was some talk also that Saddam sponsored terrorism, but the administration never tried to link him directly to 9/11
So I decided to see what I can find on this, and maaan...:
MR. RUSSERT: The Washington Post asked the American people about Saddam Hussein, and this is what they said: 69 percent said he was involved in the September 11 attacks. Are you surprised by that?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: No. I think it’s not surprising that people make that connection.
MR. RUSSERT: But is there a connection?
VICE PRES. CHENEY: We don’t know. You and I talked about this two years ago. I can remember you asking me this question just a few days after the original attack. At the time I said no, we didn’t have any evidence of that. Subsequent to that, we’ve learned a couple of things. We learned more and more that there was a relationship between Iraq and al-Qaeda that stretched back through most of the decade of the ’90s, that it involved training, for example, on BW and CW, that al-Qaeda sent personnel to Baghdad to get trained on the systems that are involved. The Iraqis providing bomb-making expertise and advice to the al-Qaeda organization.
We know, for example, in connection with the original World Trade Center bombing in ’93 that one of the bombers was Iraqi, returned to Iraq after the attack of ’93. And we’ve learned subsequent to that, since we went into Baghdad and got into the intelligence files, that this individual probably also received financing from the Iraqi government as well as safe haven.
Now, is there a connection between the Iraqi government and the original World Trade Center bombing in ’93? We know, as I say, that one of the perpetrators of that act did, in fact, receive support from the Iraqi government after the fact. With respect to 9/11, of course, we’ve had the story that’s been public out there. The Czechs alleged that Mohamed Atta, the lead attacker, met in Prague with a senior Iraqi intelligence official five months before the attack, but we’ve never been able to develop anymore of that yet either in terms of confirming it or discrediting it. We just don’t know.
...fuck Dick Chaney...
I suppose you're right, and I have to concede, but his "we don't know, but *wink**wink**nudge**nudge**wink**nudge**wink**nudge**wink*... anyway as I was saying we just don't know *wink*", sure makes me feel dirty about it.
Then again the conversation started with OP saying "why the North Koreans felt like they 'needed' to start the Korean War", so maybe the analogy still holds.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
1d ago
They never grappled with him. They shot him from a distance from their trucks. They were quite safe.
Come on man, I was already dodging one snuff film, why are you making me look up another one (this one is mercifully frozen before the shot is fired, in case you feel the same way about these sorts of clips), that I had already largely purged from my memory...
I take your larger point about the intent needed for the legal definition of muder.
My point isn't about the legal definition of murder. Charge these guys with murder for all I care, my point is about What This Says About Society. In my opinion the discourse about the shooting, and it's broader implications, would only be justified if these guys were actually intending to kill from the outset. If they were just reckless that's bad enough on it's own, we don't need to make up a whole story about "good ol' boys blowing away an outsider acting suspiciously in someone else's neighborhood".
If they intended to kill him, waiting to do that until they're grappling with him is an even more special way to do it.
They were reckless, that's my entire point. You're trying to ascribe intentionality to it, which is plainly inaccurate.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
1d ago
I thought I was attacking the point of the metaphor by being equally colorful...
...Does... Does this mean colorful writing can get in the way of productive conversation...? (No, it is the children who are wrong!)
Huh? Last I checked the latter is exactly how systemic isms work, and they're consider bad enough to riot over.
Here's a NSFW reddit thread with a picture of her burns, which is way worse than the experience most people get when they spill coffee on themselves
Yes, but that is not because McDonald's made some magical McEvil Coffee that was 400° hot without it being immediately obvious by looking at the cup from a distance.
Someone in this thread tried making the argument that the cops shouldn't be affaid of having boiling water thrown at them, because they were clothed. Someone else pointed out that this makes things worse. This is what happened here. If she prepared coffee at home, spilled it herself while wearing the same clothes, the effect would be just as bad, or worse.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
1d ago
I think this is that thread :) The McDonald's case got brought up as a comparison, and because someone was wondering how opinions on it correlate to this shooting.
I'm camp "hot water is definitely dangerous, but that does not mean the cops acted correctly". I refuse to go beyond that, as it would require watching the videos, and as others, I have a firm policy of not watching snuff films.
But I don’t think they expect it to be so hot that it literally melts your genitals off your body
But they should. That's what boiling water does, any adult should know how to handle boiling water, and you should expect any hot beverage you ordered to be just a few degrees short of boiling.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
1d ago
They thought this was hilarious. Yes, that's a real incident, not something I made up /r/thathappened-style, and I saw a lot of that sort of thing. The looks on my friends' faces were what you'd expect.
I might need to walk back the thing about gender-blindness being a good idea (as I explicitly rejected it recently), but in my defense, the idea that men and women are literally the same was the assumption of those times, and it was promoted by feminists. And in defense of these guys, under that assumption, that's a pretty tame and harmless joke.
I think the anti-woke types do underestimate how shitty things could be in the 80s and 90s.
That fact that you are also boiling my views down "everything was great back then" is even more frustrating than the fact that he was doing it.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
1d ago
I mean, yes, there has been social change, but the vast majority of that has been positive in my view,
Your previous argument was basically "we didn't change, we always wanted to get rid of you, we were just stuck with you, and now we're not". If there was change, that argument is fudamentally false, even if you consider the change to be good.
If your deepest view is culture was great in 1995 and everything was fine, yeah, you're going to be left behind
What if your deepest view isn't that everything was fine, but we had some good aspirational principles like freedom of speech, color / gender blindness, and meritocracy, and then those principles were explicitly rejected as something wrong to aspire to, and not just something we failed to achieve yet?
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
1d ago
Again, I've made this analogy before, but in 1997, if among your friend group, one of the guys in your local area that is into anime, Warhammer, Doctor Who, or whatever thing you're deeply into is kind of off, occcasionally says cring things or whatever, you may put up with it, because that's the only option you have. But, this did make a current brand of nerd think they had more support than they actually did.
But, in 2024, you don't have to deal with that guy anymore
Just a quick sanity check - do you think there were absolutely no changes in the sphere of nerdy-left beliefs, and thus in what is considered cringe, between 1997 and 2024? The fault lies 100% on the guy that got kicked out?
It's a half-joke on your own terms, why should all of it's implications be taken seriously?
When that Home Depot lady got fired we were posed a question of whether right-wingers are here are going to decry it, now that it is their side doing it. My point is analogous to that, if that cancel culture question was valid, it is valid to ask left-wingers that didn't like these sorts of insults to decry them being made about Vance. Either that, or to explicitly endorse a free-for-all.
More options
Context Copy link