ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
No bio...
User ID: 626
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
3mo ago
I thought no one's using it right now. He could even forego the underage girls entirely, and just chill on the island.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
3mo ago
Epstein Island?
I was thinking more, "if we start spamming now, they won't have time to roll back". Either that or the whole system collapses because everyone sees what a farce it is, which is also a happy ending, as far as I'm concerned.
Ok fine, but in that case I would say it pales in comparison to organizing workshops and therapy for parents of trans kids, trans kids themselves, detransitioners, all at a time of peak social-media censorship, and kicking off a remarkably well-run series of conferences. I don't know what is your experience of actually getting shit done, but whenever I tried taking on a leadership role, it was like squeezing water out of a stone. After a few experiences like that, I have mad respect for leaders who actually pull it off at a consistently high quality.
That's not to say I don't appreciate JK Rowling. Her high profile and sharp wit probably exposed a huge amount of normies to the subject, and made it all quite entertaining to boot. But it's not the same thing, I think.
Everybody plugged into the transphere, either pro- or anti-, probably knows who she is. Normies might not, but they don't matter. Left-wing European politicians attend her conferences to keep an eye on what's going on. Her activity is what keyed me in on the tide turning on trans. I really doubt it would have happened (or at the very least - would have happened at the time it did) without her.
I've had some posts about my criticisms of the "organic" / "market-driven" / "democratic" view of society, and one of these days I might flesh out a compare-and-contrast to and "elite-driven" one, which I think is far more accurate.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
3mo ago
because they abandoned the one thing that people actually want from this space: content-neutral moderation.
Possibly a nitpick, possibly this is what you meant, but CWR was pretty content-neutral, though it was probably a bit too loose on the "moderation" part.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
3mo ago
Stella O'Malley. Rowling only finances and shitposts, as far as I can tell, doesn't do any actual leadership.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
3mo ago
"[X] is persecuted because it's bad" should be the default assumption, despite what a lifetime of cultural conditioning tells me.
Huh, so what you're saying is that the Jews really did have it coming?
I agree you should examine the object level views on a case by case basis, this is, in fact my default. I disagree with "if they're persecuted, they're bad", though persecution probably indicates a fundamental incompatibility of values.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
3mo ago
Fun fact: you guys lost the war before you even knew there was one. Trans activists slipped in gender self-ID into the referendum that you thought was about gay marriage.
On the flip side, arguably the most prominent leader, in the whole worldwide pushback against trans, is an Irish woman.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
3mo ago
Ingroup you mean? Why would it?
Or the people who are around him, and putting all that fear and pressure on people? They sort of are, but it's human nature, getting too resentful of it leads towards nothing but misanthropy.
Concrete questions: when, if ever, will it be acceptable to express even the blander motte views in polite company? Was it ever?
I sometimes question my own sanity, and start asking if my recollection of the Before Times was all a fever dream, but to the best of my ability to answer your question: yes. It was completely normal to have a friend group with all sorts of people. We've had a dude that was an open (actual) fascist in mine, and the group was majority left-wing. Sometimes things would get heated, and people would fight, but at the end of the day people just wanted to have a good time. The blander views wouldn't even raise an eyebrow. Insert "this is what they took from you" meme.
Now, while I also think the news of Wokeness' death have been greatly exaggerated, I do feel like I can breathe a little. Still not comfortable attaching my Tinker Tuesday github to my resume, but way better than "undercover agent" mode of the COVID era.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
3mo ago
It's unclear what triggered the escalation to physical violence or by what dream logic Dumana's friend transformed into his sister.
I thought the person accompanying him, be it his wife, sister, or friend, was a woman? The local media articles about the additional arrests talk about "a man and a woman". Though it would be a whole 'nother level to start calling 12 year olds "sexy" in front of your wife or sister, I suppose.
mocking
I mean that as non-confrontationally as possible, as good faith as possible: you might want examine your biases if you take my literal statement of (...) as laughing at anyone.
Take it easy, you seem to be taking is as much more charged than it actually was. You probably should have also probably quoted more than the word "mocking", because I think "mocking the idea of" makes it clear it's ideas, rather than people. Feel free to substitute it with "downplaying" or "dismissing". I honestly don't see how you can claim you're not doing it, when you literally say that there are problem, but none of them include neo-feudalism, or replacement, because your life is good.
I've spent time with real-life Maoists and they speak in exactly the same language. Their in-group communication where they don't have to justify their priors to each other looks remarkably similar....
Cool, but I can't imagine a less productive conversation. Just entertaining your framing means I already lost, because you get to paint me however you want with no effort, and I'm the one that has to convince you that maybe you're wrong.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
3mo ago
Why not? Speech is fundamental for political coordination under any system, but especially in a democracy. You can sneer and call it "not being able to say nigger", but you know it's not limited to it, and that the point is disenfranchisement.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
3mo ago
I agree with SSCReader. You had the Cass Review, the puberty blocker ban, and the "trans women aren't women" ruling. Sure, the British police is committed to be a dystopian nightmare no matter the subject, but the UK has outright led the way worldwide in poring a bucket of cold water on the trans thing. Plus like I said, in this case, I'm pretty sure the overreach is going to cost them.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
3mo ago
So what's diagnosis, doctor? "Long wait times" makes it sound like could be fake, "documentation would take 30 minutes max, and might not even be counted" sounds like it could be plausible. What does it add up to?
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
3mo ago
police claiming they saw the footage and it proved X but it went missing is highly suspicious.
It is, but these are twitter anon claims backed by no documentation. There's just about enough evidence tobmake theirbstory plausible (local media posting stories about additional arrests of unnamed adults), but it could still be a sophisticated hoax.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
3mo ago
Thanks for looking into it, and for your opinion. One thing that doesn't sit right with me is that it does clearly state "concussion". Maybe it's like you say, and I just put what the patients were complaining about without really looking into it. Happy to defer to self_made_human.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
3mo ago
The impulse behind woke was that everyone wanted it except for a few backward people on the internet.
Uh, no... The correct way to phrase it is that everyone in power wanted it, but wokeness was never popular among the wider population. This was confirmed in the early days by the woke themselves, endlessly whining about being spammed with criticism, or having their audience being flooded with critical videos in recommendations, every time they upload something. I think surveys that actually asked about specific ideas showed that woke beliefs are supported by something like ~10% of the population (I wish I had links, but this is something that came up in the subreddit ages ago).
The point is that "people aren't having kids" is a strong statement that's clearly evidence of some kind of catastrophe, which is presumably why you framed the question that way. People having one or two kid instead of two or three is less clearly so.
Not really. Yeah, literally zero kids is "extinction event within our lifetimes (or should I say, just barely after)", < 1 / < 2 kids, depending on were you live, combined with mass migration, is "replacement" the very idea he was mocking. So no, it has nothing to do with why I framed it that way.
Unfortunately that's the most recent chart I could find for this.
You might still be right, but it might be a bad idea to so confidently deny my claim then.
Literally who?
Huh, I always took you for a fellow Euro. And if you are, that's an odd thing to say. Maybe you're just a bit younger than me.
His party has zero seats, so this is another point in favor of the people OP is criticizing not being popular.
Maybe he should have tried being a right-winger then, might be a bit more popular now.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
3mo ago
No, they don't. 86% of women aged 40-44 (as of 2016) had at least one child. Perhaps you meant to ask a different question?
Yeah, we can quibble over the precise formulation, if you want, but the birth rates are what are. So I'm not sure what point you're making here.
Also... the statistics you cited are from nearly a decade ago for some reason?
Despite the screeching, none of the far right parties want to throw homosexuals off rooftops, strip normies of the franchise, or 'conscript wombs'. That's why they are popular.
Sure. I'm not exactly one of those types either, but his criticisms targeted a much larger group (like people worried about capitalism turning into neo-feudalism, which would include that well-known far-rightwinger Yannis Varoufakis).
Anecdotally, a surprising amount, a lot. The majority of my coworkers approaching 30s, myself included.
Statistics tell a different story, though.
It’s just funny to see those grand declarations and nothing else. Speaking to the in-group only, reinforcing the feeling of doom within the in-group, exactly the same way the leftists do it. I’m probably much closer to “a normie” nowadays, so the internal rhetoric feels jarring, detached from the reality of my own life to a tremendous degree.
Funnily enough, I don't see much connection to reality in this criticism. Why is everyone screeching about "far right" parties performing well in Europe? Why is Europe adapting it's laws to enable more online censorship? Why is the UK arresting comedians for tweets? Those are not things that happen when a group is out of touch with the normies.
My life’s pretty good!
Yeah, mine to. I don't understand why you think this is a good argument
People around me are living normal lives, with the usual ups and downs, but nobody’s miserable to the extent the workers in UK were during the Industrial Revolution.
How many people are having kids?
I say the same thing both to the suburban Maoists and to the fascists: if you see it, go do something about it instead of writing yet another blog post.
We're trying. What's wrong with writing a blog post sometimes?
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
3mo ago
Reference to the sororitas paradox. "Coherent" isn't a well-defined idea. You can come up with a definition to make anything coherent or incoherent. I'd rather speak in terms of degrees-- accepting that any social target is going to have to be fuzzy, and working to keep it useful over trying to define hard boundaries.
Fuziness does not imply incoherence, my approach is pretty much identical to yours, and you're just arguing over semantics. What I said was that with "over-exclusion is worse then over-inclusion" approach, you will turn the category of the nation useless.
The same thing that currently happens. Escalating levels of social sanctions followed by criminal punishments.
Well... do you mind providing some details? General rules as to what kind of transgressions would meet with what kind of sanctions? Examples?
That's accurate.
You're really not making this easy... What is? My description of your views, or the statement that I misunderstood something? If the latter, could you put some effort into bridging the inferential gap? Where do you think I've gone wrong?
I'm not sure how else I'm suppose to interpret it. If the main contingent pushing the idea of a creedal nation are the liberals / the left, you strongly disagree with their creed and how it should be enforced, but "think by far the bigger threat is a government that excludes people who indisputably share my creed, versus a government that would try and promote another creed", how specifically would you prevent the importation of a sizable Muslim minority if that idea gained traction? This isn't much of a hypothetical, by the way, actually existing 90+% Catholic countries ended up going the "mass migration with no creed enforcement" route because they drank the liberal Kool-Aid.
Being confident in God isn't incompatible with working hard toward virtuous ends. "Faith without works..." etcetera etcetera.
Yeah, and carrying weapons large enough to punch holes through a small moon is not, strictly speaking, incompatible with a peaceful mission through the cosmos. It does say a lot about what kind of universe you believe you're living in, though.
It's not about being afraid of Muslims, it's about, it's that going to (a proper) church is a strictly good thing, for both the individual and the community. Rather than impose it because I'm afraid of an enemy group, I'd impose it because "getting people to do good things" is one of the main purposes of a community.
And if it can be shown that a mosque is a proper church, with similar advantages for individuals and their communities, you'd be ok with that, and you'd enforce your rule by forcing people to go to EITHER a mosque OR a Catholic church?
If I'm wrong about having the best (most beneficial) beliefs, then I have no fear of adopting better beliefs. You're missing the point by focusing on "truth" here. Of course, I also believe that my beliefs are true, but that's noncentral.
What was the point of the "truth is an asymmetric weapon" thing then?
From the perspective of dodging death, any copy is shitty, because it's a copy. None of the things that make death scary are alleviated by having one, and you never addeess the difference between prolonging your life and copying, or make an argument for why they should be treated interchangeably.
More options
Context Copy link