@BurdensomeCount's banner p

BurdensomeCount

Singapore is the only country that learned the correct lessons from the British Empire.

5 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 05 16:37:04 UTC

The neighborhood of Hampstead is just at present exercised with a series of events which seem to run on lines parallel to those of what was known to the writers of headlines and "The Kensington Horror," or "The Stabbing Woman," or "The Woman in Black." During the past two or three days several cases have occurred of young children straying from home or neglecting to return from their playing on the Heath. In all these cases the children were too young to give any properly intelligible account of themselves, but the consensus of their excuses is that they had been with a "bloofer lady." It has always been late in the evening when they have been missed, and on two occasions the children have not been found until early in the following morning. It is generally supposed in the neighborhood that, as the first child missed gave as his reason for being away that a "bloofer lady" had asked him to come for a walk, the others had picked up the phrase and used it as occasion served. This is the more natural as the favorite game of the little ones at present is luring each other away by wiles. A correspondent writes us that to see some of the tiny tots pretending to be the"bloofer lady" is supremely funny. Some of our caricaturists might, he says, take a lesson in the irony of grotesque by comparing the reality and the picture. It is only in accordance with general principles of human nature that the "bloofer lady" should be the popular role at these al fresco performances.


				

User ID: 628

BurdensomeCount

Singapore is the only country that learned the correct lessons from the British Empire.

5 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 05 16:37:04 UTC

					

The neighborhood of Hampstead is just at present exercised with a series of events which seem to run on lines parallel to those of what was known to the writers of headlines and "The Kensington Horror," or "The Stabbing Woman," or "The Woman in Black." During the past two or three days several cases have occurred of young children straying from home or neglecting to return from their playing on the Heath. In all these cases the children were too young to give any properly intelligible account of themselves, but the consensus of their excuses is that they had been with a "bloofer lady." It has always been late in the evening when they have been missed, and on two occasions the children have not been found until early in the following morning. It is generally supposed in the neighborhood that, as the first child missed gave as his reason for being away that a "bloofer lady" had asked him to come for a walk, the others had picked up the phrase and used it as occasion served. This is the more natural as the favorite game of the little ones at present is luring each other away by wiles. A correspondent writes us that to see some of the tiny tots pretending to be the"bloofer lady" is supremely funny. Some of our caricaturists might, he says, take a lesson in the irony of grotesque by comparing the reality and the picture. It is only in accordance with general principles of human nature that the "bloofer lady" should be the popular role at these al fresco performances.


					

User ID: 628

So basically, if you hit that mark on the first try, be grateful because you saved yourself a whole lot of trouble.

Or alternatively stick with her while you secretly search for someone who is a good person as well as is good for you. Now this is not an honourable thing to do, but there is no honour left in the modern west and I would not judge a man additionally for doing this beyond what I would judge any normal man who accepts and lives by the modern western belief system uncritically.

I don't blame them for offering me the job, I blame them for taxing me a shit load (also note that the people offering me the job were not the same as the people who tax me a shitload).

Your comment reminds me of this comic: https://iea.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/mister-gotcha-4-9faefa-1.jpg

Just like how the peasant is saying "we should improve society somewhat", I am saying "we should tax people like me a lot less" and am being given the same "and yet you participate in society, curious" response. Now the peasant can very well go live in the wild under the law of the jungle, just like how I can go to a different country, but that is even worse for the peasant (and for me) than the present situation. However that does not at all mean the peasant is not entitled to complain that the current state of affairs is not very good, or to agitate for them to be changed until they are more pleasant, while continuing to live his peasant life. Same with me.

That's all well and good, but it's not bringing my money back is it?

There is no common future for them and me, and I rate my chances of survival on the same level as an Indian after Columbus.

I wouldn't worry too much if I were you. You are absolutely right that these EA types basically prey on people like you. But equally there is a large and growing Post-Rationalist contingent (e/acc, d/acc etc. are just some examples) where people take many of the implication of rationalism to their logical conclusion in all domains, which then destroys the EA normie Bay Area-esque Rationalists who are above all a social group with all the taboos such groups must have to function, precisely because we turn their own professed values against them in much the same fashion as they turn their values against ordinary people.

You can think of it as you being like a piece of grass that a deer eats (here the deer are EA normie rats), while we post rats are like facultative predator tigers who gladly eat the deer but completely ignore the grass.

As a piece of grass you are safer in a world with a lot of tigers than you are in a world with a lot of deer. As Post-Rationalist label continues to grow, normie EA types are going to end up losing power and prestige and the ability to influence things, leading to the rejoicing of grass everywhere.

The sport example is terrible. Olympic swimming excludes pretty much all black people due to genetic factors, but we don't have an equivalent Olympic category for just "black people" with the same level of prestige as the open competition, but for some reason women get their own league...

Hey, I wasn't the one who brought up mayos in the first place. The comment above mine referred to the mayocide.

Come to rDrama, we have fun over there.

Yeah, right now we have Donkey Kong December going on too so there's extra special flavour (yes, I know it's April, don't ask).

I don't get the joke, what letters are you supposed to replace and where to make it funny?

Without black people, the success of modern day America would not have been possible

Downthread there is a comment from @RandomRanger where he talks about how high income blacks are still just as criminal as low income whites, using this to argue that we shouldn't treat poor people of all races the same and that the negative effects of the black population today are so bad that putting them in the USA leads to social dysfunction as bad as that in modern day Russia.

It's quite heavily implied that blacks are a problem and their presence leads to a worse USA compared to a hypothetical counterfactual where they weren't there. I don't think this is quite right, I actually think an even stronger argument can be made for the exact opposite belief, namely that it is a direct consequence of having so many blacks that the USA is as advanced and developed as it is today and that a USA which never had them would be one where everyone (including whites) was much poorer today.

The argument itself is simple. Today the USA is much richer than other peer countries in Europe etc. because it has and has had for a long time significantly lower taxes and a much weaker redistributive welfare state compared to places like Sweden and the UK. This comparative lack of "democratic socialism" and a much lighter touch of the government on private enterprise has paid off in spades for the US which has gone from being only slightly more prosperous than the UK/France/Germany etc. to being significantly more so over the last few decades.

One perfectly valid question to ask is why did the USA not follow in the same footsteps as Europe when it came to implementing a very high tax and spend redistributive economy, which consequently lead to it becoming significantly richer per capita as the virtuous cycle paid off. My answer is simple: the US had too many black people for this sort of redistribution to be palatable to the ruling white classes. Hence the US escaped the economic havoc and destruction (compared to the counterfactual) such policies lead to in the long term and was able to grow and expand unshackled which eventually lead to everyone's living standards improving massively. Indeed as the tastes of the ruling class have changed and become more accepting of the sorts of behaviours displayed by low class black Americans so too have we heard louder and louder calls to redirect more and more money to the poor from those who might do something useful with it.

By now it's very well established empirically (just look at Europe) that when white people as a class get governmental power and there aren't too many lower class people around who have a very dissimilar modus vivendi that your average high status white would find disagreeable to fund they introduce "democratic socialism" and start taxing people/companies/transactions (discouraging innovation and hard work) and use the money to set up a welfare state (discouraging innovation and hard work). This predictably leads to less innovation and growth, which leads to large scale economic welfare loss for the population as a whole. The final result of this is that everyone ends up poorer and worse off, little different from the purported negative impact blacks have of the population as a whole.

Just like how blacks (as a class) have a direct negative impact on societal welfare through their elevated crime rate etc. wherever they are, whites (as a class) have a direct negative impact on societal welfare through their very high propensity to introduce "democratic socialism" wherever they are. Now of course there are lots of whites that don't think this way and are honest to goodness capitalists, but equally lots of blacks never steal or otherwise commit crimes. Just like the existance of such blacks doesn't mean blacks as a class don't cause large scale social damage through elevated crime incidences, the existance of such whites doesn't mean whites as a class don't cause large scale social damage through promoting bad economic policy.

Indeed because economic growth is contagious and spreads its boons all over the world, it's not just Americans who would be worse off if there were no blacks and consequently American whites had fallen to their instinctive impulses of taxing the productive to give to the unproductive. A lot of the high living standards around Europe and the rest of the world are due to techonologies that were developed and matured and brought to market due to substantial efffort from Americans safe in the knowledge that they would stand to personally benefit from its successes. Without this engine of growth and productivity in America it is well possible that the developed world in this alternate universe 2024 would still have living standards no higher than our world managed in the 1960s.

Many white nationalists are perfectly at home with noticing the bad consequences of black people as a class on the sum economic welfare of the USA. However they fail to notice the more pernicious but potentially even worse consequences of letting white people with their "lets minimise harm, even if it scuttles the economy" approach run rampant over the country like it would have done had there not been a large class of black people 100 years ago the whites were less happy to redistribute money towards.

I would think they are a typical westerner and not much more about it, par for the course, as they say. In fact doing so shows they are risk taking, which is a quality I personally admire, so probably slightly positively predisposed towards them.

Yes, that something is the tabula rasa insanity believed by the left leaning sorts who are in power in Detroit and Chicago; nothing more, nothing less. It's like believing E. faecalis is no different from H. pylori and treating both of them in the same way.

Interesting, I thought the case against him was based on the whole "inciting his supporters to go shit up the capitol" thing.

Also, something about that old Scott post about trading off sacred and profane values.

The modern day west is basically 100% profane. It does not get to claim anything is sacred any more after its behaviour over the past 60 years, any such claims are just hypocrisy at this point and deserve to be called out.

Westerners have killed God, and now they deserve all the consequences of that, good and hard.

neither provide protection and security for content creators

My taxes (and the taxes of the people like me) absolutely do provide protection and security for the rest of society. Now many of these content creators themselves are smart enough to themselves be in the group of people who produce net value and I agree they should be paid (the 6hr 1st Crusade link is absolutely amazing from the first 30 minutes or so that I've seen so far, the world is a better place for it existing), but we do have a way to pay for them, namely the taxes of me and the likes of me, which would be much better of being handed to these people for their time so they can create stuff like this rather than handing it out in housing benefit to keep poors living in expensive locations they couldn't otherwise afford (and thereby not only burning taxpayer cash but also causing a deadweight loss as high desirability accommodation close to high productivity centres gets consumed by low skilled people instead of those who can exploit such an envionment to the fullest).

It is not that I expect these people (specifically) to provide high quality content to me for free, it is more that I expect to be provided high quality content for free by virtue of my position in society and how much I contribute to it.

nor do you have an army with which to go pillage them

There effectively is an army which goes and pillages the likes of me for my taxes on threat of being jailed, and then freely celebrates this pillaging. All I ask is that it be equally turned on the lower classes when they protest, yet again, about wanting even more of the societal surplus generated by the productive being redirected to them, and then showing absolutely zero thanks for what they are given.

So go on expecting whatever you want, it doesn't change the equation.

The point of my expectation is not in a hope that the world will change, I'm far too cynical for that, it's more for my own self to have zero moral pangs when I download and run more and more complicated scripts to keep on breaking anti-adblock. In the end if I have a device that I have full control over, there really isn't much YouTube or anyone else can do to control the exact content I see or that I don't see, they can only make my life hard, but not stop what I do on my own device.

The point is that when I do avoid ads I will not feel bad inside about depriving creators of their livelihoods, but rather feel good inside for asseting my control over my own device.

Here in the UK you are not allowed to turn left on a red light (the equivalent to right turn on red in the US), however back home where I am from it's permitted in certain locations, including my birthtown and its environs. When I am on my bike I freely turn left on red lights if it is safe to do so and do not feel bad about it at all, while not feeling the same way for breaking a light by going straight through. I basically consider it my birthright to turn left on red, something that is given to me by virtue of my birth and denied to the native brits purely based on where they were born (now they can change their law if they want to, and I think it would be sensible, but that's up to them).

To be honest with you I would freely turn left on red when driving as well were it not for the fact that cars have number plates and I'd get fined. So I don't do it. However I don't see this restriction as "yet another traffic rule" but rather as an undue and unfair restriction rather than a just law that has the "mandate of heaven". I see such a rule as being in the same class of rules that punish using a VPN in China. I wouldn't consider someone using one a "bad person", even though technically they broke the law, same here I would not consider a person that constantly turns left on red when safe to do so a bad person in a way that I would consider someone who breaks red lights to be bad.

However the British government does not have the bandwidth to stop all cyclists turning left on red (just like how China does not have the bandwidth to stop all VPNs), and so I freely do it, and when I do it I feel good about myself, because claiming what you are rightfully entitled to is not something to be ashamed of at all, but rather something to be proud of. If the government stopped fining cars that turned left on red I would start turning left on red as well, even though i the equivalent scenario where the government stopped fining cars that broke red lights by going striaght through I would not start going straight through. This is because I fundamentally believe I have an entitlement to turn left on red, while I have no such entitlements to run red lights. Whenever I turn left on red on my bike I feel good inside, but when I break red lights on red my internal moral compass tells me that I just did something wrong.

I have zero expectations that my belief and the beliefs of those who think like me make it at all any more likely that the government is likely to legalise left turns on red at all, but that's not the point of it, the point is for my own moral compass to see my actions as right and just vs wrong and a mere artifice. Same with my beliefs about what I am entitled to with online content, the point is for me to feel good and right and just as I apply the latest patch that continues to break whatever anti-adblock script YouTube et. al. are now pushing.

Amongst the old guard westerners nothing much improves. I expect the market for women to go bust a fair bit with the advent of hyperrealistic porn coupled with AI that allows you to create your own waifu who has the full spectrum of beliefs of your average human being and is just as intelligent (I already prefer talking to GPT4 over some IQ 100 normies I have the misfortune of having to regularly interact with in life, I genuine prefer talking to the IQ 80-90 people over the IQ 100 ones, at least those people know they are stupid and defer to you easily). But none of the underlying issues get fixed.

More and more demographic replacement from the third world, which will cause them to have their own population issues too, but in the West they'll always be able to get immigrants at a steady rate, countries not named the United States of America might have to scrape the bottom barrel for immigrants who are willing to move, but they will be able to get them.

These people will bring their own culture with them. Some of it and some of these people will dissolve in the alkahest of modernity and adopt the ways of the westerners, the rest of them will keep their own ways, and eventually hopefully we can get a second stable life pathway that is able to stand up against the constant chips and attacks of the western mindset, a sort of duopoly of cultures with healthier gender relations, which over the generations slowly gains converts from the children of those who were failed by the western way of life and converted to this one as a way to save their children from the Western Cultural Monster.

Yeah, the updated story isn't looking good for this dude. Sure the person he killed was not that many steps above scum, but he was still human. Good on him for turning himself in at least.

a Year 10 pupil said to be autistic was told to bring in a copy of the Islamic holy book by friends after losing a video game.

Notice how they don't mention why he was told to bring in a Quran after losing a video game. The book falling out of a bag on its own is nothing big and certainly not deserving of the extreme response it got, but an extreme response it did get which makes me suspect that the child was told to bring the Quran to school by his "friends" so they could do something nefarious to it, and they were caught before they could begin their act. This could be what the mother was (quite rightly) apologising for, not the book suffering light damage.

Not the person you replied to but I honestly respect prostitutes more than I respect "independent" women who sleep around for free. At least the former know their worth...

Personally I would have annexed Gaza (and the West bank too for good measure) and made everyone there a citizen. Then treat any terrorists as common criminals and punish them to the full extent of the law. This would also solve the Haredim problem in one fell swoop (or at least delay it for two generations) and crush the Israeli far right because now there are an extra two million people who'll never vote for them.

In this scenario everyone wins except for the terrorists and far right nutters; both of which are groups that deserve to have a boot stamping on their face for eternity.

Nah, I believe I have a duty to let people know there are better alternatives than the current social system state they are stuck in and pointing out situations in which our system would have outperformed your system is a particularly good way to do so. Islam is a proselytising religion after all you know...

contaminating yourself with the filthy Westerner mindset

Oh boy, It's way too late for me on that front, I'm already 80%+ western at this moment in time and I'd expect my future trajectory won't shift me much from here. Plus it's not like the West doesn't have a lot of good things going for it, it's just that Westerners don't need to be told about them because they already follow them to some extent. They need to be told about the good things they don't yet subscribe to.

My preferred system is not the one we have back home, it's a syncretic mix of that and the western system, biased if anything more towards the western way.

The future of Ukraine is Somali and Bangladeshi migrants working on farms owned by American financial institutions and managed by HR women educated in the US.

Still beats becoming a vassal state of Russia. Europe really needs to get off its ass and start arming the Ukrainians properly (it's understandable why the US doesn't seem to care, but Europe doesn't have the same luxury of distance). Yes, this will cost lots of money, but Europe can easily raise this money by massively slashing welfare and benefit spending.

Allow me to present a more parsimonious explanation of everything we're seeing:

Rust is clearly the systems language of the future. It can be just as fast as C++ and has a much nicer syntax/doesn't have weird idiosyncracies (ok, the last point is debatable). However there are lots and lots of C++/C "dinosaurs" whose livelihoods are going to be threatened were it to lose out in favour of Rust. Thus they need a way to protect themselves (as is only natural) and are trying to at the least slow down the adoption of Rust.

In a bid to do this they've found a feature of rust, namely the fact that it forces you to write good code, presented it as "undesirable" and created a narrative of how rust takes away your "freedoms", thereby aligning themselves to one side of the culture war in a bid to leverage the power of that side to protect their income stream. Nevermind that you can very easily write memory unsafe code in rust by just declaring an unsafe{} block around everything.

It's all the usual ploy of people hating technological progress and advancement because it's coming for their daily bread so they put up spurious blocks and fearmonger to ensure that coin keeps flowing to them.

and I don't believe for a second Tolkien didn't have an allegory in mind when he was writing that.

The place where that became unrealistic to me was how stupidly Saruman behaved after he got news the ring had been destroyed. The Shire under his control, like everywhere else in Middle Earth, would have felt the reverberations from the destruction of the ring and the fall of Sauron. Saruman would absolutely have known that the Fellowship hobbits were going to return back home soon (knowing their temprament and desire for domestic life) and would fight him for control there.

The very first thing a smart Saruman would have done would have been to completely ethnically cleanse the entire Shire of hobbits by genociding them all (and we know that by this point he was evil enough to do so) and replacing them with Uruk-Hai, so that when the inevetable battle happened at least the locals would side with him instead of against him. And if you read the chapter you'd quickly realise that the fellowship hobbits wouldn't have been able to muster their successful rebellion had there been no more living local hobbits left.

For whatever reason Tolkien didn't write the chapter in this way though... Perhaps it would have been even more anticlimatic than The Scouring of the Shire is on its own, but it would definitely have been more realistic.

In which case maybe the Americans should get a taste of reality and come back down to earth. Billions of people around the world would kill to be in a situation where they are an American citizen making $16 an hour and owing $100k. If these complainers had any special talents then maybe they would have a point but these people tend to be bog standard "generic human units" with nothing going for them at all.

Edit: On second thought exile them to Africa on account of I think it would be really funny.

LMAO. Would be nice to have some statistics on how long they'd have been able to last without getting enslaved themselves.

OTOH I think this would have been needless cruelty, surely they were needlessly cruel towards their own slaves but one should rise above their base level and show maganimity in victory.