Fruck
Lacks all conviction
Fruck is just this guy, you know?
User ID: 889
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
7mo ago
It would be easier and better for your psyche if, instead of getting upset at the idea of PAs having less status than doctors, you just dropped the stigma you currently associate with the working class.
The anonymity of the internet equalises the doctor, the cashier and the executive - online all their opinions are considered equally merited. And this has mostly wonderful effects imo, but one negative is that the wealthy express their opinions on working class jobs the way they think about them - calling them worthless jobs or saying the only people fit to push a broom or work at a supermarket are 70 iq or they're jobs for drug addicts - and they're right to an extent, they aren't as skilled as professional work, and don't require as much discipline or intelligence, and can indeed be performed by drug addicts (just like medicine and corpo blah blah blah).
But this has given the zeitgeist the impression that these jobs are worthless and as a result nobody wants to do them any more. They don't take pride in doing them and resent them. And so you get passive aggression at the deli and half missing fast food delivered cold, and people getting ticked off when their respectable friends are labelled working class. But there is plenty of pride in doing any job well and more importantly there is no shame in it. A janitor who takes pride in doing his job well is infinitely more respectable than a doctor who reads webmd at people in between smoke breaks.
Who cares if Rafa or I think your sister in law isn't in the same league as a doctor? You know her, is she the kind of person to fuck over someone's life through ignorance or is she going to do her best at all times? It's that spirit that is admirable, not her position in the pecking order.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
7mo ago
Yeah that will definitely have a selection effect, not just because you aren't seeing as many leftists, but also because people of all political persuasions generally hide their craziest beliefs unless they know they are in good company. So you hang out with rightists and they get comfortable with you and tell you their metaphors that they secretly believe, but are so rarely in a space that is comfortable for leftists that you don't hear their metaphors that they secretly believe.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
7mo ago
What is the patriarchy or whiteness except the ultimate in shadowy central planning? With it white men crushed and destroyed the natural inclination of society to employ black women in every leadership role and it wasn't until about a decade ago that we finally realised that and ushered in the current age of milk and honey.
Uncoordinated behaviours wouldn't involve making up entire branches of science to trick people into thinking your ethnicity and sex is superior, and yet that is apparently one of two possible reasons white men do better than their counterparts on iq tests and tests of strength - either a shadowy cabal of evil white men engineered hyper specific tests that look like general knowledge testing or a strict measure of weight lifting while actually biasing these tests on behalf of other whites and guys, or every white just knows in their racist hearts how to pass an iq test the same way every man knows the secret sexist trick to win at arm wrestling.
The only reason q anon or flat earth is different is because it doesn't have the backing of the so called experts. But the experts have been peddling conspiracy theories for decades and the right have been pointing it out the entire time. Don't confuse holding institutional power for actual expertise. Progressives do not deserve endless charity and conservatives do not deserve endless scrutiny.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
7mo ago
Yeah but when people are railing against the patriarchy they aren't taking issue with patrilineal descent, they do assume nefarious motives.
They rely on the same blurred understanding of intent and agency as the q anon types, in that the more thoughtful among them will, when you really get into it with them, call it a prospiracy in the ssc sense of an aligned group having the same motives and therefore moving towards the same goal without the need to coordinate, but then go to back to using language that implies deliberate action when speaking generally.
You present the 'prospiracy' as the machinations of society and I agree, but the crank sees it as the reason their life didn't live up to their expectations. In my experience that is a better delineation between the crank and the conspiracy theorist than the status of their conspiracies.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
7mo ago
Who are these people who need to touch grass, the implication being that they are so opposed to the woke they make this (and @WhiningCoil) look tame in comparison -
it is just really exhausting to be constantly reminded that these are the most marginalized and oppressed people ever and the slightest hint of impatience or annoyance with them is a genocidal wish for them not to exist, and meanwhile we have to celebrate them everywhere every day, in films, in games, in books, nothing can be published without Representation and god fucking forbid any work feature all gender-conforming straight white people (or any two out of those three) because that's a hate crime.
I want to "just show basic human decency." I do show basic human decency. I do not hate anyone and I do not want LGBTQ people harmed, harassed, or shoved into a closet. And that's not enough. Because I have hateful, bigoted, genocidal beliefs (like maybe trans women shouldn't compete in women's sports, and it's just possible that some sex offenders with penises who want to be sent to women's prison are not sincere about their gender identity, and also they are like 0.5% of the population so maybe everything doesn't have to be about them!).
Because it looks to me like that there is precisely what the vast majority of the anti-woke - particularly on the motte - have been screaming exasperatedly for the past decade and it is the same gaslighting that you point out here - which has only started dying down recently (since the election made it clear the progressives weren't ordained by God is how it looks to me) and was previously much much more ubiquitous - that has made them apoplectic.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
7mo ago
Precisely! I mean, there's no point in empowering chumps who don't spend money, right? A business genius looks at that situation and says "women spend money like crazy, but vidya is male dominated! If we could only get women to buy our wire monkey of masculine development we'd be rolling in dough! I know, let's paint it pink!"
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
7mo ago
I have noticed that with a lot of games with publishers, I assume it's a lack of communication. Square Enix are particularly odd about it - a game like actraiser renaissance or trials of mana you can get on android for $15 cheaper than steam, but the ff pixel remasters cost the same on both platforms and then you get paranormasight, which is more expensive on android than steam.
I grabbed a copy of dune on android, it seems like a straight port so why not?
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
7mo ago
It's not about the individual characters or elements though, it's about the philosophy behind them. The idea of having a character in a wheelchair in your fps about elite spec ops units is bugnuts retarded and can only come from a brain warped by a perverse concept of inclusivity. World war 2 was not won by girlbosses and jamming one in your game immediately demonstrates a fealty to diversity over anything else like pleasing your fans or historical accuracy.
But yes, the justification used to do all that was easy money. It was an overly simplistic perspective that equated to cooking the golden goose to smuggle in the progressive agenda, but that was the justification.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
7mo ago
Vampire survivors and co? Juice Galaxy was my first thought, but that barrel of lunacy is free already.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
7mo ago
So, back to the original wording, critical theory pattern matches really well into "all have sinned and fallen short of the Glory of God, so continue sinning because God can take it- that's the duty of the all-powerful, isn't it?".
How would you respond to that question?
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
7mo ago
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
7mo ago
Sarcastic guns n glory American exceptionalism is kind of transparent man. I liked where you took it though.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
7mo ago
What else is there to say except "we shall see"? I would note that everything you quoted before Yarvin is well known to Musk and Trump and has been discussed at length, and was a large part of project 2025 - they do have plans to deal with an entrenched and uncooperative bureaucracy.
As for what Yarvin said, I just think it's premature to laugh off Trump's plans before he's even in office, mainly because he won the election, secured funding for the border, escaped impeachment, pulled out of the Paris accords, met with North Korea, put an embassy in Jerusalem - my most consistent recurring memory of the 2016 cycle is "Hahahaha Trump is such a fucking moron, can you believe this chump? He can't just... Oh holy shit he did it!"
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
7mo ago
Lol I had an inkling that might be what your username was about, but I wasn't sure. I've definitely gotten value from your posts though, if it helps. What would you tell that person was God's duty if not to bear our sin?
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
7mo ago
Apologies, please bear with me while I readjust to the motte's language norms. He was acquitted following his first impeachment is what I meant.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
7mo ago
Both were claimed entirely impossible. I'm not saying Trump can do no wrong, I'm saying actions that are impossible for the blue tribe are not necessarily impossible for the red tribe and vice versa. Also activist media claim the possible is impossible when it impedes their agenda.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
7mo ago
I can't be spending time listening to that, but I have seen conservatives bitching about it on x - do they really admit internal polling never showed Harris could win?
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
6mo ago
I don't know about the military claim, but I base my belief in that canard on my own perspective. I knew people as a youth who became cops and they were people who abused power in their teens and went on to abuse power as police. I have daydreamed about being an anti-hero, doing bad things for justice, could I resist the temptation to live out those fantasies if I was in a position to actualise them? I believe I could, I have been tested and stayed strong in the past. And I believe I could the second time and the third and fourth and so on for a while, but the 2054th time? The 20,743rd time? I like to think I would. I don't have that faith in anyone else on this planet however.
Beyond that though, we live in the era of justification. Everything can be justified if you widen or narrow your focus a bit! Principles are for contemptuous chumps and losers who are coping about their failure to win by any means necessary. The DNC came out and said they spent the entire campaign period lying to their supporters and the public in general, telling them they were winning when that was never true and people aren't mad at them for lying, they are mad at Joe Rogan for believing in dragons. That's for the highest office in the land and you think cops are going to be more honest? I'd guess nybbler was wrong saying it was a lot of people joining for power, but it definitely happens more than it should.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
6mo ago
Pick your poison? Between letting supporters of the Democratic party pick a nomination for president and then dealing with the challenges that arise, or predicting the challenges you expect, doing a cost benefit analysis and then deciding to coronate a drunk because you literally have no choice after the cognitive decline of the guy you have been claiming is sharper than ever becomes so apparent that gaslighting no longer works, as a result forcing your supporters to spend the next hundred days claiming things like her inability to give candid interviews/string three unrehearsed sentences together isn't a deal breaker when you already know it is then using every event that occurs to justify your decision because you claim to be data driven as you poison the data with more lies, which means you have actually just been wish casting this entire time?
One of those isn't poison, it's medicine.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
6mo ago
When you decide you are more important than your stories - usually because a bunch of people are telling you that - you inevitably start avoiding and being avoided by the people who put the story first (they don't like you because they can't trust you) and self ghetto with the other self obsessed, who will help you prop yourself up in exchange for the same. Then you have basically turned your news outfits into a distributed soap opera where you and your friends generate stories for people that may also mention current events.
All media becomes incestuous when it becomes self obsessed, and all media eventually becomes self obsessed. But these motherfuckers started off that way.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
6mo ago
Perhaps I'll add, why didn't democrats rig the 2024 election given that nobody suffered consequences for rigging the election in 2020?
Imagine you put a puppet in as president, knowing that he was controllable due to ill health and that your control of mass media could hide and lie about any visible instances of his declining health, which doctors assured you was bad, but currently easy to hide. Imagine that due to circumstances outside your control his condition deteriorates faster than you expect and can manage, such that after a disastrous debate performance (perhaps sabotaged by an alternative faction in your party) power players in your organisation begin publicly demanding he step down. If he steps down however, you will have to return a bunch of money you've already spent and start a brand new presidential campaign 100 days out from the election. Due to your financial situation and because all of the highly ambitious possible alternatives refuse, you have to run a person nobody thinks can win.
Wouldn't you cede that election and put your effort in preparing for the next one? You still have to campaign as hard as possible for the people downticket, but you aren't going to pull out all the tricks to win the presidency. Especially not when your opponents are watching like hawks.
Note in this hypothetical you are the party leaders, I don't mean to imply anything about the average democrat supporter, who I believe aren't especially motivated by harming the outgroup.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
6mo ago
I would say American society has moved right in some ways, leftward in others. It's not that useful of a framework for understanding society even by meme standards, imho
It partly depends on personal perspective too. If you are left you might see Tulsi Gabbard and RFK Jr joining Trump as proof they shifted right, whereas if you are right leaning you might see it as Trump moving the party left. Who is correct?
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
6mo ago
It's a fantasy scenario for sure, but Arjin's point is sound - hell I'd say he doesn't go far enough. They don't get the economy or something else, they can have everything else - the economy, the administration, the military, healthcare, the media, education - if someone else controls culture you are going to be swimming up a waterfall.
Hey, I don't know if you remember me, I hung out around here six months ago and then flounced off after a poorly received post (in my defence at the time I was disassociating hard due to the election, and what I saw at the time as insane behaviour from my (blue tribe) circle of friends and family but I'll own up to it, I handled it poorly.) At the time you gave me advice that I took to heart, it was a great post I thought on a lot, to the point where for a few weeks my personal mantra was 'all the best teachers are dead'. I really can't thank you enough for that post, it sent me down multiple rabbit holes which I have found hugely helpful and I do believe if I hadn't read it I would be incarcerated in some fashion by now.
If all I wanted to do was thank you I would have just pmed you, but I always pay attention when I notice synchronicity, so when I read this post (I've been lurking since just before the election) I knew I had to log in and say something. Because while I loved Juvenal and Gracian, the author whose insight helped me the most wasn't one you listed - it was none other than Siddhartha Gautama. I have been devouring books on Buddhism for the past six months, it utterly blows my mind how smart and insightful the Dhammapada is. Like you I have no interest in Buddhist dogma, and in reality I've spent most of my time trying to jam sutras into my default pseudo-Christian perspective (they actually go together quite well in my opinion but I understand why Buddhists and Christians don't like hearing that), but it has had a huge influence on my outlook.
I ended up reaching a similar conclusion to you, although I think I picked a different resolution. See my conclusion was that enlightenment is functionally identical to insanity. You can not attain it until you let go of everything - including the ability to understand and be understood. That is the most difficult thing in the world to give up, because you can't do it deliberately - just the act of trying itself is failing. And the idea of going insane isn't particularly appealing to most people either. Once it happens you realise you were making a big deal about very little, but it's like virginity, once it's gone you can never really get it back.
More options
Context Copy link