@HlynkaCG's banner p

HlynkaCG

old man yelling at clouds

11 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 05 17:58:45 UTC

Failed repeatedly in his attempts to die a hero and has now lived long enough to become the villain.


				

User ID: 659

HlynkaCG

old man yelling at clouds

11 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 05 17:58:45 UTC

					

Failed repeatedly in his attempts to die a hero and has now lived long enough to become the villain.


					

User ID: 659

If you don't rebel you die. Death is one of the few absolute certainties in life. You're also wrong about not having a choice, we all have a choice in who we serve.

but I’m not aware of a pattern of such killings by Putin.

This is a joke, yes?

I know it's an unpopular take here but the older i get the more convinced I've become that you cannot derive healthy morally upstanding behavior from materialism and self-interest (enlightened or otherwise) alone. A strictly "rational" worldview inevitably devolves into either nihilism, hedonism, or psychopathy.

As @ControlsFreak observes down-thread

People really run away from agency/blame when it casts shade on their own actions or their political commitments...

If you would prefer to "serve in Hell" rather than "rebel" or "withdraw" that is wholly on you. Once again, are you not the captain of your soul?

Except for the part where "To serve in Hell" is a choice one makes.

"Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven"

Is it though?

Sounds a lot like hubris to me. All men must serve, even a King. There are no rights nor privileges without responsibilities.

So what you seem to be saying is that Democrats are the real racists. I'm glad we can finally agree on something.

I'm suddenly reminded of scenario in the Moon is a Harsh Mistress where the alleged founder and public-face of the lunar Independence movement is actually an AI-generated amalgam of multiple people.

Hal has been floated as a candidate for years and the evidence never bears out. Why would Satoshi create a Hal persona?

I think you are confusing consequent and antecedent, if you instead ask "why would Hal create a Satoshi persona?" the answer becomes obvious. If the goal is to remain hidden it will always be more difficult to find something that does not exist than something that does.

No, but that's not what "dominance" means.

We're not debating the definition of "dominance" we're debating the definition of "effective", and in either case @Belisarius appears to disagree with you else it begs the question; "What's the point?"

The idea that identity politics are not effective is simply false. The dominant coalitions rely on identity politics and use it for the advantage of the groups that it comprises.

For all of that alleged "dominance" what have they actually accomplished? What great works have been produced? Are the environments where the Identitarians hold sway happier, healthier, and more equanimous? Or are they more often than not complete (and occasionally literal) shit-shows?

Not just ineffective, but corrosive and distinctly Left-Wing/Rousseauean in nature.

I find myself wanting to ask them; are you not the Captain of your soul?.

IQ correlates with achievement in the general case

What part of "it's primary role is to sort aspiring members of the chattering class into 'winning' and 'loosing' buckets" did you not understand?

No, what I don't understand is how it's supposed to be an argument in favor of HBD and against individual merit.

ETA: or rebutt my claims regarding [current year] academia for that matter.

Let this be yet another reminder that LLMs are not reasoning engines, and that while nested regression can be an effective approach to certain use-cases, it is absolutely terrible for others.

do you mean the email server?

Do we really need to go over all of this again?

Per Comey's report "Exonerating" Clinton, on at least three occasions Clinton or someone on her staff made unauthorized copies of classified documents for whom the Secretary of State was not the classifying authority. All 3 of said documents were tagged "Top Secret" and "SCI" meaning that strict compartmentalization procedures are to be followed. Right there, that's three felonies worth 2 - 5 years in prison a piece for a normal person.

In addition to the above, said copies were then removed from the Secretary of State's SCIF (a violation of the afore mentioned compartmentalization procedures) digital copies were then uploaded to a staffer's personal computer and then sent to Clinton's personal email account in the clear (ie unencrypted) over an unsecured internet connection. (Something most security types would agree constitutes gross negligence). At some point the digital copies are altered to remove their tags and tracking data implying that somebody knew that they were being naughty and adding another 3 three felonies to the pile. The documents were recovered in the possession of an unnamed staffer's spouse (who did not have a security clearance) during an unrelated criminal investigation revealing at minimum of 3 known instances of Unauthorized Disclosure (more felonies).

Investigators subpoenaed the staffer's* email history at which point the Clinton server suffered an unfortunate loss of, oh who are we kidding, they wiped the server to destroy the evidence rather than answer the subpoena wich is about as clear-cut a case of Federal Obstruction of Justice as a prosecutor could ask for.

In contrast the FBI raided Trump's home in Mar-a-Lago for an alleged breach far less egregious than any of these.

*let's be blunt, given that the material was recovered from Anthony Weiner's personal computer while he was being investigated for child-porn and cyberstalking we can surmise that the staffer in question was Huma Abedin.

I still don't understand what argument you think you're making either then or now.

The thing that MacNamara is famous for in military circles and the thing you seem to be referencing is his efforts to make the US Military "More Efficient" by emphasizing technology over troops. Why bother with strict recruitment standards or waste money on training, housing, medical care, etc... if all you need is a gaggle of conscripts to draw fire so the airplanes know where to drop their bombs? Or so the thinking went.

What I don't understand, and what neither you nor the OP, @aardvark2, @SwordOfOccam, Et Al have bothered to explain is how MacNamara acting like the uncharitable strawman of a Silicon Valley Utilitarian is supposed to convince anyone that we ought to start treating minorities as second-class citizens, or has anything to do with HBD, Ashkenazi Jews, or Group differences in IQ.

And that point would hat be?

If there is an argument that hes trying to make i dont see it. In the meantime McNamara's legacy as SecDef is one of why no one should ever listen to WEIRD systematizing utilitarian types who think they can fix things with this one weird trick.

At no point in your prior comment did you try to make an argument/point, you were just wanted to insult/dunk on me.

Your behavior here is an apt illustration of the wider trends of historical ignorance, sloppy thinking, and "arguments as soldiers" that typify the HBD discourse on this forum.

HBD posters on theMotte generally fall into two broad categories, strict bio-determisnists, and reflexively contrarian intersectionalists/identitarians. Both consider evaluating individual people on the basis of race/ethnic membership to be the "correct" / "rational" means of understanding human behavior and both deeply resent the Anglo/American traditions of individual responsibility, agency, and merit. They derisively refer to the norms of equality before the law and evaluating people on the basis of individual ability/merit enshrined in the US Constitution as "blank slatism" and it is the destruction of these norms that is their primary motivation.

I'm not much more clearly I can state it.

McNamara was never a general. He was the CEO of Ford.

I don't think it's "deranged" so much as a plain reading of the text.

Look around. Who do you see pushing for more racial "consciousness" or "consideration" in US Government policy? It isn't Conservative Christians, or Reagan-style "Big Tent" Republicans. It's Midwestern Democrats, edgy blue-tribe socialists on Twitter/in the media, and various other flavors of secular progressive. Look at where the racial tensions have boiled over in recent years, it's progressive strongholds like Minneapolis, Chicago, San Fransisco, and New York.

but it’s also a poor fit for what progressives believe.

I think you're wrong.

It's a simple fact of US politics that if you support race-based discrimination, you vote Democrat, or maybe Libertarian if you are an edgy /pol/ rDrama type. The GOP are a distant 4th or 5th choice after the Greens and CPUSA, and have been since Bush I elevated Thomas to the USSC back in '91.

Exactly what it says on the tin.

  • -20