Immediate_Bit
4d ago
Embedded in the demand for concern is the demand to take risk to bring about the positive outcome. Maybe life hasn't gone that well for you. Outcomes are very unfair by luck and nature. And yet it is you who is being asked to bare the burden; not someone from the natural aristocracy, who can fail and land on a gold hill. I reserve my contempt for the aged and wealthy who are very much in a position to do and say positive things and do not. Transferring this burden is very much "send young men to die in old men's wars".
And further, when you're asking them to engage, you're asking them to engage with power. Most people on this forum they can engage in political conversations and not worry about things flying over their head. As long as they're reasonably informed they'll be ok. The 100iq person has to worry about getting ragdolled and humiliated. At least if you are humiliated you'll know it's because you weren't prepared. For them it stings. They can't just show up better next time. It's a game played by their betters. Better to drink what's coming down the pipe. These people still have fully Shakesbeardean existences, just not with regard to politics.
Immediate_Bit
5d ago
I think the NPC criticism, while correct, is deployed overly aggressively. These people understand their place in the system and their relative irrelevancy. Making banal statements to signal loyalty to the group most loyal to you is rational. Hyper-analysing things for truth is costly. Knowing that you are a peasant and that what matters most to you are your material concerns and competitions with those around you is wise, even if mostly unconsious. Democracy requires three things: intelligence, engagement and character. Of course you should be blackpilled.
This is especially true of the intellectual class who actually do something more sophisticated. They understand truth on an unconscious level (they have to) and then warp their whole being to succeed in society. This is more sophisticated than our autistic analyses. Anti-social? Yes. But people level critiques of idiocy when they should be levelling critiques of character.
Immediate_Bit
6d ago
I would counter that it was a wild success. They demonstrated they can riot with impunity and use this to threaten their opposition at will. Wokeness (just universalism) is further entrenched. Two steps forward one step back is a very successful long term strategy.
Immediate_Bit
7d ago
What I find really grating about this conversation is that you live in a deeply unserious society, and then when something like this happens people are like oh my god wow how could this have possibly happened. As if all your institutions will just somehow magically be immune to the social and moral decay of the last 100 years. Same thing with the secret service and Trump assasination attempt. I guess a similar thing with covid. All this hand wringing; no where near the root issue, nor even approaching it.
Immediate_Bit
23d ago
Everyone seems to be assuming it was from the American side. Just as likely to be a Venezuelan.
Immediate_Bit
27d ago
Saying they will run Venezuela is interesting because, much like the hysterical Somilia tweet, the rhetoric is correct but the action seems to be missing. They need to retire the existing government and appoint someone, but I don't think the appetite or seriousness will be there, nor would the seriousness to sustain it be there outside this presidency.
Immediate_Bit
28d ago
You make the case like you have and if it doesn't (can't) get heard - you defect. The longer you play along the longer you incentivise the status quo. But I probably wouldn't have the balls to defect also.
Immediate_Bit
28d ago
Top 5 comment all time.
You could also greatly simplify credentialling and training. Doctors don't feel like they have it great because the training hours are unnecessary and shit. Even the work hours can be pretty bad in US once qualified. Train more, work fewer hours, more open/simple credentialling.
Single payer has a very ugly aspect to it that you see when you are exposed to it a lot. There's a good book written by an Indian about it in England (forget the name). I've seen people come to ER and get a bed because their wife was in. Complain of some general stomach pain. Unable to elicit any signs. Probably the current system has this as well. It's just a very ugly thing when you make something free for common good and the underclass abuse it in ways that make you want to put them on the moon.
Immediate_Bit
1mo ago
I had the exact opposite reaction. I think everything in the article is excellent up until the app idea. It's totally unnecessary. Trump could have marched over government. People vote for the president and expect them to lead. If "the law" is in the way then get it out of the way.
You don't need it to staff government. If you set out a competent agenda you will get talent from everywhere.
People just need/want to vote once and have it fixed. For 99% of people that is the appropriate level of engagement. You need an American Bukele, perhaps with a stiffer temperament, but instead they got Trump.
Immediate_Bit
1mo ago
Strongly agree on removing the bullshit. I think it's especially bad in science. I think most of the disciplines do next to no useful work because of it. If you're going to give someone the title, just give them the money and let them work on whatever they want. Fewer scientists - fine - but full freedom.
Immediate_Bit
1mo ago
And Slave Morality is the Master Morality of moralities, because it is clearly most effective and now people are blindly justifying it whatever the outcome because it is powerful and blindly justifying whatever is most dominant is ... Master Morality. Gee wiz that sounds like recursion.
Immediate_Bit
1mo ago
Started reading this. Didn't finish. Know what it will fall into. It's going to be one of these split the world into a dichotomy that doesn't actually map onto reality then spend thousands of words agonising over the discrepancy between the real world and the 2 variable system. There should be a name for this. Perhaps Retard's Dilemma.
Master Morality is just the more natural way of things. Bears, lions all live under master morality. So do elk. They can't co-ordinate much to create moral systems or aren't incentivised to.
Slave Morality is just the moral rules people come up with when the want to push away some of the harshness of nature. If we don't constantly compete over each others wives, and we don't steal from each other etc. etc. we can all be more successful (as a group). I don't know if group selection is involved biologically (I have heard this is controversial) - it certainly can be in culture. And cultures which punish those who break group norms will de-select those people from the gene pool. Japanese are very different to Africans.
Systems which organise people with better incentives to co-operate will outcompete those which don't. African people are much closer to Master Morality. Strong rule. You see this in black NBA players when they are close to an MVP - they will talk themselves up saying they are the best. White players do not do this. In most white cultures it is very impolite to do so. You perform and let others judge you for your performance. You don't make the judgement on yourself. Also - much of the distaste of Trump (it is distasteful once you stop laughing, but it takes a long time to stop laughing).
Obviously a society is made up of individuals and they still need to do things so you only want your moral system cutting down antisocial behaviours. Extremely boastful behaviour is like this - it creates a race to the bottom. Moral systems are basically that - what rules and enforcements are needed to avoid races to the bottom so the group (individuals in the group) can be better off. And then gaming the moral system.
We still need to show off and so negotiate rules around these behaviours, then try to break the rules, accuse other of it etc etc.
The strong want to game the system by lionizing their strength and taking what they can get away with (or are at least incentivised to) and the weak limiting their harm. All while attaching themselves to strengths they can feed off. There own strengths aren't actually fair strengths to target etc. etc.
So a starting point for negotiation is all your behaviour that doesn't benefit me is bad (can simply be you doing good stuff that makes me less competitive with you) and vice versa. Then argue, lie, and try to create a ven-diagram of what we agree on and can/are willing to enforce. Thus, morality.
It makes groups stronger so it persists. It creates genetic selection in the groups.
Immediate_Bit
1mo ago
This is tangential, but I think people underestimate the effect wireheading will play in this. For those unfamiliar, wireheading refers to experiments where rats and people have had stimulatory electrodes inserted into certain parts of their brain and sometimes, due to misplacement in people or correct placement in animals, result in completely addictatory behaviour surrounding the stimulation of the electrode.
We already have this to a large extent in drugs. Anyone with any experience with this knows its incredibly profound the extent to which "push a chemical button" (and a very crude button) changes subjective experience. Societies nearly have (or perhaps have) collapsed under this even with these crude mechanisms which are naturally opposed by evolutionary homeostatic mechanisms.
If we end up with true wireheading a lot of these concerns become redundant. Wireheading without reason is extinctatory so we may see future life as a combination of wireheading with rational self-preservation (in contrast to the self-annihilation of the heroin addict).
A lot of modern suffering is from a brain poorly adapted for modern conditions. Luxury-automated-gay-space-communism is further from the adapted environment. Our experiences with drugs have demonstrated an arbitrariness to experience you can bypass. I think you'll have to be a pretty enlightened creature to overcome the pull of this technology if (or as) it becomes available.
Once this comes online it would greatly affect what you're proposing, but hard to predict timelines.
Immediate_Bit
1mo ago
I don't think you have grounds to deport the ancestors of slaves, but you do have grounds to deport recent immigrants who were brought in under cynical circumstances or who have stronger allegiances to foreign governments/populations than they do their new nation.
You don't need to eliminate the burden. You simply need to manage its size.
I just had this thought of moving to China one day to get away from Brazil like conditions and getting bullied by Chinese for being from a retard nation that destroyed itself with immigration.
The liberalism of Jews is an interesting connection, because is it their will-to-power driving them towards the dominant ideology like other elites (in which sense they are captured) or is it because they support liberalism because it promotes Jewish interests (much easier to compete in a society as a Jew if you don't have compete with White enthnonats coordinating against you)?
I think in the Palestinian question, liberalism hurts them as they are simply another Right wing apartheid state that progressives want to crush (continue the march of Unitarianism). White enthnonats would not much care if they seized all Palestinian territory and paid them to leave (might trigger a local Middle Eastern war, I know). Conflicting incentives all round.
Immediate_Bit
1mo ago
There is a sense of victory in that, even in a troll post, people have to quite accurately reflect our views.
Immediate_Bit
1mo ago
This is correct. Jews do what Whites are culturally not allowed to do: leverage their ingroup bias to help one another in society. You can understand why they do this but this is going to make them unpopular.
Any acknowledgement of this begs the question: should Whites be doing the same? Obviously Jews don't want this and progressives don't want this understood as a (justifiable) tit-for-tat behaviour.
Immediate_Bit
1mo ago
There is a way to test this, though I'm not sure he would submit to it: https://reactionaryblog.substack.com/p/using-fmri-to-remove-gays-and-paedophiles
Immediate_Bit
1mo ago
Piers is an entertainer. He's not that smart, but that works because the audience isn't. He's plays a normal person's caricature of a smart person. His main appeal is he's non-threatening.
Immediate_Bit
1mo ago
Many people view themselves highly until they actually have to do something.
Immediate_Bit
1mo ago
The buttlicking superiors and lording over subordinates is really pernicious because whites hire them (especially the competent ones) and are impressed by how energetic and agreeable they are. But beneath them is a very different experience. People who buttlick expect the same from their subordinates and when they don't get this they are not pleased.
Immediate_Bit
1mo ago
I was going to add some observations but they've already been pretty well made by others.
What I would say is, if freedom of association was real, what is the tax you would pay to work in an organisation without Indians? 5% of salary feels too low. 10% feels slightly high. But if the choice was an organisation with 100% Northern Europeans and one 50/50 Indians and Europeans, I'd take the 10% hit in a heartbeat.
Immigration is interesting because when you have a few token people from different countries, especially if well selected, it is very interesting. But as soon as you have lots of them it is shit. Really is a dose makes the poison.
My very spicy take on immigration is that it is basically "retard colonialism" where you take the people but not the land.
People are always trying retarded shit to see what they can get away with. I think with modernity you just see the enforcement incentives are very different to smaller tight-knit communities. Everyone has so little to gain, and there are so many more interactions, and it is hard to coordinate because people are more atomised, and the person you are trying to enforce the norm on can just tantrum and you have to deal with that.
I think this "humour my bullshit or I'll throw a tantrum" is always present, just harder to enforce against in modernity. So you get a race to the bottom.
This problem is much less bad in rural areas due to this dynamic.
Also the elderly. I can see the tendency but they have grown up in a world where they feared repercussions if they did this.
I'm moving to a new area that will have a lots of agricultural development which will greatly boost the economy of the area. What would be some good businesses to get involved in this kind of place? Not a wealthy place. GDP per cap US$4k and population low 6 figures. Year round hot climate. Projects planned could increase local economy by multiples over time.
Lying to game the system is a submission to the system and reinforces the judge's position.
Sincere regret is a submission to actual morality and needs to be punished.
More options
Context Copy link