JarJarJedi
Streamlined derailments and counteridea reeducation
User ID: 1118
JarJarJedi
5mo ago
White men don’t exist.
Almost true, but not exactly. My bank, for example, has a landing page where they show the usual stock pictures of happy people, presumably after using their bank services. I haven't seen a white male for a while there. But recently there were - not just one, but two. And a kid between them. If you get my drift. So there are situations where white men exist. Still waiting for a situation where white heterosexual men exist...
those making the decisions are so ideologically committed that they’re willing to hurt their own bottom line in order to “do the right thing.”
I think this is an experimentally established fact? I mean, Bud Light, Victoria Secret, Disney?
they do so with no guarantee that their rival agency is going to follow the same set of rules,
Here I think they have pretty good guarantee. First of all, they are all product of the same indoctrination system. Second of all, if somebody steps out of the line, online mobs - and in the case of especially stubborn target, actual mobs with actual weapons - will take care of them pretty quickly.
It's not a conspiracy - at least no more than things like money or English or Christianity are conspiracies. It's all in the open.
Was listening recently to Orwell's biography, and while they discussed Orwell's service at the time of the Spanish Civil War, I realized that most books I've read about the subject were from people either directly or indirectly supporting the Communist side (Orwell, of course, served on the red side and was wounded pretty gravely there). While I am not saying what they wrote were lies, their sympathies inevitably colored how they approach the matter. So I wonder - can anybody recommend some good works about the period which aren't written by leftists? I am not looking for right-side propaganda, but for an honest effort, just not from the left side, because I already seen those and now want to see something different if possible. Can be fictional or documentary, but I don't want a dry historic "this happened, then that happened, then that happened" but something more narratory, engaging and explanatory even if it's a documentary.
JarJarJedi
5mo ago
Good point. While I was living in California and visiting San Francisco, I have seen very flamboyant gay and trans types, and I am not personally a huge fan of that. I also have seen people sleeping on the streets, shooting up on the streets and defecating on the streets. To be honest, the latter types bothered me much, much more.
JarJarJedi
5mo ago
Also, I have known several trans people (and worked with some on various stages of transition) and none of them were those flaming antifa provocateurs one sees on the internet so frequently. None of them brought that part of their identity to work (I knew only because I have known them pre and post, so it was hard not to know but if I didn't I may not have known at all), none of them were doing anything different from any other guy or gal, in fact. Maybe out of work they were living a wild life, who knows - I certainly did not and neither did the rest of the coworkers. I can't say how many of the trans people are like that and how many are different, it's just a few anecdata points, but I suspect there are much more such people than the militant flamboyant types. So if the OP isn't going to dig for it, he'd likely would never know. Of course, if he plans to do romance at work (bad idea anyway) then maybe more care is required, but otherwise I wouldn't worry too much.
JarJarJedi
5mo ago
If you mean a real phobia, there's probably whole bookshelves already written on how psychiatrists treat phobias. Any competent one would know at least where to find these bookshelves.
If you mean political disagreement that is called "phobia" because of the desire to present opposing opinion as some kind of abnormality ("only a deeply sick person could have an opinion different than mine!") then there's nothing to cure, and the best way to lessen disagreements - though in no way a guaranteed one - is to respectfully and logically present your argument and respectfully listen to the other side's one.
JarJarJedi
5mo ago
Yes, inflatable/blow-up decoys are used massively and are rumored to be the source of the comical Russian reports of destroying more of a particular system or type of armament that existed in reality. It's not that Russians just invented it - somebody likely destroyed a decoy and reported about it upstream, where the figures are aggregated, only they destroyed a cheap wooden box or balloon. Most hits aren't easy to conform and also the low level soldiers have low incentive to do it - who wants to turn from a hero who destroyed a million-dollar American war machine to a doofus that spent expensive ammunition on blowing up a cheap painted balloon? There are numerous interviews online with manufacturers of these decoys, some of them look pretty convincing on video. Russians seem to be catching up on the game too, so I expect by now it happens on both sides with some frequency.
JarJarJedi
5mo ago
Nonsense
I was talking about the partisan structures specifically, not the government structures, and about open and openly practicing Marxists who do not hide their ideology and openly come to elections with it, not Soviet spies pretending to be regular Americans to get to governmental secrets. Maybe "infiltrated" in the hindsight wasn't the best word to use as indeed it also can be used for clandestine activities, but that's not what I meant. I meant if you are an open and genuine Marxist, and do not hide it, you would be much more at home at Dem party now than back then, and conversely, there are many more such people in the party now than there was back then. I would imagine back in Stalin's era there were much more hidden Soviet spies (who we can assume being Marxists by default) in partisan and governmental structures, and even if Russian spies are there now, they aren't probably Marxists anymore. But that's not the part I was talking about.
I'll address the other points later, hopefully, a bit busy now.
JarJarJedi
5mo ago
OK in this case I am sorry for getting it wrong.
JarJarJedi
5mo ago
the unprovoked displacement
What "unprovoked" displacement? Local Arabs had been fighting Jews for several decades by then, and had several successful mass murders under their belts. What does the word "unprovoked" mean in your dictionary?
Of course, the "disaster" was that the goal that they - local Arab population and outside Arab countries - set out to achieve, which is, in modern terms, genocide of the Jews and ethnic cleansing of Israel's territory - not only has not been achieved, but led to significant worsening of the situation for many Arabs. It is a completely accurate description of the result of their decisions to reject a peaceful coexistence and go for the war of elimination instead. That ended in a disaster for them.
JarJarJedi
5mo ago
When was the last time you saw ordinary Republicans protesting for those things?
Republicans are usually much less supportive of intervening into other countries - even tyrannical ones - when they don't mess with us.
Biden has issued statements calling for democracy in Cuba, Nicaragua, Venezuela, etc, against their Marxist-Leninist regimes
If you look from proclamations to actual actions, though, you see that the policy towards tyrannical regimes is always softened - that happened with Obama, and that is also happening with whoever pulls Biden's strings, which some say is the same Obama. Be it Iran, be it Cuba, be it China - beyond some perfunctory words, it's never any serious action. In fact, it's plenty of the actions in the opposite directions.
The think tanks and NGOs that catalogue the human rights crimes of these various countries and demand democracy are also pretty much always staffed by progressive democrats.
I don't know what these NGOs have in their files, deep in their computer drives, but if you look on their public stance, the impression one gets is that there's about two countries that ever commit human rights crimes worth discussing - one of them is the US, and you can easily guess the second one.
Of course, if you take the longer view you will Democrat Presidents taking military action against Marxist-Leninist movements quite regularly throughout the past century.
Well, if we talk about the whole century, the Democrat party wasn't as thoroughly infiltrated by the Marxists as they are now. Marxists were mostly on the fringe, and they are full mainstream now, with wide representation in all institutions of the society. Thus, of course, what has been then and what is happening now is rather different.
JarJarJedi
5mo ago
that Islam is just another religion and that, like Christianity and Judaism and other bronze-age religions that were once full of barbarism and genocidal ideology, the civilizing effects of modern Western liberalism will eventually secularize them
I say, who cares? I mean yes, maybe in 400 years the barbarians' descendants would be as civilized as we are now, or much more, and their descendants would look with horror on what is being done now and conduct ceremonies to honor the innocent victims of Islamic terror in 20th-21th centuries. Why should I care whether it happens or not? I won't live in 400 years, I am living now and the barbarians are committing their barbaric atrocities now. Screw that 1000-year stare the ivory tower idiots try to sell us because they read a couple of history book and now they think for some reason they are oh so much smarter than the rest. If there are barbarians now, they should be judged now. If some crazy Christian dude would come and try to burn heretics on the central square of my city, I think he should be jailed, and if he resists, shot. I want the same treatment for crazy dudes of all religions. If declaring "it's just another religion" helps that, so be it, I don't care. I don't see why either way would matter here.
The thing we need to realize here is we don't need any special case for Islam. On the contrary, we should stop applying special cases for Islam - and that's what is happening constantly in the wokesphere. Rape? Of course it's horrible, one of the most horrible sins imaginable! Oh, you mean it's done by fanatical Islamists who proclaim to be oppressed? Ah, that's different business, we need a nuanced approach here! Woman oppression? That's bullshit, maaan! Oh, you mean woman oppression in Saudi Arabia? Maaan, you can't apply your morals there! Well, yes, I can. Screw that. That's the root of all evil here. If we ever manage our culture to stop doing that, we'd win 99% of the battle already.
But I am pessimistic about Islam, in its current form, being capable of coexisting long-term with other ideologies
Again, I say I don't care, it's not my problem. I mean, it's not on me to figure out how to make requirements on Quran work in the modern world. What needs to be done is the uniform demand to live by the modern world rules, no ifs, no buts, no coconuts, no discounts and "nuanced approaches". If you can do it and keep the Quran - fine, keep it. I don't mind at all, I don't care what you do to achieve it, whatever works for you. If you can't - you should be either forced to, or be forcibly expelled from the places where civilized people live. That should be the test - whether you can follow the civilized society rules.
JarJarJedi
5mo ago
This is beyond horrible, this is literally declaring people suffering from a disease subhuman and cutting off their rights.
BTW I'm sure this is coming from the same people that advocate for giving the drug addicts drugs, syringes and paraphernalia, for "harm reduction".
Is this the sort of thing the ACLU would take up the fight for?
Old ACLU? Possible. New ACLU? Only if you manage to woke-code it - e.g. prove that, say, minorities suffer from sleep apnea 5x from whites (may be plausible btw, given obesity numbers etc.) Otherwise - no chance.
JarJarJedi
5mo ago
True, honest people have nothing to hide from the government, and no reason to object to any coercive measure, as long as it's framed to affect only the lawbreakers. There is no historical example of the government ever abusing such measures or turning them against law-abiding innocent people. In fact, it is clearly impossible, as the person who the government prosecutes is clearly ipso facto not law-abiding.
JarJarJedi
5mo ago
Back then when I've been using IRC I've been running a log server with back history and notifications for my name. And people I conversed with (admittedly, as geeky and more geeky than myself) did so too.
JarJarJedi
5mo ago
Anybody has a good take on what just happened with OpenAI / Sam Altman (and also immediately after another board member and founder, Greg Brockman)? It was pretty much out of the blue and formulations - such as "board no longer has confidence" - are pretty harsh for a regular business disagreement. Something big seems to have happened, and it happened fast. Suggestions?
JarJarJedi
5mo ago
I did, and that's why I used this example - because there are multiple examples like this which, especially when combined from different languages, kind of make "strong S-W" seem utterly ridiculous.
JarJarJedi
5mo ago
I suspect Armenians realized that they have no hope, Russia, to which they wanted to align, has zero interest in them, and they are fresh out of friends. On the other hand, Aliev is being smart and content with taking the win and not pissing off the West unnecessarily, at least for now. They wanted Karabakh back for years, now they have it and will likely have enough to do for now to absorb it. So for now it probably will quiet down for a while.
JarJarJedi
5mo ago
while not actually seeming to know much of anything about the place
I think you are seeing it in too black and white. Israel knows a lot about the place. But counting million-sized populations which have a hostile government with a little interest in the welfare of the citizens, and people living in semi-legal arrangements best described as "middle ages with iphones" does not really make the task easy. It's not an on-off switch - either you know all, or you know nothing. It's you may know a lot, but there's even more of it that you don't know. If anything, the amount of knowledge served Israel intelligence very badly - they knew so much they severely overestimated just how much they know, and thought they know exactly how the enemy thinks. That led to a chain of decisions - in the hindsight proven to be spectacularly bad - that enabled the current catastrophe. It wasn't the problem of knowing nothing, it was a problem of becoming arrogant and complacent.
JarJarJedi
5mo ago
What evidence have you seen that makes this a matter of "fact" to you? From my understanding, the studies that show this are about as high a quality as studies on trans-youth medicine, relying on parental-reports of well-being and slanted samples.
I wouldn't be too surprised, tbh, if adopted children to gay couples showed better outcomes than an average child over the whole population. The reason is very simple - adoption is a selective process. Any adoption agency that isn't completely dissolved in wokeness and just melts with "awwww gays!" seeing any same sex couple, would require people to have stable relationship, clean home, decent income, etc. It's not that such people can't be abusive or just bad parents - it's just that the incidence in this cohort would likely be lower than over the whole population, where any couple with functioning plumbing can have as many kids as they feel like.
More interesting study would be comparing outcomes to adoptions of the similar social and financial stature, between same sex and hetero couples. But this may require a sample size that may be difficult to collect. We have less than 10 years when same-sex adoption has been fully legal, way too early to measure the outcomes.
JarJarJedi
5mo ago
Why would it be a full-time job? If you're a person that doesn't do committed relationships, and given an active sex life of ~30 years, having just one partner a month - which doesn't sound like a full time job at all - would already take you to 360 partners. Of course, that's over the (active) lifetime, so median would be half of that? Still 180. All you need is a culture that allows you to hook up with a new partner at least once a month and of course the availability of the new partners. I think currently, grindr or other ways, that isn't much of a problem? Of course, that assumes a person absolutely averse to long-term relationships (which btw is the opposite of almost every homosexual person I've ever met, but I don't pretend my sample is in any way representative) and if you look at all the population the key metric would be how many are actually long-term and short-term people. But by itself, "it's a full-time job" doesn't seem to hold water here.
JarJarJedi
5mo ago
Of course, it's old and true trick, which the US system uses much more extensively than Russia. I' just saying on the whole, it still makes Russian system look much less broken - which in general would be a weird thing for me to say, but I must admit the truth when I see it.
JarJarJedi
5mo ago
Hard is that your linguistics fully determines your thought processes, and if in your language "tomorrow" and "yesterday" are the same word, you view time in a fundamentally different way than somebody who grew up with different words. The best book exploring hard S-W that I read is "Babel-17" by Delany. Softer versions are that linguistics may not be the ultimate determinant, but has certain influence - obviously, the strength of influence determines the "softness" of a particular position.
As I said, framing is real (or at least appears so) and confirmed by reproducible studies, and widely used in marketing industry, for example. So that part I think still alive. But something like "people that have same word for wavelengths X and Y actually perceive them differently than those that have different words" is already rather suspect, and even harder claims that go deeper into thought patterns become even more unlikely.
JarJarJedi
5mo ago
Well they can join the pro-homo commune if that's a central value to them.
That's the point, it's almost never is a central value either way. Shaming homoes into the closet is not something most people would put any serious effort into, and specifically making the community as welcome to homoes as humanly possible would not be a valuable effort for most either. "I DNGAF" would be the most common position by now, I suspect. 2 centuries ago it might be different, but by now it'd be no more interesting either way than, say, dudes that jerk off to tentacle porn. Not something worth the effort either way.
None of the things that you characterize as 'insanities' would exist if their perpetrators were shamed into the 'closet', or better, if they were not able to propagate the very idea of them.
This may be true, but in a useless way. There are a lot of hypothetical worlds where it wouldn't happen. If Al Qaeda took over the US, it wouldn't happen. If Soviet Union took over the world, it wouldn't happen. If we didn't have democracy or free speech, it wouldn't happen. Etc. etc. The problem here is not to find one hypothetical world where it wouldn't happen, that's easy. The problem is to find one where it didn't happen but some other things that we still want to happen happened. And that's a much more complex question.
Again, nobody will choose to isolate themselves into enclaves or move to less-technologically-advanced countries if they did not feel strongly about any of these issues.
Well, Amish do exist, and they seem to have mostly sustainable model of existence, given two things are true: a) they don't want to have absolutely any influence at all with the outside world and no contact with it as much as possible and b) the outside world is fine with them existing. You don't really need to move anywhere for the former - there are enough remote places in the US where nobody would care much what's going on in there if it stays in there - but for the latter, especially if you're dealing with globalist totalitarian ideology and you let it win, you'd have to move very, very far.
JarJarJedi
5mo ago
so regions are dependent on federal financial support
That's a feature for The Vertical of Power, I am sure.
Social security payments are strongly regressive and are paid by the employer
The same is true for the US on the regressive part, but "paid by the employer" I feel is mostly a trick since it all figures in total cost per employee, and I'm pretty sure business owners can do that calculation (which is also true for the US, of course). Still, it is not exactly a "problem" as I see - it doesn't make anything different, it just looks different.
Nope. You talk about one specific set of ads. But there are many more contexts than that. You do advertise luxury cars with hot chicks. But not cheap used family vans. Not mortgage brokers and realtor services. If you want to sell somebody a dream of laying hot chicks - you use hot chicks. If you want to sell somebody a dream of a happy family in a comfortable van and a cheap, but surprisingly decent looking McMansion - hot chicks won't help you there. Happy family pictures would however.
I can answer that (no, I am not under that pseudonym, I am completely different person) - because I am told everywhere all the time that I should. Every company has an equity statement, keeps racial statistics, and brags about representation. Did you try to apply for a job lately? Literally every single company would ask you for racial data (they say it wouldn't be used in hiring process, but I wonder why ask then?). Every sizable company constantly brags about these things, and pays people to deal with them and then promote their actions in public. I'd be super-happy to go to my happy pre-woke world where I could just ignore it, where I did, but it's kinda hard when you are surrounded by messages that claim that's extremely important 24/7. You start noticing things.
It's not. But I still notice things. It's a blessing and a curse.
More options
Context Copy link