It's unlikely the same person would just happen to sincerely post this and a bogus post about black body radiation and global warming, and about an ideal world, three totally unrelated subjects, except that posting something wrong is a sure way to stir the pot and get responses.
He's a troll. Please stop responding to him.
Jiro
2yr ago
A lot of the problem with NIMBYism is the hypocrisy. If you believe that it's a moral imperative to help the homeless, that people who don't like the homeless are evil, and that the homeless are pleasant people to live next to who don't cause problems anyway, then not wanting a homeless shelter in your backyard shows that you are being hypocritical and that your actions don't match the moral condemnation you are ready to hold over people's heads. That's very different from admitting that the homeless are smelly, rude, commit a lot of crime, and unworthy of respect and then not wanting a homeless shelter near you--of course you don't! You just explained why!
I won't say that this is a troll, since themotte has seen real people with such an opinion and it doesn't matter that someone is a new user when the entire site is new. On the other hand, this is certainly an inflammatory post without evidence, and doesn't belong here for that reason alone. Even though it does show some "evidence", the evidence is for something extremely narrow; the general claim
The answer is that excavations would be extremely hazardous to the false narrative that's been created and weaponized,
makes a very broad inflammatory claim that is not supported by the evidence provided, even if you were to assume it's true.
(And Nazis tend not to report evidence accurately anyway.)
Jiro
2yr ago
People have a way of sarcastically saying extreme versions of things they actually believe. It lets them probe how far they can go and gives them plausible deniability if they go a little too far since they can always claim to be sarcastic.
Jiro
2yr ago
It goes against the general theory of Biden as controlled by woke interests.
Woke is not "anything leftist". Unions are left-wing to the extent that they are old style economic leftism aimed at benefiting the working class, which is very far from modern woke. Nobody got cancelled for being opposed to unions (short of the lizardman constant).
Jiro
2yr ago
What exactly do you think people are revealing about themselves?
I suggest you speak plainly.
Jiro
2yr ago
Is there an underlying principle at work here that explains both positions (opposition to AA plus opposition to debt relief) that doesn't just reduce to bare economic or racial interest?
"The law/the Constitution actually means what it says. Stop trying to twist it for policy reasons."
Jiro
2yr ago
I thought an interesting question was posed:
I've seldom seen "just asking questions" done more directly.
Jiro
10mo ago
we can be reasonably confident that the modern 2nd amendment movement centred around a politically-active NRA loosely aligned with movement conservatism was founded by people who thought that gun culture was good because it enabled Jim Crow, not in spite of it.
The NRA was created by Union officials who thought pro-Union forces needed better training. You are describing a Michael Moore-style history which is the opposite of actual history.
It was a manipulative question. It’s akin to, “does calling for the rape of women violate Harvard’s rules on domestic assault?” Of course it wouldn’t, because inappropriate statements against the values of Harvard are not in the category of domestic assault
To continue the analogy, this happened after Harvard claimed that calling for the rape of 10 other categories violates the rule. (It's a hypothetical, so pretend that those categories exist.) If the president of Harvard refused to answer when asked specifically about women after agreeing for everyone else, the question isn't manipulative, it's just exposing hypocrisy.
If you claim that calling for genocide is not harassment, that's fine by itself. But if you do it in the context of all the other things that Harvard does consider harassment, it isn't.
If Harvard said "calling for genocide of Jews isn't harassment or bullying because that's the wrong category," the next question would be "how about 'it's okay to be white', or anti-trans positions?"
Jiro
2yr ago
Does this actually match any experience you personally have with trans people?
It matches the experience with defenders of trans people in the media and legal system. If you're saying that trans people don't personally act much like this, and that the complaint should be about trans allies instead of trans people, I suppose that's a fair complaint. But that's different from saying that it just isn't significant at all.
Also, the backlash against FTM is lower than against MTF precisely because FTMs aren't claiming many things that cis men exclusively get, because there aren't many things that cis men exclusively get. What exactly can they shriek at cis people to do?
Jiro
2yr ago
I don't know if you're feigning ignorance, but you're saying the things that someone feigning ignorance would say. If pet dogs was an issue for a major political party , people had pet dog rallies that were specifically there to rub pet dogs in the face of people who didn't like them, if people routinely got fired from their jobs for their opinions on pet dogs, and if people's opinions on pet dogs--or even their refusal to speak about pet dogs--marked them as irredeemably evil and not fit for polite company then pet dogs would be political. Just "I have an opinion on whether it's okay" doesn't make it political.
Jiro
2yr ago
I suggest that someone who does such things to animals is probably deluded in such a manner which indicates a propensity to harm actual people in similar ways.
Even extreme animal rights activists rarely think it's wrong to harm insects, but someone who likes pulling wings off insects just to see them squirm is probably a bad person.
I happen to have heard about how the eviction moratorium works. It defacto means that poor tenants don't have to pay their rent, but the landlords still have expenses. And most landlords are not giant corporations. It's like a law demanding that grocery stores give poor people free food. And it was ended because the Supreme Court said it was illegal. Congress "letting the support expire" is true from a certain point of view, but misleading; it was pushed through out of process and the Supreme Court said that Congress had to authorize it, which never happened.
This does not make me hopeful that the rest of this Gish gallop is accurate.
Jiro
2yr ago
IP itself is a government creation. So the question is not "does WOTC have a right", the question is "are we happy with the government giving them this right". I'm not happy with it.
Jiro
2yr ago
There's no law of the universe making it sexual. It being sexual is an observation about how and why it's done in modern American society. There's probably some extreme edge case that isn't sexual (maybe Norman Bates in Psycho), but when it comes up in politics, it's never about such cases, and there often seems to be an element of "Ha, ha, you can't prove it's sexual".
Jiro
21d ago
"Do not weakman in order to show how bad a group is."
You literally picked some random person from a group you don't like and told a shaggy dog story about her just so you can have a wall of text whose upshot is that this person and "people like" her are bad.
Jiro
4mo ago
My rules > your rules, fairly > your rules, unfairly
Your rules, unfairly: Public health covers non-health things like gun control and environmental justice but cannot be used to push back against the woke.
Your rules, fairly: Public health covers non-health things, but at least both sides can use it.
My rules: Public health has to do with health.
Jiro
5mo ago
Also, checking a map shows that the islands are about 1200 miles away from Mauritus.
Jiro
10mo ago
Unfortunately the same mechanisms that are used to suppress these things for good reasons are used to suppress them for bad reasons, and it's impossible to tell them apart.
Jiro
1yr ago
Give me a break.
A normie would think "if that's a hoax, that would require a huge, huge, amount of effort. Nobody would go through that much effort to pull a hoax on a random person". That's why she didn't figure out that it was fake.
You can fool anyone by being a weird person from the Internet, if you spend enough time tricking someone who isn't familiar with weird people on the Internet.
Jiro
1yr ago
I think there's a trans analogy here. People are superficially asking you to not say bad things about their situation, but they actually want you to think their own perception of that situation is correct, not just mouth the words. And every so often they make a demand that doesn't really fit the former and implies the latter.
Meanwhile nobody cares about this Cade Metz creature except that he wrote about Scott.
We're in a bubble. Scott seems important only because of that. And Metz is a Times writer. This inherently means that a lot of people care about what he says.
That will probably be his epitaph: "Wrote a hit piece on a beloved and respected public intellectual".
Plenty of people told similar lies about Gamergate. It's pretty obvious by now that none of them will be chiefly remembered for those lies. We don't control the discourse, and in most places where it's relevant you can't even suggest that anything said about Gamergate was a lie. And yes, it still gets brought up every so often.
This is Bulverism.
I'd give the alternative theory that Musk moved to the right because of his son going trans. It was a socially approved thing and the left never apologized....
More options
Context Copy link