Karmaze
3mo ago
Does the middle class actually have a lower standard of living in those countries? From the way I see it, I don't think that's the case at all. Sure, relatively speaking obviously it's lower, compared to their own lower classes. I would make the argument that it's possible that prices are going to adjust to whatever the middle class can afford to pay, so all you're doing with lower class/middle class inequality is making life worse for the lower classes with little actual benefit for the middle classes. (And I really don't care about relative benefit, as I think that's not a healthy way to view things)
Karmaze
1yr ago
It might be in my view of what Wokism actually is. To me, I think it's a way to make a better world in a way that doesn't threaten, and maybe enhances status/class based advantages. There's nothing inherent in that, I think, that goes against belief in a higher deity.
For what it's worth, Calvinism is one of those religious beliefs I do have a serious problem with, in the same light as I look at Wokism TBH. And the truth is, I don't see any reason why much of the memeplex couldn't come from a liberal Calvinist community.
Karmaze
1yr ago
Internalized vs. Externalized beliefs.
In this case, it's Externalized in a way where the prof's friends should have the ability to sleep with whoever they want, but outside of that, it exists in strictly a theoretical space that people shouldn't take seriously. It's based in an understanding and active adoption of the "Who, Whom" dynamic. Or Low-Rez vs. Hi-Rez dynamics.
Karmaze
23d ago
I'll throw a bit of a wrench in this.
This process usually helps the Republicans. 2020 is a bit of an exception.
Let me explain what I'm talking about here. I've been interested in this subject since say, 2000-ish, when I came across some local articles talking about how local civic groups (generally red coded) were actually paying to upgrade local voting systems. And then the whole Bush V. Gore thing happened, and shit hit the fan and it got ugly. But it got me interested in the subject regarding Margins of Errors, and their effect on elections.
The short version is that MoE rates differ based on different forms of voting, and this difference I believe can swing close elections. I also argue, again, that generally this process helps Republicans.
What happened in 2020? Truth be told, I think both sides just played lawfare more than anything, and the Democrats won in such a way that may have swung the election. Trump wanted to discredit the mail-in votes, Biden wanted to maximize their counting. So you had a situation where the way a lot of Democratic voters were voting, actually was a way that ended up having a much lower Margin of Error than what it normally would have, because they were maximally counting all votes.
I don't believe there are any good guys in all this, to be clear.
Karmaze
1mo ago
I actually feel like Narnia is a good example of this, in that I think that through the series, there's a very real change in it that pushes it more towards what I would consider to be propaganda, in a negative sense. Maybe that's my own tastes or whatever, but I think it makes something clear, that it's not such a cut or dry thing. It's not that certain ideas or concepts are in your book, it's how they're presented. (Although I still argue that I think it would be absurdly difficult to present the content of the last book in a way that doesn't go deep into this)
Karmaze
1yr ago
Yeah, I'm not saying this is necessarily a problem with the left per se. Note that I'm Canadian, so that's my perspective. What I'm saying that I think this really did break down in culture war terms...just because people are not yet presupposed into defusing culture war elements. Left AND Right. Like I said, it's just about giving more care to the out-group and their norms, and not believing status was an exemption to rules.
Karmaze
1yr ago
The original goal wasn't to tell people "hey, you don't like the roles/social expectations put on you? Then you aren't actually a woman/man!" but to allow women and men more flexibility in shaping their roles to their personality and temperament without anyone denying that they can live like that as women/men.
I don't think that's the intention, but when you start putting all sorts of prescriptive political, moral and aesthetic judgements on these things....
What they hell did they think was going to happen?
The problem was a lack of self-criticism where they never realized that trying to allow men and women more flexibility in terms of personality and temperament was always in conflict with the political goals of more freedom for women, or at least how they went about it focusing on universal socialization and the Blank Slate.
Karmaze
1yr ago
If anyone has a suggested reply that won't get them fired or un-personed, I'm all ears.
I think this might get you fired/un-personed faster, but here's my answer.
The problem is much less "white supremacy" or "patriarchy" and much more something having to do with socioeconomic and networking effects. The problem is that we don't really have a meritocracy right now, due to these forces. By focusing on these things, we can create something more of a meritocracy. The focus on identity, frankly, is an unconscious bias to push away from any sort of need for self-sacrifice from fixing these issues. It's not a solution to the problems that they're pointing to. Truth is, I believe that Neo-Progressive politics amplify these socioeconomic and networking effects.
Going back to the OP, this is what I believe "expanding" Critical Theory looks like. I think it looks like including these other, largely non-identitarian facets of power, privilege and bias into the equation. And I think it's absolutely a non-starter. My belief remains that people will abandon Critical Theory as a whole once that process starts (and I still do think it will start eventually). But I do think people react badly to this sort of thing, because it's seen (not necessarily incorrectly) as a demand that they set themselves on fire to keep other people warm.
That said, I think the activist Right are essentially reacting to the same human impulse.
Karmaze
1yr ago
FWIW, my argument is that the topic itself doesn't really matter. And because of that you don't need self-policing, when it's all about power, essentially.
Modulo conflicts like the truscum-tucute thing.
I wonder if that's going to make a comeback and break it up. Like I said, I think we're talking about at least 4 substantially different phenomenon here, and frankly, I think 2 of the 4 are much more innate than the others.
Karmaze
1yr ago
How much energy do you want to invest in trying not to give money to your political enemies?
I don't look at these things in this light. I don't think it's about political enemies at all. I think it's more so, don't spent time/energy/money on people who think that you're a problem that needs to be solved. It's not because you're rewarding them/encouraging them/providing them ammo. It's because eventually they're going to pull the rug out from under you.
Karmaze
1yr ago
I think the thing about Tate and co, is that they represent what essentially is an aspirational culture these days. Represent isn't exactly the correct word, but I'm not sure how else to put it. But I think they're reflecting a view based on a certain "Social Media Yuppie" perspective that's coming out of a few large cities, frankly, London is the biggest example here I think. Where they're wrong of course, is that the SM Yuppie mentality, isn't as common outside of these places as these people think. But that doesn't mean that it's not influential either. I do think there's reasons why people see this as pretty much the peak of attainable status right now.
And I think people do see traits of SM Yuppie culture "bleed out", and I think there's a reaction to it.
I've always argued that the manosphere as a whole (and it's a bunch of different parts and I acknowledge that) should be more focused on teaching people to avoid red flags. And I understand avoiding these red flags are tough, because again, these are relatively high-status baddies we're talking about here. But still...you don't want to deal with the narcissistic traits here. Just say no. It's not worth the headache. But educating men about potential red flags has always been seen as misogynistic by people who well...promote and sell those flags, giving them out to women to be honest.
And then there's the concern that this SM Yuppie culture will be picked up on by your partner in an existing relationship. What do you do then?
Anyway, I think largely that's what this is all about. I think you can avoid it if you want to, especially if you recognize status pressures and try your best to avoid them. But that doesn't necessarily make it easy or without cost.
Karmaze
1yr ago
What, the Stay Puff Marshmellow Man in a Klan hat thing? No no no. I'm just riffing directly off of Ghostbusters, where I really do think people get to choose "the form of the destroyer" based upon what things they actually bother to react to. It's the best analogy to how I think these things work. At the very least, they get to amplify whatever they want to amplify into the big threat. Then Toxoplasma of Rage comes into play, and everything just gets ugly.
Karmaze
1yr ago
The best way I've heard to frame it is Pluralist vs. Authoritarian. South of Center vs. North of Center is the other way I'd put the same thing...it's entirely different than left vs. right. Generally speaking, this place is mostly South of Center, with a few North of Center people around.
But yeah, I largely agree with you, and I'm against the anti-Pluralism that's floating around, left center and right. That's largely because I'm a policy wonk, and I think the details matter and I think because of that it's essential that we can actually discuss and disagree about the issues, and not break everything down into a power-based binary.
Karmaze
1yr ago
I mean, that's not a surprise TBH. Like I said, I could do an in-depth analysis of the song, and its active rejection of the Male Gender Role as a romantic value and breaking the related patterns. (Note: Even though I think it's the best for me personally, because that's my personal aesthetic, at the same time, I don't think it's realistic at all)
Karmaze
23d ago
Certainly people talk about "Billionaires" all the time. But below that? Not so much. And yeah, sometimes you'll see it targeted specifically at certain (usually outgroup) people...but generally this isn't something that's challenged, outside of an extreme minority of targets. I don't think this has always been the case, or is always the case, but I think there's a lack of awareness that the socialism different people envision might not be the same thing. Some people might truly envision a prioritizing of the working class, while others see shifting power and control to the managerial/professional classes.
Karmaze
1mo ago
I don't even think this requires actual ideology. Nepotism gets you to the same place. And there are people that would argue (including me) that a lot of these culture wars in gaming and the media are based around nepotism, and see identitarianism as a way to distract from this.
I know at my workplace, they're having to redo the diversity training because it put nepotism on the same level as other forms of discrimination and people did not like it.
Karmaze
1mo ago
Yeah. I thought it was pretty good. Not great 'tho.
I would have cut the budget on that thing significantly 'tho. And I don't mean that as a critique per se. Just that I think they way overestimated the interest in such a game. Just to be clear, I think Control (their previous game) is a much better game overall.
One of the big complaints about the modern trends in gaming is the disappearance of the "AA" game. That sort of middle-ground between budget/indie and AAA. I think Alan Wake 2 should have been an AA game.
Karmaze
1yr ago
While the difference between those two definitions seems academical as the resulting status is pretty much the same, there is a meaningful difference in that it changes completely the direction you approach them from.
I think this is correct. That said, I understand why somebody might not be aware of that distinction.
Karmaze
1yr ago
It's not loyalty to Trump, it's anti-loyalty to the regime, and opposition to perceived anarcho-tyranny.
People who see anarcho-tyranny as an existential threat, and will do ANYTHING to stop it.
For what it's worth, I think this is the prime motivation, or at least it became the prime motivation for Trump. At some point. (I'm still not a Trump supporter, because I don't see him as effective opposition, to be frank, but I'm not going to dismiss the obvious motives)
Karmaze
1yr ago
Common? I don't know. But I think I'll go to my grave probably thinking that the best song from a f->m romantic perspective is Simple and Clean. Yes, the one from Kingdom Hearts.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=0qxdwfxbONM
Honestly, I could do an in-depth analysis of the lyrics of this song, especially in terms of modern gender politics and relationships. (And what, this is like almost 20 years old at this point?) But my hand is busted so I don't feel like typing too much.
Karmaze
23d ago
My position remains the same. US elections are terrible, the 2020 election was particularly terrible, Trump lost because he didn't play the game as well as his opponents, that's the way it is, suck it up and deal unless you're going to make US elections not terrible (I.E. nationwide standards and rules, or at least state-wide standards and rules)
Karmaze
24d ago
Yeah, I think this is right, or at least it's my point. I actually think people hold on to dear life to the Oppressor/Oppressed frame so we don't break this image, lest we start questioning the connections and the generational wealth. The one thing I believe strongly, is we don't have the stomach for actual socioeconomic decline. Even the most Progressive of the Progressives will balk at this when it comes to they and theirs. It's OK when it's just "Billionaires", but when it comes down to specifics that are in the in-group? Nah. Not an option.
The big threat that comes from heterodox thinking on this, I think, is that we add connections to the DEI anti-list, I.E. things that will be counted in a negative sense. In that, it's not the unconnected white men that will lose out...it's the connected ones. You best be coming with your DEI proposal, a plan for your eventual exit. I think there's a reason why people go nuclear on heterodox thinking on these matters, things outside the Progressive vs. Reactionary binary, that all this stuff presents itself as a very real threat to not just the powers in a big sense, but your place and power in a more local sense.
Karmaze
1mo ago
Could you spell out how that works, because I don't necessarily see the straight logic there -- my guess is that progressivism is orthogonal to monogamers/polygamers.
At least what I said is my experience. I feel like people who play a wide variety of games simply are not going to waste the resources picking up expensive DLC/Microtransactions? For what you could pay getting an outfit for your Diablo 4 character (which is stupid expensive), there's a lot of options out there for great experiences you could get. There's simply more competition for the gaming dollar, I think.
But the number of people who can quickly scan a character roster for skin color or can develop an opinion about the sexual orientation of NPC romance options is much higher. It might just be bike-shedding.
I think also, people who are watching a large number of games see trends, even if they're there or not. And one of the big trends people see right now is downplaying the attractiveness of female characters in a way they are NOT doing for male characters. And of course, people tie that (not necessarily incorrectly) into various Progressive theories and models, and you get what you get.
Karmaze
10mo ago
My personal take on this is we're dealing with several similar looking but substantially different phenomenon. I do think that there are actual deep-rooted innate brain-body mismatches, and transition is certainly an option those people should have.
But I agree with the OP largely here was well. I simply can't see the current in-vogue model of gender, politics and personality traits being healthy. Because I don't believe it is at all. And I do think it can trigger something that approaches and looks like gender dysphoria....but it also probably could be treated with therapy that acknowledged these pressures in the first place. But it's getting people to acknowledge these pressures that's the tricky bit. It breaks Kayfabe hard.
My concern is the % of people who are going to take this thing seriously on all sides of the argument. That don't get the "wink wink nod nod" that it's all an intellectual game of sorts.
More options
Context Copy link