Lykurg
We're all living in Amerika
Hello back frens
User ID: 2022

But when you rent something out, you also no longer have the right to deprive the renter of it (for some pre-specified period of time), in much the same way as your own usage is limited.
The troll could also be his own lawyer, or basically subsidised by him to "bring him work".
I guess I dont expect anything of this impact to be vulnerable in a well understood way that basically anyone could exploit, else it would be down a lot more often. And even if you think the window might close, then gain from doing it like this, even if youre never found out, is ~zero. I doubt those triggers are worth pulling any time before the "enemy has a war economy" stage.
Generally, a hack of this extent and visibility cannot be easily repeated with the same methods once its done - even if youre openly hostile towards the states in question, there needs to be a reason why its used now.
the right never does are simply selective perception
Nah. We all know the issues where the right can make gains and where not, its extremely predictable, and the fact that the typical categorisation of left and right also includes issues where they do have a chance is not actually relevant.
I was going to tell you you need a double backslash to make the figure work, but for reasons I dont understand that makes both the underscores disappear, and you actually need 3. (It makes sense that they are gone: they cursive the part in between. And it makes sense that one backslash would turn it off and they are there then. But they are there at 0 backslashes also) ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Given that he still has the option of turning himself in to ICE for that great "escape plan", this seems rather implausible.
Unfortunately it appears they made a mistake and accidentally sent an internal letter
I think thats the second or third time were seeing this specific kind of leak in the new Trump administration.
the Holocaust mythos is the bedrock of Western slave morality
Slave morality is not the belief that you are guilty, its a standard of good and evil. This is usually communicated together with the holocaust story (as well as elsewhere), not because of a logical dependence but because both are needed functionally to get to the "you are guilty" point.
Now, if someone is very invested in the idea that the germans actually passed that standard, and the jews are the evil oppressive ones, then I think he believes in slave morality. Its certainly possible to be a holocaust denier who considers it important in the purely tactical way you outlines above, but that just isnt the impression I have of them, and yes you do know what I mean. (You personally are far from the worst on that front, but it does still seem to be there)
But it's not edgy at all.
The edgy thing is saying that youre any kind of holocaust denier even when its entirely unnecessary to communicate your position. They are the same picture indeed; I just disagree that anyone is fooled in the way you say, and thats so obvious that it cant have been the intent.
It's true that "this is like the lead-up to WWII" is often invoked, but that is always invoked as a nod to the Holocaust
A tightly coupled package is not "all about" the one piece that you love to talk about. Certainly the uses against Putler recently have no even pretend connection to killing jews.
the way that a religio-cultural narrative can shape not only the moral narrative of a society but radically change the genetic fabric of a civilization within a single generation.
That part at least Im fairly sure can be understood independently. And... look, you have all these smart sounding reasons why its important to talk about holocaust denialism, but youve seen a lot of it, the people writing it and their emotional emphasis etc, and I think you understand why it seems like slave morality to me - so, why isnt it?
This is reaching levels of "false opposition" on totally unprecedented levels
I think you have an inflated sense of your factions importance. Not all is done to address you specifically. This is obviously-to-everyone not serious and edgy for its own sake, which he has done in many directions.
The culpability of Winston Churchill to the outbreak of the conflict is totally irrelevant to the Western Psyche.
Disagree. The lead-up to WW2 turns into the "warning signs".
the function... is to keep it that way.
Why? Whats the point of someone who believes the holocaust but rejects its moral lesson? It seems to me rather that if its really important to you to deny it, you kind of believe the lesson.
They hunted Trotsky
Palace coups are not civil wars. If there was something like an international communist government, Id totally expect them to kill each other in there too, but not a war between nations.
it did risk going nuclear
I dont know much about that, but they had a massive common enemy sitting at the ready. Maybe the soviets thought they could win off nukes alone without being weakened vs the US, but couldnt and the attempt would be massively dumb. Something like the nuke imbalance would be unlikely in this timeline, and if anything Germany has them first, and possibly even before the West, in which case Russia would be far down the list of targets.
Yes, but the russian communists did not fight civil wars among each other, and neither did they fight with the chinese after those left.
In the OTL Russia had a very direct hand in setting up communist governments in places it had effectively conquered post WW2, which gave them a very central position. The communist Germany timeline has a big questionmark to the how, not just the who, of communist international organisation.
A communist Germany, it seems to me, would be likely to feud with Russia over who the de facto leader of European communism is.
You think? German communism was on good terms with and supported by Russia generally. The less-authoritarian socialists who were critical would face the wall anyway. I think the germans expected international cooperation, Stalin didnt have anything but Russia at this point so its not clear why he would turn them down, and then maybe this becomes a political conflict in international communism and eventually a german-soviet split, but actual war seems very unlikely.
Theres some variation in these scenarios but I think they play out pretty similar to "early GDR" anyway - GDR problems are mostly not the fault of the russians, IMO. And I assumed a capitalist coalition does survive and cold war and both german and russian communism eventually collapse like they did, which Im now less sure about - full Germany is much more powerful than the actual GDR territory, and they may have been able to stabilise the russians when their leaders lost faith, and Im pretty vague on what happens to the rest of the Warsaw Pact in all of this. I went with this because I consider it the optimistic scenario for german communism - which is still worse than actual, and thats sufficient for my point.
If there is a worldwar anyway at a similar time, it would have to be France going fascist in response, massively cleaning up its act with the army, and either being attacked late in the process or getting it through and starting it themselves, and Im not sure Roosevelt would have been on their side (though at that point he may be couped).
I think you should evaluate this not only in the context of the war. German democracy was deeply unpopular and due to end soon, and the communists and nazis where fighting for who would replace it. In retrospect, it seems clear that the germans are better of with their choice, despite everything. Communism really is that bad that youd rather lose a world war.
But what Nick Fuentes and many others outside his orbit among the "anti-semitic Dissdent Right" are perceiving is heterodox political perspectives previously monopolized by the DR become appropriated and platformed but stripped of actual criticism of Jews.
WW2 revisionism always had anti-american strands as well as anti-jewish ones (perhaps not as prominently in America itself?). BAPists are not taking the serial numbers off your stuff, they are reinterpreting the anti-american versions as being about the blue empire. Being broadly familiar with the european right that sure was what I thought moldbug was doing.
I personally know someone who believes a lot of things about WW2 are lies but not the holocaust, and is also antisemitic.
The things with european villages is that they are... villages. Not cities. I live in what I would consider a mid-sized city, which may still be a village for you, and Ive always been confused by these american urbanists - what do you think you need a car for that I dont? I guess the supermarket, but the local supermarket doesnt have that much, so usually I drive anyway. The only public transport that remotely works is the metro, the busses have 15min wait times on the low end even with them running them basically empty. The metro at least is usually 10% full, but still none of this would survive if it wasnt subsidised into the stratosphere. The conflict over cars exists here as well, and the "no cars at all" faction is if anything bigger than is america.
Given the how much the form theyve taken will lower the odds of sticking, and poison the well going forward, I think they are flat out a mistake.
Thats not quite what I meant. Disincentivising fornication is fine, and men generally can avoid it then. But you do in fact have to disincentivise it, and they will look for a way to get away with it - and the question is if that is itself a personal defect that should be corrected. Correcting it is... not necessarily identical to true asexuality, but given the layout of the human mind that would propably be the easiest way to do it, and there are likely to be significant similarities with other ways.
If it helps you, Im not christian or even really adjacent, and I have liked a good bit of hlynka, even as we disagreed. The fact is that most people here had their political formation entirely within the liberal frame - whether in agreement or opposition, and its quite hard to take the country out of the boy. They do, in fact, agree on quite a few things without being aware of it, which most anyone from outside that context can see, even if theyre quite a different kind of conservative. Naturally this is hard to summarise or explain outside a concrete case, but heres two comments I found that might help.
have more conservative sexual ethics than most on the DR(which in its most mainstream form endorses male promiscuity)
Would like to hear your thoughts on this: Its natural for a toddler to run directly towards the danger sometimes. Its not good for them to actually get there, and you should stop them - but if one of them never did that, its propably not actually well. In the same way, while I think its bad for promiscuity to happen, Im not sure the "ideal trad man" who would never even consider trying, is all that well. And I think this is often the motivation for this BAP position: Theyd be fine with a father/brother/husband being protective of a women (ok maybe fight him, but realistically mostly not), and would encourage you to be that man, but they hate trads preaching at them.
At risk of spiderman-pointing, your objection was known within nietzscheanism since Nietzsche himself, who had read the original texts a whole lot. He argued that the greeks extolled restraint because they were so virile and considered that the natural state of things.
For the record, I think neither user had wrong intent in this thread (similarly relying on personal judgement about @WhiningCoil. His comment is in fact weird and I may have warned him anyway for objectivities sake), and I think jeroboam is to blame in the linked thread. Im fairly sure Im not tribally aligned with @4bpp, though I like him personally. I think his psychologising you is false, but Im not sure what you are thinking.
That's not crazy, but doesn't it slow down reading even more than a verbal monologue would?
Not sure why you think that, but Im not thinking much about speed, just understanding at all. I agree that text is easier than a monologue.
I think in a normal "explanatory conversation", the listerner already talks back with his own understanding, which the "teacher" uses to judge.
- Prev
- Next
If its not about whats right, then in what sense do you want an alternative? In a purely conceptual sense, denying any ownership rights is an alternative.
More options
Context Copy link