@Lykurg's banner p

Lykurg

We're all living in Amerika

1 follower   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 December 29 10:51:01 UTC

Hello back frens

Verified Email

				

User ID: 2022

Lykurg

We're all living in Amerika

1 follower   follows 0 users   joined 2022 December 29 10:51:01 UTC

					

Hello back frens


					

User ID: 2022

Verified Email

Ive never seen a good explanation for how separation of powers is supposed to do anything. The ones given by people at the time, and often still repeated today, are basically that one guy cant just do whatever he wants if he cant have all the powers, and this is essentially bypassed by the existence of parties. We even talk about one party controlling all three branches of government explicitly. Now, the way these branches are appointed is not exactly the same, and that has some effects - not any 50% of people can steamroll everyone, and theres inertia.

But those could easily be replicated just within a legislature by changing how they are elected, how long the terms are, and what the quorum is. This last one is especially important - there are very good reasons why quora higher than 50%+1 are rarely used, and are always much less powerful in reality than on paper. This perhaps explains what we are seeing now. The whole separation of powers business just seems to me like what youd think if youd only seen monarchies.

There is much more of a public health argument to be made for treating STDs. (The health problems of smokers, drunks, and fatties generally do not impact other people directly.)

If we wanted to do it only for public health reasons, we could add some sort of punishment high enough that the recipients arent better off, that would eliminate the fairness concerns.

The death answer was the right one.

He doesnt mean that kind of queer, he means the "unusual" people rafa talked about.

What pretextual galaxy-brain rationalizations? It seemed pretty straightforward from both ends.

I mean, presumably he made that transformation over the ~decade since the first game came out.

Edit: I read further down and apparently the studio was bought out. Propably less personal transformation and more job keeping then.

I do wonder how distant that ancestry is. Ive never seen a european remember pocahontas amounts of jewish ancestry, and people where it was easy to find around 1940 tend to not live here anymore one way or another. So either its after that, or a lot before and hes done family research.

Since this is already spoiler territory, Id like to complain about the copyright question. It took me a while until I realised they dont think income after death can incentivise production.

Compare on the one hand, the stereotypical wild youngin, who will tell you your lectures about virtue are boring, Im going to do dumb shit now, fuck you dad. And on the other hand, the kind of slightly-OCD knowitall, who is offended by the idea of virtue in full generality because it implies some people are better than others. The stably married educated liberals preaching free love. Etc. This other hand is what I mean by "unselfish antinomianism", and its something we dont see a lot of before the modern era, including in degeneration narratives. Indeed, even today, those narratives often emphasise how they dont really mean those more ideological aspects, and its all just cover for hedonism/the jews taking over/whatever, where it had sounded to me like Plato says they do that and do mean it, and thats the problem.

But the idea that Jesse Singal's former assistant has ever been carrying water for trans activists is absurd on its face.

No, TW is not a trans activist as generally understood, but I think its quite fair to say that the author of this objects on speed and methods rather than principle.

Notice that KulakRevolt didn't go full mask-off while he was still on the Motte

I think he was extremely obvious the whole time. If hes gotten into holocaust denial now, it certainly doesnt really change much for him.

Take it from the old liberal JS Mill:

Free institutions are next to impossible in a country made up of different nationalities. Among a people without fellow-feeling, especially if they read and speak different languages, the united public opinion necessary to the working of representative government can not exist. The influences which form opinions and decide political acts are different in the different sections of the country. An altogether different set of leaders have the confidence of one part of the country and of another. The same books, newspapers, pamphlets, speeches, do not reach them. One section does not know what opinions or what instigations are circulating in another. The same incidents, the same acts, the same system of government, affect them in different ways, and each fears more injury to itself from the other nationalities than from the common arbiter, the state. Their mutual antipathies are generally much stronger than jealousy of the government. That any one of them feels aggrieved by the policy of the common ruler is sufficient to determine another to support that policy.

Now, hes explaining this in terms of nationality, but I think its clear that this is far from the only reason why people may fail to form a united public opinion - and indeed, the modern US version is mostly not based on it. But the point is that this idea of liberalism and democracy as a dispute resolution mechanism is an extremely novel idea that even liberals and democrats would have told you wont work almost universally until 1900, and mostly until WW2. It was clear that such a government must express a common national spirit. Political competition that is not grounded in such is not campaigning, it is Realist pseudo-international relations, because you have indeed nothing to lose but your chains in going there.

We have started to claim it is unnecessary, and then slowly the rules-lawyers have nudged us to stop maintaining it, and the US is now beginning to see the effects of this.

In short, I think aging philosophers have been complaining about libertine, shiftless youth for literal millennia, but the predictions rarely come true.

I was going to disagree that it fits into this pattern, because when I read the Plato post it seemed to include antinomianism even in its unselfish forms, which is not usually found in the degeneration narratives, or much at all before modern times... but I cant see it anymore today. I notice that I am confused.

This isn’t even your first time playing the lazy DRRR game.

How did you find this? Is there an advanced search for this site?

I dont really agree. The current wave of AI improvements happened because someone found a way to utilise a much bigger dataset than anyone before. This is not a way to make indefinite improvements, and weve already picked the low-hanging fruit.

But if Im wrong about that, then Im not sure theres much else we can do?

No, I do mean write as in type out. I would be spending about equal time on thinking and physical typing. Its not difficult if you set the standard low enough - its just that this is not actually something people do here.

In the long term, I think the only way a forum like this survives is if users learn to be bored by AI-tier content. Weve just seen some labled AI posts get mass downvoted, but I think something like the Mihow post could totally have been a normal top-level and even be successful if it was a current topic. IMO its a bad post, it doesnt tell me anything I didnt know, and this is something everyone needs to internalise, downvote, and collapse. You should think primarily about how to get there - once we can all agree about what is unlabled AI content, or might as well be, the remaining problem wont be difficult.

A "handwritten low-effort wall of text" is pretty much a contradiction in terms

No its not. I could write a full page rant in maybe double the time it takes just to type.

Muslim countries wont accept Gazans because then they would be responsible for controlling them.

if these people are not allowed to work legally

This is generally not the problem in Europe.

But is that a consequence of immigration for failed policy for integrating immigrants

"Leftism cannot fail, it can only be failed", and besides, the requirement to do something for integration is a negative consequence.

How fat are you talking about? Because theres very few people who dont have some fat family, the way I normally use that term.

I guess I wont argue you into my sense of relevance.

If a single person in this thread knew an early-20s family-minded guy who'd proposed to his girlfriend and been turned down, I'd be surprised.

We have some people from very religious backgrounds here, I wouldnt be surprised.

I actually don't know what anybody's vested interest is in having other people do young tradmarriages

Not sure Im in favour exactly, but I do understand. Its a sense that something about modern dating isnt going well (an impression harldy exclusive to men!), and the way most big-ticket-serious-relationship-items are out of consideration for a decade+ at the time you start dating seems like its part of the problem. And yes, this is not something you think about at the time.

For one, the premise of all of you seems to be that "trad marriages" dont happen because women avoid them.

Im online-only and Ive heard of it years ago, even read some of the blog when it was still up. Not hard to find from the Vassarites.

No, the point is that you are using those concerns to support one narrow claim, but if you look a bit further they have big implications for our general picture of the situation, and consequently the role that that narrow claim should play in our discussion of it.

To me, there are 5 key features of a neoliberal, they are as follows

I think thats a questionable mash-up. Neoliberalism started out with 1) and 2). In recent times, it means something more wonkish/technocratic, with lots of pigouvian taxes and subsidies, and generally in favour of redistribution. This is because the name stuck to an academic tradition more so than an ethical one, and the people who went into economics shifted over time.

The guy you replied to is talking about young husbands as well. And we know you are suspicious on priors - the point is that the non-conflicting things dont actually add to that. Its a bitch-eating-crackers argument.

Thats what I would have thought as well - but as per your post, Plato does describe something much more similar to modern ideology. You dont need moral relativism to fuck up the heretics. I guess Im waiting for next week.