MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
No bio...
User ID: 1783
Maverick was exactly that though. The pilots are not sexy killers who get things done. They’re mostly dorks. Maverick actually does have something like PTSD over Goose forty years later, and spends much of the film being a mother hen to Rooster.
It’s a far cry from the messaging of the original Top Gun. In the original film, the pilots are superheroes extremely capable, extremely self confident, sexy to every woman they come across. When goose died in the original, the message was not to mope around and feel sorry for yourself, but to get over it and get back to business: being a self confident, capable military warrior who could put aside grief and fear and kill the enemy. Maverick is portrayed as his most pathetic when he’s moping around after goose died. He only gets to be the hero by manning up and doing his job.
I think this is broadly correct, though I’d point out that we also have been denegrating family life, especially for women since the late 50s or early 60s. You can just look at pop culture and it’s obvious. Women are not supposed to want to be mothers. They are supposed to want careers and to be an educated girl boss.
There’s gonna be a lot of bans.
Why not a topical debate thread. Pick at topic, say the insanity defense in murder cases, and have a hosted debate where people take opposite sides and debate the merits of various ideas about the best way to handle the prosecution of someone who might be insane. A debate obviously requires contradictory arguments because if everyone agrees Theres no way to have a debate. I think that works.
I want one, but I don’t want it in the main CW thread because it tend to get lost among other discussions and it seems like the interaction is just surface level because people are skipping over it to get to the other stuff in the same thread. Kinda considering the idea of creating an AMA where people can just ask the person whatever you want to about themselves and they can answer in longer posts. I want it to exist, but it seems a waste of space and effort to make it a part of another thread.
I think there’s a bit of a false comparison.
Yes, we’re protective of kids in the USA, more so than Europe. But we are also not like Europe in enough ways that the comparison is silly. Europe has very low crime, robust public transport, and walkable public spaces. The USA has almost none of that, and the cities that do have public transport generally have so much crime in the trains or subway that you couldn’t even consider using it especially after dark. The roads in the USA are designed around fast cars and it would be almost impossible to walk to a business from a suburban home without encountering a street that has a speed limit of 40-50 mph. Letting a child walk to a store alone in Europe is not a big deal because the odds of encounters with crime are low and you have trains or subways and wide sidewalks to get around car traffic.
Im fully convinced that maturity comes from having responsibilities in life. If you read stuff from the past, say 1800 or so, it’s common for kids of 14-16 to not only be able to run their own lives, but living as fairly functioning adults. The difference is that from very young ages they were — often by necessity — helping out at home, on the farm, or in the business. They learn how to handle things independently, how to plan and accomplish those things, and understanding the consequences of not doing them.
We do the opposite. Most kids are responsible only for maybe homework and perhaps keeping their own bedrooms clean. They don’t have to cook, or clean the house, or take care of a garden, or care for a pet. They are responsible for almost nothing, and therefore do not mature into adulthood, they might be able to mature to maybe adolescence but beyond that, not really. So we now have adults who are only functioning on the maturity level of a teenager.
I think it depends, a lot of the current zeitgeist on the left is absolutely hostile to Judaism, even if right now they’re still pretending that it’s all about Palestinians. The alliance was basically one of parasitism— other ethnic minorities who are part of the DNC alliance had very little wealthy people to donate to the cause, so they needed the Jews to bankroll the party. But the same minorities, especially with the growing Arab population, don’t like Jews and they’re increasingly given microphones with which to speak their minds.
In 2019 the CDC wished to be taken seriously. One Covid later…
I think if I were trying to teach the unintelligent people something, I’d more than likely do so by teaching basically algorithms for doing tasks or flow chart style yes no questions to make decisions. What seems to work most often if you aren’t smart enough to be able to figure out something on your own is to have pretty specific step by step instructions. As far as teaching morality, I think lists of virtues are good as heuristics simply because they’re explicit and you don’t have to do a lot of moral reasoning on your own. You just teach the person to value the virtue of honesty or bravery or industry and then they know what that looks like.
If you’re talking about finding a good church, I’d suggest that such a person should use things like the basic creeds and the 5 solas to see if the church they’re looking at is orthodox enough to be a good church. I mean looking to see if the median attendee isn’t completely evil is probably a good second test, but people can lie, so it’s not the primary thing.
I agree that planning a shooting takes a lot of work and a long time. But the pattern still seems to hold: a teenager, most likely a male (at least a few have been trans, don’t know of any female spree shooters), with few or no close friends, no outside affiliations to groups like church, team, volunteer groups, no significant other, and no real plans for the future.
The number of people who fit that pattern and dont seem to spree shoot is huge, so you can’t really take the mere existence of one or two of those signs as warnings. At the same time, those signals are there for the vast majority of shooters. If you see someone in your orbit who’s exhibiting those things, it might be worth the effort to make sure that you keep tabs on them and notice if they seem to be spiraling or taking a sudden interest in guns and shooting.
It’s probably going to be on family members more than anything else to know the young men in their lives and make sure that they’re okay.
I think the right way to do religion is to take it seriously as a zeitgeist. It needs to feel like it matters to the people in the universe, that it affects more than just the world mechanics but things like morality, aesthetics, views of history, and eschatology.
What bugs me personally is to have a medieval civilization with a religion that nobody takes seriously. My dude, people in our world killed people accused of desecrating a piece of bread. They had whole wars based on which sect of Christianity was the real one. They killed people for heresy. Yet I read most fantasy and religion is treated like it is in the modern era, just something that exists and nobody thinks that hard about it.
Thou shalt not make a machine in the form of a man. The Spice must flow…
The “normal” thing is likely a mirage. I can’t think of any of the spree shooters who had an active social life. They weren’t in theater or band or sports or heavily involved in a church or social club. They often don’t seem to have any friends or at least no close friends. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a spree shooter who had a boyfriend or girlfriend at the time of the shooting. They also don’t seem to have active hobbies or interests. They don’t seem to be good at anything in particular nor are they known to be planning a future at all.
These people seem to be basically loners and losers. They exist, and are capable of behaving normally in public. But they are not normal people who just randomly snap. They’re people on the fringes of society with no connections and no future who eventually become angry enough to shoot random people. The hard part is that not everyone who fits the profile is going to spree shoot. Even for the population of loser loners, it’s probably 1% and certainly less than 5%.
I think honestly it’s a bit of narcissism. Not that having an opinion on culture issues is wrong or bad, but if you’re “waging war” about it, it’s in some form or other about the human desire to get their own way and if possible to force it on other people.
Why would it matter to a person living in California what people in Idaho think about trans issues? Why do they care? It doesn’t affect them that conservative Baptists don’t want their kids to be trans. They lose no rights in California. Why would someone in Idaho care that Californians want their kids to be trans? It’s about control and the prevention of control. I want everyone to agree with me, therefore I wage culture wars and try to get the power to force everyone to agree with me.
I keep going back to how much of a better community existed back then. You generally had a couple of friends who you could talk to, and had pastors, teachers, parents, and so on who knew you.
It’s much easier now to have social isolation and have no one to even notice. And to not have a close friend or relative you could tell about your problems.
The problem with gun control is that it really only reliably disarms people who obey laws. It doesn’t really work on people who break the law. No gang member, spree shooter, or assassin is bothered by the illegality of their weapon or signs prohibiting guns from some venue. In fact, they very likely love seeing those no guns signs because no one else is likely to be armed. So passing more no guns in school laws or whatever other gun control laws aren’t going to work.
Furthermore, the chances that Americans will ever go for the type of gun control that happens in Europe or Australia is precisely zero. It’s a nonstarter, and thus it’s kind of a waste of time. If the debate is bans or restrictions on gun ownership it’s going to be the same debate we have had for decades, and will for decades to come. It’s not going anywhere and honestly I feel like it’s a distraction and a waste of time that could be spent on ideas that Theres a chance of getting done in the next couple of years. The kids getting shot at school in the 2020s don’t have twenty or thirty years to wait.
Mental health seems a similar dead end. The help available is only available if you actually go and get it, and only if you happen to somehow mention the symptoms that would unlock the diagnosis. If the person isn’t willing to be brutally honest and tell the doctor everything even someone who is seeking help isn’t getting it. But most people are reluctant to get help. Men especially feel that going to see a psychiatrist is weak. Add in the red flag laws, and you make it very likely that a troubled young male will clam up instead of even trying. And if he does, he’s likely to be careful to downplay his problems so that he doesn’t trip any triggers and get himself into trouble.
As terrible as the idea sounds, the only thing we can probably do to is to in some form or fashion make sure that the places where shootings are likely to happen have at least someone who is armed. Nothing else will work today and it’s not something we can wait for.
I don’t see it as demoralized to keep politics to one of several things you keep track of. That’s honestly a good thing, in my view. Because politics cannot fill the voids that it’s asked to do by the radical left and right. It cannot make up for a lack of personality, nor can it make up for a lack of hobbies or social interaction. It cannot work as a religion either. And when politics is turned into all of that it ends up being a cause for verbal if not physical “jihad” where the others who merely disagree with you are to be subjugated and punished for being politically incorrect from your perspective. At that point, you set the table for killing people. It’s a dangerous game and I’m not sure where the lines will be drawn.
I think it depends. If the person in question is working off some sort of actual evidence, some sort of documents, photos, recordings of an event, I’m willing to entertain the possibility, but I don’t see much benefit in just going off some other guy’s vibes.
I think JFK stinks to high heaven. (For the record I think it was Russian agents, but given the climate at the time, if they’d admitted that, earth would be irradiated by the following nuclear war). That’s not a weird one, and I’m certainly open to other possibilities including a failed defector pulling off a miracle shot by himself and running faster than Usain Bolt only to be captured and murdered on national TV before he could be deposed.
I think we honestly have far far too many people who have made politics into both their identity and their religion. The public is far too “engaged” and it leads them the believe that politics is the only thing that matters. Add in an unhealthy amount of Last Psychiatrist style narcissistic tendencies and you end up with a toxic stew that can only lead to mental health disorders and the destruction of the country through polarization.
Watch some World Series baseball. Carve a pumpkin. Get a hobby.
I think it does matter in the sense that you have to get people interested in the game in the first place, especially the young, and as attention spans shrink, a game that’s 80% waiting for play to start is probably not going to hold as much attention as other sports.
Baseball already has this problem. It has a game much too slow for modern audiences, and has already introduced changes to try to fix those problems. The pitch clock, designated hitters, the free runners in extra innings— all of this is designed to speed up a game that is perceived as too slow. And I think they’ll run into limits eventually because the game of baseball was invented in the 1890s when spending an entire afternoon playing a single game or watching a single game was a reasonable ask. Is it really a good model in 2026 when it has to compete against faster games and better entertainment? I think it might have trouble even though I like the game.
I think Theres evidence for it. Taking the simplistic view that there are no odd goings on anywhere seems silly when you find every ancient civilization coming to believe in the same types of magical powers. Why would every culture think that stars had something to do with the future if it never worked, or that repeating words in a trance state could make physical changes, etc. shamanism exists everywhere.
I would suspect the opposite, as Chinese live under a regime that can and has arrested people for saying the wrong things online. I know the whole thing about Winnie the Pooh as a stand in for Xi, and it seems weird to think they’d do that on one topic but not on others.
I suppose, but looking around, I think that giving people the ability to have freedom sans responsibility has produced most of our problems today. Would it be better to somewhat constrain people and have a functioning society or allow total freedom and live in a society where nothing works and you can’t leave the house unarmed lest you be robbed.
- Prev
- Next

I mean proselytizing is one thing, cultural assimilation is something else. And no one post WW2 is really capable of doing so mostly because the RBIO global system has completely bought into the idea that cultures are to be conserved at all costs, even when the culture itself is harmful not only to other cultures but to itself.
Enforcing the standards of actual civilization on a backwards tribe that still practices genital mutilation is considered backwards. Insisting that the death penalty for “blasphemy” or “apostasy” are bad is evil in the RBIO. What exactly do you expect here? If Israel integrated and insisted that Palestinians could no longer preach genocide of Jews from the pulpit, would they be allowed to enforce it? Could they enforce a no jihad rule? Or would they be accused of cultural genocide for saying that “Death to Israel “ is hate speech?
More options
Context Copy link