BANNED USER: repeated antagonism and bad behavior
Nantafiria
No bio...
User ID: 246
Banned by: @Amadan
Nantafiria
5mo ago
Us ordinary Europeans keep voting for the people who have been doing this for decades. 'Victim blaming' is mostly a fake and gay concept; vote for neolibs, get neolibs. Simple as.
Nantafiria
7mo ago
I'm sure that may be true, and I'm still sure its people still by and large find cheating on your wife a bad thing. Not as bad as being part of the enemy tribe, perhaps, but 'not as bad as' does not 'totally okay' equate.
Nantafiria
7mo ago
Lots of things that aren't 'abiding by market forces' aren't theft. Until the day we live in AnCapTopia and everything is left to the free market, that's the world we live in, and things seem to work out pretty well. The archetypical case of theft is robbery: taking something that isn't yours. A thousand employees banding together and demanding higher wages or they'll quit isn't that.*
*Yes, American law makes a mess of that principle. Too bad.
Nantafiria
10mo ago
I refer to my original comment, where being known as gay would get you barred from the military or most any normal person's job, and where this was so pervasive it was the expectation. "There's no such thing as no-politics" indeed, because these gay people I've met and spoken to never had a choice.
Nantafiria
1yr ago
I don't understand why getting details wrong about a historical event is a moral failing and that people who do it should be "damned to hell."
I'm mostly with the other incredulous people here, but alright. Let's say your username isn't trolly nonsense and you're deeper down the spectrum than I am, or the median mottizen is.
Put plainly, people really really really hate their enemies. Today's world is a little fraught, and people disagree on who this should be, but in any Western nation you'll find (at least) two groups that everyone really hates: nazis and pedophiles.
Nobody likes nazis. Depending on where you are you'll get taught more or less of who they were and what they were like, but everyone knows the big outlines. Swastikas, toothbrush stache man, holocaust, invading Poland, huzzah. To a median Westerner, the nazis wete evil losers, neo-nazis are evil losers, and they aren't interested in debating this. They have better stuff to do.
There are then two kinds of people who will go and doubt the dominant narrative about the Nazis anyway. The first are - obviously - their ideological descendants, who want to look good. The second kind of person is the sorts you'll readily find in here: the sorts who never got over being the smart kid in class. Reflexive contrarians who have never held a conventional opinion in life, because those are the normies' opinions and ohmygod they're so dumb.
A normal person, or even a smart one, isn't really going to notice or care for the distinction. They rightly know the Nazis killed millions of innocents. They rightly know national-socialist ideology is an evil one that has only brought misery to all those involved. They know this, they know their friends know this, they know their loved ones know this, they know every good person they agree with knows this. Every single one.
The people who loudly profess to disagree or question this are all, at the least, Nazi sympathisers. There's a lot of reflexive contrarians, but most of us have still the modicum of shame and social regard needed not to delve into holocaust denialism as the cause to espouse. Holocaust denier club isn't fifty truth-seekers with a couple Nazis around, it's fifty Nazis with a couple autistic kids who genuinely ought to seek their intellectual masturbation elsewhere.
The result is that the average person, or even a smart one like Prager, doesn't care to ponder just why someone might question the Holocaust. Not even the staunchly leftist atheists Prager hates like or will defend Nazis. No normal person will. But he knows that holocaust deniers fall into three rough groups: Nazis, smart people who should know better, and idiots who ought to listen to smarter sorts.
Does that help? Or are things still unclear to you?
Nantafiria
1yr ago
I frequently see Somalia trotted out as what a limited state might look like, but surely you can see why people who prefer a limited state don't find that compelling?
The opposite argument comes up in these circles on occasion - or it used to, back when more vivid leftists hadn't yet been driven off as much. Some guy or another would argue the more milquetoast defence of communism, where clearly the problem isn't the ideology, it's what the likes of Stalin did to influence it, and that without such a legacy it'd all be totally fine. The counterargument is an easy one: it keeps happening. Mini-Stalins pop up wherever some communist republic appears. It doesn't stop.
Somalia is for sure a fair critique in the same vein: it keeps happening. Call it CHAZ or post-Qing China or what have you, but pointing out that places with limited or smaller governments are uniquely prone to petty warlordism is entirely a critique that the stronger sorts of Libertarians should think of addressing with a better call than 'that's unfairrrrrr'.
Nantafiria
5mo ago
That is the narrative paranoid rightists suggest, because 'they betrayed us' has been their playbook since the Dolchstoßlegende. Where Europeans elect rightists more interested in culture than money, they can in fact work against immigration, they do in fact work against immigration, and people who say it never works out aren't looking very closely. Sometimes the left beats them to the punch to take the wind out of their sails. And sometimes, in 4D chess moves that are entirely too funny to me, even the most pro-immigrant nations will take action against immigrants while insisting it's about antisemitism bro trust me bro we surely don't care about the people sucking up benefits. The French are sick of it and in no way get 'the same result'. Eastern European nations where people move away from more than to do it.
There's plenty of anti-immigration policy in Europe to be found, if you care to look. Did you actually care to?
Nantafiria
1yr ago
How do wokes
You should, sincerely, find a better place to ask. Nobody here self-identifies as woke, preciously few people are even adjacent, and people who hate them, despise them, are numerous as they get. You'd get a better and more honest answer just-about anywhere that isn't here and, additionally, I think you kind've know it. That this is not a place for the woke to be is no grand secret.
Nantafiria
7mo ago
Still no government needed there, no matter how much you insist it's OBVIOUSLY true that's how it goes.
Nantafiria
7mo ago
There are places where unions don't get these special rights, and where they exist just fine. What gives?
Nantafiria
8mo ago
What would you offer Putin? Other than "nothing, the trap is shut and it's not coming open until you die and whoever replaces you crawls back to grovel".
Why is this such a bad thing? As-is, that seems to be what the Americans are doing, and it's going just fine for them
Nantafiria
11mo ago
At least you can cry back as a woman
No more than you or I could, no. Crying on command isn't something healthy-minded people get to do very easily.
Nantafiria
1yr ago
What limits? George Washington who could not tell a lie, the French people ruled by a queen who would let them eat cake, the Germans laying claim to every tribal people from the Longobards to the Goths, trying to take Europe until it brought them such ruin they pulled a 180?
People's national myths are pretty universally dumb. I guess Ukraine's won't be different.
Nantafiria
1yr ago
That's an argument you could levy against any change. I swear, you guys, within a century the nation will be doomed if we don't slightly adjust tax policy. You can also levy it for any change: if we don't immediately do this one thing, we'll be gone in a couple generations yet.
Now, some of that may even be right. It very well may be! But we can look at people's prediction posts and see how easy it is for them to get anything wrong for the one lousy year. For smart, conscientious people, making predictions they have no stakes in. Doing it one, two, three generations in advance? Madness. Predicting those sorts of future means making thoroughly unfalsifiable claims, and I'd prefer we treat people who claim to know what'll happen in ages beyond the one we live in accordingly.
Nantafiria
1yr ago
I believe the silent killer of conservatism is young people not moving out of their parents’ homes.
You are definitely on to something here. If you can find no decent place to live, conservatism doesn't really have an answer for you beyond 'find a better job'. Not helpful. Nominal conservatives are perhaps the firmest YIMBY block out there, and their platform just isn't all that appealing to people trapped in certain lifestyles.
Nantafiria
1yr ago
So Elon is a liar of a hypocrite you shouldn't trust to keep his word, your opinion on @elonjet nonwithstanding.
Nantafiria
5mo ago
Wake me up when the effects of the policies you listed make their way to Eurostat.
Walk a ten thousand miles, get your goalpost, put it back. That's how far away you've moved it.
The line that people were never asked about X and Y is something of a nonsense argument, too. The vast, vast, vast majority of policy doesn't see much debate, because politicians figured out decades ago that policy doesn't get votes, slogans and one-liners and tribalism does. Vibes-based democracy is a new term, not a new concept. This is, as you say, par for the course, and I have no sympathy for people who vote for pro-immigration neolibs and get pro-immigrant governments. They can and should not do that if they want to make a good case.
Nantafiria
7mo ago
I'm not dense enough to think the people are Vice think everyone should be polyamorous, into swinging, as well as cuckoldry. For what it's worth, I don't think you are either.
The median Vice employee, let alone reader, thinks breaking your wife's (or husband's) trust is bad; no sacred union is required, for nothing is sacred to begin with. If that means you both go into marriage thinking any of these three rightwing boogeymen is okay, then power to them, so says the Vice liberal. If you drop it on someone out of nowhere, cheat on them, betray what was a generic relationship? Not so power to them, shitty move, so says the Vice liberal.
This isn't very complicated. This isn't news to you, either: I shouldn't have to spell it out. I don't know why you'd imply that this isn't obvious if you weren't trying to score tediously cheap points, so if you will, please tell me what the point of this has been. The ranks of Vice aren't full of people who think cheating on your wife is totally awesome, and to twist around so it kinda-sorta might look that way is tiresome. Not clever. Not enlightening. Just tiresome.
Nantafiria
7mo ago
That may or may not be so, and it still means nobody is going to jail for suggesting a date.
Nantafiria
8mo ago
The other thing is that for all this talk, Trump actually was President for four years, and neither Ukraine or Taiwan were invaded under his watch. Is that because he was construed to be a committed idealist?
America isn't the sole mover in world politics. I'd caution against attributing everything that happens to whomever is in office.
Nantafiria
10mo ago
The reactionaries we have in 2023 AD are absolutely failed progressivists, no matter what lofty ideals and past figures they worship. If any of their idols met these guys, they would despise them, and rightly so.
Nantafiria
7mo ago
I am most familiar with Dutch law, and passably so with Irish and Swedish law on the subject. Dutch law forbids employers from firing people for unionising(1), but does not get enmeshed in any negotiating that goes down. Sweden's laws on the matter are similar. Ireland does the same. The Netherlands and Ireland additionally have their laws written in such a way that unionising can never be required of someone; it is strictly that employee's choice. I don't know why I'd be opposed to this status quo, and it seems to work just fine.
1: This is not a special right, as Dutch law prohibits people from being fired for political association (and a lot of other stuff) in general. This may or may not be a good thing, but the right to unionise isn't at all special.
Nantafiria
8mo ago
Bad how? What deal should people offer, would it be better than the status quo, and would it actually be feasible?
Nantafiria
1yr ago
What exactly does a hypothetical victorious-in-Ukraine Russia have to offer random Kazakhs that they can't get at home?
Because the migrants aren't heading into Eastern Europe, and if anything migrants leave Eastern Europe. There is something cynically comical about their attitude: talk about immigrants who won't come, while emigrants flee away, that they might steal the money your own politicians already take. Genuinely funny.
More options
Context Copy link