RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
No bio...
User ID: 317
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
10hr ago
It's not just America, Jews in Europe routinely call for migrants to be accepted and tolerated more. The Bonnier Group media in Sweden fulfills a similar kind of role to the NYT in America, pushing multiculturalism and social justice issues.
We have these quotes from Jews like Barbara Spectre: "Europe is not going to be the monolithic societies they once were in the last century. Jews are going to be at the centre of that. It’s a huge transformation for Europe to make. They are now going into a multicultural mode and Jews will be resented because of our leading role."
She says it, I believe her. In the UK https://www.jcore.org.uk/, 'supporting refugees, led by Jewish values'. Where are the rabbis and Jewish NGOs against mass immigration? Jews are not right-wing in that sense. They might prefer the mass-immigration Tories to the mass-immigration, vaguely anti-semitic Labour. But they don't actually agitate against mass immigration at any considerable scale.
Wokeness was invented by Jews, they came up with blankslatism and antiracism and they pushed hard for civil rights, whereas whites were divided. It was whites who enforced Jim Crow and segregation when they were around, while Jews like Levison were advising MLK. Obviously whites are more right-wing than Jews, they were right wing in the past too.
The Anglosphere has not displayed pathological altruism across history. Robert Clive, not an altruist. Francis Drake, not known for niceness. Those people flinging smallpox ridden cloth over at the native americans, not altruistic. The Duke of Marlborough was a pretty tough guy, not to mention Wellington. You don't conquer huge swathes of land by being nice and welcoming to others. Only recently has the Anglosphere and Europe decided that their destiny was not to rule the world but to help disadvantaged communities and become majority non-white. Previously, there was the White Australia Policy, Asian Exclusion Acts, immigration restriction and white supremacy. In WW2 John Curtin of Australia spoke openly about this:
This nation will remain for ever the home of the sons of Britishers who came here in peace in order to establish in the South Seas an outpost of the British race. Our laws have proclaimed the standard of a White Australia. We did not intend it to be and it never was an affront to other races.
Pathological altruism is a recent phenomenon. It had roots in a more-benign than usual kind of imperialism certainly. But there is a qualitative difference between 'lets build some railways in India' and 'let's cover up these Pakistani grooming gangs in our country raping white girls because we don't want to look racist or prejudiced.'
It makes zero sense for the people with all the wealth and power to decide, unprompted and without external influence, to start giving away wealth and power to other peoples, invite other peoples in and give them preferential treatment. Only once you add a group with notoriously high verbal IQ does this story start to become more believable.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
11hr ago
Yes, whoops, my mistake there.
Surely 'even faker jobs' can only be a transitional step to either eudaimonia or annihilation?
Why would govts buy voters off if voters can no longer riot and overthrow the govt, if the power of millions of people in the capital city is insignificant compared to Slaughterbot Swarm #873? Why would leading corporations care what regulations there are if they can send their slaughterbots in and turn the regulators into meat paste? Or less dramatic scenes of 'super-charismatic AI explains the best course of action to take and calmly, politely shows why your particular idea, senator, would be expensive, risky, embarrassing and actually produce the reverse of what you wanted + some huge kickbacks to sweeten the deal.'
The key factor here is power transitioning from human armies to machine armies, leadership roles being taken by AIs. The rich/AIs can always renegotiate the deal later when they're more powerful. Who would trust Sam Altman to uphold a deal a moment longer than self-interest dictates?
I think we should focus on dull but important outcomes over more interesting but less significant transitional stages.
More options
Context Copy link