Skibboleth
It's never 4D Chess
No bio...
User ID: 1226
Skibboleth
It's never 4D Chess
4mo ago
Unsurprisingly, when you completely abdicate a domain to your ideological opponents, it becomes dominated by your ideological opponents. Things like "Feminist vulcanology" exists because American conservatives decided the only way they were interested in engaging with intellectualism was by standing outside and throwing rocks.
Skibboleth
It's never 4D Chess
5mo ago
What's really interesting to me about that group is that they're an incredibly niche subreddit while their right-wing equivalents are running the Republican party.
Skibboleth
It's never 4D Chess
9mo ago
None of this seems to make sense.
I'm not sure what you mean by this. It seems perfectly sensible: anti-immigration activists are repeating a rumor that supports their preferences. It might be true, it might be exaggerated, it might be a complete lie. Why bother checking? After all, even if it's not true, the fact that I could believe it really says something about society.
Skibboleth
It's never 4D Chess
3mo ago
I strongly suspect that in the arts/humanities side of things, expressing conservative views/tastes in assessments will literally often get you marked down
I don't find this to be true except in one very particular sense: there are a subset of bigots who are also conservatives who define conservatism in terms of their own prejudices, who arrive in a space that is extremely hostile to those prejudices and find that expressing them gets them in trouble. You're not going to get marked down for saying we should lower taxes or be tougher on crime, for using nationalistic iconography, taking a pro-American stance in history class etc... If you study philosophy, there's a good chance there will be literal fascists on the curriculum. You may find yourself as a distinct minority opinion and arguing with your peers a lot, which is undeniably an unpleasant experience, but the actual landmines tend to be homophobia and racism.
Could Zelenskyy not keep his pride contained for a few hours?
Counterpoint: could Trump not keep Putin's dick out of his mouth for a few hours? Saying Zelenskyy ought to be more polite is a tactical remark at best, and given that Trump and Vance appear to have been spoiling for a fight I'm not sure it would have mattered. Conversely, Trump apologists are continually telling me that I ought to respect Trump as president of the United States, but also that he can't be held responsible for what he says or does. If he's president of the United States he ought to act like it.
Ukraine needs the US much more than the US needs Ukraine.
I don't think people grasp that this goes way beyond Ukraine. This is just the latest in an escalating series of actions from Trump demonstrating to American allies that the alliances are dead - that Trump will abandon American commitments on a whim and prefers Russia to NATO. Even if the next president is a hardcore internationalist, everyone is going to remember the fact that America elected Donald Trump and the rest of the GOP fell in line behind his every temper tantrum.
And yes, the US does need its allies. It's not 1941. Autarky is retarded, and we're going to quickly find it's a lot harder to strongarm the rest of the world than have friendly negotiations.
Skibboleth
It's never 4D Chess
3mo ago
TDS in real life
Yes, that's my point. Trump sycophants constantly dismissed his critics as hysterical, but they keep being right.
They are arguing they did by dint of completing the removal prior to the judge issuing the order which therefore would not apply.
I am saying that that is comical bullshit, they know it's bullshit, and their actual argument is "who is going to stop us?"
Skibboleth
It's never 4D Chess
4mo ago
I in fact did not know that, because I don't keep a comprehensive list of petty far-right bugbears in my head.
Whenever I see people going off about ridiculousness in academia, I am unavoidably reminded of Twitter Smell Lady, who was held up as an example of silly research only to be repeatedly vindicated. The core problem here is that most of the would-be critics of academia are fundamentally incurious, which is why about half the time their cherry-picked examples turn out to be totally reasonable and only sound "dumb" either because the reader lacks the education to understand what they're talking about or has an ideological blindspot.
"I cannot fail by now to recognize the tactic of wholly emptying out one's head when put on the defensive" really stuck with me because of how often you see it.
Quite.
Skibboleth
It's never 4D Chess
4mo ago
Tangential: the 'total ideological capture of the academy' by the left is in significant part a product of right-wing anti-intellectualism. If you're going to adopt the position that anything but business, finance, and engineering are parasitic and quite possibly degenerate, it will not be surprising that a) existing academics shift away from you b) smart conservatives avoid academia* in favor of business, finance, and engineering and new academics overwhelmingly lean left c) a feedback loop emerges where conservatives and academics increasingly view each other with hostility because the former (largely correctly) believe the latter don't share their values and the latter (largely correctly) believe the former want to destroy them.
*(This is also why American conservatism is intellectually bankrupt and relies on Catholics, a small number of converts, and borrowing critiques from woke-critical centrists for basically all of their intellectual firepower)
Skibboleth
It's never 4D Chess
5mo ago
No. "Joe Biden and his team of advisors" is equivalent to "Donald Trump and his team of advisors". The equivalent of "The Left" is "The Right" - a group which includes white supremacist terrorists, corrupt police unions, etc...
Expecting someone to completely abdicate political participation because someone directionally aligned did something disqualifying is unreasonable. Expecting someone to display basic civic virtue by not support a particular candidate that did something disqualifying is entirely reasonable.
Trump Derangement Syndrome Utterly Vindicated, Season 10, Episode 19.
Trump promised to act in a lawless, corrupt, and abusive manner. Lo and behold. I don't know if the cruelty is the point, but it certainly seems like a KPI.
The trouble is, of course, that admitting the TDSers were right either requires openly admitting that you're evil
that order may have been issued after the gang members had already left US soil.
Even assuming this is true, crime does not become legal because you do it really fast. The Alien Enemies Act doesn't apply, and the administration claiming they can nullify due process is textbook tyranny.
Skibboleth
It's never 4D Chess
4mo ago
I decided to google feminist vulcanology, and tbh everything I see looks like incredibly pedestrian efforts to encourage women to study vulcanology. This may be triggering to misogynists, but this does not look like some anthropologist rambling about other ways of knowing. If this is what's corrupting science, then I withdraw my previous statement and chalk this up as another instance of American right-wingers demanding slavish submission to their beliefs. Acquiescing to that would be pretty much the opposite of integrity.
If conservatives want to contest ideas, they should throw their hat into the ring, not demand liberals think conservative thoughts on their behalf.
Skibboleth
It's never 4D Chess
3mo ago
It's not a unified subset. It's a disparate collection of individuals with discriminatory beliefs which they nevertheless consider to be an integral part of their political identity, though you can point to specific groups in some cases. Religious conservatives are a big standout on the gender and sexuality front, but they're hardly exclusive. Insofar as there's a real unifying theme, it's the "facts don't care about your feelings" aesthetic that many conservatives (especially younger ones) adopt, which IME mostly ends up glossing prejudice as "realism".
To put it as plainly as I can: whenever you find right-wingers saying "I don't think I can be open about my political beliefs because I'll be ostracized", it's never about fiscal policy or foreign policy or even touchier things like immigration or criminal justice. You can think we should slash welfare or defend aggressive foreign policy or declare that Christianity is the one true religion and your left-wing peers at college may think you're an asshole (or a rube), but you're not going to be a pariah (nor is the TA going to mark you down on your essay). The sticking point is basically always about either gender/sexuality or race, and often beliefs that would be considered boundary-pushing even in conservative milieus. For example.
Skibboleth
It's never 4D Chess
2mo ago
One of the hallmarks of the American populist right is, on the one hand, an almost gleeful cruelty, and, on the other, a fragility and hypersensitivity that is remarkably at odds with their self-image as tough and emotionally resilient (unlike the snowflake libs). Obama in particular evokes paroxysms of rage (for, uh, reasons) and "you didn't build that" rather bluntly punctures one of their core myths and their hypersensitivity means they can't let it go.
Skibboleth
It's never 4D Chess
3mo ago
Sorry for the heat, but it's probably more honest than what you usually get.
No, I actually hear stuff like this on the regular from gainfully employed relatives and acquaintances, loudly telling anyone who will listen how they're not allowed to speak their mind for fear of dire consequences.
For reasons that I don't understand, a lot of right-wingers simultaneously openly, viciously loathe liberals but also seem to crave their respect and approval.
Skibboleth
It's never 4D Chess
5mo ago
"Gulf of America" is some freedom fries-tier petulant nationalism and everyone who supports it deserves to be mocked relentlessly for their lack of dignity.
If you're a white man under 50, then you've experienced things being renamed as something that is done to your people
Speak for yourself.
Renaming thing can be good or it can be bad, because who and what we choose to honor says something about ourselves. Nor are we bound for eternity by the preferences of those who came before us. We don't expect Latvians to keep up Soviet monuments or Germans to preserve the aesthetic decisions of the Third Reich.
Renaming things that bear the names of Confederates is good, because it is a repudiation of tyranny and white supremacy. The best you can say about these men were that they were good generals (usually not even that), and we're not lacking for pillars of martial excellence that weren't traitors. Renaming things named after, say, Jefferson is bad, because while Jefferson had many less-than-admirable qualities, they're not why we honor him. I'm pretty mixed on Columbus Day, because while Columbus was pretty terrible even by the standards of the time, it's meant to be a celebration of Italian American heritage, not exploitation and genocide (though, as above, I think we could probably dredge up a less notorious alternative who was also actually American).
The Right is, of course, free to rename things, but of late the people and things they seem to want to honor have a tendency to vindicate their critics.
Also, Denali is a vastly superior name name to Mt. McKinley.
I think it's a good move
Has Trump ever done anything you didn't consider a good move?
Skibboleth
It's never 4D Chess
5mo ago
"The Left" cannot run for president. There are numerous distinctions between Trump's post-election schemes and the summer 2020 riots, but Trump's close personal involvement is a rather glaring one.
A weirdo leftist failing to get you banned for sharing a conservative opinion seems like evidence in favor of my point.
Skibboleth
It's never 4D Chess
3mo ago
I'm just going to refer back to what I wrote when this came up a few years ago, since nothing has really emerged that had changed my views on the subject (tl;dr Correia and Torgersen mostly precipitated the situation they claimed to be fighting because they were upset pulp wasn't winning awards, pre-2015 Hugo winners were totally fine):
Skibboleth
It's never 4D Chess
4mo ago
I think it's bad that those supposedly-neutral institutions have taken up partisanship.
I agree. I think it would have been better for everyone if scientists had steeled themselves against the slings and arrows of the resentfully ignorant. Alas, the scientists are only human, and after decades of being told "you're an enemy", they took it to heart.
You think it's thoughts that the conservatives are opposed to?
You know what? Yes, actually.
Again and again, the American right has proven itself to be distrustful of thoughtfulness. Many are quite proud of not being effete intellectuals who think too much. The business gentry that comprises a large share of the conservative elite resent academics and think education is solely for training new workers, nationalists can't stand critical examination of cherished patriotic myths, and religious conservatives have concluded that science is an existential threat. A large part of why they're liable to view academia as parasitic is that it doesn't sit well with their cult of action.
(This is also why they've largely been reduced to begging liberals to make conservative art for them - it's not some fundamental inability of the conservative mind to produce art, but that modern American conservatism holds artists in contempt).
Skibboleth
It's never 4D Chess
4mo ago
...this paper seems entirely unobjectionable. I'm genuinely baffled as to what the problem is here.
Skibboleth
It's never 4D Chess
5mo ago
That niche group appears to be running much of the federal government regardless of election results
That seems like an extraordinary claim. What is your basis for thinking a small group of redditors constitutes the unelected shadow government of the United States?
Skibboleth
It's never 4D Chess
5mo ago
I don't want to discount the insurrection - the combination of the riot and the fake electors scheme was truly egregious. I don't know if Trump intended for a literal riot to happen, but if you look at the speech he gave at the rally directly preceding the march on the Capitol it seems fairly apparent that Trump wanted to intimidate Congress into acquiescing to his stealing the election.
Skibboleth
It's never 4D Chess
8mo ago
The parts of WV without West Virginians are objectively non-shitholes and actually pretty incredible. The inhabited parts, on the other hand, not so much. Rural squalor is truly an underappreciated part of America, especially in the South. I would say it's tragic, but they mostly seem to prefer it and who am I to tell people how to live? So godspeed and all, but don't try and tout its superiority.
I could just as easily ask where you see that. This sounds like a fantasy version of conservatism peddled by 4channers who haven't seen the sun in weeks. Mannerbund? I have never heard any normiecon talk about this. If you were to ask the average Midwestern conservative what that was, they'd assume it was a niche beer.
It is true that conservatives often fancy themselves rugged outdoors types, and nevermind the fact that they're an insurance salesman who lives in a Dallas suburb. This has about as much credence as the pseudo-intellectual pretensions you get from a lot of college-educated liberals, i.e. none.
It is also true that conservative political narratives tend to play up reactive grievance - Trump was/is present as a natural reaction to disdain from 'coastal elites' - while playing dumb about the phenomenal amounts of bile spewed towards others. And this is what I mean. Conservatives have this bizarre tendency to posture as if they had no choice, as if the unbearable rudeness and condescension of liberals forced them into their positions. And we're expected to take them seriously for some reason.
What are you looking at/seeing which leads you to draw the opposite conclusion?
For example: the quote I quoted. Other things in this genre: McCarthy blaming Democrats for Speakership chaos, as if it were the Dems responsibility to sort out GOP coalition woes. The endless Diner Safaris are another prime example. Or, for that matter, the fact that large swathes of rugged, independent Deep Red America are basically collective welfare cases that would've died out long ago if not for Federal transfers and spending.
Harris and Biden both condemned rioters. Donald Trump vocally supported rioters as long as they happened to be wearing police uniforms and attacking protestors.
More options
Context Copy link