Supah_Schmendrick
No bio...
User ID: 618
A majority of historical wars were genocidal in intent; wanting to exterminate your enemies is in fact an extremely common motivation for warfare
Citation very much needed. Wanting to kill the enemy country's elites and replace them is common, wanting to loot the enemy country's stuff is common, wanting to reduce the enemy people to servitude or slavery is common, even wanting to displace and take territory from the enemy group is common. But even in "barbaric" ancient wars outright eliminating the enemy people root and branch is usually too much work for an unclear reward.
Socialism at the federal level mostly means endlessly bloating the elder care apparatus
To be fair it also means doling out increasingly huge wodges of cash to professional activist organizations and favored political client groups.
What, does the recent repeal of Roe v. Wade not count? The “Blue Tribe” had pinned a huge policy platform of abortion on it, and it was totally undone
So in this giant Red win meant...that Blues no longer got to unilaterally dominate national policy. This is not comparable to Obergefell (or Roe in the original instance). Blue wins mean they get to override Red preferences everywhere. Red wins mean they get plausible cover to try and eake out a separate existence in some places. These are not the same.
It sounds like what you actually want is not the freedom to do as you wish, but the power to coerce others, and particularly to deny the other what they want.
Yes, this is what Blue tribe gets when they "win."
But wanting specifically to exert your power over another is something different. Its envy, or at least, is rooted in the same. Envy is seeing what someone else has, hating them for it, and wanting to destroy it. It’s bringing someone low because you can’t stand seeing them up.
What a coincidentally perfect distillation of major leftist legal doctrine.
The problem with socialisms are two - people are selfish and tragedy of the commons. For the first the only socialist solution that works so far is to beat them into submission.
Hardly; this just optimizes for the selfish people getting control of the clubs. Marxism has never truly grokked that people's ideological statements and interpersonal solidarity can be faked or hacked.
see how anthropologists feel about Guns, Germs, and Steel
My understanding was that GGS was deprecated because it got objective facts wrong about the subjects it purports to address, not because it was ambitious in scope.
It's New York so of course the populist candidate is going to be a socialist, but is this really any different than the rise of right wing populists in Europe in effect?
Yes; the RWP rally around a policy - immigration restriction and recognition of islamicate/SE Asian cultural incompatibility with western norms - which cuts both against official ideology as well as the fundamental moral order of the post-WWII first world ideal.
NYC electing Mamdani is literally a 50-Stalins criticism of the existing order. "We haven't socialismed hard enough/real socialism has not been tried!"
I'd urge to at least try "assimilate or GTFO" (don't know if there are any success stories as stark as El Salvador, though)
The best example in America are Germans. Germans went from being a fairly-unassimilated minority, with high non-english persistence and significant ethnic lobbying...to completely dissolved in the American "white" mainstream over the course of two generations. Of course, we all-but criminalized the teaching of German in schools and fought two wars against their coethnics with pretty stringent propaganda against the inherent evils of "Germanness," but it worked.
Blackbagging by ICE seems to be an extrajudicial process by design
You need to clarify what you are talking about. Are you talking about arrests of individuals who already have a final order of removal or order revoking a lawful visa against them? Are you talking about arrests of individuals based on probable cause that they are in the country illegally? A secret third thing? Immigration law is very complex and, yes, mostly delegated by act of Congress to the administrative branch through administrative adjudication, and discussing it based on vague generalities actively obscures more than it enlightens.
Welp, that's outed me as an online far-right autist, I suppose. (tongue very much in cheek)
I'll quote @gattsuru here:
... the Obama administration issued thousands of work permits under DAPA after the Fifth Circuit [entered an] injunction [blocking the practice], and then said oops. A further hundred thousand reprieves were granted after the Obama administration swore before the court and in written submissions that they would not act on the memo while the court was ruling on the preliminary injunction to start with. During appeals the Obama administration held that it could offer whatever individualized discretion it wanted, so long as no one made those decisions because of the DAPA rule. Nor was this problem specific to DAPA. The Obama admin repeatedly refused to follow both statutory requirements and court orders mandating notice to a state for settling refugees, up to and including directing state charities to not tell state authorities.
To say nothing of how the Biden administration twisted and turned to do anything possible to refrain from enforcing the actual law on the border.
The left has a track record of breaking the law and ignoring court decisions in order to keep the border open, then trying to hide the ball under obfuscatory administratrivia.
That really depends on what you mean by "left wing." But yeah, that's a structural problem for left wingers in a functionally one-party progressive political milieu.
The reason right-leaning news is growing is that it at least tries to get the facts right
Ehhhhhh....some yes, many others no. The pressure to cater to the consumer's pre-existing beliefs is very strong, and right wingers are just as susceptible to confirmation bias and all the other old, familiar rationalist hobbyhorses as lefties.
They have all three branches of government
The majority in the House is less than 10, and there are a lot of clowns in the GOP caucus who can and gleefully will screw everything up on their pet issue du jour.
A TrumpSon run would almost certainly capture significant quantities of credibility on the third leg
Unlikely; I've seen no evidence that any of Trump's kids possess his humor or stage presence - major reasons he did so well.
If we assume 12 million illegal immigrants (range I saw was 11-13), that's a cool 30 years at the current rate with a cost of $200.6 billion (not including 30 years of inflation).
Yes, but overt deportations are not the only thing happening. During the same period, there is evidence that sizeable self-deportation, most likely in the hundreds of thousands of individuals, has occurred.
What the fuck is going on?
Politics has replaced religion as a foundational cornerstone of personal morality and identity, and people really don't like having those questioned. Seriously; just look at the polling about whether you'd be comfortable dating someone with different politics/religion and the two concepts have flipped over the last half century.
Does anyone know why they named it to have the same acronym as Biden's "Build Back Better" plan? It feels like a deliberate choice, but I'm not sure why.
Trump calls lots of things Big and Beautiful. In his 2016 campaign the border wall was "big, beautiful." He's called the U.S. a "big beautiful department store"; an EO dedicated to eliminating information siloing in the government promised to build "one big, beautiful dataset", the various diplomatic initiatives his administrations have undertaken have promised "big, beautiful deals," etc.
Meanwhile college students do hours of boring, grinding work and studying in the hope that in 4 years they can get a solid entry level job
Do they, though? What with AI and grade inflation, they increasingly can't really read or do basic math. I don't think this stereotype is as universally applicable as it was before.
If at any point he had stated that he was opposed to gay marriage, his base would have fallen out of love with him and turned on him in an instant.
Again the amnesia strikes - he did this! Repeatedly, during the 2008 election!
Republicans have a failure mode of cult of personality;
How quickly we forget the "Is Obama Enlightened" discourse, and even the "Cocaine Joe" and Bernie memes of the late Obama era. Not for nothing did Bill Clinton quip that that when it comes to picking Presidential nominees, "Democrats fall in love, Republicans fall in line.".
It's almost never about the personal impact of the transgression on the transgressor themselves; it's about modeling and justifying the behavior to people for whom it would very much be harmful (i.e. the mass of the hoi polloi).
My gut says that living in dense cities is somehow injurious to the human spirit and generates a lot of sicknesses downstream.
I think this is likely because you have not been exposed to smaller, prettier, and orderly, but still dense town environments.
I wanted the woke to be defeated by classical liberals
The problem is that "classical liberalism" has very little positive substance to it in most formulations; it's usually articulated as something of a meta-philosophy about open competition between ideological groups (free speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, equality before the law, etc.). It has very little to say about what the actual positive vision society should be working towards is. Hence its fundamental discomfort with the actual exercise of power necessary to rip out the institutional kudzu the woke has implanted into the liberal's precious "impartial institutions."
My biggest mistake, I think, was to extremely overestimate libs and the left. I really thought they would manage to blunt Trumpism's worst impulses and there would be a sort of stalemate like there was during Trump's first term.
The problem is that there is no institutional check on the left when it gets into power (eg all the nonsense the Biden Administration got up to, as documented ably by Rufo and many others) so the only actual check there can be is the one originally contemplated by the Founders - the full exercise of political power by a successive administration elected to reverse the initiatives of the last.
In fact, the checking of one aggressive force (wokism) by an equally and oppositely-aggressive one (Trumpism) is precisely the balancing of powers and passions contemplated by Madison and the federalists. It's just been so long since we had anything even resembling an equal fight between progressive and conservative forces in the country's institutions that actual open conflict looks like a radical coup.
Because this leads to photos of children being separated from their parents by law enforcement, which makes a majority of voters sufficiently sad/uncomfortable to vote against it.
- Prev
- Next
These are not materially different things. GK Chesterton actually remarked on this:
"What I saw in America" 1912, pgs. 3-9
More options
Context Copy link