Tanista
1yr ago
Just out of curiosity, which of those two buckets do you feel "don't ask enemies for political help" and "avoid calling elections rigged" each fall into?
Tanista
1yr ago
who tried to live up to their opposition's supposed standards
Except it wasn't the opposition's standards - at least not on election denialism. The difference between that and "being racist" by wanting to deport people is vast.
The idea of accepting election results was uncontroversial on both sides until Trump talked. The benefits of polarization.
Hell, the Dominion lawsuit revealed that, even within Fox, people who didn't excoriate him in public were dubious but worried about their audience.
But I guess they were also playing by Democrat standards?
Tanista
1yr ago
Depending on whether they're public figures I believe this affects the evidentiary burden.
But I don't know whether the Sandy Hook parents count (or counted at the time). The surviving kids definitely put themselves out there.
Tanista
9mo ago
Tanista
1yr ago
There's no norm that says "don't call on Russia to release hacked emails".
There is no law. Just as there is no law that you have to release your tax returns.
I think it's more of a stretch to claim there's no norm against calling for a foreign entity to help you win the election.
There isn't now though, that's for sure.
There certainly no norm against complaining that elections are rigged
Yet losing candidates are expected to congratulate their opponents and concede (it was noteworthy that Clinton didn't have a concession speech).
Again, less of an expectation with Abrams' thing + Biden pre-complaining about the midterms.
Of course many of them are with Zendaya with whomever the male lead is
Maybe we should thank God that Challengers didn't do well; otherwise, we might have been hearing about this for a decade
but the sheer amount of complaining about how Zendaya is too ugly to be paired with Hollywood men should by itself indicate that this happens quite often.
I think this is part bitter Twitter racist thing and part "woman who glams up (she looks better on the red carpet than in many films) well enough to be liked by women but isn't a sex symbol, so men complain" thing.
You hear similar things about how Taylor Swift isn't really sexy and I don't think she really gets into racial issues.
Well, assuming a Euro win, I'm sure there'll be votes. And, if people vote to become just one part of a Euro federation, who's to say it's a bad choice? They chose it, better than being Belarus.
I'm sure some Irish revolutionary who died wanting wanted a socialist state or some other vision of the country is dissatisfied in his grave. The people seem to be managing fine.
As lines go, not that bad.
Of course, that's assuming a Euro win.
Tanista
7mo ago
Did Hamas debunk the "Bronze Age Mindset"?
There has been a lot of discourse among the American Right about the recent Hamas attack on Israel. This specific attack has caught this attention of the "vitalist Nietzschean" sphere of the Right, often followers of Bronze Age Pervert.
This sphere is known to be against moralizing and all "slave morality" coming from either the liberal establishement, the left or religion. An example of this would be the meme culture of the BAP sphere, which openly celebrates murder, rape and death. However, with an ironic twist of reality, Hamas is precisely getting accused of what these BAP rightists vitalists uphold. But when they are faced with Hamas's "barbarian vitalist attack" on Israel, utilizing non-modern warfare techniques, they suddenly all cowered out.
All of the BAP sphere has stopped celebrating "vitalism" when it came to Israel. This is because it is now "low IQ Muslims" that do it. It is very clear that Islam challenges the ontological foundations of the Nietzschean worldview. They can not explain Hamas on their terms.
Since you are forced by the rise of the world market to take a position (the American people's money is going into this), the Nietzschean BAP sphere can not say anything. They are practically rendered politically irrelevant. Thus, their position is reduced to fence-setting or straight zionism, a position completely and utterly in line with the political establishement in America. All of this to claim to be "right-wing dissidents". All of the rejection of moralizing now became an endorsement of moralizing. BAP openly retweeted a post denouncing "the rape & genocide" of Hamas (unproven by the way) while he himself, a couple days earlier, celebrated the killing of a leftist journalist saying it turned him on.
This reveals a huge hole in BAP's worldview. A gap between his "complete surrendering to natural instinct" and "transcendetal Platonist moralizing". He has now suddenly decided to start moralizing! He has found the exception to his Nietzscheanism! This single event has proven the complete bankruptcy of the Nietzschean outlook. It can never explain REVOLUTIONS, it can only react to it in its own moralizing sense through its metaphysical lense of "will to Power". It is fundamentally a whining ideology.
The Nietzschean outlook does not understand that high culture is only secondary to material harmony of society. Only when inherent tensions are solved in modernity can "high culture" be produced once again. Harmony is directly derivative of political & economic realities. Thus, taking the metaphysical lense of "will to Power" becomes non-sensical when faced with a pre-modern (non-aristocratic) revolutionary force. It is what creates (or destroys) aristocracy itself. Faced with the deep ancient Islamic spirit, the Nietzscheans have no answer. In the same way that the revolutionnaries of the 20th century rendered Nietzschean fascism politically useless (this was done by Mao and the creation of Neo-China), the same is happening with the new Hamas partisan. This is material Being asserting itself against ideology.
This has forced the online political sphere, specifically the Right, for a re-alignement. You either oppose the current political establishement (left-wing) or you support it (right-wing). BAP has chosen to support it.
The choice is clear.
I also don't quite know how to fix this.
"˹O Prophet!˺ Tell the believing men to lower their gaze and guard their chastity. That is purer for them. Surely Allah is All-Aware of what they do."
The current trajectory is pointing towards boring adjustment, where even in exciting situations people consciously suppress their emotions and play it cool, which we already do in most other, especially work, situations.
Or stable and internalized norms will mean that people won't even consider that particular expression of their emotions, instead of it being a constant struggle to not do a certain thing.
Take the Sharia pill.
Tanista
9mo ago
Why is it stated as self-evident even by supposed ideological dissidents like Hanania that romantically unsuccessful men are the only men holding so-called misogynistic views?
Because at least some scholars who study such men seem to think (e.g. William Costello) that they do tend to be more misogynistic (which, as pointed out, is different from them being the only misogynists)?
Tanista
1yr ago
but it could well have been the accidental prototype that people picked up and ran with
I've seen others making similar claims in this thread and I think it reverses cause and effect. That brand of atheism was pushed by mainly urban, educated, cosmopolitan, secular humanist types, i.e. already progressive. If it represents anything it's just that they were more likely to be subject to those ideas earlier than the rest of us, they didn't spawn it.
"If you ask her out, what's the worst that can happen? She says no?".
I think there is a clear difference here: Watson didn't publicly humiliate the man or claim she was abused and she had allegedly made it clear beforehand that she didn't like being approached that way. Basically, she did say no.
It matters because gobbling all of Ukraine fits the theory of people (e.g. Julia Ioffe) who want to see this as Russia pressing on and on until someone stops them, taking Eastern Ukraine and forcing Minsky/other concessions could be seen as Russia trying to militarily recreate the political situation like before the revolution when the Ukrainian government had to lean in Russia's direction (obviously achieving this militarily removes the democratic veneer)
Revisionist power aimed at NATO vs declining power trying (and failing) to shore up a core interest (as it sees it).
It is not a coincidence that the Jewish foundational myth entails their presence as a fifth column in a host civilization, within which an influential and trusted political figure spread plagues throughout the land- including the ritualistic murder of the firstborn sons of the gentiles by the Jewish tribal god Yahweh, culminating in a slave revolt followed by their ultimate expulsion from their host nation.
Leaving out a lot of context why the Golden Age of Egyptian Jews fell apart here.
Tanista
6mo ago
Stipe lost the second time around due to a stupid team on his part which made him weigh in at 234 instead of 250, thwarting his wrestling game.
Maybe partly, but Ngannou looked much better as a wrestler in the second fight. Ngannou also carried his adaptations forward so I'm inclined to give him some credit: he became much more circumspect in general and wrestled Gane to a decision, the went the distance with Fury. Before the second Stipe fight that'd seem like a bad thing to bet on.
He also came in much more prepared for Fury than anyone expected so, at this point, I'm going to say he's a just very adaptable, trainable fighter.
Remember, this is heavyweight where the worst of the worst fight.
I think HW has gotten better but yes, UFC HW is the best place for an athletic late starter with cinderblock hands and a good chin.
IMO that doesn't change that basically everyone expected Fury to do him like Wilder. That doesn't mean he's going to go beat Usyk or Joshua or have a long boxing career but you're underselling everyone's shock at seeing Francis come out disciplined and double jab, stance switch and clinch his way to a moral victory over 10 rounds (I think he took 3,7, & 8 but the rest are dubious)
Someone like Yoel Romero or Brock Lesnar were much better physical specimens than him and they would be much bigger what ifs.
Brock in MMA I grant because of the diverticulitis which hangs over his career. Romero...Romero had a long career in multiple combat sports. I don't see as big a what-if? What if he came to MMA earlier? I guess. But that's the thing about people who have mature skills in another sport: that's kind of their bread and butter, so it's harder to conceive of them as the same fighter if they just didn't do it.
I had Fury ahead on points and he barely looked fazed when knocked-down compared to the times when he was knocked-down by Wilder, but it was an embarrassing performance.
Wilder definitely knocked more brain cells loose. But it feels like Fury was still wary of Ngannou's power even before the KD (the first time he landed was in R2) and Ngannou was much stronger than Wilder in the clinch
But yeah, I think a close split decision is fair if humiliating. The specific rounds on the scorecard? Well, there's always something with the boxing judges.
If I were Fury and cared about my lEgAcY in addition to other con$ern$
At this point both are thankfully aligned for him. He can't lose after this or he's hurting his purse as much as his legacy. I wouldn't be surprised if he pushed the Usyk fight to train and recover more.
Tanista
9mo ago
That's usually not how it works: I doubt most people are salivating to debate Nathan Robinson in particular. But they will attack the Left, claiming it doesn't discuss things anymore and where have the good liberal leftists gone and so on. This is an old game played by right-wingers and is especially good after some form of college illiberalism is thrown their way (e.g. Shapiro, Milo).
I just heard him on Hanania and he basically said as much: the Left doesn't really do debate anymore so the goal is to make it so uncomfortable that they have to.
Tanista
1yr ago
but I think it'd pretty much always cause controversy if it was leaked.
"Controversy" like playing footsie with the idea the election as stolen? If so, do you think Fox always cares about controversy?
Let's put it another way: let's say this information leaked about Fox (or any other workplace) but there was zero lawsuit risk. How important do you think the "controversy" would be in practical terms?
That's not going to happen. If the trans side loses the whole thing is getting memory holed
Might be naive, but I don't think things like that can get memory-holed.
The fucking President met with Dylan Mulvaney, on HD video, visible from the little clairvoyant in everyone's pocket. It's over.
Tanista
1yr ago
I guess we'll see if the "billionaire's wife" meme actually tracks reality.
Tanista
1yr ago
That doesn’t make them not nationalists.
It's not really the problem here. The problem is that they are anti-nationalist of the universally recognized flag of the nation that holds the country - just as the US flag is universally recognized as the flag of the current government holding sway over those territories.
They are showing the same "disrespect" that Kaep showed. Point is that that "respect" is not universal at all.
Basically you can't lean on some descriptive fact about flag popularity here; you just have to make a normative case that it's wrong to dismiss the national flag relative to other (less practically relevant in some cases) alternatives.
Tanista
1yr ago
Take,yes. Annex...I don't know. Holding the entire country would be very difficult. Trying to force a puppet leader to allow the annexation of the East and creating a land bridge to Crimea? More viable.
This is in line with what Naryshkin let slip too early in that amazingly cinematic National Security meeting: they were definitely going to annex Donetsk and Luhansk. He didn't say they would take the whole thing.
Russia is not entitled to USSR-sized sphere of influence.
It's doubtful that's what they were going for. Eastern Ukraine? Probably. Getting to USSR levels?
This "as Ukraine goes, so does Europe" is a talking point by hawks to try to leverage the domino theory instincts from the Cold War* so Americans can pay the price (at least in ammo, not blood this time) for a nation that most of them previously couldn't find on the map.
* In this case justified by the psychologization of the Russian imperatives as a product of Putin's particular feeling of humiliation at the end of the USSR rather than justified via the evangelical nature of communism.
Tanista
1yr ago
Not going to happen without a totaliatarian regime with the current technology level
The bigger problem is cultural.
illiberal is not synonymous with totalitarian. Many societies maintained and maintain bans and taboos against all of those things without totalitarianism. For example: I think it would be very bad for the cause if you simply removed any ability to sue for anti-LGBT discrimination. I think the lack of that protection alone disincentivizes a lot of activism in less progressive countries.
The issue is whether Western societies are willing to tolerate such actions.
"Somehow"?
Literally just take out his game of footsy with election denial and I would argue it'd lower the temperature.
More options
Context Copy link