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
6mo 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
8mo 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)?
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
5mo 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
8mo 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
23d ago
Also, if you're a strong HBD believer, remember to apply the policy uniformly - without such selection it's luck that you got to immigrate and your countrymen didn't, and would you want to live in America with another 400M Africans?
Shit, that is a good point.
Did you overlook when I said I don't hold these beliefs?
I was using the generic you in the example. It was less about you holding the beliefs yourself, I disagreed on how much charity you were granting.
Like, I didn't assume that you personally were for bullying Rebecca Tuvel or any unfortunate who asked about transracials...
If you tell me you believe in fluxberries and can define it and therefore I should do what you want but:
- You cannot provide a coherent definition of fluxberries when pressed even a little. In fact, the definition changes before our eyes when it suits you
- You actively try to bully, discredit or destroy people who demand a coherent definition or raise questions about why this a slightly different colored berry is not, in fact, a "fluxberry"
- You explicitly admit that you cannot define a previously concrete and less controversial term like "berries"
I have to wonder to what degree you believe you think you can justify belief in fluxberries - certainly you seem to believe in a distinct way to how you believe in say...policemen, or fish.
I don't see how OP's original point about the reluctance to square this doesn't apply:
My impression is that for quite a few of these people, they would be unwilling to clearly answer the question, "what are trans kids?" without getting evasive and yet protecting that category is a moral imperative.
Like, we know for a fact that some already do this with "woman", that one is not even debatable because Kentaji Brown did it in front of Congress - and all the same problems apply there. I'm supposed to grant extra charity on "trans child"?
In most of their their worldviews(there are several different factions with different answers) there is an intrinsic 'trans' quality that some people are born with.
Yes, and what is that quality?
The 'trans' quality frequently causes kids great distress around puberty
Frequently? So not always? So what else can we use to judge if a kid is "trans"? Dysphoria is hugely problematic (given kids desist) but at least concrete.
If we grant that there is an innate quality that we can easily distinguish, there is no problem. The point is that nailing this down in some definitive way seems to be difficult
Just as, if we accept that there is a trans-inclusive category called "women", there is no fundamental problem. Yet some random Daily Wire dad who dresses like an actuary has driven left-wingers into a frenzy trying to get an answer to this basic question.
This is a microcosm of this whole debate. All of this sounds good in the abstract. Once you start discussing it you not only get tough questions from traditionalists, but even feminists who ask how the markers of this innate quality are not regressive (it often boils down to stereotypes).
Tanista
1mo ago
It's all part of the game at this point. The recent "leak" of the "Royal racist" in Dutch translations right when Omid Scobie's book was coming out was basically PR while maintaining the illusion of respecting the rules.
Tanista
3mo ago
Because democracy isn't just an arbitrary principle, it's a political technology for nonviolent resolution of unrest. People who live in your country but don't vote can still riot, can still strike, and can still join insurgent groups.
Which is why the Gulf States are a hotbed of insurrection?
but I get the impression that Fury figured this was just going to be a warm-up and didn't take it as seriously as he probably should have
Isn't this the story of Fury's life? I can't count how many times I've heard this.
It seems like every time I watch a boxing match, no matter the level, they all end in TKOs after one guy gets ground down to the point that he can no longer defend himself.
Yeah, that'd be a bad plan. It took Stipe being a much better boxer AND outwrestling him AND Ngannou throwing recklessly to wear out Francis in the first fight and, even near-dead from exhaustion, he still didn't get KOed or submitted.
He rarely gets rocked, even with 4-oz gloves. In fact, Stipe thinking he rocked him with a counter is what got him KOed in their rematch
I don't know if he watched old tape of Francis from the first Stipe fight or what, but he's learned to be more measured and patient and not punch himself out. If Fury wanted to wear him down he was gonna have to work harder than waiting for Ngannou to come to him and he didn't.
Anyone watched the Fury-Ngannou fight? Spoilers below.
As an MMA fan: what the fuck? We're kinda used to the unreasonable effectiveness of Francis Ngannou (Rozenstruik is a tenured kickboxer, for context. So was Overeem) and he has a general reputation as a very fast learner but this is kind of ridiculous.
Before the fight, even fans of his were mainly glad he was going to get a boxing style payday, despite the likely KO.
I almost suspect Saudi shenanigans but they're having Fury-Usyk so it wouldn't be in their interests. I guess Fury's used to tiring people in the clinch and Francis' famous strength + greater experience clinching turned the tables. It was absurd how he threw him around at some points. But Francis looked good even outside that.
Ngannou went into MMA because the skill level was seen as much more favorable for a late starter. But, as a latecomer, he beat multiple strikers, submitted wrestlers, adapted so much to his one serious loss that Stipe Miocic looked like he had nothing for him, wrestlefucked Gane...him going straight into boxing or being discovered as a teen is the biggest what-if in combat sports.
Tanista
7mo ago
Yeah, "keto" can easily be "low carb" in actuality, especially if you're not tracking. When I wasn't I was probably just doing low-carb - especially if you consider that a lot of keto diets call for a lot more fat than protein and I always found it harder to hit the targets for the former compared to the latter.
But I think even low carb will work for a lot of people simply by forcing you to cut out a lot of bad shit you might otherwise unthinkingly consume.
Tanista
8mo ago
It also discredits them with the dissatisfied. This is why Putin was so angry at Naryshkin's slight hesitance to invade Ukraine. They don't want anyone that can even appear to be a rallying point later on.
Everyone signs the death warrant. That way no one can later go to the mob and playact innocence.
He ran into the "don't make the USA your enemy" exception.
(Even he got away with killing rebels after the first Gulf War and likely would have stayed in place despite sanctions if not for 9/11 and the free shot it gave Bush and Cheney)
Granted, they'll have to compete against poor white and asian students for those slots
And, apparently, they lose. Which is why Harvard and the NY magnet schools were in the mess they were in.
Your point might be true, if we took "disadvantaged" to mean "pushed to engage in slanted competition" as opposed to "disproportionately loses in competition". But the latter situation is at least in play now.
but they won't have to compete against wealthy Nigerians.
They will have to compete with a bunch of poor or "poor" Nigerians and other immigrants who are technically lower SES still have some social capital (this is the standard explanation of "model minority" success)
But, again, if people like Hanania are right: both groups are not only taken to the cleaners by Asians now, they will continue to do so indefinitely.
If your argument was for race + class-based affirmative action to cut out well-off Nigerians it'd be one thing. But pure class AA is another thing entirely.
Are you going to force these elite Nigerians to live in places that most black Americans actually live and intermarry with them?
Maybe not them but their grand-kids?
I think you underestimate how good Americans are at assimilation. They only have to win once, and they usually do.
If instead you hold everyone to the same standard, then even if fewer black people get through, the ones who do will actually gain full values from their degree. Which, especially if culture is the dominant factor, creates a gateway to success for black people who want to escape that culture and become successful. But even if genes predominate, this still enables a way for above-average intelligence black people to distinguish themselves from the average.
I see no way in which the benefit to fewer degree holders will overcome the total wreckage for everyone else.
If the anti-hereditarians are right, I see far less reason to not provide AA since we know class-based AA will disadvantage blacks. If we can't blame genes we will have to look at things like where blacks live, which may or may not be blamed on racism. But, even putting that aside, if blacks won't inherently revert to the mean as HBDers claim, if the "dumb" AA students are only merely disadvantaged by living with the wrong people (as opposed to being promoted to schools well past their competence) why not take them? You're going to miss out on the chance to give the future leaders of the community even more cachet so they can shape the community? In the name of...changing the norms of the community?
Like, I don't think Obama has caused a major change in norms but it's probably better to have had him and men like him than not. By his wife's own account people like her might not have made it without AA.
If Hanania and Murray are right there's also almost no way getting rid of AA is better for black people.
I'll use Murray, since he gives us clear numbers on what he thinks happens at the top scores in Facing Reality:
The College Board declined my request for the data that would give me the precise numbers, but the published breakdowns allow for reasonably accurate estimates of how many students of each race get 1500 or higher on the SAT.1 The numbers of test takers with a combined verbal and math score of 1500+ were around 900 for Africans and around 3,300 for Latins. Meanwhile, the numbers for Europeans and Asians with scores in that range were about 27,500 and 20,000 respectively.
900 & 3,300...to 27,000. There is no set of hidden benefits to disadvantaging everyone apart from this population that'll make it worth it for the losers.
If you want to do as Murray does and argue for meritocracy or a politics of difference, okay. But it just isn't one of those "rising tide" situations. Someone has to lose in a meritocracy. Allegedly entire categories of "someones", sometimes.
Yes, John McWhorter and Neil DeGrasse Tyson will lose that asterisk - but they seem to have shed it on their own anyway. But plenty of black people will never get a shot at all at that level. Yes, as it stands now there's some drag on Harvard's credibility and the credibility of black AA beneficiaries. But, as I said, most people are normies and either don't know the details of AA or know better than to say and Harvard is clearly maintaining enough of its prestige for them to get benefits.
You're also leaving out the problem that feminists run into: women's revealed preference is to work less, let's say we had a legal situation that allowed most women to do so. It would create its own negative stereotype. You're worried about the stereotype that McWhorters have to swim against, but you forget the much older prejudice of "yeah, he made it through X but maybe he slipped through the cracks. I'd prefer a white. "
There's almost no way a wipeout better from the African-American perspective than the current messy system that at least incentivizes Harvard to find some ADOS blacks (even if most of them are Nigerians)
Audible.com
More options
Context Copy link