Because it looks like the person using it is creating a fig leaf of an argument so an allied group will never be held responsible.
It's an attempt at bullshit. It isn't really about truth but is just an attempt to convince (or, more likely, just deflect and waste time long enough to dissipate actionable outrage) so what's the point in trying to get into a factual debate about it?
The person has revealed themselves to be a partisan.
What exactly is Newsom's selling point? If you want some charismatic Obama stand-in surely the party is full of many such pretenders who don't have absolutely awful records* and don't come across as a slimy cyberpunk mayor? They're all trying to be that guy now.
The Democratic party is still unpopular now despite Trump rampaging. People don't like what it stands for. Newsom is slick, but he can't actually change the past and what he did.
If it's just that Trump will have sunk the GOP's chances then charisma shouldn't factor into it (and presumably Democrats will pick someone they think the general public will vote for, like they did with Biden)
* Note that Obama himself had a thin resume and that was a good thing.
Tanista
5d ago
If the petrostate part of the petrostate isn't smart [or powerful] enough to prevent that, and content with losing elections for ever, then it will be so.
If that happens, you might end up with a legitimate secessionist movement (assuming the stink from Trump wears off).
It's treated as absurd, as if QC has the exclusive right to agitate so, but we'll see.
Tanista
5d ago
The Conservatives were in the Labour position: certain to win, so they decided to shut the fuck about anything controversial to avoid being tarred (as your AI says the Liberals are the natural governing party, the media is very favorable to them, every single conservative leader is prima facie suspicious and a possible Trumpite/American wedge to them). Whether they're leaving a highly motivated immigration voting bloc on the table or were right to avoid pissing off Boomers who don't want to be like America I don't know. But I think the latter fear is very reasonable.
But it isn't a Tory situation where people seem to actively want to punish them. Trudeau's handling of the immigration system was so over the top that even hardcore immigration restrictionists would likely welcome a turn back to Harper's already large numbers. And because they knew that, the CPC did nothing. Fuck were they going to do, vote PPC? Okay, maybe it isn't the late Tory situation.
The minute Trudeau dropped out though, the immigration argument stopped making itself and the CPC didn't want to touch it. PP's abrasive personality was also no longer a plus when it seemed like Trump was the only person it didn't apply to. But, then again, he wasn't in office and couldn't pull any stunts (like Doug Ford, another person you could consider an asshole at times who directed that at the US and scored some points, despite having to pull back on some of his stunts).
Beyond Carney's already noted talents, he is good at another thing and it's not doing anything radical while being seen to do stuff. Immigration has come down, especially temporary workers, but then there's also going to be a one-time speedup in PR for protected persons of about 100,000 (and he's assuming that the temporary workers let in by Trudeau will all just leave). Then the method of calculating the budget changed to split the operating budget and investment, which theoretically makes sense except Carney is in control of this distinction which has obvious consequences (like a supposedly balanced budget with a massive deficit)
On top of all of the right noises on interprovincial trade barriers and pipelines, I can see not only why he's popular but gaining defectors. If he's going to hang around for 5 years you might as well go to the popular party that can do something.
Anyways it seems like the era of third parties and spoilers may be coming to a close, so we may see Canada simply become a one-party two-bit petrostate.
A petrostate with a loud minority of people who loathe building infrastructure to support and sell oil.
Tanista
5d ago
What about delivering on prosperity? Has Carney actually lowered cost of living, made things more affordable?
Nope. But then, this war may bail him out of responsibility to do that.
Tanista
5d ago
In the context of romance, I don't see a problem with calling high standards unrealistic, since reproduction is necessary for the perpetuation of society.
So is friendship.
Even worse, the risk-takers in that demographic were already killed or jailed in the previous wave of repression.
I really don't understand why, if Trump was considering attacking, he didn't do so when the protests were closer to their peak and he threatened intervention if people got shot.
I've seen attempts to praise Trump for holding to his red lines, unlike a certain other President, but what good is it if you dither long enough that it doesn't matter? It was always a long shot that you could stop this stuff from the air (we apparently have to go through cyclical phases of optimism about regime change/victory via air power) but same goes for collapsing this regime.
This is probably more true for the fate of the hobbits than that of the elves.
The Elves in LOTR are just a standard tale of hubris. It is their desire to recreate Valinor in Middle-Earth without being forced to subject themselves to the authority of the Valar that caused the entire mess with the Rings. Celebrimbor's pride is what led to him helping Sauron, despite Galadriel and the other Wise being suspicious.
They were supposed to either stay and fade or leave, passing the world to Men. It was pride and a desire to stop the inevitable that made them make the rings.
Passivity isn't the problem. It's rejecting hope in God's plan. The world is degenerating and becoming disenchanted, but Eru is still at work (Numenor's destruction is actually hopeful in one way because it's clear evidence that Sauron is wrong: Eru has not abandoned the world and isn't some inert deist god) and is supposed to make it right at some point. Evil will not triumph in the end but you have to trust (and fight). It doesn't matter if you're worse off than before you fought, not fighting would be even worse.
Most everyone who becomes corrupted or grievously fails in some way rejects hope in that plan and creates problems. Celebrimbor decides he knows better, Saruman decides to bandwagon because he sees no rational path to victory, Denethor won't join Sauron but simply gives up out of despair and tries to kill himself like a "heathen king", the Valar themselves arguably fail by refusing to confront Morgoth early enough to stop him corrupting everything (which is why the Elves fade so fast in Middle Earth) for fear of destroying Arda despite knowing that Eru proclaimed Morgoth could never triumph...
Because people have free will, they fuck things up. But it's not over until it's over.
Tanista
8d ago
The United States exists in the first place because a bunch of people committed treason. Treason is not automatically bad. It's kind of incoherent for an American to criticize treason. What even is treason? It's a very "in the eye of the beholder" thing, isn't it?
If it's in the eye of the beholder then where's the problem in finding some actions unjustified and others not?
I think he's talking specifically about the "you can just wait, there's IVF" messaging which leaves out mention of any of the difficulties you might face.
It doesn't create the attitude, but it does help reinforce it by implying there's an easy fix to the downsides of not having kids early.
Thanks to the internet, its actually millions upon millions of third world males obsessed with bobs and vagene.
These sorts of Third World males select into red pill and Andrew Tate fandom more likely. Obsession with vagene + low patience for Western women's complaints is already pushing you into "misogynist" spaces that are pre-discredited.
I also see no reason to doubt that there aren't Western simps driving this because you see it in other cases, e.g. all of the celebrities crying and taking responsibility after George Floyd's death, and all of the stuff significantly less famous people did in its wake. All of the people "listening and learning" show the same outgroup preference simps do.
Tanista
14d ago
The Terminator sequels were all hoping to set up a timeline they could squeeze/mine. That's why they usually have some sort of stinger or tease (IIRC Genisys had a tease with Arnold becoming a liquid metal Terminator which...ugh).
They simply failed every single time and had to reboot.
This is a one-and-done idea. That's fine for fanfiction but are you going to pay Arnold and Hamilton's likely extortionate fees in order to try to successfully end the Terminator franchise? Look at the MCU: a good ending can be its own curse.
Tanista
14d ago
There's one very obvious reason: you can't make Terminator films after it.
Tanista
14d ago
Man discovers that the
RepublicanRevolutionary Guard isn't going to send back tens of thousands of Americans in body bags, instantly starts to sound like Karl Rove.
First time?
Give it a bit.
"The future is not set" was part of Reese's message in The Terminator, and the villain's entire plan hinged on the idea that changing the future is possible.
Reese isn't the guy to ask, he's the pawn of the guy who actually has a holistic view of time travel, a reverse Isaac sent to his death by his son as a sacrifice.
Connor's actions in the film heavily imply he believes time is a flat circle, correctly. That's why he can blow up the machine and feel secure he won't need to send Reese any reinforcements.
Tanista
17d ago
They would be, if we weren't decades downstream of anti-imperialist, anti-colonialist education. People know just enough to feel they can slot each group into the appropriate ethical slots.
The Jews are Jim Crow Southerners and the Palestinians at worst are the Nat Turners of the world: righteous freedom fighters (ignore any nasty stuff of course) driven to evil by oppression. Any complaint by Jews that they'll be murdered if they ever give the concessions the other side wants are obviously just a repeat of what the Southern slavers said.
Is Islam pagan because its origin involved pagan elements and pagan characters?
People who believe those are pagan elements (as opposed to elements corrupted by paganism*) absolutely believe that about Islam. It is one of the most common attacks used against Islam actually.
* In Islam monotheism is ancient and paganism is the degeneration. The Kaaba is supposedly a house built by Abraham and Ishmael and then corrupted by pagan worship and restored by Mohammed. If you don't believe this, the Hajj (which predated Islam) really is just a pagan ceremony that was given a face-lift. There's a reason Muslims insist on it.
I'm not much for Jewposting but...the explanation for why progressive feminists and pro-LGBT people support it is basically the same and it's not any more flattering to them either. If they can be accused of being short-sighted, why not Jews?
Tanista
21d ago
Leviticus 26 is Yahweh telling the jews that if they fail to obey him, he will punish them grievously
The Moab stele makes the same claim about Chemosh. This isn't actually incompatible with the people being punished being the chosen of that God. Hell, it's kind of the point. Divine favoritism comes with a cost.
My naive take was that it's almost impossible for the game of partisan tit for tat to not end with the filibuster gone.
But the Senate has been resistant to going all the way despite Trump suggesting it. I suppose their desire to matter outweighs their desire to stick it to the other team.
Yes, many historians make the argument that the Islamic focus on pagans is polemic. Mohammed's supposed home was surrounded by different Christians and many Arabs were Christians. Yet it makes it seem like it was mainly a struggle with pagans.
I'm not so revisionist that I'm sold that Mohammed's followers were all Christians though. I think one reading is that the Qur'anic author saw the Christianity was already winning and, like Paul, saw a chance to both convert pagans (who already accepted Allah as a high god ) and assimilate the "god-fearers" who were interested but for whom the lack of an Arabic Bible was a problem with the rest of the monotheistic faiths. The Qur'an explicitly backs the old religions (until it doesn't) and outright states that the point of it being sent down was to give Arabs their own book in "clear Arabic", the Bible not being translated at this time.
One reason I don't believe that they were all out and out Christians is the ignorance of a lot of Christian material. The author of the Qur'an is not only very ignorant about Jesus (his polemics against the divinity of Christ are amateur hour) they can't quite tell what's apocryphal or not. There are other mistakes that are stunningly ignorant for either Jews or Christians.
It would also explain the absolute arrogance of trying to weld together Christianity and Judaism without accounting for all of the reasons Paul had issues with the law or the wide divergence over centuries: they just didn't know what they didn't know.
(Now that I think about it: if it was just the path of least resistance why not abandon the strict monotheism? It would only piss off the Jews but it would bring in far more Christians as allies, it wasn't like most of them at this time were Ebionites)
Incidentally, the five Christian Pentarchs were the bishops of Rome, Constantinople, Antioch, Alexandria, and Jerusalem. Rome is Catholic, Constantinople was Orthodox up until the 1400's but is now Muslim (and called Istanbul), while Antioch, Alexandria, and Jerusalem fell to the rising Arabs. In other words, 4 of the 5 original Christian holy cities are currently under Muslim control.
Huh. In Paradox's games set when paganism was still a thing one of the ways to get your religion reformed and recognized as a stable equal of the organized monotheistic faiths is to capture - iirc - 80% of the existing holy sites. I wonder if someone was influenced by this.
While I do think that at its core masculinity implies a responsibility to be willing to use force to defend the good if necessary - and thus all men have a certain responsibility to embrace the capacity for violence - it's a big world and it's okay if some guys are skinny nerds who read a lot.
I mean, it's a big world and fat chicks get laid all the time too. I don't know that it's irrational for them to want to improve their status despite that fact.
It's also okay to be a skinny nerd iff the situation isn't so bad as to justify the deployment of force at scale and the entire point of the meme is that the growth in the number of such men will make it necessary. He has reason to strike back.
Tanista
26d ago
That would fit the the "empires win except for RNG" claim.
The most likely outcome was the Arabs converting to one of the other existing monotheisms. Most likely of the two being Christianity. It was incredibly lucky (or it was providence) that Mohammed existed and he could draw on the Biblical description of Arabs. And even then they benefited from both nearby empires having dragged each other to death's door.
Without this, they continue as they were with groups like the Ghassanids being aligned with the Christian Romans and being mercenaries for them.
A point that MattyY makes is that acts of civil disobedience work because they play on existing faultlines and sympathies. Which is why stopping traffic for Gaza does nothing. It's just a cargo cult licensing their Main Character Syndrome.
That is why they should care, insofar as they care about their cause at all and it's not an excuse to impose their will: you don't need to earn omw_68's specific respect, but you probably need to earn it from some segment of society if you want to make sweeping changes to very big systems or policies.
More options
Context Copy link