@TheDemonRazgriz's banner p

TheDemonRazgriz


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2025 March 07 03:43:02 UTC

				

User ID: 3577

TheDemonRazgriz


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2025 March 07 03:43:02 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 3577

Yeah I agree with that. I was really just wondering why Britain, specifically, had this particular problem. Plenty of places with problematic migrant groups (France, Germany, Sweden) did not have this qualitative kind of problem or this degree of coverup. I do think their particular history likely plays a role. But it could also be down to something as simple as no other country having large-scale migration of the particular Pakistani subculture that forms these rape gangs, like how only Sweden has issues with migrant gangs regularly throwing bombs at each other.

The problem with the grooming gang seems to be instead that, for the Anglo to care about the White poor, they had to go against the minority community.

I agree that this is true, but (to my knowledge, I’m not British) there’s an additional element of class at play in Britain. It’s obviously true that western elites writ large “love to signal how much they care about minorities and the poor outside their household” but in the UK this attitude is standing on the back of a long history of especially stark class differences which persist to this day, such that the poor are not merely “the poor” but fully other, a separate and inferior culture. Today they deserve pity and perhaps charity but are still broadly contemptible. This differentiates the native lower-class from poor immigrants, who are now seen as Diverse and Enriching to the culture, where the native poor are seen as the same drag on the culture they’ve been seen as for centuries.

I suspect this cultural history is the secret sauce for how this problem became so much more pronounced in Britain than anywhere else: other countries have problems with migrant crime, including sexual violence, but not with mass-scale organized rape gangs.

A jew sabbath checking an intern

WTF is “Sabbath checking”? What are you talking about?

And I’m kinda surprised it doesn’t have a rape problem.

Burning Man says they don’t have a rape problem. I recall reading (or watching? not sure) somewhere that they have a bad relationship with the local sheriff/PD because the Burning Man security staff pressures sex assault victims into not reporting to the police, and even recanting after calling the police (“do you really want to get The Man involved? have some drugs and chill out”), thus keeping the statistics down.

Very much an aside, but:

I guess the more left-wing you are the more likely you are to fill in a ballot late.

This seems entirely believable to me. At the extreme end, zero-covid loons would all vote by mail and would be overwhelmingly far-left. Very-online far-left agoraphobes would also exclusively vote by mail, which is not true of very-online far-right types (who wouldn’t trust it). More relevantly, far-left PMC types who can’t be bothered to go out to a polling station are more likely to vote by mail. Same for boomer-lib retiree types. Less charitably, dysfunctional zoomer-socialists with self-diagnosed mental illnesses are presumably very likely to send their mail-in votes at the last possible moment. Combine these and similar factors, plus the fact that actual republicans are likely not to trust vote-by-mail systems, and I could easily see a direct correlation between left-wing-ness and propensity for mail voting. I think this is borne out by surveys too, although I admit I don’t remember where I read that.

Ehh, given that it’s LA (where a supermajority of primary votes can be presumed to go to one democrat or another; the fact a republican is competing at all is an anomaly over recent decades) and that democrats are significantly more likely than republicans to vote by mail, I don’t think it’s impossible that a batch of ~10k mail-in votes, especially if they came from the same neighborhood, could have zero for the republican. Unlikely, yes, but not impossible. A 1% chance isn’t zero chance. I admit it is Bayesian evidence toward fraud, but even putting aside possible misreporting my priors based on modern history are that electoral fraud in the US really is minimal. Incompetence rather than malice.

Anyway, this is exactly why I think some common sense vote-counting reform is so important. We should not be able to have this conversation in a first-world democracy. It is at best a pathetic embarrassment. The mail-in postmark deadline should be set several days before the election date, with at most a one-day grace period for late arrivals. My understanding is that most states, including blue states, pretty much do it this way already anyway without issue.

Similarly to why I think voter ID laws should be enacted. I don’t believe there’s an epidemic of non-citizen votes, but I do think allowing for the appearance thereof is itself a serious problem. People being concerned about election integrity is itself a valid and important reason to shore up the process, even if they can’t prove anything. I remember the first election I voted in was 2016, while I was in college; a couple of my friends were international students who asked about what it was like. They were somewhere between baffled and appalled when I explained the process and how little verification there was, even the one who was a very liberal girl was shocked. They couldn’t imagine that elections in the famous U.S. of A. were so ramshackle. It was an eye-opening experience.

Much the same applies to drop boxes and electronic voting. Even if they are largely secure in practice, the mere appearance of an opportunity for fraud is a pointless and stupid mistake.

Yeah, I think the proper timing for Britain’s loss of “balls and brains” is after the Cold War ended, not after WWII. The process did start with postwar decolonization and the loss of empire brought on by the war’s damage but they were not a weak or irrelevant country throughout the 20th century. The Brits were still entirely capable of fighting the Falklands War in the 1980s, for example. It seems to me that their leadership bought too deeply into the comfortable dream of globalization and the post-Soviet “end of history”, chose disarmament and financialization, and walked the country into a managed decline more or less voluntarily.

The utterly blasé attitude of California to its comically pathetic electoral dysfunction is very frustrating to me, if not exactly surprising, given the state of the state. Functional democratic systems simply cannot (and indeed do not) take weeks to tally votes. Even if there is no or negligible fraud actually taking place (and I honestly believe that that’s true) the blatant appearance of opportunity for fraudulent elections is itself a serious problem. Part of a democracy is and must be confidence in the system! People need to see that the votes are being counted properly! Especially since this problem only appeared post-Covid, presumably due to lax rules about mail-in ballot postmark dates, the fix cannot be that difficult.

Does the federal government have any leverage to force reform? I know states control their own elections (which I think is right and proper in the US system) but surely there’s a point where this just can’t go on. Will it ever become sufficiently embarrassing such that the functionally one-party state government actually feels pressure to change? There seems to be very, very little motivation even from California voters to fix the system, many don’t even seem to see it as a problem.

As a result, Benjamin Franklin has become even more immortalized, to the point that his first name is used interchangeably with $100 in some contexts.

I’ve always liked to think Ben Franklin would enjoy knowing this.

Trump is failing. He will be replaced by Newsome.

Thoroughly tangential to the actual thread here, but I would not be so confident about this one. Newsom is coasting on name recognition. Personally I don’t think he’ll even be the Dem nominee come 2028. I’d put his odds below all of AOC, “miscellaneous swing-state governor” (think Josh Shapiro, Gretchen Whitmer, maybe even Jared Polis), and probably even “someone no one is currently considering”. He is governor of California at a time when that state is extraordinarily dysfunctional, which makes him easy to attack. He’s not an exceptional speaker and has already been known to put his foot in his mouth in public (not damning but it doesn’t help). He is too moderate for the far-left wing and too combative (and perhaps too Californian) for the moderate wing. I think he’s quite similar to Harris actually: highly successful inside his state’s political machine, but will crumble during a national campaign.

Even if he does get the nomination, I could see him losing to the likes of Vance or Rubio for the same reasons (and being governor of California for the recent past is really not going to play well with a lot of independent voters), even with the albatross of Trump II around their necks. If the Trump admin somehow manages to right the ship over the next few years, or even if they just manage to scrape through the midterms, Newsom (who epitomizes the “vote for us because we’re not Trump” style of Democrat) doesn’t look so promising at all. And if Trump II does continue to go this badly (if they get shredded in November and/or fail to deliver in the subsequent two years) there’s always the chance of an outsider primary campaign within the GOP as well, which would shake up the picture further… 2028 is still quite a ways away.

WORDS WORDS WORDS with reams of photos and pointing arrows and histories and obscure engineering diagrams

twenty-seven 8x10 color glossy photographs with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each one…

Yes, that appears to be correct. Thanks!

And sometimes the soldiers (on either side) look like this.

Do you happen to know who that kid is? Just curious.

It’s all about training. An infuriatingly large (and IME growing) percentage of dog owners absolutely do not give the slightest fuck about disciplining their dogs. They don’t know what they’re doing and have no interest in learning; in many cases they don’t even seem to know it’s possible. They either luck into a naturally obedient one, or, uh, don’t. Having grown up with dogs I find it extremely frustrating.

Given the responses from the Male Motte, the most I can say is that male and female intuitions on this topic are just diametrically opposed.

For the record, I don’t think these intuitions are very much opposed at all on a male/female level. Everyone wants their spouse to trust them. This site just selects for a very particular type of person.

The only realistic path they have to a 2028 presidential election victory is some surprise candidate winning the primary over the wishes of the DNC like Obama did.

Well, if the Trump admin can’t pull its shit together it’s possible that any successor will be tainted and the Dems can stumble into a narrow win with a bland-but-inoffensive candidate, similarly to the 2020 Biden campaign. But, yeah, that’s not exactly a “strategy” worthy of the name.

There was a brief moment after the 2024 election stretching into early 2025 where it looked like the DNC might actually learn something. Alas, it seems the one thing they’re good at is avoiding information that may upset their existing power structure. Their current top prospects are Gavin Newsom and, uh, Harris again. It’s still a long way to go to 2028 but both of those choices (practically anyone from California, honestly) are electoral suicide.

Same reason the acronym “BIPOC” came into being. It doesn’t really make sense, but in a certain context it’s politically useful (for organizing and for rallying white liberals to a singular cause).

It's one of the things I tease California about. People from there just assume strawberries have no flavour. Steve Sailer is a Californian and usually has interesting observations, but once he talked about how strawberries are a flavourless decorative fruit.

California popularized adding strawberries to salads, because they think they are basically a vegetable.

This is absurd and hilarious. Can any CA posters confirm if this is real? If true, just another reason not to move to Cali, I guess.

Where in the country are you, and where do you shop? I’m in New England and I don’t think I’ve had any of these problems even once (except the strawberries, I have bought bad strawberries before, I think it’s worth getting branded ones in many cases). I get groceries variously at Star Market, Trader Joe’s, Market Basket, and occasionally Costco. I’ve bought cheap meat that wasn’t exactly good, but never outright bad like you’re describing. Maybe go up one price level?

The potato thing in particular makes me think your solution is “go to a different store.” Bad potatoes at a supermarket is just ridiculous. Never seen that anywhere.

controller/peripheral

Huh. Why do they always pick such long words for the “new” versions of these things? Master/servant still too hierarchical? Dom/sub too sexual?

It’s wild to me how quickly this must’ve changed. I graduated during the tail end of covid, not long ago at all and after the Summer of Floyd, and I can recall some general discussion about standards orgs and curricula potentially moving away from master/slave as a term. My coworker graduated this past summer and had never even heard of master/slave as a term.

Many of the architects we work with have changed from “master suite” to “primary suite” on their drawings, which is a change of the same era, but in actual conversation and even during more formal meetings most will switch between the two casually and pretty much at random (and contractors/builders never say “primary”, although few of them would be confused if you did). I try to call those rooms “primary” in meetings if that’s how they’re labeled, but only in the way I’d always try to stick to the right name for each room in general, there’s certainly no pressure to avoid saying master. I wonder if architecture students are now leaving school having never heard the term “master bedroom.”

Amusingly I just had a new hire be genuinely surprised to see “master” and “slave” control boards in a wiring diagram. He’s not even a lefty (or political at all afaik), just had genuinely never seen it before, it actually took him a second to realize what the term meant. He sort of awkwardly chuckled like “are we really allowed to call it that?” and then we moved on. Quite funny tbh.

Evidently there’s a new euphemism that everyone learns in engineering school now? I should’ve asked him what it was.

I hope for the mistake theory, but the more cynical I'm feeling the more The Crush seems plausible - not helped by the extreme unwillingness of anyone serious to engage with the possibility, even to recognize its failure in the trans stuff.

To temper that cynicism a little, I’d think that the “crush” scenario can only work, or at least only be really durable, when the “mistake theory” is also true (and probably with a “deluge” period in between). By the time “crush” factors were meaningfully coming into play, the overwhelming majority of the public was already on board with gay rights broadly, or at least cared so little about the issue that the opposition seemed at least as out-there as the supporters. This meant the only people being meaningfully “crushed” were easily written off by a supermajority of the public as wingnuts and weirdos. Certainly homophobia, especially the really hardcore type, has become drastically rarer in the US compared to, say, the 1980s, or even the 2000s. That win is organic and durable.

One could argue that this frame also describes the relative failure of the trans rights movement: trying to speedrun the deluge and ride the momentum straight into a crush, while skipping entirely over the long slog of boring acceptance into society which made the deluge -> crush political strategy actually work for gay rights.

If this were anyone other than Trump, no one would be talking about it.

Really? You sincerely think if another politician posted an image of himself as Jesus Christ no one would be talking about it? My priors on that are very different, to put it mildly.

Obviously democrats don’t care about “blasphemy” (for Christians at any rate), but the only people complaining about it being “blasphemous” that I’ve seen have been Christian sources, most of which are right-leaning. Democrat criticism appears to be on the grounds of delusional narcissism, tastelessness, and/or simple pointing and laughing.

Yeah, I saw some vague allusions to the US having been explicitly aware that it would take time for the whole of the Iranian military to actually receive news of the ceasefire declaration, and accepting the fact. Nothing entirely concrete but it seems plausible; a lot of the US efforts were directed at degrading Iranian command and control after all, even on top of intentional Iranian decentralization. And the idea of a ceasefire (or any order really) reaching a whole army instantaneously is extremely modern.

I do wonder if part of the reason for the ceasefire was a sort of “both of us need to regroup, and we both know it, so let’s talk in the meantime and see if it goes anywhere.” Obviously not the only reason but it could be a factor. Oddly old-fashioned and almost gentlemanly if true.