@ThisIsSin's banner p

ThisIsSin

Derive the current state of affairs from a frictionless spherical state of nature

2 followers   follows 3 users  
joined 2022 September 06 05:37:32 UTC

				

User ID: 822

ThisIsSin

Derive the current state of affairs from a frictionless spherical state of nature

2 followers   follows 3 users   joined 2022 September 06 05:37:32 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 822

Well, freedom of association was never in the Constitution to begin with.

(Not that it helps nations that have it in theirs; their problem is more that they put a "we're not obeying this fuck you lolol" in the header instead.)

Capable civilized attorneys are fully in the tank for progressive taxation and the welfare state, though.

Technically, their failing to reproduce is also good old-fashioned eugenic sterilization. And maybe that's OK.

Life getting safer makes men and women believe that delegation and training is riskier and may be delayed, preferably (and observably) indefinitely.

So it becomes less important, thus the need to accommodate for it is less, thus the concept that it should even occur passes away.

Yes; minor males get prosecuted for self-produced CSM all the time.

Some even get charged as an adult for it, which tends to be A-OK with the courts because again, male.


Of course, what's actually being litigated here is more along the lines of

Were there ever child sex abuse cases happening under a mother's own roof where the woman was deemed not susceptible enough to the man's manipulation and control [as in, she gets charged for it]?

and dissenting on the assumption that "the woman isn't being sufficiently Believed (that being coerced != pained emotionally)" in this case, which this dissenter even took pains to point out.

or humiliation immediately after or in the minutes, hours, or days following the sexual misconduct depicted in the material

Again, smuggling in the "consent can and should be withdrawn afterwards" standard. The accedent likely realize this from the other direction; "regrets it afterwards" is not a law on the books.

We let them get away with their lies; that they didn’t believe, or profit, that they didn’t know, that they were threatened, that the disease just happened to them, and that it was hard.

Yeah, I remember the Covid times too.

Women don't like bureaucracy either.

The fact they're the only class with the power to deal with it (because the moral hazard is in their favor) but are doing fuck-all about it is the fundamental root of the problem here.

Men gave up their power to unilaterally dictate terms to women in relatively peaceful ways. Until women figure out they have to do the same- until they fully embrace the fact equality is a solved problem, as men did so many years ago- this will continue, but the fact they're on the high side of those gibs makes this unlikely.

Liability being financially ruinous because reasons (that are tangentially related to the above core) doesn't help things either.

Yes, that's what they say about the Pence Rule as well, which exists for the exact same reasons.

And ignores "they also maintain readiness to take action to preserve this society if it is threatened" factor.

Management doesn't know what to do with a department that's "just a cost center, what does he even do, shouldn't we just eliminate the positions?". And once that happens, the consequences to a lack of maintenance usually don't show up for a while. Sure, they might be catastrophic, and often are, but that's future management's problem.

This is a common pattern across companies; it stands to reason that because the same people who end up managing companies also tend to manage a society more generally (something that is also a company, just a very large one, and when it fires people it tends to be more literal) societies inevitably end up sharing that failure mode unless something forces them not to be. In other words, any organization that isn't maintenance-first (or "isn't explicitly right-wing") ends up being wholly unable to do maintenance even when required (or "inevitably ends up left-wing", per Conquest).

What are we even talking about?

Specifically, anti-regime violence.

The demand for murder of [not men] vastly exceeds its supply- this is why it has to be overestimated and/or overstated. Compare "femicide" for the more general case.

no punishment for women that rape

The traditional viewpoint is that women- by definition, the passive partner in any sexual encounter- cannot rape.
Why would you expect any society to bother proscribing a logical impossibility? (Not that it stopped them from "can you be gay with yourself", but...)

The criticism against the Talmud is as follows: among the very many authoritative rules which religious Jews follow with extreme care, are also rules that appear evil. The evil rules are not currently followed, but for what reason? Is it only because they can’t get away with it? Are they just biding their time until they can?

Hence the trouble modern churches have.

There are a few rules in the Bible that also appear evil, and opponents of the Church can thus ask an incredibly effective question- is the only reason churches outwardly compatible with classical liberalism do that so that, as soon as everyone's a member, they can do their best villain laugh and reimpose the evil-appearing rules? Obviously some churches deal with this better than others- the ones that throw themselves prostrate before the community (you can tell the ones that are like this because they have Current Thing stapled to them, usually a Pride flag) eventually scatter to the winds because throwing themselves to the floor to be trod on destroys any community- the movers and shakers give up and leave, then everyone else does. Ask the Boy Scouts about that.

And Christianity, which derives its power based on something inherently not of this world, just doesn't have a good answer to that "but will you turn evil again someday?" question- or rather, the answer they do have is not really something one can deliver in a press release[1]. Christianity is alien, and Christians forget that at their own peril (and if they are aware of that, they tend to come off like this).


[1] The most recent Superman movie was about this exact thing. It didn't have a satisfying answer to that either since the dog bailed him out of everything, but then again, Christians are also supposed to trust that Dog God will bail them out, so...

a bit like how McDonald's still exists in Russia after McDonald's International left the country

Well, no, for 2 reasons.

First, software isn't fast food. In a restaurant like that you already have a bunch of employees who have the institutional knowledge to remake it from scratch, but for tech the platforms are a lot more complex. Not that a Twitter clone is technologically out of reach of the EU, but they couldn't really re-use anything.

Sure, "but Elon Musk did it by firing 90% of the company", but that only works if you're Elon Musk and still have the infrastructure running. But Twitter EU loses access to a lot of that infrastructure (and the code repos) the second the plug is pulled.

Second, because the product is software, the US alternative doesn't suddenly cease to exist. They don't have to have a corporate presence in a country to sell there. They don't have to have EU divisions for any reason... other than "we'd like to use local labor for things like localization and lock down the smarter workers coming out of the universities in those countries". Which are good reasons, but in the face of EU sanction the best thing to do is likely to pull out and let them fend for themselves while the ad spend continues apace. And in a sanction fight the EU loses for the same reasons they're losing here now: they let the Americans capture the power that comes from building -> owning the international banking system for reasons that had to do with the domestic balance of power, so the EU telling banks to not process payments to US companies because reasons is not going to be particularly enforceable.

Have I badly misread this or is everybody else crazy?

This is the "just build your own financial system if you want to [political act]" finally deployed against the outgroup.
Which is why people are cheering it. It's that simple.

But then again, this is what happens when you willingly outsource your technology and financial system to the Americans. It doesn't come for free; just like membership in NATO, the cost is not "X% of GDP on military", it's "the US gets to fuck around in your country, delete your sovereignty, and there's fuck all you can do about it".

If Europeans didn't want to be vulnerable to this, they can build their own system. Oh, but that costs money and requires paying for the kinds of talent that run to the US at the first opportunity, and if there's anything European elites hate more than being told "no" it's having to pay their countrymen at fair market prices. So the response to this will be impotent at best- maybe more EU sanctions/finger-wagging to American tech companies because their AI can deny the Holocaust or whatever (and I'm sure it was coincidental that the French launched an investigation against Grok for that around this time).