ThisIsSin
PC is for progressive-conservative
No bio...
User ID: 822
ThisIsSin
PC is for progressive-conservative
3hr ago
You make left-wingers sound like retarded children who can't grasp the basics of cause and effect.
That's the mistake theory explanation, yes. People think this because the conflict theory explanation- where when pressed, they pretend it's a game, then pretend they weren't serious, then attempt to remind you their inherent moral worth deserves your leniency, then make it clear they know exactly what they're doing and proceed with the destructive thing anyway- is just not something humans have evolved to deal with.
We don't accept explanations of just following orders "actually, I'm just retarded" from the right[0] for deep-seated biological reasons. That we accept them from the left[1] (also for deep-seated biological reasons) is actually a big deal.
"Oh, no! She's going to be insufferable after this. She's going to ride the sympathy and milk it for the next 50 years. She might get to be president now. This is a disaster."
Not that "involuntarily attending a school shooting" isn't a viable way to political power (David Hogg), but I very much doubt that if you get shot like Kirk was, you'll be enjoying anything after that (much less political power).
[0, 1] For rightists, being retarded is never believed because, as human doings [or in modern times, people more aligned with human doings], it's strictly an evolutionary malus (stupidity is a detriment to executing your will) so any assertions you were retarded accidentally are naturally looked upon with extreme skepticism. For leftists it's always believed because, as human beings [or in modern times, people more aligned with human beings], being able to convince human doings to take pity on you while manipulating them when their back is turned is an evolutionary bonus (feigning childishness is an enhancement).
ThisIsSin
PC is for progressive-conservative
7hr ago
State-sanctioned killing is just vigilante killing by proxy, much like how elections are wars by proxy.
ThisIsSin
PC is for progressive-conservative
21hr ago
Which country successfully put reformers in office
US. (Rs are Reform, Ds are Conservative, since about 2020.)
which other country elected a hard-Blue government as a result?
Canada. Technically across the water too, though nobody generally thinks about that.
I'm not sure that will work any better for them than it will for local blues
Unlike every other part of the Empire you actually managed to put reformers in office (and the reaction to that has resulted in at least one hard-Blue government being elected in another nation- one whose Blue-aligned voters have also been cheering this murder). Across the water, increasingly blue (as in, establishment/conservative) candidates are elected and potential reformers are jailed.
They have other things they need to deal with, too; I think it will be worse for European countries in particular due to their having imported a ton of foreign fighting-age males over the last 10 years. Not that these are the most violent specimens (those ones stayed home), but the capability is likely there for more mayhem.
Australia or new zealand
Those places are under more Blue control than the US is (concentration camps for the uncommon cold, etc.). Singapore's probably the best option mostly due to their monarchy and being outside of the traditional first-world orbit while still being vital to its operations in Asia.
ThisIsSin
PC is for progressive-conservative
22hr ago
is to leave the country
No, it isn't. If civil war breaks out Blue vs. Red in the US, it's going to be an excuse for every other [Blue-aligned] province of the American empire to descend into the despotism whose agenda they are even today ahead of the US in implementing.
The US is, and due to demographics is likely to remain, the least authoritarian Western nation (and any assertions to the contrary are made by Blues, who intentionally mislabel authoritarianism as freedom).
ThisIsSin
PC is for progressive-conservative
23hr ago
As far as other shootings go, most stuff like that stays local.
As they should. Targeted workplace violence is targeted (schools are workplaces).
Even some shootings that make national news tend to follow the same pattern- "shoot the people you have a grudge on, then pick off targets of opportunity because your life was forfeit with the first murder". Lockdowns are only effective insofar as they manage the number of targets of opportunity the criminal will encounter.
Perhaps we should be questioning why workplaces are so violent in a time when the average worker can't just mail-order a gun, but the answer to that question forms part of a serious refutation to the politics and ethics of those paid to manage those workplaces. (So naturally, it's the outgroup's fault.)
ThisIsSin
PC is for progressive-conservative
23hr ago
Yes, but the cultural lie that "people legitimately cannot tell an ex-man from an actual woman" only strengthens that argument.
it was only out of safety to avoid pedophiles trying to use single mothers to gain access to children
Much like war, grown women have always been the primary victims of pedophilia.
Not the daughters functionally pimped out to get a man to commit to mom- they're mom's sexual competition, so mom has no vested interest in keeping them unmolested. (Sons, as surplus male(s) in the 'tribe', either get beaten hard enough they drive off or are simply killed in this case.)
ThisIsSin
PC is for progressive-conservative
2d ago
An Aeropress made of other materials might be interesting though
They offer one made out of glass. It's 10x the price of the normal one.
ThisIsSin
PC is for progressive-conservative
2d ago
Or more generally,
That said, white [conservatives] are the one group that shifted towards Harris in 2024, and [conservative] boomers seem to be the most intensely focused on norm-violations by the [liberals] and have a particular contempt for Trump. Younger [progressive-conservative] are more in the camp of "yes of course [liberals] are [trying to destroy conservative social privilege], older ones show this feeling of [the youth are about to run this country off a cliff, think that is bad, and may be more willing to sacrifice their own lives in service of conservative privilege as a consequence].
I expect to see more attacks like this as the future of conservatism crystallizes into progressive-conservatism. What Boomers know as traditional conservatism (i.e. what conservatism was to them in their youth) is dead and gone, and what few remaining tradcons remain cheated them out of the inheritance they thought they were going to get by throwing their support behind the [true] classical liberals, not the progressive-conservatives [who were deceived into thinking they were classical liberals].
ThisIsSin
PC is for progressive-conservative
3d ago
In theory, yes.
In practice, look at how many votes are strictly on party lines. The US is better than most in this regard for avoiding these but it still happens; there are some countries whose systems only ever vote party line, which means who you actually voted for is completely irrelevant.
I'm surprised there haven't been more attempts to freeze a society as a given technological level.
You're in one right now, and you don't notice it because it's imposed by a loosely co-ordinated compact in each of the most technologically-advanced nations.
The massively capital-intensive nature of manufacturing the highest technologies doesn't help either, of course, nor did our outsourcing of low-cost manufacturing to another nation help that either.
This is one of the things the modern regulatory/bureaucratic state actively exists to do, as it's in its interest not to let technology develop that would make it more difficult to govern. Companies also co-ordinate to do this, particularly technology ones (this is the main reason hardware and software manufacturers intentionally frustrate attempts to run arbitrary code on their systems).
Modern reform governments, like the one in the US right now, tend to degrade the bureaucracy's ability to do this as its first order of business. Progressive-conservatives would rather make sure the seals aren't emotionally affected by your rocket launches.
ThisIsSin
PC is for progressive-conservative
4d ago
I don’t think “right-wing” is quite adequate.
If by "right-wing" one means "here is my ironclad justification to prefer cheap, raw base instincts over [more expensive] co-operation, and I want to bias towards current survival and risk-adversity rather than spend time and calories thinking about longer-term re-investment and optimization", then yes, it's right-wing.
I normally expect this process to take a few shots at trans issues first.
That's because most people who write right-wing apologia are writing 'is' with some predefined 'ought' in mind. While there are minor issues with this in the sidebars (and am most critical of the one in this entry, both because it's kind of skipping a step, and because the answer to why that would occur is already covered in chapters 3, 4, and [to a point] 5 so its rhetorical presence appears to undermine itself) I'm not convinced 'ought' is the intent here, especially considering the replies to certain comments are done in the same way I'd make them for the same reasons I make them when I'm discussing social dynamics in this way.
I think you can derive why basically every social-issue-du-jour exists, and why the distribution of people who instinctively take a side is predictable from the information that has already been presented (especially when you consider the actors' moral hazards), but that derivation remains so far (and, to a degree, I hope it remains) an exercise for the reader.
pop sexism
I don't think this is the case here provided you're not reading it with an intent to find an excuse to justify being lazy and retarded (which is what pop sexism by and large is, and which the condemnation of that sexism, much like every other -ism, exists to combat).
Not that this pop psych look at things isn't self-justifying, since I can just claim at that point that your efforts to deduct my social credit for being OK with the existence of literature that describes a model that's less wrong than the one it's to your evolutionary advantage I accept are your base instinctual behavior. Which then serves as base instinctual behavior on my part, and the cycle completes.
ThisIsSin
PC is for progressive-conservative
4d ago
This is a basic axiom of English common law.
Of course, it's trivial to cheat at that simply by declaring the entire nation in violation of that law, then proceeding to selectively enforce it only against those that improved the place.
ThisIsSin
PC is for progressive-conservative
5d ago
Biden didn't wake up one day and go out of his way to coax ten million people into coming to the US.
No, but the people whose organization Biden also belongs to actively did this.
These people want to come, therefore what right have we to infringe on their freedom by stopping them?
Why do we enforce laws against and obsess over human trafficking, but not illegal immigration, even though they're literally the same thing?
It's because one of them negatively affects the average left-wing voter (since when we say "human trafficking", we usually mean "for sex purposes", which means the average domestic woman's ability to demand a price for sex is adversely affected), and one is neutral to positive for that voter (since when we say "illegal immigration", we usually mean "for labor purposes", which means the average domestic man's ability to demand a fair price for labor is adversely affected).
and it is a fundamentally moral, compassionate one.
No, it's concern trolling laundered through a "moral, compassionate" lens.
ThisIsSin
PC is for progressive-conservative
6d ago
Indeed- the 20s and 30s were a massive expansion in progressive thought to the point that the Americans installed a dictator and underwent a socialist revolution in the mid-1930s.
Modern feminism might be potent, but not "two Constitutional Amendments" potent or Civil Rights Act potent.
ThisIsSin
PC is for progressive-conservative
6d ago
Are the gays truly the most corrosive element in society that deserves uniquely lethal treatment?
No- for DreadJim, that would be women, and the reason they don't get lethal treatment (though they may be beaten into submission) is simply that they're more useful alive.
He's literally just a feminist with the valence switched (that's what "kill all men" means- when they tell you who they are, believe them). It's not intellectually sophisticated. The fact we permit and encourage unironic expressions of one but not the other is the underlying problem of the modern age, yes (and the fact that it's useful to certain power structures to maintain this state of affairs is as disgusting as slavery), but this is the "peepee poopoo" version of criticizing it.
Making babies is not optional for civilization.
Raising new workers is more expensive than it was in the past and the current markets thus can't support the production of more people. This is to some degree artificial (enclosure is not an elite thing this time, as it's currently perpetrated by slightly over half the demos), but every single human being in Western society is selected for based on how well they can boss slaves around more than anything else, and some of our solution is simply to increase society's reliance on slavery.
That the slaves in the modern era are powered by lightning and fossil fuel is not particularly material when you're comparing across other civilizations, whose unpaid labor was generally of the human variety.
ThisIsSin
PC is for progressive-conservative
6d ago
1920s/1930s moral values = 1920s/1930s TFR
I'm not convinced that returning to the moral standards of the one time in US history that the urban birthrate was lower than it is today is a good way to fix low TFR.
ThisIsSin
PC is for progressive-conservative
7d ago
He, like many others, lacks the necessary coldness of heart to effectively prosecute the culture war.
Or in other words, he's too busy thinking with his dick.
The feminists are correct when they point this out, especially when discussing those sorts of people who can't really handle modernity; it's just that instead of fixing the problem, they simply replaced one set of destructive fetishes with a different set of destructive fetishes (they get off on the oppression narratives just as men get off on the possession ones).
Humanity in general has a hard time dealing with that, given the destructiveness of those fetishes never had to be dealt with before (as it evolved alongside the state of nature) by either gender. Hence we see a lot more DreadJilling (eliminating political power for the vast majority of "normies" and all men, executing straight people, conscripting wallets).
I hesitate to even call DreadJim right-wing, for he is not. That label belongs to whatever the "entrench corruption harder/50 Stalins" faction is in society, and that faction is the feminist one. His faction has simply fallen completely off of the reform -> conserve -> ossify/tradition political treadmill.
ThisIsSin
PC is for progressive-conservative
9d ago
Consider any ideological cause leftists and liberals are interested in: creedal citizenship
If leftists and progressives were that interested in that cause they would have freed their slaves legalized their illegals when they had the power to do so. They have had it several times in the past.
They did not, and because of that inaction- that inability to make a deal with the rest of the country and get it Done- now their cause suffers. Perhaps it was because they'd be destroyed as a party for making legible that flagrant and absurd violation of the laws and norms of the country? Perhaps it was because they believed that holding "they'll be deported otherwise" hostage would curry greater electoral success by driving turnout? Perhaps it was because they could do the county-level equivalent of court-packing by counting them in the census and redistricting accordingly? Perhaps it was because they were of a demographic that (socially, politically, economically) profited most from being able to undercut domestic labor, being of the class that most often buys it? It's difficult to say.
Now, we can talk about corruption in the sense that some slaves are getting rounded up faster than others, or who it's being done to first/who's getting exempted. And I have sympathy for your material conditions; economic instability is, naturally, bad for business as finance for it depends in large degree to a now-frustrated economic forecast (and of all the criticisms of Trump this is the greatest and most grounded, and affects both the capital of the Empire and all of its provinces).
But a side doesn't get to claim it's some unique badness because it [mistake theory] never made the sacrifices and compromises necessary to fix the issue and in so doing revealed that side didn't care, or [conflict theory] where it intentionally made the problem worse.
Whenever he said something that offended [conservative sensibilities], blue-tribers expected him to lose status. Instead, [conservatives] have lost the ability to exert moral power.
Hence, TDS.
These are conservatives, and their conservative media, whinging about the loss of their social credit. (Blues/Ds are, make no mistake, fundamentally conservative- they are everything they once claimed to criticize. They pretend they aren't The Man and purposefully evade the label of "obsolete, entrenched, and corrupt" by defining those things away from themselves, but that doesn't mean it isn't true.)
That's why they have to blast out misinformation (and why the new South Park episodes are just... lame). Just like Fox News (and something the new conservatives- that is, Blue voters- complained bitterly about the old conservatives' version of this), the goal is to keep America divided the moral outrage machine hot enough that they can convince voters that way.
This is why they use words like "corrupt". It's not actually a complaint about physical corruption- though one could claim their opponents don't care, people always make their strongest arguments all the times and there's barely anything there so I draw my conclusions accordingly- but about moral corruption [in the eyes of those who believe they're in charge of what 'moral' is].
Moral people worship Safety, Equality, and Consent. Trump is therefore an icon of sin, an avatar of the sinfulness of an age rejecting the Goddesses.
Remember, it was immoral to end slavery, too.
One guy who has proven above the law, above public opinion, and above the checks and balances which make up so much of our national mythos.
That's our criticism, just of conservatives in general. Of course, it's fine for them to do that because it was popular, and what's popular should always win no matter what the law actually says, right?
ThisIsSin
PC is for progressive-conservative
11d ago
They're 'young adult of indeterminate age'-coded. They're not children, because we have clear examples of what those look like in-universe, and they're not elderly, because we have clear examples of that too.
The reason for the overwhelming popularity of young adults in media is that young adults are really the only group that both have goals they haven't achieved yet, and have the power and energy to drive towards those goals. Biologically speaking, that's naturally early-teenager-to-early-20s territory (obfuscated as that may be in modern times), but can be slightly less (or more) depending on how complicated the thing is and how complex the participant is.
Writing teenagers in particular still lets you get away with immaturity if/as the situation calls for it, so you still have reasonable latitude for character growth while not being constrained by the general lack of drive that typifies people as they get older and more established.
Of course, most of the "they're all over 18" comments for MLP has "so it's OK to look up porn of them" tacitly attached to it. Places that are less neurotic about that have more accurate estimates.
ThisIsSin
PC is for progressive-conservative
12d ago
6 ARC
I mean, if you're not going to be at all serious about the comparison I'm not sure why I should continue. While I agree that yes, the US would get some mileage out of switching to an intermediate cartridge that's actually well-designed (and 5.56 is really not), we're also not discussing intermediate cartridges.
so the high pressures aren't getting you much more for all those trade-offs
The high pressures serve one purpose: to get better performance from a shorter barrel.
.308 simply cannot sling 140 grains as fast as 6.8x51 can when both are being fired from 13" barrels. .308 can do that if it has a much longer barrel, sure, but we don't want a long barrel, we want a short barrel (so that we retain the same overall length of the system if we stick a suppressor onto it). In theory, this is an excellent idea; in practice, the rifle is a boat anchor that says SIG on the side.
As far as noise goes... yeah, cutting a .308 gun down to 13" is going to be blasty as fuck too. For recoil, full-power rifle gonna full-power rifle; not sure what they're expecting there (especially if you're running the hottest ammunition where the recoil actually does exceeds what .308 does- I wouldn't want something in .270 Win or .300 Win Mag as my service rifle either, lol).
Any tiny improvements in ballistics are swallowed by the increase in weight.
The MCX (and not the 6.8x51 one, which one would expect to be slightly beefed up; added system weight is what, half a pound?) is already a heavy rifle to begin with and the ballistic improvements are in fact quite significant... or at least, they are when considering the companion machine gun that is arguably far more important than the rifle ever will be.
The other big thing with the round is that it lets you have a rifle that, with the suppressor, is only as long as the M16 is without sacrificing performance. Without the suppressor, it's as short as the M4. That's not something any other round really lets you get away with, since if you do that with .308 you just get really loud 7.62x39.
Actually, all the military AR-10s (and the Bren 2) are about this same weight- 9 1/4 pounds. Of course, those aren't being issued with the assumption you'll be using a suppressor (though indeed, some are) and every single one of them appears intended for a specialty role, not door-kicking.
It's not like you can't make a very lightweight full-power rifle; FN managed to do it in a mass-issue rifle (the SCAR-H is under 8 pounds, even), and a few other AR-10s that are even lighter exist (though perhaps not something you want in military service).
No, I think SIG just sucks when they're not making clean-sheet designs, and the MCX is held back by virtue of having to fit the AR-15/AR-10 footprint rather than just being its own thing. I get that the Army is conservative about drifting away from the AR-15 footprint for training reasons, which is why the MCX has two charging handles, but in this case perhaps they shouldn't be.
I'd be as shocked if not more so getting the weight of an M240 replacements to less than fifteen pounds.
The M250 is the replacement for the M240, and it does weigh just under 15 pounds, with the suppressor. Which is kind of downright miraculous when you think about it, considering the weight of the companion rifle. That's far lighter than any other MMG system on the market, competitive or beating nearly every LMG (assuming the M250's suppressor is detached), lighter than even the M60E6 is, and is only a couple pounds heavier than the full-size Knights Armament LAMG is.
The M7 makes more sense in a context where it's merely the companion "because we had to" to the M250- and the M7 is so incredibly heavy that there's only a couple of pounds between it and the machine gun. It's the same calculus the Stoner 63 suffered from: if the machine gun and the rifle are basically the same weight, why would you ever take the rifle?
It's also worth noting that there haven't really been any reported issues with the M250, but then again, the M250 also seems to be a clean-sheet design where the M7 is wearing literal pounds of legacy baggage. There's zero reason that gun needs to match an AR-10's footprint outside of "muh training"- it makes it more expensive to manufacture, and it turns it into a worse rifle (the forend on the M7 is absolute garbage) than it should by all rights be.
Also, note that 'left-wing ideology' forms the 'traditional female' role in society (creates secondary goods, thrive/idealistic mindset, sets morality/cultural aesthetics), where 'right-wing ideology' forms the 'traditional male' role (creates primary goods, survive/realistic mindset, executes on morality/cultural aesthetics).
Remember that
is the state of nature, and what humans have spent the last 200,000 years evolving alongside, and that
has only been true in Western nations for only about the last hundred years. We're still in the evolutionary transition period from the former to the latter, and most left-wing actions are perfectly sane if you view them as "women getting revenge on men for the crime of being utterly dependent on them" (and "the unproductive getting revenge on the productive for being utterly dependent on them" is an excellent explanation for why there are still communists in Western countries).
The problem, and the growing pains now, are that women/leftists perceive (and they are correct) that the Nazis were the last male/rightist attempt at a State. So anything that grants men more power is, in a very literal sense, Naziism to a leftist. [The fact this definition is self-serving, and exists as a conservative force to avoid a more equitable distribution of moral power in society, is by definition irrelevant to leftists.]
More options
Context Copy link