TiltingGambit
No bio...
User ID: 804
TiltingGambit
6d ago
- there is only so much demand for consumables and market goods and services, so that economic demand begins to be overshadowed by status concerns and non-economic spheres of life in terms of desired things
We already have, in effect, a trial run of post scarcity civilisations. Not complete or total, obviously. But western society is long past needing to worry about food and water.
I think men will play games and have fun in that kind of sci fi world. They'll find new and interesting things to pursue. They'll go sailing or rock climbing.
Women will play the status games, become depressed and create social problems via whatever the next social media is. Unless AI can turn this behaviour more productive at least.
TiltingGambit
6d ago
I presume the kind of scottish teenagers who carry hatchets to the park are the kind who know not to brandish them as they walk down the street.
TiltingGambit
6d ago
On priors, I would find it more likely that young men harass some underage girls than that some underage girls get out of their way to threaten some young immigrant men, but stranger things than the latter have happened.
The bayes calc on it would just be a total win for the "he touched the girls" take.
If you are using judicial verdicts to update your world view
Reminds me of the Australian SAS warcrime case. Footage was released of what was inarguably an extra judicial killing of a captured and unarmed man. Like, I'm ex Australian army and not even I could deny that these guys were guilty of murder. But there were still hundreds of people saying "they haven't been convicted yet" and "the investigation hasn't been concluded."
https://old.reddit.com/r/Military/comments/1lccwjc/australian_sasr_during_their_deployment_to/
But we could see it with our own eyes. You can see in real time the murder happening, zero grounds for self defence. In war you get away with shooting the odd POW, sure. That guy could have been making IEDs or have personally killed Australians, sure. But if you get caught on camera you go to jail. That's how the world works. Why do people insist on the outcome of the investigation or the court ruling when they can see with their own eyes the crime occurring.
It's a weird deferral of responsibility, even though we know the courts are wrong all the time.
TiltingGambit
6d ago
It seems like your explanation covers only half the story. And the alternative explanation covers the other half. In the original video the girls are screaming "don't fuckin' touch us over and over." They're still obviously carrying weapons. Why isn't the middle of the road opinion that some Scottish "neds" were walking around with knives (your take) and were felt up by the guy at some point (braveheart take) explaining why they were yelling and brandishing weapons while backing away?
TiltingGambit
7d ago
Let's see what the normies think of this:
I've said it before but Reddit has become so bad I just can't log in anymore. It used to be longer takes, with more reasonableness than Twitter. But now it's like 90% one liner, gut reation posts.
No amount of explaining does the trick either. They just downvote and ignore. I once tried to defend Palantir as being not the source of pure evil it's purported to be. Literally nobody even knows what it does. But literally nobody cares either. They've classified it as evil and that's the end of the story.
TiltingGambit
7d ago
No, I'm saying that law already exists where I live. And if you'd read my post more keenly you'd recognise I'm not suggesting any new laws (no idea where you got this from) and arguing for the exact opposite of a police state. Like, the exact opposite. Reducing the amount of cases that go to court by using common sense is a great way to avoid police/legal over reach.
That's certainly what you seem to be saying.
It's usually a very bad conversation etiquette to tell somebody what they're saying, especially after they've said they're not saying it.
TiltingGambit
8d ago
Speeding offences might have latitude. Something that may end up in court obviously doesn't. Something where a supervisor might have a different opinion, you're going to have to steer towards that.
TiltingGambit
8d ago
multi-tier citizenry and where everyone's technically guilty at all times
That's the exact opposite of what I said.
TiltingGambit
8d ago
This is a misunderstanding of how bodycam footage works- the storage capacity on bodycam footage is not infinite
It's ten years in my jurisdiction at a minimum. With appeals this might be 15+.
Routine stops like that aren't getting reviewed by a supervisor
Yes they are, and at any time they can be. Officers can have a full shift review if e.g. they ding their vehicle or receieve a complaint. Or for any other reason the supervisor has to check.
Police supervisors have actual jobs to do that don't entail personally watching officers do theirs(they system was set up to have officers work with limited supervision).
Obviously their job is to supervise and some portion of that is reviewing arrests or interactions.
It's not even my higher level point anyway. Police now have to operate as if their footage might be looked at in the future. This stops dirty cops planting guns, sure. But it also stops good cops from applying the law commensurate with the intent of the law.
TiltingGambit
8d ago
Yes but in practice nobody does want it. They want the intent of the law followed. If they're generally they safe drivers they want to be pulled over and given a warning for marginal speeding. They don't want a guy to say "the rules are the rules" and give them a ticket.
But they also want serial speeders heavily punished for making the streets unsafe.
TiltingGambit
8d ago
enabling discriminatory enforcement at worst.
That's my point. I accept it's unpopular, but we actually do want discrimination in the application of the law. A law written to reduce the amount of 16 year olds stabbing people on the train can't be written as "but let grandpas with swiss army knives go". We can instead rely on the cop to use his common sense.
TiltingGambit
8d ago
Not validated their arguments- many of the arguments against police body cams simply fell flat. And not disproven reformist fears of bad actors. But the pro-police coalition seem to have largely been happy enough for bad eggs to be subject to the appropriate processes, which is part of how institutions cultivate/sustain popular legitimacy over time. Meanwhile footage of Actual Incidents (TM) can paint a lot of pictures of a lot of other bad eggs on the other sides that polite company, and media, often downplayed or ignored.
I'm in a position to watch body cam footage on occasion as part of my job. I think there is one other factor that should be explored as an extension of the above.
Firstly, when an officer is wearing a body camera they do act differently. A cop's supervisor is always in a position to have a look at the footage, and this encourages stricter adherence to protocols than without the body cam. If you're a left-wing voter, you probably think this is great.
But there's a cost to having police constantly aware that their actions might be scrutinised too. That dad who forgot he had a stanley knife in his pocket on the way home from work gets pulled up by police? Police are now in a position where they cannot use their personal judgement about the matter, and instead are forced to charge the guy. The law was clearly written with the intent to stop hoodie wearing 16 year old boys carrying knives on trains, but the law isn't supposed to discriminate, so can't be written to target e.g. scummy looking teenagers. Previously, common sense would largely prevail. Now? If you exercise common sense as a police officer, you may be pulled up for breaking policy upon returning to the station.
You can do the same exercise with speeding, assault, neighbourhood disputes. Police frequently let people off with a warning, or just used their authority to resolve a situation outside of court. But now, just being a good community cop who enforces the intent of the law isn't a thing. You're going to have to charge everybody with everything and let the magistrate decide what to do with them.
A particular case I know of was a country cop who had been in the same region for about 15 years. A years long dispute between farming neighbours over everything from "he's stealing too much water from my dam" to "he waved his gun in my face" had been routinely resolved by the cop showing up and adjudicating the problems. A very old school town sheriff type story. When body cams were implemented, his ability to do this was grossly perverted. He could no longer personally resolve these issues, and was being forced to e.g. confiscate guns, suspend drivers licences, report problems to the EPA around the water sources, etc. I'm not so much lamenting the sheriff-style approach as I am the issues that arise from deferring problem resolution to a blind, unfeeling public entity. The EPA ruled that one guy couldn't access the water anymore (despite it having been shared for thirty years) and crushed the neighbour's farm. The other guy had his licence suspended and had to abandon the farm to live with his son.
I think it's pretty uncontroversial to say that body camera footage has been an almost complete victory for the conservatives (as you are implying above) in the sense that now everybody can see that these guys getting shot generally did everything they could to get themselves shot. To show that police aren't just finding black guys to rough up, they just tend to be the type to act crazy in a shopping centre carpark on average.
But there has been at least some cost to body camera footage. Every cop knows if he lets the 50 year old white woman go with a warning, but charges the young mexican gang-banger, there's always a possibility that some organisation pulls the footage, calls you a racist and ruins your career and reputation. For me, I want the law applied differently in different circumstances. I know that's very open to rebuttal, but I'd prefer a world where cops are trusted to use their own personal judgement too.
TiltingGambit
9d ago
Most comments about Trump being literally Hitler aren't about Jan 6th. They're about things that he does that look or feel bad. Most/many/all of those things aren't anything even resembling a threat to democracy. Most/many/all of the things people don't like Trump are things that are absolutely legal, supported by about 50% of the population, but they just disagree with. Most are complete nothing burgers, and others are just Trump being a terrible person/politician/statesman/geopolitician. These things are being framed as things that are going to destroy democracy in America.
And I just don't see some losers in plastic Viking helmets running into the Capitol as being comparable to the Night of the Long Knives. And I don't think anybody really sees Hitler in Trump. Hitler was a big person, with grand plans. He was planning the invasion of Russia since 1925 when he published his book. And his book had some serious geopolitical insights. Trump's book is on how to make deals, and he seems to be pretty shit at that. Trump is a small man, with small plans. He's thinking about hotel deals, not Lebensraum.
I will grant that Jan 6th looks bad and makes people worry. I would not categorise almost any other facet of what Trump does as comparable to Hitler or America to Hitler's Germany. The panic that people are experiencing is not commensurate with the person they're worried about, or the reality on the ground. Trump is not going to be the president in a few years, America will continue, the NASDAQ will go up and to the right, and everybody will forget about the cringe tiktoks they were making in 2026.
TiltingGambit
9d ago
I ask because I tried to implement your option (a) with a "It's not 2018 anymore, nobody gives a shit about this patriarchy shit" to match their unthinking dismissal. I unfortunately didn't have the follow through in real time to deliver a critical hit.
TiltingGambit
9d ago
Why? Being normal is how societies form and continue to function. If people just acted on any whim they had we'd live in chaos. Some places now do live in chaos because people do that as a norm. They litter, burn trash, shoot each other.
Being abnormal does not equate to "acting on any whim". And being abnormal is definitely not a clear cut negative for society. What is it, like 75% of silicon valley unicorn founders are autistic? People with a propensity to not conform, socially or otherwise, seem to be disproportionately progressing society right now.
Pretending to be a mother is directly in contradiction with acting in the best interests of the child. How would we possibly accept any of this person's other actions as being so?
The law does, generally, accept people who are not optimal parents as the parents of their own children. And in this case, where these two people are undoubtedly the parents of this child, it should definitely accept it also.
Are you arguing that the Irish government should not accept that the actual, biological parent, is a parent, in this case?
Because too many wrong people have won battles such as this. This is a good battle to fight to make the world better.
If they did, they'd go to Mexico or California (and one of those places would probably execute them unless they reformed) but, if they didn't they'd be shot.
An argument that basically goes "Trans people are weird, they should choose not to be, in an ideal world we would exile them or kill them, because I've had enough of losing these arguments" is just not working for me. Maybe you have all this background info that, if included, forms this into some rationale that I could follow. But as presented, this is the same level of "boo outgroup" ranting that the Reddit lefties are doing about everybody who voted for Trump. We can all just pick the political opponents we don't like, call them freaks and wish death on them because we're tired of each other.
I just come from a position where I think that type of rhetoric makes the world a worse place. I think it's a dogshit take, not because I am actually pro trans or anything. I'm pretty moderately to aggressively against the movement. But if you have some total insensitivity towards the specific issues in question, and can't differentiate from a bad expectation and a reasonable expectation (you seem to explicitly state you don't care what the issue is) you're definitely in a position to make the world worse. Which is what you're doing.
TiltingGambit
9d ago
Okay I'm talking to myself here: no we are not even remotely close to anything even remotely like a fascist dictatorship. By almost every definition we are likely the farthest we have ever been from living in a fascist dictatorship.
It seems to be almost a Reddit left wing consensus that the year is 1933 and you should do whatever you would have done then if you consider yourself a good person. It's totally beyond me how this much panic has set in. I've never seen it in my whole life in any political domain.
So this means that deprogramming isn't so much a process of unwinding everything, it's just a matter of installing a new set of ideas. Deprogramming could happen in a few days, for some people it could probably happen in a single episode of John Oliver or Rachel Maddow.
The next election. That's all it's going to take. A liberal candidate will win and everybody will think they saved the world by showing up to vote (but won't ever think they were overreacting by calling the US a fascist state).
Dismantling the idea won't happen before the election, it can't happen before Trump is gone. Because Trump is literally Hitler, or at least trying to be. There can't be catharsis until he is gone and the threat is over. Don't let your guard down!
I'm just so dismayed at how the left is handling the current situation I just can't read anything online anymore. I actually logged back in here for the first time in years to get away from every subreddit I love becoming a home to normies wigging out. Even fucking movie review channels that have never said a political word in their lives had emergency panic threads stickied in their subreddits.
TiltingGambit
9d ago
“If you hold this position you’re an icky person”
I agree this is a bad rhetorical device but what's the best way to get around them just calling you ick and posting a screenshot of you on Twitter? I'm my experience engaging with it, they just call you cringe and recieve a trillion upvotes.
TiltingGambit
10d ago
"Just be normal" is possibly the worst objection to anything I could think of.
"I am the MOTHER in all contexts except for this particular one where the law requires me to declare I'm a father to act in the best interest of my child" is interesting, but a total nothing burger when you consider literally every other conceivable circumstance of a parent acting in the best interest of their child.
Gleefully posting laughing emojis on the twitter repost is fun and all, but i think the appropriate response to a handwave "lol stop being wierd and you won't have any problems, freak 😜" is "well that's just not how the world works."
Prioritizing your weird rules over normal rules means you are crazy and people should not want your kids as citizens.
Historically, the whole family is lucky to not be exiled.
Historically as in pre-enlightenment? We've spent a couple hundred years trying pretty hard to steer away from this type of ridiculousness for good reason.
Ideally I think space travel will continue to fly under the radar, and slowly get better and better.
I'm far from an expert but some of the brutally worthless projects undertaken by NASA (see Casey Handmer) seem to indicate this is the opposite of what's happening. Publicly funded projects are a complete win for the libertarian crowd with SpaceX (derided by everybody) the only player interested in making space work at all.
TiltingGambit
16d ago
They need the 'professional antifa black bloc veteran' to tell them what to do and how to do it and, most importantly, make sure they do turn up to do it.
I'm not sure we disagree on anything. I am saying that these methods are well understood in far-left protest-attendee circles. And trying to make flaky 20 year olds show up on time is a skill most Target managers have grappled with.
I'm just trying to balance out the WOs implication that this is America's Helmand province, or that insurgents might be arming themselves to the teeth, with an IED campaign just around the corner.
I am critical of these groups, believe me. They say they want peace, but they want war. They are incapable of having the kind of conversations that people on this forum consider critical for humanity. Every value is a disvalue, every truth, a lie. Every type of integrity a vilness of soul.
But at the end of the day they're strongest when taking over institutions, moving words around, and forcing compliance through abstract policy. I just don't see the American left as capable of what the WO is implying. These are small people.
TiltingGambit
16d ago
Because of what I said previously. Immigration hasn't been a major political issue compared to the UK or Germany. One Nation has received under 5% of votes for the last 20 years, despite us having twice the amount of immigrants as those countries.
Since covid there's been a general backlash from voters of both sides of the aisle re: cost of living and cost of housing. This has raised the question of immigration in spheres that aren't racial. E.g. a labor party (left wing) candidate saying they want to reduce immigration to decrease the demand for housing.
One Nation has obviously been around forever, but has always been unpopular. It's recent success (in polls, not in practice) is attributed to both cost of living and more recently, Bondi.
German anti immigration parties are getting 20%+ in the polls. UK voted for brexit at least partially, or wholly, as a response to immigration. Australia just doesn't have that movement.
TiltingGambit
16d ago
I do think security services should investigate though. If I was the FBI I'd create a task force that includes ex-Green Berets and CIA SAD 'color revolution specialists' and go digging if they haven't already. If its American citizens acting autonomously, then fine, but if there are foreign agitators then pull them out root and stem.
We did in Australia and as I said in another comment, it wasn't so much former Iraqi tortures or NKVD agents. Just 55 year old women and 60 year old men who had been living off their fruitstall money in the NSW hinterlands for 20 years and attending protests as their "job".
TiltingGambit
16d ago
What do you mean, those are the shadowy influencers teaching this behavior!
Lol true. I thought the WO was implying that an e.g. foreign expert in insurgencies was teaching them. Not the 55 year old grievance collector in this case.
a) Normal people don't have time to do this shit for 20 years. They are almost certainly sponsored by someone top-down.
The two people who were the defacto leaders have been doing these kinds of protests for decades while living on basically environmentally neutral hippie compounds out in rural australia. They're not normal, they're not "sponsored', they just do this kind of bullshit because they really like to.
b) If they were ex-NKVD, how would you know?
We checked and you'd need to take my word.
These groups do think of themselves as insurgents against authorities. But I'm just saying the temperature of the message should be read a lot cooler than "and this is now Fallujah".
They're still comprised mostly of cringe, unemployed, lefties.
TiltingGambit
16d ago
Edit: "Your average person on the street doesn't know how to do this. There has to be a cadre teaching them."
Protestors in Australia have been organising into role-based teams for years. These guys, for example: https://disruptlandforces.org/our-commitment/
They had spotters, volunteers to be arrested, financing to get their legal fees paid for, organisers, logistics people who were caching immobile vehicles that were later used to block traffic, "legal observers", medics etc. They rented a nearby location to use as a base and store supplies like water, banners, paint, etc.
Their spotters were going around the facility working out if they could infiltrate it or cause mischief for the attendees. There are rumours they even paid for a stall inside under a false business name and were going to use their lanyards/business credentials to get in and set off fire alarms or flares etc.
So I disagree with the implication that you need shadowy influencers teaching this behaviour. You can have 15 lefties sitting around, playing "war" for a few weekends, who will work most of this out. The Disrupt Land Forces crew had "professional grievance collectors"/"Professional protestors" consulting with them and running training. These guys weren't exactly ex-NKVD assets or anything. Just people who had been going to protests for 20 years and had an idea of how to disrupt police operations for these events.
Yeah I remember this happening. I think a lot went woke because they'd spent their whole lives arguing against the conservatives and had eatablishes social and family links to left wing groups. Aronra seemed to fit this bill when he (briefly) began turning his atheism attention to the new culture war. It seemed like his wife, or something, was a big feminist and he tried to migrate his audience into a pro feminist sphere. Didn't work, he lost a lot of support and just went back to debating creationists.
More options
Context Copy link