@Tintin's banner p

Tintin


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2025 February 15 14:38:09 UTC

				

User ID: 3536

Tintin


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2025 February 15 14:38:09 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 3536

if a member of a couple is being killed, it's usually the wife by the husband.

It used to be 75 husbands to 100 wives murdered by their spouse, way more balanced. But now women can just divorce to get their husband's estate, while upwardly mobile husbands have only the kinetic option.

I mean it’s not a mystery, they’re explicitly discriminating against men. There are new EU and german laws mandating between 30 and 40 % of the board of publicly listed companies be women. Note that the employees of large automakers like daimler are 87% male.

I think the scandis are far worse actually, the anti-rape and anti-harassment laws are “world-beating”. Norway pioneered the 40% female board quotas we are now implementing. They have a law on the books that enlarges the scope of sexual harassment to “statements that have the effect of being offensive, frightening, hostile or degrading “. You don’t even need to go to the office, you can sexually harass a woman by contradicting a random woman on the street if she deems it so.

Last Sunday, I had dinner with my extended family in Germany. They’re what they call ‘Bildungsburgertum’, best class and best-in-class, educated middle class of doctors, teachers, and executives. They accordingly vote either green or social democrat, and gasp if someone dares defend the Afd or Trump.

Cousin‘s girlfriend says she’s in the running for a promotion at the bank she works for because the banking regulatory agency “suggested” they need more ”diversity“ at the top level. She might lose the job to a less competent woman because her rival is also the “director for sustainability” and the title sounds good to the powers that be. I ask her what the hell a bank has to do with sustainability . “Exactly. She just gives a silly PowerPoint presentation once a year and uses that “fulfilled mission” as an excuse to be incompetent on everything else”. Her male boss/colleague/friend did not appreciate being summarily passed over and has tended his resignation.

After the ladies retire to the boudoir, a different cousin’s husband, who works in IT at a large company, picking up on my skepticism, sits next to me and whispers : “It’s pointless if you’re male.” He tells me he just refused a promotion because he doesn’t want to deal with the headache of having women under him, and the constant humiliation of forced diversity. One of his colleague’s career was apparently ruined after a sexism accusation, although he didn’t give details.

He recently had a woman in a junior post who could not do a simple task and would cry sexism(“I feel like you’re always contradicting me and not the others”) if corrected in public or reminded of her duties. He just did her job for her and never corrected her again.

Final words: “I’m not a masculinist or feminist, I hate all those things. I just wanted to do my job. Now I do the bare minimum, I don’t care anymore, I’m a loser” (I had brought up Rao’s archetypes of Psychopaths, Clueless, and Losers earlier).

There was some controversy recently over Helen Andrews’ essay on the feminization of the workplace. I consider all internet discourse a priori overdramatic and disconnected from real people who just touch grass at a barbecue in ignorant bliss. But this couple of anecdotes suggests real life (in Germany, at least) is actually worse than the widely-decried-as-misogynistic Andrews take: open widespread discrimination against men (obviously), ubiquitous fear of one-sided legal and professional penalties, declining competence at all levels.

If upvotes mean ‘more of this’ and (like most commenters) fuckduck was largely upvoted, shouldn’t there be a presumption of adding value to the forum, that cannot be annulled by you simply finding me annoying?

I admit, I’m not a high-effort, longform poster. More of a mid-effort reply guy. I get bored on the fourth paragraph describing an idea. I don’t have the impeccable prose of a rafa. But we can’t all be rock stars. I’m not a rock, I identify more as the glue, or cement, in a forum like this. I argue with everyone. Someone has to purge by fire all the crank theories and showerthoughts that make up the AAQC. This can come off as hostile ‘call-outs’, ‘shit-stirring’ and ‘condescension’, but I’d say it’s valuable – and I never tried to get anyone I argued with banned, hostile or not.

Mostly, I blame my vulgar name for how things turned out. I never had much problems with other alts before or since. Much like trannyporno, I fell victim to nominative determinism. Milgram’s experiment of sorts: first named as a villain, then treated as one, sooner or later I ended up as one.

Anyway, since I often defended trannyporno, darwin, hlynka, burdensomecount and almost everyone else who was slowly banned or chased away by heavy-handed moderation, I thought I might as well put in a kind word for myself. @The_Nybbler , @Primaprimaprima , thanks for the appeal.

I think it's worth it. If an expert debater and religious authority with a knack for youth online culture like yourself isn't going to dispel their harmful illusions, who is?

I think this is remarkably wrong. A big part of the reason these yutes complaining about capitalism, or sexism/racism, or the ‚destruction of the planet‘ are unhappy, is because those are deeply incorrect, anxiety-and-depression inducing beliefs! You could actually solve most of their long-term problems by convincing them they are false (which isn‘t easy, I grant), instead of patronizing them every day by making them feel good for 5 minutes. They could have talked about the weather if they wanted to wallow in their misery, but no, they‘re practically begging you to save them, and you say „no thanks you‘re just being phatic kiddo“, tap them on the head and go on your way.

What a garbage theory. Astrology for geopolitics. "And on the second moon of the third year of war, the russian, as always, will have learned his lesson and win". Predicting future events from nothing more than the eternal essence of the participants.

So, do the americans, or the french, not learn, in war? You say his essence makes the russian learn slow, yet, sometimes, against the turk, the russian still learns fast. And the theory predicts the russian ends up winning, but of course, russians lost quite a lot of wars, even in wars where they appeared to be slowly learning at first, in accordance with their eternal destiny.

Some unskilled 55 year old I know has been pushing a button at Porsche for 15 years, makes 30 Euros/hour base pay. He‘s being offered free early retirement packages (which are insanely good in germany). He‘s also addicted to coke and in bankruptcy proceedings, but that‘s another story.

The MSM seems to think canada's dreaded dairy tariff is effectively 0%.

That these countries and Trump say they 'approach it as a negotiation', are open to negotiations‘ conveys no information. Russia was ‚open to negotiations‘ right before they invaded, Ukraine and Russia have been ‚open to negotiations‘ the whole war. They, like Trump and the EU, have incompatible understandings of reality.

I guess we‘ll soon see who‘s right. If the tariffs are largely lifted after some compromise, you were right, hardball negotiating tactic.

I think you misunderstand Trump, you misunderstand the EU, and your own position is incoherent.

Trump does not actually believe international trade, negative balance trade at least, is mutually beneficial, and this sets him apart from the EU and most of the rest of the world. He‘s not negotiating, he really prefers no trade to a trade deficit. He‘s been saying so for decades, but his supporters, and even the market until recently, refused to believe him.

Your attempts to read a sinister motive into the EU‘s trade policy : yeah, they want markets for their exporters – and the very next sentence, they say they support foreigners in their attempts to export to them. They acknowledge most countries have some tariffs in place – this means Trump unilaterally 5Xing every tariff is ‚moving towards the global norm‘?

You once made the bizarre argument that the US ‚gave‘ europe a trade surplus against itself in exchange for (europe‘s) military support. This is a zero-sum trumpian understanding of international trade. If europe cancels this ‚agreement‘, what trade is there to negotiate? The ‚subventions‘ (US trade deficit) will simply stop. Just like the ‚subventions‘ to cambodia and fiji and the rest of the world.

tariffs that will raise prices on everything by at least 30%.

I think tariffs are harmful, but that‘s a very high estimate. US Foreign trade to gdp ratio is only 25% (for comparison, canada 67% or germany 83%). Why would all prices increase by the tariff rate when most goods are produced in the US?

There is a middle path where the globalist agenda is crushed via onshoring manufacturing which yes,will increase costs for the coastal elite who own big corporations, but will also raise wages for the working and middle class.

It could also decrease those wages, in fact it‘s very likely. First there‘s the obvious loss in purchasing power through tariff-induced inflation. And secondly, the american consumer loves consooming too much. He will eat the seed corn if you leave him alone with it. Other countries used to make up for it with their savings, ensuring the american worker‘s productivity was higher than it would be if he had to rely on his own meager savings for investment.

I find this economic story at least as plausible as trump‘s ‚my trade deficit is your profit‘ . Partly because my theory doesn‘t rely on the very adventurous claim that the rich guy is actually being exploited by the poor foreigners who send him the stuff he consumes.

Dubious and clashing economic narratives aside, you have to concede that the argument in favour of tariffs is necessarily weak and specific to certain non-typical situations, else tariffs between US states would be a good idea.

If other countries DON'T take active steps to reduce tariffs or otherwise negotiate, I will have to admit that my model of the world is drastically misinformed.

Say you‘re the median trade partner with the US, you have a trade surplus towards it, and about a 5% tariff on US goods. Out comes trump with a 20% tariff, with a 10 % minimum, and not based on anything you actually do (or whether you are friend or foe), just balance of trade. And you think they will cancel their own tariffs and offer mineral concessions ?

From the POV of the rest of the world, this is extremely high 'trade aggression'. If you answer this with concessions, you are the most spineless weakling that ever noodled.

The only question being debated right now from brussels to peking and tokyo to london is how much to retaliate. The most extreme pro-american, pro-free trade position being to ignore it and wait for his tantrum, or his presidency, to end.

You‘re very lucky empirically because your theory has been tested and disproved within 24 hours. China has retaliated with a 34% tariff on US goods.

Or forget about hate speech, focus on attempts to overthrow the government. The lesson from that time may well be: in cases like the beer hall putsch and january 6, hand out death sentences like candy. ok for Jan 6, they looked like a collection of village idiots, they may be spared under low IQ threshold rules, but a man of sound mind, attempting to grab supreme executive power? That‘s do or die for the state, and therefore, death for the man.

I despise hate speech laws, but an argument can be made that a few hundred dollar fines and maybe 3 weeks in prison for 30 counts of hate speech over 10 years, is too mild. What would Stalin have thought of this "crackdown"? Where are the cracked heads? Starting with Hitler, of course. The man was an awoved enemy of the state, had caused deaths in trying to overturn it, and he was let go with a slap on the wrist because he had 'noble intentions'.

I'm not aware of any crackdown on right-wing extremism in 1930s germany. There was Hitler's Beer Hall putsch in 1923, but he got off easy, one year in prison for an attempted coup with loss of life.

I remind you that shortly before the war, 55% of Germans still were for operating NS2 "despite the ongoing conflict with Russia".

Conflicts. That‘s like saying: before pearl harbor, the american public‘s view of japan wasn‘t all that negative. Then the propaganda came along, and ruined that beautiful friendship.

Earlier, you admitted that the neighbours of russia are correct to fear it. So 200 km from the russian border, around the Oder, that justified true belief magically turns into US-implanted false consciousness. And then, if you go further, past the channel and the atlantic, russia‘s threats, largely nuclear, become real once again. But we in the middle have nothing to fear. We‘re sitting in a bubble of peaceful russian intentions, sadly filled by american propaganda.

you will still think that Germany should stay neutral and mind its own economic interests?

I hope this is a rhetorical question. Yes, obviously, I think I can tell the difference between truth and falsehood. I assume the same of you.

I don't think I've seen much of that messaging at all, and to begin with, was this before or after their people were being killed with military hardware that we donated?

This is nothing. Under realist/19th century rules, we should be at war the moment russia sent troops against our vassal‘s government. And threatening us with nukes for that would still be beyond the pale.

What trespasses were there against Germany?

Constantly using war and war threats as your main foreign policy tool, especially on peripheral countries who want to join our sphere/EU, and against our allies, like the baltics. Threatening to nuke us, them, and the world.


So you support an amoral russian regime and the oppression of russia‘s neighbours as a counterweight to the seemingly greater evil of american hegemony?

That‘s a convoluted and dangerous gambit. Can you refresh my memory, which ones are your preferred victims, proving america‘s evil? The palestinians, I think you appreciate particularly. Chomsky had a problem with the US bombing the serbs and pol pot. Do you have a number in mind, like 10 million murdered by uncle sam, therefore a few hundred thousands ukrainians are small fries?

To begin with, are you suggesting that coups are not "violence"?

They're certainly far less violent than what's going on. I'm also judging some decisions made later than crimea. There is a moment after the grab-zelensky attack on kiev failed, where russians could have gone home. Instead putin decided to fight a real war, with the blood cost this implies. Here was a moral decision of far greater consequence than to coup or not to coup.

Another thing: You claim to be able to explain russia‘s policy because you know how the country ‚ticks‘; Does this mean that the man on the street, or whoever you hear tick, is in charge? Or would have acted the same as putin? When you imply the honest muzhik would never attack germany, did he attack ukraine, or was it someone else‘s idea?

You're affable. You're in sales, you have mild doubts about modern society and the enlightenment. Personal motto: aww, schucks.

Rest assured I will argue for the same position when/if China vs. Taiwan kicks off

Yeah, but any idiot would; the analogous China argument is incomparably stronger; china being a superpower, far more peaceful, and on the other side of the world. I find american discourse on china shrill and out of proportion to chinese aggression. If our american friends look to be engaged in an ego driven „War for Number One“, Europe should obviously do a 180 and moonwalk out of the ring.

"scary unknowns may be capable of anything"

Where is the unknown? They keep threatening our cities with nukes. The idea that we could resume cordial relations after this is delusional.

Germany ignored its friends‘ advice and gave russia a chance to be peaceful and rich, forgave its trespasses for a long time. Now that it has all ended in tears and defection, that failed forgiveness and goodwill is to be withdrawn with prejudice, and I want russia to lose more than I want ukraine to win.

Russians always go on about their perceived slights, justifying all this madness; this is ours. Germany‘s been disrespected; put this into your prison hierarchy metaphor.

if Russia subjugated its neighbours or they at least forced them to act mindful of the possibility of it doing so, that would mean a lot of middlemen who want a cut from the natural beneficial trade partnership being robbed of their ability to demand it.

That's disgusting. Keep your blood gas.

I expected better from you, but every time I dig into a pro-russian position, there is nothing but moral nihilism.

On that matter, should the Russians have asked the same thing when the US+EU were grabbing Ukraine? Do you know the events that lead up to Euromaidan?

You know, if they‘d just counter-coup‘ed, and put yanukovich back , I would have no problem, fair game. I we had then sent in the bundeswehr to attack the yanukovich regime, that would be a slight worthy of russian outrage. Do you see how that works?

Why did they not counter-coup? Perhaps they preferred losing hundreds of thousands of men. Or they can‘t counter-coup, because they‘re unpopular. All they have left is violence and their own lack of restraint to inflict it.

Call it a personal preference. Young parents look an act like zombies. All of feminism represents people who did not like it. But some find it fulfilling, for sure. And if they can use their hobby to give more humans the gift of life, so much the better.

I‘m not sure what I‘m supposed to do with a claim of unmanlyness. If I call a man unmanly, for being a coward, for example, I‘m referring to a shared understanding of what a man should be ; accusing him, in effect, of failing to act according to his own ideals. You and I share no such understanding on the topic of parenting.

Let's assume euromaidan was an american conspiracy...and further take a 'realist' view of international relations (neither of which I agree with, for the record). Germany prefers a border country(Ukraine) to be under a far-away power(US) than a close-by power (Russia). The Far-away power won the borderland with soft-power. The bad loser responded with hard-power, violence, hundreds of thousands of deaths and counting. They lost a chess game (partly against germany, see EU-ukraine trade agreements) , pulled a gun, and mowed down the whole country. Obviously this cancels the peace.

Russian living in germany, as per his response. I would say his opinion of germany's interests wrt russia is tainted and not representative. Of course there are some pro-putin arguments in the german left, but, I don't think 4bpp would fall for them if he wasn't russian, because they're pretty stupid. It's different for the american left (eg, chomsky) , because they're far away and don't know what they're talking about, not stupid.

I understand. It's tedious to raise children, and it makes no difference anyway.

And I'm not a natalist because I want to spread my genes either.

No, it's the Gift of Life. The more, the merrier.