Tree
1yr ago
Yes, there’s also agreeableness, emotionality, conventionality. I don’t really like femininity, especially not in men. Am I allowed to say that, or is only masculinity subject to censure? Men’s personalities have been one-sidedly filed down by three decades of this.
Tree
1yr ago
Ask for it back . "I do not avoid women, Mandrake, but I do deny them my essence."
Tree
1yr ago
According to you, nybbler, there was never anything to be done, it was an unstoppable steamroller, and all rebels would die for nothing. With an attitude like that, it could never have been stopped.
Tree
1yr ago
"Ending masculinity" in males leaves you with female clones. Metaphorically, you've cut off their balls. This is unpleasant by itself, but there's a double meaning: eunuch is an insult among men, their high pitched voice is a source of ridicule, and they're assumed to have a weak character, especially among ancient authors.
Tree
1yr ago
incredibly dangerous to speak out against it
Hyperbole much? Surely a contributing factor to the rise of wokeness is the utter spinelessness of most people. It was amazing to see again and again, the woke attacking some man of considerable achievements with no apparent woke beliefs, which would conclude with him delivering an abject groveling apology. Or the university presidents and professors who went along with radicals they clearly didn’t agree with. The grad students who traded ‘DEI statements’ for a job. Or you, reader, who put his pronouns in his profile.
Part of the reason is, you aren’t allowed to call men pussies anymore (in polite company). In the past, those who prostrated themselves in this way would have been shamed “Be a man and say no fuck off when you mean no.“ The taboo-ization of manliness has left society wide open for this kind of agreeable-emotional scam ideology, which reinforces the taboo further. Wokeness is both a cause and a symptom of it.
We used to reproduce sexually, which gave us some genetic diversity. After we all turned ourselves into female clones doing parthenogenesis, we became vulnerable to viruses. But thankfully for us middle class folk, through cultural isolation, some intrepid billionaires and rednecks avoided being gelded, and so the woke virus was ultimately stopped.
Tree
1yr ago
Maybe this corps of North Koreans will manage to disappear before there is any proof they ever existed
They have released a video of what appears to be north korean prisoners:
Tree
1yr ago
I don’t mind arrogance as such. You can catch me admitting that normal people are pretty stupid, too. But that doesn’t mean their lives and hobbies are meaningless and their thoughts ‘false consciousness’.
That passage we discuss is not just arrogance, it’s unjustified arrogance, it’s wrong. Hobby readers read ‘with all their attention’ too. And their hobby of reading is ‘part and parcel of their lives’ too.
You speculate that what I wrote reflects some sort of ego-driven rejection of others’ superiority, that I’m offended (and you’re allowed to do that, even though I think it’s incorrect). You form a model of my personality based on my writings. Well, that’s just what I did with his. It jumps up at me that he’s someone who resents the happiness of others….. (((((((((((“under capitalism”)))))))). That last part is just a fig leaf.
Paraphrasing adorno: ‘people should have no hobbies, no poetry, no beautiful buildings, their lives and thoughts are meaningless. (((((((((((again, “under capitalism”))))))))’. There’s superiority in that statement, but it’s not the superiority that bothers me. It’s the hostility to joy, beauty, meaning, life.
I just want to make it clear that it can be considered in isolation.
Death of the author, huh? Even ignoring all context, I still think “reading with all my attention” is pretentious, describing something as “part and parcel of my life” is trite, and hobbies are not mock-worthy. But whatever floats your boat, as long as I don't have to hear it during smalltalk.
Tree
1yr ago
I only knew adorno by reputation, which in my circles wasn’t great. Now having read these few pages of primary source, I feel I understand him much better, and despise him far more. He’s a bitter, spiteful man, utterly devoid of what one might call, generosity of spirit. Just this morning I was reading about postmodern art, and I came upon one of his quotes “To write poetry after Auschwitz is barbaric.“ – That fucking scold, I thought. People have never needed poetry, and art in general, as much as after Auschwitz. Adorno’s chief purpose in life seems to nag and make others miserable.
But you’re right of course, all that is a little ad-hominem-y. Let’s get to what he says, as opposed to the how and why.
Is it not possible to read thoughtfully and carefully, and equally possible to read thoughtlessly and carelessly?
Sure, that can happen. But he implied that those who read 'as a hobby' , ie most people, always read carelessly, while he never reads carelessly. That is an unproven, absolute and pointless claim of superiority. It would be like claiming he’s a very good driver, therefore he should never be fined for speeding. While trying to erase the conceptual regime that discriminates between work and not-work, he invents new conceptual distinctions (his reading versus normal people reading) which make far less sense.
Do you think that it's possible to lead a meaningful and holistic life, as opposed to one that is not? Maybe it's possible, but not particularly valuable either way, and thus not something to be aspired to? Or do you think that it's both possible and something that is proper to aspire to, but you just have specific issues with Adorno's presentation?
Holistic is a bullshit term, as in holistic medicine, holistic science, holistic nutrition, holistic shower gel. I believe people’s lives are meaningful already.
Do you think that the hobbies you spend your time on are meaningful, or no?
Sure. Take this place. On a very modest level, I think exchanging ideas is potentially helping the world. Even in my most cynical moments, when I think it has no "redeeming social value" and is just for fun, I find that meaningful, too.
Tree
1yr ago
But Adorno already said that he has no problem with simply listing the activities he does outside of his working hours
Oh, he has a problem with it, it’s his whole problem. He worries that he doesn’t come off as cool when he tells people what he does with his time:
Woe betide you if you have no hobby, no pastime; then you are a swot or an oldtimer, an eccentric, and you will fall prey to ridicule in a society which foists upon you what your free time should be.
So when he reads, he reads ‘with all his attention’(as opposed to normal people, who supposedly read distractedly. The point is, he’s better than them, at reading) . And he doesn’t have hobbies, he has a meaningful, holistic life. Please.
We’re all nerds with nerd hobbies here, but this one unloads his inadequacies and frustrations in the most petty, passive aggressive way possible.
Tree
1yr ago
Sounds like a frustrated bear excuse, my guy. If the government’s holding the line, it’d be stupid not to leverage. It makes no difference whether it is naturally a good strategy, or if the government is artificially propping it up. It has been working for 16 years, so you can’t use it as an example of a strategy that’s likely to fail on a 2 year timeframe.
Tree
1yr ago
No, he’s not right. Even if we lived on a tropical island before capitalism, when two strangers would meet, among the first questions they would ask would be ‘so what do you do to eat?’, and ‘what do you do when you’re not fishing/hunting/gathering?’ . And when Old Theo would answer ‘How dare you imply my non-work activities are mockworthy and meaningless? I do everything passionately!’, the other man would hit him over the head with a stick, just like in real life.
The negative implications of ‘hobby’ that adorno is incensed about, he put there himself. People do not think their hobbies are meaningless and worthy of mockery.
Tree
1yr ago
Making music, listening to music, reading with all my attention, these activities are part and parcel of my life; to call them hobbies would make a mockery of them.
Imagine some guy lays this on you after you ask him about his hobbies. What an extraordinarily annoying and pretentious thing to say. Adorno’s dripping contempt for the “barbarous”, “horrifying”, “mock-worthy” common man, what he enjoys, how he talks, and what he thinks. All rooted in Adorno's resentment that the rube has again and again rejected marx’ bullshit.
“people are unaware of how utterly unfree they are, even where they feel most at liberty“ - thought bubble of guy in corner at party meme.
Tree
1yr ago
yeah, I already said this, losses are acceptable.
I don't take the pro-russian right seriously when they say they care about ukraine, its economy and demography. For one thing, because they say they don't care about ukraine on the next argument (it's far away, strategically unimportant, we need the money for the people here, etc). For another thing, because it's an argument putin makes, a mafia-extortion argument ('pay the black hand and nothing will happen to your nice flower shop'). Like zelensky says: We never pay any-one Dane-geld, no matter how trifling the cost; for the end of that game is oppression and shame, And the nation that plays it is lost!
Tree
1yr ago
If he doesn't want a deal, because, as usual, since day one, total russian victory is just around the corner, that's fine. Ukraine, for its part, can accept trump's offer, gets increased aid, and continue the war. Westerners aren't exactly under pressure to end the war.
I much prefer to make the same deal (whatever it is) now rather than earlier (assuming it was even on the table). If you're going to make a deal with a mafioso, it's much better morally to have him pay for it in blood, rather than just handing it over. Losses on your side that result from this preference are par for the course & acceptable. This only seems heartless from a naively pacifistic view. The mafioso is of course far more heartless.
Tree
1yr ago
Not gonna happen. Even if AI is strictly superior at clerical/intellectual jobs to most people (and I doubt that), there is unlimited demand for dog-walking at 10$/hour.
The machines have long ago replaced human physical power, and animal physical power, and weaving and sowing and cobbling and copying and calculating and transporting and and and ... never was man left idle.
Tree
1yr ago
There are black women who’ve won legitimately(miss France, for example)
Bad example. Oldest miss france ever at 34. She finished first runner up of her departement fourteen years ago. So during a time where most women lose attractiveness, she managed to raise hers from regional contender level to national champion. And they just changed rules to allow women over 24, as well as married women or mothers, to participate. The rule change by itself is fine, but obviously it's just a way to put 'inspiring' 50 year old women up there 'with the most difficult job in the world'. Whatever, beauty contests are stupid anyway, they just got considerably stupider now that they're ugly.
Tree
1yr ago
I don’t think the EU-US tariffs are preferrential, and I’m in favour of free trade, so I think the tariff on american cars should be 0%. The discussion on whether the tariffs are truly equal in a cosmic sense is essentially : ‘Yes, I have this special tariff(or subvention) on Y, but what about your special tariff on X ?’ ad infinitam. You think the tariffs are preferrential because when you cut a pie in two and give it to brothers, they will each insist they got the smaller piece.
I've largely said what I wanted to say. I’ll recap our points of disagreement (You think / I don’t think):
-
trade deficits harm a country
-
deficit countries subsidize surplus countries
-
trade deficits are the result of unequal tariffs
-
Therefore the tariffs with europe and china are preferrential, unequal and unfair to the US
Tree
1yr ago
Maddison gives US gdp/cap in 1700 as below world average (which seems a little low, I admit), only catching up to the UK around 200 years later. French peasants, who according to those numbers were richer than americans, were always one bad harvest away from starving during the 18th century.
Tree
1yr ago
the EU establishment has significant interest incentives to downplay, ignore, or reframe why US-EU tariff barriers are at the level they are.
That goes for the US as well, they have incentives to downplay, ignore, reframe all their own barriers(for example in the airbus-boeing trade fights). You said ‘military support for advantageous tariffs’ is an agreement. Doesn’t sound like the EU agreed to it.
No, European purchases of middle eastern energy is transactional. Notably, the Arabs are making a profit off of providing their good/service to the Europeans at market rates.
Of course they are, the question is what the europeans are getting out of it, since according to your view, the buyer (guy with a trade deficit, here the european) is just handing out ‘subsidies’. So if I buy oil from an arab, that’s a fair trade, but if you buy champaign from me, that’s a subsidy?
At the time, the European tariff barrier for automobiles was 10%, in a market about 260k US cars exported for around 6 billion.
You have a 25% tariff on light trucks including SUVs, which is the majority of the US car market.
Even if there was an entire category of X-but-small trade volume at 0% tariffs, that wouldn't mean the 'average' tariff was 5%.
I think it’s based on value of goods sold. So if the EU sells 100 B and the US takes in a total of 5 B tariffs, that’s an average tariff of 5%, whether some tariffs are at 0% and others at 50%.
I’ll agree that average tariff of the good traded does not mean that much since entire parts of the EU-US trade are high tariffed to zero trade happening, like a lot of agricultural products, cars.
As I said on principle I don’t mind equalizing all the tariffs (though I’ve just read the 25% light truck ‘chicken tax’ seems hard to repeal because of bipartisan support) , but it’s not going to help your trade deficit because the deficit is not caused by preferential tariffs.
The Europeans were embracing industrial policy as a systemic government priority well before the Americans, and won the argument.
No one ever truly wins these economic fad arguments, they wax and wane. It's true that european elites are fond of their dirigisme, and it always ends up being an expensive clusterfuck.
The question, as raised earlier, is what you are willing to offer to make it convincing to the Americans that it is in their interest.
Nothing. If they don’t think trade benefits them, I can try to argue that it does, but if they don’t see it, I’m not offering a bribe, they can just walk away. They’re a free country.
Tree
1yr ago
Buying an item in the supermarket (or trading beans for bacon with my neighbour) is a mutually beneficial transaction. I don’t owe walmart military service afterwards.
Was this military-support-for-one-sided-tariffs agreement commented on by anyone at the time (preferably european)? These needlessly complicated ‘subventions’ breed confusions. Next time we’ll take it in cash, not in trade.
You’ve had a way bigger deficit against china than us for a long time. What did they agree to do for you in order to get this preferential treatment? We have a big deficit against saudi arabia – is that a subsidy too?
a systemic trade bias in European favor (thanks to higher tariffs against American goods than for European goods)
The average tariff between US-EU is 3%. I don’t mind equalizing if you find an ‘unfair’ percent here and there, but it’s not going to meaningfully change the balance of trade, because it depends on other characteristics of the economy. So Trump is still going to claim exploitation and raise tariffs 25 % and so the people, agreeing to disagree, will mutually consent to the unraveling of mutually beneficial trade.
Tree
1yr ago
OK, so the main disagreement is that I think trade balance is irrelevant . Trade isn’t a zero sum game where the US sells ‘at loss’ because they have a trade deficit. It’s kind of the opposite really, given that trade surplus countries are accused of ‘dumping’ manufactured goods like electric cars or planes they supposedly produce at a loss.
The excellent american economic health has gone hand in hand with trade deficits, to the point that many have suspected that americans get free stuff while the rest of the world gets worthless dollars. I’m not saying it’s causal, just that trump’s domestic story of exploited americans might not play as well elsewhere, when he’s negotiating supermarket prices. Non-americans have their own exploitation story, and at least they're, you know, poorer.
Because I see trade as mutually beneficial, you can understand why trump’s threats look more like ‘blackmail’ to me , and I understand why to you or trump it’s just ‘putting pressure’.
Eunuchs get assigned feminine qualities. To me, you seem hyper-sensitive to any insult to womanhood, even abstract and metaphorical - as required by modern etiquette. I'm criticizing gender roles, what's the big deal?
We're explaining wokeness here, and in this extreme form it's recent. 30 years ago we had PC so it fits.
As to your implied jibe that I'm a reactionary who wants women in the kitchen, I've heard it all before, and you couldn't be more wrong.
More options
Context Copy link