@Tree's banner p

Tree


				

				

				
1 follower   follows 0 users  
joined 2024 July 17 08:28:18 UTC

				

User ID: 3144

Tree


				
				
				

				
1 follower   follows 0 users   joined 2024 July 17 08:28:18 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 3144

Maybe the reason the tide turned was because BLM, cancellations, terrible netflix movies and so on alienated the center-left.

Ironic that he was fired not for celebrating Kirk’s death, but for the kind of post-truth statement maga has whole-heartedly embraced : “I don’t really know, so I’ll just believe and say whatever is most convenient for my side”.

I can see how stupid it all is, but I still feel the blue tribe had it coming. Once the red mob has collected its own scalps, their feelings of rage, impotence and confusion may dissipate. And the blues can brush up on newton's third law, all for this small price.

As to you people, this is another victory (of sorts) for the right that you would never have predicted, blackpillers that you are.

The left as forced economic redistribution of resources, to the poor. I thought that was implied. Sulla lining handing his enemies’ estates to his allies doesn’t qualify. Sulla abolishing the grain dole does make him right-wing. Enclosure , that’s just privatization. Although it might be characterized as dispossession of the riff-raff, which would be right-wing.

If you define leftism as forced economic redistribution, there’s a good case to be made for the nazis. It fits in the pattern of liquidating a minority’s assets for the benefit of the majority. In other places, leftists liquidated aristocrats or kulaks, hitler picked the jews.

Some medieval kings, once they were deeply in debt to jews, suddenly discovered that they were enemies of christ after all, and in fact, they should leave his kingdom; not their assets though, these could, and should, stay, he insisted. Philipp IV famously liquidated the Knights Templar with this simple trick.

The german working class lived large under the nazis, largely from stolen money, first from jews, then from conquered euro countries. Many of their welfare laws are still on the books. The reason why this isn’t commented on more is that everyone else at the time was also turning hard left. With FDR’s new deal, and Leon Blum’s government in france, both laying the groundwork for their countries respective welfare states.

No more US money to Egypt and the other nations around them means no more land trade. The US giving up (well more than they have already) at dealing with the houthis means there's no more shipping, either.

How? The houthis are on a completely different sea from the main israeli coast. It’s like saying alaskan separatist tribes are going to blockade the US.

No one here is going to be willing to argue that a large plurality of Blue Tribe, and likely an outright majority of young politically-active blues outright don't support the shooting.

It’s monday, and I am willing. We saw universal condemnation by all powerful and influential people of the left. Undeterred, the pro-civil war right decided to signal boost randos who made insensitive jokes.

Is there any way to falsify your beliefs? In every possible world, there will be a few people who don’t mourn charlie kirk according to your standards. You would then use them to confirm your theory of irreparable cross-tribe hostility.

how the shooting was his own fault

The one journalist (Matt Dowd) who tried that was immediately fired.

This is, in fact, as far as I've understood, a very, very radical view in the American political sphere on a key issue, one which some might call the defining issue of American politics.

Which is strange. As a european who never had much contact with blacks outside of hollywood movies, when I first learned what the Civil rights law actually was, I rejected it. Why can’t they have their own diners? It goes against the basic right of freedom of association. If whites are so oppressive and racist, why would you want to sit next to them? I don't try to get into gay bars or irish bars, because I know they'll taunt me. And if they were known to take away my voting rights and lynch me, it'd be even weirder to suggest attending their bars and schools at the solution to my problems.

Looks like it worked and the format allowed your guys to make some good points. I don’t understand the blanket hostility (“fake debate, fake intellectual engagement, fake morality “). Like yeah, it’s not perfect, no-holds-barred, high quality debate, but it’s… still good enough?

Whoever talks faster, and is more skilled with "debating" has a clear advantage, regardless of whether they actually believe in their ideas or not. Regardless of whether their ideas are good. As long as you can present them as being such, you can have the upper hand.

For the process to work (and consequently the entire liberal project), you don't need the correct idea to win every time, regardless of rhetorical skill. It is enough for the correctness to be correlated to winning, and I believe it is. I think even destiny and charlie kirk (I don't watch their stuff either) would have trouble defending manifestly absurd positions, like the sexes being as strong as each other, anti-vax nonsense, or black people having to live in fear of random white people violence.

I’m going to take the Ezra Klein-Hanania line and, without any sappy respect for a dead man, I’ll say these ‘dunking’ debates are good, actually. Literal marketplace of ideas, forum of democracy. Though it may offend your snobbish sensibilities, that’s how ideas trickle down to the little guy.

Matt Dowd isn't getting fired in a week.

A-hem!

he was probably just a crazy person" explanation until I see concrete evidence that he is actually crazy.

Ok well that's fine, my misunderstanding, although I don't know why you felt the need to specify that.

What portion of the left-wing internet is some degree of happy that he's dead, in your view and experience?

What is 'some degree of happy'? Like 0.00001% happy? Ambivalent feelings can come up when a person one does not like dies. That is not celebrating or approving someone's death. It seems this is all preparing the prosecution of your opponents for the crime of 'not being sad enough' and 'being quiet, evilly' ('feigning smug disinterest').

But to answer your question, I see nothing but condemnation from party leaders and influential people. What you're seeing is the screenshotting of some fringe nobodies for engagement.

Didn't you just say that your side will not accept a crazy guy with a gun explanation?

No one in Red Tribe is going to accept that a famous Conservative activist being sniped on a college campus can be summarized as "crazy guy with a gun".

Why are your enemies required to be so much more rational and forgiving than you are?

the entire left-wing internet is either openly celebrating his murder or feigning smug disinterest.

This is A) not true, and B) "murder and suspected jaywalking".

Plus, this wasn't the shocking moment where he was shot, it was the moment trump announced he's dead. I doubt they were that excited over this almost-inevitable followup. I'm going to mark that episode as a red hate-fantasy.

Neither was he. So all the influential people plus the silent majority agree on nonviolence.

Those two aren’t endorsements. TNR removed the ‘troll’ qualifier. Yglesias isn’t wrong, here or on twitter, there are too many over-excited righties going ‘He was the nice one. You won’t like me and my friends when we inflict indiscriminate violence on half the country’.

Some morons, sure. The kind that celebrated Jesse James in another time.

If the last years' wild swings in political moods have taught us anything, is that there is a, forgive the cliché, 'silent majority' of people who are not on board with the excesses of their tribe. They just sulk until the preference cascade pendulum passes them by, back and forth.

No one here is going to be willing to argue that a large plurality of Blue Tribe, and likely an outright majority of young politically-active blues outright don't support the shooting.

That is crazy talk. Although, kudos for making it falsifiable - 'by next monday'. Okay. I predict I will be willing to argue a majority of young politically active blues don't support the shooting.

At trump's assassination attempt, you thought the SS did it.

Maybe someone should post the charlie kirk assassination. Sounds like a culture war.

Interesting. I really want to argue with your points, but since I don’t have any experience doing this (not in the US), I’ll cede the field.

Yeah, possibly the biggest barrier is the need for some seed capital and the willingness to take some counterparty risk on it. The guy seemed like he was juggling/transferring thousands of dollars per day to take advantage of the credit card bonuses and the cheap tokens. You’d probably need like 20-50k starting capital you’re ready to lose (although I think the risk is not that big), and, like you say, a considerable time investment, before you can earn his full one hour a day salary.

Anyway, if it's a hassle, or less lucrative than advertised, it's probably better to do something less zero sum.