coffee_enjoyer
☕️
No bio...
User ID: 541
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1yr ago
I imagine the motive here is to further deny the white public from admiring their supremacy in any way. It is a reminder that you can’t have white heroes or stories, not in the foundation of the Republic (what we saw a few years ago) and not even in the misguided women’s rights movement, and certainly not in pseudohistorical entertainment (Bridgerton, Hamilton). You have to let them know that every white achievement is stained in blood and evilness. So to have a musical — the culture of the wealthy liberal base — extol heroic white women is a faux pas that must be balanced by blackening their reputation. Expect an update story and cast in future productions. At least to me this genuinely has the most predictive power for which things are criticized and altered. It’s not actually about purity spiraling, as we know (for instance) that MLK was a pro-rape plagiarist [2]. There won’t seriously be change to the connotation of MLK because of this.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1yr ago
I’m confused about the coup talk. Because the decision reads
At a minimum, the President must be immune from prosecution for an official act unless the Government can show that applying a criminal prohibition to that act would pose no “dangers of intrusion on the authority and functions of the Executive Branch."
It is the Government's burden to rebut the presumption of immunity. The Court therefore remands to the District Court to assess in the first instance whether a prosecution involving Trump's alleged attempts to influence the Vice President's oversight of the certification proceeding would pose any dangers of intrusion on the authority and functions of the Executive Branch.
Wouldn’t a coup attempt fall squarely in the non-core function of the President? The Government would then have a trivial time proving that its prosecution does not “pose dangers of intrusion on the authority and functions of the Executive Branch.” So the court would find that the coup attempt constitutes a punishable crime.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1yr ago
Rejoice in your heart! Forgetfulness profits you. Follow your heart as long as you live! Put perfume on, dress in fine clothes, clean and adorn yourself like a god. Heap up your happiness, let your heart not sink! Follow your heart and your happiness. Do your things on earth as your heart commands! When there comes to you that day of mourning, no weary-hearted god hears your mourning — wailing saves no man from the pit! Make holiday and do not tire of it! No one is allowed to take his goods with him and none who depart come back again!
Maybe a word or there gives it away, but this is not in fact some 19th century American poet’s life advice (perhaps a Whitman or Emerson), but actually a 4000-year-old poem for an Egyptian tomb — “the Harper’s song”
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1yr ago
It’s hard to deny the overriding social benefits: ease of finding many partners, ease of job transitioning, ease of friendship, and even benefits for your children. The stresses can be solved by wearing a wig and sunglasses when you want to have a normal night out I think, which is far effort than what a normal person must expend for the benefits of fame. So I would say it’s worth it (not in sense of acquiring but in possessing) for most normal people.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1yr ago
I think if there’s no profit or fame incentive you can trust them. Or if you trust someone like Rhonda Patrick / Hubermann I bet he’s talked about this.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1yr ago
There are studies on this that you can plug into google scholar and access via sci-hub. Roughage (fibers), fats, cinnnamon and some other things totally reduce insulin spikes or the “glycemic load” of the meal when eaten beforehand or within the meal. Walking for 15min directly after a meal does this as well. Not sure about vinegar or protein. I would type in: [term] glycemic load. Sort by 2020 to see new research.
fanatics
TBH this is wildly important information for how little awareness there is of it. We have inexpensive and effective ways of sizably reducing the problems caused by insulin spikes, which are myriad and severe.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1yr ago
I’m not sure what you mean by “it isn’t a choice, one identity has to win out.” I’m trying to think of an example of what you mean but I only find counterexamples in the context of enlarged group dynamics. Someone could grow up in Pakistan where tribes matter, and then move to America and join the Desi student organization or a Southeast Asian networking society, while internalizing a story about colonialism and racism (anti-white) that may no even apply to their tribe. This example can just as well apply to a Native American who usefully identifies as “indigenous”, or a Saudi tribal member who begins to identify as Arab, or any other group. Even Korean descendants in America may cease to hate Japan and affiliate with Asian Umbrella organizations from middle school even to their job at Google, where they may advocate for more Asian employees without regard for Koreans specifically. All of this is volitional and the choice is informed by an intuitive allegiant identity, an organic understanding that you and your kin are better positioned by combining together related groups. This is, in fact, the very story of Europe until 21st century philosophers desperately tried to revise it. Your “English” identity came about through a useful amalgamation, but of course, Cornwall will always be unique culturally right? But if you had British members stationed in India in 1910, the obvious group dynamic would be that the Welsh and Scottish and British are one group — even if at home they have separate interests.
even within England the dominance of the South over the North is a live issue
Is that not immaterial? Even within my household the dominance of the Apple TV between me and my sibling was a live issue. Even within my grandparents’ progeny the dominance over a house may be a live issue. This can apply in infinitely large or infinitely small directions, but whenever we look at group dynamics we clearly see the allegiant identities I mention above. Eg, where India is concerned, the petty squabbles of Pakistani tribes no longer matter.
Why are you so against keeping the unique identities of Europe
Keep them until they get boring, it doesn’t matter, but
homogeneity(-qua-outgroup)
is absolutely essential unless you want zero power, demotivated children and probable replacement. In other words, if you genuinely love your unique identity, you must understand that it’s a small branch of a larger tree, and there is already someone with an axe trying at the trunk beneath you.
Alliances are a very different thing than identity
I disagree, even the earliest identity in Europe was the conscious decision by an old tribal leader, and even the identity “Welsh” or “Scottish” is the consequence of an old alliance. And Anglo-Saxon and all the other hyphenated-Brits… The clearest example of an allegiant identity is maybe Italian, which had different languages and customs at the time of its unification. Really I think it’s some sort of intuitive utilitarian formula. You can interbreed your identity but it will eventually become irrelevant, or you can combine it prudently and have a defensible identity, not unlike a country — or a union of “Greek” states.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1yr ago
I have never heard of “heartlander identity”. What are its stories and who are its writers? Who are the big historical heroes? Are you sure you have enough manpower to lobby for your interests if the American upper class becomes less amenable to “heartlanders”? As a Cajun, you don’t want any unity with the French who share your heritage? How can your story be written so as to exclude the vast flood of central and south American migrants, or do you not care?
IMO this is a losing strategy. Take the Quebecoise — cool, they have their own unique post-French identity in a location they have control over (for now). What are their plans for the massive increase in Canadian Indians who may not relinquish their identity and who will control their parent-territory? They will go the way of the Samaritans who refused to unite with the twelve tribes. They will be a relic of the demographic museum like white south afrikkaners, with a timetable for their replacement. It’ll be like that Nazi cartoon of the last French white people. You’ll be the Kalash of Pakistan, temporarily tolerated by the unified Pashtun all around them.
I think this will happen to any small ethnicity which fails to adapt to global reality. Adaption is a reality of history which is why there was even a French people to begin with — a combined group of Frankish Germans, Celts, Roman ancestry. Imagine how silly you would be if you were the last remaining “heartlander” Celt in France, while Charlemagne rewrites the glory of your adapted relatives.
I don’t think this thesis pans out empirically. White Americans were quite fine with the idea of a unique white people and civilization pretty much from the get-go, so for hundreds of years, even while they retained their own special affinity to their unique ethnicities. When Europeans discussed colonization and their own continent in the 18th through early 20th century, they were always clear to bind Europeans together into a whole, separated from others. They may at times have placed special “powers” upon the Germany-derived (Saxons), but when speaking about the world they always divided white from other groups. All of this happened organically, which signals that there is an organic delineation that is intuitively obvious when comparing global populations. You simply don’t see an organic other-ization of whites until you get to edge cases like the most Africanized area of Sicily or the North Africa.
Your example of sunni and shia don’t make sense in the context of America where there are hundreds of Arab-specific or Muslim-specific advocacy groups with storytellers. Of course they have serious infighting between them, as does even the most unified people like Israel today with the Haredi. But when it comes to establishing a powerbase in America, they unify and unify their stories. You see the same when it comes to anti-Israelism in the Middle East: Hamas is Sunni, funded by the Shia stronghold. Even the Jewish people were once and still are different tribes, the Cohen tribe or the Ashkenazi/Sephardic division. Asians in America have Asian organizations like AAAJ with revenue in millions and they have a truly fictitious category, combining Hawaiians, Pacific Islanders, and Arabs.
So it’s just a mistake to confuse ethnicity with race here. Europeans have always defined themselves as a single people against the other peoples of the world, and this does not exclude predilection to unique identifiers. What it comes down to is the consequence you want. Do you think it is the optimal strategy to cling to a British identity and exclude your cousins, when the other peoples of the world are binding together all of their cousins to position themselves better in the longrun? Alliances are as old as time.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1yr ago
Alright, but what I am trying to get at is what you intend your story to be. Is this a single-family story? Do you intend to somehow keep your ethnic-specific identity eg as an Irishman?
But that applies to everyone. A group story needs to make the group’s struggles out as special. I think every non-white group in America has a story that is utilized by the competitive PMC class, even great oppressors in history (the Arabs) can complain about the history of colonialism and even complain about post-9/11 discrimination. High-caste Indians in the UK may complain about colonialism. Etc.
These are highly motivating: “I have been unjustly oppressed and attacked by you — I am a moral sympathetic character whom God likes more than you — and yet here I am succeeding wildly in spite of this, with my guiltless and pure repute. [Implied: you must really suck, white folks, because not only did you take my wealth and abuse me, but I perform better than you in spite of your corrupt advantage]”.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1yr ago
I see where you come from, but how can you devise a captivating and holistic identity which specifically excludes red tribe? And while you may not like them now, perhaps you would like red tribe if they stopped behaving self-destructively?
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1yr ago
It doesn’t bother you that your children and great grandchildren will face a worsened quality of life as a result? They will be confronted with their “character” written in the stories of others and, consciously or unconsciously, lose motivation. Their social and career outcomes will be worse. Other groups have perceived the vast benefit of monolithizing related tribes into one single group, and there are no signs of this slowing down.
I would also say: it’s dubious that humans can even replace a positive tribal story with something else. This seems ingrained in the same way that belonging to a tribe is ingrained. “Being really good at math” is not a sufficient plotline to make up for an empowering origin and destiny.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1yr ago
He blatantly refused to answer some questions
This is an excellent debate strategy. You have a limited amount of time to express your ideology and there’s no reason to stay within the fictitious drawn square that CNN places you in. Putin and J6 are not serious questions, I don’t think, but rather attempts to remind the viewer of Trump Bad.
just incoherent. It's like if a lobotomized chatGPT was told to act like Trump
I’m surprised you believe that. I went into the debate thinking Trump would do badly but he came out strong and quick-witted. His reaction time to questions was immediate.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1yr ago
You can’t make a captivating story out of just that. A truly captivating story needs a protagonist who suffers, especially unjustly. All of the most powerful social-organizing stories have this component. You read it in Exodus, the Gospel, in French revolutionary literature, in both communism and nazism (not that these are good but they were powerful movements), in China’s century of humiliation.
Victimhood is a key element to any group’s story because it increases intragroup ties, it inoculates against catastrophe (you won’t always be great), and it prevents emotions from being taken advantage of by outside forces. You have to still have an element of greatness and destiny, but a victimhood and overcoming component is essential.
Folklore for White Folk: stories for wypipo to meet the world?
Humans are driven by stories. Stories establish the legitimacy of rulers when hearkened back to legend, they establish sympathy with average voters via fictionalized humble origins, they motivate soldiers to fight against impossible odds and bind solitary faces into a single fasces. No nation or people have ever been able to cooperate or dominate without apportioning huge sums to the Storyteller Class: poets, priests, historians, dramatists, civic artists, on and on. The wars going on in the world today show the necessity of storytelling. When the Russian president had time to propagandize to the American public in his Tucker interview, he starts with half an hour of storytelling, selecting an arrangement of events to best suit his purpose. When the Ukrainians needed to motivate their countrymen to fight, they recruit the cosmic Star Wars actors to drench themselves in meaning. In the Holy Land, stories and religion meld together to incentivize soldiers and martyrs.
Stories legitimize and empower a group’s existence, and not just their present existence but their future. The Arab world, the Chinese and Japanese nations, the African tribes, the Native Americans, the Black Americans, the Mexicans — every group uses stories. There is no need for them to justify their use. So what of the children of Europe? What should we make of their folklore today?
Unused to unpleasantness (more than unused to it— racial hierarchies tell white people that they are entitled to peace and deference), they lack the "racial stamina" to engage in difficult conversations. This leads them to respond to "racial triggers"—the show "Dear White People," the term "wypipo"-with "emotions such as anger, fear and guilt," DiAngelo writes, "and behaviors such as argumentation, silence, and withdrawal from the stress-inducing situation." [White Fragility, the New Yorker]
The white story today is the one told in the classrooms of the elites, found in the the popular books and documentaries, and hawked by the newspapers. There is no need to overwrite and overwrought what has been written for years: slavery, colonization, oppression, and unearned privilege characterize the relationship between white people and others in the mainstream view. (Every story defines the relationship between the group and those outside of it. To the Romans, the others were barbarians in need of subjugation and command; to the Ancient Jews, the "nations" were in need of a light to enlighten them on G-dly matters. To the Chinese today, the Chinese are particularly ancient with superior cultural developments.) The white story is the only story in history which both subjugates a people to an eternally lesser reputation and yet believed by those it subjugates. It is an anomalously demotivating story.
But can we say that the white story transformed into something more global? Can’t the white American story, for example, just be the American story? Nope. If you relinquish the use of a powerful tool while the other groups around you continue to use the tool, you have permanently reduced your ability at a pure loss to yourself. Wokism has died down in public discourse, but it has not diminished its institutional potency, and there’s no guarantee it will not return in double force. There are still hundreds, thousands, of ethnocentric advocacy groups which promote their own empowering story from middle school to the halls of FAANG. Relinquishing your power can work when everyone else is on board, like with nuclear weapons, but it does not work when others are writing you in as the bad guy in their book. Black Americans will continue their storywriting, new Indian managers may continue to favor their own caste, the decades of liberal Reform Judaism are coming to an end, and China will continue trying to influence the Chinese Western population.
Relinquishing your power as a white person isn’t a noble deed when virtue is written by stories and you have burned down your library. No one will remember or care for your innoble sacrifice — certainly not God, the great storyteller who commands his children to write the best stories, even sacrificing their own children in the process. Neither will your non-white great grandchild care, who will despise you because of a story they read, and who — like the Brazilian — may have their craniums measured to see if they are non-white enough to secure a university spot. You may identify yourself as “merely American” or “merely a man”, but the Americans around you do not feel that way and neither do the mass of man on earth. Show me a successful nation in history filled with men — there is none, only those filled with particular peoples with particular stories.
Failing to establish a story means that white children will be passed up for jobs by both non-white and white employers. It means that the person who judges his college application will deduce points in favor of (perhaps) a wealthy Nigerian scion. It means that he will be disinherited even from “secular” storytelling institutions, as we see with the recent Disney leak by Project Veritas. If your kin happens to be trapped in a warzone, a Sikh leader of your country may direct the military to save foreign Sikhs rather than his own countrymen, as we read in Canada today. The stakes are significant and concrete.
“Isn’t it sufficient to dispel the bad stories?”, it may be asked, and the answer is a clear negative. Which restaurant would you patronize, the one which shows you its great features, or the one that stammers about how the rumors of rat infestation and food poisoning are exaggerated? Who would you rather go on a date with, the one who presents their best self or the one who tells you that they certainly don’t have AIDS? Even to attempt to dispel a bad story puts you in a significantly worse position than before. This is a dark art of discourse, typified in the old question asked of politicians: “how often do you beat your wife?”. Attaching a bad story to a person’s connotation, even when obviously false, harms the connotation. There’s a whole world of irrational but potent emotional alchemy that occurs when one stimuli is associated with a different stimuli of positive or negative valence. If I have you smell lavender and then scream at you, you now slightly dislike lavender even if you don’t realize it. If I do this repeatedly, you will learn to hate lavender. You say “white people were not the only slavers”, your children hear “white people as a conceptual space are associated with oppression and are implicitly negatively evaluated”. If you don’t believe me, tell your girlfriend “you do not look fat and disgusting” whenever she wears her favorite dress.
Whypeople
The cure for this social disease is for whites to rediscover their birthright as storytellers: to write their why, proudly and independently. Storytelling is their manifest destiny, a great continent that awaits their traversal. It is territory uncharted, constellations yet connected. It’s the plot to reality’s RPG and your bloodline’s DnD campaign. It’s the story old men tell their children as a sense of security and motivation shines from their face. “What is the story that most motivates my kin” is the story that must be told, for no other reasons than that it can be, because others do their own, because now it’s a competition, and because it’s ultimately fun.
The best story, IMO, wouldn’t focus on the deeds of white folk. Claims of having written the best literature or music, or having erected the greatest architecture, did not stop the Romans from asserting superiority over Greeks while appropriating all of their own inventions. Wars and conquest are also insufficient grounds for a story. The best story is captivating and shows the protagonist overcoming adversity to secure something they rightfully deserve. There are a number of ways to weave a purely secular story for the children of Europe. Does the European first domesticating dogs show his unwavering loyalty to his brethren? I don’t know, but it is pleasant to imagine. Did White people flee Africa because of oppression only to bear with the brutal cold and develop a unique nature through overcoming nature herself? It’s something you can imagine. Does their ability to drink milk show their unusual innocence and love for women? Sure, why not. Have white people the spotless reputation that has been wrongfully blackened by corrupt and wicked people? These are ingredients, I am not a chef. But any positive story — no matter how insane — is better than a lack of story and certainly better than a negative story. All of the peoples of the world when saying their own name feel a sense of pride, and it’s absurd to imagine that there should be an exception to that rule.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1yr ago
Might the emphasis that certain cultures place on family and clan commitment inadvertently cause selfish / sociopathic genes to flourish? If you have children with varying levels of sociopathy, then the most sociopathic of kin would benefit from the activity of the least sociopathic of kin, as they are both morally incentivized to benefit the family or clan as a whole, but the sociopathic one is a free-rider. If instead you have a culture without family or clan commitment, and instead relative free association, then the most-empathic / least-sociopathic progeny can form mutually beneficial “societies-in-miniature” with those from other families and clans, provided they have some method of weeding out free-riders and the hidden sociopathic. I think we could imagine such a shift happening when religious communities colonized North America. If this phenomenon is legitimate then it would weed out the sociopathic across generations.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1yr ago
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1yr ago
Any twin studies on effect of poverty on criminality?
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1yr ago
It’s intrinsically enjoyable to collect things just as a human instinct, hence why so many video games have a collection feature. For those old people, it’s likely two things combined: an enjoyment of the pattern of seeking for an item (this is enjoyable even just for seashells on the beach), and then having memories attached to the items that they don’t want to lose
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1yr ago
I recall a Greek(?) myth about a demigod(?) who lived an idyllic life of hunting all day and then enjoying a meal from his hunt in the evening. Anyone know what it could be?
Also, does anyone have a favorite myth regarding a paradisal or ideal state for humans?
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1yr ago
For sure in the US. But the thought experiment is also interesting from the standpoint of measuring intranational quality of life and proposing higher taxation. If, at the greatest extreme, a person would sacrifice two thirds of his extraneous income (after housing/food) in order to live in this utopian social environment, then we really ought to be comparing social environments instead of economies when considering quality of life between nations and states. And this probably has some moral application to taxing the wealthy more.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1yr ago
How much of a pay decrement would you take if —
-
you never have to worry about school quality, healthcare, crime, or drug abuse among your children
-
the area where you work is beautiful and stress-reducing
-
you can walk a pleasant street to obtain the necessities of life
-
the people who you meet daily are kind and have good etiquette
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1yr ago
I found this stuff:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryan_certificate
https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/aryan-1 (the official holocaust encyclopedia)
Popularly, however, it continued to be used inside and outside of Germany to refer not only to Germans, but also to other European nationalities, such as Italians, Norwegians, and Croatians. Although Poles, Russians, and some other Slavs suffered brutal persecution under Nazi rule, they were considered to be "Aryans." Race scientists and anthropologists too considered Slavs to be composed of the same races, including Nordic, as Germans. They were deemed to be of related blood.
However in Mein Kampf we find:
By handing Russia to Bolshevism, it robbed the Russian nation of that intelligentsia which previously brought about and guaranteed it existence as a state. For the organization of a Russian state formation was not the result of the political abilities of the Slavs in Russia, but only a wonderful example of the state-forming efficacy of the German element in an inferior race. Numerous mighty empires on earth have been created in this way. Lower nations led by Germanic organizers and overlords have more than once grown to be mighty state formations and have endured as long as the racial nucleus of the creative state race had maintained itself. For centuries Russia drew nourishment from this Germanic nucleus of its upper stata. Today it can be regarded as almost totally exterminated....
I think the questions are, “did Nazis consider Slavs more inferior than was normal to the 20th century,” “did Nazis consider Slavs sufficiently inferior that their conduct in war was motivated on racial superiority”. You probably have to also consider that dehumanization is common to war. Even today, Israeli politicians are calling the Palestinians “seeds of Amalek”, and both Ukrainians and Russians are dehumanizing each other, and Americans pretty much dehumanized the Pashtuns as barbaric savages stuck in the past.
IMO heroes are not quite the issue. The Left has heroes, they are just continually written into and out of the political story. Their heroes come and go like musical productions. Obama was a hero, now he is not, and AOC is a hero for those who “subscribe” to her but one day she won’t be. What the Left doesn’t have is any permanent hero, definitely not any old white ones from the white tradition. I mean… Marx? I don’t know. The parasocial relationship that young left Americans have with Hasanabi is pretty indicative of “hero worship” — watching for hours, imitating, buying merch, as an example.
My apolitical opinion on hero worship is that it’s an essential biological feature of humans that will never go away, because it’s shared social imitation. Ideally we should appreciate the specific virtues of specific heroes and not care about about the rest, and possess a large repertoire of heroes to pull from. For a culture, it’s optimal to have a number of heroes as points of reference in conversation and as stories for the young and as “self-checkups” for our own conduct — that’s kind of what the medieval virtues were all about.
More options
Context Copy link