@crushedoranges's banner p

crushedoranges

Russia and Ukraine are two butch lesbians fighting over a condom

1 follower   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 04 19:35:13 UTC

				

User ID: 111

crushedoranges

Russia and Ukraine are two butch lesbians fighting over a condom

1 follower   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 04 19:35:13 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 111

It boils my piss when people throw out accusations at people in the Motte in the general sense. If you're going to smear a 'not insignificant' fraction of his fellow partisans in this community as misogynists, you better have everything cut and dry or I'm going to assume you're talking shit. Name names.

If the value of your house is literally one dollar and you have a 3k mortgage, you walk away from it and the bank can have your worthless house. This happened a lot in the 2008 crash. They call it being underwater in a mortgage. Obviously the value of your house is very important!

You're being a bit silly, aren't you? Do you use this logic for cars? Would you be okay me taking a sledgehammer to your vehicle's body work? Maybe I could go to your house and shit in the chimney. You wouldn't feel poorer, would you? You still have 7k a month to spend!

Ah, whoops! My bad.

People who own houses often have it as their primary asset. Reducing the value of real estate is, in a very real sense, making them poorer. And people who own homes vote.

The American Dream is basically 'what if everyone was part of the land-owning class?' and then people are surprised that as a newly endowed member of that class, they are opposed to the renting class and new buyers. Well, no shit! You've spent a great amount of government subsidy to align their interests in that way.

Trump is just being honest in that he is siding with the landowners. Anyone who is an advocate for reducing the price of housing but isn't for building new construction is a liar who is a part of the problem. Their best ideas for reducing the price are to subsidize the demand and this is why structural reform is impossible.

Yes, of course. I won't bring it up again. Just wanted to get it off my chest.

I feel like I'm back in high school where both parties are punished, irrespective of actual fault. Obviously he was being deliberately obtuse, back then. Several commentors (yourself included) spoke out about it!

If there is a different read for 'So are you saying you're a Nazi then?', magickittycat hasn't explained themselves. They flounced. And now they come back, calling the Motte full of overtly online people. What ground does he have to stand on? The pot calling the kettle black? Isn't he making a generalized statement about a group that is an insult to everyone here? That really gets my goat. It violates multiple site rules on good faith, generalizations, and just manners in general. It's sour grapes from people who lose arguments.

I'll drop it, but it really annoys me that I can get dinged for personal attacks but anyone - even moderators! - can go 'yeah, this site is full of terminally onlines/partisan hacks/trolls' etc. It's sneering. If I called magickittycat terminally online, that would be a personal attack. But if they call everyone talking here terminally online, they can get away with it. Because they didn't single out anyone specific. He can be lazy and slur my entire partisan side as Nazis and I have to sit here and take it. Because ha ha, zinger. Just a joke. Why can't you take a joke?

No. Either Nazis are a serious subject out of the Overton Window, or I can break out the Nazi jokes, and believe me: my arsenal is great and terrible. I know you just want to end the argument and get it out the moderation queue, but that is specifically what set me off.

No, the average American will laugh at you because leftists have been calling every conservative a Nazi since approximately forever.
Your shrill shrieking has no more power. You are still crying wolf, and no ones hears it. Go on. Call me a Nazi some more. What should be done with 'Nazis', oh dark hinter? You didn't answer that question last time.

I make a commitment now: to continually remind the Motte of your complete lack of credibility, honesty, and good faith because you deserve it. I will hold you to account for what you have said because it is easy and you are ridiculous.

"Ha ha, I was only calling you a Nazi as a joke!"

Oh, so it's okay to joke about Nazis now. I will keep this in mind.

I will quote you directly. The passive voice does not exonerate you. Your continued shamelessness in the face of your own words only proves my point.

I will quote Amadan:

saying you understand why someone feels the way they do does not necessarily mean you feel the same way. That is in fact one of the purposes of the Motte, to explicate your viewpoint in a way that people who don't share it can understand why you hold it.

And you still don't seem to understand that. Nothing has changed. I know you're coping and seething and still calling everyone that disagrees with you a Nazi. I bring it up just in case anyone accidentally takes you seriously.

I wasn't going to say anything, but you're the one who called me a Nazi, and I want to get ahead of your pedantry and say that you pretending to be a moderate is a pretense no one believes. Your condescending argument is an insincere tactic. You would never make an appeal to moderation for any of the left's sacred cows.

And then you insult the users of the Motte. You really saying that the people around here are worse than Reddit? Than Facebook? Than X, than 4chan? Where is this mythical bar of virtue that we fall short of? Aren't you in this picture, Mr. Calls Other People Nazis? Aren't you equally shitting up discourse?

Get off your high horse, man.

What do you think a sanctuary city is?

I agree that not going after hotels and restaurants and farms for illegal labor is hypocrisy. But those in favor of remigration and deportations of such are not in the Trump administration: presumably, he is obliged to the business part of the coalition. This is not a happy marriage. But let it not be said that the good be the enemy of the perfect. If the current spectacle justifies building up the infrastructure so that such a future policy shift is feasible, I'm okay with it.

"It's a tense, dangerous situation, where someone may have just been killed. You know what would help? Me screaming into a man's ear hysterically!"

In an old movie, a man slapping a woman for being emotional comes off as sexist, but perhaps it's just received knowledge from thousands of years of women screaming their heads off and making things worse. Perhaps they were onto something.

But that line of argument basically goes 'the left can veto any right immigration policy enforcement with a heckler's veto', because they'll never cooperate with the right, ever, even when they lose elections.

My critique is that not only are these campaigns to correct problems wrongheaded and ineffective, they're of the long-term sort that expose the systemic problems of the party. Namely, that the party commands too much from the top-down. Party planners wanted to correct the birth rate to avert Malthusian catastrophe and did so in a inhuman and vicious matter. Now, all of those girls they aborted are a haunting hole in the demography. The slightest concern for the environment or health regulation could have forestalled disaster and plague. But it didn't happen.

Not to say that this doesn't happen in the West. But the corrective mechanisms in an authoritarian society are simply too slow to react to largely foreseeable problems. No doubt the next set of existential crises are lurking about, unchecked, because to point them out would be embarrassing to the local politicians - and to the party, by proxy.

This does not sound like a communist, technocratic government where pragmatism dominates. This is the rot of the Soviet Union - a bureaucracy and party apparatus who can only react and not proactively solve problems. I wish for the best for my countrymen. I hope they prosper to provide a second pole if America should falter. But I enjoy western liberal norms, and I'm not willing to oblige myself to the strong authority of a state. So I'm stuck in an uncomfortable place.

Ah well. My opinion doesn't really matter.

The problem is that those subsidies run up against the the bubble that is the Chinese housing market. To be married as a man in China requires that you have a property to even compete. More money is useful for those already planning families but does nothing to make men be capable of marriage.

I wouldn't be so opposed to the Communist party if they demonstrated technocratic chops to govern. But even if you look at the official figures, the birth rate and the demographic pyramid scream mismanagement. I don't know how people can sell Chinese technocrats as wise and farsighted luminaries when it's obvious they have the same short-term incentives that all politicians share. At least the West has the excuse that democracies elect feckless and shortsighted leaders. What's China's excuse for half a billion pensioners in 2100?

And so far, the solution it seems is to pretend it doesn't exist: to become South Korea with nukes with a quarter of the GDP per capita.

What the fuck are you talking about?

I am Chinese. I have Canadian citizenship, but that makes me no more a Canadian than a dog born in a stable a horse. And my countrymen see me in this way, as well.

You can't trick me out of my ethnic identification or nationality with your wordcel ramblings. If you want to tell me that I'm not a real Chinese because I don't share your Fifty Cent army opinions, you can jump off a cliff.

You could write a book about it, but let me condense my concerns into three points.

A) Gross materialism and an obsession with wealth. If you think Americans are disgusting in greed and consumerism, they have nothing on the Chinese. You would think that a communist state would have a more egalitarian ethos, but mainlanders judge very sharply on money and class. When you obliterate traditional mores and religion, what you are left with is a class of hustlers who have no shame or dignity.

B) Placing face over truth. Nearly all Eastern cultures have this to some extent, but China will never foster an intellectual or artistic scene that is worth a damn if the powers that be only allow critique for the purpose of internal power struggle. When you embrace lying to preserve the reputation of your superiors, you move away from the Enlightenment and sink into oriental despotism.

C) Destroying the environment. I'm not a green, but poisoning the water table, scouring the oceans clean of life, and pumping unfiltered toxins into the air is not a sign of a rational or scientific government. This casual disregard for their own stewardship extends to the people as well (baby formula being the most significant, but SARS and COVID are there, too.)

All of these things are bad, and will destroy China if allowed to continue unabated, but the party has shown no signs of even recognizing that these are problems.

I can understand it, but there is a considerable risk from switching from a flawed democracy as a master to an autocratic communist state. If the Europeans or Canada are complaining about human rights and authoritarianism, then taking China as a master is not an improvement.

As an actual Chinese I can tell you for sure that my Chinese-ness is not dependant on the papers I have or the country I live in, and having an outsider tell me I'm not is hilarious. I'm not a Changstan or a weird cultist, either, but having a foreigner lecture me on my own ethnic homeland is rich. You think you know things but you really don't. Sinophillic russian you may be, you want to believe the best of China to grind an axe against the west. You will be disappointed, in the end.

I don't like you, not because you're Indian, but because you're literally the meme that goes 'Hello, let me explain to you what being an Westerner is and how this definition includes me'. No, you don't get to be spiritually western until you've abandoned your parochial ideas and pagan beliefs back in the old country. You are a outsider trying to rules lawyer creeds and legalities but no matter how many pieces of paper you show me, your behavior and attitude will permanently make you an outsider - even if you lived here for a thousand years.

Just drop it. Accept that you'll be seen as a foreigner for a generation or two. Then no one will care. No one cares about Koreans or the Vietnamese or the Hmong. Just stop whining about it. But if you believe you are owed apologies for being Indian, then you'll be waiting until the second coming of Christ.

I am actually Chinese and China is nowhere as great as you think it is. 99% of what is written about China in English is narrative and lies, and about 85% of Chinese-language content about China is the same. So if you are a foreigner making your opinion on China's tightly controlled PR vs the open media of the West that has its laundry hanged out to dry, and siding with China, you're just as foolish as the pro-Soviet boosters in the NYT who didn't see the Holodomor.

I seem to recall one of our own being unfairly profiled as Israeli agent, but at this point, I have to ask. Are you an agent of the People's Republic of China, or have any relation to a corporation that does extensive business with them? Or are you some variant of Maoist Third Worldist?

Note that there's nothing wrong with being any of those things, but the pretense of being a neutral observer chuffing about American degeneracy is wearing thin. Please explain why you believe the communists in China are more trustworthy partners that the Americans.

Rubio publicly supported Vance as Trump's successor a while ago on Fox News. Vance isn't being discarded for anything (he just isn't welcome at a European meetup.)