crushedoranges
No bio...
User ID: 111
crushedoranges
1yr ago
From what I can tell it is so undeniably woke in that it effectively sets up a reverse caste system, enshrined into the law.
And since South America lacks the advanced institutions of the cathedral to implement this outside of the viewpoint of the majority, the Chileans have to write it into constitutional law - and exposed to the light of democracy, it withers and dies like a vampire.
crushedoranges
1yr ago
I'm all for it, but stuffing yourself in a obscurantist cubbyhole is a bad way to keep abreast of the trends of popular culture. Being aware of what normies consume is a great way to ascertain the valence of what is allowed to be believed.
crushedoranges
1yr ago
Blue Tribe has an anti-conspicious consumption bias, partly for Gaia-worshipping, and partly because flaunting wealth is very Trump and anything that can be remotely considered to be Trump is bad.
But surprise, surprise, that doesn't stop anyone from using wealth to flaunt status! You may notice a certain lifestylism by those who proclaim themselves liberal and socialist and egalitarian. Hobbies like travel, as you said, can cost an absolute fortune, while the person in question looks like a scruffy pleb. 'Minimalist' lifestyles that rely on the labor and effort of a half-dozen people, behind the scenes. Showing off the install of the solar panels on your house. Long hikes on the Appalachian trail (with equipment worth thousands of dollars.)
It turns out it is quite expensive to look authentically working-class. Blue Tribe elite try their darndest to not look like what they really are but like everything that exists, it is a commodity, sold at Whole Foods, the North Face, and your local gastropub.
crushedoranges
1yr ago
There was an article in the constitution that had a provision for a separate system (justice, medical, schooling) for the Mapuche people - which, at best, would be Jim Crow. At worst, it would be the effective division of the country on ethnic grounds.
And that's not even the worst of it, really. The whole thing reads like a wish list of the globalist progressive left, and what's even worse is that it's 178 pages long with 378 articles. Such a byzantine constitution would be contested at every turn, and give way too much pressure on the weak legal institutions to adjudicate well... everything. The Economist does a pretty [good] (https://archive.ph/wbzDZ) write up on it.
crushedoranges
1yr ago
It is my position that those policies create a caste system in the more affluent West as well - nakedly open racial preference in service of social justice is just as abhorrent as it is in the service of the majority, like in Malaysia. Either way, you're creating distorted incentives that are rife for corruption and nepotism.
To take a unorthodox (and decidedly un-feminist) perspective on the matter: elite men.
Feminism is a product of industrial civilization. It is inherently bourgeoise in origin: look up the lists of suffragettes and their ranks are plucked mostly from the emerging middle-class. In this general atmosphere of awakening political consciousness, a small group of women desired to have the political rights of rich men. Keep in mind that universal male suffrage was in the process of rolling out around the world: female suffrage was only a natural evolution of this if you subscribe to Whig history!
The anti-suffragettes (cut out of the historical narrative) correctly saw this as dividing the vote of a household, of fragmenting the family unit, and bringing politics into the realm of the home. And the first legislative policy that could be said to laid at the feet of these suffragette organizations in America? Prohibition.
There are always those who scheme of changing the nature of the electorate to accomplish their policy goals - rather than convincing the existing demos of the necessity for change. The further a woman is 'liberated' from structures of faith, tribe, and family, the more energy can be devoted to political endeavors. A politician could hardly care that his female constituents are unhappy or are childless - in the atomized, liberal worldview, she is only as valuable as her vote, and as a foot soldier for the causes of the day. The women who would form the base of community and social life are instead cannibalized into the great Molochian machine of modernity, a bonfire of social capital.
It is ultimately a project to alienate woman from loving their families, their neighbors, the people they live with. And for what? To throw them into a cosmic conflict against a perverse scapegoat of the hated masculine - a struggle that is eternal as it is unwinnable. And it is supported in the west because it creates a potent voting bloc to hammer plebian men into submission. It is not elite women who are living lives of independence from men: they get married as quickly as possible and raise their children with all the resources that they can bring to bear. By supporting ever further Hobbesian freedom into insanity, elite men gain a patina of virtue. They promulgate values that they do not personally practice: in addition to gaining a harem of strivers from the middle-class of which he can casually discard at a whim.
crushedoranges
1yr ago
Don't give them too much credit.
The attention once given to family and children has been re-invested into politics and labor. That's the logic of bourgeoise democracy: every possible constituency must be broken up and dissolved into its smallest parts, so that they may be set against each other in the war of all versus all.
Women are just such a potent bloc that it is impossible to leave them politically inactive. As the largest part of a potential demos that can be activated, elites around the world came to the same conclusion independently: it was expedient to support feminism in support of their aims.
But it is a gamble that has increasingly diminishing returns. You can say that every wave of feminism is an attempt to increase the radicalization of women and increase their engagement with politics and the work force. But there is only so much you can socially engineer - and so much consciousness you can dump into an overloaded mind - before the birth rates plummet for good.
Because of political expediency, women were not so much freed from the home as pushed out of it, and now it is impossible for blue and white collar women to start a family with any sort of timeliness. It was not to their benefit, or to society's benefit: and the same geniuses behind these sociological schemes now seek to outsource birthing to the third world to make up for their own injuries to women as a sex.
It will not end well.
crushedoranges
1yr ago
Japan comes to the rescue: just call them futanari and be done with it. :P
crushedoranges
1yr ago
The term 'newhalf' is workable. Although it refers to pre-op or non-transitioning ftms, it's suitably gender-neutral to be flipped about to 'reverse newhalf' to gain the same meaning.
Honestly, Japan's fetish porn community comes up with perfectly functional technical terms that aren't dripping with ideology, so perhaps we should outsource this to them in general.
crushedoranges
1yr ago
But wealth is a social construct. You could give a monkey a hundred bananas and he may lord it over his peers, using it to coerce sexual favors and social position - but he couldn't imagine having a million bananas, more than he could ever eat, or create a system of classes dependent on banana-ownership, or leverage his bananas into purchasing banana plantations in El Salvador.
If wealth is real, it has a quality of subjective realness that only exist in human societies.
crushedoranges
1yr ago
But you didn't use your childhood games - which are arguably about as legitimate as a base of identity as any of these frauds - for financial benefit, for a political soapbox, to lambast the why-tie on their various political and social sins. It is on a grand scale the same crime as forum sock-puppeting, but with actual stakes. They are using the trappings of another ethnic group that others sympathize with for clout and platform.
crushedoranges
1yr ago
I've noticed that terminally online (and dishonest) leftists can jump into the bailey of 'your valid and rigorous critique of x does not apply to y' because Marxism describes socialism as a stage of communism, or socialism is the end state of communism, or to be left is to be socialist, or the only true leftists are communist...
What you see that is an error of impreciseness is more of an general fly-swatter to those arguments. You don't have to be an orthodox Marxist-Leninist to know what exactly we're talking about here.
crushedoranges
1yr ago
They're writing political screeds on obscure political forums out of the sight of the eye of Sauron.
Do you have something to tell the class?
crushedoranges
1yr ago
I know this is a tangent to what you're really talking about, but I have to say something about crypto. In short, there is a very short list of people less trustworthy than the Argentine government: the people who advocate for cryptocurrency are amongst them. The sort of people who hold a morbid fascination with the misery and suffering of others to further the adoption of their internet funcoins in the off chance they can offload their bags onto desperate people is profoundly evil.
Crypto is not a good store of value, or a currency. And anyone who says that it is you should be very wary of.
crushedoranges
1yr ago
Just because the Argentinian state is a known bad actor does not make any proposed alternative inherently better. I can point to any amount of rugpulls, from the original MT.Gox to the very recent Polaris to demonstrate that crypto is not safe.
I would ask you to assume good faith, that I am informed and I have good reason to believe in what I do. Then make an argument, if you believe I am wrong. For the same reason, I assume you have no position in cryptocurrency and are arguing purely on its technical and utilitarian merits.
To do otherwise would be a great conflict of interest.
crushedoranges
1yr ago
Is cryptocurrency a significant contributor to capital flight? It's hard to believe, when it can be legislated out of existence by the whim of the legislature. Is Russia using the technology to bypass western sanctions? Surely, if there is any use case for crypto, we would have seen it boom if it was an effective way to bypass Western capital controls.
In my view, it's a solution in search of a problem: nearly everything its advocates say it can do is already done and on a far more economical scale.
crushedoranges
1yr ago
I am of the opinion that stupid people, trusting people, and old people should be allowed to keep their money. It is not reasonable to transfer the burden of 'educating oneself' onto the general public when it comes to investments and finance. When a state turns the deposits in their national banks into worthless nothing, it is of course a wrong thing. It is also a wrong thing when sleazy cryptoscammers run off with all the investor's money.
It's not a young man's game anymore. A careless idiot degenerate gambler who loses his inheritance by blowing it on a shitcoin is highly unsympathetic. But you read the bankruptcy documents of these shams of companies, and you see the pure despair of the investors. They are men and women in their fifties and sixties, who were sold hopes and dreams of financial independence. They are ruined now, and it is unlikely they will find good employment: they will be working now until the day they die. You read about marriages falling apart, people losing their houses. These desperate, foolish letters begging the judge to be pushed to the front of the creditor line, when the truth is that there is no money at all. All they have are the worthless tokens on a server they can't even withdraw from. So much for the promise of a decentralized currency!
There is no protection against this, in the technology, in the services that have sprung up around it. It is as safe as a screaming buzz saw for the unwary. It is not their fault: they were deceived, by advocates who were full of themselves, who gladly pumped them up - but dumped them, and called them witless fools and rubes when they lost it all.
So I find it hard to argue on the 'merits' and 'technicalities' of cryptocurrency when it has created so much human suffering. You may be able to ignore it, but I can't.
crushedoranges
1yr ago
But that's not true, not in the least. If you are scammed in real life, you have several avenues of recourse, through the financial and legal systems. The very virtues crypto advocates praise (untrackability, anonymity, trustless systems) are exactly the qualities that make it possible for scams to be pulled off with incredible ease.
There are certainly those Don Quixotes who tilt at the windmill of the USD being a hegemonic currency, but that doesn't make alternatives to it better. If you create abusable tools, advocate for them, and don't tell naive newcomers of the dangers and only the benefits - you're more awful than you think. You don't get to walk away from the moral implications of your actions. You can't hide in the theoretical wonderlands and ignore how the implications of the technology come about in real life.
The devil isn't the inchoate maw that devours sinners at the bottom: he's the man who pushes a wavering soul at the edge.
crushedoranges
1yr ago
I disagree: and I think it's a fundamental difference in values that can't be overcome by argument. I think that the world would be a better place if people thought through the consequences of their actions. If you pour chemical waste into the water table, you recruit people into a cult, or you don't push a shopping cart back to the corral, it's not guiltlessness - it's malicious indifference. There's no legal liability, but morally it is abhorrent all the same.
crushedoranges
1yr ago
But my viewpoint is that cryptocurrency is a first order terrible thing, it is a banal evil like slash and burn agriculture, payday loans, etc. All the good it could possible do is corrupted by its incredible inefficiency and callous indifference to its own toxicity.
It is technology that is completely worthless, obsolete as it was theorized and definitely as it was implemented. Its only use I see is to extort the tears and sweat of the gullible and enrich the intelligent and evil. That some South Americans occasionally use it to buy USD is, in my mind, completely inconsequential.
Technology is not agnostic. It can be built to be vile. No amount of clever evasions and definitional wordplay can hide smug, self-satisfied, all-consuming avarice behind it all.
crushedoranges
1yr ago
How many smart actors are in political betting, anyway. I think it's mostly wishcasting by feverent partisans. It's best used as a gauge for enthusiasm of the core base. Ceremonially igniting your cash on a bonfire to signal faith in your tribe is worth something (and if you actually win, bonus!)
I bet in antiquity, people would watch the smoke rising from the temples to gauge which Babylonian cult was on the ascendency. It's much the same here.
crushedoranges
1yr ago
At the simplest level of understanding, inflation is the consequence of too much money chasing too few goods.
Since none of us are Scrooge McDuck, we don't have a need for money: we want the goods that money represents.
An NrX solution would be to appoint Jeff Bezos as a Czar of logistics with the intent of increasing supply. I would nationalize all food banks and related charities, and import German managers from Aldi to coordinate them. I would create biblical-scale, Josephian government granaries that are needlessly large - seven years worth? - enough to convince even the most ardent hoarder that there is a lot of goods to be had.
I would also enlarge the strategic fossil fuel reserve and convince oil companies to invest in extraction with a fixed, contracted price. Housing is more difficult, but the creation of a state-based stockpile of common building materials - ensuring a stable price for construction - would also work, too.
The best thing about all of these agencies is that their mission is very defined: and can be phased out when the need passes.
Oh, boy, it's time for the annual political spin and deflection season!
I'm going to dispense with any poll-tracking or statistic-tealeaf-reading and go with my gut here. I think the Republicans will gain the senate while Dems squeak by in the house, making no one happy and reverting the system back to the 2nd-term Obama status quo. This is good for dramacoin. Nothing makes Americans more politically engaged when their legislature starts throwing DNS errors. The imperial presidency grinds on...
'22 is only significant, in my mind, as the pre-season for Trump Strikes Back '24. Fetterman and Oz is a preview of a greater contest, between a mental invalid and a scruple-less grifter. As much as my little accelerationist heart quivers at the idea of the VP debating Trump, it's most likely that we are witnessing the Last of the Boomer Civic Nationalists fight it out. The last of the people who value a liberal rules-based international order will croak in the next eight years.
God help us all.
Who will gain control of America's imperial hegemonic power? The right-populists, or the left-populists? Will the civil war be averted for another generation, or will it happen in my lifetime? The fate of the nation may very well be decided on which geriatric old man has a fatal stroke first. What you see today in politics - the insanity, the terror - this is not the nadir of the republic's fortunes: it is merely the threshold unto the abyss.
In time, we will look upon the misfortunes of our day as a golden age lost to time and tragedy.
But perhaps it doesn't matter. Perhaps electing corpses is the future of American politics. We have the technology to continue the life of brain-dead patients indefinitely. In the Oval Office, there is a mighty chair beneath the Resolute Desk, a Golden Throne, that will sustain the president's life for as long as it needs to be. A thousand infants are sacrificed each year to feed the device's need for adenochrome, perpetuating the beacon of boomer power from Washington, DC forever.
Anything to avoid electing someone from Gen X.
Gack, my memory is hazy. You are correct.
I'll leave the mistake as it is, as a mea culpa, but I believe the rest is essentially true.
There's a certain degree of wokeness to all modern media of which must be tolerated, but RoP is where I draw the line.
I don't like series which disrespects its core material, its literary fanbase, which sneers on twitter and all of the fashionable places to mine for engagement eyeballs. It may be a perfectly servicable show but I hate the modern hype engine that intentionally turns up its nose at the nerds to try and gain cachet with an audience that doesn't even exist.
More options
Context Copy link