drmanhattan16
No bio...
User ID: 640
drmanhattan16
2mo ago
Because "Elections are by their nature a contested environment"
So is capitalism. I don't see that getting in the way of two competing rational capitalists being unable to agree to facts.
Because "the purpose of an election is not to produce a "true" or "accurate" result. It is to produce a clear result that the candidates (and their voters) can accept as legitimate, including the ones who lost."
You misunderstood what I was saying. I wasn't arguing about why we have elections, I was arguing about how we understand if the procedure/process was followed conditional on our agreement to such a process. Basically, I reject the notion that the election process' outcome doesn't need to be truthful just because the real contention is the policies both sides want.
drmanhattan16
4mo ago
Sure. What is fundamentally predatory about adult-child or adult-teenager sex which couldn't be negated if neither party is sexually interested in the other?
drmanhattan16
5mo ago
I'm not entirely sure that's the reasoning behind the original comment. This site has quite a few people who seem unwilling or outright incapable of speaking about trans people without words or a tone of deep disgust. Note that joyful didn't say "Why do you use the pronoun she for a male?", but rather "why do you use the pronoun she for a male pedophile?" This should increase the likelihood of this being a disgust response in our eyes.
But even we granted that this is just about objective reality, it wouldn't have an impact on pronoun policy. There is no inconsistency between your view and the idea that one should respect the pronouns of others.
drmanhattan16
10mo ago
Ah yes, how could I forget to celebrate bad things happening to people who disagree with me? Truly, not a sign that every slight lives rent-free in my head.
drmanhattan16
10mo ago
But when they're going all-out on "We cast a BLACK actress" then it's not about "this is the best actress for the role", it's about a different set of values.
Yes, as I said, progressives are de facto hypocritical on this topic. But this selective raceblindness can and probably is still out of a genuinely-held if compartmentalized belief that race doesn't matter to the character, so there's a free lunch to be had in also promoting an IRL social goal.
People keep asserting maliciousness, that's what I don't like.
drmanhattan16
10mo ago
Esmeralda was a white girl raised by gypsies in the book, but in modern productions she must always be a person of color. There were a bunch of angry articles written a while back after a college production of Hunchback cast a white girl as Esmeralda.
Sorry, which college production? When I search for this, I find a case of this happening in a high school. Moreover, how many people have even read Hunchback compared to seen the Disney film, in which Esmeralda was decidedly not white? In contrast, the Peter Jackson films are still the way most if not all people have engaged with LOTR at a first pass.
drmanhattan16
10mo ago
The Little Mermaid is another example of what I'm talking about. I don't know what the Star Wars example is.
drmanhattan16
10mo ago
What do you mean by setting? I doubt you mean the actual geography.
drmanhattan16
1yr ago
Also, have you seen how many subs some of the powermods moderate? No one functional has that much free time.
Are we talking about powermods or mods in general? The original comment didn't say powermods. I agree that those people are more suspect in general - GallowBoob's deletion of critical posts and articles, the way that criticism of chtorr's removal of Marsey was itself removed, etc. But they don't constitute all mods by definition. But I know that GallowBoob gets paids for shilling, and getting paid to be an influencer isn't unheard of.
Progressive activists absolutely have sought out moderations position on reddit.
Again, are we talking mods or powermods? Pick one and show me proof that this is being done out of service to the ideology.
drmanhattan16
1yr ago
It has to be proven on a case-by-case basis is my point. If someone wants to argue that the industry is signaling its progressive credentials, I'm going to ask why it's not possible that a politically neutral search couldn't replicate the same result for other reasons.
drmanhattan16
1yr ago
Entertainment for men is already widespread, you can get into, among others things, manga, anime, video games, and more.
The question at hand is whether there are young men novelists who are not being valued by the industry. To which I say, either the market matters or it doesn't. It's fine to say that selling more books isn't a metric of "upcoming" or whatever, but evidence has to be provided if you go that route. Who are these people that we're not seeing on lists of the people who write physical books (or would have, in another age)?
drmanhattan16
1yr ago
Well, yes, if Musk changed the bias at the top, Twitter is free as it wasn't previously. You're free to be Alex Jones, you're not free to be someone Musk happens to dislike (not as easily, anyways). The complaints about Musk can definitely be seen as partisan whining, but we shouldn't take that to mean he's any better than the people he replaced. The only way to judge him as being better is to see how he acts against people he doesn't like. Hell, Bari Weiss even said as much, leading to a rift between her and Musk despite their Twitter Files collaboration.
drmanhattan16
1yr ago
I mean, or you could just recognize that it’s utterly ridiculous to take “75,000,000 great American Patriots” as somehow intended to pick out rioters specifically and thus constitute “indirect incitement.” If merely referring positively to any group whatsoever of which they’re a subset is doing that, then Trump would never be allowed to praise “people who support me” ok social media ever again.
I didn't say any of this.
OK, so either Twitter was set up in a way that allowed a minority of partisan wackadoos to get their way over a more reasonable “silent majority” on one of the biggest social media decisions in history, or it’s just full of partisan wackadoos full stop. If anything the former seems worse than the latter.
I don't think most companies rely on democratic voting to determine policy, so it shouldn't surprise us that a small number of vocal people can have an effect much larger than themselves. But there was clear pushback, that pushback just wasn't enough. If we consider it as reasonable that voters get to decide what happens, then the people who "voted" in this case to ban him seem to be much more in number than those who don't. A democratic outcome, even if it conflicts with the morality of others.
drmanhattan16
1yr ago
Sharing power is what Trump offered. An American civic nationalism, an ethnogenesis, an ethnic fusion. Everybody gives up their other identities and becomes American and adopts American values. Everybody of every colour and creed becomes ethnically American, no hyphenation. This was rejected. Perhaps someone will be able to do it, but TPTB do not want this.
Oh? What are these "ethnic American values"? How much is everyone required to give up? It's hardly giving something up, after all, if what you call "ethic American values" just happen to be your own. You say no more hyphenation, I imagine the first to step in should be European-Americans.
drmanhattan16
2mo ago
I'm not shaming anyone. My initial comment was out of confusion, but I have no problem with people deciding even their voice is too much to risk. Moreover, not every part of one's identity is the same. If I show you a picture of my hand, you'll discover my race, but showing my face would be far more personal and could lead far easier to identification.
drmanhattan16
2mo ago
We're talking about what has to be necessarily revealed on Yassine's podcast. Voice is necessary simply because people have to speak on a podcast, the information you're talking about wouldn't be necessary unless Yassine was insisting on identifying people to that level.
drmanhattan16
2mo ago
Who is objecting to that on the "2020 wasn't stolen" side? Put simply, if you open your argument with "I don't think 2020 was stolen, but here are cases where we need to tighten election security", I think you'd find earnest discussion in even the most pro-Biden/left-wing spaces.
drmanhattan16
2mo ago
Why would it be better? It's a flat-out rejection of the idea that the truth should inform action. I have no problem with litigation over the facts of the 2020 election, but the frustrating part is that the election truthers don't ever give me confidence that they care about the truth for its own sake, but more because they think it's impossible Trump could have lost in the first place.
drmanhattan16
2mo ago
Perhaps this is the Leviathan-shaped hole in the discourse rearing it's ugly head again, but "negotiations over policy" (or rather who gets to set that policy) is exactly what an election is, is it not?
No, my point is that you and anyone else who takes this viewpoint is essentially claiming that you don't care about proof over whether the election was stolen in the first place. You just want a guarantee that your policies are enacted.
Suppose the Democrats were to offer a guarantee that they'd quash any attempt at enacting laws which would shift the government's stance to be more socially progressive in exchange for Republicans (including the MAGA ones) never bringing up the 2020 election again, and that this would hold for the next 10 years. God himself comes down and says they're not lying about what they'll do. In this scenario, I would expect people complaining about the election losers to largely come down against this deal on principle. Instead, I suspect the losers would actually, seriously debate if they should accept.
drmanhattan16
2mo ago
I agree. But if you want to go down the route of saying the losers are refusing to be rational because that would cost them energy and momentum vs. the winners who don't, then just say that.
drmanhattan16
2mo ago
That means you don't really even want elections, right? You just want negotiations over policy. Because if the losers, as I suspect, are a bit more motivated by losing than they claim to be, then no amount of proof would work because they don't care about proof in the first place.
drmanhattan16
2mo ago
If the claim in court, where you do need to be very specific, was that people weren't allowed in, but they were and just kept far away, then the claim should reflect that, right?
drmanhattan16
2mo ago
From your report's summary:
There was no evidence of widespread voter fraud. In all likelihood, more eligible voters cast ballots for Joe Biden than Donald Trump. We found little direct evidence of fraud, and for the most part, an analysis of the results and voting patterns does not give rise to an inference of fraud.
Seems like this is the key takeaway for anyone.
Is your ultimate point that elections have security issues, or that the 2020 election was actually stolen from Trump? People who want to argue the first are free to do so, I'm open to the idea that we can tighten election security, especially for state and local elections (where more serious claims appear to be made).
drmanhattan16
4mo ago
...is that sarcasm? I have to assume you are at least aware that Twitch isn't only for gaming, right? I know you said you don't watch it, but the idea that Twitch or even live-streaming in general is just about gaming is trivially demonstrated as false.
I recognize you didn't give a "should", but Hlynka very much would agree with the absurd position I detailed in my previous comment. That's his position, unless he draws some line based on how many people actually disagree.
More options
Context Copy link