georgioz
17hr ago
Neither party has done either. I’ll accept we’re in some sort of emergency (crazy politicians, Gen Z apathy, climate change and TFR collapse). I’m not remotely convinced a leader of any major party can lead us out.
You just brushed with a specific concept that emerged from Davos crowd in 2016, the specific term is polycrisis and they are in love with it since then. Like you mentioned, we have demographic crisis, climate crisis, mental health crisis and everything in between and more. It is a feature, not a bug - some of these like climate crisis or demographic crisis are just new fact of life that will stay with us for our lifetimes.
Moreover there are micro panics, this week it is the wife that strangled her three kids, and it seems that 10% of the world knows about it. Next week it will be something else. It is just a constant barrage of various issues, sense of endless anxiety that triggers basic psychological programming.
georgioz
2d ago
Of course, this is the model that I also have. Just because you are a good manager does not mean that you are good at everything - from repairing stuff or soldiering through to philosophy or even things such as being a good father. In fact good managers are perfectly aware of this fact and they are good at matching various people with capital in order to get the best result - they would be the first to tell you they themselves are not best at repairing broken ship motor, while organizing everybody to either help or at least get out of the hair of somebody with such a skill needed for occasion.
georgioz
3d ago
So they ended up hiring a mentally ill con man who was good at not saying anything that would ruffle the wrong feathers.
I'd argue that they wanted a con man and ended up with a person with pseudologia fantastica. It is different from con man, as con men try to be rational and persuasive, they do not invent completely out-there story as their objective is to get some financial or other reward. So they keep their con believable. Pathological liars are completely opposite, they draw pleasure if somebody validates their fantasies and they will push the boundaries to get a new high.
Of course the whole Critical Justice/DEI framework is especially vulnerable to these pathological liars, as first the claims themselves are unhinged, where inventing new ways of how one was oppressed while sitting on a bench is matter of course - you know the genre of X is racist (knitting, hiking etc.). Second, the whole field uses standpoint epistemology, basically "believe X" where X is somebody oppressed. So it is not your place to disbelieve and especially criticize people of color, especially if you are white.
So yes, they made the bed that they are now sleeping in, and it is not easy to unmake. The vulnerability is deeply ingrained in the fields it affects.
I actually think that @Corvos has a point. Imagine that you are a modern self-employed digger without any boss. You probably utilize some sort of capital in form of excavator, that in turn utilizes labor of probably millions of people from iron ore processing to electronics. You are only good at operating this highly specific piece of machine, you would be nothing without it, you are "parasite" on labor of all those workers that produced the capital you now use. CEO like Elon Musk is just high-tier version of this digger. He is good not at operating a single machine, but at operation of huge gigafactories and software houses. That is his level of expertise, these companies are his capital and he is best in the world operating them.
Moreover, there is no world where position like that does not exist. You could be in Soviet Russia and you will have a local party boss managing the factory, who is subject to some planning committee that collectively represent Elon Musk on steroid as they produce 5 year plan for the whole economy.
What LLMs do specifically, is that they are just another vector of showing how intellectual property is nonsensical category. The solution is easy, the intellectual property belongs to the person who was first and fulfills any number of invented arbitrary rules for intellectual property (e.g. that it cannot be mathematical formula etc.). If it does not fulfill these criteria, then this app is freeware just as if you xittered some new mathematical formula. If it does fulfill these criteria then the app is his by virtue of being first and everybody else is plagiarizing his work. And it does not matter if it is an app or music or whatever.
You are missing a middle bullet point: Humanity inherits the guilt of their ancestor Adam.
That is definitely not the only or even predominant Christian view outside of Calvinists and related sects. For instance Catholics do not view original sin through prism of guilt, original sin is contracted, not committed. Orthodox Christians actually use different vocabulary, they call it Ancestral Sin.
"Humans must navigate this fact" Humans must actively seek redemption and grace
Yes, seeking redemption is the way how you do it. I did not want to go into details of soteriology as there are even more profound differences in as with what is the nature of grace, what is the nature of justification, sanctification and glorification etc.
As for the rest you are also too hung up on details here, which is strange as as you have no problem saying that Communism and Wokeism “borrowed” this concept. You defined Original Sin narrowly toward Calvinist tradition yet at the same time Marxist share it? Of course you will find out that it is unique. I framed Original Sin as more general concept specifically related to nature of the world and human. Of course various religions or even specific heresies will differ on specifics of cosmology and related human ontology and harmatiology - including Communism and Wokism.
Incorrect partially, the race you are born to gives you your sinful status at birth. Being born white means you inherit the racial sins of your ancestors and must seek redemption through atonement in the woke belief system.
Incorrect partially. You were born with white privilege - but this privilege is bestowed upon you by oppressive system of white supremacy, it is not inside your ontological nature. It is the system that is corrupt. You have to of course do proper progressive work, accept and profess your privilege, listen to people of color as they posses superior standpoint epistemological position etc. But this work is related to dismantling the oppressive system, so that future whites are no longer corrupted and we live in true and voluntary equity. I'd argue that there is no true personal atonement in progressivism, you are shaped by material conditions of the systems of opression, to “atone” is to change and ideally abolish these systems, so you and future generations will be shaped differently. There is just endless work in Theory-Praxis cycle for everybody, as we all possess some kind of privilege even black women can be cis etc.
From a Malaysian, currently living in Australia: I usually don't really think about Canada all too much since pretty little of what it does affects me. I have been over there, and kind of have to agree with @OliveTapenade in that I think of it as being like a less belligerent and less polarised US with more legacy allegiance to Britain, with the (sort of hilarious) quirk that the nation's self-conception is largely defined around not being the US despite sharing a very large number of cultural characteristics with their more powerful neighbour. Perhaps the differences may seem large if all you know is the North American cultural sphere, but to the rest of the world the distinction is not that clear. Canada is really just not all that distinctive internationally nor is it that prominent when it comes to foreign affairs.
I think this is the general identity crisis in the whole Commonwealth ruled by the king, including Australia and New Zealand. As the British Empire collapsed, so did the overall identity of these countries as having the "civilizing mission" where it was their burden to uplift the world in line with projects such as ending slavery, saving artifacts in Imperial museums, spreading literacy etc. What they came up with was alignment with post WW2 liberal consensus of building multicultural societies, while other countries of commonwealth such as those in Caribbean took upon the identity as anticolonial crusaders.
Now as the mutliculturalism collapses, there is new profound identity crisis. So what is left is pretending to be more sophisticated opposition toward uncouth Americans - this is by the way also the identity of many EU nations as they also see their mutlicutural projects collapsing together with prestige be it economic, scientific, diplomatic or technological.
The whole dynamics reminds me actually of late Austrian empire and its identity as opposition toward militaristic unsophisticated Piefke "Reichsdeutschen" Germans, while at the same time being jealous of German economic dynamism and rise to power. The comparison is uncanny right down to failure of multicultural project as ethnic tensions increased down to bureaucratic paralysis and anemic economy and science as well as tension being supposedly culturally superior while relying on supposedly civilizationally inferior power for protection and growth.
While I agree, there is something interesting going on. Euthanasia is similar to surrogacy. It just silently becames a thing and it was barely even discussed. When I opened this topic with my friends, there were quite some differences ranging from this is legalized human trafficking and slavery to nothingburger and hugely beneficial thing. These were opinions of a husband and a wife, and it also surprised them how their view differed on this under the hood change of reality.
Things like these are pushed and normalized constantly, it is akin to gish-galop of policies and regulations - many just pass bellow the radar only to pop-up when they actually cause massive problems. Sometimes these things silently work the other way around, for instance how introduction of body cams for US police officers basically demolished the argument of excess policing. These videos basically replaced Law&Order TV shows and reality shows in one.
There are numerous pre-Christian religions/theologies, that developed outside if Christianity (e.g. in Americas) that share the Original/Ancestral sin framework. For that, the main two attributes of the original sin is as follows:
- The world was created as good but it has fallen.
- The human is born broken, he is prone to sin and evil and his duty is to navigate this fact.
Here, Buddhism is a direct comparison. The universe is orderly and good, while human is born broken often ridden with karmic debt. The Pythagoreans had similar concepts as do Hindus with doctrine of Ṛṇa or Popol Vuh of Mayans. Of course there are quite an important details that completely subvert the Christian story, but so does Progressive religion.
Progressives believe in subverted story of original sin - individuals are born as perfect innocent tabula rasa individuals, it is the world that is evil and poisons them through systems of oppression into various sins such as racism etc. You have to become woke to these sinful poisonous systems out there, and do the work to perfect yourself and the world in order to build eschatological progressive heaven on Earth in form of ultimate Social Justice, thus liberating future perfect newborn beings from these negative influences. Progressive hamartiology has more overlap with let's say Gnostic view of Original Sin as opposed to mainstream Christianity - and it is not a coincidence.
I'd like Christians to stop pretending Wokeism is not their child and not following similar behavioral patterns as it's memetic ancestors.
I do not think anybody is pretending, for instance I as a Catholic can say that traditional Satanists who believe in existence of demonic entity of Satan are "children of Christianity" in a very narrow sense that they probably could not exist without Christianity and its system. I can even accept Wokeism as a religion that subverts Christianity - heck, they literally celebrate the most heinous mortal sin of pride connected to sexual depravity. Many Christians see it as a work of The Enemy and indirect proof of their own faith.
I know many people on the right like to categorize Wokeism as a theological/religious movement but then they immediately balk when you ask what base theology did Wokeism form from.
I will not balk, it is a Hegelian "religion", same as OG Marxism etc, which in turn was informed by other religions and traditions such as Christianity, Hermeticism, enlightenment philosophy etc. They developed their own philosophical system answering question for instance of ontology (what is a man), sociology (how should society organize itself) etc. And they do not even deny it, they have a process for it inside their own religious tradition - Hegelian dialectic. Just one example, the concept of abolish has Hegelian roots, it is the concept of aufheben - it is to resolve the contradiction by dissolving it in higher truth.
There are many such words, even the word oppression is based on Hegelian Master-Slave (or more precise Lordship-Bondage) framework developed in his Phenomenology of Spirit way back in 1807. It is interesting because to explain this concept, Hegel framed it as clash of Will where the weaker will submits to the stronger one, thus forging the relationship. He introduced a new form of social and historical will as result of clash for power, which is quite distinct to let's say Augustinian concept of free will as a gift from God. There are stark differences in theology of philosophical systems that borrow from different traditions.
The same for words like alienation or consciousness in a sense of let's say class consciousness or false consciousness. These are religiously supercharged terms, talking about false consciousness requires you to accept the whole baggage in this religious system and its theology, it is completely different meaning from regular usage of let's say falling unconscious after hitting your head.
Just for instance look at the topic of "human rights". What are they, how they come to be, who has authority to arbitrate between them in terms of hierarchy, how do we amend or suspend or cancel them. These are all highly metaphysical questions for which there is no simple answer.
The very fact that they refuse to categorize it as a religion is part of the culture war, they want to posit their religious dogma and doctrine informing how law and morality is enforced as some "universal" system outside of any critique. They presuppose that their religion is correct and invite you to only discuss the issue on their own terms.
How do you measure oppression? On the face of it in terms of basic rights, this situation is solved. Universal suffrage and all that, the baseline of dignity achieved. Right? Except there is always more to that baseline and in that case the only measure of discrimination, oppression and the rest of it is outcomes. If outcomes are unequal, then oppression had to take place. For some times classical liberals talked about "equality of opportunity". Which is again an interesting concept - but how do you measure if access to opportunity is truly equal except of outcomes?
HBD means nuking tabula rasa, which is the basic dogma of most version of various humanist movements. Be happy with basic constitutional rights, everything else is free for all and there will be various casts, classes and groups, some of them in hereditary worse situation when it comes to outcomes. This is a very, very hard pill to swallow in current equality/equity obsessed society. Hence the vehement resistance to the whole concept of HBD.
More options
Context Copy link