hanikrummihundursvin
No bio...
User ID: 673
hanikrummihundursvin
6hr ago
You're morally framing these things. Cooper, as far as I can tell, wants to factually frame them.
The Holocaust was exaggerated
Jews influence a lot of the media
Jews influence the government
Jews have split loyalties
Hitler was not that bad
From there you don't need to hate jews. I don't know what Cooper thinks beyond that, but I would just demand they don't act like they are above the common courtesy everyone else has to show eachother.
For example, stop promoting the ethnic denigration of the people who allowed you to live in their countries. Stop dropping our bombs on your neighbors and then demand we take them in as refugees. Stop pathologizing and villainizing your hosts. Take an active role in caring for their wellbeing rather than being ambivalent about them and their future. If you want to be jewish and care for your people and culture, with the goal of maintaining both, that's great. But you can't do that at the same time as you undermine other peoples and their culture. That action can only lead to conflict.
I mean, if nigh every western leader can go to the wailing wall and proclaim their undying loyalty and friendship to Israel, surely jewish leaders can return the favor sometimes.
hanikrummihundursvin
7hr ago
Yeah. As if killing children and filming yourself lighting people on fire wasn't PR disaster enough.
hanikrummihundursvin
8hr ago
We are talking about Darryll Cooper. I don't see how the steelman is abstracting anything relevant as Cooper, in his own words, describes himself and his viewpoint similarly, though at greater length. What claims and facts you refer to or their relevance, I am missing.
And now I've fully lost sight of how this metaphor corresponds to reality at all.
I'm referring to the paragraph written above, where I note that people like Douglas Murray take issue with the viewpoint of people like Daryll Cooper, who allow themselves to exist outside the post war consensus orthodoxy with regards to WW2. I assumed you were in a similar boat to Murray, and that when you referred to Coopers viewpoint as not being a 'stable equilibrium' you were referring to a similar contention, just relating to the JQ, not WW2. I'm happy to hear where I misread you and what you meant by 'stable equilibrium'.
hanikrummihundursvin
9hr ago
I don't see the reason for the one sentence strawman. To reply with a one sentence steelman of Cooper: 'Here are historical circumstance, here's why they came to be, here's the horrible outcome, here's what could have gone differently. By the way, don't hate people.'
I think the issue rests more with people who are unwilling to let go of a pseudo religious otherizing ahistorical narrative, similar to Douglas Murray on his recent Joe Rogan debate, rather than people forming opinions that exist outside the post war consensus.
I mean, I agree, it sure isn't a stable equilibrium for the church to sit idly by as heresy is spread. But I don't see why anyone should be concerned with the church.
hanikrummihundursvin
9hr ago
I think it speaks to the expansion of the right wing ecosystem that we now have principled antisemitic centrism.
I think it also speaks volumes of how different the landscape is now compared to 10 or 20 years ago. It's very hard to be public on the dissident right and not have some critical caveats on the consequences of jewish representation in America.
I'd be interested to see what the difference would be between the overall reach of something like the National Alliance was and the modern dissident right. Since this might just be history repeating the 90's-00's dissident right.
hanikrummihundursvin
9hr ago
I'm just surprised this isn't more common. Islamic terror attacks in the west would make a lot more sense if done under the guise of just being a part of the war in Palestine.
To that extent it will be interesting to see if there are any global events that manage to push the western public to action. A globalist world is a lot smaller, and the hands that can reach the center of power are much more diverse.
hanikrummihundursvin
10hr ago
"Jews are pernicious, they should have been gassed, and Hitler wasn't such a bad dude, but that doesn't mean that you should hate them"
Whose opinion is this?
But that's what a trans person is and that's what trans rights are in practice. Anyone who is squeamish about these things is by definition transphobic. As well as being, pardon my French, hysterical and ridiculous. As if your male coworkers suddenly turn into a physical danger as soon as you have to share a porcelain bowl...
There's an entire progressive dialect invented to get past these hurdles. Followed by a ruleset that should allow any well-meaning actor, who is concerned with the rights of trans people, to get along with their day without allowing their transphobia to negatively affect trans people as they try to exist.
Unisex toilets exist all over the world. This is transphobia masquerading as misandry. It should not be allowed to stand in any case if we are holding ourselves to any egalitarian modern standard.
hanikrummihundursvin
1d ago
I presume this is the type of observation I will be hearing about until the day I die.
Most people seem to have no idea what a trans person is or what trans rights are. So when even the slightest personal inconvenience arises, the good folk will balk at the notion and do their best to shield themselves and their immediate environment from the thing they've been advocating for most of their lives. You could make the same observation for nigh every policy.
hanikrummihundursvin
7d ago
All too often 'systems' in practice get excused by idealism. POSIWID works as a shorthand to cut through that idealism.
Scott seems to be coming at this from some critical angle and I'm not entirely sure what the point of it is. You can wordplay anything into absurdity and uselessness.
To you and @Raziel, who commented below, I can only ask: What rigor? Who are these experts and what has been the outcome of their advocacy?
From where I am sitting, the 'experts' of the western world have for the past decades managed to run the most peaceful and technologically advanced societies in human history into the ground. Why look at anything they have done with veneration?
And even then we are presupposing that 'rigor' has ever been a relevant thing at all beyond an aesthetic preference where people with power modulate academia and media towards their own wants.
hanikrummihundursvin
21d ago
You can do this type of reductionist deconstruction with every story.
As a counter argument: Using the 'correct' view, good stories are about the journey. Not the Shyamalanaman plot twist, clever subversion of tropes or badass value shifts.
It's easy to get overwhelmed by these short term moments, designed to give you an emotional high, and lose focus on what's actually good when you're born into what's effectively a vortex dragging your brain towards this sort of short term stimuli on an ever-accelerating repeat. But we should be able to spot it.
This vortex afflicts both the consumer and creator. As can be seen, for example with projects like Star Trek. One of the big problems with new Star Trek, to kick that dead horse, is the narrow scope of the overarching narrative. It's not about a transcendent view of humanity, that existed in the older versions. It's about... Brexit? Immigration? Racism? It loses sight of what makes the 'journey' of watching Star Trek and being immersed in that universe feel good. None of the bells and whistles of the new era matter since the journey you have to take to enjoy them involves wrapping yourself in some sort of post-progressive pessimism where humanity is still constantly tripping over itself.
By the same token, categorizing fairy tales by their plot elements is just... For a lack of a better term: Not getting it.
You don't really need a plot twist at the end of a story with a simple moral message. And whilst the OG versions of these fairy tales often had a quite a... 'convoluted' message, they lived on to serve a different purpose. In short: These movies should be wrapping the viewer in the warm embrace of a loved one that's just sat down next to them on a sofa with a grandfather clock rhythmically ticking in the background. Ready to soothingly tell them a story from memory. Instead the movie is contextualized in political feces before it's even released.
hanikrummihundursvin
24d ago
Another example of 'rationalism' and related isms, just being conflict aversion.
If you hide your preferences behind an 'is' you've rhetorically/aesthetically removed yourself as a motivated actor. You're simply a 'rational' being doing 'what makes sense'.
It would be permissible to excuse certain actions and beliefs on the basis of objective reality. And we certainly shouldn't believe things that are false. But the inexplicable predicament many 'rationalists' have to contend with is that their view of objective reality somehow manages to conform itself precisely within the lines of the mainstream Overton Window. Often rubbing shoulders with the more left leaning parts of it. It betrays their alleged pursuit of truth and reason as little other than social conformity. Furthermore, their seeming inability to notice this and question in an endless ocean of articles and blogs paints them and their social networks as, at best, childishly ignorant of their own motivations.
hanikrummihundursvin
25d ago
Not that everyone here is friends or anything, but this seems a rather hostile post towards ymeskhout. Am I missing lore?
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
Your point, as it could be read from your post, was tethered to the idea that populism was some kind of related problem. I don't see how that can be relevant when so many of the questions you assert to not being asked of Musk can be very similarly leveraged towards the ruling class that sat prior to Musk.
I mean, Musk has seen plenty of open criticism recently. The H1B/Vivek stuff, along with him pretending to be good at video games. Alongside that you have a budding media industry centered around hating Musk 24/7. His companies being subsidized by the government is certainly not an uncriticized element.
I'm not sure to what extent dislike for USAID needs to be astroturfed or to what extent you want to question the media narrative surrounding it. I think there's a sizable population that doesn't like their taxes wasted on trans operas in Ireland or whatever. I find the whole ordeal more similar to something like the 'twitter files'. Just with more meat on the bone. But yes, Musk sure can press his finger on the scale considering his reach on X. And between the reach of him, Trump and Joe Rogan I'm not sure what oddity you are looking to question.
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
Musk has more overt power than Soros because he's playing a strongman on social media. Soros, in contrast, was a part of a giant emergent international blob. Financed via other 'billionaire philanthropists' along with tax dollars from all over the world. Working around the clock to skew peoples perception of reality to a preferred political end. There's no comparison.
Maybe when Musk and friends start fermenting their own global blob we can start asking questions. But so far there's not even a coherent idea of what that blob should be or why.
Unemployment was tiny (at least through biden's presidency) and labor productivity keeps going up. The empirical data is not on your side.
Unemployment is irrelevant to the point, and labor productivity is in this context just relabeled GDP.
The kind and degree of inferiority matters a lot. I've been arguing the whole time that the degree is small and the kind has no real evidence of being genetic.
The degree being small is dependent on context. A small degree of negativity can have large cascading impacts on a population that relies in part on civil services that can only exist with a certain amount of surplus within an economy.
As for evidence of something being genetic: It's all genetic.
Okay so then they're doing totally fine? Then they have nothing to complain about! You can't have it both ways. Either these communities are threatened or they're not.
No, they're not fine. They are pissed off and want radical change. The point here is very simple: If your economic policies produce political unrest then you are going to have problems.
Don't be so quick to dismiss my "pocket theory" out of hand. It's the difference between low-fertility rates being a structural feature of cities vs. something cities have the power to change.
I don't see the consequence. Liberals are failing to have their own children and this can be seen by simply looking at birth rates by political affiliation.
I've been talking to a lot of anti-immigrant people and to the extent that they've been concerned with demographic replacement that's exactly what "seeing other people's children as competition" means. Certainly, that's the position of the original blog post in question. But if it's not, I'll be charitable and assume that the question of demographics is fundamentally uninteresting to you, and-- assuming that's settled-- only address the question of economics from here on out.
There is a difference between being against demographic replacement and 'seeing other peoples children as competition'. If you want to discuss the former I suggest getting rid of the latter.
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
Who is to blame for the trans madness took years to get 'unearthed' in a publicly accessible way. Prior to 2016 you could not find any tangible info on what was happening and why beyond /pol/ schizos talking about John Money and what books the Germans had been burning in the 1930's. By the same token you can not easily find out who is to blame for the AAA spiral into insanity. The ousting of Carleton Coon is just the tip of the iceberg and 99.9% of people don't even know who that is.
To the extent the AAA needs to pretend to hold to some sort of code of conduct, so does Elon. People make fun of him online if he doesn't. The H1B/Vivek debacle is a great example. Or when he pretended to be good at video games. Even if that amounts to nothing, it's at least transparent. Elon can be yelled at personally. The AAA presents no such target for the public. It only has to pretend to maintain the disguise of sensibility to the public and to please their 'masters', who are more or less completely hidden. If it is ever attacked by the public it can hide behind the mass of media and academia that are all running the same playbook to please the same 'masters'.
I know what you're getting at. I don't think an accretion of Twitter reposters make a good institution.
Neither do I. But when the alternative is mind bending insanity from people who have made it a career to look sensible to fool the gullible I choose to pick my own poison and sort my own substack subscriptions based on a more primitive but holistic human approach, rather than pretend that there exists some 'system' of science do gooders that receive grants from heaven and are therefore definitely not in the tank for whatever is funding their existence.
To put it differently: Lift the veil on the 'systems' and it's just the left wing version of cringe permanently online right wingers. But instead of scientific racism, misogyny with anime profile pics you get feel good humanism, misandry and a LinkedIn profile.
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
That's not much of a rejoinder when this system of the best and brightest in the richest and most information dense time in known human history can't figure whether men can get pregnant or not.
The argument is not about what system to use. It's about the nature of power and how the people who wield it will push their will through regardless. I prefer to know those people by name. Rather than rolling around in confusion and conspiracy regarding how on earth the American Anthropology Association managed to deduce that biological race is a mostly imaginary social construct cooked up by evil racists in the 1700's.
Some guy and his cronies just randomly being right continually seems unlikely even in theory. Why did we need institutions in the first place then?
What are institutions?
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
When the choice is between guys pretending not to be white identitarian and guys pretending not to be zionist my wish is that we could all come together, stop pretending and just be ourselves.
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
Musk representing himself as a powerful man is a break with the conventional institutional 'representatives'
The strength of the 'institutional representation' system is how intangible it is. Lies get woven into 'official' reports that get represented as fact based on 'scientific consensus' by completely replaceable 'spokespeople'. And when someone seeks to fact check these representatives and what they say they are met with the rhetorical equivalent of cold hard brutalist concrete: "Are you saying science is wrong? Do you not believe our intelligence communities? Are you anti-intellectual? Do you not believe in physics?!"
To this extent academia and media are just PR firms that wash dirt off of policy positions for the people in power. Like immigration being fantastic and without any flaws. Or that we can't share one last moment with grandma on the hospital bed due to risk of spreading COVID, but that we can protest against racial inequality by joining a giant street protest, rubbing shoulders with hundreds if not thousands of random people.
So, in fairness to Musk being incorrect sometimes: So to was the prior system sometimes incorrect! And just how incorrect it got and how impossible it was to fact check is practically why we have Musk where he is now.
I'm not sure what Hanania is after here, other than whining about the fact that X doesn't boost his posts when he links to his substack and that he wasn't picked up to be involved with any of Musks projects. Or that mass media has allowed people Hanania considers lesser than himself to reach heights of clout and upvotes he can only dream of... All things directly or indirectly mentioned in the article. To that extent the entire thing is just an embarrassing pout from the author. I mean:
The right-wing clubhouse Musk has created is just repulsive to anyone who is independently minded. I wasn’t surprised when Musk unfollowed me...
Yeah... At risk of breaking the rules: lol. lmao even.
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
Why wouldn't we get the full story if the 'elements' are within Israel? I think some people might understand that sort of a cut off as a dark hint. Especially considering how outspoken Ian Carrolls is on the subject of Israeli influence in the US.
My family routinely works with the same pair of illegal immigrant contractors and they always do great work. The idea that immigrants do poor work is just cope from people who can't compete.
The opposite of my work experience. But regardless of that, the X in ten that happen to be proficient workers is not worth the hollowing out of the native labour force. Furthermore, my point still stands. GDP would go up if the assumptions made in my comment are correct. An obvious example of why GDP is a bad metric for this topic.
The original article tries to argue that immigrants are inferior to natives by using statistics from the immigrants' home nations.
Which is irrelevant to the point being made. We could see by simply looking at immigrants already here that they are 'inferior' to certain native populations. They are only positive when we lump in negative population groups into the native tally. This is why I said I don't like the term 'immigrant' and 'American'. We can see where the 'good' immigrants come from by comparing them to net positive native population groups.
Except that is what happens, as demonstrated by identity grievance politics! All this anti-immigrant, protectionism nonsense is as much grievance politics as affirmative action. You want to force pluralistic urban areas into giving you money for labor and goods despite the fact that you can't compete on your own merits.
You said they would 'disappear into the void'. That's not happening. They are advocating for themselves based on identity grievance politics. Stop trying to pivot out of your arguments.
The policies and beliefs that make California suck are Nimbyism and Prop 8. Anti-immigration, protectionist whining is just more of the same.
In the most polite way possible: I did not ask nor do I care about what your pocket theory for why California sucks. The point of contention related to how urban liberals are the lowest fertility demographic in the world. You said that their culture is 'strong' and here to stay. In reality liberals are on the fastest track to self replacement of all the demographics.
So why would I want other people to have children? That's just competition.
This is a fundamental disagreement we have. I don't see others people children as competition nor do I celebrate human shortcomings and failure. To that extent I think your viewpoint is extremely anti-human and ugly. Aside from it being very different from most Catholics I've interacted with.
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
GDP is a bad metric for the topic. It goes up even when things are going bad. A 100% increase in foreign construction workers driving down pay whilst doing sub par work that needs to be repaired in two years is actually great for the GDP but terrible for anyone that wants to live in a well made house in a country with a healthy construction labour force.
Urban liberals are either dead end economic units with no children, or in their late 30's trying to move away from the city to find a better life for their children. Red tribers in America have identified the threat. They don't want those kinds of people in their neighborhoods since their policies and beliefs create places that are terrible to live in. It's less fear of supremacy, and more fear of a plague.
Did you read nothing I wrote? I'm not saying there are no differences between populations-- I'm saying that immigrants are not a representative sample from their native population.
Try reading yourself. Immigrants not being representative of their native population is irrelevant to the point.
But in point of fact, yes, forcing immigrants to stay in their home countries would improve them. That's why I'm against it!
The immigrants move, facilitating the western countries becoming worse along with their own. Everyone loses except a few economists that look at the world through a monetary lens and somehow can't wrap their brains around the fact that an economic theory that necessitates demographic collapse is a bad thing.
Let me drain the brains! I want all the backwoods towns and backward states to collapse into the void left by the absence of all their best, most motivated people.
Except that's not what happens. As demonstrated by identity grievance politics.
The original phrasing doesn't need to imply anything beyond what Cooper himself would want it to imply. If the government is run by jews then that's a factual matter that can be examined. That's the position Cooper is affording himself.
The meaning of the demands is to illustrate that 'antisemitism' isn't magic that sprouts from thin air. People air their grievances. They purport to have facts on their side. If those are wrong then that should be exposed. Not buried under accusations that any inquiry is just a first step towards a second holocaust. And if those accusations turn out to be true then it falls on the accused to make amends, not dig their heels in the ground and refuse responsibility.
It's also there to illustrate that inroads and peace between different people can be made if both parties are interested. It certainly wouldn't take much to get most of the right on your side. As has been demonstrated in France by Éric Zemmour, or to a lesser extend by Stephen Miller in the US.
Depends on how they are ruled. There have been plenty of multiethnic empires and countries in Europe. Why anyone would presuppose that harm would befall them if they acted with kindness and respect towards Europeans is a mental illness with no name.
More options
Context Copy link