BANNED USER: Unhinged diatribe
>Unban in 45d 14h 44m
hanikrummihundursvin
No bio...
User ID: 673
Banned by: @Amadan
hanikrummihundursvin
3yr ago
I mean, yeah, if. By the same token there was no reason to think Russia would actually invade Ukraine. Despite having 'issues' with them for the better part of two decades. Some things don't happen until they do. Same was true for mass migration into Canda.
I don't think anyone can logic their way into the correct position here. The main point I'm making is that Russia has options. Arguing whether they will or wont is, to me, irrelevant to that point.
hanikrummihundursvin
3yr ago
Along with Tajikistan and Kazakhstan and anywhere else.
I suppose migrants will flock to the regions that offer some economic salvation. I don't think I'm making predictions grander than any of the predictions already made by market speculators about the potential gains to be made through investing in war ravaged Ukraine after most of the fighting dies down.
hanikrummihundursvin
3yr ago
I don't know if you are an ethno-nationalist but these priors of racial families don't need to apply if folks writing policy happen to not be ethno-nationalists. If Russia opens the gates to large scale Asian immigration, which doesn't have to come from just China but the various Asiatic regions surrounding Russia, they can easily be underway to repopulate the region. In a few decades time there will be no reason to even consider Ukrainians to ever have existed in the first place, as far as Russia is concerned. Ukraine, not that anyone would ever call it that, could just be a regional melting pot of various immigrants of diverse ethnic backgrounds that exists within Russia. And if we cut the same historical corners as is being done in Europe and the US, we can say that it was never anything more than that in the first place.
It's not about dollar revenue, it's about control over natural resources. Ukraine has some of the most arable land in the world as well as holding significant shares of the total amount of high quality iron ore reserves and various other metals. If Russia holds power of the lion share of these various resources in conjunction with China they can turn the western dominated 'economic sanctions game' on its head. Just like Russia did with gas.
*edit, I should have added that the geographic location of Ukraine is also very relevant, considering the ease of European access to said resources.
hanikrummihundursvin
3yr ago
Ukraine as a country isn't particularly important and the population is likely to be hostile to Russia, meaning that to integrate it into Russia proper will be difficult if not impossible.
Ukraine is extremely important when it comes to base level goods like grain and iron. If Russia manages to capture just a decent chunk of Ukraine it could considerably strengthen any leverage it has over NATO and the EU. On top of that Russia as a government seems to be open to Asian immigration. It doesn't need to integrate Ukrainians, though it certainly can to an extent. Russia can just ethnically replace the population. Where the western elites have trapped themselves rhetorically as well.
hanikrummihundursvin
3yr ago
Your post reminds me of the archetype of a 'centrist' movie/video game critic persona found on various blogs and Youtube channels that would go on tirades against Anita Sarkeesian and the like for 'pointing out sexism' and whatever else. To the point they would be denying reality itself just to rebuke every word ever written by a feminist.
Just like the reason for the main character in a video game being a guy is sexist and the reason the women in the game are dressed to sexually provoke men is sexist, the reason for this movie existing is racist. There is no lack of fascinating men in the world. The reason this fascinating man is getting a movie is because he was black.
To borrow an argument from Anita Sarkeesian: It's not that you can't make a game about men and scantily clad women without it being sexist. It's that the reason for these things existing today as they do and the cultural context surrounding them is sexist, and it's worthwhile to recognize that and point it out for what it is. The same is true here. It's not that you can't, in theory, make a movie about a black man beating the odds in white society. It's that you can't do it today and not recognize it for what it is and most importantly why it is.
hanikrummihundursvin
3yr ago
I wasn't referring to that comment or that complaint in particular. I was referring to comments more along the lines of mcjunker, and the general sentiment it imbues. Hope that serves as some clarification.
hanikrummihundursvin
3yr ago
I agree with what you say for the most part. Whilst I think there is more value in the sphinx than you do.
I don't know if I am misunderstanding you but to me these people did engage by effort posting about the alleged woes of the motte. And considering the nature of their claims I'd stand by my assertions and 'shaming' language about where these claims come from. Though I am not trying to shame them to participate, I'm shaming them for participating the way they did.
I think your criticism is valid but I take issue with the wording of it. Why you would level that criticism at me for shaming 'them' when, as far as I'm concerned, and taking everything you say at face value, both parties are worthy of it? It seems to me, pardon the framing, that you walked into a 'fun' debate to tell me that it is low brow. I don't disagree but I'd still say it's worth having considering the lackluster display of the 'opposition'.
hanikrummihundursvin
3yr ago
Not to be too much us vs them but reading some of the comments on that thread...
If you imagine a total opposite of Julius Branson, you get these sort of posters. Instead of making ten alts to continue the war effort, they buckle under the pressure of ten downvotes. But what they lack in tenacity they make up for with narcissism. So unlike Branson they engage in a cold war in their own minds, not having any tenacity or alts to rely on, until they can post some narcissistic masochistic historical revision about what 'happened' and why things are now worse since their 'status' was not respected. I've never read a more pathetic diatribe of self centered nonsense.
For the record I'd take a Julius Branson and five of his alts over any one of these whiners. Absolutely pathetic.
hanikrummihundursvin
3yr ago
I'm not sure if I'm understanding you correctly. You can find purpose in life pulling the handle on a slot machine. The point being made is that even if it might not be obvious to the one emotionally invested in buying spins, it's very obvious to the outside observer that they are doing something sad. That there is in fact a universally superior alternative to spending all your time devoted to your pet animals. Even if it might be hard for the animal lover to see. Just like it might be hard for the slot machine player to see. None of that changes the superiority of the alternatives.
hanikrummihundursvin
3yr ago
I think the truth value of the pity people feel towards a person who dotes over their cat as if it were a child is that cats are not children. A cat will never say 'I love you' back. So much emotional effort being spent on something that will never return it to anyone. It's the same reason people feel pity when watching someone earnestly playing slots as if they were going to win their money back. It's not visible to the person that is emotionally invested in their little world. But from an outside view the entire endeavor is obviously sad, since you can so easily see the futility of it. Instead of throwing your money away, maybe save it or buy something useful. Maybe instead of investing all your love into a cat, invest it into a child.
I think Catholicism is much more than just desperate, pathetic and pitiable. It's tragic. And that's, I think, part of the point of the plight of nuns and the burdens of celibate clergy. There is beauty in sacrifice. There is honor in deadly devotion. And those elements exist precisely because of what is being sacrificed. None if it changes the fact that it is stupid, and that I am against the practice of celibacy for those who have so much to give. But at least, to some extent, they are self aware. It's a plight. A burden. A sacrifice. Proof of devotion to a higher power. An overcoming of sin. I don't think many cat oriented people couch their love for animals in the same manner.
hanikrummihundursvin
3yr ago
Depending on what we mean by 'rich'. You can derive a 'rich' life from servicing a litter of cats. That doesn't change the fact that the people who do so look, for some reason, desperate, pathetic and pitiable next to a person who serviced their own children instead.
I'm not trying to cast shade on people who dedicate themselves to servicing animals. It's just a matter of fact. Any substitute for an actual child and an actual family looks like the cope that it is. All energy expended in a direction that's not familial has, in some sense, an essence of waste about it in comparison.
hanikrummihundursvin
3yr ago
'being liberal' didn't fall from the sky. The direction of American liberalism has been influenced and directed by jews for close to a century.
hanikrummihundursvin
3yr ago
Ethnicity is an extremely important and deep topic in Europe. I don't know if you are missing the forest for the trees to make a point here but, bruh.
hanikrummihundursvin
3yr ago
"Conservatives" and anti-feminists aren't the same thing. The distinction I see between them is that one tells men to get married, and the other tells men not to. Being opposed to divorce is just, at this point, a word game. Where both sides are against 'divorce' for completely different reasons.
hanikrummihundursvin
3yr ago
No. What was being said is that statistically, in western society, being a woman is better, and that inserting our imagined important factors into the conversation is irrelevant since we can already see the statistical outcomes. You might value physical fitness, for whatever reason, and I don't need to care about it since every single metric shows that women still have it better than men despite men being stronger than women.
To illustrate, what good did superior physical fitness do for men? They get killed more, assaulted more, get less wages in multiple white collar professions, are more likely to die on the job, are more likely to kill themselves, more likely to be homeless. When we collapse everything, the end result is that if you are born a woman in the west then you are far less likely to fall into any of the big negatives. And controlling for intelligence, you are far more likely to fall into the big positives outside of the top .1% of western society. And even then you have mandated government programs pushing women into those areas.
hanikrummihundursvin
3yr ago
No man. Maybe you have lost the thread of the conversation because it's been a day or two but the point being made was that statistically it was better to be a woman. There was no ambiguity in my replies to you about what 'better' meant.
I then made a point specifically addressing what you are doing now and have been doing, where you say that you feel that being a man is better without any qualifiers or definitions. The only argument here subsisting on a lack of definitions is yours.
Again, this isn't about what we personally think. In a statistical comparison women have it better than men in the west. Inserting our personal biases, wills and wants into the equation is pointless obfuscation.
hanikrummihundursvin
3yr ago
The term 'apples to apples' here refers to job market comparisons. To reiterate: In multiple white collar professions women make more money than similarly experienced and educated men. The education and experience is the apple being compared. If being a woman was worse you would not see this.
hanikrummihundursvin
3yr ago
You had stuff like this back in 2014 all the time. And there are probably examples much earlier than that. This isn't downhill. You're just on the wrong team.
hanikrummihundursvin
3yr ago
Despite undernegotiating their salaries, in an apples to apples comparison women make more than men on top of everything else in multiple professions. Moreover, men don't get to decide to have kids and have money. If you have children, as a man, you are either married, and will be paying for everything, or you are going to be paying alimony.
Again, this isn't about what we personally think. In a statistical comparison women have it better than men in the west. Inserting our personal biases, wills and wants into the equation is pointless obfuscation.
hanikrummihundursvin
3yr ago
It's not really about what we personally think. Statistically it's very clear that being a woman is better than being a man in the west. Especially when controlling for intelligence.
With regards to every one of those metrics, being young and smart as anything other than white is better than being young smart and white. So I don't really get your point.
I am assuming, if some institution drags you and your family through the coal because of your race, that you put on your big boy pants, as the paterfamilias, and eat shit with a big proud smile on your face. I don't understand what you would propose to do as an alternative given that any advocacy on behalf of your race is prone to get you irrationally annoyed.
I mean, if an institution announces they won't be hiring your children because of their ancestry, you don't get annoyed?
I mean, if a group of blacks beat your son to death and the justice system practically lets them walk, what does a paterfamilias do? Is it not "annoying" that the guys who caved in your sons skull whilst laughing about it get to walk free?
I mean, if a black guy executes your 5 year old and the media refuses to cover the story, does that make you more or less irrationally annoyed than seeing white males engaging in grievance studies?
In all seriousness, I am having a hard time understanding the relative strength and power of the 'slapper' from your analogy. Are you, as a paterfamilias, 'stronger' than the justice system? Media? Corporate America? The implied pride you take in being above racial grievance feels more like the cope of a servant father who tells himself that one day, at least, his son might become a janissary.
hanikrummihundursvin
3yr ago
If I remember correctly Lynn didn't measure Ashkenazi Jews to have an IQ of 110. He wrote a book about Jewish IQ where, after looking at inflated IQ numbers for jews, and contrasting them with numbers from a test he actually did, which turned out a verbal IQ score of 107, he collapsed all of that together into a 110.
hanikrummihundursvin
3yr ago
Think about it from the perspective of someone who has no exposure or knowledge at all. Say, a student coming into it for the first time. They might grasp that the ideology is contested, but they wouldn't be able to make an independent judgment.
That's why I said the book is good for what it is. Doesn't change the point being made, that liking or disliking something because it's fascist or marxist is silly.
Gottfried, hilariously enough, both coined the term "alt-right" and rejects it entirely as describing himself. But even if you think he's alt-right there is some amount of history that is going to inform what definitions of alt-right are more accurate than not.
I know who Gottfried is. You should focus less on point scoring and more on what is actually being said. To reiterate for you: Despite everything, Paul Gottfried can be quickly categorized as alt-right. This is true, regardless of what Gottfried is or wants. And this matters because, as I wrote in that paragraph, the people who control the meaning of labels and words can throw all of his work out the window by association. You can't be Gottfried and do what amounts to apologetics for fascism. Even if it's true.
It's really surprising me why this is like pulling teeth when you hit on similar notes yourself in the intro for Gottfried.
Really? I would think most modern Republican conservatives aren't fascists. Seems like that would be a large group.
Most republican conservatives are not like French, Ryan or Dreher. Most republican conservatives are much farther to the right of the people they elect to office. The go to examples for this being immigration and general distrust of institutions, government or otherwise. If we take Gottfried's distinction of fascist and non-fascist, how many actually fit the bill of not being fascist when most people don't trust the government apparatus. I'd call it more along the lines of 50/50.
The world has plenty of arable land and is also a very small place when Russia and China are throwing their weight around. The argument here isn't that the sky will fall. The argument is that the leverage the west has over the rest gets weaker. Potentially getting turned on its head.
More options
Context Copy link