hanikrummihundursvin
No bio...
User ID: 673
Of course, with Da Jooos, there's always some genius like Shaun King to get things started.
I think it would be more fair to say, despite any conspiracy and maximally antagonistic JIDF posting, that the guy who started this is the guy who got himself arrested in America on account of luring a child to have sex with him and the fact that the same man is now free as a bird in Israel and not trapped in a small concrete box in Nevada.
It certainly does not help the JIDF case in this matter that the person ultimately responsible for his release, whether they were actually involved or not, is an Israeli born Jew and alleged zionist. Along the with the District attorney allegedly being jewish as well. Though that may all be besides the point.
The 'conspiracy angle' between this and Epstein is not known to me, and I don't see it being false as a relevant point to anything Joo related in totality, as there is still a long and ugly history of nasty jewish pedophiles making use of their jewishness to evade justice. This just seems like another example of that ugly reality which is allowed to persist for reasons the JIDF posters are sure to be able to rationalize away as perfectly coincidentally natural.
hanikrummihundursvin
11d ago
Considering what's on display, it doesn't seem very complicated to boss them around. As they look to be captive by the same process that most others are captive by. The belief is that the ingroup needs to sacrifice to make amends with the outgroup.
People who hold this belief feel it is their moral right to sacrifice other peoples children to make the bigger picture come together. And considering it has been decided as an economic policy to move vast amounts of third world browns around, and Europe has built a justice system based on European peoples and their comparatively more peaceful and redeemable criminals, what else is there for these judges to do? Just like the government and journalists in Sweden who hide the knowledge of race based crime statistics from the public in the name of solidarity and progress. It's literally the only play that makes sense when holding oneself to egalitarian priors.
Judges being people doesn't seem to be a problem at all. It actually looks like a perfectly functioning limb of an unassailable system that one can't be against without being literally Hitler.
hanikrummihundursvin
12d ago
I don't see the connection between 'being a person' and therefor automatically being inclined to give foreign rapists light sentences.
To me it doesn't seem reasonable or humane, just cowardly and sick. Being so wrapped up in and simultaneously so blind to ones own twisted moral intuition that it becomes practically impossible to differentiate between the person raping a 15 year old and the person calling them a pig is not 'normal'.
I think it would be a lot more pertinent for people like this to examine their state of mind and how it has managed to drive them towards results such as this. But it seems like we've managed to build an impervious wall that keeps people away from exploring the true extent of the problem and just what feeds these 'outgroup sycophants' to do what they do.
hanikrummihundursvin
17d ago
There are more pieces to the puzzle. And whilst it might be easy to throw together a few negative connections and proclaim everyone is 'just like the creationists' it just so happens that everyone is also not like that, depending on context.
For one, SIG has been on a long downward trend in the gun sphere. Complaints of poor quality control can be found online going back to 2013 and further. On top of that, SIG gets awarded a military contract allegedly based on low price. Pushing forward a pistol that is not drop safe.
To go from 'High Quality Swiss-German, Made in Eckernförde, Germany' to 'Low quality and cheap, Assembled in Newington, New Hampshire, parts from wherever' is a big change.
To that extent this is more a protest than a cult. At some point SIG managed to devalue its name, through whatever means, to a point where people feel the need to vent about it. SIG was good, now it's bad. Things didn't used to be like this. Now they do.
hanikrummihundursvin
23d ago
There has to have been a board meeting where the suit and ties timidly navigate around the need of appealing more to their awkwardly large coomer market.
It's just... Somehow with all the talk of hope centered around AI technology and human flourishing there sits a big nasty tumor called 'masturbation'.
Yudkowsky might have been right after all, just for the wrong reasons. It's not the flesh eating nanobots but the 2D waifus that need to be nuked.
hanikrummihundursvin
24d ago
So much for meme history.
hanikrummihundursvin
24d ago
I'm sure there is a based tradcath out there somewhere who can contextualize all of these follies of the modern world within the disaster that is the sexual revolution, but 'drastic' age gaps were, as far as my meme understanding of history goes, more common back in the day.
But regardless of that, a part of the issue has to be the lack of a centralized authority that decides on this. Allowing everyone to recognize what the parameters are so that they can at least not claim ignorance of how the dating scene works and where they fall on the value curve.
My question would be, would that change be a good thing? Would that information change peoples behavior at all?
hanikrummihundursvin
24d ago
The age thing, whilst more viscerally nasty, is probably not the sole reason for why Epstein and friends are looked at so negatively.
The idea of an upper class that lives voraciously lavish lives, engaging in all manner of depravity and indulgence, is pervasive in history and fiction. I don't think there is a single example where people look at these behaviors positively.
To that extent, whilst one might have to make more nuanced arguments against Epstein and friends on those grounds, the argument is there. Epstein and the people going to parties on private islands were doing something shameful and ugly even without the child rape trafficking.
hanikrummihundursvin
26d ago
No, not what sounds good vs what is effective. Most of these problems have no proven actionable solutions. From race to homelessness. And often times the problems are linked. The problems are also woven into the moral fabric of progressive ontology that came out of the older 'classical liberal' world.
That goes double for when we are operating within the parameters of what progressive voters will allow to fly or what can actually pass a human inspection. It's all well and good for us here talking about graphs and whatnot, but these debates have been had in the spheres where they matter. Turns out you can't be taken seriously as a classical liberal in civilized society if your answer to the moral impetus that drives progressives forward is bold faced racism or a confident 'welp'.
hanikrummihundursvin
27d ago
From a progressive standpoint, you're not looking at successful systems in hopes of further maximizing efficiency. You are looking for solutions to problems. Expensive projects with dubious results might look economically silly, but the need for them arises from a want. For example, after hearing that a local homeless person froze to death or something. 'We need to do something' always sounds better than 'welp'.
hanikrummihundursvin
28d ago
Eh, I'd think of it more in terms of if an attractive looking woman is hitting on you, you don't need agency.
Also, I'm sure wealthy men are going for young women. Just not marrying them. To that end I'm not sure if the data is demonstrating that recently married men are getting married to parity partners or if these parity partners have been an item for a long time. It would certainly match my experience of people meeting in university.
hanikrummihundursvin
29d ago
I'm inclined to agree with you. There is 'hatred' in many nations regarding past wars. But that's between nations.
To change perspectives, how one can say they are part of a group with a righteous feeling of anger, fear and vengeance against another national group whilst still claiming to be an equal national to that group strikes me as peculiar. Similar to how some advanced progressive/liberal/leftists manage to order their politics in such a way that brown people can do no wrong.
It is necessarily the case by dint of these emotions that there is a difference. How one would categorize or order that difference is up for debate, but that's where it starts.
hanikrummihundursvin
29d ago
I'll be honest, the condescending twattery got to me a little. But I forgive you.
Now, Let's read together. I say:
"As I've just said, the point wasn't about jews in particular but the phenomenon of outside population groups reaping the harvest and then leaving when it's time to till the field."
You say: "Well, that's a bad thing to do, agreed. Glad you didn't mean Jews"
There's nothing for me to say or do here when what I write holds no relevance to what you reply with.
It feels like we are trying to push a square peg through a round hole, so long as scientists are people and not robots.
Having gone through a long journey of internet atheism, towards 'Skepticism' as a sort of general outlook to fill in the void that a lack of coherent belief system creates, I was left, like many, very unimpressed by my fellow atheists, skeptics and scientists in general insofar as they were represented by science popularizers. I did not find anything similar to Less Wrong during this time, but was left to trudge through the mud of Skeptic drama, power tripping feminist moderators and such. Atheism+ came along with a bang and every foot soldier of internet atheism and skepticism turned from making mountains out of molehills, where the actions of some pastor in the middle of nowhere did or said something silly, towards tearing each other apart over small ideological differences. These were the same people who scoffed at the silly religious people who start wars over inconsequential differences in scripture...
Now, that's just the rabble beneath the 'Science'. It included a lot of professors and scientists, sure, but it also included a lot of nobodies. But this was the population group that had, for at least a decade, labored under the delusion that they were in some way different from the rest. With science, reason and rationality as their shield. Turns out they very much weren't any of that to any extent that mattered.
But, again, this is the rabble. The scientists themselves, surely, are better. Right? Well, as you say yourself, they kind of aren't. And better men than me or you have long made that observation. Turns out they are very much human like everyone else.
To that end I'd argue the kind of 'scientist' you seem to pine for would probably make for a terrible person in any other aspect of life. Good people don't constantly have to evaluate base truths. Wallowing in self doubt over whatever facet of their life they happen to re-evaluate today, to not fall prey to bias or whatever, whilst potentially destroying key aspects of their life in the process.
Further than that, I'd say that if you ever want to colonize Mars, the last thing you need is science. As you can't hope to achieve such a lofty goal without true believers who hold not doubt in their heart towards their task but unshakeable faith and enthusiasm. Lest you end up with another 'Whitey on the Moon' paradigm.
As far as my mind can see, if we were to form any sort of realistic framework that could facilitate this goal of veneration and exploration for science, physics and space, we are working towards a chauvinistic European and/or East Asian supremacism. Any other population groups and any other concerns that don't functionally establish such authority are doomed to fall prey to everything we've seen trip up science so far. Though I welcome any thoughts to the contrary.
In conclusion, it seems that if one loves science, one should learn to love politics first.
More options
Context Copy link