hanikrummihundursvin
No bio...
User ID: 673
hanikrummihundursvin
5hr ago
I'm not sure where you are from but 'Bomb everything and then watch mass starvation, suffering and death whilst shrugging your shoulders saying 'Iran can't have nukes' sounds, at best, bizarre.
Like, at what point does nuking Israel just become a more humanitarian option to your proposals.
hanikrummihundursvin
5hr ago
That would be a relevant point if we knew nothing about Iran. But we do know things about Iran so I don't see the need for games of analogy.
hanikrummihundursvin
11hr ago
That might be true but I'm not sure what that changes.
That's a very salient point that comes from a perspective I'd not normally think from. Though I think it raises two questions: Why was this knowledge and tradition lost in the first place and what good would come of bringing it back?
Women might be trying their best to lock down a relationship with an attractive man but so long as that man is not looking for life long commitment or is demanding sex before taking things any further then any woman not playing the out-slutting game will simply lose faster than anyone who is, no? And this state of affairs can continue forever so long as there are more women looking for attractive men than there are attractive men. Since the men have the power to gatekeep relationships.
From my perspective a part of the problem is still, as I alluded to before, that women have a choice. They could bend to some form of patriarchy and functionally organize and regulate sex in exchange for commitment, as traditionalist social values functionally did for a time, or at least tried to. Or they could have a sexual revolution against these social values and dictate their own bodies how they please.
Now, women have already made their choice. And I think their choice was made before you saw any widescale acceptance of black pilled nihilism about life and the lack of value placed on work and pushing yourself. Exhibited by many men in the thread you linked. To that end I think the chain of causality that leads to many of our issues, though certainly not all, lies at the feet of women having the power to make that poor choice.
hanikrummihundursvin
2d ago
Shaming and punishing e-thots can only work when alternative life paths are broadly accessible for average women.
Work how and to what end? I don't think most people calling out Aella are there to 'save' her and bring her to Jesus. They just want her to stop spreading her poison. I'm sure many think it would be good if she found salvation, happiness and peace or whatever, but her not existing as she does today is a more immediate goal, I would reckon.
Your post reads like the blame lies somewhere with 'attractive' men not committing to the women who want them. But chances are there are simply not enough 'attractive' men for these women. A part of that problem, that older societies had solved, was to largely take the choice away from women. To that end I can only roll my eyes at your post. The problem is entirely woman made, maintained and supported. So if women are having a perspective on this issue I'd hope it includes some pretty drastic self critique and reflection to reconcile just where the woman ingroup brain has taken the society that gave it freedom.
On top of that, women can be financially independent. How we can equate marriage and prostitution as the only avenues of life for women in the modern age doesn't compute for me.
hanikrummihundursvin
3d ago
https://news.antiwar.com/2024/03/10/video-shows-israeli-soldiers-executing-unarmed-palestinian-man/
This video shows the IDF talking about killing an unarmed man, and shows a man dead on the floor. The mood seems jovial.
It's the closest I can get to meeting your criteria. I can't find videos that show both the shooter and person getting shot, as that might be a rough thing to get on film.
hanikrummihundursvin
4d ago
I think your demand is hard to meet simply because gore videos like this are not easily searchable. But that fact seems rather irrelevant to the question of whether or not these killings are happening. Unless the position is that these mainstream media outlets and human rights groups are lying about these deaths and the videos they allege to have of the events.
hanikrummihundursvin
5d ago
Was very easy to find.
Considering that Israel has denied the Red Cross visitation to their prisons post Oct 7 it shouldn't be a surprise that there are some sordid things going on.
Firas Hassan, a 50-year-old youth ministry worker from Bethlehem, was arrested under an administrative detention order in 2022. Conditions then were acceptable, he told the Guardian: there were hot showers, decent food, time outside in the yard, and about six prisoners to a cell, each with his own bunk.
In early 2023, Ben-Gvir was appointed the minister in charge of prisons. He immediately set about getting rid of what he called “perks” for Palestinian inmates, such as fresh bread, and limiting shower times to four minutes.
But those changes were nothing compared to what happened after 7 October, Hassan said. “There was respect before. But after 7 October I was sure I was going to die there. I lost all hope.”
Hassan described conditions common to many of the interviews. He said he and his cellmates – up to 20 people in the same cell designed for seven – were beaten, sometimes several times a day. He said one injured cellmate claimed to him through tears after a particularly brutal incident in November that guards had raped him with a baton.
With little water and no washing facilities or clean clothes, conditions quickly became extremely unsanitary. Food for the entire room consisted of a piece of meat, a cup of cheese, half a tomato and half a cucumber in the morning, and about five spoonfuls of uncooked rice per person for dinner. There was one 2-litre bottle of water for the whole room to share.
“The guards told me, we are giving you enough to keep you alive, but if it was up to us we will let you starve,” he said. On his release without charge in April, Hassan had lost 22kg in weight.
Hassan also heard the screams of 38-year-old Thaer Abu Asab, who was allegedly beaten to death in the cell next door after refusing to bow his head to guards.
Another witness, Mousa Aasi, 58, from Ramallah governorate, told the Guardian that after the beating, Asab was dragged into the courtyard in view of all the inmates. “They said he died in hospital later, but I think he was already dead,” he said.
hanikrummihundursvin
7d ago
If we evaluate everything from a position of intellectual titillation then yeah, bring it on. But that's not what anyone does. So why should someone like this get a pass? There are plenty of people who think a single person shouting 'boo whore' is more valuable than a thousand Aellas.
hanikrummihundursvin
10d ago
I wasn't trying to contradict any of your reasoning. That's why I said that propaganda is what you say, and then I elaborated further on what you were missing to understand my point.
By blocking I mean people with certain views and impulses can't have an outlet to vent their emotions or resonate with others.
As I tried to get across before, Rogan acts as a lightning rod for those people who fall outside the mainstream media ecosystems. He amplifies their impulses and ideas through resonance. Without him they are much like the now splintered audience of TotalBiscuit. They hate many things about the current state of affairs, but they don't do it because they are told to do so by Rogan. They already did. That's why they are there.
Exactly what my argument would predict.
Then I don't understand your contention about the limits of propaganda. So long as the left can exercise power over existing mediums and curate media ecosystems, they just continue winning. They dropped the ball on Rogan, but similar things have happened in the past. I mean, how could Rush Limbaugh have been so popular whilst laughing about gay people dying from AIDS? Why can't the left have their own radio shock jock?
Fixating on the idea that the 'left' can't have a Joe Rogan, Rush Limbaugh or anyone else when the only reason such people have relevance in this context is that they are not 'left' seems asinine. Due to total cultural dominance the left have half the population isolated and starved of emotional resonance. This population then gravitates like flies to whatever guy shows them light. And even then half the flies are too scared to go against the mainstream programming anyway.
To me this all seems like a product of total left victory. Sure, it's a problem to set up a concentration camp for your enemy. And the partisans hiding in the forest are an issue. But you still won the war.
hanikrummihundursvin
12d ago
Propaganda is what you say, just on a much larger timescale. With the addition of blocking certain ideas and types of thinking. You don't need to spread your message all the time. Just make sure it's the only message available.
As for Rogan, he was a mildly failed comedian with a small time career in TV. Nothing about his podcast was deliberate beyond what any other random podcast was. No one knew what could become of the medium. I'd say Rogan's success was about as deliberate as a person winning the lottery. If you want to say that you can deliberately win the lottery by buying a ticket, that's that. But that doesn't fit any conception I have of deliberate action.
The left did not need to change themselves to kill the internet. They won't need to change themselves to block the next Joe Rogan. It reminds me of an old video game reviewer called Total Biscuit. He managed to position himself as probably the biggest reviewer of video games. He passed away from cancer a few years ago and nothing has replaced him. People still play video games, people still fret about missing graphics options and bad games being sold for 60 dollars, but there's no central outlet for that like he provided. No public voice echoing their woes and reinforcing the validity of their wants and needs in the face of tone deaf developers and greedy publishers.
Around 50% of America is already not on board with the program regardless of Rogan existing or not. The question for the left is not 'how do we get them onboard'. The question is 'how do we keep them silent'. How do we keep their wants and impulses locked in a societal straightjacket so they don't threaten our power. Joe Rogan is bad for left wing propaganda since he exists as an outlet for the impulses 'non left' people already have.
hanikrummihundursvin
13d ago
You're approaching this from an angle where propaganda is something I don't think it is.
Joe Rogan wasn't 'built'. It was an accidental fire that happened to be able to exist since it spawned from spheres that were very much not intellectual and not mainstream. Fighting sports, drugs and a clique of mildly failing comedians. On top of that it was a new and emerging medium. It did survive by chance. It was fringe enough that no one with money wanted to touch it until people figured out just how big it had gotten.
By that point Rogan, through his own personal conviction and other things, figured out he didn't need any money men. The technology to monetize was, by chance, there to be used. His ownership of this thing he had made was more important to him. You can swap Rogan out for a different person and that person could just as well have sold the whole thing out for a big paycheck as soon as he could. Let Spotify or whatever interested party dictate the guests or allow them some minimal control over what is allowed to be said about certain topics and whatever else. Really not a big deal in the grand scheme of things.
Similar to how cries of cries of a lack of internet censorship were eventually heard, the calls for a left wing Joe Rogan will eventually be heard. This exact same game was played out with early internet culture. "What goes on the internet stays forever". Turns out this is not true. 'The Internet Hate Machine' was eventually neutered and killed off. Be that through direct action by the powers that be, or that people change, grow older, die, or whatever else. To that extent there is nothing that is lined up to replace Rogan. And like with other mediums, the slot Joe Rogan fills will either be subverted and controlled or bricked up.
hanikrummihundursvin
13d ago
The Joe Rogan problem for the 'left' is "We control everything except this one thing". I don't see how that is propaganda having its limits. Just that one side is not completely omnipotent. The propaganda still works well enough. We wouldn't be where we are today if it didn't.
hanikrummihundursvin
13d ago
That's the fault line in all of this. The outgroup is stupid cattle that needs to be herded.
I see a lot of the more liberal centrist aligned people huffing and scolding the 'left' over their inability to understand why Joe Rogan exists in the first place. How dumb the 'left' is for not recognizing that it's their own suffocating need to propagandize everything for the correct cause that creates the space Joe Rogan can occupy. But there's a small blind spot there as well.
To an extent the viewpoint that everything needs to be propaganda for the cause, and that everyone who isn't a true believe is just stupid cattle that needs to be herded and 'educated', has proven more correct than not. It's hard to find an intellectual hobby that has not been colonized or is in the process of being colonized by 'left' influence. Books, movies, TV, video and board games. For the past two decades practically every major hub and media outlet for these things has been taken over. And the stupid cattle still earnestly engage with it.
So who is really the odd one out here? The people who have managed to propagandize nigh every western institutional and intellectual space to deliver their message, or the people who periodically pop their heads out of the ocean of left wing propaganda to pissedly proclaim that you can't propagandize everything... Before diving back in.
hanikrummihundursvin
17d ago
Why can't I read filtered comments? Not directed at you per se.
hanikrummihundursvin
18d ago
I think there are too many stupid hobbies and sinful acts that too many people engage in for your point to be of much relevance.
hanikrummihundursvin
26d ago
Did I get the wrong David Cole at Taki mag? Or are you arguing for some specific definition of Holocaust denial?
hanikrummihundursvin
26d ago
He's a jew who did some holocaust denial work in the 90's. It's of great cathartic importance for some people here to notice and comment on his woes.
If I had rested any of my arguments on the fact that Caplan is not serious then I'd whole heartedly agree. But I didn't. To that end I do not understand what relevance the opinion of 'most people' has to do with anything. Much less so considering most people would say that advocating for an open borders policy is a sign of someone not being serious.
It's hard for me to address your claims when you keep the intentionally vague.
As an example, you say that my descriptions of Caplan don't ring true. You don't say which ones, but one of them was obviously true: That the environment Caplan inhabits purposefully prohibits certain things from being discussed.
My problem here is that earlier in this comment chain you rested one of your claims on the fact that Caplan has done a lot of work within this gestapo environment to be a point in his favor. This irks me a bit, since instead of arguing against an actual argument I made relating to the fact that a person purposefully inhabiting such a stifling environment and that the work produced within is not 'serious', you ignore it.
Related to that, you assert I am not familiar with Caplan and his work. Insinuating that my lack of familiarity is a point against me. But by the same token, you assert that Caplan could probably not address these points publicly, given the environment mentioned above. So how could my alleged unfamiliarity with Caplan be of any relevance?
My description of Caplan was that he has not engaged with population group differences within the US and the lackluster result of immigration into the EU when it comes to his assertions. I, as a consequence, said he is not a serious person. I am, given all of this, at a loss as to how my descriptions are not true.
To top it all off: You, despite having allegedly far greater knowledge of his work, don't point to where he addresses these contentions. Instead you just spend one too many a comment floating the possibility that he has. Well, you now say he has written about them, but you're just not telling. OK man.
hanikrummihundursvin
30d ago
I've spent a few paragraphs voicing exactly what my problems are. Whatever it is you are doing now, including antagonistically mischaracterizing what I write, should be beneath you. I can just as well assert that the only reason you are here is because you agree with Caplan and that your fixation on the word "serious" is the only in you have to play defense, irrelevant though it might be. But that would be a tad low brow and fruitless.
To answer your question about who is serious:
Insofar as people present reasons for why they believe things, they can be held to that standard. I gave examples where Caplan is actively ignoring contradictory information. Be that human differences between population groups or economic data from outside the US. Because Caplan is ignoring information pertinent to his own standard he can not be considered serious.
By the same token a leftist open borders moralizer is serious. They don't need to pretend that their advocacy has any locally positive economic benefits based on statistical extrapolations and human behavior. They just assert that people fleeing a country need refuge and that there is a moral duty to provide shelter. They can volunteer their time and effort to solidify the fact they actually believe this, but the argument is ultimately just moral.
I wrote this for you, but to me, these distinctions are largely irrelevant to the topic at hand. My point was about Caplan. He was presented by you and others as being something he is not. I did not argue that point by asserting that he is not serious so I don't see the relevance about some universally applicable definition of the word.
hanikrummihundursvin
30d ago
When people curtail their viewpoint diversity to be within the Overton Window and then ignore obvious blindspots to legitimate contradiction then no, they are not serious. Regardless of how much they work and waffle within those parameters.
There is an entire cottage industry of academics and media that exists for little other than venerating immigration. There can exist no serious thought within that sphere when alternatives are functionally verboten. The people who exist within this sphere without acknowledging just how ridiculous the entire thing is are not serious.
hanikrummihundursvin
30d ago
And I think you just agree with him so you want to venerate him.
A serious person would contend with the obvious and hard objections to the proposed policy. Caplan has never done that. In fact, his advocacy is a perfect example of non-serious thinking. Divorced from reality and extrapolated from fiction. A fiction partially maintained by institutions that you allege lend Caplan credibility.
I mean, you're not going to debate anyone in a public setting that points out that, outside of East-Asia and Europe, almost every single immigrant population group that moves into EU countries is a net negative. That seems like kind of a big deal. But no, Caplan is a serious thinker who writes books, blogs, does podcasts, has lectured at a university for 20 years and never interacts with any of it. Just create a magic category called 'Immigrant' and compare it to a magic category called 'American Native' and voila.
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
Asserting he has heard and answered every critique on immigration is not accurate so long as he is not distinguishing between population groups within the US. Further than that, there's a good reason why he and those like him focus on immigration into the US and not immigration into the EU.
Contrary to the lies of convenience told by Caplan, there is plenty of high quality data in the EU on immigration that could certainly have made it into his many articles and book. It's only that the alleged immigration benefits do not live up to the hype and can only be maintained through statistical sleight of hand, like counting the children of immigrants as native and playing fast and loose with population groups. And even then there are OECD countries that post flat out negative numbers.
Caplan is not a serious person.
Why? For some reason that's not some nebulous human flourishing?
More options
Context Copy link