netstack
Texas is freedom land
No bio...
User ID: 647
netstack
Texas is freedom land
20d ago
That’s stupid. No, worse—it’s a bailey, an attempt to distance white nationalism from the poor optics of boots meeting necks.
Civic nationalism pretends race-blindness right until it comes time to judge whether someone is capable of meeting this nebulous standard. And what do you know, suddenly it’s time to fall back on population statistics and half-assed sociology. How convenient it is to use skin color as a proxy!
netstack
Texas is freedom land
22d ago
I assumed you were being facetious, and I started to write a response about the elite college mission. But it’s possible you’re dead serious, and have some alternative structure in mind. This is why we have a rule about speaking plainly.
In the interest of not misrepresenting you—do you believe elite colleges spend more or less time teaching people things than they did in the 1950s? And do you think that should actually change?
netstack
Texas is freedom land
11d ago
I don’t either.
If you expected this, don’t act so sore when it happens.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
27d ago
Israel's motive and tactics for dealing with the Gazans generally, but especially the impending Rafah Aktion, mirror the Revisionist interpretation of the resettlement of Jews in Eastern Europe.
The Revisionists have spent decades trying to make the Holocaust look as tame as possible, emphasizing all the ways that Germany could have been doing it as a perfectly normal resettlement policy. Then when Israel does anything resembling resettlement, what do you know, suddenly that’s super evil and completely unjustified. Oh, how the tables have turned!
Is that really the best you’ve got?
I have only ever noticed Revisionists really talk about Revisionism.
Funny, I was thinking the same thing. You are remarkably consistent.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
13d ago
Man, I really enjoyed the summary, especially Gorsuch reducing a professional to a stammering mess. Warms the soul.
Then you had to go and ruin it by tilting at this weird caricature of “New Lefty Science” and “the Lefties That Be.” Have you considered that maybe people you don’t like can be right?
- Sotomayor asks: if this ordinance is not applied to people who are incidentally sleeping outside, but only if the police think they have no home address, is it really legalizing conduct?
- Kagan adds that enforcement rests on having a home, which is a status, not a conduct.
- Evangelis counters that Robinson featured no actus reus, but this situation does: camping. Or really sleeping outside, due to the specifics of the injunction.
- Jackson reasons that if you’re relying on the act of sleeping, then you are touching on a “basic function”. And that’s what gets proportionality protections from the 8th.
- Evangelis avoids a follow-up about eating in public by arguing that a “necessity defense” would come up before the 8th.
- After some going around in circles, Roberts shelves the subject.
Which part of this do you have a problem with? Because it looks, to me, like a legitimate debate over the limits of the 8th. The hypotheticals are relevant. The questions are clear. No digressions about historical richness or other sources of vibes. Just “why is this different from Robinson?”
I will try to review more of the summary later. So far, I don’t see what you’re so sarcastic about.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
14d ago
Less antagonistic, please.
You can make this observation—it sure does look like that was already implied by MartianNight—without turning up the heat.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
1d ago
I don’t understand why people expect that of Trump. When has he ever struck back at the civil service? “Putting away woke” (?) sounds like it’ll end with the same results as “draining the swamp.”
Most progress on this front has been made by the B- and C-list of conservatives. DeSantis, Abbott…I think Rufo is more credible as a reformer, and he’s not even pursuing office. Would Trump be making these particular mouth sounds if they hadn’t been pushing related issues in the midterms?
In my opinion, the most likely path for making idpol unfashionable is a foreign-policy presidency. Doesn’t really matter who. We’re not getting a “fresh prince” decade by cranking up the domestic outrage.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
27d ago
I also disagree, mod hat off, that his angle is particularly cogent. He’s quite thoroughly on record defending Nazi “resettlements,” but now that he can claim his favorite punching bags are doing the same?
And his evidence for the sameness gives way in favor of paragraphs and paragraphs of harping on eyewitness accounts. It’s the definition of a strawman.
The rule definitely exists.
Look at the post history in question and tell me that SS posts about multiple subjects. I actually thought he was doing better than this. The most recent I found was a month back, and while it doesn’t mention Jews, I’d still put it firmly in the category of apologetics. Go back a couple further, and even his analysis of topical movies has to harp on their Jewishness. Tell me, on what else has he spilled any volume of ink?
netstack
Texas is freedom land
4d ago
Modern new left liberalism is a very radical ideology that doesn't get sufficient negativity for it.
No it isn’t. The world bank, WHO, rules-based-international-order of neoliberalism? That’s about as nonradical as you can get. Aggressively not radical. It files the sharp edges off the communists and the reactionaries in order to keep things running a little more smoothly.
A South Africa that didn't allow parties like ANC and those more extreme, and such politicians found themselves in prison, and parties and organizations with such agenda banned
How do you think that’s enforced? How do you make sure the right people get suppressed? For every apartheid SA there’s a lovely Cambodia or North Korea or Rwanda descending into bloodshed. The best situation we’ve found, empirically speaking, is to weaponize tolerance. That’s liberalism.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
8d ago
Correlation isn’t causation. I’d be willing to bet that their birth rates predate whatever this is.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
8d ago
Okay, but how bad is it really?
Looking at the Unherd article, for example. Their thesis: #MeToo caused radical misogyny and conservative backlash. Their evidence: one survey showing young men were unusually hostile to the current president. A second survey, published in 2019, saying they really disliked feminism. And then a smattering of demographic and dating stats which don’t really measure opinion so much as try to justify it.
If that’s the quality of evidence, I’m not sure it can be distinguished from garden-variety fearmongering. Hey, our students don’t really like Biden. Does that mean the Democrats are at a crossroads of anti[femin/egalitarian/Semit]ism?
On the other hand, SK apparently elected their antifeminist. That speaks a little louder. Has he actually acted on his alleged platform? Because this sort of narrative is what I’d expect to see from a smear campaign.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
15d ago
By whom?
I'm sure you can find any number of groups who are proud to participate. I don't think any of them deserve much credit.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
19d ago
It’s possible. The elements are present, and I can’t say I’ll be surprised if there turns out to be a press release condemning the transphobic userbase, or whatever.
I find it more likely that this is a lazy solution to technical debt or to giving players “more” by reusing assets. That’s the kind of mundane blunder that happens all the time, San Fran or not.
I work for a defense contractor halfway across the country. We’ve got a DEI statement or three on our website! But if we ended up in the news for making ugly software, let alone an ugly plane, there would be a dozen reasons I’d suspect before asking if it was done to promote idpol. There’s just…so many other considerations.
That Twitter account says Niantic hired a DEI training company, and also that they’re in San Francisco. Neither of those things is enough to explain screwing up your flagship product! Perhaps there’s a simpler explanation?
But he’s also making it his job to piss people off. If there’s a reasonable explanation, you’re not going to hear it from him.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
27d ago
Now listen here, sir. This is the CW thread, and I expect you to be on your worst behavior. None of this light-hearted nonsense!
netstack
Texas is freedom land
8d ago
I don’t believe you can draw a line from Jim Crow defenders and lynch mobs to whatever’s popular today. Even your caricature of it.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
8d ago
To me, this sounds a lot more plausible than “#MeToo did it.” The articles looked political first and theoretical a distant second.
What’re you basing this on? What gives you this impression?
netstack
Texas is freedom land
13d ago
Why do you think it’s misplaced sympathy and not, I dunno, doing their jobs?
Surely it’s not just because they’ve disagreed with your intuition.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
13d ago
No, it doesn’t.
I’ve laid out the case for deterrence before. That only requires Russia to think they can succeed quickly and easily. Correcting their estimate is valuable.
In the world where we refused to supply any of them, Russia could exert power over its NATO neighbors.
If more people thought like me, it's entirely possible that this war would not have happened.
How do you mean? I expect Russia would have more incentive to invade, not less, if they foresaw no Western opposition.
blank check
If we were talking about Patriot Acts and boots on the ground, maybe. But spending money on munitions is like…our comparative advantage. It’s making a slightly larger fraction of GDP go towards geopolitical goals. I think we’re still getting a decent return on investment.
Yes, more people are dying than would if we washed our hands of it, and I wish they weren’t. But how much of the culpability falls on us rather than on the conscriptors, let alone the invaders?
I would take your “Mistakes were Made” bet, because I don’t expect this to escalate in the ways you’re thinking. Russia is probably going to win out as Ukraine collapses. I will admit that I was wrong—and lobby my Congressman against it, etc.—if America considers more direct intervention.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
24d ago
No, I’m willing to bet that no one wants such a thing. If you think it’s a good rhetorical question, then you need a little time to cool off.
One day ban.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
8d ago
I believe that was zPv’s point. Making a stink about Obama’s latest change was accepting the legitimacy of the past four decades of Title IX.
That’s not a nullification. I’d say the correct remedy for opposing a law is challenging it in court, and Abbott’s doing that. But since this isn’t a law passed by Congress, it’s hard to fault him for instructing his administration on how to implement their administrative change.
Now, there’s a little problem. The USED already implements other Title IX athletics rules. Seeing as those aren’t being challenged, I assume Congress explicitly delegated the power at some point. Either that, or it was assumed through the ever-popular federal funding mechanism.
So what makes this different? If it were an Executive Order, I’d understand the case for a Constitutional violation. But this is a “Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.” See here. It sure sounds like business as usual. If so, the federal government has its obvious recourse: cut federal funding. No Constitutional wrangling necessary.
That’d probably be a big win for Texas Republicans. The rule is being spun as “destroying women’s sports” already. Actually reducing any federal funds? Free leverage for Abbott. As much as I resent the guy, he’s set up a decent gambit. Hard to blame him, when Biden’s agencies are being such partisan hardliners—
Oh.
Well, no one was going to look at the actual rule, anyway. And if they did, they’d surely see that it’s a trap; no restriction could ever survive the captured, liberal media blitz. And if it did, the deep state would bury it. And if they didn’t, those partisan judges would have to legislate from the bench to stop it. And if they didn’t, well, Biden would obviously send the 101st Airborne to escort a minimally-sympathetic trans woman into your daughter’s locker room. Or worse, do it himself. And you don’t want Sleepy Joe near your daughter, do you?
Far better to make political hay now, before all that unpleasantness can get started.
More options
Context Copy link