domain:eigenrobot.substack.com
Rov_Scam
2m ago
The Supreme Court just ruled unanimously that the CRA is not a one-way street, and the same standards apply regardless of whether the plaintiff is a member of a minority group.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
3m ago
Yeah, though it's almost certainly due to the TV show. Thanks for confirming alignment, though. It made sense, but I couldn't be sure there wasn't some Guy Fawkesaesque valance flip.
Catsnakes_
4m ago
Why does Musk or Trump blaming the left mean specifically that "the left" needs specifically to criticize Kirk as some sort of a response (rather than criticizing Musk or Trump, for instance, given the victim isn't the one blaming the left)? "the left" could even respond to Musk and Trump the way many sensible people did by disavowing the senseless violence without qualification and leaving it at that, which defangs that attack.
orthoxerox
If you can read this, you're using a custom theme
4m ago
That's a bigass bathroom. My usual sizing for a master bathroom is 6x10 ft or 180x300cm: 80cm for a full-sized bath, 80cm for a toilet, 140cm for a double vanity.
How can you fit a queen bed into 8 feet? That leaves just 1.5 feet at either side of it. Are you designing it for crab people that will edge sidewise into bed?
Wave_Existence
4m ago
he was something that ONLY appears on the right.
ANY left-leaning commentator you could name.
Well, you listed some examples of people who you don't think meet the criteria, i think probably the most comparable person on the left is Destiny. For all his moral shortcomings, both alleged and photographed, the guy does essentially the exact kind of events Kirk was doing.
I'm not fully aware of the dem college campus debatelord universe but i do imagine there are more examples if i was to look into it. IIRC there was a whole traveling circus of these types who got into an internal struggle session the week they were supposed to start a collegiate tour earlier this year (which, yes this is funny but it also shows that there are more personalities in this space than i am familiar with)
You can say a lot of things about the dire state of the broader left wing's willingness to engage in debate, but there are a number of people of varying levels of success and organizational prowess either doing or trying to do what Kirk did, so i think you are putting too much emphasis on how uniquely brave his actions were.
RIP though, he didn't deserve to die for his beliefs, and certainly not by public execution.
OracleOutlook
Fiat justitia ruat caelum
5m ago
If the meaning was as you speculate, why would he call that a very, very radical view?
Because from Elementary School on kids are indoctrinated into treating MLK Jr. as an American saint who saved us from our sins of racism. We study his pastoral letters and speeches while teachers coo about how enlightened he was. Even saying, "he was a good man, but not perfect," would be radical. And he wasn't perfect. He plagiarized his PHD dissertation and a lot of his speeches. He cheated on his wife with multiple women, one of whom he struck. He still likely had a positive impact on the country, because most of these pecadillos were not widely known during his life or even today. But if more people knew these details about him, I don't think it would become a very radical thing to say that MLK Jr. was not a good man.
Thank you for turning up more than I could, but I wish I could watch a video where he actually goes into what his beef is with the Civil Rights Act so I don't have to strongman him myself.
TheAntipopulist
Formerly Ben___Garrison
8m ago
I don't have the guts to put myself out in public and go around debating leftists in person at venues across the country. In terms of virtue points, maybe I get 8 for honesty and he gets 5 points, but he gets 10 for courage, and I get like 2, so he beats me.
"Going out in public" and debating people is hardly something that takes immense courage. I did policy debate in college -- where's my statute?
Before this, public figures generally didn't worry that much about their personal safety. Random crazies have always been a threat, but they're relatively rare compared to all the public figures going out into public. Maybe that's slowly changing as the US becomes more sectarian?
cjet79
10m ago
This debate shakes out the same way every time. Amadan was willing to write the objections, so I'll not repeat them all.
I'll add that I see being slow on responding to news as a feature rather than a bug of the policy.
This is not a news website it's a discussion website, and it's a place for thinking. I'd prefer allowing people to digest the news elsewhere and then post here if they want to actually discuss a particular thing.
The poster earned a ban because I have explicitly told them in the past to not do this. I'm not in favor of unlimited "warnings" that have no teeth.
Amadan
Enjoying my short-lived victory
11m ago
Sure, but if you want to start a thread about mod policies, it would be better to put it in the Small Questions thread than the CW thread.
TowardsPanna
12m ago
That's good to know.
I've gone with a cheap-ish but hopefully pretty solid intro package for coffee at home: Krups Silent Vortex blade grinder (saves a lot of $), Chemex 3 cup pour-over brewer with their proprietary filters + I'll make do with my non-goosenecked but pretty good new kettle with thermostat.
And I've informed myself a little on how to brew and where to get beans.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
12m ago
Yeah, this is starting to feel like an elaborate version of the mental gymnastics meme. I can get the "just because a lefty did, that doesnt say anything about the broader left" reaction, but we're cycling through them and they're getting increasingly frantic.
And again I can understand that from a hard-leftist, but it's quite a bit mire disturbing coming from the moderate ones.
YoungAchamian
13m ago
Such an action is toxic to the norms of discourse that is fundamental to a free, democratic society. They should be caught, tried by a jury of their peers, and put to death.
However at what point does one person's political assassination become another person's freedom fighter?
Stefferi
Chief Suomiposter
14m ago
If one moves about in European (and presumably American) far left circles, even peripherally (ie. Discords and stuff), it is pretty much guaranteed that they will know Bella Ciao and its Italian partisan context.
TheAntipopulist
Formerly Ben___Garrison
14m ago
He was dunk-farming on infantile leftists for clout in a similar vein that Milo Yiannopoulos exploited about a decade ago. That's not a bad thing, but it's hardly some great civic service.
TheAntipopulist
Formerly Ben___Garrison
18m ago
Maybe you'd have a point if we could all collectively agree to wait for a week before opining on this sort of thing, but top conservatives like Musk and Trump almost immediately blamed "the left" (basically half of the country) for this attack. You're effectively demanding unilateral disarmament.
YoungAchamian
18m ago
This doesn't at all mean him pulling the short straw and the risk coming due isn't tragic as he acknowledged in his comment.
Sure it is tragic, but it doesn't mean he is owed sympathy. And the lack of that sympathy doesn't make people sociopaths any more than a lack of sympathy for illegal immigrant mothers being pulled from their homes and deported, makes other people not sociopaths.
I am completely unsympathetic to both appeals for sympathy and cries of sociopathy at ones outgroup.
oats_son
23m ago
I really appreciate the apology, no joke. I've had such extreme emotions lately, I've tried so hard to get people to understand, I've left so many communities today... I thought I was going to be writing a long response to your reply proving my genuineness and self-doxxing myself even more with a tear-drenched keyboard.
I understand that it would be very damaging to relax every rule in the face of such emotional appeals. But I do think it might make sense to make a separate thread about this. Can I create a separate thread about this?
faceh
24m ago
that would make all sorts of things special exemptions like killing in self-defense (nobody needs to defend themselves against me)
Nah.
"Self-Defense" is actually quite simple. "I will not use violence against any person... UNLESS they use it against me first." Both defense and offense are 'using violence.' But generally speaking, offense is the one who initiated, and defense is the person responding to it.
A person who uses violence against me 'first' is demonstrating that they are okay with violence being used against them. Else, what entitles them to do it to me? I am absolutely happy to oblige them and have no moral qualms about this. I will, of course, exhaust most other possible remedies first before doing so because violence, as a sheer practical matter, sucks for all involved and still puts me at risk of harm.
Remember. I literally teach this stuff professionally. I also live in a state where the law supports self defense. I practice law. I am vigorously overqualified to argue what is and is not justifiable self-defense.
And I believe EVERY human is entitled to use violence to protect themselves from others who use violence on them.
No special pleading necessary.
prohibiting 6 year olds from drinking alcohol.
I can cover that one by pointing out that you're not really prohibiting six year olds from drinking. Most six year olds don't know what the fuck alcohol 'is'. You're prohibiting people from giving alcohol to six year olds and there are absolutely justifiable reasons for doing that.
YoungAchamian
25m ago
I mean, the 80s is half a lifetime away. The right wing that existed then doesn't exist today, and the lineage is rather thin as well
I mean fair but also there's definitely enough Christian conservatives on this forum advocating for a return to Christian morality even if they only make up a minority of the Right. And that's even before we get into the dissident rightists. Different flavors, but I imagine the feeling of being oppressed for having a different morality than them will be the same. I think the cultural memetic scars are also much longer lasting.
The left probably doesn't feel like they are deliberately oppressing FC. It's that C.S. Lewis quote all over. They feel they are freeing the people FC's tribe were oppressing. And if a few "bigots" need to be stomped on then so be it. I agree that they aren't deriving power from it directly but they are flexing that power, and to quote some Fantasy/Sci-fi Author I can't remember (Our that my memory invented: "Power is alive and it seeks those who will wield it, those it can corrupt to increase the power, so that they may wield it better. Power always grows in the hands of tyrants" Power is an egregor, and all entities exist to perpetuate their own growth and existence. The power they are flexing, that we feel oppressed by, will just be taken up by who ever replaces them. You can see that with the Rights return to cancel culture. After being affected by it for 2 decades, is the answer "Lets put the superweapon back in the box" no its "lets turn it on our enemies in our brief moment of power"
we're just two groups killing each other over whether bread should be buttered on top or on the bottom.
I like this phrase I'm stealing it. I despair that it will ever be so.
Not sure I want to wade into the discussion about the merit of the lefts vs rights values, too nebulous for me.
Primaprimaprima
Aliquid stat pro aliquo
26m ago
Frankly, I don't want people posting here who aren't smart. The stringent moderation has helped us cultivate a high-quality community. If people are getting filtered by the rules, then that's a feature, not a bug.
But those people can't provide coverage of everything here.
Quality over quantity. If something is genuinely newsworthy, then someone will write a sufficiently effortful post about it eventually (where, again, sufficiently effortful typically means 4-5 sentences). There's no rush.
jkf
26m ago
Where's the prayer for the high school students shot by a neonazi a few days ago?
That's the neat thing about praying -- you can pray for whomever you want!
If the Demcritters had asked for a prayer for those people, do you think the Repcritters would have shouted them down?
Quantumfreakonomics
30m ago
how and when you communicate is as important as the literal words.
Is there a better time to talk about Charlie Kirk than right now? He has never been, and never again will be, more relevant than he is right now. He is the topic of the national conversation.
Amadan
Enjoying my short-lived victory
30m ago
Everything is incredibly sad right now.
Yes, it is. You know what? I was probably more hostile than I needed to be, and I'm sorry for that. We've been getting a lot of shit thrown at us lately and the threads this week have been terrible. But I should still have tried to write that in a less antagonistic manner. I apologize.
That said- the point stands. Our rule against posting hot takes on breaking news is not because we're trying to make people jump through unreasonable hoops or prevent people from talking about breaking news. It's because we want to see effortposts, not people trying to emulate Twitter with who can get the fastest zinger out there. It really is not unreasonable to ask you, if you want to talk about the latest breaking news, to put a few minutes thought into what you want to say about it and not just copy-paste a link and an excerpt, which looks very much like someone who is just eager to have the first top-level thread on the subject.
I keep seeing this take. It's one thing to do 12 hours of "man on the street" and then edit to highlight idiots and owns. I'm sure he edited for owns for clips, but how much screening was Kirk doing on people coming up to the mic? Even if it was a fair amount, unlike man on the street, he wasn't going up to randos; his interlocutors came to him.
More options
Context Copy link