domain:felipec.substack.com
It doesn't solve any of that, of course.
Assets that, if some reports are to be believed, were in some locations recently relocated and possibly preparing for an upcoming major strike that would coincide with the peace talks ongoing offensive.
Oops! I managed to miss the irony
The pro-Russians tend to outwardly go for a more "rational" style of discourse and pro-Ukrainians for more "emotional", but these are just chosen styles of discourse, they don't actually indicate that one side is more rational and the other more emotional. I still remember how the "rational" pro-Russian warbloggers and -tweeters spent weeks declaring that there's not a slightest chance the Ukrainians would get the city of H'erson back or push Russians out of the Kharkiv oblast and then dropped the whole topic like a hot potato when that happened without any indication of why they were wrong.
Pro-Russians have been shouting about the imminent nuclear war and crazy Ukrainians being on the brink of WW3 for three years now in a row every time that Ukrainians pull a successful operation of some kind (and also between the operations). Isn't it a bit tiresome when WW3 once again fails to happen?
Word on the street (who knows if true) is that the drone containers were assembled inside Russia by Ukrainian sleeper agents. There's a photo circulating claiming to depict the interior of the same warehouse in Chelyabinsk (I think) that was in the Ukrainian propaganda release depicting the assembly process.
Show Burke or Chesterton the system being destabilized, and I'm skeptical their conclusion would go the way you claim.
SCOTUS defied all its normal rules about procedural posture to protect the rights of an illegal immigrant in six hours on a holiday weekend.
While I do not know the specifics, based on priors I would guess that this involved a suspected gang member being at risk of imminent deportation to some El Salvador mega prison. As Trump's efforts to follow court orders to get people deported in such a way were sadly unsuccessful, it seems reasonable to treat these deportations as a permanent harm and prioritize these cases accordingly.
--
I think the problem with the 2nd amendment is that the text allows for a wide range of interpretations. One could argue that the framers meant the small arms of the 1780s -- which were the only guns they knew about, and if a city-destroying laser gun had popped up in 1800 they might have felt different about everyone owning it. Or that they meant 'state of the art military firearms, in perpetuity', because surely nobody would beat any tyrant today with flintlock rifles. Or even that they meant weapon systems to wage war in general, from man-portable antitank weapons to stealth bombers and nukes.
Previous case law has extended 2A to cover cartridges, revolvers and semiautomatics, but not automatics or explosive weapons. As far as the original purpose of the second (to enable the population to resist a tyrant like the US did during the revolutionary war) is concerned, it is very much moot. If the tyrant fields a tank, then the Americans owning what is currently legal for them to own, AR15s or no AR15s, will lose very badly in a direct confrontation. To give them the firepower to even have a fighting chance against tanks or airplanes would also give them the power to effortlessly take out school busses or jumbo jets, and this is a trade-off which few people will favor.
It should also be pointed out that the current SCOTUS has been otherwise quite Republican-friendly. They overturned Roe (which to be fair was always a stretch) and they gave Trump immunity for basically anything he did as a president. I can assure you, the disappointment the gun nuts feel with the SCOTUS for not affirming the legality of semi-automatic AR15s is tiny compared to the disappointment the liberals feel over Dobbs.
I question to what extent those people even are thought leaders in the context of MAGA or the modern Republican base. It's hard to see Burke or Chesterton approving of the kind of reckless destabilisation that you get with Trump, no matter how far you stretch the analogy.
To my mind they're just totally different ideologies. There are always some differences between the way a movement's elite conceives of its mission and the way the masses do, but I think this is far enough that it's fair to say there is no meaningful resemblance.
Much appreciated!
... Huh?
How does that solve the problem of drones hurled at Dodgers games or Morgan Wallen concerts? Or power substations or the George Washington bridge at rush hour? Or, hell, just in the general direction of downtown Dallas?
Accurate.
War is ghoulish endeavor. There was a saying that only losing generals have glorious victories, because they are the ones that haven't seen what battlefield aftermath is after winning.
Probably because it is a game.
In general, the curated lists as well as the GoI-Hubs are a good place to start since they give some info, so you can judge better whether it's the kind of story you like. But the top-rated ones are almost all great, and going in blind is just more effective for many of them. Btw, it's no coincidence that almost all highly-rated stories are older.
For some of my own recommendations, to keep with the Lovecraftian (meaning grand-scale horror tied into smaller exploration stories):
-the Daevite stories. There's quite a lot of content so there is bound to be some hit and miss, but the core idea is solid and a nice twist on Lovecraft.
-SCP-2935, aka the dead planet
-SCP-093, aka the red sea object.
And some other personal favorites:
-SCP-3008, aka the IKEA dimension
-SCP-1689, aka the holding bag of potatoes
-SCP-2718, aka what happens after?
-SCP-1562, aka the tunnel slide
-SCP-3003, aka the end of history
-SCP-3673, aka the ballet room
-Parawatch Hub. Just some honest, small scale mystery/horror.
I will let my comment be: I'm glad you got yourself away from this person. Hopefully no lasting damage to you.
I don't know why I am always surprised when someone is surprised to discover "Catholic is, indeed, Catholic".
Her policy is just the policy of the Catholic Church, some kind of generic progressive social democracy except opposed to abortion.
I honestly have to laugh about this, because remember back when she was being confirmed and the rumour-mongering was about her being a member of a cult? A traditionalist cult that treated women as second-class? I don't think Dianne Feinstein was complaining about her being too liberal when she went off about the dogma lives loudly in you.
Yeah, weirdly enough the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church is not a right-wing American institution. Or a left-wing American institution. But now you guys have the pope, here's your chance to get it Chicago-style!
Relevant, perhaps, but still unwise to attend.
(reposting to alert of major correction)
with the only indication being an extra "approve" item on the row of small, greyed-out text at the bottom of each comment
The moderators can use custom CSS to make the approve button more visible. For example, [data-bs-target="#reportCommentModal"]{font-size:2em!important;}
makes the report button twice as big as the other buttons. (Not being a moderator, I don't know what selector will make the approve button bigger. I'm just using the report button as an example. From looking at the code, I think it might be something like [id^=approve]
.)
What’s happening here is the wrong decision, just like Roe v. Wade was the wrong decision
That is fundamentally not what is happening here. The question is not whether the Supreme court has made a good decision in this case. The question is whether the Supreme Court is capable of delivering a good decision in any case.
And to a fair degree of precision, the answer is, "No".
We have numerous examples of what an actual Supreme Court victory looks like. Desegregation enforced by Paratroopers dispersing peaceful protestors, including children, with fixed bayonets is what a Supreme Court victory looks like. Obergefell, which overnight fundamentally reshaped the law nationwide with strict enforcement and zero mercy for resistance or dissent is what a Supreme Court victory looks like. A Supreme Court victory means you get your way, and those who disagree are shit out of luck.
It turns out that Red Tribe is not allowed to have actual Supreme Court victories. Red tribe supreme court victories apply only where Red Tribe has secured unassailable political power; Blue Tribe strongholds are free to ignore the rulings at will, and it turns out that when they do so, the Court will back down rather than escalate. We have stress-tested the formal mechanisms of the Constitution and its adjudication to their limits and perhaps beyond, and they simply were not able to handle the load. That is unfortunate, but hardly unexpected. The important thing is to realize that the formal account of the system is in fact a lie, and that the necessary power will not be found here and so must be found elsewhere.
The Constitution is a scam. Perhaps it can be a useful scam, to the extent that knowledge of its insubstantiality is not yet fully general; it is likely possible to still get people to trade actual value for its paper promises. I will not be one of those people ever again, though, and you shouldn't be either.
This isn't even the full story. The full version includes possible sexual assault, possible lying about sexual assault, minor physical violence, inappropriate emotional outbursts, more cheating, more erratic behaviour, and more crazy dating experiences.
What's farcical? You guys are agreeing:
They'd make housing as quickly and as cheaply as they are making that bullet train.
That's farcical. If California made a state-owned housing corporation, they would build zero houses. The state is precisely the obstacle to house building. The reason we don't have houses is because if you try to build a house, they'll put you in jail.
Every year, Scott runs a book review contest for his readers. This year, to mix things up a little, he's running an "anything that isn't a book" review contest. Readers can vote on the finalists here: https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/choose-nonbook-review-finalists-2025
In the interests of partial disclosure, I did enter the contest, but in order to maintain Scott's desire for the entries to be judged anonymously, I won't tell you which entry is mine. Suffice to say that writing it was a big operation, to the point of having my girlfriend read over it to give feedback, and also printing it off myself so as to go through it literally line-by-line. I think the end result was something pretty special, and I hope you all agree if you do end up reading it.
More options
Context Copy link