domain:archive.ph
sun_the_second
could survive a COD lobby and a gay furry discord server
1d ago
The principle of "who whom" has been, to my understanding, established to broadly apply to both sides. So the most new information that can be gained is whether it applies specifically to JD Vance.
pbmonster
1d ago
Television sets or (preferably) projector screens are for movie watching in company. Watching something together is fun.
But when I'm watching alone, I prefer studio headphones and my 30" 4K monitor 3' away from my face. It feels more immersive than IMAX (except for the bass, can't beat feeling explosions with your diaphragm).
quiet_NaN
1d ago
I think that almost all societies which are commonly labeled fascist did not use that as an endonym. Comes with the territory -- "we just adopted an ideology of the Italians" is a hard sell for ultra-nationalists.
I think there is a cluster in thing-space for the states of Mussolini, Hitler, Franco, and it is useful to have a word to reference that cluster, and the word their opponents have adopted for better or worse is fascism. One can debate how well it applies even to Franco and if it ever applied to any other states, of course.
Just because the SJ lets people pick some common identifiers it does not mean that individuals get to pick all identifiers. The SJ certainly does not like "I identify as native-American", and "I identify as assigned-female-at-birth" is absurd. Nor do we respect people deciding that they are not schizophrenic, but merely willing servants of the man in the moon.
Fascism as used by Eco is mostly an exonym, and it makes sense to have an exodefinition for that.
Iconochasm
2. Bootstrap the rest of the fucking omnipotence.
1d ago
Well gosh golly gee willickers, mister! All of that combined sounds almost as bad as a Weekend Update joke swap! By the inverse property of bipolar politics, I'm now feeling much friendlier towards the young democrats, the people who've spent the last two years in open, full-throated support of the demonic death cult that wants to rape and murder my children for being Jewish.
Nah, I'm just kidding. Michael Che goes way harder than any of the stuff in that Politico article during the left's weekly religious services. The crocodile tears are worth nothing until Colin Jost's head is on a pike.
And finally, no one but the most repulsive monsters would ever interact with a horrid goblin like Richard Hanania. I'm sure the Kamala Harris supporters of the "right", like Fuentes, are quite terrible in private. I join the chorus of condemnations for Hanania and anyone else lowly and contemptible enough to invite him to a private group chat.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
1d ago
Not "did people who are freaking out about this have anything to say about the comments on Charlie Kirk"?
Bingbong
1d ago
we'll do weird things like them away from their parents and raise them as our own'.
I'd say the intention of the Stolen Generation was ultimately benevolent from the government of the day even if the way it was carried out has a bunch of controversies. Also the ironicness of the Stolen Generation ultimately producing the vast majority of educated, reasonably-affluent Indigenous and their descendants who now rally endlessly about how bad the stolen generation was whilst their un-stolen counterparts essentially continue to rot in the ass-end of nowhere maybe deserves a serious thinkthrough.
Bingbong
1d ago
Yeah but a lot of the China rhetoric stuff is paying tribute to the legacy that led them to the current moment and sufficient undercurrent of 'if you do not pay lip service, you will not advance'. At an individual level from having chatted to a decent amount of Mainlanders there's a collectivist spirit but anything that your standard Westerner would call 'communism' is fairly dead on the ground.
sun_the_second
could survive a COD lobby and a gay furry discord server
1d ago
'Did JD have anything to say about the comments on Charlie Kirk's shooting' is the pertinent question here, I think.
WhiningCoil
Ghost of Quokka's Future
1d ago
I am so profoundly glad I had my teens and 20-somethings before the age of, whatever this is. We had ICQ, AOL IM, irc, and to the best of my knowledge none of this was really permanent? Logs were all stored locally, if you missed something in irc, you just missed it. It was all far more ephemeral by nature.
I'm especially glad there are no recording of what went on at LAN parties even into our 20's. Or the insane conversations we had at college. Or the things we said drunk post college. Or the chauvinistic things we joked about when we started having some success with women.
Side note: Didn't we just get done watching liberals melt down over "comedy being illegal" because Jimmy Kimmel almost lost his job? Isn't Jay Jones still running in my state on a platform of making me suffer because I'm evil, I'm breeding little fascist, and I need to feel the boot until I change my politics? And not a single Democrat has called for him to drop out, or even withdrawn their endorsement?
JD has the right of this.
iprayiam3
1d ago
At least some of the “praise for hitler” was mocking their own side/base for being far right.
Don’t know much about the rest. They should resign, but for being stupid and a liability not for their jokes.
In this day and age how is anyone dumb enough to make edgy jokes in professional or at least “official” forums.
Save it for the bar. Be friends with people IRL that you can meet with physically and say dumb shit to.
I'd make sure that whatever I did, there wouldn't be gigantic protest movements against my country all over the world.
Your phrasing is very telling. Whatever I did. Because I really do get the distinct impression that whatever Israel does, people will be condemning it.
The gigantic protest movements against the country in question had begun in earnest less than a week after October 7th, well before Israel even had the opportunity to commit any war crimes. In New York, there were protests and calls to "globalise the intifada" literally the day after. (The less said about the people at these protests chanting "Allahu akbar" and "gas the Jews", the better.)
Call me crazy, but it kind of seems like at least a significant proportion of these protests have nothing to do with how Israel's military conducts itself, and more to do with the fact that Israel exists at all.
Throwaway05
1d ago
If you mean injecting drugs....sure.
Lots of Meth users are pure meth though.
MadMonzer
Epstein Files must have done something really awful for so many libs to want him released.
1d ago
They haven't - I think MAGA are wrong about the American establishment being full of communists - even with a small "c". But the whole point of the "cultural Marxist" meme as used by the right is to allow you to call people communists even if they are talking about racial equality and not violently seizing the means of production. Similarly "Bio-Leninism", which is a favourite of MAGA-friendly Motteposters.
But the question "Are left-wing authoritarian wokists communist?" is fundamentally irrelevant - it is an argument about the definition of a defeated ideology. It is no more useful than the question "Are right-wing authoritarian MAGA supporters fascist?" If you abstract out the meaning of controversial words and try to answer questions about the real world, the key questions are "Was there ever a real threat of a left-wing authoritarian woke takeover that would justify a right-wing authoritarian response?" (MAGA think the answer to this one is "Yes", and appear to do so sincerely) and "Is there a real threat of a right-wing authoritarian takeover under the Trump-Miller administration?" (The fact that Trump, Miller, and their supporters in the country all think that the answer to the first question is "Yes" is a large part of why the answer to the second question is "Yes")
Sure, "Science" has been the calling card for many a scientismist for quite a long time, core to their being as atheists. One question is whether this is truly "Christian heresy", but all these atheists have, indeed, been around for a long time. Plenty stretching back to antiquity and in non-Christian societies.
I'm not sure why we'd assume a continuity of ancient atheism and modern atheism. Atheism is a rejection of God(s). How we see gods influences it.
Consider New Atheism: their moral critique of Christianity was that it was a) unnecessary and b) insufficiently universalist because non-Christians are excluded from full communion. The latter is not a critique that ancient atheists would necessarily have cared about. Ethics doesn't actually obligate you to be a universalist.
Criticisms of the morality of the Old Testament God are born of the same impulse that gave us an actual, clear Christian heresy like gnosticism: the god of the Hebrew Bible, at first blush, fails by the standards of the New Testament/NT-inspired modern morality. This is a problem that becomes acute when you're not a polytheist.
The other claim is that science can fill the role religion plays as an arbiter of truth, a moral authority and a source of meaning and the sense of the numinous. I see no reason for these to be basic atheistic assumptions. A lot of our debates are about principles. And truth doesn't have to be numinous.
KingOfTheBailey
1d ago
Dr. Jill Biden, 46th POTUS.
zeke5123a
1d ago
A lot of seems to be a joke. For example, the gas chamber comment was in reference to republicans that didn’t vote for him or even republicans that did but weren’t full throated supports. It seems obvious that he doesn’t and would never actually want to gas them. It’s a clear joke. Maybe the sin is it isn’t that funny but it is a joke.
orthoxerox
If you can read this, you're using a custom theme
1d ago
Which of these communist agitators have been talking about violently seizing the means of production?
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
1d ago
Notably, Czechs and Slovaks retain the right of return, or just free travel, through each other's countries.
orthoxerox
If you can read this, you're using a custom theme
1d ago
Marxist-Leninist line always was that feudal and capitalist culture is great and belongs to working class, what was wrong with it was that the oppressors kept it only for themselves.
Not always. The 20's and early 30's (aka the years of peak Marxism) were all about new culture and everything old was derided. I think [Alexander Nevsky (1938)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Nevsky_(film)) was the first instance when a historical figure, a "great man" was shown in a positive context. Before that, everything associated with the "great men" of old was held in contempt, as nobles and clerics and merchants of any kind, native of foreign, were viewed as the natural enemies of the "common men".
ControlsFreak
1d ago
If I could, I'd like to take a rain check on this. I have an effort post in the works, and I think it's going to include this (at this moment, there is a minor chance that a narrow component of this will get edited out of that one and pushed further, so please remind me if it does).
In the meantime, here are a few comments/chains which contain some elements.
OliveTapenade
1d ago
Well, if we go up-thread, I have been reading this whole conversation as being about whether it makes sense to describe feminism as downstream of Marxism, a species of Marxism, cultural Marxism, etc.
In that context I made the point that feminism is a much broader stream than Marxism, and much less ideologically coherent - Marxism has a clear central thinker, Marx, canonical texts, and so on, while those are more up-for-grabs in feminism. I then noticed that the most prominent or influential feminist texts of the 20th century that I can think of don't seem particularly Marxist.
ThisIsSin replied by saying "Feminism is redistributionist at its core, though", which I took in context as disagreeing with me. I don't think ThisIsSin was saying "feminism, like all political and social movements, is redistributionist" - I think he was saying, "actually, Olive, I think this is a significant similarity between feminism and Marxism".
In that context I think it was reasonable to ask what kind of redistribution he was talking about, and then to suggest that redistribution alone is not enough to constitute a significant similarity to Marxism.
To be clear, is support of Hitler acceptable from politicians and staffers or is it not? If supporting Hitler is acceptable when done in private conversations, then what behavior if any is unacceptable to you?
More options
Context Copy link