domain:eigenrobot.substack.com
jkf
39m ago
Maybe the Democrats should start having prayer sessions for people involved in incidents that they think should be elevated then, instead of shitting all over other people's tragedies?
Tree
39m ago
Looks like it worked and the format allowed your guys to make some good points. I don’t understand the blanket hostility (“fake debate, fake intellectual engagement, fake morality “). Like yeah, it’s not perfect, no-holds-barred, high quality debate, but it’s… still good enough?
daguerrean
39m ago
Why are we overthinking this? He wrote multiple explicitly antifascist slogans on the bullets. In every case of someone writing on bullets/guns that I know of, be it Tarrant or Mangione it has been an earnest (if meme-filled) expression of their beliefs.
Rov_Scam
40m ago
For al milquetoast speaker the media networks memorializing him are suspiciously avoiding showing clips of him saying anything.
JarJarJedi
41m ago
"Unarmed leftist protesters" are prone to physically attacking people, just ask Andy Ngo. And "unarmed" is such a weasel word - if somebody bashes you skull in with a brick, was he "unarmed"? What about metal bike lock? Skateboard? Plain old glass bottle? Or the same filled with petrol and set on fire? Given how easy it is to conceal a knife, is there even a way to know somebody is "unarmed"? Especially when you facing a mob dressed in a way that is specifically designed to make them intimidating? In some situations, where people are clearly behaving aggressively, it's only prudent to assume they may escalate - and take measures to deter then from doing that.
And have you heard about the group named NFAC? Using the initials only to make it SFW. To be clear, I support the right of these guys to own arms as much as any other person, but what they are doing with their legally owned arms is nothing but intimidation. And Black Panthers are know for posting uniformed big guys "unarmed" with clubs at polling places - just to make coming there more fun and welcoming, I am sure. So when discussing intimidation, let's remember that.
But the most important thing is this: if those conservatives would want to intimidate you, they'd say "stay away from me, or else". What the left is saying is different - "shut up and cease to spread your message, or else". And "or else", in this case, is clearly demonstrated as being murder. And the lower ranks of the left explicitly and enthusiastically endorse it. They don't say "how horrible it is that it come to that", they say "what a joyous day, let's murder Musk and Trump next!".
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
42m ago
Because we've never seen a mormon kid from Utah turn against the faith. Never.
FtttG
45m ago
Occasionally I'll see a comedy bit which I don't agree with, but which is executed so well I can't help but crack a smile: https://instagram.com/reel/DM0ZSGfu6dk/
Garfielf
48m ago
Noahides are not "bad" from a Jewish perspective at all. Virtuous pagans were fundamentally good people (whose deaths should be mourned) unable to know the truth of Christ. They were not 'less bad'. (IDK about marxists though)
ThenElection
49m ago
(Tongue in cheek) Throwing this out there as a proposal: it's a double false flag, a lefty pretending to be a righty pretending to be a lefty. All the hints that he's a right-wing 4chan kid are so explicit that no one earnestly trying to cover his tracks would be so obvious.
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
50m ago
I do not disagree with the idea people can be different degrees of bad.
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
50m ago
US can't do anything about PRC and no county save Russia has enough nukes to engage it,
I'm going to assume there's an unstated "in this scenario" there, because obviously outside of this scenario the USA also has enough nukes to send China back to being a basket-case.
so what are you talking about
There'd be a combination of 1) various US military assets, likely including nukes to at least some extent, being "adopted" by allied countries, 2) a large number of First World countries (most obviously South Korea and Japan) denouncing the NPT and making a mad sprint to build their own nukes.
The time pressure and uncertainty created by all of that could well end in a nuclear exchange.
Blueberry
50m ago
On X they post pictures from him as a kid with lots of guns and his conservative mormon family. The internet fried his brain but I can't say if in the antifa or far-right direction....
SkoomaDentist
51m ago
Look man, don’t go all reasony to me when I’m just looking for a cheap excuse to shit on furries as is sacred interwebs tradition.
edmund-nelson
Filthy Anime Memester
52m ago
ok, so that means you probably were hit the hardest by price changes!
The biggest changes price wise in the positive direction are medical care, housing and restaurant food.
So basically if you live in an apartment and eat out a lot you were hit the hardest by the recent changes in relative prices.
professorgerm
You shall love your crooked neighbor, with your crooked heart
53m ago
It neatly denotes a cohesive cultural subgroup which otherwise requires a confusing counterintuitive stew of euphemisms
By this argument, both capital B Black and capital W White make a lot of sense. Both are new ethnicities divorced from "Old World" roots, some by force and some by choice. Both occupy a strange checkbox of culture and ethnicity. Alas, the NYT style guide doesn't use your much stronger argument.
Black refers to all black people around the world:
Based on those discussions, we’ve decided to adopt the change and start using uppercase “Black” to describe people and cultures of African origin, both in the United States and elsewhere. We believe this style best conveys elements of shared history and identity, and reflects our goal to be respectful of all the people and communities we cover.
Emphasis mine. As far as I'm concerned this is deeply racist and, of course, quietly white supremacist (or slightly more charitable and using progressive language, their argument continues to center the experience and importance of white people behind a mask of false respect for Blackness). Black people in America, in the UK, in Africa, everywhere? Basically all the same, according to Dean Baquet and Phil Corbett.
We will retain lowercase treatment for “white.” While there is an obvious question of parallelism, there has been no comparable movement toward widespread adoption of a new style for “white,” and there is less of a sense that “white” describes a shared culture and history. Moreover, hate groups and white supremacists have long favored the uppercase style, which in itself is reason to avoid it.
White people are just too doggone diverse and unique to have a shared anything. Plus bad people used it, so it's radioactive.
Garfielf
55m ago
Christians acknowledge there were "virtuous pagans", Jews acknowledge gentiles who lived righteously. Even Marxists developed the concept of someone in the past being "historically progressive."
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
56m ago
What is the alternative? If one is not a moral relativist this position is something of a necessity.
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
57m ago
Kirk recognized the political expediencies necessary to have the reach he does. No one doubted he was a savvy operator.
Garfielf
58m ago
What an utterly fascinating worldview. If that's the case, perhaps you should use your eminently correct modern values to triangulate when the first good person in the world was born, so we can know the first funeral it was moral to shed tears at.
vorpa-glavo
59m ago
But Kash says he'll see him there, implying that Kash is going to Valhalla as well. Really, I don't think Kash meant it literally at all. It was just a fancy way of saying, 'I see you as a fallen warrior for our side, and I will keep up the good fight, and metaphorically warrant a place by your side in Valhalla.'
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
1hr ago
Sure. People in the past often had pretty values, I think. I reserve judgement about whether any of their deaths was "sad" but I think lionizing them as moral paragons would be bad.
NullHypothesis
1hr ago
I don't think Kash Patel literally believes in Valhalla so much as he's trying to create the image of Charlie Kirk being a warrior.
But also when a Hindu (Kash Patel) tells a Protestant (Charlie Kirk) "I’ll see you in Valhalla" it is somehow even more incoherent.
I mean, that would have still made sense coming from a protestant. Kash Patel is trying to say Charlie Kirk was a warrior for his side, who died a warrior's death. Whether it landed or not is a separate issue.
How can/should Hindus appeal to the divine and the afterlife in public pleasantries like this? Should they invoke their own religious mythos? Or should they just appeal to "God" even though they are not talking about the same literary figure(s) as everyone else? Should/are they all going to convert to Christianity? Seems unlikely. They should probably just avoid this trap altogether although that's difficult to do for a Conservative constituency.
I feel like this issue already played out in the Greater Indian sphere, with the end result being that Muslims in that sphere grudgingly accepted Hindus as People of the Book. You can see this today in the weird Islamicized version of Hinduism supposedly practiced in Bali.
Granted, that's a slightly easier posture to adopt in Islam, where the Quran says God has sent prophets to every nation. If you already accept that Judaism and Christianity are corrupted forms of Islam (with mainstream Christianity even having polytheism/shirk from an Islamic perspective), why not accept that Hinduism is a super corrupted form of a true revelation sent from God?
From an orthodox Christian perspective, Hinduism is demon worship writ large. And while the British were practical enough to not actually convert the Indian subcontinent to Christianity, it sits uneasily in the Christian sphere.
I think a compromise invocation of "God" probably works okay (since there are monotheistic sects of Hinduism, and the nature of logical identity is that if there is a God, they're all the same god), but things get dicier when you start to get to the exact specifics of what state Charlie Kirk's soul is in from a Hindu perspective. (He presumably hasn't achieved Moksha or some other higher spiritual state, so he's still part of Samsara, and thus reincarnated based on his karma.) I think referring to secular legacy elements might be the safest compromise. Something like, "You'll live on in our hearts and minds, and in the amazing legacy you've left behind for all of us, but especially for your wife and two kids."
What do you even lead with? Random dunk will get massive effortposts.
Bunch of other stuff is verboten to even begin arguing about like preferred treatment of gender dysphoria.
More options
Context Copy link