domain:rifters.com
Gaashk
1hr ago
I figured people were mostly driving to their friend's house, or a bar (or other location, such as fishing), drinking there, and driving home sooner than is a good idea. I've never actually heard of an American drinking in the car. There are lots of signs at parks about not bringing glass bottles, but I don't think I even disapprove of them buying a pack of cold beers, driving to a park, drinking it with their friends, then driving home -- just that they shouldn't be drinking the whole pack by themselves. Authorities clearly don't care about it, since they allow bars to serve not only beer, but hard liquor, in places that clearly need to be driven to, full of people who very obviously drove by themselves, and are not carpooling with a designated driver (nor is there public transport available).
Zephyr
2hr ago
With a mental illness you can’t.
This should really be “With a mental illness, it is much more challenging not to.” I don’t give a lot of sympathy to people who use excuses like BPD or autism or whatever else to be a jerk.
Some people are dramatically helped by medication (see using Ritalin to make it easier to have executive function with AHDH) - the consequences of not having executive function should not be inflicted on others. If you struggle to remember to (for example) bring both children to school, then put a note on the doorknob, or the coffee machine, or wherever else you will definitely look. Too often, I see people who claim (for example) that they have to make a mess for their partner to clean up, but somehow the negative consequences of their actions never seem to land on themselves.
Amadan
Enjoying my short-lived victory
2hr ago
It makes a difference if you want to send them somewhere out of the way. Though if you're saying you think his actual preferred solution is in fact extermination, well, maybe it is. He kind of denies it but not really, so we're just speculating.
Lykurg
We're all living in Amerika
2hr ago
I am guessing (but this is only a guess ) that your actual preferred solution would be something like disenfranchising Jews, denying them the right to vote or own property in non-Jewish lands, and shipping them all off to Madagascar
That seems unlikely to me. SS presumably doesnt believe in magic soil, and so would have no reason to think that it makes a difference long term whether theyre shipped to Israel or Madagascar.
Iconochasm
2. Bootstrap the rest of the fucking omnipotence.
2hr ago
No, that's just how human psychology works. Earnestly keeping in mind the pain suffered by the innocent in the prosecution of a just/necessary/Good war is just asking for your enemies to act like puppy-killing utility demons. That's what dehumanization is for, so you can fight and win without being hobbled and cripped (and eventually, raped, murdered and genocided) by your own suicidal empathy.
It's the same reason conservatives post Ghibli memes about crying deportees. They are no longer willing to give a shred of concern or credibility for crocodile tears of the people who caused the situation on purpose. Accusations of cruelty are met with mockery, because if you give an inch they'll let in another 50 million unvetted randos.
It's the same reason progressives never, ever, ever express any concern about the feelings and harm they may cause to their outgroup. It's the same reason no one is even bothering to try to use anything like this argument on Hamas or Iran, or their supporters in the US.
Just round the situation off to "blame goes to the aggressor" and win the damn war.
Mihow
Lipstick on a guitar
2hr ago
Thank you so much!
Definitely gonna take the two hour trip to hall of mosses and then take the rest of the day to explore and work our way back it looks like!
netstack
Texas is freedom land
2hr ago
I more or less agree, but I was trying to argue against @Mihow and @Primaprimaprima’s complaint about the term “ethnic cleansing.”
If Israel is fighting a just war, then it has a legal war goal which isn’t ethnic cleansing. Therefore activists who insist otherwise are being disingenuous.
If Israel isn’t fighting a just war, though, its war aims might include things like killing all Palestinians. This is verboten in the post-WW2 world. Naturally, Hamas has made it impossible for Israel to fight without killing some noncombatants and, in doing so, casting doubt on its war aims.
My point is that calling it ethnic cleansing isn’t a sign of mindkilled bad-faith partisanship. It is an intended outcome of Hamas’ strategy.
Lizzardspawn
2hr ago
Probably I didn't phrase it well. Because those are performative pearl cluthing mostly. I don't believe that anyone smart and informed sincerely believes Putin wants or is committing genocide.
hanikrummihundursvin
2hr ago
As far as punditry goes, he was right on the money and deserves credit where due. Whatever that is.
Fuentes being in the ballpark of accurate wouldn't be a big deal, given how much pundits talk, except calling attention to this instance drives a lot of people towards needless argumentation and grievance. I'd be interested to hear what people want to be said instead, and by whom, in contrast to what Fuentes is saying. Given he can drive up so much ire even when apparently accurate.
hydroacetylene
2hr ago
I have a friend I refer to as ‘the at risk youth I mentor’, even though I met him when he was in his twenties. His family dropped hard off the homeschooling deep end when he was growing up and I taught him how to be an adult(not his parents) when he was 24 years old. He’d been acting like an unusually tall middle schooler before then.
I didn’t intervene in this family’s poor management of their 21 year old who acted 12. It wouldn’t have done anything but burn bridges.
vorpa-glavo
3hr ago
I'll concede that "I have to shop around for banks that will give me credit in my own name, and I might not get it in the end" is less oppression than, say, "Society is structured so that the entirety of my future is decided by another person", but I think it still qualifies as oppression.
The nature of this discussion is that there is going to be some point where the oppression falls below a threshold where it makes sense to draw attention to it, or where the benefits of paternalism and freedom outweigh the downsides of oppression.
I don't think it would be unreasonable to say that women were oppressed as late as 1974, and that things may have tipped over towards very slightly favoring women on net starting in 1979 (when women became a slight majority of people enrolled in college), but I wouldn't think a person was wrong for choosing slightly different dates for those things either, or for saying that there is rough equality of the sexes in the United States, because both sexes have problems and they mostly fall under the threshold of attention worthiness.
The_Nybbler
In the game of roller derby, women aren't just the opposing team; they're the ball.
3hr ago
Proportionality is a principle in the conduct of war, as are injunctions against reprisals and collective punishment.
It doesn't mean what you imply it means. Proportionality does not mean you must ignore attacks if they aren't too damaging; it means when making your own attacks, the expected collateral damage must be justified by the military advantage expected to be gained.
Israel, of course, claims it is not engaging in reprisals. But even if they were reprisals against civilians are not entirely forbidden by treaties Israel and the US have agreed to; Israel never signed and the US never ratified Additional Protocol I of the Geneva Conventions. (the UK did ratify that protocol, but notably with the reservation that attacks on civilians were justified as reprisals if the enemy committed such attacks first)
hydroacetylene
3hr ago
Ah, yes, notoriously high class… Nick Fuentes?
Skibboleth
It's never 4D Chess
3hr ago
Proportionality is a principle in the conduct of war, as are injunctions against reprisals and collective punishment.
Israel is not obliged to merely ignore rocket attacks (which in fact they were doing), let alone raids, simply because those attacks do not present an existential threat.
I didn't suggest that they were. I am suggesting that Israel is pursuing what amount to reprisals against Palestinian civilians.
If Hamas was an existential threat to Israel, matters might be different, but Hamas isn't an existential threat and is exceedingly unlikely to become one. (It still wouldn't justify reprisals, but it would at least change the calculations on proportional use of force).
hydroacetylene
3hr ago
What’s the civilian death rate in Bakhmut/mariopol/etc? Ukraine’s land area is pretty big, and life in Gaza and life in bakhmut or chernihiv might be a one to one comparison but live in lviv definitely isn’t.
dr_analog
top 1% of underdog fetishists
3hr ago
In doing so, their retaliation against Gaza will knowingly provoke a retaliation from Iranian-backed militias against Israel.
Hezbollah, an Iranian-backed militia, began attacking Israel on 10/8 though, before Israel did anything.
Nasrallah characterized it as follows:
“Some say I’m going to announce that we have entered the battle,” Nasrallah said Friday. “We already entered the battle on Oct. 8.” He argued that Hezbollah’s cross-border strikes have pulled away Israeli forces that would otherwise be focused on Hamas in Gaza.
George_E_Hale
insufferable blowhard
3hr ago
I'm sure you've seen the recent stories about tourists being squirted with water guns in Barcelona. As I was reading that story I could understand the locals' frustration (though were I to go to Spain again I would certainly be the one getting squirted).
The downturn of the yen, the very modern era attraction of live streaming from an exotic locale, the now-happening Osaka Expo, and perhaps a general interest in Japan fueled by anime/manga and Shogun and whatever else, have combined into a perfect storm where currently large areas of Osaka are bereft of Japanese people, though they are still full of people. At an outdoor bar by the river in Namba recently (I know, what did I expect?) the bartender didn't understand my Japanese (he was from Vietnam.) The shopping arcades are thronged with tourists. At least in such places one can adopt a sense of free-for-all and just push through. My commute, however, takes me through a hub on the way to an international airport, so the subway cars are routinely filled with giant suitcases rolling on casters and you see a lot of behavior that is notably non-Japqnese.
Yesterday at 5:50 am three British travelers were so loud on the train (just having a good time, but annoyingly so) that I could see the Japanese passengers were disturbed (though the British group probably had no idea they were causing any disturbance...maybe). A Thai woman was speaking extremely loudly into her phone while standing in a crowded, moving subway car. One group of New Zealand kids on some school tour made a crack about my suit (which I heard and then began to discuss with them).
Most behavior is very benign. Probably even just reading my descriptions of what I've seen as faux pas seems absurd, as if I am fretting over the most insignificant nothings in a world where bombs are falling. And this is true of course. But it reminds me how Japanese people probably regularly expect me to behave like an unschooled savage most of the time (and honestly, because I am always learning new Japanese I realize I probably screw up a lot still.)
The kicker is that generally no Japanese will ever say a word about this. The very first rule of 和 is that you don't talk about 和. I have been intending to write an effortpost about this but life keeps getting in the way.
The_Nybbler
In the game of roller derby, women aren't just the opposing team; they're the ball.
3hr ago
There is no law of war which says you can't make war unless you're faced with an existential threat. Israel is not obliged to merely ignore rocket attacks (which in fact they were doing), let alone raids, simply because those attacks do not present an existential threat.
SSCReader
3hr ago
the forced passivity feels more akin to foot-binding or raising a vegan cat than religious beliefs.
My grandparents were raised in a super pacifist offshoot of Christianity, you also have Jainism and the like. Passivity is also part of what people get to indoctrinate their kids into. And of course I am sure the other way round, you can put your kid in boxing and martial arts at an early age if you want.
It's possible the US would be more cohesive if public education was centralized and everyone was taught the same value system, and parents were not allowed to go against it. But I'm not sure it would be the US at that stage, quite.
I kinda feel the same way about my sister in law (who is Catholic and has huge problems with Catholic guilt which she incessantly complains about), raising my nieces and nephews in Catholicism. I think she is causing them significant damage. But if my brother is ok with it (he like me is an atheist) then I keep my mouth shut. People get to raise their kids in ways I find stupid and damaging.
The alternative is you giving swords to their kid secretly, me telling my nieces and nephews that God doesn't exist and is made up, and so on and so forth. But that's not likely to be any better I don't think in the long run.
VoxelVexillologist
Multidimensional Radical Centrist
3hr ago
And yet no one is seriously accusing them of being genocidal.
I think "no one" is excluding a lot here: the governments of several NATO member states have made such claims, and the ICC (which admittedly isn't held in the highest esteem everywhere) has issued arrest warrants for Russian leaders on genocide or genocide-adjacent charges.
I'm not suggesting you have to agree with those descriptions, but I think it falls well short of "no one."
Skibboleth
It's never 4D Chess
3hr ago
I think it's fair to say these four belligerents combined constitute an existential threat to Israel.
I think this is true, but only because Iran is on that list. Hamas and Hezbollah are occasionally deadly nuisances, but even that is substantially attributable to Iranian support. The actual existential threat to Israel is a nuclear-armed Iran, and that is not a problem remedied by bombing Gazan apartment buildings.
MathWizard
Good things are good
3hr ago
Treating people kindly and with love and trust is always the solution to any is-ought problem in any culture I've been to because it absolves yourself of the guilt of having acted unkindly or unlovingly and if someone interprets it incorrectly it is not because your underlying intentions were wrong.
This is only true if you tautologically define the term "kindly and with love and trust" to contain all of the complexities and nuances of the broader "is-ought".
Is it kind, loving, and trustful to lock your house or your car? Well, it's kind to the people inside the house, less kind to the thieves that want your stuff.
Is it kind, loving, and trustful to guard your wallet from pickpockets in a crime-ridden area and stop one if you catch them mid-theft?
Is it kind, loving, and trustful to punish someone for a crime? You can argue that it's kind to the victim, but unkind to the perpetrator being punished. Or you can make a complicated argument about how it's ultimately "kind and loving" to the perpetrator because the punishment will help them learn the error of their ways and become a better person which will ultimately be for their own good.
I'm not saying generally acting with kindness, love, and trust is wrong. They're good guidelines when to look to when trying to ground your decisions, but those words alone do not automatically solve all of the potential ethical dilemmas and tradeoffs inherent to the complexity of the real world.
gattsuru
3hr ago
Yeah, that's pretty fair. I'd argue Ellison a few other bits going on (eg, themes of self-sacrifice, some of the hate including legitimate criticisms, a not-IFLS-style scienticism), but I've got of tolerance for well-aimed hate, and I can understand his public persona as a lot deeper a disappointment than Moore-style stuff.
I love that book! Still my favorite read of all time, and one I've been intending to re-read for, fuck, over a decade now. It was a remarkably profound book when I first read it, and significantly more so for its time. Like you, I didn't agree with every idea LeGuin entertained in the novel either, but between the extensive world-building and the evolution of the relationship between the main characters I quickly went from almost bouncing off of it the first time I read it due largely to said world-building at the beginning to completely enthralled.
More options
Context Copy link