banned
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
2mo ago
Well, rape is a very bad outcome, and this is why it is fielded as an argument by both the TERFs and the trans activists.
I haven't really seen it used as an argument by TERFs to be honest.
Anyway, you haven't answered the other part of the question. If rape is the argument, and there isn't enough of it to keep trans women out of women's bathrooms, what is the evidence that trans women will be raped more in mens bathrooms?
Presumably, some men are uncomfortable being oogled by gay men (likely a reason why openly gay people were banned from the military), and likely some women would prefer not to undress in front of a lesbian.
Somehow we haven't seen a massive outcry about gays in mens bathrooms, or lesbians in women's bathrooms, so probably any discomfort created is much lower than the one caused by males in women's bathrooms.
And some trans people will cause someone to be uncomfortable no matter where you put them.
The question is will it be less or more.
quiet_NaN
2mo ago
Step me through this, why are statistically significant amounts of rape the only valid reason for keeping trans women away from women's spaces? If trans women don't get raped in the men's bathrooms, can we just declare that they have no right to access women's batrooms?
Well, rape is a very bad outcome, and this is why it is fielded as an argument by both the TERFs and the trans activists.
Of course, it is not the only argument -- we could likely prevent some rape in bathrooms through extended video surveillance, and yet nobody argues for that.
It has the added advantage of being somewhat quantifiable. If we instead judge purely on how uncomfortable it makes people to be oogled by someone who is attracted to them (divorced from how threatened it makes them -- that is related at least to the subjective perception of rape risk), we run into all kinds of problems related to quantifying that. Presumably, some men are uncomfortable being oogled by gay men (likely a reason why openly gay people were banned from the military), and likely some women would prefer not to undress in front of a lesbian. And some trans people will cause someone to be uncomfortable no matter where you put them.
quiet_NaN
2mo ago
From my understanding of the ruling, it bans trans women from single sex women spaces. So de jure, even a fully passing trans-woman is banned. Obviously, defying that ban would be a infraction which is hard to detect.
At what point in any trans person's life will they be through the transition process so well that they "pass", and also still sharing showers with sex-segregated people?
Is your argument that any use of a communal shower is voluntary, and that a trans-person can simply opt not to go to the swimming pool to avoid gender-segregated spaces? Just as she can stay at home to avoid using gender-segregated bathrooms?
I will grant you that from what I know, many trans women who did not have surgery will try their uttermost to avoid situations like communal showers, because unlike what J.K. Rowling is thinking, they do not really get off on the idea of showering with a bunch of random women who can see their dick. (I think the solution is to have some single-stall, unisex cabins and showers, btw.)
But to deny people who can pass while naked their preferred gender showers seems silly.
I just wrapped up a deep dive into Taylor Lorenz’s Wikipedia page, and what I found feels like a live case study in the kind of media bias and institutional trust issues we often unpack here. Taylor Lorenz is once again making waves for her controversial praise for Luigi Mangione. She first expressed “joy” over the murder in a December 2024 Piers Morgan interview, saying it tied to her belief in the “sanctity of life” amid healthcare frustrations, though she later backtracked to “not empathy.” Then, she doubled down on CNN, calling Mangione “handsome,” “smart,” and—most shockingly—“morally good,” framing him as a revolutionary figure that women admire. This sparked immediate backlash, with figures like Stephen Miller, Ted Cruz, and Mike Lee slamming her on X, and outlets like Fox News and The Independent covering the uproar extensively. Yet, when I checked her Wikipedia page today, April 16, 2025, there’s not a single mention of this controversy (or any others!). I found this isn’t the first time her page has skipped major controversies. There are other omissions we’ve discussed here before, like her 2020 amplification of Claudia Conway’s anti-Trump TikToks—criticized for exploiting a minor, as reported by Daily Mail—and her 2021 false claim that Marc Andreessen used a slur on Clubhouse, later corrected but not without backlash, as noted by Fox News. Both incidents were widely covered but are absent from her page, suggesting a pattern of selective editing. The Mangione comments feel especially egregious given their recency and impact. Fox News ran pieces on both her Piers Morgan and CNN remarks, with headlines like “Taylor Lorenz’s ‘heinous’ defense of Luigi Mangione as a ‘morally good man’ disgusts X users,” while The Independent highlighted her CNN interview, noting she’s a “regular target of attacks from the right online” but also pointing to the “disingenuous outrage culture” her comments feed. National Review and OutKick also weighed in, with the latter accusing her of backtracking after initially denying the “morally good” claim—despite video evidence. This level of coverage screams notability, so why the silence on Wikipedia? The Wikipedia Talk page for Lorenz’s article offers some clues. Just yesterday a user named The lorax argued that the Mangione comments have gained “lasting impact” due to ongoing media attention, citing The Independent’s recent article as a reliable source. Marquardtika agreed, pushing for inclusion, but others pushed back, claiming the coverage might be biased or not “DUE” enough, referencing Wikipedia’s Reliable Sources Policy. Notwally, in a detailed post, dissected The Independent’s reporting, noting it mischaracterized Lorenz’s CNN remarks—her actual quote framed Mangione’s appeal as a public sentiment rather than her personal view—but still argued the controversy might not be significant enough, especially since the latest article didn’t reference her earlier “joy” comment.
This debate mirrors earlier ones on the Talk page about Lorenz’s harassment experiences, where editors have been battling since March 2025 over whether to call attacks against her “coordinated.” Some pointed to sources showing coordination (e.g., Lorenz’s claim that Tucker Carlson mobilized followers against her), while others argued there’s no proof, leading to the section being renamed simply “Harassment.”
What strikes me most about the Talk page is the tension between editors trying to maintain neutrality and those who seem overly cautious about including anything too controversial.
In the harassment debate, Delectopierre accused another editor of downplaying Lorenz’s experiences, warning that such edits “mimic some of the disgusting tactics used in Gamergate” by denying her reality. The editor countered that they were trying to expand the section neutrally, focusing on secondary sources over Lorenz’s tweets to avoid bias, but the back-and-forth shows how contentious this page is. The Mangione discussion feels like a continuation of this struggle: even with reliable sources, some editors are hesitant to touch polarizing content. But Wikipedia’s NPOV policy demands that all significant views be represented, and Lorenz’s comments—praising an accused killer and drawing condemnation from high-profile figures—clearly meet that bar. Excluding them isn’t neutrality; it’s selective storytelling.
This isn’t just about Lorenz; it’s about Wikipedia’s credibility. If her page can skip over statements this explosive, especially when they’re so fresh and widely covered, what does that say about Wikipedia’s ability to handle divisive figures? The pattern of omission suggests a bias toward downplaying Lorenz’s most polarizing moments, which risks presenting a sanitized version of her public image.
I was considering jumping into the Talk page debate myself, arguing that the Mangione comments deserve inclusion under NPOV given the breadth of coverage and their impact. But as it turns out my IP is banned from editing even though I’ve never tried.
I’m curious if any of you have noticed similar patterns on other Wikipedia pages for controversial figures. Is this a systemic issue? Do we need a new Wikipedia built by uncompassionate LLMs?
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
2mo ago
On other hand, the pro-Trump camp who wants Abrego Garcia to stay in El Salvador are not at all concerned that they will be next, because in their view citizens and non-citizens are two morally distinct categories.
I don't understand your use of the word "morally" here. The question isn't who counts as an American citizen in some legal or moral sense, so much as what physically can happen to a citizen or non citizen. Facts are disputed, and even the worst cops get things right most of the time, but it is unclear to me where in the process the circuit breaker exists for me to avoid being deported to El Salvador. This is of course, incredibly unlikely: I'm a blond American and I've never lived anywhere north of the Narragansett or south of the Mason-Dixon. But assuming I was picked up, it's not clear at what point any of that becomes relevant. I don't get a hearing before deportation. Speaking English, or being white, are no guarantee of anything. Once I get to El Salvador, do they give me a hearing?
If there is no functional way for me to assert my citizenship, then my citizenship is of no value, and in order to protect my rights as a citizen I must protect the rights of anyone else from whom it is impossible to distinguish myself. I don't want to live in a country where I must carry an ID card at all times at risk of being sent to a foreign torture prison.
The moral core of the question in my mind is whether El Salvador is acting primarily as the USA's paid jailor, or are they acting as a sovereign choosing to imprison their own citizen. I'm not sure there is a clear answer there.
A little analogy...
I go over to BJJ tonight, an assistant coach is teaching class. During open mat after, one of the three guys at the gym named Tom rolls with me. Tom is a bit of a dirty fighter, and when we're rolling and he's trying to get out of a single leg, he hits me with the old oil check. I shout what the fuck, we yell at each other, I leave. The next day I come back for the morning class, and the gym owner asks me how the Tuesday night class was, I tell him the class was good but Tom fucking oil checked me and that's not why I come here, if it keeps happening I might have to quit. The owner says no, that's fucked, Tom is fucking banned.
Two scenarios from here:
-
The next day, Tom calls me, and says "Hey, I'm sorry, I shouldn't have done that, I got too worked up, I'm gonna work on myself and make sure that never happens again. Let me buy you a case of Yuengling as an apology, and maybe we can be friends again?" I might forgive Tom, or I might not, but I'm under no obligation to tell the gym owner to let Tom back in. After all, it's his gym, not mine, I can't make him change his mind, if he feels that behavior is unacceptable even once that's his right.
-
The next day, Tom2 calls me, and says "Hey, what the fuck dude, I didn't oil check you, I wasn't even there that night, you got me confused with Tom1!" At this point, I definitely have a moral obligation to tell the gym owner to let Tom2 back in, and explain the mistake, and that he shouldn't keep Tom2 out on my account. The gym owner could, of course, ban Tom2 for totally unrelated reasons. It's his gym not mine. But I'm obligated to tell him that he has the wrong Tom.
Which of these scenarios we are in makes the difference for me, morally.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
2mo ago
IMO, it would be ideal for CICO to be banned from any discussion on the obesity crisis so we can instead direct precious mental energy to real solutions.
FCfromSSC
Nuclear levels of sour
2mo ago
For more context, there's a particular troll who makes a new account, makes posts consisting of a link to an article usually having something to do with white supremacy, adds a bit of commentary, often including a critique of the white supremacist point sufficiently weak to trigger people's instinct to correct obvious errors, and then deletes their post once the thread gets rolling. Then they get banned, and start the whole process over a week or two later. They've been doing this off and on for years now.
George_E_Hale
insufferable blowhard
2mo ago
I see /u/newintown was banned, but also all his (?) posts were wiped. I am not criticizing the ban necessarily (though 'spammer' seems vague), but wondering if the self wiping was done by the user or if that's what happens with certain bans? Paging @netstack
If the former, that's really annoying. If the latter, this seems like something new.
Rov_Scam
2mo ago
Even if it were banned, I'd still prefer the deletion to editing it to the point of indecipherability.
MollieTheMare
2mo ago
I don't think it even needs a new rule, clearly violates:
- Keep to a single account.
- Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
as well as meta rule
- Don't be egregiously obnoxious
Maybe top level comments requiring some account age/karma for posting would help though.
I assume the mods would have already banned the person if there was an easy way. Did @2rafa recognize the style, or is top-level post deleter using a consistent block of IPs or set of IPs known to be used by a single VPN provider? I suppose someone could make some sort of bot that auto-replies with the original post in the case OP deletes the post in bad faith. Maybe selectively browser fingerprinting new accounts from suspect IPs?
hydroacetylene
2mo ago
I don't think they realise how badly informed some voters are.
I’m reminded of the NYT study of low information voters during the 2024 campaign. Specifically, there was one woman they interviewed who liked Biden but was angry that he’d banned abortion and so planned to vote Trump. This woman lived in a blue state and so could have gotten all the abortions she wanted.
4nji2
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
2mo ago
Morning Chestnut Problem
After two delays Assassin’s Creed: Shadows, the latest installment in Ubisoft’s hit and award-winning series, has been released.
Several months ago when the latest installment in Assassin’s Creed video game franchise was announced to have a person named “Yasuke” as a protagonist, it was in the English-speaking discourse to proclaim he is a beloved in Japan and considered an important historical figure by the Japanese and that any negative opinion of this peculiar choice was coming from gaijin. It wasn’t only the English-speaking internet masses who promoted this conjecture, a powerful member of this community and even New York Times (although as this article contained no information that wasn’t known at the time, it may have been written just to launder the Hirayama’s tweet that Yasuke was a samurai, into something citable on wikipedia) did too. Introducing one “Kazuma Hashimoto”, whose knowledge of the Japanese language is unknown, who in his twitter bio used to identify as half-Japanese, as “a Japanese consultant”, despite the fact that he belongs to the California geographical and cultural milieu, thus a very non-central example of a Japanese person! After his deception was discovered he laid low, until surfacing after the release to peddle the same distortions, speaking over a native people.—
I suspect the reason why such a person was cited, is that even gaijin working on matters related to Japan, think that the knowledge of English language is sufficient to obtain all necessary information and as “Kazuma Hashimoto” has chosen a Japanese name, but has the knowledge of English of the American he is, he is the perfect source to lend credibility to conjectures about Japan some journalist might have. If one wants a starting point for researching some topic related to Japanese people, searching for it on X, Google, or YouTube by its Japanese, not English name: “弥助” not “Yasuke”, “アサクリ” or “アサシン クリード” not “Assassin’s Creed”, “問題” not “controversy”. Doing so, one finds some comprehensive overviews of issues some Japanese have with Assassin’s Creed: Shadows. Even if you do not know Japanese, using Google Translate and Deepl on a Japanese text written by a Japanese person will get you closer to their perspective, than asking a monolingual American who got his opinion from a monolingual American who got his opinion from a monolingual American who misunderstood a bilingual westernized Japanese.—
But he is just one man. His influence would in the English-speaking be negligible, if he didn’t have fellows (1) working towards the same goal of minimizing Japanese perspectives, and interpreting them to suit their agenda, combined with the general attitude that whatever is created in Japanese, must first pass through a native English speaker in order to gain value or credibility.—
This incident makes it clear that anyone unaffected by Gell-Mann Amnesia should be wary of foreign authors writing about Japan. No matter how minor the topic, many non-Japanese writers seem to consistently prefer English sources over foreign-language ones. For example, the English Wikipedia page on Yasuke uses citations from historical fiction, non-peer-reviewed articles written by tendentious gaijin, and recent news. The reliance on news is especially strange-why should a journalist's opinion, who doesn’t have any specific expertise, be considered more important than anyone else's? One might draw a parallel to the hypothetical situation where mathematical wikipedia articles would be based not on rigorous academic papers but upon the distorted misinterpretations, such as those presented in popular science journalism. The reality is that these English-language texts, simply by virtue of being written in a familiar language, are favored over more authoritative sources. The authentic primary sources and meticulous research conducted by Japanese historians is overlooked in favor of easily accessible, yet not rigorous, English sources.— (2)
EoPs set the null hypothesis about foreign countries. Given the affinity that Americans feel towards Blacks, this naturally leads them to imagine every Black person as much greater and more important than they really were. So they write, picking and choosing among the already scant sources available in English, to craft a narrative. As it is written in English, it is considered the default, and the native experts have to prove a negative. In English, of course, you can’t expect EoP historians of other countries to learn another language.—
Now, you could say this is what people say online; maybe that is a biased sample, and perhaps only the 'antis' are vocal, while the majority loves it. A not absurd objection; one should search for objective sources. Luckily, in the case of Japan and video games, we have that: every week it is published how many physical sales of games and consoles were made there. One would expect that if, in a long-running franchise, an entry would be released this time set in Japan, it would sell better in Japan than previous entries set in foreign locales. People are narcissistic; they like being talked about and are interested in what others think of them. Ghost of Tsushima, an AC game in all but name, which was set in Japan, sold more copies in Japan than any AC game. With the added bonus of featuring the allegedly popular-in-Japan protagonist Yasuke, sales would surely increase compared to previous installments.—
Data:
Opening week physical sales in Japan for AC games and GoT, ordered chronologically:
name [platform of the best selling version] release date, opening week sales on that platform (opening week sales across all platforms)
Shadows [PS5] R7-03-20, 17701
Mirage [PS5] R5-10-06, 20407 (28436)
Ghost of Tsushima Director’s Cut [PS5] R3-08-20, 13745 (23969)
Valhalla [PS4] R2-11-10, 45055 (49282)
Ghost of Tsushima [PS4] R2-07-17, 212915
Odyssey [PS4] H30-10-05, 50173
Origins [PS4] H29-10-27, 53716
Syndicate [PS4] H27-11-12, 39858
Rogue [PS3] H26-12-11, 19496
Unity [PS4] H26-11-20, 43838
IV: Black Flag [PS3] H25-11-28, 50032 (65910)
III [PS3] H24-11-15, 85918 (97991)
III: Liberation [PSV] H24-11-15, 22110
Revelations [PS3] H23-12-01, 40440 (47602)
Brotherhood [PS3] H22-12-09, 39198 (50964)
Bloodlines [PSP] H21-12-23, 16221
II [PS3] H21-12-03, 55789 (83874)
I [PS3] H20-01-31, 36898 (70952)
Week 2, ordered chronologically:
Shadows [PS5] R7-03-20, 5565
Mirage [PS5] R5-10-05, 3402
Mirage [PS4] R5-10-05, 1890
Ghost of Tsushima Director’s Cut [PS4] R3-08-20, 4154
Ghost of Tsushima Director’s Cut [PS5] R3-08-20, 3526
Valhalla [PS4] R2-11-10, 6918
Valhalla [PS5] R2-11-10, <2265
Ghost of Tsushima [PS4] R2-07-17, 53387
Sales totals after two weeks, ordered by sales totals:
Ghost of Tsushima [PS4] R2-07-17, 266302
Valhalla [PS4] R2-11-10, 51973
Mirage [PS5] R5-10-05, 23809
Shadows [PS5] R7-03-20, 23266
Ghost of Tsushima Director’s Cut [PS5] R3-08-20, 17271
Ghost of Tsushima Director’s Cut [PS4] R3-08-20, 14378
Mirage [PS4] R5-10-05, 9919
Valhalla [PS5] R2-11-10, >=4227&<=6491
Interpretation: It has been almost a year since details about Assassin’s Creed: Red were announced, and only slightly less since English-language game journalists started lying about the reception the game had in Japan to their English-speaking audience. The latter is blameless, for it is too much to ask the masses to actively research an issue which is at best tangential to their lives. The former is blameworthy, as a journalist which leaves the reader with a worse model of the world than he started with is worse than a monkey with a typewriter. At least chimp’s writings won’t worsen the reader’s perception of the world.—
Shadows had the second worst first week sales out of all non-re-releases of Assassin’s Creed games. Only Bloodlines on the PSP sold worse, and even that only slightly.—
This can be said to be the end of a significant phase of a scandal. Unsurprisingly, gaijin Assassin’s Creed fans who considered it big news that Shadows was for a brief moment in the top 5 games by revenue on Steam in Japan, or in the top 10 best-selling games on Amazon Japan, either ignored these Famitsu numbers from ignorance or embarrassment, or downplayed them saying gaijin games don’t sell in Japan. A statement disproven by the success of Ghost of Tsushima and Shadows‘ sales being even lower than of previous entries.—
In the interest of intellectual honesty I must also be open about evidence I discovered which goes against my thesis. There exists a website which scrapes Steam reviews by language. For Odyssey, .32% of reviews are in Japanese, Valhalla, .53% of reviews are in Japanese, Mirage, .31% of reviews are in Japanese, Shadows, .71% of reviews are in Japanese. This could imply the Assassin’s Creed audience in Japan moved to Steam, thus consumer sales do not tell the whole story.—
(1)Such as one Jeffrey J. Hall.(1.1) Unlike other gaijin who report on Japan, he cannot plead ignorance about. For you see one aspect of the Morning Chestnut Problem which reached even the PM of Japan was ingame destruction of shrines. Politically it started with one member of the prefectural assembly conducting an interview with the head priest of the shrine depicted in the viral video showing the African protagonist marauding through it. I noticed this interview early on, but so did Jeffrey. Ever willing to discredit indigenous people(1.2), the man who holds a position equivalent to a state senator. The next day the local politician uploaded another video, showing he brought the issue to a member of Japan's Upper House, conveniently adding English subtitles. It was the latter man who spoke a day before the games release in Japan’s Diet about this issue and to whom Ishiba, Japan’s PM replied. The attention shrine vandalism was too great to ignore and Ubisoft issued a silent Day 1 patch, which only partially limited it but continues to refence the real shrine by name, but has yet to issue a formal response to protests from the Hyougo Shrine Association.(1.3)—
(1.1)To put it in terms Americans would better understand, Jeffrey (and Kazuma, if he didn’t also pretend to be Japanese) is to Japan what people like Claas Relotius, are to the US. In that both distort the countries they proclaim to be experts about, in order to reinforce the pre-existing perpectives of their audiences.—
(1.2)This wasn’t the first time this game caught the attention of a Japanese politician. Before the events I describe above, a member of the Party to Protect the People from NHK, had asked the National Diet Library for all materials it possessed that pertain to Yasuke. Jeffrey made hay of the fact this party is a minor, non-coalition one. The politicians I describe above belong to the perpetually-in-power Jimin-tou.—
(2)The wikipedia editor most responsible for the current sorry state of the English wikipedia article on Yasuke, ‘Symphony Regalia’, was on R6-11-13 topic-banned from Yasuke for a year on English wikipedia. This sanction follows a permanent suspension of that editor on Japanese wikipedia for sockpuppeting which occured on R6-08-31. The vandalism he inflicted was fixed in the Japanese, but not in the English language article. I think this is because I think wikipedia works by establishing a consensus. Early on, before this happens, one can slant and selectively interpret and pick sources to push a POV, without restrictions. Then one can use this history as evidence that a consensus is clear. And if one is successful, this POV is determined to be the truth, indisputable unless a great number of Reliable Sources, in English of course, disagree plainly.—
Sources: https://sites.google.com/site/gamedatalibrary/, sales for week of R2-07-20 to R2-07-26, sales for week of R2-11-16 to R2-11-22, sales for week of R3-08-23 to R3-08-29, sales for week of R5-10-09 to R5-10-15, sales for week of R7-03-24 to R7-03-30
SSCReader
2mo ago
We should write in ways that do not feed the wolf of anger, as the old parable goes. We should write such that others are not explicitly excluded. But there's no way to avoid all the possible tripwires.
Nope, but we can get most of them. It's not that difficult, I don't think. And the main issue that gets people banned is they don't even try as far as I can see. It's just the same repetitive reflexive boo outgroup stuff.
But I disagree above, we can in fact overcome those gulfs. And in fact if you find it makes you resentful that is (in my opinion) part of the problem. It doesn't make me resentful when I have to rephrase something so I don't offend a Christian or a white nationalist. Why should it? I WANT them to read and engage. I want to hear from them, so spending a bit of time to hopefully increase their engagement is a positive thing in my mind.
Letting go of all of the emotional baggage of what people do outside of this space, is I think key. Treat it as its own world. Even if 99.9% of gay librarians or white nationalists would just yell or seethe, we are writing for those who come here and want to engage. Don't resent rewriting your words, that's the whole point of the space. See how well you can predict those you disagree with, if you have a good understanding of them, then you should be able to do well in reducing heat, if you don't, then that's the other thing this space is for!
I've been here and back when we were on Reddit for years, and I don't think I have ever even picked up a mod warning let alone a ban. I am sure I will at some point, but avoiding the most obvious boo outgroup stuff, and wording that is likely to enrage or annoy your opponents is fairly easy. You just have to want to spend the time and energy to do it. Regardless of (to go back to my original point) how much you hate or despise or think they will be ungrateful, or wouldn't do the same in reverse. Do it for you, not for them. Because you want the conversation that might result. Those moments when you can for a second connect with someone you think is entirely wrong about the world and might even be harming it, when you can see through their eyes for just a second. Even if they never see through yours.
What we do here has no impact on the outcome of the culture war, there are no stakes. It's just for the love of the game.
MaximumCuddles
The world-spirit texting on the toilet
2mo ago
It’s been apparent to me for years and years that the vast, vast majority of opponents to Trump & Trumpism have little to no theory of mind when it comes to their political enemies. Sometimes even proudly so, boasting of their ignorance from the rooftops as if it grants them high status.
They fail the intellectual Turing test over and over because of the iron information bubble they’ve built for themselves, and even when they leave the physical bubble to places like this where open Trump support isn’t instantly banned / siloed / throttled / etc, often the bubble still exists in mind. Even now after the walls have come down in social media and the censorship has cooled, even if only relatively.
Many are incapable of simple listening, not even to speak of comprehension. It’s too late, They’re Not Going To Make It, and they have no idea what’s in store for them.
Sad!
SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
2mo ago
How can people trust with this level of malfeasance? How do we get the trust back?
The same way you get trust back in a normal human relationship: you apologize unreservedly, make concrete steps to prevent the issue happening again, and accept that it will be a long time (if ever!) before the trust is rebuilt to what it used to be.
In this case, that means that first, everyone who repeated this false evidence needs to retract it, and apologize for their error in repeating it. No holding back because they think that fighting racism is a noble goal, no minimizing to try to avoid reputation damage, nothing. Full on admit the fault and apologize. Second, this man himself needs to be banned from ever doing research again without supervision from someone more trustworthy. Third, publications which repeated this falsified research need to brainstorm a plan for how they will catch future problems like this, and that should include a good honest look at how their own biases helped it to happen (because I have very little doubt they didn't check too closely because this research confirmed some editors' biases).
The medical profession needs to do that not only for this case, but for any other cases that come to light. And then wait. They will no doubt be beaten up in the short term by people who are angry at having been betrayed. They will get this thrown back in their faces from time to time. But eventually, if they are patient and keep acting with integrity, the wound will (probably) heal and the trust will be back. It's not an easy or fast process though.
faceh
2mo ago
More directly:
Being untrustworthy should come with fairly immediate consequences upon revelation.
And you should DEFINITELY be kicked from any position of trust and banned from future ones.
I am alive, I have blocked youtube, twitter, Instagram (deactivated my account back in October), Reddit and everything distracting from my laptop and my phone. My co-working idea from 2023 finally took off, I co work with two other people, one being my mentor, the other being an extremely competent friend of my age who si may age.
Progress so far
I am nearly done with Math Foundations 3 which is MathAcademy's final pre-university module that also covers calculus right before Multi variable calc. I will head on to Logic and proofs followed by Discrete Math. Math for ML will follow these two. In the meantime, I will do some math that I learnt in Math Foundations 1, 2 and 3 from a rigorous textbook so that I have a decent level of mastery and fluency with regard to math. I ultimately want to be a really good research ML engineer.
My mathacademy total xp is now close to 11k, every xp is worth a minute or more, it feels trivial compared to people who do real STEM stuff at a high enough level but I know how hard differential equations, sub topics in integration was. It seems laughably easy once I have done it but I can never appreciate myself for doing any of it. Its way beyond what I ever did, I just dont like myself enough to say anything nice, not being whiny, I dont want to be known as the guy who considered basic math literacy to be a milestone. I hit 180 or 3 hours in an airport and one time in a fucking train with a pinhole light, without even having a seat to sit properly on. The same guy who could not study for a decade, pissed away his chances at grad school, flunked two classes was able to do something that. I do respect myself for that though, quite a bit.
I dropped Clojure and front end, opting to double down on Python instead. I do Boot.devs material; I finished their OOPs course a few minutes ago. I will do the Python workbook and aim to finish that in three weeks while doing my daily three hours of math and an hour of Boot.dev. I will still need money since I wont be able to afford meds after july but I will find some ways around that, my sabbatical will last at least 4-6 more months.
My life is boring in ways. I wake up, work out (three days), meditate, study, and sleep. My phone time is much lower since I track it and would be zero if I were not a massive coombrained person. Which is why I also nuked all the images I had of girls from my past life. That stuff will not help me live now.
If I am late in posting updates, know that I am in a better place than what I started in. 6 years ago I posted here and on slatestarcodex as a delusional cram school kid who was shit scared of failing his high school equivalent exams and never getting to a uni. It took me half a decade but I am at least on an ok track now. My co working mates are genuinely very good engineers and they do celebrate my progress but I cannot feel nice.
Maybe I will in some time. My time here has always been great, this is not a goodbye post, I will post, I am just not going to be as regular but I will update. People here saw me go through life and I think they deserve to read the good parts too.
Routines
Working out first thing in the morning kickstarts my concerta. I feel relief climbing out of the dingy pajeet gym I work out, the stairs connecting the basement to the ground, lit up with the sun. My mind feels clear after I meditate, I feel zero friction when I work. The day feels amazing, my only issue is sleeping on time, I must sleep by 11 daily and did that zero fucking times in all these months. It pisses me off and makes my bi onthly therapy session feel like a waste since she wants me to sleep by 11 every day to help fix my circadian rhythm. 1:30 am right now, fuck. Sleeping full 8 hours should do wonders for my life.
Birthdays
My grandad turns 92 this Saturday. We are throwing a party and it reminded me of my more recent Wednesday update about nostalgia. I remember watching movies with my cousins in late March, playing Holi and all four of us (the two of them and my younger brother) being there for grandads birthdays. We get the front yard done and throw a large get-together. This year, neither of them are turning up for his birthday, thier mom, my aunt is since she can't miss her dad's birthday but I do feel a little bad about it. You cannot go back, still for a moment, I wish they came. We even had a golden week where we saw holi, grandads birthday and a literal movie shoot happen in the same week. They shot a movie in our front yard since I live in a large old-fashioned house, ones built for feudal lords of the day. Remembering it makes me smile. We spent the entire night playing FIFA, saw a lot of decent movies and I got introduced to electronic music via Swedish House Mafias albums. Not the best music but I still mosty listen to electronic music, much better kind though.
Oneitis
The girl I was into out of my betaness and low status is now just another girl. A friend of mine recently told me about bumping into her in a nightclub in Delhi where she was coked out of her mind, chatting up everyone whilst looking fatter. In that moment I felt sad for her. Every girl I have ever always ends up worse once I lose my rose-tinted glasses and she seems the same honestly. Doing substances in a bar with your friends and going back home to your parents, working a dead-end job where you only make enough to live paycheck to paycheck because you have a lifestyle to afford (do not blame her here tbh, the Indian economy is the culprit). For the first time, I felt a lot of pity for her. I was 21, 4 years ago exactly when I posted about how she was sleeping around with other guys, being super emotional about it instead of manning up and just meeting her. Me from the past would not believe that I genuinely don't like her at all now.
Why post
Moreover, I am coming to terms with the fact that things have changed, the people I knew in the past, are well in the past and they should stay there. I am still unemployed, unskilled, skinny and living with my parents but I am better each day. Every day I try my hardest to be better, or at least try harder at trying my hardest. I am in the top 5 percent of both math academy and boot.dev, much higher in mathacademy, maybe top 5-10 people all time in terms of weekly volume done.
I just hope that I can continue my progress and that everyone around me is alive, happy and healthy to see me do well. I came to this place at a very difficult time in my life, everyone here helped me be who I am in a very literal sense. Strength training, meditation, pua, a pursuit of mastery, and the belief that I can do better, are things I picked up along the way. Some kind souls still read my life's updates and my new arc of being a guy who learns math and backend engineering to eventually do cutting-edge ML stuff is not all that exciting.
My bad days are about 4 hours and at about hour 8, I can no longer work, though I suspect with enough practice, I can stretch that to 12 but that will take a while. Working on hard things, learning this stuff, meditating, working out, all of it is extremely humbling. Every single session makes me aware of just how far behind I am from where I wish to be. The bright side is that each time, I get better. Many in life just mentally check out and live in deluded fantasy lands where they are too smart to do anything, only to wake up at 40 and realise that they have failed at life. There are days when my brain just gives out and it is satisfying in a way. Every time I drag myself out of the gym having struggled with benching less than 135, I get closer to benching 225 or dipping and chinning half that as long as I don't get injured and don't miss a session. 225 is not unreasonable in a year given I am quite untrained.
Coda
Life is not something that happens to me, I have some control over it. Everyone I know besides a few is out of shape, sad, not earning as much as they wished to, and living in total denial of reality. That was me too, for the longest time. @Standard_Order once told em to seek sun and steel, and chase natural happiness, I get what he meant now.
My posting history makes me cringe, a lot. Why would someone like me post about his life on a place dedicated to culture war discussion, why even would the people there help and how on earth did I not get banned years ago? I posted earlier because I had nothing going on in my life, the attention I got online helped soothe that, and now I am making some progress, which makes me care less about it, hence the abstinence from twitter.
Thank you, to everyone on the motte, to all the people I befriended here, everyone who cared enough to help me. Remember, mrvanillasky is going to get better. May the gods help me, may they help us all.
Hari Om!
Primaprimaprima
...something all admit only "TRUMP", and the Trump Administration, can do.
2mo ago
remaining plenty ignorant about how a contested environment could pose any challenges to the implementation of such a social theory
What challenges is he not aware of? He's aware of the external challenges (plenty of historical examples of communist rebellions being put down before they took over the whole country). He's aware of the internal challenges (degenerating into a Stalinistic reign of terror). I mean dear God, his entire career has been dedicated to thinking about the many, many challenges that communism faces.
He seems to have a very particular (materialist etc.) social theory for precisely how to engineer our social relations [...] this certainly reads like "subjugating people wholesale" as "a form of manipulation by social institutions"
But this is so general that it describes virtually every ideology and political system ever. Civilization, as opposed to the anarchy of nature, is the imposition of social order. Civilization requires that people conform to a certain social order. Politics is the attempt to enforce a certain vision of that social order. That's just what politics is.
The Taliban have announced that Afghanistan will be remade in the image of sharia law. They have banned women and girls "from education, many jobs and most public spaces". They have a very particular social theory for precisely how to engineer social relations. They are subjugating people wholesale using social institutions. Are they thereby following an "Enlightenment" ideology? Is sharia law "the same as" communism?
Consider European feudalism. They too subjugated large swaths of people for the sake of engineering a certain vision of social relations, through the institution of serfdom. The social mobility of serfs was extremely restricted: they could not voluntarily leave their contract without their master's permission, and their children inherited the status of serfdom as well. In some ways feudalism was a consummate example of a "rationally planned" society; the clergy, nobility, and serfs were all viewed as having their own particular and necessary social role. So is feudalism an "Enlightenment" ideology? Is it the same as what the Taliban have going on with sharia, or is it different?
Obviously contemporary western democracies do not escape the basic fact that all civilizations must impose some kind of order. We too are bound by laws and social expectations.
This is not to say that all ideologies and systems are equally totalitarian of course. Some are clearly more totalitarian than others. But if the fundamental distinction that you and FC are concerned with here is "freedom vs totalitarianism" then you should just say so, instead of saying "yeah those guys have like, a list of goals they want to achieve, and they think they can make people do things". Well, duh. That's just politics.
The Great Le Pen Conviction Saga
Yesterday, Marine Le Pen, a French politician sometimes called a (female) French Trump and once called the Devil's daughter, was convicted in France of embezzling EU funds in the early 2000s. She is to be sentenced to house arrest for two years, and barred from politics for five.
The significance? That takes her out of the next presidential election, in 2027, where she is the current front runner.
The other problem?
When the original sentencing judge says Le Pen and other co-defendants didn't enrich themselves personally, 'embezzling' may have the wrong connotations. The judge who made the ruling preferred a 'democratic bypass that deceived parliament and voters.'
How does this lead to a leading political candidate getting imprisoned and disqualified in a leading western democracy?
Oh boy. This is a long one.
TL;DR: Banal political corruption insinuations ahead. And more. And more. Bless your innocent hearts if you have high trust in government, and don't be surprised if what follows starts to echo in your culture war interpretations in the months and years to come.
Disclaimer: What follows is a mix of plentiful citations, and some things that can only be noted with an eyebrow. Which is to say- some pretty hefty suspicion of impropriety, in ways that aren't exactly public record. However, if you want to believe that all governments are innocent unless proven guilty, by all means. Be ye warned.
What is this scandal?
It's more of a funding-code issue that results when you deliberately overlap organizational interests but establish conditionals that can be used as gotchas depending on whether the anti-fraud office wants to pursue.
EU funding for european political parties is normal. The overlap between national parties and EU political parties (Members of European Parliament, or MEP) is normal. The transition between national parties and nominally distinct EU parties is normal. Money is fungible. Even political aids are fungible- an aid who helps in one respect of a politician's work load enables the politician to work on others.
What Le Pen is charged / guilty of is that EU MEP party-member funds were used for someone who was working for Le Pen, the National Party leader, rather than Le Pen, the MEP party leader. Part of the basis of this claim is where there aid worked from- MEP assistants getting EU funds are supposed to work from / near the EU parliament, but around 20 of Le Pen's aides worked from France. As a result, they did not qualify for the funds they drew for being an aid to MEP-Le Pen, since Le Pen's MEP-aids are supposed to be geographically bounded.
Hence, embezzlement. Did the aids help with MEP work from France? Not actually relevant. Did the aids enable Le Pen to better focus on her MEP duties, as was the purpose of the money-for-aides? Also not particularly relevant.
What gives the saga more backstory, and scandal potential for those who think it's a gotcha, is that it's part of a much, much longer multi-decade saga.
Who is Le Pen?
Marine Le Pen is the daughter of Jean Le Pen, her father who founded the party. In short, he was the political outsider / far rightist / probable fascist sympathizer / possible nazi sympathizer, or at least dismisser, who was absolutely hated by the French political establishment. He's the guy who's synonymous with the National Front, unrepentant French far-right of the post-WW2 variety .
One of the key notes of Le Pen is that he ran the National Front like a family business... not successfully. Whether by purely coincidental mismanagement, personal bilateral animosity with French industry, or possibly indirect state pressures after the National Front's surprise and embarrassing showing in the 2002 presidential election, the National Front had some troubled finances.
And by troubled finances, I mean that by 2010 the French Government was progressively revoking the government's political party stipend that made up a plurality of its funding, even as Jean Le Pen was unable to get bank loans from French banks and unable to find a buyer for the 10-to-15 million Paris HQ to raise funds in 2008.
Where does the money come in?
The financial situation is where Marine Le Pen really enters in earnest. Marine Le Pen was given control of the party by her father in 2010. This was notably after she had already entered the European Parliament for over a half decade. Marine Le Pen was a MEP from 2004 to 2017, which is to say she inherited the National Front- and its financial issues- when she was already a MEP with no particular issue.
Marine's political priorities in the early 2010s was the rehabilitation of the National Front as a party. In 2013, she was still being called the Devil's Daughter by publications by the Atlantic. In 2018, this was when the National Front became the National Rally.
But the other part of Le Pen's job was to right the fiscal ship to keep the party viable. This is why across the 2010s Marine Le Pen was seeking foreign bank loans from abroad, including from US banks. This was where the Russia bank loan line of attack starts, since it was a Russian bank in 2014 that ultimately ended the credit embargo, but also saw Le Pen adopt a more pro-Russia rhetorical position. This challenge / options for loans has endured, and is why Le Pen more recently got a loan from Hungary in 2022.
So, to restate- Marine Le Pen was a reasonably-long-standing MEP in the 2000s with no major alleged issues at the time. In 2010, she took control over the national front. At this time, the NF was in financial distress.
This is the context where the misuse of European funds arose.
The Start of the Scandal
The Marine Le Pen allegations arose in Feb 2015, when European Parliament President Martin Shulz, a German MEP, raised complaints against her. Le Pen's party promptly counter-accused one of Shulz's own aids of a similar not-in-the-right-location violation. This didn't exactly get anywhere, because as noted at the time-
Machmer explained that one of Schulz’s assistants organizes study trips for a local branch of the SPD, but said this was “in his spare time, for free, because it is his hobby.”
Remember: it's embezzlement if you take EU money and work for the party. It's not embezzlement if you voluntarily do national party work for free as a hobby.
Who was Martin Schulz?
Well, in 2014, the year before he initiated the Le Pen allegations were made, Schulz was generally considered a bit... lacking in ethical enforcement. He was one of the European leaders who may / may not have turned a bit of a blind eye to notorious Malta corruption. After his time in the EU parliament, he made a brief but ambitious play in german power politics as the actual head of the German SDP in the 2017 German election. He lost to Merkel, of course, but so do they all. But he had the ambition to try, and had a history of building favors and friends.
But back to the earlier 2010s for a moment. Besides being President of the European Parliament at the time, he was a member of the Party of European Socialists in the European Parliament. He was also a (clearly important) member of the Social Democratic Party (SDP) in Germany, i.e. part of the key governing coalition which itself is part of the Franco-German alliance that is the heart of the EU. Schulz was in the running for being the German foreign minister following the 2017 German election,, which might have some relevance to foreign relation implications with France.
Why does Martin Schulz matter?
Why does this party orientation possibly matter?
Because in 2015, the President of France, Francoise Hollande, was a French Socialist. Unsurprisingly, French Socialists tend to caucus well with the European socialists in the European parliament, though party politics being what it is I'll just ask you believe me on that.
Did they get alone? It's hard to say. But in May 2015, just a few months after the le Pen allegations were leveraged, Hollande was among the heads of state awarding Schulz the Charlemagne prize 2015. The Charlemagne prize is bestowed to those who have advanced european unification, which means as much or as little as you think it means. Typically it's an insider's appreciation award for strengthening European Union politics, which is to say strengthening the Franco-German influence on the continent because that is, in most practical respects, what EU centralization entails.
More relevant was that Schulz's very diplomatic interest in working with French rose above partisan politics, such as his notably high-profile willingness in 2017 to work with Macron, the current (but currently troubled) French president whose political fortunes have gotten a bit better with Le Pen's disqualification.
Would a German politician-
- with a spotty ethical record
- who stood to personally benefit
- from a political favor
- to the ideologically-aligned current French president
- or the subsequent french president
- who they might closely work with in their post-EU political career
-ever leverage a politically motivated ethics complaint against a MEP with a decade of non-complaints, over an issue that they themselves might be guilty of?
Heavens no, that's absurd.
Ahem. Sorry. Back to 2017 for a minute?
2017: Enter Macron
2017 is when Macron enters the Le Pen tale, since the 2017 election is what established them as rivals.
The 2017 French elections were notable for that they benefited both Macron and Le Pen as anti-establishment candidates. The election saw the collapse of the French establish right and left, and while that left a vacuum for Macron, it also benefited Le Pen. Macron ultimately won by the French firewall when the French socialist-left voted for him and against Le Pen, but it was historically remarkably close.
What was also remarkable is that Macron's party position has gotten worse over time. His party did very poorly in the 2020 municiple elections, though this was more a collapse of his left than a rise to Le Pen on the right. Macron pulled out another win in the 2022 election, where Le Pen, again, made it to the final round after a stronger-than-most showing.
This creates a certain... shall we say complication for the 2027 election, because Macron can't run for re-election in 2027, and he's known to not like that. Macron managed to beat Le Pen twice- was arguably the only person who could have- but the 2027 election would see him leave the stage and Le Pen be... well, a clear leading candidate, if by no means a guarantee.
Unless, of course, the judicial block-out is coincidentally underway even before the 2022 election is over.
And starting in a way that is- coincidentally- convenient for Macron's re-election.
2022: The Year the Scandal Returns In A Most Convenient Way
Five years after Macron takes the presidency, and nearly 7 after the Le Pen EU funding scandal starts, it returns in ways whose implications to the surrounding context become a bit clearer if you lay out relative dates of events. (Most of these dates are in the above al jazeera link.)
11 March 2022: The European Anti-Fraud Office provides the French prosecutor's office it's report on Le Pen.
Clearly the French government was taken by total surprise, and had no hand or insight into this EU process delivering this package.
12 March - 9 April 2022: No mention of or publicity is given to this report in most media. As such, no voters are aware of the duplicitious deception of French voters by a former MEP for whom this is an old scandal, forgotten scandal from over half a decade prior.
Which might have been slightly topical, given that...
10 April 2022: The first round of the French Presidential Election occurs.
After the French government sits on the report for a month, Le Pen places strong but somewhat distant second place, out-performing some expectations and underperforming others. 28% Macron, 23% Le Pen. The third-place runner up, and thus the potential second-round candidate party is a leftist party that garnered... 22%.
Which is to say, the French Prosectors really did Le Pen a favor by keeping that potentially embarrassing and undemocratic revelation a secret! Why, if she hadn't made it to the second round, Macron would have faced a broadly united left against him rather than for him in the name of the anti-le pen firewall!
It's a good thing that this virtuous adherence to principle applied for the rest of the campa-
17 April 2022: French prosecutors announce the new (actually old) Le Pen fund appropriation report
Coincidentally, 17 April 2022 was a Sunday, meaning this would be one of the opening media report for the next week's media cycle.
24 April 2022: The second round of the French Presidential Election occurs. Macron wins, 58% to 42%.
Fortunately, Macron's presidential margins are great! Any effects from the timing of the report probably had no result on a 16% gap.
June 2022: Unfortunately, Macron's parliamentary margins in the June 2022 elections are dismal, as his party loses control of the parliament and Le Pen's party gains 81 seats to become a key power player in government (in)stability for the next year and a half.
July 2022-February 2023: No particular action or movement is made on the Le Pen case. Nominally this is when the French prosecutors are developing their case, but given the substantial prior awareness in practice the case remains where it was since between rounds 1 of the election: available as a basis of future prosecution if and when desired.
The key point of 2022 is that the Le Pen scandal resurfaced coincidentally in time to shape the 2022 Presidential Election, where it was sat on when it might have hindered Le Pen's ability to get to the second round, but publicized right at a time to maximize Macron's electoral margins. Afterwards, it was further sat on until future timeliness.
2023 - 2024: A series of Correlating Progressions
March 2023: After Macron does the eternally popular thing of cutting welfare in the name of reform, the Macron government (in the legislature) comes less than a dozen votes from falling in a no confidence vote after Le Pen's party largely votes for no confidence.
June 2023: After about a year of political paralysis and parliamentary instability, a Macron ally who totally likes him for real guys raises the prospect of amending French constitution to give Macron third term. This totally-not-a-trial-balloon proposal flops like something that has no life.
October 2023: Just kidding about before, Macron makes a personal call for constitutional amendment for a third term.
8 December 2023: The French government announces Le Pen's trial will start in March 2024.](https://www.france24.com/en/france/20231208-french-prosecutores-order-le-pen-to-stand-trial-in-eu-funding-scandal)
20 December 2023: Le Pen does the unforgivable, and gives Macron a 'kiss of death' by forcing him to compromise on immigration legislation in return for support. This actually triggers an internal party rebellion for Macron. Unrelated, establishment French media wonder how Macron will manage Le Pen's ever-rising rise.
The 20 December events aren't particularly causal in the process, but are amusing context.
The more relevant point of 2023 is that Macron's decision to prosecute Le Pen, an act which would bring favor from the French establishment, comes amidst his very unpopular bid to extend his time in office, which would require support from the French establishment. At this time, the Macron administration adopts a Tough-on-Le Pen position of 10 years- a period of time that would easily take her out of two elections- that will later be taken down to two years out of [insert choice here].
Also notable in the August 2023 initiation of prosecution of that it is both a starting block for the timer, and all future events. Whether there needed to be a 7-month gap between the announced intent to prosecute and the trial or not, had the prosecution train been started seven months earlier- during the large gap after the 2022 elections- then the future 2-year house arrest would have by consequence ended before, rather than probably after, the 2027 election. An 18-month bar, for other cases, would have been even less likely have a presidential election impact... had that been desirable.
2024: The Trial of Political Opponents with Absolutely No Political Parallels Or Impacts Elsewhere
March 2024: The Trial of Le Pen starts, about 24 months after the French government received an EU report of the 2015 report nearly 108 months prior. Truly the gears of French justice turned as fast as they could.
These are completely unrelated. Just because three major democracies of mutually-sympathetic ruling parties had parallel legal cases against leading opposition parties that threatened incumbent interests, and just because they did so on similar narrative themes/justification sof protecting democracy and rule of law themes, does not mean there was any sort of wink or nod or feeling emboldened by the example of others. Every case was independently moved forward on its own merits, with monetary judgements appropriate to the severity, and the mutual commentary by the states on the other's prosecutions was exactly what you would expect.
Also also coincidentally, this happened to be timed to roughly the same time that a UK court not only rejected a Trump lawsuit over the Steele dossier that was the root of the Russiagate hoax, but ordered Trump to pay 6-figures in legal fees, which was helpfully noted as adding to the half-billion in legal fees Trump had accrued so far that year and not at all contributing to pressures or efforts to drive Trump into bankruptcy analogous to the Le Pen experience earlier in the experience. Note that was before the historically unprecedented further half-billion fine from the New York judgement.
Now, admittedly, the Trump fiscal correlation must be a total distraction. Reputable democracies do not try to bankrupt their oppositions out of politics, and France failed to force Le Pen into fiscal insolvency years ago. The French government would only seek a 300,000 euro fine against Le Pen. And a 2 million euro fine against her party. And opened up a new case in September 2024 alleging illegal financing of the 2022 election.
This, clearly, is utterly unrelated to any other aspect of handling the Le Pen case, and not the initiation for a future basis to further fine and disqualify Le Pen from politics in the future after the current judgement runs its course.
And returning to the only relevant case itself, Le Pen trial that began in March in turn would certainly have no impact on...
June 2024: Surprise! Macron triggers snap elections in effort to overturn political gridlock and break his dependence on Le Pen. Perhaps the ongoing Le Pen trial will at last get rid of this troublesome opposition party?
July 2024: It, uh, doesn't work. Le Pen's party gets about 1/3 of all votes, and about 13% more than Macron's party.
The snap elections are generally considered a strategic mistake for Macron, doubling-down on his issues.
They also, coincidentally, totally kill any talk of Macron's constitutional reform for a third term candidacy.
A candidacy that- remembering previous elections- would have been substantially improved with a Le Pen in the field to rally a resentful Left to his side.
But now that Macron's political hopes for a third election are dead and buried...
November 2024: The French Government announces it seeks 5 years in jail, on top of the political bar, for Le Pen. However, conflicting reports say 2 years., with judgement expected in march 2025
Notably- even a 2 year sentence from vaguely April 2025 to April 2027 would release Le Pen right on / after the 2027 election, and thus totally unable to compete. And, depending on the terms of the house arrest, unable to speak or influence.
31 March 2025 (Yesterday): Le Pen is sentenced to 4-but-2-if-she-behaves years of prison, 2 of them under house arrest and 2 suspended, and a five year bar from political office. She is allowed to appeal but...
Even if she does appeal the ban on public office, only an appellate ruling could overturn it and restore her hopes of running, although time is running out for that to happen before the election as appeals in France can take several years to conclude.
Gallic shrug
I am sure the French government that took a decade to bring this conviction about will speedily process the appeal of the Le Pen who recent French polling suggested was somewhere in the 40% voting range for the first round. (Usual French first round poling disclaimers abound.)
Functionally, this ruling conveniently clears the deck for France's nominal establishment left and rights to make a return, without Le Pen in the way.
Call it Macron's farewell gift to French democracy. It's not like he disqualified his own presidential election opponent...
...though that's more because he failed to get the constitutional change he wanted that would have allowed him to run again...
...in which case, perhaps prosecutorial discretion might have leaned another way.
Summing It All Up
Le Pen (Senior) was an all-around tosser and more or less enemy of the French establishment, if not the French State per see
- Le Pen (Senior) embarrassed the French Establishment in the early 2002 election where he made the second round of the presidential election
- Le Pen (Senior) thereafter suffered years of unfortunate financial prospects that would have driven the Le Pen party out of politics
- Misfortune including perfectly neutral reductions in state stipends for political parties, a bank blockade, and an inability to sell a multi-million dollar property in Paris
- Le Pen (Senior) is politically toxic, and fiscally insolvent, before his daughter takes over the party
Le Pen (Marine) is Le Pen's daughter who inherited his mess, and his enemies
- Le Pen was an unexceptional MEP for over a decade with no notable scandals or accusations of fraud of this sort at the time
- In 2011, Le Pen inherits the party, and its finances, from her father. Money is tight.
- During this time, and probably before, Le Pen deals in the technically-illegal-but-totally-not-widely-practiced practice of paying national party members with EU funds.
- No one cares.
- Le Pen spends the next years working to rebuild fiscal solvency, including taking foreign loans to break the Parisian bank blockade
- The foreign loan most in question is Russian, marking a turn towards a more Russian-friendly narrative line, and increased institutional and international suspicion
President of European Parliament Shulz was a totally-not-corrupt German politician who totally didn't do a political hit job on the rival of an ally in furtherance of his own political ambitions
- Schulz had a notable, internationally-reported reputation for corruption, including on a similar issue
- The issue that will be the basis of the scandal is, uh, not unknown in his circles
- Schulz takes a particular stab at the political rival of a major political partner
- and potential future diplomatic partner who could help Schulz's ambitions come true
- Schulz definitely doesn't get awarded for services rendered for French-appreciated interests
- Or eagerly try to sustain the relationship with surprise arrival Macron
- But Schulz is not the villain
- Merely the tool providing the French establishment their means to prosecute Le Pen when desired
President Macron was totally not letting Le Pen stay in politics as a foil to bolster his personal electoral prospects against the French left
- It's not like Le Pen automatically invoked the support of the French left in every second round election
- Or bolstered his parliamentary prospects against the left that would, absent her, happily no-confidence him
- Or that his administration hid scandalous information that might have let her fail to be the foil when his left flank was weak
- It just takes an additional half-decade to complete investigations to find prosecutable evidence of something that was recorded and reported on more than half a decade prior
- You know, to develop the case until the time is right
Macron was totally not prolonging the case management by months or years in parallel to anticipation of extending his own political career
- Extending his jupiter-style presidency to a third term would have been more unpopular than he was
- In which case a free Le Pen sure would have been useful for those second-round elections
- But keep her and her party in a slow boil post-2022 with unclear intentions or scope
- As insurance policy, or leverage on the parliamentary politics
But Macron's efforts to garner support for a constitutional amendment failed
- And Macron's snap election gambit to regain control of government failed
- And when it failed, so did his prospects at constitutional change
- And if he's not running again, there's no electoral advantage in Le Pen to run again
Which makes it naturally the best time to announce the intent to jail and disqualify the clear frontrunner
- A merciful 'mere' 2 years house arrest just coincidentally scheduled to time to the next election cycle
- It certainly could not have occurred earlier, and thus mitigated the perception of intentional procedural manipulation
- This is justified because embezzlement of EU funds is a critical subversion of democracy the voters should know about
- Just not when it might have harmed Macron's electoral prospects
- Or by letting voters vote accordingly against Le Pen with the knowledge
In Conclusion
Is there a 'benign' explanation for all this? Sure, if you want.
Is this a sketchy-but-will-be-claimed-above-reapproach series of events? Also yes.
The Le Pen saga doesn't actually require some all-encompassing conspiracy. La Pen (Senior) can have his own political feuds with the French establishment separate from La Pen (Marine). Schulz was a means, but hardly the start or the end of the Le Pen family feud with the French establishment. Macron was (probably) never involved in the early phases of whatever French state pressures may or may not have been used to try to bankrupt the Le Pen party.
But unless you believe the French prosecutor's office is completely independent of Macron and only coincidentally schedules things to align with electoral milestones and key dates to Macron's benefit, the Macron-era Le Pen saga has plenty of its own implications of, shall we say, politically considerate handling.
And those Macron handlings were built on a history of the Marine Le Pen handlings. And the Marine Le Pen handlings were built on the Le Pen (Senior) handlings. This has been a political fight for longer than some of the posters on this forum have been alive.
None of this means that Le Pen didn't actually 'defraud' the EU of however many manhours of political aid hours she charged the EU. If that's all you care about, this can be 'just,' sure. Let justice be done though the heavens fall, and all that.
But the other part of 'just' is if this is handled the same as other cases. And to an extent this is impossible, because no one else in France gets handled like Le Pen, because no one else represents what the Le Pen family represents, or threatens, to the French establishment.
What Next?
Don't be surprised if this becomes a significant reoccurring propaganda / european culture war theme for the anti-establishment skeptics, on both sides of the Atlantic.
Establishment European media are already signaling an expectation of further political chaos in France, and trying to coax/signal Le Pen to 'help her party' over 'seek revenge.' (Politico) The National Rally remains in position to topple the government by contributing to a no-confidence vote if the other parties oppose Macron.
The New York Times, which is broadly sympathetic to the French government effort and hostile towards Le Pen with the NYT's characteristic framing devices, concedes that-
Ms. Le Pen, like it or not, may now become another element in the Vance-Musk case for European democratic failure.
This is surrounded by all the appropriate signals that this is bad thought, of course, but it is unlikely to be solely an American critique. Various right-of-center politicians across Europe were quick to condemn, and the culture war lines will write themselves.
Not all are unhappy or afraid, though.
In Paris’ Republic Plaza, where public demonstrations often unfold, Le Pen detractors punched the air in celebration.
“We were here in this square to celebrate the death of her father,” said Jean Dupont, 45, a schoolteacher. “And this is now the death of Le Pen’s presidential ambitions.”
Jean-Marie Le Pen, the founder of the National Front and a figure long associated with racism and Holocaust denial, died earlier this year at age 96.
Sophie Martin, 34, a graphic designer, was among those in a celebratory mood. “I had to check the date — I thought it was April Fool’s Day,” she said. “But it’s not. She’s finally been knocked down. We’ve lived with her poison in our politics for too long.”
jkf
2mo ago
My opinion (which I think I shared at the time) was that he got banned for a combination of "breaking with the HBD consensus" in the form of wrangling with many/most of the actual neo-Nazis around here, and being a bit of a cantankerous fuck who posts a lot -- which (the latter) provided lots of opportunity for said Nazis to report him for technically correct but minor rule violations which would have otherwise flown under the radar.
The reports-volume-based moderation strategy is fundamentally flawed when it comes to high-volume cantankerous posters, and I say this as somebody who was banned more than once by Hlynka for cantankerous wrangling, and kind of pissed off about it in the moment.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2mo ago
Tequila didn't say the mods enforced the hbd consensus he said unofficially hlynka got banned for breaking with the hbd consensus. Despite his contrariness he was still a member of this community and despite his cynicism it seems he couldn't tolerate the community converging on something he found so immoral. It was the reason he decided it wasn't worth playing by the rules to whatever extent he had been before.
JarJarJedi
2mo ago
It would be an appropriate comparison if the King, say, had a vote (and regularly used it) in the parliament equalling 2/3 of the sum of the votes of other members, or equivalent amount of power, and everybody would just go "well, we know it's only a relic based on a technicality but that's how it is and we're not changing it". Effectively, abortion in Germany beyond initial 12 weeks is banned, and something that many in the US consider absolutely barbaric, batshit insane, unconstitutional, bible-thumping far-right lunacy - is accepted as the norm. I find it very hard to reconcile with "perceived as harmless" - if anti-abortion movement is so harmless and is merely a decorative relic, why not do the same as the left in the US has been doing for years and roll out free abortions for all to the birth and beyond? The left hasn't ever been shy in implementing their agenda - even with the strong opposition, they often manage to go very far. If the situation is so that there's no opposition to speak of at all, except some decorative relics - why didn't they do that? The most plausible explanation would be that your assessment of the opposition to it being merely a decorative relic is wrong and if the left tried to push the consensus from the current settled point they would encounter a significant pushback, and a lot of people actually think that this compromise point is better than what the left can offer them. For the left to be using this fact as an argument along the lines of "Europe actually loves abortions and long they implemented what we're asking for and they're all fine with it" in this context sounds very misleading.
Amadan
Enjoying my short-lived victory
2mo ago
Unofficially it looks like he may have been banned for breaking with the rationalist consensus on race and IQ.
You do not know what you're talking about.
TheMotte is rationalist-adjacent because of our origins, but we (and especially the mod team) are not enforcing some kind of "rationalist consensus" on anything, least of all race and IQ. Hylnka was very open about his disdain for HBD and HBD posters. Most of the mods are also critical of it and HBD obsessives to varying degrees. What consensus were we trying to enforce?
A week before he got banned he alluded to having been threatened with a ban if he didn't "bend the knee"
Hlynka said a lot of stuff that was rank bullshit.
and the fact that his ban was announced as a top level post without citing any specific rule-breaking comments would seem to suggest that whatever happened to justify his ban happened out of the public eye.
This was officially the post that finally earned him a permaban, but it was really an accumulation of posting over months and months, during which we repeatedly asked him to stop doing that (I mean, we literally told him "Please stop doing this or eventually we will have to permaban you and we really don't want to do that"!)
Is there an epic blowout in some mod's DMs that we never got to read?
No. He did argue with us in DMs, but it was not much different from what he was saying in public: that we should be quicker to ban people and we should especially ban the people he didn't like, and police the place up more. Meanwhile he'd continue aggressively attacking the people we weren't banning.
Conspiratorially he and the mods knew that the 2024 election might make him a public figure and target for "journalism"
That's, uh, quite a theory all right. I know of no such discussions among the mods, and if Hylnka has become a public figure under another name I am unaware of it. And of all the regular or former motteposters who might draw the Eye of Sauron on us, Hlynka wouldn't be in my top 10.
I dunno, I am pretty left wing (by the standards of the Motte) and while there are certain brands of bullshit popular here, it's more that this forum selects for truth-seeking regardless of who it offends, and that, as a side effect, selects for contrary rightist or dissident leftist opinions. I literally don't know of any other left-leaning or so-called "neutral" forum, for example, that would let someone argue that trans women are men or that IQ is both hereditary and has a racial component, or that deporting illegal immigrants is good, or that Trump is not a fascist. I don't mean that any of those propositions are necessarily true: I'm saying almost anywhere else, you can't even debate it. You might get away with suggesting it, but after the subsequent dogpile, if you persist, you will be banned as a Nazi. No exaggeration, I've seen that happen... almost everywhere else.
As a liberal it's disheartening and annoying. I don't think rightists actually have a closer relationship with the truth, per se. But they do put a higher value on truth as a terminal value, whereas leftists today regard truth as secondary to social approval and psychological comfort.
More options
Context Copy link