site banner
Advanced search parameters (with examples): "author:quadnarca", "domain:reddit.com", "over18:true"

Showing 25 of 2451 results for

domain:nytimes.com

Tolkien’s Middle Earth stories are intended as an ersatz mythos for the historical peoples of the British Isles; the various peoples and factions of the world are rough stand-ins or symbolic idealizations of the various ethnic groups and their myths which have coalesced into the modern (white) peoples of England, Scotland, Wales, and Ireland. (And, by extension, the Celtic and North Germanic peoples of Continental Europe.) Gondor as a rough analogue for Roman-Celtic Britain, Rohan as the horse-obsessed Anglo-Saxons, Elves as the remnants of the pre-Aryan Neolithic peoples, etc.

This is expressly incorrect.

If you open up your copy of The Lord of the Rings, Tolkien writes in the appendices that the Rohirrim do not resemble the Anglo-Saxons:

This linguistic procedure does not imply that the Rohirrim closely resembled the ancient English otherwise, in culture or art, in weapons or modes of warfare, except in a general way due to their circumstances: a simpler and more primitive people living in contact with a higher and more venerable culture, and occupying lands that had once been part of its domain.

He represents the language of Rohan as old English in order to express its linguistic relationship to the common speech spoken by the hobbits, which he represents as modern English, but he says clearly that the folk of Rohan do not especially resemble the ancient English otherwise.

Likewise for Gondor, note Tolkien's Letter #294, where he is responding to and criticising the draft of an interview of him for the Daily Telegraph:

[Journalist:] Middle-earth .... corresponds spiritually to Nordic Europe.

Not Nordic, please! A word I personally dislike; it is associated, though of French origin, with racialist theories. Geographically Northern is usually better. But examination will show that even this is inapplicable (geographically or spiritually) to 'Middle-earth'. This is an old word, not invented by me, as reference to a dictionary such as the Shorter Oxford will show. It meant the habitable lands of our world, set amid the surrounding Ocean. The action of the story takes place in the North-west of 'Middle-earth', equivalent in latitude to the coastlands of Europe and the north shores of the Mediterranean. But this is not a purely 'Nordic' area in any sense. If Hobbiton and Rivendell are taken (as intended) to be at about the latitude of Oxford, then Minas Tirith, 600 miles south, is at about the latitude of Florence. The Mouths of Anduin and the ancient city of Pelargir are at about the latitude of ancient Troy.

Auden has asserted that for me 'the North is a sacred direction'. That is not true. The North-west of Europe, where I (and most of my ancestors) have lived, has my affection, as a man's home should. I love its atmosphere, and know more of its histories and languages than I do of other parts; but it is not 'sacred', nor does it exhaust my affections. I have, for instance, a particular love for the Latin language, and among its descendants for Spanish. That it is untrue for my story, a mere reading of the synopses should show. The North was the seat of the fortresses of the Devil. The progress of the tale ends in what is far more like the re-establishment of an effective Holy Roman Empire with its seat in Rome than anything that would be devised by a 'Nordic'.

Tolkien analogises the return of the king to Gondor to the re-establishment of the Holy Roman Empire, with its capital in Rome. It seems to me that this would make Gondor or Minas Tirith the proper analogue to Rome itself, or Italy more generally. This seems supported by his intention that Gondor is, in terms of latitude, somewhere roughly between northern Italy and Greece or western Turkey.

I agree that The Rings of Power is garbage and that, in general, actors should be cast who plausibly resemble the characters they are intended to portray, but I want to nitpick that your claim about Tolkien's intentions here is just false.

+1. "Better graphics", undoubtedly, but that doesn't make a better video game.

We do have much better video games now, though.

Very debatable, especially if you include the early 2000s.

The parallel comments already said about as much, but Iranian media does not represent the standard of communication that I would wish for this community to aspire to.

You may consider your rationale as being analogous to "my outgroup shoots at me, so I would be stupid to unilaterally disarm and not shoot at them", but perhaps it is more akin to "my outgroup has bad hygiene, so I would be stupid to unilaterally disarm and take a shower".

Y'know, your comment helped me clarify a thought I've had. It seems that there are several different beliefs that often get confused for one another because they are only subtly different.

  • Liberalism: reject tribalism, embrace equality and "color-blindness," let's put aside our differences to get rich and live and in peace (classical /old-school liberals)
  • Identitarianism: embrace tribalism, take from others and give to your own, by hook or by crook (e.g. ethnocentric immigrants, Black nationalists):
  • Anti-White Identitarianism: Same as above, except your tribe prioritizes taking from whites first (mostly because it's easy pickin's, but also something something oppression). There's the Progressive variant that adds the rest of the intersectional totem pole under whites

so far, do familiar. But then

  • Pro-Republic Liberal Identitariansm (there has to be a better name): embrace tribalism, (but reluctantly and only as a means to RETVRN to limited liberalism, not as an end in itself) because liberalism can only function as s fine-tuning knob on a cohesive society, not as a combat arena for rival incompatible cultures to duke it out for supremacy.

Did I miss any?

Sorry for the late reply, but I think the founding principles of America vs Japan are way different. America has a ton of stuff about equality and freedom in its founding document. The natural outcome there is the liberation of the slaves. Japan had no such thing. Also, Japan, like the rest of the Old World, was a way older thing, so the historical standard is stronger.

I was never a huge aldi shopper but it seems to be a direct copy of euro aldi, in a way that is quite strange to see for my American brain.

The thing I most noticed is the coin thing with the shopping carts and the cash boxes.

The stuff being stolen most nowadays is high value-to-volume non-perishable packaged goods which are easy to fence. Razor blades are a classic example, but if you look at places where shoplifted goods are being sold online or at what gets locked up in stores, laundry detergent is probably the number one target.

Poors shoplifting for personal consumption happens (particularly for booze) but isn't what is closing grocery stores.

Eh, I agree with you that Trump keeps bringing this back up when he should shut up. I occasionally look at /r/conservative because it's interesting to me to see which news circulates and which doesn't circulate in different bubbles. This one does have staying power in denting Trump's popularity among conservatives. But beyond remaining a sore spot and blemish in Trump's record, I don't think it amounts to anything concrete. Trump can't run again anyway, and it's not like they're going to start voting Democrat. Republicans in Congress are mostly shutting up and either doing nothing because Trump is doing everything via EOs, or quietly passing a few things here and there but not talking about it. Democrats are trying to keep this alive as long as possible because it's the only thing they've managed to hit him with that has had any effect at all.

I'm a big fan of noticing that he's against most books. The man's a distillation of every criticism of 'elite human capital' that isn't.

I wouldn't describe the immigrants I know as being "given" much beyond the opportunity to immigrate to the U.S. That's significant!, but they worked their ass off to climb from their poor neighborhoods to Fairfax County. I also don't think my family is perceived as the "outgroup" in any meaningful sense that affects our well-being.

It's great that you don't feel any ill effects from this because you can apparently afford to live in NOVA. I briefly considered moving back to NOVA to send my kids to a very specific and unique school I once attended, but real estate is so outrageous that even with my pretty decent tech salary we would be mortgage-poor if we tried. I visited my old neighborhood -- a nice middle to upper middle class neighborhood -- and it is now apparently entirely Indian/Pakistani/Arab, each driveway has a bunch of cars so presumably the houses are packed with people, and our local grocery store now looks like a halal bazaar. Even if I could afford to live there, I don't think I would, because I don't think me and my (nonwhite!) American family would fit in anymore.

If we hadn't had have massive immigration, there would be less pressure on real estate and housing (fewer people, lower cultural acceptance of people packing in like sardines and paying insane rent/mortgages) and thus a higher standard of living for existing Americans, and my neighborhood would still be recognizably American instead of some Indian/Middle Eastern colony. It's easy to be shielded from this sort of thing when you apparently make enough money to live comfortably in NOVA -- you're probably surrounded by other very affluent people who have integrated well.

You can pave over a lot of problems with prosperity and wealth, but when times are hard those attitudes will come to the fore.

It's not that I disagree, but how do you think these attitudes would manifest to hurt my family?

Sorry, I was thinking in the other direction--I think young people are the ones who may have better reason to feel this is all constraining their liberty. The 1990s seem to have been "peak America" in several ways--probably the best "Free Speech" era, certainly an economic dream time, cost disease in education had begun but was years from spiraling out of control, etc.

We do have much better video games now, though.

It's worth mentioning that the Pink Tax probably doesn't exist.

Unsurprisingly, feminist academics who look into whether women are arbitrarily charged more because of sexism tend not to be the most dispassionate researchers.

I don't think one should change one's opinion on the object level based on popular sentiment.

Oh, thanks for outing yourself. I already banned you for two weeks because you keep making shitty comments, but since you just admitted to being a very specific ban evader, I will make it permanent.

I don't get why you think this makes you clever, but whatever.

What kind of an incel would be school shooter keeps a diary?

One who is also transgender -- Audrey Hale, whose "manifesto" was more like a diary -- though that wouldn't fit the narrative. Also I don't know if Hale was an incel.

What are some of these freedoms that an older person might be missing out on?

If the author mentions fine details that would refer to some real life incident that is not actually supposed to be in the story, there's a good chance the author is trying to lecture about the real life incident.

But I was assured that "the knife-ears took er jerbs!" scene was not at all meant to be a comment on Trump and immigration! 😁

Differences in price due to color are common and accepted, if not liked. Right now for me the same Levis 501s are $39.99 in Dark Stonewash, $41.99 in Medium Stonewash, and $49.99 in Olive Night.

Usually the "pink" items complained about are slightly (or even considerably) different anyway.

You've accumulated four warnings in a couple of months for obnoxious raspberries that add nothing to the conversation. And you decide you need to come back to a 17-day-old comment to say "Fuck off, retard"?

I'm going straight to a two-week ban this time, and will be in favor of escalating to a permaban next time, because you seem to be one of those people who's just here to shit on threads.

ETA: Escalated to permaban for ban evasion

Classic hyperagency/hypoagency. Men need to adapt to fit society (or they are failures who need to be mocked for their fragility), whereas society needs to adapt to fit women (or else it's failing women and victimising them). Feminists malignantly prey on and reinforce this double standard all the time.

Numbering is mine. Amadan seems to think I've had at least 4 accounts and is holding this against me in his moderation decisions.

I did believe you have gone through at least four accounts between reddit and here. I did not hold that against you in my moderation decisions.

You have told me (in modmail) that this is incorrect, you never had any other accounts. As I told you in the response you apparently won't read, I will take your word for that and apologize for my error. But it doesn't matter, because as @naraburns and I said, "running alts" was never one of the issues with you. (I never claimed nor thought you were using alts for ban evasion.)

I don't think it was ever confirmed that she was pregnant. It doesn't appear any journalist ever bothered to track down this particular Aracely Henriquez.

Where's the part where we "warped the rules" for Darwin's benefit?

I don't entirely agree with Zorba's (6-year-old!) distinction between "abrasive" and "antagonistic" (they are two different things, but they are closely associated and someone being consistently abrasive is probably being consistently antagonistic) but I see what he was getting at. You have never been able to accept that you can't rules-lawyer your way into demanding we ban all and only the people you don't like.