domain:dualn-back.com
cae_jones
46m ago
As I recall, the Jamaican Maroons were badass and used the "all look the same" trope to pull some ninja crap in their rebellions. FFS, wouldn't Black Flag have gotten into that general time and region?
Black Panther illustrates that there is/was demand for black people being awesome in their own right, not as a participation trophy in other people's stories. You'd think someone would have picked up on that and done something based on historical black badasses. Instead, they tried making a movie about a notoriously atrocious slavemongery kingdom as though they were the exact opposite, and when that failed, shrugged and went back to the cultural colonialism treatment.
2D3D
45m ago
White leftists writing fiction about black people is basically never going to turn out good, because white leftists worship blacks
They don't worship blacks, they worship the idea of an underdog achieving victory, and the eternal failure that is blacks in america (and frankly most blacks save for certain hyperperforming subgroups like tswana igbo or maybe tutsi) is moral cocaine for leftists. Ask a leftist what blacks cultural values are and you'd get at BEST some southern baptist flavors on a bog standard secular humanist post-race fairytale. That blacks themselves either just want to be left alone like white normies or are violent assholes is never considered; blacks can shout from the rooftops that yakub is evil and leftists will plug their ears to advance a black narrative that no black ever actually elides. Fuck, even bell hooks doesn't spout the weird shit leftists say about blacks, and she's pretty much the sole 'sane' black leftist intellectual.
marinuso
42m ago
Will Elon throttle me if he finds out I’m short Tesla stock?
You probably meant this as a joke, but I'd be wary of buying a car from a tech company. What happens in X years when they shut the servers down that it wants to connect to? Or what happens if your account gets banned?
Tesla employees have been caught sharing videos from the cameras on the cars. That tells me that a) they can access whatever you can, and b) there isn't much stopping even individual employees screwing around with people's cars, neither in terms of IT security or company culture.
aqouta
39m ago
I think you're onto something with underdog victory being a guiding principle among progressives. It's why they can't accept any framing that they are actually in power. I think shooting this particular victim complex is also one of the genuinely new things about the Trump right as well, it's a very useful combination of memes to have for motivating a group.
Tophattingson
39m ago
It seems to me that every single one of your arguments again places a convenient cutoff point on history.
I quite deliberately mentioned that you can keep finding earlier original wrongs. "repeat this process for pre-1948 wrongs". The point is that the origin mentioned by OP is definitely incorrect because these earlier wrongs exist.
The 1948 war was preceded by massive Jewish immigration into Palestinian lands
Massive immigration fits most of Europe and Europeans are generally not considered to be entitled to commit random acts of violence.
terrorism by armed groups representing it,
Same.
and them leveraging their ties to the international community to secure support for plans that already amounted to mass expropriations of Palestinians
The housing crisis in many major cities in Europe has this same de facto outcome.
The particular reason why Palestinians are more entitled to engage in unrestrained terror tactics than these groups is that they have been subjected to unrestrained terror tactics first and continuously.
And this would also apply to Israelis, who also believe that they were subjected to unrestrained terror tactics first and continuously. So once again we end up with no special reason why Palestinians are uniquely entitled to do this.
quiet_NaN
38m ago
As I see it, conscripted military in a democratic country are the ones who it is least just for someone attacked by that country to retaliate against, because they are coerced into doing what they do and often are not even allowed to leave before completing their service.
Well, draft dodging is a thing in most democratic countries, as few countries provide the kind of coercion which would get people to assist a serial killer.
In my mind, there is a kind of pyramid of responsibility.
On the lowest rug is the taxpayer. Most democratic countries do not wage total wars most of the time, so it is likely that only a small fraction of their productivity goes towards sustaining the war. Intentionally targeting these civilians is generally considered a war crime, but they may become collateral damage.
The next rug are people working full time for the war effort in low end jobs. This includes the conscript but also the person who works in a munitions factory or writes software documentation for killer drones. Killing them during their work seems a legitimate tactic to me.
Then you have the specialists, like fighter pilots, star programmers of smart munitions and so on. I think these might be legitimate subjects of targeted elimination.
Then you have the leadership, like generals and politicians. Legitimate targets.
(Note: I am not a lawyer or ethics expert, please consult with your lawyer and spiritual guidance provider before killing anyone.)
Ideally, you would want to achieve your tactical and strategic goals with minimum loss of life. Practically, the easiest way to neutralize enemy infantry is to shoot them, which is why every army in the world has weapon systems for that purpose. Sometimes (e.g. WWI), the best strategy is to to feed your men into the meat grinder and hope the enemy runs out of people first. Sometimes, it is mostly about taking out high tech materiel or leaders and any grunts killed are only collateral. Sometimes people decide to go for the tax base of their enemy, but we have thankfully agreed that the military benefits are too low to justify the costs in human lives and call these people "war criminals".
I will grant you that if Hamas had killed a thousand IDF conscripts on Oct 7 instead of civilians, that would not have achieved any strategic or tactical goals either. Still, I think the distinction of "unarmed civilians" and "soldiers" forms a very useful Schelling fence.
Is it really that bizarre? As an intuition pump, what does the total morality thing say about obligatory meat consumption? Does the wrongness of the Inuit hunter who tries to kill the walrus to feed his family and the walrus that gores the hunter trying to kill it sum up to >=1? I would consider dodging this question by saying that the walrus can not be a moral subject to be a copout.
I think in that case I might be okay with the outcome of the struggle for life.
If I were a follower of Odin who thinks that battle is good, I might say the warriors of tribes A and B are both totally justified in trying to murder each other, because I like the resulting outcome (war).
Instead, I am a normalish modern Westerner who thinks that modern war is terrible, an inadequate equilibrium to be avoided almost all of the time. There are a small number of cases where war may be justified to remove vast amounts of negative utility, e.g. by liberating Auschwitz. But if the argument for side A being justified hinges on "if they win the war, this will create a better world than if they lose it", then the argument can not be true for both sides at once.
faceh
36m ago
My working theory which I don't (yet) endorse is that MBA grads and SJWs actually have a lot of aligned incentives.
MBAs come into a company and try to figure out how to broaden their target market beyond whatever core demographic they have established. Regardless of what your company sells, the MBA wants to find a way to sell it to EVERYBODY.
SJWs also have a 'product' they want to sell to 'everybody.' That is, their ideology.
And SJWs can claim to be the ones who can tell the MBAs how to sell beyond their core demo. "If your product isn't selling well to women, it is probably too sexist. If your product isn't selling well to minorities, its probably too racist. If you can't get LGBT folks to buy, your product is too heteronormative. If you denounce the patriarchy and white supremacy and become known as a queer ally, you can reach out to those otherwise unattainable groups who will then buy your product."
An MBA presumably doesn't bother to comprehend the ideology or its goals, but thinks "Ah, we hire extra women, we run some ads that uplift black people, and we start openly celebrating pride and that will kick open new, untapped markets. Lets do it!"
And because SJWs have indeed done the groundwork in prepping the larger society to accept more diversity, this strategy might even pay off in the short term.
In this sense, MBAs and SJWs form a symbiotic team, with both having the similar end goal of achieving 100% market saturation for their product even if it means 'sacrificing' those things that made the product successful to begin with.
jeroboam
35m ago
My explanation for puzzling CEO behavior.
CEO's don't care about corporate profits or woke politics. What they do care about is status signalling within their elite group. They get more plaudits for woke initiatives than they do for meeting quarterly earnings targets. Therefore, they will purse woke nonsense at the expense of earnings, up to the point where they lose their jobs.
Corporate boards, also caring mostly about intra-elite status games, will give woke-presenting CEOs a long leash before they pull the plug.
However, there is a limiting principle. CEO's with extremely poor performance will lose their job. Being fired is low status so it keeps things from getting too ridiculous.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
31m ago
Almost finished With the Old Breed. Vivid and chilling. I’d recommend it to anyone interested in war memoirs.
Thank God we don’t have to experience this. I don’t just mean American civilians—I suspect no one on the planet faces such a level of industrialized brutality. Two hundred thousand men crammed into 5 miles of front.
Walterodim
Only equals speak the truth, that’s my thought on’t
30m ago
How many votes will Robert Kennedy Jr receive in the Presidental election? For the most part, this is treated as silly or just a footnote, but he keeps polling at around 10%. This also isn't even that weird - we all know Perot got a ton of votes, but did you know that in 2016 Gary Johnson got 3.28% of the vote? Looking at state-by-state totals, there's a pretty good chance that Johnson flipped Maine, New Hampshire, and Minnesota to Clinton and almost did the same in Michigan and Wisconsin. At no point do I recall him polling anywhere near as high as RFK and he certainly didn't have the name recognition, which makes it entirely plausible to me that something like 10 million people are going to vote for RFK.
2D3D
29m ago
The coopting of leftist language by trump and his toadies is frankly the best part of his presidency. nothing gets me giggling like police going 'did you presume his gender?' when some dangerhair screams defund the police crap at a police officer.
sliders1234
29m ago
What is the dog that didn’t bark here?
They inserted a black character into a Japanese story why? Could they not find a black story tell and have the setting in black civilization.
A fun game would be to get the woke upset that Ubisoft thinks so little of black civilization that they insert black characters into other civs instead of doing a game based on black history.
The anti woke shouldn’t be attacking the cultural appropriation of Japanese culture by inserting Hollywood’s preferred racial balance they should be autistically demanding a black story and accusing Ubisoft of racism for refusing to do that.
ToaKraka
Dislikes you
20m ago
Gamblers allegedly think that the chance of a third-party victory is a whopping 2.5 percent. Note, however, that this single number is an aggregation of multiple betting services, whose underlying numbers (available by tapping on or hovering over the Dem. and Rep. party symbols) seem to be all over the place.
jeroboam
20m ago
I have the following well-worn preference cascade
-
My rules. In this case, race blindness.
-
Your rules, enforced fairly. In this case, all races are treated as protected classes.
-
Your rules, enforced unfairly. In this case, white people are uniquely disrespected. Black people, uniquely sanctified. <--- we are here
I prefer 1, then 2, then 3.
5434a
20m ago
It's difficult to judge as a TV show because I know the book and so I knew the plot and the characters going in and could tell what parts they took out, what parts they altered, what parts they cut down and so on. Over all it was fine, no complaints*, but the book is necessarily a much richer experience and if I ever want to revisit the story I'd re-read the book rather than rewatch the show.
* One complaint: Lady Ochiba's anime villainess dialogue delivery.
cjet79
14m ago
Its one of those stories where the flaws don't bother me too much or they are actually kind of a positive.
I'd consider Runesmith kinda mediocre, but its also held my attention much longer than other stories.
I think the author is very good at creating interesting worlds/settings, decent at desperate and action packed combat scenes, and good at a steady sense of progression for the main character.
The grammar and word choice and editing leave a great deal to be desired. I think the author uses voice to text, because there are sometimes words that sort of sound correct if you are speaking out loud, but are totally the wrong word choice. If you are an editing stickler this story is a hard pass. I am mostly not a stickler for tight editing. As long as I can mostly understand it then I'm fine. Though repeated bad explanations like in translated novels will wear me down into frustration eventually.
The dialogue and social scenes sometimes annoy me. The author likes to create "anime scenes". Where the main character and side characters are doing silly and embarrassing things. The side characters are filled with beautiful women. Its not Harem, but it falls into a side genre that I'm gonna call "Harem Eyes". The MC isn't sleeping with a bunch of people, but the author is definitely undressing all of them with his writing. There are lots of beautiful big breasted women around. Its almost like being set in a harem setting, without the actual harem showing up.
The main character is also mostly rational in their long term approach to problems. They will sometimes make emotional hero-like decisions in the moment. Generally I am not getting frustrated with the main character for being an idiot to drive the plot forward.
Without the MC holding an idiot ball the author seems to have some trouble advancing the plot sometimes. So instead the MC just seems fantastically unlucky. Also because the author often describes mundane events and interesting events with the same amount of leading details you never really know when a bout of bad luck is about to strike the MC. I kinda like that surprise.
VoxelVexillologist
Multidimensional Radical Centrist
11m ago
Unironically, it seems to me that Mansa Musa would fit well with the other "power and political intrigue" settings in the AC series, although I've only played a couple of the early titles.
faceh
4m ago
Yes, lack of accountability does end up gelling with my other theory on institutional failure
As I hinted at above, I would hope that the end of an era of low interest rates enabling all kinds of corporate shenanigans would meant that financial performance again becomes the dominant metric by which decisions to fire are made.
CertainlyWorse
Dedicated Pessimist
1m ago
Thank you. I think I need to go and read the book.
you-get-an-upvote
Hyperbole is bad
just now
From your original post:
Low male employment, antiwork, and the rise of NEET-dom
I am not @SomethingMusic
The question is why does it seem ubiquitous. And maybe it is because leftist culture is the culture of PMC.
More options
Context Copy link