domain:freddiedeboer.substack.com
Eh, it’s possible. People here are unusually likely to pass that sort of Turing test.
And I don’t disagree that the bottom, so to speak, has fallen out. There are a lot of people who are feeling more afraid, alienated, polarized. What they aren’t feeling is vindication. That’s something you get from people who were already thinking about a CW model.
The reverse side should have the picture of the autopen.
All of the above?
This reads a lot like the "50 Stalins" dialog, and I at least see a plausible reading where "That would be Hitler" is rhetorically "No, 50 Stalins!" in a way that is pointing out the extremism of one's own side.
I guess it depends on how earnestly "Hitler" is supposed to be taken here, or if it's a clearly-over-the-top suggestion. Still relatively unprofessional for such an organizational forum, though.
Do you believe that all of politics can only be summed up as "left" and "right" and that it is impossible to be both against killing people like Kirk and against racism/neonazism/etc?
Yes.
Let me put it like this. When a high profile Jan 6 defendant gets tenure at a major university, and becomes the mentor to the next president, I might be willing to entertain the notion that I have enemies to the right. If the town my daughter is growing up in doesn't flip from 80% white to 30% white over her lifetime like mine did, I might be willing to entertain that I have enemies to the right. If I can look up resumes in my field and not see that 50% of them have some variation of "we prioritize hiring diversity", I might be willing to entertain that I have enemies to the right.
But my life has been made so infinitely worse by my enemies to the left, I don't understand why I could possibly care about these theoretical enemies to my right. They've literally never done anything to me.
In July, I did my routine vitals checkup, and got some bad news. High glucose levels (110), high HA1C (5.7), abnormal lipids and liver function tests. Of these, the glucose part has been most worrying, since I have genetic predisposition to diabetes duer to family history, and that's not fun. I talked to the doctor and he said basically you can lose weight or we can give you a bunch of pills, your choice. So, I decided to take some measures to reduce my weight and sugar intake and see how much it can more the needle. What I have done:
- I've been eating pretty cleanly already, but I excluded all added sugar products pretty much completely
- I stopped all snacking, unless it's nuts, cheese or beef jerky, and only do those 1-2 times a day in small quantities
- Stopped all sweets altogether (with rare occasional exceptions like birthday, etc.) including no sugary fruit
- Stopped all high-carb foods - no bread, pasta, etc.
- No alcohol (again, with rare exceptions like birthday or social occasion with friends - which came out no more than once a month)
- Made an IF routine where I only eat anything between 10am and 8pm, outside of it I only drink water or tea
- Exercise routine - at least 3 gym days (15 mins cardio, then 45 mins to an hour resistance training) plus 1hr martial arts 2 times a week
- In addition to that, walk with the dog 45-1hr daily
This wasn't very hard to maintain - I am missing the sweets a bit, but otherwise I just needed to be a little more organized and regular with what I was already doing. Just required to keep in mind and reminding myself that I need to keep to the routine. It does include eating less varied diet than I used to and forgo some culinary pleasures, but it doesn't become intolerable (fortunately, my wife is a good cook and is very supportive).
This week, after 3 months of this routine, I got the new tests. The glucose is back into acceptable range, HA1C is 5.4 - well within normal range, liver function normal, lipids are still abnormal but much better than before. And I lost 20 pounds. I am happy with the result and plan to continue with the same regimen with another 3 months, and get my weight close to my ideal range (which requires losing another 10-15 pounds). After which I plan to slowly relax the routine and re-introduce some stuff like occasional bread or fruit and see if I can maintain the lower weight while allowing some more tricky items in - my wife is also a good baker, so some temptations are definitely there. So far I'm optimistic about this.
Liberalism is what a dictatorship of the working class looks like when it goes through gender affirming care.
Fascism is what a dictatorship of the working class looks like when it forgets to invite any women.
Communism is what a dictatorship of the working class looks like when it forgets to invite any men.
Okay, how about composing and performing a song about it being springtime for Hitler?
the ones who were already jumping at the bit.
It is interesting to see it potentially developing as the last straw for a lot of people, where a passive lack of charity crosses into something more active.
Once, I did care, but I burned out before this. I don't really consider the right "my side" in an affirmative sense, but my anti-leftness solidified sometime during the whole "whiteness is the source of all evil but technically doesn't mean white people wink wink nudge nudge" era of egregious bigotry.
This is not good for society, and it's definitely not good for my intellectual charity when talking to whatever infinitesimal fraction of the left refused to tolerate that shit, but I don't really feel like the ball is in my court for solving it, either. For all my many flaws and failures, I've never declared an ethnicity a contract with the devil, or tried to create high-minded academic fig leaves for virulent racism.
Yeah, as with a lot of things Jewish, there's two kinds of people who use the noun "Jew" to refer to a Jewish person -- neo-Nazis and Jews.
(OK maybe boomers too)
Now a bit regarding Nazism specifically. The left has so abused the term Nazi/fascist, similar to abuse of Antisemite or Communist/Socialist, that at some point you can’t be surprised when people start to think Nazism isn’t so bad, and start to wear the badge in defiance. In a weird way it becomes analogous to blacks reclaiming the word “nigger”
Lots of people manage to be called Nazi/fascist inappropriately without becoming pro Nazi. I wonder what the difference here is between the anti Nazi conservatives and the pro Nazi conservatives are. My guess at the most obvious explanation would be that the pro nazis are just pro nazi to begin with and any excuse they give is just that, an excuse.
Now maybe we could say that it's because "Nazism" as a term has become diluted, like how "Communism is when the government does stuff" happened among many youth.
But diluted communism/socialism is typically like "I'm such a socialist, I wish we were like Norway". For Nazism to be diluted, I wouldn't expect Hitler and gas chambers, I'd expect "I'm such a Nazi, I wish we were like Slovakia" or something. The dilution in the mainstream is typically from shared misunderstandings.
"Young" in this case is 18-40, adults working in a professional capacity.
I ran into this in my local Republican party, I was invited to join the Young Republicans and I laughed, saying I'm 30 and I'm married and I have a mortgage, I think I'm just a regular Republican. They said oh no it goes up to 40, and I was flabbergasted.
Is there anyone who thinks the Young Republicans is an important organization, and not a kind of hanger-on group that doesn't really achieve much if anything? It strikes me as an organization that exists within the party structure so that it doesn't not exist, and hierarchy-wise it gives you a few sinecures for minor apparatchiks working their way through the party, but I don't think the Young Republicans carry any real power.
No. Otherwise it would mean you've just become about as literal Nazi as possible in a world where the Nazi party is no longer around.
But there's no reliable evidence this guy wants peaceful coexistence, last time he was out he engaged in violent attacks. He "reformed" in prison so dupes at the UN would get behind his cause of release.
Interesting how pretty much all of this is just "people who don't show perfect loyalty to the tribe". In which case I suppose there's a question to be asked.
Why should the Gov Scott/Stefanik/Roger Stone/etc crew who are appalled by Nazism and bigotry have to show their loyalty to the Nazi side and accept their anti American values, instead of the Nazi side having to show their loyalty to the Gov Scott/etc side and stop being Nazis?
Ever looked at The Listener crossword in The Times? It makes a cryptic look like a child's word search.
I tried to find an example but I can only find pictures of finished puzzles without the clues. Looks like there are some follow-alongs on YouTube.
…did you ever?
I did. The whole reason I got into /r/SSC and The Motte is because I thought they represented a chance for dialogue between the two sides, and a chance for each of us to say "I guess they make some good points sometimes", come together, and either forge a common path, or at least forge a pact to purge the crazies on each respective side. All I got for the trouble was "not good enough" said in so many ways, and a litany of denials that there's anything wrong with the progressive side, and that if I think otherwise, it's because I'm being uncharitable.
Now... you know me (and I know me), I know I'm prone to sperging out at times, but I was actually trying, but at this point, why bother? This isn't even accusatory, I know your heart's in the right place, but I know that you and people like you are incapable of stopping the things I find offensive and distasteful that come from your side, so why should I police mine?
There are no literal Nazis, and there haven't been in 80 years. That's part of the point here, you're chasing boogeymen.
So "I love Hitler" is about as literal Nazi as possible in a world where the Nazi party is no longer around?
In my opinion there is literally nothing that can be said between two consenting adults in a private conversation that I would consider unacceptable behavior.
So two adults coordinating a child porn ring is acceptable as long as it's done in private? Might need to walk back your literally nothing claim here.
It's fine if you are 1-3. You'll just have to trust me when I say that these conversations take place all the time
I'm sorry, but if you're in such a world where you genuinely believe that every man jokes this way and anyone who doesn't is just a liar, it says a lot more about you and the people you hang out with in your dark matter world than about men in general.
This type of defense is truly incredible just as a concept though. Like it's literally "Yes all men!" but as an endorsement, it comes off as a lack of imagination and theory of mind.
Heck, the very term "Jew" was declared offensive in some blue tribe circles 5+ years ago! There was even a This American Life episode featuring the Jewish host Ira Glass asking one of his younger interns or recent hires to describe what person he is in terms of his religion, and she insisted on calling him a "Jewish person" or something of the sort, while explicitly refusing to call him a "Jew," despite the fact that he self-identified as a "Jew."
I don't think it caught on, but then again, the blue tribe environments in which I reside don't have that many Jews and don't talk about Jews much, so it could be one of those things that just quietly passed under my radar and is actually dominant in the blue tribe.
Was there any actual support for Hitler? The single quote appears to be, as per the context The_Nybbler provided, a reducto ad absurdum joke.
I don't understand what the humor here is in
A: "Let's elect the most hardcore of our beliefs"
B: "That would be Hitler"
Seems like an admission that the beliefs are Hitler Lite, not a great sign.
But ok, sure let's take that as just a joke and not read into anything. What about the other comments like the one about the Kansas delegation possibly liking someone more if they painted them as Nazis? It seems over and over again the joke here is "boy we sure are a lot like literal Nazis".
Republicans like Gov Scott, Stefanik, Roger Stone, etc all seem to be appalled by it, so it's not some just Bad Faith Left Wing thing either unless anyone who breaks tribal loyalty is inherently considered an outsider enemy.
It doesn't even have real life traction, thats the thing.Firing some young republican nobodies is costless for republicans, and now everyone sotto voce thinks the liberals are the crazy moralizing karens they spent the ladt year pretending they werent. There is an extremely aggressive attempt to memoryhole the shaming and screeching of the late 2010s but this just shows the libs can't help themselves from beating the racism gong when some supply actually instantiates to feed their unlimited demand for wrongthink.
My understanding of 4chan culture is that none of these are remotely homophobic in practice, and the term "fag" has become sufficiently debased that someone needed to coin the term "gayfag" to describe male homosexuals.
Yes. Why wouldn't it be? They'd still obviously be liable for creation/distribution/possession of the child porn itself so there's no need to crack down on mere "coordination" other than an authoritarian desire to sneak in more control over private speech in general.
More options
Context Copy link