domain:putanumonit.com
ThomasdelVasto
Κύριε, ποίησόν με ὄργανον τῆς ἀγάπης σου
2m ago
Another is that the synthesis of progressivism and liberalism seeks state intervention to free individuals from the influences of their families, churches, and other societies of private life. No-fault divorce is now ubiquitous. Governments forbid male-only fraternal organizations. Some state universities de facto ban religious student groups by requiring them to admit as members or officers those who don’t share their convictions. After a while one begins to think that liberalism as it exists will not leave well enough alone; and if the state is to intervene, I want it intervening to support my idea of the good and not to ban it.
This is a great response, and does change my mind a bit! You're right that the state has been wielded directly against local communities, families, parishes, etc. Makes it a bit more complicated.
Where do you think we might end up?
Chrisprattalpharaptr
Ave Imperaptor
3m ago
You seem to be joking here but have you already forgotten those psychotic blanket pardons?
Referenced later on in the same post:
Hell, Biden did too in the heady last month of his presidency when the pardon printer went brrrrr and the ERA suddenly passed. If Democrats elected left-wing Trump, I guarantee that you would absolutely lose your shit.
The point stands. Even now, the typical angle of attack is 'senile admin run by the deep state' because that lands a lot closer to the mark for normies than radical leftist firebrand.
"It's difficult to predict when the Riot Party will riot" might not be as much of an update as you're looking for.
At a certain point, this level of cynicism and bitterness starts reflecting more on you than the people you hate. You, too, seem to be even angrier now that your star is ascendant.
ThomasdelVasto
Κύριε, ποίησόν με ὄργανον τῆς ἀγάπης σου
5m ago
I'd agree that for better or worse the 'capital T' Traditional world is dying. I think an important factor that's often overlooked is that the ubiquitous preindustrial peasant sustenance economies that dominated almost the entire globe 200 years ago are gone entirely or radically diminished today in Europe, America, East Asia and increasingly the developing world as well. Most old religious and cultural traditions were made by and for people who lived in in societies that were arranged very differently from ours, and these traditions served the needs and aspirations of the people who lived in these types of societies.
Extremely good points! Yeah even the metaphors and language in the Bible is very focused on those types of cultures. Having to answer all these complex questions certainly seems to have overwhelmed church hierarchies.
The rapid pace of technological advancement also seems quite difficult to keep up with when trying to promote a careful solution that fits with centuries of dogma and other teachings.
Primaprimaprima
Aliquid stat pro aliquo
7m ago
Before AI, the hard part was finding information.
??? Before internet, maybe.
Why would AI trigger a flood of personal theorizing?
It won't. The average human is spiritually, cognitively, and creatively empty.
Vast majority of people still haven't produced an original artistic work even with the availability of AI art tools. They have no motivation or desire to do so. So it goes too for the construction of "frameworks".
Chrisprattalpharaptr
Ave Imperaptor
8m ago
And a bit different: Down in the river to pray - Colorado All State Treble Choir (this goes semi-viral every few years since 2019 I think)
Love it! Thanks so much. My family has never been religious, but I've always been sucker for a good choir.
ThomasdelVasto
Κύριε, ποίησόν με ὄργανον τῆς ἀγάπης σου
9m ago
It appears the SSC subreddit is now pointing here to define their rules on Culture War. Does this mean we won? https://old.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/1nb6zqe/the_culture_war_rule/nd0741j/
CertainlyWorse
No one is coming. It's just you.
12m ago
I honestly want to send a thank you note to the genious in the Police that gave the order.
The way that the head of the Metropolitan Police asked for the govt to 'review and clarify' the hatespeech laws makes me think the arrest has the whiff of malicious compliance.
RaiderOfALostTusken
24m ago
All I could think about was if a ended with a musical dance number praising Abe Lincoln, Roosevelt, Grant, every american hero with big statues of guns, it would be the most conservative movie ever made.
I thought it was fun!
If you read the biographies of artists and writers who grew up in the mid to early 20th century, when America was assumed to be more conservative and religious, a theme is how they were constantly breaking the law and given second chances. it's like these ppl were in and out of detention and skipping school and smoking and drinking in their early teens, and no one cared that much.
I think that was viable in large part because of the lower rate of serious criminality. (Particularly in white neighborhoods before desegregation.) If crime is less of a problem, if fewer people are escalating from minor offenses to murder, then you don't need to be as harsh to keep it down. It's like a thermostat, if the furnace is running more (harsher policing and sentencing), the insulation is better (older population), and yet the temperature inside (murder rate) is the same or colder then it's probably colder outside. An alternative explanation would be that the furnace doesn't work, but based on stuff like the success of 90s tough-on-crime efforts and the surge from the Ferguson/Floyd Effect it seems like policing has the expected effect, it just has more to handle. Similarly in other countries harsher policing seems effective but the countries that need to resort to it are the ones that had crime problems to begin with. Of course none of this means that "less religiosity" or the like is one of the reasons why, I just think the tradeoffs here are underappreciated. There's a tendency for people to either believe harsh policing and sentencing is intrinsically good/free (Why should we worry about the welfare of criminal scum?), or to believe that it's evil/useless (Don't you know Sweden has 18% of the U.S. incarceration rate and yet it has only 20% of the U.S. murder rate? Why can't we just use their system?). Instead it's a necessary but serious cost and the preferable situation is to avoid paying it by having less criminality to begin with.
Chrisprattalpharaptr
Ave Imperaptor
27m ago
JarJarJedi
31m ago
I didn't claim the whole continent, my forefathers did, and then asserted that claim. They, and I, are native sons of this land.
You, of course, realize that these two sentences are contradictory. You can not "claim" territory that you are the native of. "Claiming" only applies to territories you previously did not inhabit. Irish never "claimed" Ireland - they just lived there. Chinese never "claimed" China - they are Chinese because they are in China, and had been there since forever. There's no need for "claiming".
And, you seem to have a mighty broad ancestry if your ancestors claimed all the territories of the continent, including Mexico and Canada. The only problem that "claiming" them does not do anything - Mexico and Canada are still there. Are you going to war with them to liberate your ancestral territories anytime soon?
but if you have 0 ancestors in the british colonies in 1776, or no ancestors in the United States in 1789, when that document was written, then I don't consider you American in any way.
Too bad for you almost every American - or at least vast majority of them, by now - is not American for you. Good thing is nobody cares. America just had elected a non-American president and he's doing a decent job so far, and it will continue going in the same vein, without regard to weird pureblood claims. As I said, your worst case scenario had long past happened, so you need a new one now.
ADOS and the Indian tribes are also native, but they are not American.
ADOS are definitely not native - they were brought in against their will and this process is well documented. People that were by hilarious mistake named Indians are natives, and if they are not American natives, then what they are natives of I wonder? Narnia?
JarJarJedi
42m ago
So, the current theory is the DHS assistant secretary Tricia McLaughlin was lying and he wasn't actually arrested for suspicion of assault? Or you are ready to admin that your example has nothing to do with ICE errors and you are 0:2 as far as supporting your claims with evidence goes?
If companies in (or investing in) our country are so productive and there's enough market demand that they want to do >Y creation, then why is it good to cap them artificially? Now I know, the general response is "because those jobs should go to the locals!" but the thing is, talented local people already have jobs.
With the labor force constrained to the people currently living here, when we want to do >Y production, we can bid up the wages for it, or we can figure out ways to produce more efficiently, both of which are strong, socially-positive alternatives to simply capping production. Importing more workers achieves neither.
As any hiring manager knows nowadays, the job pool is mostly incompetents, liars, lazies, addicts, or otherwise unwanted because of a serious flaw.
You have gall, I'll give you that.
The other effect keeping to a fixed pool of labor provides, it seems to me, is that there is less incentive to simply write off the sort of people you evidently hold in such contempt. If we cannot simply export jobs or import cheap foreign labor, we have a vested interest in keeping our people from turning into human waste, and a vested interest in salvaging absolutely any of them that we can. It appears to me that you are rating these people as worthless in order to continue the process by which they lost their worth.
I was recently reading an article about drug problems, and it mentioned the communities that have been blighted by drugs "since the economic upheaval of the 90s". the 90s was when we started buying in to the pitch you're making here. I remember that pitch when it was new, how there would be some disruption but the economic prosperity would lift all boats. I remember small towns with their town squares, full of bustling businesses and broad-based prosperity. I drive through some of those old town squares now; they're uniformly ghost towns, boarded up and crumbling. We were foolish to buy the pitch then. Buying it now requires a special sort of derangement.
Adopting your view necessarily means devaluing our countrymen. If I'm going to devalue my countrymen, I'm going to do it for more fitting reasons than pecuniary interest.
quiet_NaN
1hr ago
I'm surprised there haven't been more attempts to freeze a society as a given technological level.
You're in one right now, and you don't notice it because it's imposed by a loosely co-ordinated compact in each of the most technologically-advanced nations.
The massively capital-intensive nature of manufacturing the highest technologies doesn't help either, of course, nor did our outsourcing of low-cost manufacturing to another nation help that either.
This is one of the things the modern regulatory/bureaucratic state actively exists to do, as it's in its interest not to let technology develop that would make it more difficult to govern. Companies also co-ordinate to do this, particularly technology ones (this is the main reason hardware and software manufacturers intentionally frustrate attempts to run arbitrary code on their systems).
Modern reform governments, like the one in the US right now, tend to degrade the bureaucracy's ability to do this as its first order of business. Progressive-conservatives would rather make sure the seals aren't emotionally affected by your rocket launches.
zeke5123a
1hr ago
This just isn’t the norm. As a general rule, PE buys an entity with debt. Banks don’t permit cash to leave the banking group.
The only time is when banks lend money to an existing PE owned business with the express intention of repatriation cash (ie a levered recap). Most liquidity events aren’t levered recaps. Moreover, banks aren’t interested in lending to businesses that will go bankrupt (ie banks don’t want to equitize their debt; they want to get paid back on the debt). So generally leveraged recaps will only occur when the risk of bankruptcy is remote.
None of this means all PE companies survive, but in generally PEs cannot successful generate returns by bankrupting companies.
The British were not kind to India.
They were incredibly kind to India as an imperial overlord.
They actually paid money to the Raj government when deploying Indian troops for imperial operations that didn't have to do with the defence of India. The cost of war would be borne by the British treasury, not the Indian treasury. India also got access to British technology and investment. When WW2 ended, India had twice the rail network of China.
In some respects India got a better deal than the US gives its allies today. Britain and Australia don't get rebates for joining in US wars in the Middle East, they get sneered at for not spending enough of their own money on 'defence'.
Who prevented Russia from gobbling up India in their southward push through Central Asia in the 19th century? Who protected India from the Japanese (world-class experts in the field of imperial cruelty)? The British, despite huge 'Quit India' protests. The Bengal Famine was mainly due to the Japanese invasion of Burma. Unsurprisingly, if rice imports from Burma are cut off and millions of refugees flee North, during a time of wartime strain, there will be problems in Bengal. Wherever the Japanese went, there was famine. Famine in the Philippines, famine in Indonesia, famine in China and famine in East India.
And we see the same incredible overgenerosity today where Indians/ex-Raj ethnicities get all kinds of special privileges in the UK - jobs that are safeguarded for non-whites, police refusing to crack down on them despite unmentionable abuses lest they seem racist. Then there's all the foreign aid they gave India post-independence.
India just finds it easier to blame Britain for everything that goes wrong, all the poverty that remains. It also helps unite the country, there's nothing so universally popular as hating and blaming outsiders. The British and Europeans generally did far more harm to China with the Opium Wars and unequal treaties (let alone the Japanese) yet China has come out well ahead of India today.
If the British were half as cruel as the Indian media likes to suggest, India would be a servile, loyal colony today. They could've liquidated Gandhi on the spot or prevented any Indian intellectual class emerging in the first place. They could've crushed any revolt with heavy-handed suppression, machine-gun fire, gas and incendiary attacks. Just imagine the amount of devastation they inflicted on rich, industrialized Germany, all the millions of men they put into the field instead redirected instead to repress India. Success would be assured. They could've used Indians as cheap labour in factories, instead they let them start their own trade unions. Britain even let Indians become the commercial class of East Africa, enjoying the fruits of empire as a subject.
Goldenpath
1hr ago
I'd agree that for better or worse the 'capital T' Traditional world is dying. I think an important factor that's often overlooked is that the ubiquitous preindustrial peasant sustenance economies that dominated almost the entire globe 200 years ago are gone entirely or radically diminished today in Europe, America, East Asia and increasingly the developing world as well. Most old religious and cultural traditions were made by and for people who lived in in societies that were arranged very differently from ours, and these traditions served the needs and aspirations of the people who lived in these types of societies.
Obviously there are differences; Rome isn't Babylon, which isn't the kingdom of Mercia, which isn't the Delhi Sultanate etc. However, there are some very broad comonalities in premodern agricultural societies that dont apply to today. We aren't as subject to the seasons or time of day for our livelihoods anymore. Our lives arent determined by the will of a military aristocracy. Corvee labor isnt really a thing. I feel that if the spirit of our traditions is to continue into the future, it will need to confront and interact with the world we have, not the one our ancestors did.
For a tradition to survive it needs to retain its core foundational ideas, while simultaneously adapting its teachings and doctrine to the industrial world and really decide what they want to integrate vs discard. Are vtubers haram? Maybe. Is launching a nuclear war moral in X or Y circumstance? Maybe not. But I think that having these sorts of ready made answers would be a massive boon for most religions, even if the rulings are arbitrary or rely on esoteric theology.
No_one
1hr ago
But to succeed, PE generally needs to in the aggregate sell businesses for more than it purchased them for.
It doesn't. It just needs to get more money, by say, buying back stock or paying dividends to themselves.
Forgive me for being a bit skeptical. The only time I came across PE was reading about the fate of US gun makers, where the PE invariably made things worse and their business model was basically exploit the good name of a company they bought by lowering quality and then saddle it with debt and finally let it go bankrupt.
E.g. Remington was bought for $360 million, immediately issued a billion $ worth of debt. 10 years later, 700 millions are written off in a bankruptcy, even though they sold off their buildings to a company owned by the PE group so they could rent them back.
KMC
2hr ago
You can't help but put words in my mouth.
The null hypothesis is the preamble of the constitution: we do this for ourselves and our children. Not for Koreans. No hate required.
And the Georgians agreed to these terms, at least until their partners failed to honor the agreement and then conquered Georgia. I don't think what they wanted for themselves has mattered since 1865, and certainly not since 1964.
Regardless, since 1789 states have not been allowed to set their own immigration policies, and so I need not be a Georgian, merely an American.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
2hr ago
I am skeptical of your general argument, yes.
I’d like to think this skepticism is rational rather than reflexive. It’s certainly not intended as commentary on your erudition.
OliveTapenade
2hr ago
Are you a Georgian? I still haven't seen any evidence that Georgians hate Koreans or are opposed to their presence in the state. Why should it be the null hypothesis that Georgians want these people out? Nothing in the top level post quoting the WSJ indicated that natives have any problems with the Koreans, and the Koreans seem to contributing well to the local economy and cultural acclimatising to American ways, including by taking English names. I can find the full article by archiving it and there seems to be positivity there, including by Georgian government officials. Some local union workers have complained, but it also seems like most of these Koreans have come legally, consistent with Georgia's laws.
I mean, this mostly seems like a model minority situation to me. Koreans have mostly come to Georgia via the legal process, which Georgians themselves established via their state government, and those that have come have respected the local culture, worked hard, and tried to fit in.
Now, sure, maybe native Georgians hate them for some reason and want them to go, but you can't just assume that as your starting point. Be careful not to typical-mind here - maybe you don't think Koreans should live alongside Americans, but it is hardly clear that that is a majority opinion in Georgia.
At any rate, some Koreans coming to Georgia to live and work there, if consistent with Georgia's existing laws, cannot be said to constitute 'replacement' in any reasonable sense of the word.
I very strongly agree with this... I don't think you are missing my point I think we see eye to eye on a lot of these topics.
I suppose what I don't like is a boneheaded and sort of violent approach towards forcing traditionalism back, as opposed to as you say working through democracy or being more reasonable and optimistic about our current society. So again, I think we're on the same page.
More options
Context Copy link