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

Showing 25 of 1821 results for

domain:worksinprogress.co

The whole city is not within the limits of the Temple Mount, and nuclear weapons are made in different magnitudes. So this could conceivably be accomplished with negligible loss of life.

They can't be the new Fedoras - some women actually like them

He Who Fights With Monsters, Book 10 By Shirtaloon. I appreciate that it's (finally) become self-aware enough to subvert some of its tropes, but I'll probably have to give the series some time before reading 11 as I've been reading too much LitRPG lately.

The moment attitude to China changed from "how do we keep them in eternal poverty and civil war" to anything else, Americans lost.

It's that simple. They're mostly one people, they were backward for historical reasons. They are 1/2 of the world's high average IQ population.

Had US presidents read more Lothrop Stoddard, this would never have happened.

Fuck propping up the USSR to keep Chinese down would have made sense.

What, specifically, is wrong with these people? Is that really the best way to argue against them? Or is it just being kind of a dick when you make fun of people's appearances?

Indeed, damage enough to the country.

I think flatter hierarchies might be less likely to benefit from diversity/greater "foreign" populations.

The state as conceived by a libertarian is likely to be "small" and less populated, due to less government capacity for intervention. The liberaltarian state is big, but tries to find a balance with a bigger hierarchy and larger population.

This sounds similar to the armchair "war filter" theory that current day eastern european women are mostly attractive due to the fact that so many men were slaughtered in the 20th century that those who remained could choose only the most attractive as mates. I'm not sure evolution works that fast.

As @ZanarkandAbesFan suggests, there may not be a clear consensus on whether the median European (white?) woman is more attractive on the whole (and I'll use your phenotype term, meaning basically clear skin, facial symmetry, good straight teeth, healthy hair, etc but correct me if you mean something else) than her counterparts in other ethnicities. I assume we're talking about women of a certain age range?

So what exactly do you really believe is the parallel? First, is the increased budget for ICE an increase in the salary of ICE agents or more funding to accomplish their task? Because the second wouldn't make them feel any extra loyalty. Do you also seriously believe that Trump is planning or hoping that ICE is going to stand on his side against... the US military? All other state law enforcement? Seriously, state what you believe Trump is doing here and listen to yourself, and then realize why everyone is telling you this is just TDS. He's just funding the main tool he has to do something a majority of americans explicitely wants him to do, and which fuels his popularity.

I doubt you could get an article published suggesting this but if you look at the revealed preferences of almost any other group of people when they have any choice to mate with Europeans at all, this seems quite obviously true. “Western” bit is a stretch though. Slavs or actual Caucasians obviously win over English/French at physical beauty. Southern Europeans too imo.

It’s not necessarily looking ugly or strange but the fact that someone can’t figure out that they look off-putting even though they could fix this with some work, is profoundly disturbing. It suggests something unhinged about you as you are the sort of person without anyone in your life to tell you such a thing. What did you do to drive everyone away? What other social norms are you oblivious about?

It’s the new fedora.

What's with beards these days? I feel like beards came back hard over the last 10-15 years.

I would disagree entirely - I think it’s an “Al Capone was arrested for tax evasion” type thing.

If someone lies about intending the downfall of America, you have a much better excuse to kick them out than if you have to find an example of them stepping outside the bounds of free speech.

I've also been seeing the "worst wildfire of the year" in California articles. I keep thinking how LA almost burned to the ground in January and wondering how worst is being measured.

So, what are you reading?

I'm picking up With and Without Galton, an open access book on Vasilii Florinskii and Russian eugenics, or as the author calls it, 'eugamics' (ie. well-married), as distinguished from Galton's eugenics.

I suppose humans are more fundamentally hierarchical than they are tribalist/racist.

As long as the person or people on the top stand to benefit from greater numbers of workers, and they don't personally suffer negative effects from things like immigration and ethnic diversity it is in their interest to encourage it. They command the people below them, who are also made better off in a number of ways from the increased number of workers, and on down through the system.

Okay, but the question you originally asked was:

I'm a little unclear on how a libertarian watchman state where all of the government enforcers are racist/sectarian/whatever, ever stops being bigoted.

So isn't the direct analogy here the people on the top being more racist, and therefore commanding the people below them to be more racist? If the dynamics of diversity and rational self-interest naturally result in people on the top imposing non-racism on the bottom, how does the nightwatchman state end up with government enforcers being racist/sectarian/whatever?

Is it generally agreed that Western Europeans (and people of WE descent) are more attractive?

So why did they build it? Is it just a stepping stone to the hydrogen bomb?

The first stage of a hydrogen bomb is basically an implosion type fission bomb. They may also be aiming for a boosted fission weapon to get into high tens / low hundreds of kilotons range.

Most of the complaints I see have nothing to do with dogs or vets, but are instead about the impact to birds.

I suppose humans are more fundamentally hierarchical than they are tribalist/racist.

As long as the person or people on the top stand to benefit from greater numbers of workers, and they don't personally suffer negative effects from things like immigration and ethnic diversity it is in their interest to encourage it. They command the people below them, who are also made better off in a number of ways from the increased number of workers, and on down through the system.

In this way, you only need a system where diverse races are in the rational self-interest of a smaller group of people at the top, and then they can use men with guns to force a culture that is conducive to their rational self-interest, which works because the hierarchy-minded people below them don't rebel enough to make that entirely untenable. There are going to be limits pushing against these things in various directions, and there's probably a Goldilock's zone where all of these varying aspects of human nature (rational self interest, hierarchy and tribalism) are balanced against each other and you have a relatively functional society. Outside of that Goldilock's zone, either people's tribalism overwhelms their hierarchical social instincts, or it starts to be in the rational self interest of the ruler to care only about the people tribally similar to themselves.

To be clear I in no way support stopping municipal fireworks shows. I'm referring purely to people setting them off in the street in front of their house, which has a significant component of antisocial jerks in my city. Official fireworks shows (municipal or otherwise) are perfectly fine and need no action taken at all.

And yet people have jobs, which they very frequently have to be at the next day. July 4 doesn't usually fall on a weekend like it did this year. It's not reasonable to insist that people can't get sleep when they have to be up the next morning just so that people can get hours upon hours of fireworks. 11 pm, even in your time zone, would be over an hour of darkness. 10pm would be similar in places I've lived. My stated timeframe of 10-11pm is a perfectly reasonable one imo.

That's the thinking of the people pushing for shutting down municipal fireworks shows.

stopping at a reasonable hour (say 10-11 pm) so as not to disturb those trying to sleep. 10pm?! This gets you less than an hour of darkness where I live.

On July 4th itself, we should at least induldge till 2:00am., with maybe till midnight on the day before, through the next closest weekend.