domain:youtube.com
SecureSignals
Civilization is simply a geno-memetic-techno-capital machine
5m ago
Can you name a single conservative thinker who is pro-affirmative action?
No, I can't, and that's the point.
So to summarize:
- It's not about race, it's about politics.
- You are against affirmative action in favor of "race-blind meritocracy"
- You are opposed to being "pro-white" in favor of being "pro-meritocracy"
- You are in favor of national over racial identity
- You are an favor of American focus on "dynamism" rather than racial issues
So where's the dissidence? That's just standard boomer conservative. Maybe you believe in race and IQ and hate women, that doesn't make you a dissident it basically just makes you a Republican. A lot of Republicans have low-key or implicit HBD views and similar "edgy" views on gender.
Hence, the sheep in wolves' clothing. These people act all based and red-pilled with edgy memes or greek statue avatars, but at the end of the day they basically just support republican talking points, are highly defensive of Jews, and don't really care for white identity politics.
Do you really think they should be cheering you on as you try to form lines of in-group preference and out-group prejudice with them on the outside?
Yes, actually, I do think they should have, but that ship had sailed. White Americans gave fealty to Jews in the 20th century, none was given in return. That's how it's supposed to work, you can't demand fealty and give none in return. But now I just accept they are a political opposition, which is why this is an important issue, and when anon "dissidents" deny that it's an important issue it's a strong tell they are secretly Jewish.
Supah_Schmendrick
7m ago
Who do you think goes to all the public hearings on building permits and bitches that the new rowhouse or apartment building "destroys the character of the neighborhood?" Who do you think leverages historic building designations to keep anything from being built? Who do you think files the CEQA lawsuits (okay, that's mostly unions pissed off that developers don't want to use "prevailing wage" labor).
SecureSignals
Civilization is simply a geno-memetic-techno-capital machine
11m ago
There's Ron Unz, also Murray Rothbard, otherwise it just doesn't seem to be the case that Jews are really overrepresented within the anti-Semitic DR. That's not to say these people don't exist. It's to say whenever there's a DR figure who turns out to secretly be Jewish, it's always someone who either ignored the issue or tried to direct the DR writ-large from engaging with it.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
12m ago
That’s actually close to a phrasing we’ve considered. Our dear departed @ymeskhout was interested in some sort of formal challenge system—see a ridiculous, unsupported claim? Demand a defense. He was particularly frustrated with (what he saw as) isolated demands for rigor.
Anyway. There’s no time limit. The faster a controversial claim is defended, the better.
Tomato
13m ago
If that’s a priority for you there are tons of places in the country where demand is low enough to allow that. It’s totally crazy for us as a society to empower someone to prevent his neighbor from doing what he wants to do with his own land in the most productive, in demand location on the planet.
Tomato
17m ago
The entire sunset district could look like Manhattan. It’s not like we don’t know how to build buildings that are taller than two stories. It’s a completely self-inflicted space constraint.
Tomato
18m ago
Most of the US has gotten much richer and has also gained population. Prices are particularly so much higher in the Bay Area because it’s impossible to build new housing in the Bay Area. In other words, demand has increased everywhere but supply has been flat (or even negative given depreciation of the existing stock) particularly in California, due to incumbent local NIMBYs.
Skibboleth
23m ago
cjet79
26m ago
Definitely could have had some better word choice there. "filled" seems to replace "infested" just fine.
Tenaz
33m ago
I think it's a combination of 4 and 5.
- Survivorship bias applies not only to reporting, but to continuing with the diet at all. If you give up then you're not going to report that it didn't work.
- Simply watching one's weight is often enough to lose weight due to correlation if not causation. Those who press forward and continue to watch their weight and follow any diet are likely making other lifestyle changes too.
- A 2 hour window where you eat very little is probably a big improvement on its own for most people. You need to plan out your meals much better and cannot mindlessly snack (you at least need to check you're not within the window first).
Only downside is wasting time and effort and (as with EY) potentially convincing yourself that dieting doesn't work.
I think it's worth trying, but improving physical health is really a lifelong goal. These gimmick diets might work for losing the initial weight, but you need to be willing to keep the diet up forever or learn the fundamental skills involved if you don't want the weight to come right back.
Until said reversal actually manifests, calling its absence an artifact seems premature. Predicting the Democrats are going to become the party of rich white people is one thing (which I still find doubtful, but nevertheless). Saying the Democrats are already the party of old rich white people is factually inaccurate when the GOP has a distinct advantage with high income voters (approx. 10 points), white voters (approx. 10-15 points), and older voters (approx. 5 points, higher when talking about really old voters).
Amongst the posh, Democrats are so utterly dominant its comical.
This seems to hinge on gerrymandering 'elite' (and related terms) in ways that include a lot of middle income people from major cities while excluding high income people from the suburbs and major cities (and fits into a broader pattern of conservatives denying their own political power). The regional gentry that dominate the Republican Party don't like to think of themselves as 'elite', even though they often make more money (in many cases, significantly more money) than the urban professional class that mirrors them in the Democratic Party.
Like, I'm not really sure what you mean by posh here, since that's a British term without clear American analogy (maybe some New England Old Money, but they're frankly not very relevant). I'm guessing you mean affluent metropolitan professionals, but that's just a guess. Or maybe Ivy League students, but then you're not really comparing SES, you're comparing children to parents.
I can't find it on Google (because of course I can't) but someone looked at political donations from every large employer.
Assuming this is true (and I will grant that it is facially plausible), it is evidence for the merchant/gentry class vs professional class divide. It's not evidence for Republicans being poorer or more working class.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
38m ago
100ProofTollBooth
38m ago
Then forget about learning how to do the job before you do it. You won't, and you might bring in some preconceived notions that actually hinder you.
- Work Hard
- Be willing to fail and then learn
- Ask for help
- Talk to people. Cold outreach e-mails work
- Understand you're going on probably the most difficult emotional journey of your life aside from a big relationship thing (wedding, divorce) or other family relevant stuff (birth of children)
100ProofTollBooth
40m ago
- Simply watching one's weight is sufficient to lose weight
- Survivorship bias: only the people who lost weight report it
Pretty much these two things. Most diets fail because the diet-er just stops.
quiet_NaN
40m ago
Originally I picked uniforms kind of at random, but thinking more about it, it seems like a fun hill to die on.
Uniforms have been part of most armies for centuries. Kind of weird as a fashion choice? I think that the reason is that uniforms serve a useful purpose in the military: they erase differences in class and culture between the troops, and emphasize the difference between the troops and the enemy or civilians. This increases group cohesion: instead of seeing Bob the bully lying bleeding in the barbed wires in their stupid blue sweater, you see a fellow brother in arms. This unit cohesion and the sublimation of individual responsibility to the chain of command are then useful for military operations such as winning a battle or murdering a village.
"beliefs they are fighting for the oppressed" and "wears uniforms" are both Bayesian evidence for someone being more likely to drag you from your home and murdering you. Of course, there are some important difference in details between the postmen and the Einsatzgruppen, but there are also some important differences in details between the Stalinists and campus protesters.
100ProofTollBooth
41m ago
the Pope's rather unusual looking sculpture
Holy Fuck that's fucking metal as shit. Fuckin' Deus Vult, Bro.
As a tradcath (perhaps I need to downgrade myself to aspiring tradcath, thanks, @hydroacetylene) it's important to me that people realize the deep history of badassery present in religious art.
The 1970s Peter-Paul-and-Mary-ization of American Churches and hymns really did far too much to turn the aesthetics fake and gay.
CertainlyWorse
Dedicated Pessimist
45m ago
Don't have a Code of Conduct. Tear out anyone suggesting a Code of Conduct root and stem.
jeroboam
47m ago
Re: your fact about major corp's donations; It was the NYPD and ... The United States Marine Corps. God Bless the Alcoholic Gun Cult.
It's crazy how total the left's demand for control is. They will not rest until they control literally every institution.
They already have the universities, nearly all major corporations, the media, the bureaucracy, the non-profit sector, the rich, the technology sector, and the legal system (minus the Supreme Court). But we are assured that just a single election could usher in a right-wing fascist dictatorship. It's delusional.
practical_romantic
50m ago
I have zero previous experience lol
Tomato
51m ago
No one has an obligation to sell you their home just because it would improve your commute and they're not commuting any more.
They have made it illegal for their neighbors to use their land how they want to use it (e.g., build higher density apartment buildings). Nobody is forcing granny to sell her home; granny is preventing other people from doing things with their own land. That's a real economic harm.
Tomato
53m ago
There are plenty of people who want to sell, the problem is that their neighbors have made it illegal to build higher density on their own land.
100ProofTollBooth
53m ago
[1]: If you are into cryptocurrency, watch the episode of Alexi Friedman with the founder of Cardano on it. He talks for like 6 hours and says NOTHING. This is a good example of what a 2024 motte poster does in most top level posts.
My favorite part of that interview was him repeatedly saying "normies are too dumb to understand crypto so we can't let them use it. Also, it's very important that everyone uses crypto." He should'e had his wife's boyfriend review his notes.
jeroboam
53m ago
What do you think causes people on the Shangri-La diet to lose weight? I'll present a few possibilities.
- The mechanism explained in the Less Wrong article is correct
- Something else we don't understand
- No one actually loses weight, they are lying
- Simply watching one's weight is sufficient to lose weight
- Survivorship bias: only the people who lost weight report it
In any case, there don't seem to be any downsides and the anecdotal evidence is strong. I don't need a causal mechanism as long as it's safe which this diet obviously is.
Well, the appeal of living in gigantic skyscrapers does diminish a bit when you're living in an earthquake zone. Even being in a fourth floor apartment during a 3.2 a few years back was a deeply unpleasant experience, and I say this as someone who slept through the '92 Northridge quake as a kid.
More options
Context Copy link