Lewis2
3mo ago
Easy come, easy go. The only thing I really lose by creating a new account is my saved comments and posts.
Lewis2
3mo ago
The welfare state will eventually collapse of its own accord, and it won’t be pretty when it does. All open borders accomplishes is hastening that collapse and making things worse in the meantime. As Trump said, Mexico (et al.) aren’t sending their best.
Lewis2
3mo ago
Maybe my small sample size is skewed. But I would say that the illegals I’ve known who came here a couple of decades or more ago are hard-working, ambitious, and respectable. The second generation is a mixed bag: some are model citizens (including one whom I greatly respect), but far too many are net negatives to society, content to commit petty crimes, soak up government handouts, and, especially among the women, jump on the “we need compensation for putting up with this racist and sexist American society” bandwagon. I don’t know if that’s due to regression to the mean, poor cultural influences, or some other factor, but it’s a pattern I’ve noticed. In addition, more recent illegal immigrants haven’t really impressed me. Again, though, my sample is small and may be skewed. Considering your location and general line of work, I’m sure you interact with far more illegals than I do.
Relevant Yes, Prime Minister clip
I suppose the question would be whether those kill or harm you quickly enough to significantly reduce your lifetime earnings. That seems doubtful with smoking and drinking, but it may very well be the case with drugs and not wearing seatbelts.
From a utilitarian standpoint, I suppose the law would ideally mandate seatbelt wearing for children and the gainfully employed, while forbidding seatbelt use for the chronically unemployed and retired.
Lewis2
3mo ago
On reflection, I’ll happily retract the bit about Mexico not sending their best. You might very well be right that they by and large are. But due to America’s birthright citizenship, I’m not only or even primarily concerned with the generation that illegally immigrates. I’m more concerned with their offspring: Are they net users of welfare? Do they advocate the same deleterious socialist policies that helped to ruin their fatherlands? Do they push for divisive race-, ethnicity-, or gender-based programs such as DEI, affirmative action, etc? Do they vote to even further loosen our border, both de jure and de facto? Do they commit crimes at a higher rate than their Anglo neighbors (controlling for income)? As far as I can tell, the answers are yes, yes, yes, yes, and yes. So the overall impact of illegal immigration is negative, even if the first generation that comes here is actually okay.
Lewis2
3mo ago
Here, though, the paper isn’t making any claim. They’re just reporting what Western officials said. They could remove “without citing evidence” without impacting the paper one bit.
Lewis2
3mo ago
You’re falling for one of the oldest tricks in the book. Who cares what the conclusion says? What does the actual evidence imply? @gattsuru had a post just last month that discussed an academic’s open, unpunished admission that he lied in the conclusion of one of his papers in order to hide an inconvenient result. This report is just more of the same. The authors put all of the inconvenient evidence in the body, said whatever they wanted in the conclusion, and trusted that most people would simply take the conclusion at face value, as you’re doing here.
Lewis2
3mo ago
An appraisal will tell you roughly what the market value of a property is. An assessment will tell you what the government values the property at for tax purposes. You might think that those should be the same, but in many, if not most, jurisdictions, they aren’t. Some city and county assessors even provide separate assessment and appraisal values each year.
The last time we discussed this, I gave the example of farmland in my area, which is pretty much universally assessed at around $2,000 per acre, even though the sale price of farmland is typically close to $20,000 per acre. The counties choose to assess farmland at a far lesser rate than its market value in order to keep farming financially viable in the area. It’s essentially a sort of hidden subsidy. Some jurisdictions also cap the rate at which property taxes can rise from year to year, which can eventually cause assessments to fall far behind appraisal values, even if they were once fairly close.
Lewis2
3mo ago
I think you have to make a distinction here between the leaders of the Radical Reformation and those of the Magisterial Reformation. The radical reformers wanted to fundamentally reshape the church, shed the theological and aesthetic accoutrements of 1,500 years, and move back to a pure, primitive form of Christianity. The magisterial reformers saw themselves as still very much a continuation of the medieval church; their goal was to keep as much as possible while fixing only those things that were clearly broken. I suppose you could liken it to two people being given a shitty piece of code. One decides the best approach is to tweak it as necessary but otherwise to make as few changes as possible, while the other decides the best approach is to start from scratch.
You mentioned that the confessional Protestants in America take their confessions’ ideas on church order more seriously than their European counterparts. I won’t speak to the Reformed, but at least among Anglicans and Lutherans, that’s just not the case. Anglicans don’t have an agreed-upon set of confessions to draw on, but they universally have bishops, while the Lutheran confessions explicitly say that bishops are fine:
Concerning this subject we have frequently testified in this assembly that it is our greatest wish to maintain the old church regulations and the government of bishops, even though they have been made by human authority, provided the bishops allow our doctrine and receive our priests. For we know that church discipline was instituted by the Fathers, in the manner laid down in the ancient canons, with a good and useful intention. But the bishops either compel our priests to reject and condemn this kind of doctrine which we have confessed, or, by a new and unheard-of cruelty, they put to death the poor innocent men. These causes hinder our priests from acknowledging such bishops. Thus the cruelty of the bishops is the reason why the canonical government, which we greatly desired to maintain, is in some places dissolved.
In Germany, all but a couple of bishops opposed the Reformation, so the Lutherans changed their governance structure to eliminate bishops. In the Scandinavian and Baltic countries, the bishops were split, so those churches were able to continue on with the same structure as before.
Lewis2
3mo ago
Do British drivers actually abide by the speed limits? US drivers routinely drive at least ten MPH over.
I’m not knowledgeable enough about potential electoral fraud to get into much of a debate, but it does seem to me that any fraud should tend to favor Democrats over Republicans simply because it’s easier for Democrats to cheat.
As @SwordOfOccam pointed out, “the best check on election fraud at any scale is that people of various ideologies and parties make up the officials and volunteers in any given area, and all it takes is one witness to expose something.” The trouble is, that’s just not the case in all urban districts. In 2012, for example, 59 voting precincts in Philadelphia alone voted 100% for Obama. The linked article notes that precincts in Chicago and Atlanta did the same in 2008. It would be much easier to run up the tally in those areas, either via fraudulent votes or fraudulent tallies, than it would be in even the reddist of Republican precincts, since Republicans don’t cluster up in the same way that urban Democrats do, and there are always at least a few Democrats in the strongest Republican strongholds.
Lewis2
3mo ago
My point was mostly that @ymeskhout’s first point was not necessarily correct—that I would expect the background level of fraud to favor Democrats in any given election due to ease of opportunity.
As for a grand, national conspiracy to change election results, while I do think that is a threat due to most states’ remarkably poor election security practices, I don’t think it’s the only, or even primary, threat model to be worried about. Instead, I would think a distributed conspiracy would be far more likely, with low-level participants each working independently and without any direction from on high, but all from the same motive.
Take sex abuse conspiracies by way of analogy. The Catholic sex abuse scandal was a grand international conspiracy, with almost all members of the hierarchy implicated in some way or another in moving priests around and preventing them from being prosecuted. The conspiracy naturally eventually leaked, and it caused a huge scandal. By contrast, every time some Baptist minister abused a girl in his church in the past 50 years, the elders just quietly removed him, sent him away to counseling, and didn’t say anything when they learned he was serving another church a year later. You had pretty much the same actions in both cases, but for the Catholics, the conspiracy was (naturally) a top-down one, while for the Baptists, it was (naturally) bottom-up, without any coordination from congregation to congregation. A bottom-up conspiracy of people individually choosing to fill out absentee ballots for their mentally incompetent relatives, poll workers in safe areas slightly inflating their numbers, and the like, would be very difficult to prove, since there would be essentially no coordination among participants or even knowledge that anyone else is doing anything similar. Just about the only thing they’d have in common would be opposition to rules that make voting more secure, which is a position that’s remarkably more common in one party than the other.
Lewis2
3mo ago
Really? People don’t routinely go at least ten over on highways and rural roads where you live? We have vastly different experiences then. In the city where I work, even the timed lights require you to go about five MPH over the speed limit to avoid hitting a red light.
Lewis2
3mo ago
You’re nitpicking the analogy without really addressing my point. Your previous comment pointed out that it would be extremely difficult for a coordinated group of national conspirators to fraudulently alter the election results in enough swing states to change the election. I’m saying there wouldn’t need to be a grand conspiracy. Recent elections have hinged on only a few tens of thousands of votes in the right places. With such small margins, all it would take to tip the scales is one side having either more motive or more opportunity to cheat than the other. I’m not even saying that necessarily happened in 2020. Thanks to insecure vote by mail procedures coupled with the secret ballot, it would be almost impossible to tell one way or the other. (For the record, I support the secret ballot, but I’m opposed to vote by mail except perhaps with the narrowest of exceptions.)
Lewis2
3mo ago
It probably much more effectively discourages criminals from entering politics on the wrong side, which isn’t quite the same thing.
Lewis2
3mo ago
What’s wrong with 2/10? When I went through drivers’ training, that was taught both in the class and in the state-issued handbook as the position least likely to lead to serious injury in the event of an accident due to the way the airbags deploy.
(Actually, the teacher said we should do something closer to 2:30/9:30, but that’s still pretty close.)
Lewis2
2mo ago
I think that would be an excellent thread, maybe in one of the Friday Fun Threads. I feel like that’s come up before, though, either here or on DSL (or maybe even on SSC). If someone could find an earlier discussion, that would provide a great starting point.
Lewis2
2mo ago
The problem is not just that you’re paying for them; it’s also that it’s impossible to get many jobs without a college diploma, and in a world where almost all of the universities are staffed nearly exclusively with radical leftists, it becomes impossible for conservatives to even think of entering many well-paid, influential, and/or important professions. It would take more than defunding the colleges to solve that problem. At a minimum, you’d also need to remove college degrees from state licensing requirements. If the conservatives cede all the law schools but the state governments maintain the requirement that you must graduate from a law school in order to take the bar exam, the conservatives will have suddenly ceded the entire legal profession, even more than they have already. Ideally, in a world where conservatives give up on the universities, they should also make it illegal to inquire about job candidates’ educational background, just as it is currently illegal to inquire about marital status or religious affiliation.
Lewis2
2mo ago
I had to take a BS cultural diversity class in college. The professor was a black female adjunct who started off day one by trying unsuccessfully to create racial and sex-based divisions between the students. In day three or four, she snapped at me in class for “questioning” her and thereby “undermining her authority.” I was frankly stunned. I pretty regularly asked questions in other classes if something sounded off to my ears and even directly argued with professors. In all those previous classes, the professors loved it (at least I was engaged, which couldn’t be said for many of my classmates). After I challenged her for including inaccurate information in her presentations, she stopped uploading them to the class site. These were insane errors too, like claiming that Max Weber, close friend and colleague of Martin Luther, invented the Protestant Work Ethic as a way to discriminate against Jews and Catholics, which in turn served as a model for later Jim Crow laws (I swear I’m not making any of that up). Her final straw was when she said something blatantly wrong in class, and one of the other students turned around to me and asked, “Is that right?” The fire in the prof’s eyes was quite a sight to behold. She naturally failed me, but fortunately, I’d been meeting with my advisor after every class to document the issues, so I was able to get the grade overturned on appeal.
That’s the kind of bullshit that these diversity classes make people put up with. If you have even the slightest inkling that the professors teaching those classes will treat students fairly or allow multiple points of view, you need to spend more time with The Nybbler. Maybe some his cynicism will rub off.
Lewis2
2mo ago
New Reddit’s design has more white space and shows less content. It also requires you to load a new page in order to read comments that are more than a few levels deep, whereas old Reddit just requires you to tap a [+]. And as No_one said, Reddit requires you to log in to view some content, including sometimes perfectly innocuous content. Really the only downside to old Reddit is that it doesn’t have a dark mode.
Oh, and like you, I didn’t start browsing Reddit until after old Reddit had been replaced, so I don’t say any of this out of nostalgia for the old days.
Lewis2
2mo ago
Humans are by nature animalistic tribal beings. Actually worse than animalistic, since animals don’t have the same imagination for creative evil that we do. No animal would come up with, “What is best in life? To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women.” Or if you think that’s unrealistically pessimistic, coming as it does from fiction, here’s a real quote: “Heaven brings forth innumerable things to nurture man. Man has nothing good with which to recompense Heaven. Kill. Kill. Kill. Kill. Kill. Kill. Kill.”
The only reason people rise above their baser instincts is that they’ve been trained and civilized otherwise (and note that the civilizing process has been a long one, and there’s plenty of evidence that most of its advances can be undone in a short amount of time).
As for Penn’s specific examples, every man has more of a proclivity toward some sins than others. Perhaps he and you are just not naturally wrathful people. Plenty of others are. I’ll say for myself, I do not want to murder anyone right now. I do not want to murder anyone 99.999% of the time. I have, however, been so furious in the past that I have absolutely wanted to murder someone, particularly when I was younger and presumably more testosterone-filled than I am now. I never acted on those feelings, of course, but they were there.
I am reminded of C. S. Lewis’s introduction to the Screwtape Letters, where wrote that all he had to do to come up with the book was spend some time in serious introspection, thinking about all the ways in which his thoughts, temptations, and natural proclivities tended toward evil. If you really think people are kind, compassionate, and fundamentally good by nature, I’d suggest you’re probably just not introspecting hard enough.
Lewis2
2mo ago
He probably had that Buddhist monk who self-immolated in the 1960s in mind. This picture was in my high school history textbook, and I remember him being portrayed as stunning and brave.
He’s also not the only man to set himself on fire for dubious reasons recently. Some guy did it on SCOTUS’s front steps two years ago to protest climate change. It seems like the sort of thing that could be memed into greater popularity given the right conditions.
Lewis2
2mo ago
Have the other predictions failed or just not come true yet? I think the normalization of pederastic relationships is coming absent a culture shift, but I don’t think it will happen for another several decades at least.
Lewis2
2mo ago
I’d be interested to hear any examples you can give of past pederastic predictions. I spend a lot of time reading 19th and early 20th century primary sources, and I don’t remember ever coming across that concern, nor can I think of anything that would have caused concern about it in the 16th–18th centuries. The closest I can come up with is opposition to castrati, but that’s closer to opposition to trans procedures for minors than to anything related to pedophilia. I guess there was also opposition to child brothels, but those were apparently actually a thing in some areas, and polite society was unanimously happy to shut them down.
As for the present, I agree pederasty normalization is extremely unlikely in the next several decades for reasons that you note. I can’t help but notice, though, that some pedophilic activists and sympathizers have started to mimic techniques that other marginalized groups have used to gain acceptance, and I could see a concerted effort paying dividends in, say, 50–70 years.
Well, my plan to not enter an email address, memorize my password, and then stay signed in long enough that I forget the password completely was a smashing success. I suppose I’ll probably end up doing it again and becoming Lewis3 the next time this happens.
More options
Context Copy link