@Stefferi's banner p

Stefferi

Chief Suomiposter

9 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 04 20:29:13 UTC

https://alakasa.substack.com/

Verified Email

				

User ID: 137

Stefferi

Chief Suomiposter

9 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 04 20:29:13 UTC

					
				

				

				

				

				

					

User ID: 137

Verified Email

How many Republicans, conservatives, or right-wingers support killing Black or Latino people just for being Black or Latino?

One can go on Twitter, search for "TND" and find examples of rando accounts doing just that, particularly after the Iryna Zaretska murder. Who knows how many (presumably some of them are sockpuppets), but there are at least some.

A ton of weird hippies went rightwards after Covid, arguably the most prominent one (who is also not known for living a particularly conventional lifestyle) now being the Secretary of HHS. I'd hardly expect all of them to immediately join a church, get a house in the suburbs with a white picket fence, become monogamous and/or drop their drug habits.

Okay, let's filter out all indictments. I'm looking for acts of political violence that occurred between 01/01/2005 and 08/15/25. Not the slow wheel of justice grinding on to a then-40 year old crime. In fact let's limit the data set to actual crimes, attacks, and just in case "unknown/unclear" so as to also filter out pleas, complaints, arrests, arraignments, and sentencing. Now we're down to 453 incidents out of the original 3874. Wow that is a change.

I don't think this is a good method. If you look at indictments for the recent years, it includes entires like this: "On October 5, 2023, Philip Jerome Buyno, 73, of Propheststown, Illinois, accepted a guilty plea of attempted arson. In the early morning of May 20, 2023, Buyno attempted to burn down a building set to become an abortion clinic in Danville, IL. According to the DOJ, Buyno "admitted that...he brought several containers filled with gasoline with him and used his car to breach the front entrance to a commercial building... for the purpose of burning it down before it could be used as a reproductive health clinic." (DOJ)" Buyno is not listed anywhere else, so this is a case of a recent crime that is listed just in the indictments, meaning that you'd be filtering out many other similar cases. Clearly this category doesn't just list people convicted of decades-old cases.

I also tried to check out whether the dataset includes the Allen, Texas - what seems to be an obvious case of right-wing terrorism - shooting with Mauricio Martinez Garcia listed as Hispanic or White to check whether just limiting cases to white people leaves out essential right-wing terrorism cases perpetrated by, say, Hispanic people with clear far-right ideology, but I couldn't find it... at all?

The point being answered is “If someone is glad that Charlie Kirk, a moderate conservative squish, is dead and deserved to be killed for what he believed, they’d be ecstatic if I or people like me died / were killed based on what I believe”. The lefties who are cheering for his death would not have seen him as a moderate, and as mentioned many times, he himself referred to his view on a key issue as being very, very radical, making it less likely this would be his self-description, either.

If one moves about in European (and presumably American) far left circles, even peripherally (ie. Discords and stuff), it is pretty much guaranteed that they will know Bella Ciao and its Italian partisan context.

Outside of politicians, Jacobin published an article against calling for violence, at least.

They are at least material against the claim that Kirk can be best described as a "moderate conservative squish".

There's a video where he confirms that the quote is true. He says that they talk about why the Civil Rights Act was a mistake once a week. He also confirms that he thinks MLK is a bad guy, which is also a radical view - the latest polling I could find indicates that 81% of Americans think that MLK had a positive impact on the country, with polling division indicating that at least some of the other respondents (for some reason Pew doesn't indicate how many of the others answer in the negative and how many say they don't know) would be black people who think that MLK wasn't radical enough.

If the meaning was as you speculate, why would he call that a very, very radical view?

...why would being personally terrified obscure this thing? Is this some sort of an artificial standard where it's only "real" care or condemnation if they're floating on an abstract plane, free from any personal feeling? Of course their feelings related to their own personal security are going to affect whatever they're saying, they're human after all.

You're right, I was probably thinking more about American presence as gamers contributing to the creation of an American internet culture that a lot of other stuff was built upon.

Before social medias like Facebook ate everything there were localized social medias in other countries (at least Irc-Galleria in Finland, built on site where IRC users could post pics about themselves and evolving to a generalized social media for some time), but it was easy for many people to move to American sites since they already had American contacts from, among other things, using Internet forums.

Kirk apparently said the following:

I have a very, very radical view on this, but I can defend it, and I've thought about it. We made a huge mistake when we passed the Civil Rights Act in the mid-1960s.

This is, in fact, as far as I've understood, a very, very radical view in the American political sphere on a key issue, one which some might call the defining issue of American politics. It's not the one that would have been shared by the Trump admin: when Trump issued his anti-affirmative-action EO, the framing was that CRA was good and that the things he was banning were going against its spirit. And as the quote says, Kirk himself calls it a radical opinion!

Of course, for many or even most of the leftists celebrating Kirk's demise, the point is not any of the race-based stuff but his strong Christian conservative opinions, such as opposing abortion including for rape and underaged kids, but the people doing that stuff do not do it because they believe Kirk to be a moderate.

I've also seen a number of far right types on social media saying that Kirk was a moderate when he started his career but had been evolving rightwards towards being "/ourguy/" before his tragic death.

...and American dominance in software is downstream, among other things, from the huge national security state investment campaign obviously connected to tech industry right from the start in various ways, as well as general American cultural dominance (Listen to American music, watch American shows, go see American films - obviously you're going to play American games as well, and how much of social media is downstream from already-existing forums culture created in large part by games forums? And that is just one, probably not even the most important, example of building on the existing that I've thought about a lot recently).

One of EU's tragedies is trusting on regulatory state to make up for driving down the elements of you-can-just-do-things state, ie the sort of direct state intervention to bolster business that America has always done in spades while hypocritically preaching laissez faire to the rest of the world. (Of course there has been direct state intervention in the EU and by EU too, but building bridges in Slovakia, while undoubtedly important for Slovaks, is probably less effective in staying globally competitive).

I was listening to a talk by a couple of Finnish financial speakers earlier this year and one of them said that if you don't include the Big Five tech companies (not sure what the exact definition he was using at that point) then US and EU growth would have been equal, but haven't bothered to check this claim.

At least this got me thinking about how the US continues to reap huge economic benefits precisely from the sort of American cultural domination that underpins a lot of global tech sector success. The online world continues to run on American mores, even local non-American forums and such. That also of course highlights how, say, UK has been unable to recently utilize its own vast cultural capital (not as dominant as American, of course, but UK still punches way above its weights in these matters, globally speaking).

That survey has been linked a number of times, but isn't the research methodology rather sus here? They are not asking a binary question on "Do you think that the murder of [Musk/Trump] is justified", they're asking on agreement on a scale of 1-7 and then counting all the answers that aren't 1 ("Not at all justified") on the "justified" side. One can do that, it tells of something but it's still an odd way to do a survey unless one is specifically intent on getting a sensationalized result. There are people who, when encountering a scale like that, instinctively avoid answers 1 and 7 on account of being "extreme", even though of course in this case that's hardly the correct way to go on about it.

You're right, I misread the Marxist comment.

Where was the celebration of it?

A sitting Republican senator initially reacted to it by posting "This is what happens When Marxists don't get their way" and "Nightmare on Waltz street".

How much of the cartel operating logic is "specifically sell drugs for profit" and how much is "sell contraband and do other criminal stuff for profit"?

Reminds me of this definitive encapsulation of Finnish cinema.

I'm reminded of the Monkey Dust "Jerry Brickhammer" parody of a fictional Hollywood production of Diary of Anne Frank with all the Nazis as Englishmen and the Jews as literally Irish, but it seems to have disappeared from the Internet along with a lot of other Monkey Dust material.

Who prevented Russia from gobbling up India in their southward push through Central Asia in the 19th century?

Doesn't seem like a very likely thing to happen tbh. Russia was unable to gobble up Turkey despite a constant desire to do so, operating through Central Asia would have been a logistical nightmare. Sure, the British ruled India with a skeleton crew, but they operated from the sea, not through the land.

Isn't the modern understanding that the whole "Great Game" narrative was mistaken anyway and that the Russian ambitions regarding Afghanistan or lands to the south of it were rather more modest than what was presented by the British propaganda?

I haven't seen The Patriot, but isn't the way the British are portrayed in that movie similar?

Oodles and oodles of SMS groups, chats, Discords, Slacks, FB groups etc with partly overlapping membership bases. Information on changing preferences can move very fast with reinforcement from multiple sources at the same time.

Might have a Muslim father but still have been raised as at least a nominal Christian. It happens in the Balkans, Zlatan Ibrahimovic was raised as a nominal Catholic despite having "Ibrahim" in last name.

Ali is also a name in various non-Islamic cultures, generally short for Alexander.

Most people will probably be indifferent towards most strangers they see at the gym, unless they're hogging the weights they were planning to use or otherwise causing issues.

So there you have it- no plans, no budget, no orders; instead it was "mind-reading" by lower-level officers. This is the mainstream position which has emerged due to the inabilitiy of mainstream historians to find any documents substantiating their characterization of German policy in this respect.

How does this differ from the mainstream position on how the Great Purge, Holodomor, the Cultural Revolution, Great Leap Forward and similar Communist atrocities happened?