BANNED USER: last straw
AhhhTheFrench
We will sell no wine before its time
Interesting that you clicked on this...I hope your day is going well and you're at least finding our conversation stimulating, if you're not finding it pleasant. Looking to reinforce your beliefs about about me? Dig up some dirt? Have at it! Only cowards and scam artists make their profile private.
User ID: 2897
Banned by: @Amadan
Oh here we go. The kid was a school shooter to a T. Shooting at trump for notoriety and disaffection rather than a school. Registered repub as well. Is trump a crisis actor?
Yeah turns out it was a disaffected republican registered loser white kid, more like a school shooter than an assassination attempt. Unless you think school shooting victims have all been assassinated rather than murdered to take out some impotent rage at the world. Dude didn't even have a scope...pathetic and sad stuff from the SS and this kid. I'm glad he miffed it. But it wasn't a political assassination. There were fucking command snipers in the building he crawled up. Sad stuff.
Maybe dig into all the people who said this guy would be a left wing nut instead of a school shooter right wing dude obsessed with a youtube right gun channel, to the point of buying merch. I can almost feel themott's boogaloo contingent being massively disappointed.
I can see you went through your "enemies list" and looked to see if they thought there wouldn't be an attempt on trump so you could try to shame them. It only shames the accelerationist right wing as this was done by one of your own.
Wasn't it a registered republican that took the shot? There is a chance they wanted someone even further right.
Seafoam fuel additive. I have always thought everything like this was bullshit...I was wrong. Seafoam will fix engines. I've recently used it on two lawnmowers, one riding tractor, and a generator that I would have otherwise had to take apart, one of the lawnmowers I did take apart and clean the carb etc...the seafoam pushed it over the edge afterwards into a useful machine. It is now on my list of mechanical must haves.
It didn't happen for the same reason the internet and drones never existed before. We didn't have the technology to enable it. Technology obviates previous needs and hierarchies. It used to be very important to be strong, not so much anymore, you used to need 7 kids to ensure your old age care, and that enough made it through to adulthood, not anymore.
There simply isn't the need to conform to those previous norms to survive and thrive. The state also takes care of a lot due to abundance of resources brought on by technological progress, hence all the single mothers etc...It isn't that they tried all three and disappeared without a trace (as you say you have zero proof of one succeeding or failing), it is that they couldn't have existed with the technology of the time.
You think there are a lot of lost tribes out there that tried all 3 and never invented writing or something? This whole theory is puzzling. No one had gunpowder, phones, and crocs at the same time either.
I can see why you blocked me.
Well there you have it. Jesus dude, could you construct a more convoluted argument? Literally throwing darts at a non-existent enemy.
Redsox game is a must, even if you hate baseball, don't bring a large bag or you have to pay to check it across the street, do the freedom trail, have lunch at faneuil hall, what season are you going to be there? That has an impact. Climb to the top of the bunker hill monument. Duck boats are a waste of money but fun if you like cheesy tourist shit. The Aquarium is fun but always packed with school kids, museum of science is great if you have kids or still act like one! Try on some hats, there are some great haberdashers in Boston, good restaurants are too numerous and based on taste to mention, like all major cities. I would say get some B&M baked beans but they closed their factory and moved production from Portland to NJ and now they suck, so don't do that. You can take the Downeaster train up to Portland Maine as well for an inexpensive day trip.
As far as I know, no society has ever embraced the following three norms simultaneously and survived: (1) sex outside of marriage is morally acceptable, (2) homosexuality is morally acceptable, (3) male and female sex roles ought to be respected equally. For example, the Romans accepted (1) and (2) but not (3).
Can you give us some examples of societies that have failed because they accepted all 3 of these things at the same time?
Because we don't care about shit like this. There are yacht parties to go to.
Fair. I also have this setup, with one dual generator and starlink. I'm not plotting and asking about it.
May I ask why you're doing all this? Is this a prepper style setup you're creating on a back lot in the woods somewhere?
1 and 3 wouldn't work. The bet sizes you're allowed to place are not large enough.
England was a trading empire long before coal and textiles. It was already very rich by Euro standards before the industrial revolution. It wasn't the coal and the textiles. It was the people and the culture that developed in a place that could only be reached and lived in with some expeditiousness.
I struggle a lot with whether I think “Western values” even refers to any real and reliably identifiable category at all - and, if so, what jettisoning such values would mean for the societies who supposedly believe in them today. Would I actually want to live in a society where the concept of “inalienable human rights” was abandoned? Sure, it’d certainly mean less homeless people in my neighborhood. Probably less disorder. Certainly less refugees and welfare recipients. What would be its other knock-on effects? To what extent are the soft-headed liberal values you’re decrying actually load-bearing cultural infrastructure underpinning the best parts of our society, versus simply luxury beliefs that could easily be discarded or de-emphasized without impacting the parts of my society that I care about? Certainly I personally don’t believe that every individual human life has significant intrinsic moral value. But do I want to live in a society where everyone in power agrees with me? I’m not actually certain.
This section to me is particularly dangerous. You can't untangle "western values" from the societies that have been created by them and the benefits conferred to billions through that process. Many times when you pull on a few seemingly unrelated threads in a system it turns out that they were actually load bearing threads and the whole thing unravels. There is certainly a secret to western success, and a large part of it has been trust and cooperation beyond clan and family; if you abandon those values you're right back to it. It is all fun and games until you're the one up against the wall with no due process. Everyone always imagines they'll be the boot instead of the human face, most people don't end up being the boot.
All drugs were legal in the USA until the first drug law was passed in San Francisco in 1875, banning the smoking of opium in opium dens. Many here on the Motte would argue that the first hundred years of the United states were the best of times. The issue now with our social safety net, we would all be working hard to support people who choose to smoke opium every day. We kind of already do that with what it costs to medically support one homeless person in a Major city (more than I make in a year). Would having pure legal drugs make this worse if we coupled it with actually policing people's behaviors? We know stealth legalizing drugs and ignoring crime all at once is a bad idea and is bad for society and cities. Once human labor is obviated by automation, then I see no reason to prohibit drug use of any kind.
Yes, so am I. He said Chinese re-education camp in exchange for a chinese dissident. I believe his point is that is maybe /u/2cimarafa wouldn't then end results following /u/2cimarafa's policy of silencing free speech and liberal values.
Trump is fat, he is the third heaviest president ever, I think he lost some weight since he was president though. William Howard Taft was famously rotund. Grover Cleveland was fat. More Americans, and especially republicans, are fat, and would identify with a fat candidate. I wouldn't say it improves anyone's chances. But the fact that Chris Christy even took a stab at it shows it isn't outside the overton window these days.
Unless that person says that literally if the roles were reversed they would silence you, or worse. Then it is very charitable to only say they won't ban you and maybe you should think about what it would be like to live in a place that didn't have these classical liberal values.
He said he wasn't going to ban him because he didn't want be like him and did in fact believe in the free exchange of ideas even when he held "the power". The most charitable interpretation of HlynkaCG's post was that we should tolerate everything except intolerance, and those that would call liberalism and free speech bullshit should perhaps experience what it is like to live in a society without those values, such as China, where they would not be allowed to share such views.
Look at patent law cases that actually go to the mat. Then look away quickly. That retinal burning sensation and after image of Satan is what you get with this unholy union.
Thank you for the detailed and accurate summation. I really do appreciate it!
Maybe I'm not online enough but what does current_year+8 mean and what is "whomst inquired", and what is a second-world person?
I mean the whole point was that it was a comedy/joke band, I don't know Jack's feelings towards it though.
More options
Context Copy link