@Amadan's banner p

Amadan

Letting the hate flow through me

10 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 05 00:23:21 UTC
Verified Email 

				
User ID: 297


				
				
				

			

		

	














	


		


			



	

		

			

			

				

					

						

							
						

						

							
							

								
Amadan


								

								

								
								
									
								
								
								
								

								
							
					
 
				


				
Letting the hate flow through me

				
				
				

				

					10 followers  

					follows 0 users  

					joined 2022 September 05 00:23:21 UTC
				


				
					

					
No bio...

				

				

				

				

				

					

					

					
					
					

					
User ID: 297


					
					
					
				

			


					

						
							
								Verified Email
							
						
					



		

	

 











			
			

			
			

			




	


		

			
‎

			

				
				

					Hour
					Day
					Week
					Month
					Year
					
				

			


			
‎

			

	
	

	 Hot Bump Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
	



		

	






	

		
		

		
		
	

	

  







		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 9, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Beg to differ (coming in late because of reports) but my experience is closer to @asdasdasdasd's. I was around Rush and O'Reilly listeners in an even earlier era (Clinton). I definitely heard a lot of "Democrats hate America, liberals are a cancer, and you should cut off any family members who voted for Clinton." The rage was palpable, especially when he was reelected.


Ann Coulter was a big name at the time, and you may or may not remember this gem from 2002:




When contemplating college liberals, you really regret once again that John Walker is not getting the death penalty. We need to execute people like John Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals, by making them realize that they can be killed, too. Otherwise, they will turn out to be outright traitors.




Now, Ann Coulter was and is a massive troll and I believe a lot of her act was performative grifting, but these were not isolated sentiments.


Of course I also saw the palpable rage from liberals when Bush was elected, and then reelected. But your version that conservatives just regarded liberals with a sort of benign contempt but no real animosity, and it was liberals who first got ugly and "bloodthirsty" about it, does not match my recollection.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Small-Scale Question Sunday for February 22, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Well, this is the point. Native speakers intuitively understand the difference between "I eat," "I am eating" and "I have eaten" and when to use them, even if they couldn't name the tenses. But to learn (or teach) English, it's a big help to explicitly name them.


Likewise the "royal order" of adjectives, or OSASCAMP. Most native speakers can't list it, they just know "brown big dog" sounds unnatural. But you need to know it to teach it and while you can pick it up through immersion, it will be faster to study a chart that actually explains it


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 23, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
You (and @ArjinFerman):


    

  1. 

    If you suspect someone of being an alt, report it to us (people frequently do this when pressing the report button). It is much more effective and less annoying. We'll take it under advisement, though we won't necessarily (and probably will not) tell you if we decide someone is a ban evader. People suspect other posters of being alts all the time. Usually they are wrong, sometimes they are right, but publicly calling someone out like this is not productive. It just causes drama, especially the way you do it, in such a taunting "neener-neener I see you" manner.
    

    2. 

  2. 

    Length of account history is not a guarantee of not being an alt. Many people create multiple sockpuppets, sometimes going back years, just to establish account history and have backups in case their primary shit-stirring alt gets banned. They frequently brag about this to us when they get banned, and think they are demonstrating their great cunning, because we've surely never anticipated such a genius move.
    

    3. 

  3. 

    @omw_68, while on thin ice for other reasons (mostly bad faith attacks on other posters), is probably not Mr. Underappreciated Naturally Whitely Superior Genius Ebophile. That guy is in the category of people who cannot hide their light under a bushel--they always reveal themselves quickly. Most of our repeat obsessives underestimate how difficult it is to hide their obsessions and their writing style even when they are trying to fly under the radar. At any given time, we're aware of a number of alts who think we haven't noticed them yet. Generally our policy is to let them have enough rope. Fact is, subject matter alone is rarely a decisive tell, and guys who want to complain about progressives and specifically why progressives are terrible for disapproving of age gap relationships and prioritizing female preference are... not exactly rare on the Motte.
    

    4. 

  4. 

    @HereAndGone2 was never permabanned and is not ban-evading. If she had been, she would not be allowed to still post (she is another one who could never keep a mask on for very long). She has flounced several times and come back under a new name, which we allow because she doesn't exactly try to hide it. That said, her past record doesn't get wiped clean with a new account. Please behave yourself, Daoiseach-of-the-many-names, I would also hate to see you leave forever, even though you keep blaming me for your departures.
    

    5. 



				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 2, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
So my read of all this is "I think things are bad, but not as entirely one-sided and approaching civil war as you think they are."


I'm not trying to flippant, just concise. Do you think that is a fair summary or no?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Small-Scale Question Sunday for February 22, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Yeah, a lot of other countries that have English as a required second language throughout primary school and secondary education (Japan and Korea, for example) are terrible at it. University students who have theoretically been studying English for 12 years often arrive barely able to manage basic introductions or simple phrases.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Small-Scale Question Sunday for February 22, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Immersion as the sole means of learning is not as efficient as jump-starting it with grammar and translation drills. But it is key to actually becoming fluent. And you can eventually become fluent with immersion alone. You will never become fluent with grammar and translation drills alone.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Small-Scale Question Sunday for February 22, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


Only a few language nerds find topics like present imperfect or the dative case interesting and understandable. The rest treat it like algebra; arcane nonsense that you have to memorize just long enough to pass the exam and then never use for the rest of your life. And they are right. Nobody learns to speak a language like that. Nobody writes like that. It's useless knowledge.




It might be useless knowledge (unless you're a language teacher) to know what "present imperfect" means. It is not useless knowledge to know how to use it correctly.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 2, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I don't want to blow you off and be accused of ghosting again. I also don't have the time to write a response with the effort this requires. (I am actually traveling this week.) The problem with responding with the effort this requires is that I have to read all your links and then debate each item point by point (the thing I said I hate doing), which means each one will become pages of debate. What it looks like to me (but not to you) is that two things can both be true: we can live in a country where opposition politics still exists and neither side has achieved the total victory you claim/fear, and we can live in a country where a lot of people would really like to achieved total victory and are completely unprincipled about it. E.g., cases from California which offend every classical liberal sensibility but which do not, in my mind (but apparently do in yours) round to "We live in an authoritarian dystopia where you are not allowed to disagree with leftists."


Oh hell, let's take one example though I said I didn't have the time to go into the weeds.




The left will not be murdering political enemies with impunity




You responded with Matthew Dolloff.


Okay, let's suppose I take everything you are implying (but which is unstated in that article) at face value: a leftist totally got away with killing righties because the DA and judge were in the tank for the left and think killing conservatives is Just Fine. This requires me accepting your version on faith and assuming that the DA's and judge's reasoning as stated in the article is politically motivated fiction, but let's give it you, even though I only know what I just read in that one article (sorry) and will not be reading a bunch of other articles to research it further (not sorry). So I stipulate this was a heinous injustice. Does this mean it's now legal for leftists to shoot conservatives, or a heinous injustice occurred? I don't know how many such cases it would take to prove to me that the law has legalized murdering conservatives, but that number is >1. Do you not think someone as motivated as you in the opposite direction (say an Impassionata or a Darwin with research skills) would not be able to provide ample links of conservatives doing awful things, awful court cases to support their narrative, and thus argue we functionally live in a fascist police state? No need to guess- I see these people on my socials! And if you take their posts and linkspam at face value, they too make some compelling cases.


There's some longer point to be made here where your secondary thesis is that leftists wailing about fascism don't really believe it because they don't really act like it, while rightists wailing that they have no right to protest loudly protest in public.




My reason for not believing MadMonzer when MadMonzer says that number is that four months ago he called anyone making it an idiot. Insert the Frieren meme here.




Again, is this just us not agreeing about what certain statements mean? MadMonzer says anyone calling Trump a Nazi is an idiot. MadMonzer also says he thinks there is a 10% chance Trump suspends the Constitution. Regardless of whether I think his number is too high, I do not think those two statements contradict each other. You do. Why? I say leftists cannot shoot conservatives with impunity. I also say your example of a leftist who was not prosecuted for shooting a conservative was (taking your version at face value) an injustice. I do not see these statements as contradictory. You do. Why?


I spent way more time typing this than I wanted to and not enough to even dig into counterarguments. You typically impress your fans with your collection of links and walls of text. No, I do not find them impressive because I think, as I have said before, much of what you throw at me is what I used to call mischaracterization, strawmanning, or cherrypicking, but now I think may simply be a fundamental difference in what we think is actually being asserted. But trying to engage with you is exhausting, because as I have also said, I have a really hard time following what you are even claiming from one paragraph to the next. I'm exhausted and I know I will be given no credit for trying to respond to you in good faith and the next round is going to be even more exhausting.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 2, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I am calm. And no, there was no humor or goodwill there. It wasn't a joke.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 2, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
No, it's not. Poetic similes and literalness are both appropriate in their respective domains, and a bluesky-tier smarm-quote about someone who disingenuously conflates them does not mean every instance of one is a disingenuous conflation with the other. The problem with you and @gattsuru both is that you will ask me something like "Don't you agree that the left is creating Orwellian thought-police?" and I will say "No, I do not think the left is creating Orwellian thought-police," and then I will say "This leftist thing is pretty censorious" and then you will "AHA YOU HYPOCRITICAL LIAR!" me.


I'm open to debates about where on a sliding scale we are, whether I give too much credit here or too much blame there, and the degree of relativity (though this often tediously boils down to "who started it?"), but claiming "I think A is bad but not infinitely bad" means if I ever acknowledge A is bad I have contradicted myself when telling someone else that A is not infinitely bad is tiresome as hell.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 2, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I guess you could ask me directly, instead of asking @ArjinFerman, who's a bad-faith anklebiter trying to gotcha me with less skill than you. (For example, above he's quoting that one line to imply that essentially nothing realistic will convince me. Maybe it's not obvious to you, but I tend to be rather literal. When I say "literally Orwellian," I mean literally Orwellian.)


On this, you will have to clarify, since I am not sure what specifically "California Code Is Free Speech bans" refers to.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 16, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Okay, you know what? That's enough. Your record is long and terrible. Over and over the mod notes say "Escalate and/or permaban next time." Yet each new infraction comes just long enough from the last one and is just low-level enough to make us hesitate to press the permaban button. At this point, I think it's calculated and you're playing us for chumps.


Get lost.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 9, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
IANAL but most forms of fraud require intent to deceive. If you sell a stolen car, the prosecution will have to prove you knew it was stolen, or at least were willfully negligent (proven beyond a reasonable doubt).


A woman who cheats (or just doesn't tell the purported father he wasn't the only one) might or might not believe he is in fact the father. Did he ask? Did he know? If you really want to prosecute women for paternity fraud (by which I assume you mean "Put her in jail") I'm game, but not if the standard of evidence is "She slept with someone else and didn't disclose it."


Incidentally, I believe paternity tests should be automatic at all hospital births, which would solve a lot of these problems and probably also be even more satisfactory to the men who rub their hands gleefully at the thought of ho-punishing than paternity fraud laws. (There would probably have to be some complicated rules for waivers and disclosures to handle the variety of edge cases, but in general, just make this a norm and let the consequences unfold.)


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 9, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
How would you prove she didn't know the named father was actually the father? At best, you could say she had reason to believe he might not be the father. Prosecuting for intentional paternity fraud is a different proposition than prosecuting for being unfaithful and lying about it.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 9, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
It's trivially easy to prove whether or not someone is the father of a child. It's not trivially easy to prove intentional "paternity fraud" (which if you really want to prosecute or bring civil cases for, would have to be defined more narrowly than "She cheated on me").


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 2, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
In that five-year-old post, how many of the things I have said wouldn't happen have happened? (Noting that I gave a time frame of 20 years, so we still both have time to be wrong.)


I already told you that I am less confident in my assertions than I was. The reason I am less confident is that what I see is that we are locked in a game of tit-for-tat-only-harder. Trump is unquestionably ratcheting up the retaliation for past misdeeds by Democrats. Assuming that the Republic does not die with this administration, eventually the Democrats will come to power again. I fully expect them to escalate (they are already bragging about how they are going to prosecute anyone who collaborated with Trump and ICE). I think that's bad, in case you're unclear. At some point we really are going to wind up in a failed dystopia, whether or not you believe we are already there. We will probably disagree about whether the starting point was during a Republican or Democratic administration, but if it happens during a Democratic one you can say I was wrong for all the satisfaction that gives you. Yes, we're clearly on a slippery slope. We're farther than I thought we'd be five years ago- but right now, we're on a slippery slope that Red tribe is pushing us down. (Yes, I know the response is "They started it, tit for tat is the proper game theory response," and that is how we keep going down the slope. No, I don't know what the exit looks like.)


If you want to cite some specific thing for me to respond to or agree with or rebut, I will do my best, but I do not think it is reasonable for you to demand I revisit a five-year-old post and answer all the questions you don't think I answered satisfactorily five years ago.




But if we can't have that discussion, hell, I'd just take a serious engagement with the thing that brought you into this thread. You popped in to insist that it's a bad idea to make single bets, even at steeply favorable odds,




I was just being pedantic about poker, ffs. And also expressing my general dislike of the "Put money on it or you don't really believe this" form of argumentation.




no one's saying literally Hitler




I said "literally Hitler is absurd." That is my opinion. I did not say "no one's saying literally Hitler." Obviously there are people saying literally Hitler. I think they are wrong. Do you think you fairly characterized my position just now? Do you think the way you do things like that might contribute to my frustration and reluctance to engage with you point-by-point?




Well, MadMonzer's willing to bet often




I am not MadMonzer. Don't get indignant that I lump you with KulakRevolt and then try to associate me with whatever other left-leaning person is in the thread.




Does this say anything? Do you have some other reason to believe that MadMonzer actually believes that number, when you yourself are saying that it's clearly absurd?




I think there is a pedantic argument about whether "literally Hitler is absurd" and "a 10% chance of Trump suspending the Constitution is too high a probability" are the same statement, and I do not think they are, but if for the sake of argument I grant that they are (because I would stand by both statements), my reasons for believing MadMonzer believes that number is that I know that many, many leftists believe that number or a higher number, and they clearly sincerely believe it whether or not they are willing to put money on it. That their belief is often driven by hysteria and/or detached from actual facts does not mean they don't seriously believe it. How this applies to our five-year-old argument I think is pretty obvious, but that argument was never about whether I believed that you or @FCfromSSC really believed the things you were saying. Are you trying to debate me, now, about whether @MadMonzer (or liberals with TDS in general) really believe the things they are saying?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 16, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Depends on the level. The military gives out Secret clearances like candy. Getting a Top Secret or higher (which is what defense contractors usually need to work on the DoD projects) is a lot more selective. (And not reporting an arrest or conviction is pretty much an automatic loss of clearance if they find out. Your sailor friend may have just gotten lucky.)


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 2, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


I'm not demanding that you admit you're wrong. I'd like you to be right! But it's hard to come away from conversations like this thinking we're debating what the actual state of reality is, rather than trying to discuss what we're even talking about.




Well, yeah, that's the problem. I mean, I already told you I literally have trouble figuring out exactly what you are accusing me of, and here you are returning almost two weeks later to go at it again! (I'm not saying you have a time limit on responding, but come on, I thought we'd both walked away from this one, and now I have to reread the whole thread to remember where we even were.)




I get lumped in with Soros conspiracy theorists and KulakCatgirl fanboys.))




I think I already apologized for accusing you of being a Kulak fan, and I honestly don't remember calling you a Soros conspiracy theorist. I suppose you have a link where I implied it or something. You're not a Soros conspiracy theorist. Are you happy?


Look, as I once said to you in private: what do you want? Is it really that specific post you have been hounding me about for years, that argument I had with @FCfromSSC? I have said repeatedly that I regret that exchange and have reconsidered how I expressed myself, even if don't repudiate the core thesis. So if "Admit you're wrong" is not what you're after, what are you after? You really just want to replay that particular argument again? After five goddamn years? Really?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 9, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Okay, but specifically asking a woman to let you drug her so you can fuck her unconscious body and her agreeing to cater to this very specific fetish is not the central example of "Guys who like fucking unconscious women."


If she's into it, okay, whatever. (Though, sorry, yes, I still think that's weird. But lots of people are into things I think are weird.)


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 9, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Well, I believe there is a fetish for everything, but you know that fetishes by definition are outside the norm, right? And your girlfriend was willing - would you actually do it to a woman who hadn't consented?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 9, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
That sounds like a just-so story. How many hot women have you had sex with, to know so much about the calculations in their mind and their sexual performance? Do you base this on anything at all other than supposition?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 9, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Yes. Though I think it would usually be pretty hard to prove.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 9, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
5 percent I believe. I don't think you'd find 80 percent in an Indian slum.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 9, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I just looked at your comment history, and it's mostly just sneering and insults. I'm surprised you were never reported or warned before, but since this account was created a week ago, seemingly for the sole purpose of shitting on people, I'm gonna assume you're just another one of our alt-recycling trolls and bin this one.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 9, 2026
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I'm not disputing that Christianity greatly improved the lot of women (and the poor, and many other marginalized groups). I'm disputing that improvements in women's rights are uniquely Christian and that only Christian societies ever treated them as more than property.