DiscourseMagnus
2d ago
I don't mean to be a conspiracy theorist, but it looks to me like the powers that be in India are deliberately angling for a nuclear war with Pakistan because they see it as inevitable in the long term but think that the results will be more favorable for them the sooner it happens. Moreover, they're also angling for Pakistan to launch the first (nuclear) strike because they expect the rest of the world will be more sympathetic to them in that case.
DiscourseMagnus
3d ago
Self-demonstrating post?
DiscourseMagnus
3d ago
I could see it becoming less effective in the near future as it becomes associated with AI; AI draining dry the collective pool of effective rhetoric.
DiscourseMagnus
3d ago
It occurs to me that the term "serial monogamy" is very directly analogous to "crony capitalism". Or "social justice", for that matter.
DiscourseMagnus
3d ago
I personally suspect that this is not actually a modern innovation on harems per se, and that the reason we don't have extensive records of it in the ancient world is that it was considered irrelevant trivia, not that it was considered forbidden. Contrary to male homosexual behavior (which is likelier to be an outright aberration that natural selection simply has trouble weeding out, comparable to mental illness), it seems like the most obvious context that female homosexual behavior would evolve for - particularly given that women are much likelier to be bisexual than men.
DiscourseMagnus
3d ago
Definitionally, sure, but I think it's connotationally out.
DiscourseMagnus
4d ago
I note that you took no issue with my similarly unfavorable description of the left.
DiscourseMagnus
4d ago
Go flop around on Twitter or /pol/ for a short time.
DiscourseMagnus
4d ago
Yeah, but those boys have both shit ends of the stick; the left thinks that they're rapists-in-waiting who need to be castrated or gaslighted into turning gay, while the right thinks that if they have any positive feelings for women aside from maybe lust then they're as good as gay already and need to be beaten. (Ignoring the normie/boomer faction of the right that's just a reskin of the left.)
DiscourseMagnus
4d ago
You aren't meant to just know, though, is the thing. You're meant to just not know. You're meant to be eugenically filtered out.
DiscourseMagnus
12d ago
I have the general impression that the "enhanced social bonding" of alcohol is just the same sort of euphemism that people use to justify the use of cannabis.
DiscourseMagnus
14d ago
I'd speculate that what actually happened here wasn't "deep-blue strongholds", but the opposite - an increasingly noteworthy phenomenon of deep-red strongholds who somehow managed to ostrich-with-head-in-the-sand their way through the entire LGBT activist phenomenon until recently. They can wind up thinking of things like drag queen story hour as opening blows in the conflict because they weren't paying attention before that.
DiscourseMagnus
14d ago
Actually parents in 0 AD weren't doing anything because there was no year 0 AD.
DiscourseMagnus
1mo ago
I'd better stop here. I've been noticing misandry against men in Western culture for quite sometime, but now it looks like boys are targets too, which makes me a bit upset.
Always have been.
DiscourseMagnus
1mo ago
The key would be to "eat" Canada bit by bit, taking over its most right-wing parts, accelerating the collapse of the rest of it and its associated right-wing turn, rinse-wash-repeat until you've gotten the whole thing.
DiscourseMagnus
1mo ago
It seems likely that the "before time" was when they were actually successful in their propagandizing, before the snake started eating its own tail. Back then, they knew to slip subversive material in subtly - one gay book in a stack of normal ones, not a whole stack of gay books. The parent's less likely to notice the one gay book in the normal stack, and even if the parent does notice, it's likelier to be dismissed as a harmless aberration. The whole stack of gay books isn't actually more useful for their aims - it's a self-defeating result of their fifty-Stalins purity-signaling spiral.
DiscourseMagnus
1mo ago
Fair; I felt the need to emotionally underline my point, but it felt un-The-Motte-ish as I did it, a feeling I should have paid more attention to.
DiscourseMagnus
1mo ago
I think that, much as with homosexuality, you err in assuming that a propensity for child abuse is primarily an aberrant genetic mutation that affects desire, as opposed to a willful choice to perform a transgressive evil for the sake of it. I think that the people running American society won't allow anyone into their club - they won't allow anyone else to have any of their power - until they've proven that they really are completely soulless, empty, and evil. Anything we'd recognize as sexual - the whole limited hangout archetype everyone's rambling about here, with an entrapment sex party featuring jailbait - is essentially incidental. You have to be on the record participating in the sadistic torture and execution of a few innocent people before they let you into the big leagues, and you need to seem to enjoy it, too. They're Satanists, and they only want to share the halls of power with fellow Satanists. Those are the people who made America. Freemasons. Those fuckers.
DiscourseMagnus
1mo ago
There are a lot of things with potentially innocent explanations that are nonetheless in aggregate fishy but can't be investigated because of an early version of what we'd now recognize as the War On Misinformation. Several promotional bios for Obama prior to his presidential campaign state that he was born in Kenya, which was apparently a mistake but one of unclear origin (perhaps Obama or someone close to him was engaging in a foolhardy attempt to inflate his diversity status, a la Warren?). The idea was popular among his family and their community in Kenya, for local pride reasons, and they would claim to remember his birth there (possibly mistaking him for a relative). When Obama did eventually release his birth certificate, it was an easily-tampered-with copy (apparently this is a problem with copy machines in general?) and the bureaucrat who verified it died in a mysterious small plane crash shortly thereafter.
I completely agree that "was Barack Obama ineligible for the presidency" is a narrower target than "was Barack Obama born in Kenya", which is itself a narrower target than "was Barack Obama trying to hide something related to his birth".
DiscourseMagnus
1mo ago
While Obama was likely a turning point in these dynamics, I think they clearly go back much further. The phrase "[President] Derangement Syndrome" was invented for Bush Derangement Syndrome in 2003, and at the time it was referencing dynamics generally acknowledged to have already existed under Clinton. Reagan and Nixon stand out as facing similar, and it seems entirely likely that Carter got the same at the time and it's just faded in his post-presidency. Johnson? Kennedy? Maybe this is just how people treat presidents.
DiscourseMagnus
1mo ago
There was actually reason to believe that there was something iffy about Obama's birthplace, although at this point it's presumably well-buried enough that we'll never find out exactly what happened there. (Entirely likely that he really was born in Hawaii and the irregularities came from trying to cover up or distract from some other embarrassment.) Michelle being transgender, by contrast, is nonsense, but you're right that lots of schizos seem to be fixated on it; it's like an awful peek into the lumpenprole-right id.
DiscourseMagnus
1mo ago
I wouldn't consider this entirely surprising; the Walsh/Shapiro partnership has long struck me as odd, as Walsh seems much more aggressive and hardline in his right-wing takes, compared with Shapiro who is far more often infuriating in the opposite direction, as the definition of a spineless party-line-reciting moderate pundit.
DiscourseMagnus
2mo ago
Worth also remembering that Zelensky became a Presidential candidate in the first place because he was caught on camera ranting about corrupt politicians, IIRC.
Amusingly, you've confused him with the fictional character he played.
DiscourseMagnus
2mo ago
However, if he now is truly attempting to maximize his people's well-being, he should have signed the rare-earth agreement with the United States. His childish behavior (inappropriate attire, attempting to alter the deal in front of the press, insolence to a nation responsible for his nation still existing) put the deal at risk, and seems to indicate that his country’s well-being no longer holds paramount sway in Zelensky.
I generally found this post remarkably insightful, but I found this particular section of the analysis very weak, in a way speaking to heavy consumption of propaganda - and your overall point rests on it. I know that I'm going right for the weakest point made, but still - inappropriate attire, really? He's the leader of a country in the midst of an existential war; his presentation was as expected.
That is my assumption, yeah. At the moment, nuclear war between Pakistan and India wouldn't actually be an MAD scenario; Pakistan would be completely destroyed (and you can't get any more destroyed than that) while India would "merely" suffer the worst disaster in memory. Pakistan and India have similar-sized nuclear arsenals (in terms of number of bombs - India's bombs are much stronger), but India is of course much larger, and they also have much more sophisticated nuclear delivery systems; Pakistan's arsenal is dangerous but it's currently one of the easier nuclear powers in the world to foil an attack from. In the future they'll most likely be more evenly-matched and a nuclear war would actually spell the end of both India and Pakistan.
More options
Context Copy link