@DiscourseMagnus's banner p

DiscourseMagnus


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2024 July 11 01:04:04 UTC

				

User ID: 3133

DiscourseMagnus


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2024 July 11 01:04:04 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 3133

Does he really think that gracefully turning the other cheek will magically convince anyone on the obviously dominant side that cancel culture is bad actually - or (less charitably) even lead to any, any "are we the baddies" entry-level introspection among those involved at all?

Do the people rationalizing the escalatory course of action as "something we'll do until the other side learns to stop" really think that their actions will lead to any basic "are we the baddies"-type introspection on the left?

Given a realistic model of human behavior, that sounds somewhere between "massive" and "infinity" to me. How long will we keep kidnapping our enemy's children and torturing them to death on stream? Until the blood feud stops. Obviously.

Yes, although the optics of the jokey 2-part tweet about the matter are bizarrely poor.

They apparently tested it.

He's also 81 and obviously in poor health already.

I would usually be inclined to agree, but this particular tweet seems critically unaware of how Twitter works, in a way I'd generally consider much more characteristic of an old man with dementia than a social media team.

That's because the guy who made the video tracked her down and confronted her at her workplace about her social media post. That was what this was about.

Biden got COVID and tweeted out this? Seeing a lot of people speculate that he's prepping to drop out of the race with the COVID as a pretense, but at the moment he still seems to be trying to play everything off.

https://x.com/JoeBiden/status/1813715902250017022

This is naked sophistry. Surely your opponents could as easily find supposed examples of Trump engaging in second level speech (uh-oh no-no bad), which would make calling for his assassination third level speech (Real American Defended Free Speech) and trying to get assassination fans fired fourth level speech (??????????).

I would generally describe the attempts to frame this angry mob behavior as a productive and rational game theory strategy as "a serious game theory L for red tribe", yeah.

Don't get me wrong, the political instability you're pointing at is serious. But it doesn't disgust me nearly as much as the trend I've seen of people trying to posthumously cancel the rally-goer who was killed protecting his family during the shooting. The worst of the left are digging through his internet history laughing it up at right-wing posts he made, trying to make an example out of him the same way they would if he was a random civilian who'd wound up in the news for any other reason. It seems to be a very popular stance to take, in certain corners of Twitter. Microcelebrities are getting in on it. In their social circles, it's gauche to defend him. He was a Trump supporter; of course he deserves to be dragged through the mud online. Hundreds of Tweets saying things to the effect of "obviously he didn't deserve to die, but", perfectly conveying that they're lying their asses off, are quite glad that he's dead, and think it's a good start.

The policy you describe is obviously monstrous, but moreover, it seems likely to me that its worst consequence wouldn't be the people directly executed by the state; it would be the surge in crime brought on by well-meaning citizens frantically taking in homeless people to save them from the policy, no questions asked. The typical criminally insane homeless man wouldn't be killed under your regime; he would be given free access to the home of a WASP-y upper-middle-class overeducated Democrat family who conscientiously object to the policy. It would take many of their number being robbed, raped, and murdered for them to learn better, if they ever would; even relatively moderate sorts you wouldn't expect - Republican voters, even, hardcore Christian churchgoers - would be much more easily pressured into making serious personal sacrifices for the homeless under the conditions you describe creating.

I am cynical enough to wonder if something like this is your intent, although I am not so cynical to immediately assume it is.

"It sounds like you're just feeding naive liberal women to the homeless."