Ditto6687
3mo ago
The claim was literally "Russia is bad", so I felt that it could be countered by listing a few achievements of world-historic significance that benefited all of mankind off the top of my head
I beg the differ. Unironically, Russia is good and kills bad guys. Besides, quite a lot of Israelis have Russian ancestry, up to the point of having just changed their surnames, and Israel would not exist if it weren't for Russian support.
Russia is one of the great historic nations, it's never going anywhere. No amount of spite will change the fact that they launched the first man in space or erase their contributions to art and science.
Ditto6687
3mo ago
This is a weird rule formulation. Why not just plainly state that the President and Vice President shall not be residents of the same state?
Ditto6687
4mo ago
Can you remove the strikethroughs, at least after the first one? It's a bit jarring.
Ditto6687
4mo ago
I mean don't you know Reddit is a combination of willing echo-chamber and strong top-down ideological control by partisan mods? Expecting even-handedness in this case would be like expecting /r/europe or something to be balanced about the Ukraine war.
It's not just bots from team A fighting bots from team B. Team B doesn't even get to play.
Ditto6687
5mo ago
I certainly hope that it is, but can't know for sure. That said, I believe a country with one of the most advanced capitalist economies in history is functionally extremely different than the USSR, and I feel much more comfortable being bullish on it.
Ditto6687
5mo ago
enforces a rules-based international order
Up until the second that the rules come into conflict with US interests. "Rules-based international order" is a propaganda term that Western news outlets repeat like robots. I believe that it was chosen exactly because saying it is so ridiculous in face of reality, that it serves as an ultimate loyalty signal, like "the sky is green".
The US, like evey major power or hegemon, imposes its will, unconcerned with principles and consistency.
China would probably do something similar, but under pretty different rules.
I am sure they would exercise power. But I am not sure what the maximum extent of that power would look like.
Ones that I would argue are much less compatible with longstanding European traditions.
I am just unconvinced that Chinese dominance would mean a completely different political and cultural system in Europe. I can see many positives (countries I like no longer being bullied by the US), and can imagine outcomes where the Chinese mostly meddle less than the US.
Ditto6687
5mo ago
In Xinjiang the CPC executed a heavy-handed response to a real, substantial domestic terror threat. I doubt the CPC in the dominance scenario will ever have the capacity to do so in the Netherlands, nor that it would ever judge it necessary.
Netherlands, Germany, or Poland
That has little to do with the US, and a lot to do with the native population.
I don't know what CPC dominance would look like. But I am guessing that the intrusiveness would be much closer to US levels (cultural, geopol) than to the USSR. Why? I have acquaintances from China and access to the internet, it is nothing like the USSR.
Ditto6687
5mo ago
It was a hypothetical. I am trying to say that a city can provide worse career opportunities while still having better policing policies. Providing the best opportunities and being the most attractive city does not imply that all policies are the best.
Ditto6687
5mo ago
If you gave me equal income opportunities I would rather live in Moscow Sankt Petersburg. Your argument proves too much, just because New York provides better opportunities does not mean all local policies there are better than in Moscow. In fact, New York can probably get away with much worse given the income disparity.
Ditto6687
5mo ago
Can you explain why is it beneficial to a country for foreigners to buy up their companies? Also I understand investing when you give the company money either for a loan or to buy their shares directly, but how is "after-market" public trading of stocks with other owners "investing" (in the sense of something beneficial to the country/company)?
(I'm asking as an ignoramus I'm not making a point.)
Ditto6687
6mo ago
I've asked my gf about this.
-
Women seem to assume that "in the forest" means "without social consequences, ever". Meaning, they suspect that some significant portion of men do not actually have an innate problem with rape and violence towards women, they simply do not do it most of the time out of fear.
-
She claimed that many women who responded with "bear" were victims of violent rape who literally would rather die than be raped.
-
She also claimed that most wild animals leave you alone if you are not a threat.
I'm pretty sure (3) does not mean you have a high chance of surviving a bear encounter. I would shit my pants and start running away the moment the bear started approaching me, make myself a threat, and get caught and mauled.
And while this may sound crass, I think getting mauled by a bear is worse than rape. I would rather be raped as a man that get mauled by a bear.
Ditto6687
6mo ago
What makes it a gulag instead of a prison? How are American jails different?
If they locked up Trump, would you refer to American prisons as "gulag"?
Ditto6687
6mo ago
They are certainly powerful enough to get America to send billions in aid to a country that seems far more brutal in their war than Russia, as part of the same package that is meant to punish Russia for being brutal.
Edit: just remembered that American evangelicals have weird beliefs about Israel + geopolitical concerns. That might be a better explanation for the blatant hypocrisy of supporting Israel's actions in Gaza than Jewish power.
Ditto6687
6mo ago
I have not. It's just that a lot of people in my circles talk about it. For example, I follow Justin Murphy (who imo hosted one of the best Moldbug irl appearances) was very into it. Interestingly, most of his followers would fall into the Continental Philosophy constellation, so there's some viewpoint diversity already.
Ditto6687
6mo ago
I can't explain myself to ants because they do not have notions at all. Nothing can be explained to ants. No one can do it. None of the possible combinations of pheromones will ever lead to any "ant understanding".
Not the case w/ humans and language.
Ditto6687
6mo ago
I think dogs can't understand us primarily because they can't "understand" pretty much anything. As long as a species are capable of thought and have concepts like goal-seeking behavior, I doubt any intelligence gap actually causes the problem you are describing.
Asking if ants can understand humans is like asking if rocks can understand us. It's not a matter of scale, it's a category error. But asking if humans can understand God is just a question of knowledge. God could explain himself to us, we can't explain ourselves to ants.
Ditto6687
6mo ago
If you aren't willing to show your face for a cause, to have your name associated with it, do you really believe in it at all?
I'm pretty sure I saw the official Israel twitter account or some large American Jewish account bragging about how they were gonna use facial recognition tech to make sure "none of these people ever find a job again."
Croatian (OK you caught me, South-Eastern European? But so are Serbs.)
Needless to say your nationality does not determine your stance, and I am sick and tired of these generalizations, as if we are all reducible to your average Redditor.
More options
Context Copy link