MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
No bio...
User ID: 1783
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
20hr ago
Just because the liberals folded doesn’t mean that the Cathedral doesn’t exist. It means precisely that the liberals didn’t want to fight in the ways you mentioned. I’d argue that it’s because they don’t have to. As long as they have control of the university system, NGOs, and the administrative system, the damage that a Trump Presidency can do is limited and temporary.
Every student leaving a university has been trained to support DEI and redistribution of wealth. They’ve been trained to be globalist and to be if not atheists, at least very secular. And most of them, even if they don’t agree with that, have to go along with it because the DEI loving HR office won’t tolerate dissent.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
1d ago
This has always been my read on history, most of the libertine and progressive ideals that we hold are essentially the fruits of the labor of the more anti-progressive people built. But the problem is that a bad idea or a set of them can destroy the prosperity that allowed them to flourish in the first place. I would consider the fall of heteronormativity and the traditional family structure to be degenerative— those norms produced children who could flourish in society, were generally well adjusted, and were ready to build whatever came next. Modern kids raised by daycares and public schools are a mess. And since we’re now two generations from the era when mom raised the kids as a norm, we now see the fallout as kids raised in daycares and public school turn more and more feral. Eventually the good times stop and the libertine excesses are revoked by a society that has no patience for those things.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
1d ago
I think something like that would cause brain rot in almost anyone doing it for a living. It’s a system of pretended power where the entire system revolves around not being the person making the decisions. And so most of the job is Kafaybe— you pretend to be powerful and push any actual work to others while claiming credit and ducking responsibility. Nobody cares if they’re wrong, they certainly don’t because as long as they tick off the boxes, the results don’t matter.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
1d ago
Yeah, I just don’t understand the mindset that “my boss told me to stop posting private information on social media, so I’m doubling down.” No business im aware of would not fire you instantly if you get caught. Hell Walmart employees got fired for pointing out how hard it is for someone to get accidentally locked in an oven. But of course they see themselves as above laws and rules and so they have a right to break any laws they please. They see themselves as untouchable priests of the global order, and they seem to honestly believe that there are no consequences to those actions.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
2d ago
I think this is pretty clear to me. Science cannot by nature decide what “Good” is. It can tell you how to do things you decide are good, but it cannot tell you that some goal is actually good. A lot of that framework comes in, often unconsciously, from the personal beliefs of the individual. Those beliefs would be absorbed from the culture and the dominant belief systems of that culture.
In the West, Christianity has colored western concepts of truth, Justice, rights, laws, and ethical values for nearly two millennia. We don’t think about it because even today, it’s still in the water we swim in. But the concept of individual rights and liberty comes out of the Christian idea that only a person’s own beliefs can save them. We don’t see the point of forcing people into Christianity because especially in Protestant Christianity, you have to decide for yourself to believe. Other systems have absolutely no problem with holding a knife to the throat of an infidel and saying “declare yourself a Muslim or your head comes off.” Or “just obey the emperor and all will be well.” We believe in restraint in war and in mercy. Watching the Israel/Gaza conflict, it’s clear that this isn’t a universal virtue. Nobody wants to show mercy, so it’s a constant revenge fest.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
2d ago
Not only that, but very little of our powerhouse STEM sector comes about because the government funded it, in fact most of the innovations have come from private companies despite government interference.
AI is coming out of private companies, so did much of our Internet companies stating with Amazon and moving through Zillio. Even in the past, most American innovation came from private research firms like Bell Labs or the Edison Labs or Tesla’s company. Modern robotics will come out of Boston dynamics.
At best, the government grant system works well for very basic research into pure sciences. It doesn’t work well to create new technologies that people will actually use. SpaceX has done more to improve space travel than NASA has in 50 years.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
3d ago
Honestly either one is bad. What we need is to set ourselves on a steady fiscal course and restructure our economy towards productivity and growth and thus create prosperity. The fiscal part is quite simple — starve the beast that’s eating up not only the vast majority of our money, but creating so many burdens on productivity that even if the government was solvent, it would still be almost impossible to create growth.
The burdens are enormous. You have thousands of regulations to start even a simple business are pretty high. Theres OSHA, labor laws, if you’re doing food service an entire Bible of health code laws. Some rules are necessary, obviously, but at a certain point, you become your own enemy. We can’t create small businesses and new products as we could if you didn’t have so many rules and regulations to follow.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
3d ago
But the stakes of status quo are too high. Our interest owed alone is more than we have allocated to the military. And that’s just with current spending. We cannot sustain ourselves as a country if we end up spending more on interest owed than anything else in the budget. Obligatory welfare spending, which includes social security, Medicare, Medicaid, welfare reimbursements, and subsidies to institutions to provide aid are a huge and ever growing burden on the American taxpayers and thus a huge drag on the economy. Quite frankly we’re broke and in fact underwater in ways that will become apparent fairly soon. Any shock to the status quo— our status as reserve currency, a trade war, a large scale war, and we will have a catastrophe on our hands because we no longer have the option to simply money printer go brrrrrr our way out of a fiscal crisis. And if you look to countries where these sorts of currency collapses happened, they’re to quote the President “shithole countries”.
I think doing it this way might be a bit ham handed, but the alternative to “shut it all down” might well be “whelp we tried to get our fiscal house in order, but nobody was willing to cut any programs. I guess we just go along here.” Which I think would be a huge problem because the chickens of too much spending will come home to roost on the taxpayers’ backs or on hyperinflation or both.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
3d ago
I don’t think kindness is a virtue so much as an affectation. Everyone pretends that their views are kind, loving, and so on. But im kind because I want to bring society in line with my view of reality, and you do too, except we don’t agree on reality. Is it kind to encourage kids to live as trans people and eventually become sterilized eunuchs? Or is is kind to stop them even if they’re mad today but will eventually become parents? Is it kind to not make your kid do his math homework and play on his computer, or to force tge issue so he learns the material and has options to get into better colleges and better jobs in ten years? Cancer treatment today or dead of cancer in two years? Kindness can only kosherize what you’ve already decided. And quite often kindness is used to make terrible decisions on behalf of other people, on the grounds that the decision that would make their life long-term better is going to hurt in the moment, or require effort beyond what the person is willing to do.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
4d ago
Makes perfect sense as the reasons we actually tell the story of the holocaust generally don’t have anything to do specifically with Jews or Judaism.
Firstly, it’s a moralizing myth casting the Nazis as a secular Satan who must be stood against at all costs. It casts the allies (and NATO which grew out of the non-Soviet part of the alliance) as heroes who beat back an evil, expansionist, and genocidal regime. Now the point of this is to set certain international norms and standards. You can’t be with the good guys and do Nazi things. Thou shalt not invade. Thou shalt not make prison camps. Thou shalt not ethnically cleanse. Thou shalt not genocide. Thou shalt not think more highly of your own civilization, race or religion than anyone else’s. It’s a new religion in essence, to replace the moral system that Christendom used to provide before the First World War. Antifascism was the religion of the post war era.
Second, it provided an opportunity to sell alignment with NATO to third world countries. We saved Europe. We defeated people who invaded France and Poland. We liberated the continent. We are strong enough to protect you if you ally with us against the Soviets. This is why the Soviets end up airbrushed out of the picture. We almost immediately started a Cold War with the USSR and her allies. Telling southeast Asian people to side with us sounds a lot less impressive when it turns out that the Soviets did a fair bit of the liberating and at much greater cost.
Third, it forced through a lot of changes that liberals wanted. A turn toward internationalism with the UN leading the way. The ascendancy of cultural relativism where it’s now forbidden to suggest that some ways of doing things are better than others. The beginnings of globalization and the transition to thinking of countries as economic development zones rather than places with a culture and people who belong there and have a right to sovereignty. It meant a lot of rules to formalize these changes and therefore more control over people.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
4d ago
The rejoinder here is — we aren’t actually addressing even obvious problems. We’ve known about climate change, peak oil, birth rate collapse, crime and loss of trust, etc. for nearly half a century, in many cares, a full century. Assabiya has been written about in one form or another since the time of Plato. Yet, no serious actions are undertaken. The cliffs get closer every year, yet every year our elected officials loot the treasury and do nothing for fear of being unpopular.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
4d ago
You can plausibly do so by raising the prestige of having children.
-
encourage or enforce a policy that women on TV prioritize children over career. Make it a thing where a high powered career woman has a baby and stays home with it, and this is shown as a good and desirable things to do. Show other women as jealous of the mom at home raising her own child as they wage-slave over spreadsheets they don’t actually care about.
-
prioritize schools teaching home skills. Not just cooking and sewing, but simple repairs, budgeting, etc. teach women to do those things and let them realize just how creative one can be in homemaking. Teaching childcare is a given, especially when it’s explained just how important mothers and fathers actually are to children.
-
encourage generous family leave policies— at least a full year.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
4d ago
I mean I think most liberals see standing and power and prestige as a dinner party kind of way. They see it as popularity, being invited to cool parties, and so on. It’s a false view of power and prestige in my view. You can like someone and laugh at them at the same time. You can think of them as wimps and fools and still invite them to parties.
Power, prestige and standing instead has to do with getting things done, and especially getting things done that the other party doesn’t necessarily want to do. If you have a boss who wants you to stay late, even though you wanted to go home, his power can compel you to stay, because he’s shown that defying him can put people in the doghouse. You don’t have to be mean about it, but you have to back up the words with consequences. I’ve seen this a lot because I have a lot of teachers in my family. If you don’t back up your words with consequences, the kids might like you, but you really only have control as long as your agenda matches with theirs. If you do, then you’ll have control and you can go on to maybe have fun or whatever you need to get done. But the minute a ten year old realizes there’s no bite behind the bark, he’ll just ignore the bark.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
6d ago
I get the impression that a lot of commentors here don't grasp just how unpopular identity politics is in "normie" spaces. In fact, I would say that to call it "unpopular" may be grossly under selling it. Leftists often lament the weakness/lack of class consciousness in the US, that the poor, more often than not, do not see themselves as "exploited" as much as they see themselves as "temporarily embarrassed". However I believe that this is a feature rather than a bug if one wants to live in a society with high trust and social mobility, and one of the things that distinguishes the US from other nations.
I think it’s a fine belief in the instance that you actually aren’t harmed by the misbelief. If you really are exploited, the first step in changing the situation is realizing you’re exploited. Likewise, a belief that identity politics is bad only works when you aren’t being harmed by believing that. If everybody but your group is playing identity politics, you’re not being more noble, you’re simply surrendering the field. If you’re not willing to stand up for your social class if you’re being exploited, you’ll be exploited. Politics, whether you like it or not are a team sport. Five people voting together get what they want. Five people voting separately get nothing.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
6d ago
I think you can go too far in that direction though. This guy was getting material to make chemical weapons, literature from a terrorist organization, was caught numerous times carrying weapons, and had been expelled from school for violence. How many bright red flags need to be waved before the government is allowed to do something about this guy? Or does “rule of law” mean we have to let people openly plan terrorist acts and let them kill people and terrorize the public, because to do otherwise violates procedures? I think even if you had to make up an excuse for a 48 hold for psychiatric evaluation, it probably would have allowed the police to investigate and find evidence.
I’m of the school of thought that without Justice and safety, nothing else matters. We’re so deep into anarchy-tyranny that the public is now being trained on how to behave when Theres a mass casualty event in a public place. We’re chewing through what’s left of the high trust society we used to have as more and more things get locked up because of theft and people are more worried about security when going out in public. The government only seems to be able to act when the usually law-abiding citizens complain or try to do something about it. If such things continue down this path, there won’t be a society to protect. King Charles’ grandkids might well rule over a country full of uncontrolled knife gangs. America might be full of cartels and mafiosi. Unless crime is actually to be curbed, by law or by the police simply taking control, you might end up there.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
7d ago
I think this is close, but what Cthulhu wants is power without accountability. The biggest problem with feudalism was that the ruled classes knew who had power and if that power didn’t produce a good life for them, it was simply a matter of removing those bad rulers and putting someone better in charge. With modern administrations, the real power sits in agencies where the official government requires an agency to exist and follow procedures but the agency has the power to rule, the official government is there mostly as a whipping boy. You can rage against your elected representatives all you want, Cthulhu is happy enough to let you do so, because those guys are not Cthulhu. And that lack of accountability means longevity for Cthulhu, so long as the people don’t completely upend society or some outside force doesn’t overthrow it.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
8d ago
It’s not just echo chambers. Honestly these people generally don’t understand the concepts they’re discussing, nor do they understand the concept that there are seasons of life and that some things have to happen by a certain time if you wanted them to happen. Housing is often a thing you want to have before thirty because once you have kids it gets a lot harder to get a lump sum for a down payment.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
8d ago
I mean it’s good for business advertising, in fact it’s almost a given that any business will have a Facebook presence, probably instagram as well. That doesn’t make it useful for other things.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
8d ago
I disagree simply because we are and have been running in the direction of more identity politics rather than less. Trump might well represent a step away from that, but for how long? If we start back up again, will not being at the table be good? When blacks are allowed to get boosts from the government as minority owned businesses, in a downturn, why does it make sense that white owned businesses can’t say anything about the government choosing those businesses when everyone needs work?
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
8d ago
You could try doing things like having single serve versions of the food. Instead of getting one big bag of chips, get a box of single serve chips so when you grab chips, you’d have to go back and grab another bag (you could try getting baggies and doing it yourself as well. And when you get rice or whatever, just either get single serve portions or only cook enough for your one meal.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
8d ago
The norms that existed before became the issue. Facebook didn’t implement any sort of system to separate your social networks. If you posted to “friends” anyone you friended could see it. So you couldn’t keep your coworkers from finding out about your drinking binge or your granny from seeing your post that’s slightly racy and meant for your twenty-something friends. The norm that developed was “only post stuff you’d tell your boss about and feel comfortable talking about in front of granny” because they could see it. Of course this creates a fairly safe-space vibe where only the most boring stuff gets posted and you have to be absolutely on your office manners the whole time.
The fun part of social media is that on a really good space, you get to be yourself. You don’t have to worry about what someone will report to the boss and so on. Facebook sucks because it’s basically part of a social network score alongside your credit score that determines how well you fit in mainstream social structures.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
8d ago
Because we aren’t there and are rapidly running in the opposite direction. In 1990 we could have more or less said something like that without a problem. But as it sits today, the racial, sexual, and gender groups are much larger and stronger with more group cohesion than ever before. To ignore this simply means choosing not to have your political interests matter. Nobody cared about the problems of poor whites until said poor whites began to organize themselves into the alt-right movement and other similar groups. Nobody cared what white men wanted until they began to see themselves as a group that has needs and has every right to get those needs met. Nobody worried about what Christians wanted until they started uniting around the ideas of Christian nationalism.
Once it became clear that whites were going to demand that DEI stop, sure people started paying attention to it. Before that point, it was taken as a given that since blacks were watching and voted as a group, that it was politically wise to make sure to not anger the Black vote because they vote as a block.
Unilateral disarmament is quite simply deciding to lose on principle.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
8d ago
I think the big thing dooming Facebook was that it didn’t recognize the difference between social circles for a long time, which leads to a kind of self censorship. Once people understood that anyone you’d friended could see everything, it became pretty clear that you couldn’t say just anything on Facebook because everyone from your boss to your granny could see it. Posting wild party pictures, or talking with your friends in ways that would offend people became a potential liability.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
9d ago
I think it depends on the type of identity awareness. There’s definitely a time to be an individual and a time to circle the wagons. The individual can do great things, certainly. But when you’re in electoral politics, ten individuals lose to a group of five if the five acts as a bloc. This is exactly the issue. Whites have been taught that they are evil if they form a voting bloc over their race and racial interests. Other minorities are allowed to do so. And thus when things like DEI are decided, blacks, Hispanics, women and others are there demanding to be included in the program. Whites aren’t there and thus cannot push back even though the entire process is based on removing whites from coveted positions in the workplace and schools to give them to others. Is that working? Are the political needs of whites being considered in these programs?
I think that underestimates Israel on two points. First, unlike other colonial powers the people making the decisions have no where else to go. Israel is the only Jewish majority state on th3 planet. Given the last 2000 years of Jewish history, if Jews lose the country they control, and their military ability to defend themselves they fully expect a return to periodic pogroms and expulsions. That’s what their history has been in Europe. That’s a lot different from most other colonial projects done by Europeans projecting power from relative security in Europe and thus could give up on a territory without putting themselves in danger. Jews in Israel will fight to the last man and woman to protect Israel because they have no other option.
Second, Israel has the full backing of the USA. Even in the face of huge opposition, neither party could bring themselves to offer more than pious mouth noises as they give Israel full access to the American arsenal and logistical and intelligence support on the side. Trump has, if anything provided more of this support, including strong arming Jordan and Egypt into taking Palestinians into their countries. Other countries in the region don’t have that.
More options
Context Copy link