MelodicBerries
virtus junxit mors non separabit
No bio...
User ID: 1678
don’t have the appropriate level of relations with European countries, or just don’t want the listless young men back.
Correct, but you can't really force regimes like Assad or the Taliban to take them back as their countries are disasters anyway. They don't need more young people causing trouble. And while they might accept bribes, history has shown that such regimes often engage in double-dealing and backchannel smuggling to enrich themselves even after such deals are made.
In short, there is no easy solution to this problem even if the considerable liberal domestic opposition was overcome.
Remember "creeping Sharia Law" that far-right hysterics were warning about 10-15 years ago? Of course it was always ridiculous, but now something pretty amusing has happened.
‘A sense of betrayal’: liberal dismay as Muslim-led US city bans Pride flags
What stood out to me was the support of right-wing activists from nearby towns. So this isn't just a moslem issue, even white Republicans are joined up. Here in Europe, populists like Geert Wilders were often warning about how too many moslem immigrants would threaten liberal values but they've been supplanted by a newer generation of populists that appear to increasingly take a page out of America's right-wing playbook by uniting with moslems against the LGBT crowd.
For liberals it also creates a bizarre spectacle. They've been obsessed with white Christian "fascists" and often turned a blind eye towards immigrants. Many of these immigrants rarely had much in common with them on social issues. They just voted left because of economic interests and the fact that the white left is more likely to let their entire family back home settle in the West.
Another ironic twist is that the supposed "Great Replacement myth" is largely what facilitated this change. Moslems are now a clear supermajority in the city and the change happened relatively quickly. Liberals were demographically replaced by the people they brought in and now feel like they've been hosed. Can't feel much sympathy for those who use immigration as a political weapon against their domestic political enemies.
Feudal problems require feudal solutions. In this case, the king (Spez), is checking the power of the upper nobility (power mods) by playing them off the lower nobility and peasants (small time mods and users). This ensures a smooth transition of power, as the lower mods who will be actioning these requests have moderation experience, familiarity with the communities they will be moderating, and they will be selected specifically for their collaboration with Reddit against other unaligned forces.
In the real world, the house nearly always wins. The scrappy upstarts gets brutally beaten down and possibly destroyed. Hollywood has destroyed so many lives by feeding people false fantasies during their childhoods (often with parents helping to pile on) as people later become confronted with life as it is rather than an idealised version that never existed.
This reddit drama is just a microcosm of that. It's also a gentle reminder that much of our actual lives are essentially hyperauthoritarian with basically zero democracy. A lot of anarchist theorists have noted this in the past when analysing our modern liberal capitalist systems, but it's nice to get another confirmation with this entire saga. Ultimately the only voices that actually matter can be counted on a single hand. That is true in almost all large organisms, ranging from large communities, corporations to even nation-states.
Depends which forums. I am still member of a couple which are as active and interesting as ever, although they have a fairly distinct profile. "Normie" forums probably died thanks to reddit.
I've been using RedReader for years and they came out saying that they would function as before even with the API changes. What's nice about RR is that you don't even need an account to browse subreddits and it's ad-free.
I disagree. BLM was massively goosed by the media. With little attention given to it, it would have fizzled. I think we overestimate how "organic" these movements are.
Yet that does not explain why Christianity overtook the Roman Empire, given that its first adherents were low-status losers literally thrown to the lions for the sport of the roaring crowds.
They were able, in time, to convert virtually the entire Roman elite through sheer force of conviction. Tom Holland has written a great book on the rise of Christianity, it certainly helped shed some of my cynicism. Come to think of it, idealism is in fact a very powerful force. Sometimes for very destructive ends (e.g. many of the most brutal communists truly believed in their utopia).
I don't see how Ukraine maintains itself as a functional nation as their demographics become untenable to support economic activity. Unless perhaps all the other nations of the world commit to pouring massive ongoing support into the country.
Ukraine's population is now only 29 million and fertility has dropped below 1 per woman, nearing South Korean levels. It's fair to say this is their final fight.
Ukraine as a country will probably massively shrink after this war and with large parts gobbled up by their neighbours in the long term. I suspect Western Ukraine, which is ground zero for Ukrainian nationalism, will remain independent because nobody wants to deal with a recalcitrant population.
Nobody seems to talk about the RU-UA war here anymore. I guess it's because we're saturated with it everywhere else.
Yet given that Ukraine has launched what is unquestionably the largest offensive since the Kharkov surge in late September when it took back wide swathes of territory, I believe a status update is warranted.
First, it is immediately clear that the Russians are much more prepared this time. The area that Ukraine took back in autumn was barely defended by a rag-tag group of volunteer militias. That was a big lapse by the Russian general command, which also led to the big mobilisation drive. This time is different.
Even pro-UA accounts like Julian Röpcke are conceding that Ukraine is losing lots of armored vehicles with very marginal gains. Western officials like the CIA chief or the US foreign secretary have all pointed out that the aftermath of the offensive will shape upcoming negotiations. Given that Ukraine has little to show for their offensive thus far, this inevitably casts a dark shadow on any prospects for large territorial compromises. Why would the Russians give the Ukrainians something at the negotiating table which they cannot gain on the battlefield?
To my mind, the best that Ukraine can hope for now is a stalemate. This war has shown that in the era of ubiquitous ISR capabilities, trying to surprise your enemy is much harder if he's on his toes (which the Russians weren't in the autumn, but they are now). Consequently, offensives are simply far costlier and harder. The Russians had the same problems, which is why capturing Bakhmut took such an absurdly long time.
For those of us who would want to see a negotiated settlement, the reality is that neither side is running out of money or arms. Russia is spending a moderate amount of money and the West can keep supplying Ukraine enough to keep going for years if the decision is made that defensive action is the way to go. The only way this war ends is if the West tells Ukraine to give in and accept large territorial losses in return for a settlement and possibly security guarantees. Such an outcome would be nearly impossible to sell to Ukraine's domestic public and would almost certainly end the career of whoever was leading the country, including Zelensky. Whatever comes out of this war, I'm not optimistic about Ukraine's long-term prospects.
Sixth-generation American secular Jewish academics with a fertility rate of 0.9 who volunteer for 'Jewish Voice for Peace' and whose conception of Judaism is essentially identical to progressive social justice (much as is the Christianity of the average modern Episcopalian/Anglican priest) and hardcore Israeli religious Zionists intent on colonizing the West Bank and having 5+ children, who couldn't give less of a shit about American politics are two very different groups of people
The overwhelming majority of Jews in elite positions are Zionists. Most may identify as liberal Zionists - if one can be a "liberal ethno-nationalist" - but they are Zionists. These JVP types are fringe elements. It's a fact that many Jews in the US preach liberal ideology to the goyim while heavily supporting an ethno-nationalist creed for Israel.
In a sense, this is a higher-IQ version of German Turks who vote for the left in the Germany but support Erdogan when voting from abroad. In my view, the true underlying values of a community can only be revealed when they are in the majority. There are too many ethnic self-interest incentives when you're a minority.
Harrison Ford is 80 years old, who on earth thought he should star in an action movie?
The audiences, apparently. Most of what Hollywood produces these days are either remakes or sequels. There's something to be said here about lack of cultural vitality. I suspect the movie will be a hit simply on account of nostalgia and sentimental buying.
The only real action franchise worth anything that has emerged in the last decade was probably John Wick. I also like the Taken series but the main protagonist is quite old now. Frankly, so is Reeves.
So Erdogan won the Turkish presential election in the final round today.
First, a brief guide to Turkish politics. The liberals in Turkey are often paradoxically more racist than the conservatives. This sounds very weird in a Western context but Islam is after all a proselytizing religion. Race is a barrier that must be broken to increase your adherents to the faith. What follows is that if you're a serious moslem (and Erdogan is by all accounts) then you must categorically reject racism.
Unsurprisingly, Erdogan has taken in millions of Syrian refugees and even began to slowly give them citizenships. The liberal/secular opposition in Turkey have no strong religious identity. In its stead, there is often an ethnic emphasis and, as you might imagine, they are not too happy with being flooded with millions of Arabs.
There are of course other factions. Some ultra-hardliners on the right have campaigned even harder against refugees but their main candidate got eliminated in the 1st round and who did he endorse? Erdogan! I never promised this would make sense.
Given how long Erdogan has been in power, I don't think it's necessary to provide some in-depth commentary on the man. He is a "known entity" by now. I suspect the biggest impact will be in foreign policy. The liberal candidate openly distanced himself from Russia during the campaign, whereas Erdogan has repeatedly emphasised his supposed friendship with Putin. Erdogan will also likely want to extract a steep price from the US in exchange of Sweden's NATO membership. The official explanation about some Kurdish terrorists is likely mostly a smokescreen. The US kicked Turkey out of the F-35 programme after the Turks bought the Russian S-400 missile system. Now Turkey wants at least F-16s but opposition in the US congress is steep. Enter the NATO accession diplomacy and you begin to understand the context.
From a European perspective, I am not certain a victory for Erdogan is bad. I don't want to see his country in the EU and while the chance would have been remote if the liberal opposition won, it is all but dead with him in power. Turkey is also more likely to keep refugees in their country, though they will probably continue to intermittently use them as human shields in order to get something they want in exchange from Europe.
One final reflection. Given Erdogan's economic mismanagement, many wonder why he wasn't voted out. I think this is yet another example of the importance of cultural politics. Why has the white working class been voting GOP for many decades despite essentially voting against their economic interests? Because they sense the seething hatred that liberal elites have for them. I suspect it isn't much different in Turkey. Politics is often tribal, more than we give acknowledge in the West, and so who you voted for is often a function of your identity as much as your rational interests.
Sunak himself commented on it, saying how political correctness shouldn't prevent people from identifying these grooming gangs. In some ways, getting an Indian PM to say these things is a "cultural victory" of sorts. Having other races stan for you is the ultimate soft power. The media is also talking about it openly. That wasn't the case years ago.
More importantly, police have actually begun to prosecute and sentencing these vile rapists. So your characterisation that they "refuse to act" is simply wrong. Perhaps you could argue that they should do more, but saying they refuse to act is incorrect. There have been many trials by now and they are still continuing:
20 years ago, it was all swept under the carpet. As the UK has gotten more diverse, these things have gotten easier to talk about, not harder. And coverage is pretty balanced even in left-wing papers like the Guardian, meanwhile many of these vile scum are getting hauled off to court. Not exactly what you'd expect if you believed that whites were losing power. You'd see cover-ups or even celebrations. That's not what we see.
Erdogan is pretty loopy but he isn't that bad. I follow their economy fairly closely. They will see more devaluations but no Lebanon-style collapse.
Yet their lives are infinitely better than if they would have remained sovereign. No offence to American Indians, but given their social problems, I find it hard to believe that their standard of living would have been better today if not for European conquest. The tall tales of mass annihilation is also mostly bunk. Many Europeans were often very sympathetic (e.g. Sam Houston).
Enoch Powell's prediction of "the black man will have the whip hand over the white man" comes to mind. Modern Britain may be diverse but it is hard to argue that blacks control anything of importance. I've lost count on how many times in RW spaces I've seen people predicting civil war and/or collapse for many years. Just never happens.
Germany has had a problem with declining industrial competitiveness even before C-19 struck. The auto industry peaked and it doesn't appear that there's anything to take its place in the immediate turn. That may explain the problem
It is in fact possible to have high inflation and an energy crisis brewing at the same time. That's what happened in the 1970s across much of the developed world. Many people thought this would be the same but it clearly isn't.
I think the inflationary impulse is bad, yet it has also peaked. Germany's underlying problems with finding a new growth model after relying so much on the auto industry will remain, however.
Frankfurt investment banks are a sea of ‘vons’. Same with senior government jobs in Berlin, or with media. Unlike in the UK, it’s barely even commented upon.
Correct, however it's worth pointing out that this pattern is universal across the world where we have good data. Even in supposedly egalitarian societies. There simply does not seem to be that much social mobility at the very top. The rate of taxation doesn't appear to make much difference for the elites.
Remember the big energy crisis that Europe was supposed to be doomed with for years to come? Yeah, it's pretty much gone. Worth pointing out two things.
First, natural gas demand has been much weaker than anticipated since China is weaker. Indeed, there is now a surplus of gas in the world market.Some people claim that "last winter we got lucky", but this doesn't explain how gas storage is at historically high levels. Germany, Europe's biggest gas consumer, has an excellent position going into the autumn.
Second, renewable energy is beating new records by the day. In Northern Europe, electricity prices are bouncing around zero and occasionally dipping below the line into negative territory.There's also a structural trend of rapidly growing renewable energy, which means that even as gas prices return to historical norms, it is unlikely that consumption will stay the same. The shift now underway to renewable and clean energy (e.g. nuclear) is permanent. Russia had its chance at energy blackmail and it turned out it was a dud.
I think there are a couple of conclusions to draw from this. The most important one is that scaremongering and hysteria rarely pays to listen to. We can broaden this to a discussion about climate change or even immigration. Sure, there will be issues, but the doomsters on both issues were proven wrong historically. So were the doomsters on Europe's supposedly "permanent energy crisis" thesis.Then why do people persist by wallowing in fear? I don't have a clear answer but perhaps there are evolutionary adaptions that were beneficial to those who were erring on the side of caution?
Another important takeaway for me is once a crisis gets going you should never underestimate humanity's capacity for adaption and change. The system we inhabit may look brittle, but it's probably a lot more sturdy than we give it credit for. Some of us still remember the panicked predictions about the food supply chains breaking down when Covid hit, and plenty people stocked up on tons of canned food, often for no good reason. Some even talked of famine.
Perhaps being the optimist just isn't socially profitable. You're taken more seriously by being a "deeply concerned" pessimist. If this is true, then social incentives will be skewed to having the bad take. People who will be aware of this will probably draw the right conclusions in times when most other folks are losing their minds in fear.
I'm supportive of Erdogan winning in Turkey's elections since him being in power means two things. First, Turkey is more likely to have a pro-refugee stance (compared to the opposition) and thus alleviate pressure off Europe. Second, his quasi-islamist sympathies ensures that Turkey is unlikely to join the EU any time soon or even get stuff like free visa access, which they've been whining about for almost a decade now.
Erdogan is a "known entity" and despite the scaremongering painted by the Turkish liberal bloc, he's pretty pragmatic.
Interesting, thanks!
The people who opposed it were often prevented from competing on fair terms electorally. In many cases, their party leaders were just jailed. This is a recent example. So no, I find the "let's blame the voters" unconvincing and frankly a sign of a mind unable to look critically at the system as it is.
Honestly he just comes across as a weird schizo, but it sure is amusing to see the uptick in Latinx and Indian nazis.
If memory serves, the leader of the far-right "Proud Boys" group was mestizo.
I know about Cole's turnaround but Irving is news to me. Mind sharing source?
I suspect the discontinuity between local and national is down to demographic weight. What percentage are moslems of America's population? A couple of percent? Given those odds, it stands to reason that they would do what they've traditionally done: vote for the white leftists who will give you money and your uncle back home a better chance at escaping his third world hellhole.
What this local election shows is revealed preference when unencumbered by demographic constraints; when making pragmatic alliances are no longer as crucial.
More options
Context Copy link