TitaniumButterfly
No bio...
User ID: 2854
Something I have no idea how to gauge is whether the layoffs will themselves have a substantial economic effect. Seeing all those houses for sale around DC was kind of shocking but perhaps only matters locally.
Let's call it multivariate.
I think @ThisIsSin is correct downthread when he points out (perhaps I'm editorializing) that a lot of it has to do with cultivating legitimacy. Our national myths are the Civil Rights Movement (protecting the 'oppressed' from the 'privileged') and taking down Nazi Germany because they were killing minorities, whether that had anything to do with our motives at the time or not.
Ergo, to legitimize ongoing and novel interventionism, it helps to slot the matter into such a frame. People are familiar with the concept and trained from birth to see it as morally correct.
and ‘the English language’ are not instincts
Yes, you're correct, though proclivity toward English is almost certainly there in the genes. Which I mention because I think it's so cool and a window into so much else.
"Victim of colonialism" is an even more important moral virtue, apparently.
Don't think this is quite it. The criterion seems to be more along the lines of "dysfunctional and not white" though I can't put my finger on it exactly. Ethiopia e.g. would get plenty of play despite no colonization, whereas a functional post-colonial country (especially with lots of Hajnal-descended people in it) would be broadly ignored regardless of the magnitude of past abuses.
Well, no, he said that mere accusations of fascism would get a country "at least" get cut off from trade and possibly bombed. It's a pretty outlandish statement and @upsidedownmotter's objection is warranted.
Though I think @MaiqTheTrue's overall point is valid and important.
You know I had originally dismissed this post as trolling and moved on, but it's been on my mind for some reason, and I'd like to stop and ask just in case you're serious. From my perspective the amount of bad-faith canards you're throwing out doesn't look like an accident, but, you know, maybe I'd actually believe that stuff but for the grace of God. So who can say?
I mean, the only genes that differ are essentially about some obscure pigmentation. As far as the science of the human genome goes, "ethnicity" has always been a cultural thing, not a genetic one.
This isn't even remotely the case. Genes involving intelligence, impulse control, self-confidence, aggression, and so on differ quite a bit. Almost certainly also genes involving parental investment, promiscuity, industriousness, and many others.
Brain size, bone structure, proportion of fast vs slow twitch muscle fibers, etc. Hormonal timings, e.g. blacks generally hit puberty about a year before whites. We are very different.
Part of the problem here is that research into these things is borderline forbidden.
Orthodox can do shellfish during fasts. However, I find them abominable and don't eat any.
We can also eat reptiles apparently, but I've never seen this come up in practice.
Well, you can stipulate this, and I can do the opposite. I don't think it's marriage unless the couple is at least willing to try for children, and my church would back me up on that. A secure partnership for the generation and upbringing of children is at least one of the central aspects of marriage.
But people can call a legally-encumbered fling anything they want, I suppose.
I have an Iliad and Odyssey pair illustrated by Alan Lee and perfect for my precocious 7-8 year old who's reading them over and over again now. The Iliad book is called Black Ships Before Troy.
We're enjoying The Hobbit too but right now she prefers The Odyssey. Had a good conversation on lotuses as they appear in modern life.
Random accusations toward Jews seem to have become commonplace enough that I just sorta started screening them out. So what occurred to me as odd here is the idea that any organization with that sort of capacity would be so bothered with the UK. Pretty sure it's at the point where you could just leave it alone for a couple/few more decades then come back and declare victory.
My biases would have been much better-flattered by a tenuous insistence that this is some sort of Chinese plot.
Was Huckleberry Finn equipped to make that call, or should he have sent Hard-R Jim back into bondage?
Ultimately he has to follow his conviction, as we all do.
"God will decide for me whether I survive this flood."
"I sent you two boats and a helicopter!"
Probably my fault but I'm not grasping the relevance.
Lizzardspawn has made the the anti-Mauritian forces so efficient that now all the work is done by a single Australian man.
On that note I've long wondered whether nicotine pouches are classified as tobacco products.
All it did was make me think. Never landed at any conclusions.
I don't think that intelligence is correlated with mental illness in white people. Jews are just neurotic.
What kind of prompt gets that output?
Yeah, lots of LSAT questions are this way. It's not pick a correct answer, it's pick the most correct answer.
There is no answer. IQ is genetic.
This implies some answers.
The LSAT is heavily g-loaded. Most people simply aren't constitutionally capable of doing that kind of thinking.
literal firehose of propaganda
🤔
I don't disagree, but it wouldn't be hard to based upon how one defines 'morality'. What it means to be moral is rarely even discussed, perhaps because the once-bedrock shared understandings which would have made such conversation possible have been so badly eroded. This occurs to me as concerning.
It is far better, morally speaking, to be a virtuous loser than a vicious winner.
What would you say to someone who asks 'why?'
Man I knew there was a joke in there but couldn't find it.
Where does "The clergy are wrong about God's will" fit in this schema?
It's a thorny issue to be sure and relies upon what could be called ineffability to work, i.e. there's no satisfactory intellectual answer from just about any standpoint.
A Christian should be obedient to his priest and the church hierarchy in most cases. However, the hierarchy is made up of humans, who can and do go wrong. At the individual scale this can be devastating and 'should I ignore my priest about this' is a very uncomfortable question for a Christian to ever have to ask. The reality is that most people aren't really equipped to make that call. Ideally the problem is fixed by those priests being accountable to bishops and so on, but in practice the whole system can and does fail. Then again, at one point the Orthodox patriarchs and bishops all decided to reunite with the Church of Rome under the Pope, and the laity stood firm and told them 'no', and the hierarchy demurred.
What we have is a system where we all understand that human components sometimes fail, sometimes en masse, and yet we believe that Christ in His capacity as the head of the Church makes it work out anyway. It's gotten us this far.
What about "God gave us the firewood, but expects us to light the match"?
Example?
Inasmuch as 'being good with a given language' is under selection pressure, populations will evolve to be better at that language.
Check this out. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41539-024-00229-7
There's more research on this sort of thing but it's difficult to find and often gets disappeared.
More options
Context Copy link