Oof guess I missed this. So Wicks was the son (and grandson) of Prentice? What are the beats that suggest this?
I loved Knives Out. It definitely came from a particular worldview, but at least the out-of-touch liberals were a target of fun-poking in addition to the alt-right teen and conservative assholes. Plus the plot was really quite brilliant, a truly novel twist on the genre (I think?).
Glass Onion was much less good. The plot was more convoluted and less satisfying, and the characters were over-the-top culture war stereotypes. As faceh pointed out, they really just make sure that the bad guys are 100% bad and worthless with no redeeming qualities whatsoever.
I enjoyed Wake Up Dead Man, more than Glass Onion but less than Knives Out. A fairly interesting plot with explicit homages to the genre. The religious protagonist really is a good man, and he represents what is supposed to be the mainstream religious worldview, so Christianity does not come off as being mocked.
But despite the "moral clarity" that Rian Johnson tends to demonstrate in these movies, Jud's behavior at the end of the movie leaves me a bit confused, but can be explained with a boring CW angle.
[ MAJOR SPOILERS FOR THE REST OF THIS POST] Near the end of the film, Grace, the Harlot Whore, is reframed as a "poor girl." Prentice's decision to hide her inheritance (and everyone's judgements of her?) are played up as a grave mistreatment, with multiple characters muttering "that poor girl."
But then... Jud does the same thing to Cy. He hides the insanely valuable jewel from its rightful inheritor, and this is played off as a "booh yah" because that smug prick deserves it. Jud is definitely supposed to be a good guy, so first off it's wild that a priest just decides to keep a lie for the rest of his life and there's no moral conflict presented. But furthermore, this is the exact same behavior Prentice had taken vis a vis Grace, and we're all supposed to feel bad for her. I was genuinely confused about what I was "supposed" to find to be good.
The boring culture war angle is: she's a harlot whore, which is something that is treated positively in Johnson's worldview, whereas Cy represents right-wing political aspiration, obviously a bad thing. Who/whom.
I guess I see Molochian incentives create bullshit jobs. Sure, locally speaking, I value hiring a super expensive lawyer to defend me in court, but only because the guy suing me hired his super expensive lawyer. We could take away those two jobs and be in the same place.
I mean on the dad question in particular, which something to the effect of "did you grow up with racism in your household and if so, do you think it affected your current outlook." (That's not actually a quote, just my remembered paraphrase.)
going after some dudeβs dad
I don't know, I thought Fuentes was doing the pearl clutching here. All the "low blow" faux-offense. Nick never gave a straight answer.
I think the interview made it clear that Fuentes is, well, actually racist. I think most normies will be turned off. But maybe GenZ really is that different.
Budapest Memorandum
Can you give me a brief case against the Budapest Memorandum's relevance to this issue?
I think centering this on taxes (though understandable in this context because we are talking about government subsidies) misses a big part of what productivity is about: value provided to others who utilize your outputs. You could run a business that makes a great product that serves millions of people and just squeaks by breaking even, paying no taxes. That is still highly productive.
This is why, even if the "Amazon pays no taxes" meme were true, this would not make them a leech: they provide so much value to millions (billions?) of consumers.
The other is that to make a superior product; that is, a university that produces higher quality education than Harvard does today, is essentially illegal.
Can you elaborate? I see the structural analogy, but how is it implemented in this case?
Were you trying to purchase the car straight-up full cost and they still wouldn't sell it to you ? Or were you trying to get financing on it?
It does seem notable that Democrat national politicians seem to be..almost blaming Kirk for being murdered.
Can you offer some links?
Non functionalists disagree that it is analogous. So you need to actually make that argument beyond "it is obviously so because it is so from the functionalist standpoint".
On the flip side... how is the thought experiment helping illustrate anything to anyone who doesn't already agree with Searle's take? It's as if he's saying "...and obviously the room doesn't know anything so functionalism is wrong."
One man's modus ponens is another man's modus tollens. π€·
From the article:
the so-called unitary executive theory, which states that the president has the sole authority over the executive branch
I straightforwardly thought this was always the case. I thought the current controversy around Trump was about whether his actions trampled on the domains of the other branches.
But these don't have to be handled federally. Honestly, student loans don't need to be government-granted at all.. why can't the market take care of that?
Public schools can be funded locally/state level. Though I'd rather just a federally-issued voucher for everyone and let schools compete for students.
I mean... libertarian and anarchist types were indeed complaining from at least Obama onward.
Are you in agreement that this executive is overstepping its powers, and just think it's justified?
If you think both this administration and the previous one are overstepping its powers... do you think they are doing it to the same degree? Which Biden-admin actions do you think are of a similar level to those mentioned above?
I don't see how Trump's plan would satisfy the leftist motte... Direct US control (ownership ?) of an area is the paragon case of "oppressor nation persecuting the poor browns".
I just can't believe I live in a world where "woke gender ideology" appears in official executive memos.
Beast Academy -- made by the Art of Problem Solving team -- might be challenging enough, and has a great online program. It's focused on elmentary-levle math but truly deep, wihch sounds like what OP is looking for.
https://mathpickle.com/ is a wonderful treasury of puzzles that will induce kids to think deeply on problems. Not an online program, rather an intro to puzzles to complete in meatworld. Probably better in groups but I do some of the puzzles 1-on-1 with my gifted 8yo.
I seek recommendations for a book about WWII for my son. He's 8 years old and is an advanced reader... he hasn't read much text targeted for adults but sucks down 500-page young adult fantasy novels on a day.
We watched a documentary about FDR and now he wants to learn about World War II. I think what I seek is something non-fiction targeted to adults but also targeted to popular consumption -- not something super dry but something a bit more meaty than a fantasy novel.
Alternatively, good fiction that's not just super depressing could be interesting as well.
Why do the donors want a crypto reserve? Just because it boosts the price of BTC? Or does that strategic reserve actually serve their interests in some other way?
I have to admit, I was surprised and I am trying to acknowledge that my prediction was wrong: when I read the text I thought that whatever Elon did would have to be a stretch to call a Nazi salute.
Then I watched the video and... yeah, idk. Based on priors I assume he wasn't trying to do a Nazi salute, but it really is what it looks like to me prima facie. If you point out that "no, a real Nazi salute is..." I just have to say: yes, I believe you, but that salute definitely fits with a normie imagining of what it looks like.
He's the guy who actually discovered nuclear fission. But you probably haven't heard of him.
I guess I just wonder how much this sort of thing happens.
Would you link to something that summarizes what goes on in public schools today?
If we do this, do Americans βwinβ? Well, not biologically. We would have won a socially constructed number-based game that has zero impact on our biological success.
Your biological definition of success, especially keyed to some concept of the American "people" that's supposedly cached out to something biological (is it white people? Anglo-Amerocans, descendents of anyone present in 1776?) is just as constructed. You're begging the question on the question of immigration by defining success that way.
Okay, if we add a bunch of Indians and have the best economy on the world, I (a white American with pre-revolutionary ancestry) win in many ways: the technology of my country develops rapidly, I am able to buy many products for cheap and I have a high income, the value of my dollar is worth a lot globally, my physical security is backed by the mightiest military in the world, I have a vast selection of consumer goods, my kids get reach adulthood in a country with new and thriving businesses that they can be part of.
A thriving economy puts more options on the table for me and my kin. Why wouldn't I want that?
- Prev
- Next

I don't think that's what's going on here. There may be some root value differences that are due to different cultural backgrounds, but the Boy Meets World fans don't think "I don't care of Cory's life sucks; it's ontologically American so I support it!" No, they think that living a good life (functionally) is not just about being valedictorian and going to the best college. I think a big part of why America is so successful has to do with values such as individualism, experimentation, exploration, personal integrity, and kindheartedness. That's what Western "mediocrity" narratives teach.
More options
Context Copy link