netstack
Texas is freedom land
No bio...
User ID: 647
Jim is an idiot who has to position himself as the edgiest guy in the room. I don’t understand why you find him credible.
Are you in the American cultural umbrella? Martin Luther did a number on the concept, but it definitely still comes up, mostly as a strategy for recruiting nonbelievers.
My girlfriend pitched the latter to me after she finished it. I decided it sounded incredibly stressful.
Can’t remember where I first heard it. It wasn’t Watchmen. Probably either English class or one of those Egypt-adjacent kid’s books.
Everybody's got a bomb
We could all die any day, aw
But before I'll let that happen
I'll dance my life away, oh-oh-oh
They say, 2000-00, party over
Oops, out of time
We're runnin' outta time
So tonight we gonna party like it's 1999
I dunno, I think the sentiment is pretty clear.
In addition to what @bonsaii observed about being first—it was also the most accessible to the U.S. following the war. While we were bombing Korea and refusing to talk to China, we were actively occupying Japan. While we were bombing Vietnam and trying to get an in with China, we were still using and trading with Japan. By the time we had regular relations with the majority of East Asia, Japan was coming into its own electronics and heavy industry, securing its position in the West-dominated economy. That’s when tourism really started to take off.
The people making this meme don’t think he’s “slightly less hawkish.” They think he’s outright sympathetic to Putin and will explicitly, not just effectively, lead to Ukrainian defeat. Hence side-switching and not, I dunno, kicked for griefing.
Also, I don’t think anyone says he’s “literally in bed with dictators.”
Next thing you know, they’ll be appointing antivaxxers and naming departments after crypto.
Are boomers actually moving sites? I figured they were still on Facebook.
I also observe that Twitter partisans have the same shitty incentives as, say, Libs of TikTok. Whether or not Bluesky is a bot-ridden 1984 hellscape, they’ll benefit from portraying it as such.
I bet you could get similar results for most any decade. I started to do so for a random 80s top 40, but it’s too messy to finish on my phone.
(Anybody want to write a script to automate this? Google the titles, grep for “tonight,” show a histogram?)
I’d say Maniac, Puttin on the Ritz, Rock of Ages, and Total Eclipse of the Heart have to count. China Girl and Human Nature are certainly more subdued even though they keep the phrasing. And Safety Dance captures the spirit even though it doesn’t specify “tonight.”
But this is the year that gave us 1999, which outdoes any recession-era apocalyptica.
I never should have uninstalled GAMMA.
Ah, but what if it was a full moon? I don’t want to break out the tide charts, but I bet you could clear a billion, easy.
Assuming you mean “civil suit,” yeah. It would have been a criminal case rather than a tort, and he would most likely have ended up with multiple life sentences, since Connecticut banned the death penalty that same year.
Why stop at life in prison? Terry Nichols could meet Jones’ penalty at only $7.70 an hour.
But neither he nor Jones are expected to actual pay the balance of that debt. There’s a ceiling on how much you can penalize one person with one lifetime, and everything past that is about certainty. Terry Nichols will stay in prison for the rest of his life. Alex Jones will lose his assets. Why try to compare apples to oranges?
I’m okay with the DNC pivoting to “no step on snek,” but I’m not holding my breath.
We’re getting Newsom 2028 and we’re going to like it.
This week in the dankest timeline: Satire publication The Onion buys Alex Jones’ Infowars at auction with Sandy Hook families’ backing.
Yes, a site for unbelievable comedy playing to the biases of the gullible is now owned by the Onion. It appears they intend to use it to promote gun control. I can only hope this is presented in the style of existing InfoWars schlock.
While I deeply disagree with gun control activists, I’d much rather the site goes to them than to Jones’s merchandising companies. One of them was apparently the runner-up. But it’s alright for Jones: he’s allegedly on the short list for Trump’s next press secretary. Wait, no, that was last year. It was also only ever going to be a temporary fling, but that’s a given for the position.
I suppose Jones will have to keep shouting at globalists under a different brand.
The people who don’t get that education form equally strong opinions and have an equal lack of knowledge. You simply like their opinions better.
Most people do not, in fact, teach themselves philosophy or statistics from the Internet. Instead they learn directly-relevant job skills plus whatever knowledge floats around their social sphere. The conflict happens when someone tries to privilege their social-sphere knowledge.
“Well, The Science says…”
“This is what they don’t want you to know…”
“Everyone knows that…”
These are standard, intuitive social tactics. They’re also decoupled from reality. Unfortunately, the natural response is similarly decoupled, because it’s way easier to shout “nuh uh!” than to explain law or philosophy or chemistry to amateurs. Especially when the Truth is genuinely still under debate.
I’d like to think that’s why we’re here.
Why on Earth would you expect an arbitrary student council to forecast support for Gaza? This is like interviewing homeless men until you find one with no shirt. Is “support” for shirts dying?
For what it’s worth, the articles of impeachment can be found here. They look fine to me. Campaign promises don’t and shouldn’t supersede actual rules.
Isn’t “welder” likely to be a union shop, too? And I’m not even sure what qualifies one as a “machine operator.”
Pop quiz: which of the following jobs contribute more to Democrats than Republicans?
- Flight Attendant
- Bartender
- Librarian
- Taxi Driver
- Pediatrician
- Architect
- Carpenter
- Park Ranger
- Gardener
- Chef
- Union Organizer
Answers. I think your category completely fails to capture our red/blue divide. Is that because you borrowed it from Ayn Rand?
I’m pretty sure that describes the Tea Party era of Fox News. A giant spotlight on whatever government spending was most visible. All it got us were a few government shutdowns and a stage set for Trump.
More effort than this, please.
We are a discussion site, not a link aggregator. Or, uh, a quote aggregator.
We’re not actually worried about being attacked. Not like Russia rolling over the border to Ukraine. It’s the rest of our interests that are at risk. Erosion of our hegemony over the ocean, space, finance, etc. A long series of bad trades just under the margin of what we’re willing to fight. Securing that is more complicated than just looking dangerous.
I wouldn’t be quite so bold about it as @Ben___Garrison, but, uh, I don’t understand why people keep expecting coherent plans out of Trump. He was the vibes-based President.
If Rubio’s shown the right kind of enthusiasm, Trump isn’t going to have a problem folding him into the enterprise. When he inevitably butts heads, Trump will throw him out. Whether Rubio accomplishes anything in the meantime is more about his level of ass-kissing than his stated politics.
Personally, I give this dynamic a lot of credit for the legal hurdles faced by the Trump admin. But I doubt that’ll convince anyone who prefers the Deep State explanation.
Still on Castles of Steel. It’s more tense than I expected, and for surprising reasons. Everyone going into the war expected Britannia to rule the waves. Everyone today knows that Britain did, in fact, keep control of the sea, and obviously went on to win the war. The tension comes from all the disasters along the way.
The child’s model of naval warfare starts with two piles of ships, which are dashed against each other until one side is out of hit points. Both British and German strategies were chosen according to sophisticated versions of such a model, which agreed that the British would dominate an open fight on account of having more ships. In theory, Germany would only accept lopsided fights against smaller elements of the British navy, relying on torpedoes and mines to level the playing field. The British, then, had a veto on any German naval operations so long as they could avoid throwing it away.
And by God, they tried their best. Poor training, executive meddling, insane deployment orders—the British continually courted disaster. They had a near-perfect intelligence advantage thanks to lucky recovery of German codes, but they repeatedly failed to actually use it. When they did manage to engage the enemy, their gunnery was generally unimpressive, and tactical errors kept them from dealing crippling damage. Meanwhile, Germany kept trying operations which should have been suicide. Everyone on both sides thought they’re trying heroic maneuvers and devious plans, and but they're really risking everything for minimal gain, often playing exactly into enemy hands. The net results were unbelievable quantities of metal, coal, and human lives sent up in flames.
So the book is tense. Everything has to end in stalemate or disaster, and the question is usually who made the fatal mistake this time. That doesn’t detract from the overall experience. I want to recommend this book to anyone who wants to know more about the period. I also want to wave it in the face of anyone promoting an elaborate strategy for, well, anything. No plan survives contact with the enemy.
More options
Context Copy link