@thrownaway24e89172's banner p

thrownaway24e89172

wrong about everything

3 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 09 17:41:34 UTC

				

User ID: 1081

thrownaway24e89172

wrong about everything

3 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 09 17:41:34 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 1081

You never said anything about the cost, merely that "the more able ought to help the less able". Now you are putting up guardrails. Fine. Define them. Exactly how "costly" must an action be to make it no longer required for the more able to help the less able?

I think the primary reason you notice this "aversion" is the desire to create a dependent underclass similar to the idea described by @SteveKirk in this comment:

Yep. You see this in all the sexology pedophilia discussion: the goal of "destigmatization" is to make pedophiles into a dependent ally accomplice class.

"Come out of the closet, it's fine! Oh, but if you ever stop supporting us you'll be thrown in a woodchipper by the other side, so you'd better stay a valuable party member ;)"
It's possibly the ultimate form of bioleninism.

This is why you so often see leftist "activists" pushing much more radical policies than those they claim to be advocating for--they want to alienate opponents in order to better corner and thereby control the groups they nominally "support".

The government rounding up people and IDing them, effectively forcing their focus groups to carry proof of citizenship on pain of being hassled for a few hours feels very Unamerican.

Did you happen to live through the initial drama surrounding the passage of the REALID Act and the inexorable change to support of even the most adamant critics? There is perhaps nothing more American at this point than performatively complaining about the growth of "Papers Please" to participate in society while opponents are in power then conveniently contributing to that very growth when the political winds change.

Alice has a womb and Bob does not, but Bob wants to have a genetically-related child. Since Alice is "more able" than Bob, does she therefore have an obligation to provide Bob with a genetically-related child?

There's no evidence that the protestors specifically entered the church because they wanted to prevent the congregation from being able to practice their religion.

In Don Lemon's own video, in a parking lot gathering prior to going to the church he interviews one of the organizers, Nekima Levy Armstrong, who explicitly says:

Operation <garbled name>, more of a clandestine operation. We show up somewhere that is a key location, they don't expect us to come there and then we disrupt business as usual.

Another protester allegedly posted a video of himself saying (censorship from the youtube clip, I don't know what the actual censored words are but from context probably some variant of "fucking"):

How can they live so comfortably while the <censored> people from Somalia that are in this country legally--they have <censored> citizenship--can't even go to their Mosque and pray? How do they deserve any <censored> different?

I think these quotes from the protesters themselves are significantly more than "no evidence". Maybe not decisive evidence, but surely more than enough to make the charges (EDIT:) alleged intent to prevent religious practice plausible.

If I beat a guy up and he can't vote the next day because he's in the hospital, it certainly interferes with a civil right, but it's a lot different than if I beat him up specifically to prevent him from voting.

This situation is materially different than that hypothetical, as in this case they were intentionally and explicitly disrupting the religious service to coerce members. They wanted to make it clear to the congregation that their religious observances would not be permitted unobstructed while they associated with a member of ICE. That is not an incidental violation, as they were attempting to hold the congregation members' rights hostage.

Why would he get egg on his face for settling low? It seems to line up with everything he does--make an outrageous demand and settle for peanuts if anything.

It feels to me more similar to the alleged sniper safaris in Bosnia (the motivation that is, not the situation)--a well-off tourist wanting in on the "excitement". Not so much demonstrative as treating the situation as a form of personal entertainment.

No, it's being treated seriously by people who are being intentionally riled up and misled by those seeking to gain from the chaos. They don't "get" that federal law enforcement is actual law enforcement because they are being explicitly told by people they trust that ICE has no power over them. This chaos is being deliberately orchestrated. Don't let those doing the orchestration off the hook.

Assault is a crime. (I would have thought that the violence is an inherent part, but I do not know the specifics of MN state law, so maybe I am wrong and 'violent assault' is a thing.)

Traditionally assault (threat of imminent violence) was legally distinct from battery (the actual violence), but it seems MN combines the two. Under Minnesota Statute § 609.02:

Subd. 10. Assault. "Assault" is:

(1) an act done with intent to cause fear in another of immediate bodily harm or death; or

(2) the intentional infliction of or attempt to inflict bodily harm upon another.

EDIT: Formatting.

Therapy I think is more often the modern replacement of the confidant in an age where deep friendship has been undermined by the demands of society than the secular replacement of confession. The most commonly treated mental illnesses (anxiety and depression) often have little to do with one's sins, but rather with the weakness and vulnerability of one's social bonds in their communities.

Whites are "indigenous" to Europe, so one of the biggest social checks on expressing concern about demographic replacement in the US doesn't apply there, making it simultaneously safer for people so inclined to express and a convenient retort to those who would criticize them.

When the driver of the vehicle you are in is accelerating for a cliff while another passenger is wildly swinging a knife around, it's hard to bring oneself to care about the cliff given the more immediate threat of the knife and the apparent impossibility of doing anything about the driver you can't reach.

Relational aggression. For various reasons (eg, feminism, male intragender competition), we've been systematically eliminating the checks on this when practiced by women.

Of course, those fathers raising an "emancipated independent woman who can stand up to the world" conveniently neglect to teach her not to abuse her partners, while supporting raising sons to be agreeable and submissive and thus easy for her to take advantage of...

Sure, so long as we symmetrically destroy the wonders of modern (social) technology that enables women to create a social environment that pushes men away from socialization due to their extreme levels of unchecked social aggression. Men wouldn't be so inclined to remain "undersocialized" if we didn't enable women to abuse them so much in their intragender status games while denying men the ability to complain or often even talk about it, let alone retaliate without instantly jumping on them to "protect" the women in question--granting the women the status gains they were going for in the process.

First homework is stupid. Even worse it is pointless.

Most work you perform during your working years will be stupid and pointless, but you still need to do it. Better that children are taught early to swallow their pride and get shit done even when they don't see the point in it.

Human artistic successes are indicative of survivorship bias. AI just makes this more visible because the productivity is so much higher.

And people like Good, who seem to believe that a fake title ('I'm a Legal Observer! Can't touch me!') is going to protect them from any consequences

What do you expect when nominally respectable media sources are implying exactly that (emphasis mine):

What should an observer or wrongfully detained citizen do if they’re taken by ICE?

More than anything, keep yourself safe. In the instance of an arrest, don’t resist, don’t fight. Those are the kinds of things that could get you hurt. If you are a U.S. citizen observer and you are detained by ICE, ICE has no authority over you. ICE agents, under the law, are allowed to temporarily detain someone until they’re able to verify their immigration status. But just remember that you have the right to document and observe ICE officers. They can be recorded. If you do get arrested, confirm that you are a U.S. citizen and say nothing else. Call a lawyer, call the National Lawyers Guild hotline, and we will figure out how to get you out.

No, the "official left position" has long been that behavior that would be classified as a *-ism when targeting groups they support isn't a *-ism when targeting groups they don't, allowing them to continue claiming *-isms are bad without having to give up discriminatory behavior against groups they don't favor.

Does it? Zero empathy seems better to me--inequality tends to build the kind of resentment that burns bridges rather than building them, while shared hardship tends to do the opposite.

I suppose an excess of empathy can be a thing. At risk of getting too philosophical though, I'm pretty sure most schools of thought consider an excess of apathy (or worse, contempt) to be more dangerous in virtually every sense, yes? If we must err, let us do so on the side of empathy. And due process, for crying out loud.

If we must err on the side of empathy, then let us do so universally rather than selectively. Those decrying ICE are rarely acting out of universal empathy. For instance, did you know that MN has the largest number of indefinitely detained citizens in the country? Ie, it locks people up indefinitely with civil commitment to work around the due process that would be necessary for criminal detention in a process routinely defended by Democrats including progressives like Keith Ellison. They curiously don't get protesters out like ICE, despite being subject to consequences far worse than deportation.

What recourse would you have against the Somali migrant that you wouldn't against the ICE agent? In the role of baby-sitter, the ICE agent has no special privileges above those of a normal citizen. The most likely offenses a baby-sitter would commit would be state offenses, and it is well established that local law enforcement is not particularly supportive of ICE atm, so it seems unlikely LEO camaraderie will benefit them.

The west shore of Lake Superior also leans heavily left, even compared to MN as a whole. MN's 8th district, which covers that shore, was a DFL stronghold for over 50 years until redistricting merged it with more conservative districts to the south and west.

That is what their media bubble is telling them and it is driving them to extreme levels of paranoia around the situation.

Whatever it is, it isn't trolling. Progressives in the area view ICE as Trump's personal thugs here to snatch dissidents, not LEO here to enforce laws.