Things like the fertility crisis that make it harder to bounce back (and act as a justification for migration) seem to predate people lying about black women inventing telescopes.
I mean, in part, it goes to back to some things I said about "DEI" not being about diversity per se, but about raising up the most questionable unqualified people deliberately. Because they fundamentally don't believe in merit, or accomplishment at all.
I have been thinking of it more and more as a vastly less consequential form of a third world country just grabbing all of the farmland or positions on the grounds that the privileged stole it and things will run just fine when others are given their chance. Except we're redistributing glory instead of material assets. Which makes sense given the sort of person interested in this sort of thing.
At least when it goes wrong no one starves or gets shot.
I do disagree with you on Harris though. I think there was just no one else Biden could have picked that fit the demographic criteria he decided he wanted. It's not "deliberately pick the worst person" it's "set up criteria you can't meet given the number of qualified candidates in that class then shoehorn whoever you have into the niche"
As for Walz, they really did seem to believe that a "weird" lying sitcom dad was positive masculinity. That and Shapiro was apparently not as deferential as they wanted. (Which makes sense; if you're jumping on a sinking ship you should be compensated for the risk. All of the celebrities were)
Speaking of Civilization: has anyone played The Old World? How's it?
I dipped out of the genre around the end of Civ 5 but it looks attractive as a Civ clone with some CK2 elements.
shame (less powerful in a more atomised society)
Welfare itself makes it less powerful.
More Daniel Pennys or Kyle Rittenhouses can't magic up a high trust society. They're mainly useful in showing the insane behavior of agovernment that abdicated responsibility and then punished anyone that refused to be preyed on.
The government just has to do its job and enforce order. But apparently that's too much to ask for a variety of reasons.
Definitely not the one idea I'd expect to see grow in strength from my admittedly cursory undergrad study, and definitely much later than any example I could think of.
Thanks!
I'm 98% sure it's this Graham Factor piece:Earl Warren's greatest mistake?
What was the last big win for this state-sponsored critical reflection?
It's bad but those people are doing science and are subject to review so we are least have some idea when they stray. In theory.
How many people pick up "truthy" ideas from these courses and then just disappear from the perspective of the academy when they graduate and carry those ideas into daily life? How do you count those people or subject their views to some sort of objective discipline?
The disillusionment is also just half the issue. The people who haven't become disillusioned may also be suffering direct damage from absorbing whatever fashionable stuff is coming out of academia.
Kamala lost women and minorities relative to 2020
Can't overestimate the body blow of losing Latinos to a guy they've been trying to protect Latinos from since he came off the elevator escalator. Total narrative collapse.
Only thing worse would be losing black people. That'd be existential.
"Men" and "white people" are not cabals. They are not coordinated, possibly clandestine (relatively) small groups with a shared goal. They're just...populations.
When progressives talk about, for example, "white flight" they do not generally frame it as behavior driven by some small set of elites. It's driven by a mix of inherited inequities and certain biases and attitudes towards black people across the white population as a whole. That is what they blame.
Otherwise the career of someone like Robin DiAngelo makes no sense and is in fact, an act of sadism. They target normal people for retraining on the grounds that normal people - who know nothing about any coordinated racist plan - and their biases matter.
Silly poster, he should have known that the only acceptable way to speak of shadowy cabals is to give them a name like "the patriarchy" or "systemic racism"
Leftists will immediately say that they don't think of those as cabals.
They claim a set of structures and incentives that cause people to act in certain ways. Which structures? Which incentives? Well, varies depending on the phenomenon. Or maybe all of them
They're closer to constructs like aether trying to fill in a hole in a mechanical understanding of the world than claims about Jews or elites in a smoky room.
What the hell is going on in Georgia?
On the other hand, if they want to keep appealing to their white nationalist faction while still appearing respectable, they're going to have to come up with some new justification for being opposed to immigration other than racial animus or the still-unacceptable euphemism of "cultural homogeneity"
How much of the GOP is actually white nationalist and how much of it is just illegal immigration radicalizing people? A lot of people didn't accept Roe or max abortion rights. Now that they get to vote on it again they almost certainly won't vote for the max pro-life position. But it's hard to tell how it'll shake out when Roe is a unifying enemy.
Status and deniability matter. It theoretically makes no difference but "supermodel" reads differently than "Onlyfans model".
Did Miranda Kerr get into something tawdry with a fat Malaysian scammer for what could only be the financial benefits? Maybe. But it's not on tape, she denies it and the guy was apparently a weird introvert who apparently really did do things like pay for women to flaunt and then wouldn't even talk to them. Harry...I think is legitimately dumb enough to not believe anything but video until it was too late.
I think a man like Kerr's is not in this woman's future but she probably will get married to a fairly normal guy (assuming she has some creepsense and filters out people who like this stuff). She made it as hard as possible for that guy though.
I can understand people having a brief dalliance with extreme behavior and learning a sharp lesson. But...when you get to the point where you're competing with Aella in how terms of how many people came in the fluffer you must have had multiple hints that you aren't built like that?
And if you want to do the crying wojak thing instead of pulling back I have little sympathy.
Do religious people actually genuinely believe that those who willingly perform such stunts are capable of having all their sins washed away?
My reading of my society's trad Muslim faith* is that we formally leave room for the notion that this person is redeemable. Allah only knows who's in heaven and all.
But the sort of credulity shown by online simps who immediately welcome any convert who even touches Christianity would not be acceptable. No one sane would assume that they could just reach her with one verse, nor trust her if she just said she converted. She would simply have to suffer a bit of a social death. Being visibly observant (easier to tell than with other faiths) while suffering social opprobrium seems like a minimal requirement to signal true commitment.
* I guess we can say "conservative". I don't want to imagine the really trad sharia punishment.
Edited for meme accuracy.
That seems to be the general right wing take, that he's singing for his pardon.
Adams had some critiques of the Democratic establishment on migration before but he seems utterly unburdened by any sense of loyalty since the election.
Interesting to see.
they don’t have the wonderful american civic tradition
But when they do have this tradition, they can be blamed because their tradition is more aggressive and assimilationist than the US, so maybe that's causing the backlash
Martin is a Romantic and places a primal role on Romantic love (which involves sex) as a human motivation. This does not just mean sex but also protecting your family and community of love (which all too abstract in Tolkien’s Gondor, although not as much in the shire).
This comes out a lot in his book Dying of the Light, where both romantic and fraternal love come up against a very rigid and misogynistic honor culture.
Characters drive themselves to ruin because love demands things of them that their social rules simply cannot accommodate.
It's been a while since I read it but seeing a main character risk death because he cannot bring himself to accept the socially mandated restitution for an injury done to his lover because it would enshrine her lower status, because it would limit the outrage to a mere insult to his own honor, makes it hard to conclude that all Martin cares about is sex.
and that blasphemy not only denies the three most powerful goddesses in the Western pantheon at the same time (safety, equality, and consent)
Its not the blasphemy that was the problem. It was the inadvertent support for the blood libel. Milo was the victim. Ordinarily you get some leeway. No perfect victims and all that. If anything could be excused as rationalization...
Homosexuality and pederasty is something LGBT activists fought very hard to decouple in the public mind.
Having a gay guy not only say it happens but talking about it in plural, as a good (ish) thing?
Everyone said fuck that. The gays said a hearty fuck that. Conservatives that were opening up to a flamboyant provocateur immediately turned around upon seeing him validate the worst stereotypes. I'm sure gay conservatives were doubly incensed.
Thanks. That range seems high, higher than I assumed, but not high enough for many of the theories about the problems caused by their absence (e.g. monasteries as release valve/containment zone for autists and other types)
lots of young fertile people entered monasteries and convents
How many is "lots" here? We talk about this every so often here and I've never gotten a good idea.
- Prev
- Next
Shit.
More options
Context Copy link