domain:philippelemoine.com
Lykurg
We're all living in Amerika
36m ago
Thats not quite what I meant. Disincentivising fornication is fine, and men generally can avoid it then. But you do in fact have to disincentivise it, and they will look for a way to get away with it - and the question is if that is itself a personal defect that should be corrected. Correcting it is... not necessarily identical to true asexuality, but given the layout of the human mind that would propably be the easiest way to do it, and there are likely to be significant similarities with other ways.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
53m ago
Can you give me a few links to the "there is no such thing as a limited freedom of speech" arguing that the government must fun their full time jobs where they get to promote their ideas for a living?
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
55m ago
Getting fired has nothing to do with free speech. The principle of free speech is that the government cannot prevent you from speaking.
Nah, this is exactly what progressives were saying as they were getting people fired. I don't think the principle of free speech is by definition limited to the government.
Templexious
59m ago
I am amenable to Scott's implied "the system isn't entirely evil" argument.
That said, I'm not willing to get into arguments over whether something was a side effect or the intent of a policy. Godspeed to any with enough gumption to try their hand in that so-called discourse.
But between him and moldbug putting out "okay, newage rightwing, sometimes the system is actually pretty good, we just need to change who the system caters to" posts, I've noticed my growing confusion on what they actually wanted with the change of the guard.
You can't just say "yeah, put these ideas into power" and then fail to notice that was part of the plan from the beginning.
Crowflies
1hr ago
You are doing a classical motte and bailey tactic. The context given by @ResoluteRaven was about "researchers working in hard science fields" and you are withdrawing to tech companies.
Big Tech is just a subset (and it is questionable even to label Google, Meta, or Netflix as tech companies, they are advertising and media companies with some tech undertones) of the field and not a place, where even a significant part of research is going on.
Europe leads in pharmaceutical research and is, for example, a place, where the longest sustainable fusion reaction was achieved. It's a place, where "researchers working in hard science fields" can certainly find a place to flourish. Will they? Who knows but it's not a research desert.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
1hr ago
Getting fired has nothing to do with free speech. The principle of free speech is that the government cannot prevent you from speaking. It does not mean the government is obligated to protect your job in the event your boss doesn’t like what you’re saying or to keep you on staff in a university.
It also doesn’t mean that you can protest in any way you like. You are free to March around with signs. You are not free to block access to buildings, harass people, deface property, or block traffic.
2rafa
2hr ago
If you observe a novel system and wish to understand it, look at the outputs it produces. Those outputs are what the people feeding and maintaining the system consider sufficiently acceptable to continue feeding and maintaining it.
No, I think you discount inertia here. Plenty of people maintain systems they don’t really believe in, support or care for because it’s just what they do, it’s what they’ve always done, and changing a routine (even if you have the power to do so) requires effort.
Then, of course, you respond by saying that in this case, even if the system’s output is ideologically unattractive to those who feed it, they still consider it acceptable, and therefore TPOSIWID is still true, because the purpose itself is a kind of inertia machine, or to be a sinecure, or to perpetuate itself in some grand sense. But then the whole phrase is kind of meaningless.
Or, to put it another way, TPOSIWID is a common catchphrase on right wing twitter to criticize mainstream or progressive institutions. But it works equally well in reverse, because it explains to us that a lot of rightist grand ideological plans will end up establishing (and arguably already have) institutions that fail, are corrupt, are sinecures, exist to perpetuate themselves and have highly deleterious outcomes for society.
So the phrase just becomes a warning about where ideology leads, and thus just another dull argument for the kind of technocratic mediocrity that TPOSIWID advocates hate.
jake
2hr ago
The nicer interpretation is they hate Trump. The thoroughly evidence interpretation is they hate the US and are actively working to destroy it.
I've had a problem with the operations of the judicial branch since well before Trump. I oppose any judge below SCOTUS issuing any federal injunction for any reason. The essential structure of the sovereign United States is Executive, Congress, SCOTUS. Executive appointments have no authority to check SCOTUS, it follows circuit courts have no authority to check POTUS.
The WH Press Secretary says they're looking into the legality of deporting undesirable citizens. Have a legal citation for expulsion being an exception to habeas corpus?
Sovereigns owe foreigners no rights. A foreigner has no claim to habeas corpus, let alone any appeal for their deportation, as sovereigns may unconditionally expel foreigners. Citizens are owed due process, which is fulfilled in trial and verdict. I agree that a state should not be able to remove citizens who are otherwise-non-criminally-undesirable, but the conflation of deporting foreigners or banishing violent criminals with latter tyranny is historically baseless and at best maudlin idealism and at worst fearmongering weaponized in service of preserving the tremendous numbers of illegal aliens in this country.
The UK practiced transportation for centuries, now they won't deport serial rapists.
distic
2hr ago
Optimistically, the academics leaving the USA are the ones most ideologically captured, such that their contributions to knowledge production is easily replaceable or even a net negative, as is the case for much of what is purportedly being cut by DOGE.
How fast from "there is no such thing as a limited freedom of speech" to "just fire them"...
Pasha
Defend Kebab
2hr ago
Yes I am aware of that but one country having a slightly higher rate of a single metric really doesn’t indicate an evolutionary process
2rafa
2hr ago
Did @2rafa recognize the style, or is top-level post deleter using a consistent block of IPs or set of IPs known to be used by a single VPN provider?
I’m not a mod so don’t have access to that information, but I noticed the style and that he posted two top level responses in a row which is very rare for regulars outside of election-day or other major happening threads.
distic
2hr ago
There is no international competition, those conferences will be restricted to locals for the exact same reason. The american military researcher can't just choose to go to a chinese conference instead
2rafa
2hr ago
Even if new users couldn’t delete posts until they’d been users for 100 days or whatever, this guy would just edit them to say ‘deleted’ and then delete his account, so that isn’t a big deterrent.
The only thing I can think of is mods (who are presumably able to see deleted posts) manually restoring deleted comments created within 50 posts of a user joining the community to protect against bad actors. Idk if that’s viable.
SteveAgain
2hr ago
Oh interesting, wikipedia listed him as "Anglicanism/Catholicism," which I just rounded off to popery of the "I just go for the incense, honest!" type
distic
2hr ago
Then just change the rules? For example make any deadly touch eliminatory, so that no one says "I'm going to leave myself wide open and go for an uncovered afterblow" . I suspect the problem is that you want tournaments to be more spectacular than realistic (if the adversaries are more conservative it might get a bit boring)
hydroacetylene
2hr ago
I no more endorse true asexuality than I do contraception or sodomy. I am an actual literal rad trad and have associated views on sex and gender. I am the trad preaching at BAP. Yes, I’ve seen him misrepresent Thomas Aquinas about prostitution. It’s certainly natural for a young guy to be tempted, that I won’t deny, and most of st Thomas’s argument is ‘better to fence off where men who can’t control themselves do bad things’.
I might think that view is more-or-less true in the abstract. Doesn’t mean I’d let a recent customer date my daughter. ‘Not fornicating’ is a realistic expectation of young men even if the desire is generally there.
Crowstep
2hr ago
He seems to be opposed to excessive government getting in the way of his growth agenda/state capacity, and has told his cabinet to stop hiding behind quangos.
Of course, Labour gonna Labour, so they're still setting up new quangos and implementing new rules about diversity and stuff, so we'll see how it shakes out.
crushedoranges
2hr ago
Scott Alexander has transitioned from someone with deep insight into a guy who makes obnoxious, Facebook-tier takes that are meant to be nodded to and not thought about. Obviously people care far more about what systems do than what they were created for! Only a pendant (maybe with extremely nerdy glasses) would nasally insist 'it was made with the best of intentions! that should matter!'
Which I would reply: get back to laying the bricks for the HSR to Bakersfield-Tartarus, dude.
hydroacetylene
3hr ago
Evangelicals produce some high-human capital people, but they tend not to accumulate the specific skill sets necessary to go into government.
hydroacetylene
3hr ago
Gorsuch is also a Protestant, although neither are evangelical.
sarker
It isn't happening, and if it is, it's a bad thing
3hr ago
I was primed to look, but it was the scripture references that first made me think something was up. At first, knowing nothing about the director (or Korean culture really) I ignorantly thought it was an esl type thing - the foreign director wants to reference Christianity somehow, saw a passage mentioning ghosts and went with it (sort of like how Osgood Perkins jammed T. Rex into longlegs). But it is referenced again later in the film by the girl in white and by that point in the film I had seen too much self-awareness to accept my original assumption about the use of scripture, I'd already started beating myself up for it. It was too on the nose, I just couldn't accept that this apparently clever film was now going to make the girl in white a christ figure by having her actually quote Jesus.
You've confused this - it's actually the Japanese man who references the intro quote, as he transforms into a devil and shows the deacon his stigmata.
Quality movie. I'm not sure what I think happened yet, but my first instinct is that all the three major players are evil, possibly competing to harvest the village's psychic energy via bloody murder or something like that.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
3hr ago
Yeah it's interesting actually - because of the way the motte is displayed on my phone, it placed "Does driving the truck not open up possibilities of non-" on the first line and "garbage truck driving?" on the second, and due to that separation I intuitively read it as non 'garbage truck driving', so same business, but not in a truck. But when I quoted your post after you explained what you meant it printed non-garbage truck driving on the same line, and it was obvious what you originally meant. Sorry for my confusion.
Anyway it does for sure, but council truck driving is nothing like private truck driving. Despite being the most precious person I know when it comes to smells, I'd be happy to get a job driving a garbage truck if I was out of work. But you'd never convince me to drive trucks interstate or for earthworking. The amount of money you get for the work and risk is completely out of whack.
Imaginary_Knowledge
4hr ago
It's also possible that this behavior, while annoying, can't be stopped at any positive ROI. We're talking about a policy of the mods restoring posts people have consciously deleted. I think the safety valve of post deletion makes people feel safer being bolder and so enlivens discussion. If breaking deletion is what it takes to stop this guy, then maybe stopping this guy isn't worth it.
jake
4hr ago
Good comment.
I invoke my "neutron star fallacy" at your reframing of the top-level comment. It's not a human rights abuse to send foreigners back to their home countries, even if they may face punishment or death. The argument goes that such "abuses" will inevitably snowball into greater tyranny but we know this never happened. It is directly analogous to the identitarian concerns I name.
What days are you hearkening back to? I struggle to think of any notable mass deportations in the modern era.
The legislature
Voted removals aren't checks. A judge overrules the executive or congress, congress can vote to remove, while it takes another judge to overrule the first. The judicial checks itself. At a minimum it should be that if a judge is overruled by a superior court X instances in period of time Y, they are automatically and immediately removed from office. This maintains protection from a nearly-even congress politicizing removals (and the reciprocal gaming that would invite in a change of control) while making their accountability structural. But this also is not a check. We can remove judges ,stuff courts, the power remains, what do we do? Limit it as much as possible. The judicial effectually has authority that supersedes all others, so its authority must be the most strictly regulated, starting with all judges below SCOTUS losing the power to issue injunctions on government activity.
To go even further: I do think there are going to be really difficult pills to swallow in the coming decades regarding mass migration, not even outside of borders, but within our borders as well. I don't think it's unreasonable to think that there is some potential future where we will be watching masses of people starve through binoculars across the Rio Grande. It'd be great to figure out how we can, as a nation, navigate those turbulent waters without regressing to animalistic authoritarianism, but over the past 10 years I have lost faith more and more that that's even possible.
All of this is just a play for more executive power. I don't trust that executive power won't be abused, especially given that the current executive seems to get off (sexually?) on flaunting abuses of power. But maybe there's where you and I differ in concerns about real dangers to our freedom in the coming years.
From 1900, every single bloodthirsty non-socialist non-communist nationalist movement emerged as a response to no less than equally bloodthirsty socialist and communist movements. No milquetoast conservative government sat by only to be taken over by reactionaries. So while I am also concerned about what horrors may lie in our future, I know they will only rise as the last reaction. My beliefs align with preventing that from happening by bringing about the people's current, eminently moderate requests. The district judge ordering the executive to bring back an illegal alien does not reduce the possibility of tyranny, it sharply raises it. Because again, the judicial branch checks itself, but these judges invite a check on power from a much different, far older structure.
Didn't we had literally that in many places during peak defund the police times?
More options
Context Copy link