In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

Old subthreads
free thoughtpolice
.
.
Posts: 11165
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 4:27 pm

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21481

Post by free thoughtpolice »

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote: They don't give a fuck about the dangers of islamism because they have never been subjected to it. They have no fucking idea what they're talking about. Fuck them, the "useful idiots".
The dangers of islamic terrorism is much overrated. People are much more likely to be killed or injured by everyday things like toasters or trampolines. :geek:

Service Dog
.
.
Posts: 8652
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 2:52 pm

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21482

Post by Service Dog »

https://galoremag.com/wp-content/upload ... re_mag.jpg

Won't someone please think of the underpriviledged models?

https://newyork.craigslist.org/mnh/zip/ ... 90537.html

:violin: :violin: :violin: :violin: :violin: :violin:

shoutinghorse
.
.
Posts: 2649
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2017 6:01 am

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21483

Post by shoutinghorse »

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
Shatterface wrote: Had to be said:
women are puzzle boxes, just waiting to have the right button pushed or level pulled so that a tasty sex treat will fall out of her
I'm not really into scat but I've heard there are websites devoted to stuff like this.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/foxyfolklo ... s-consent/
Maybe she was thinking of this:

What the fuck? :violence-uzi:

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 15449
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21484

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

Adequate funding of schools is necessary but not sufficient for improving results.

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 15449
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21485

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

Service Dog wrote: https://galoremag.com/wp-content/upload ... re_mag.jpg

Won't someone please think of the under priviledged fed models?
FTFY

shoutinghorse
.
.
Posts: 2649
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2017 6:01 am

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21486

Post by shoutinghorse »

Talking of schools, how about a jihadi finishing school?

http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/ne ... ref=twtrec
Attachments
school.PNG
(314.71 KiB) Downloaded 165 times

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21487

Post by Brive1987 »

Old_ones wrote:
Brive1987 wrote: I'm a bit concerned my one vote per family concept hasn't gained traction. I hope this explaination clears things up.

[i.mg]https://i.imgur.com/5sXeDCN.jpg[/img]
That's the stupidest way to define productivity that I've ever seen given that our world is vastly overpopulated. Maybe we should be taking voting rights away from breeders on the theory that you all are too busy to use your brains, and therefore incapable of making an informed decision.
We are obsessed with population driven growth in the West. Good old GDP. But we have introduced pressures that have stopped us wanting or being able to reproduce. So we have a below replacement birth rate of 1.6 to 1.8 children per woman.

So. We have to import people, often from societies where there are no such inhibitions. And presto, we have cultural replacement and diversity actions.

Imagine if society actually defined self initiated replacement and cultural reinforcement as a mission - over immigration. And we balanced our ideas of mindless “growth” against individual quality of life. And we got all those good Indian doctors and accountants to ply their skills stabilising their own problematic countries.

Then you wouldn’t have the dynamic in the tweet below where net immigration (green) is a disproportional component of my states (NSW) “growth”, there would be less negative inter state flight of long term residents (orange) and natural growth (blue) is normalised. And maybe then we don’t have to level low density garden suburbs and replace them with high rise mass produced boxes for all the new comers.

So how do you create an environment where the means for natural growth (families) is assigned proper social and enonomic value?

Probably not through celebrating gay “marriage” via our NYE fireworks display eh?


paddybrown
.
.
Posts: 1728
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2013 7:06 am
Contact:

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21488

Post by paddybrown »

Some thoughts on the Foxy Folklorist and consent.

Consent will stop being something to be sought when it starts going both ways. When a woman's consent is the difference between a loving relationship and a heinous crime, but a man's consent is a complete non-issue, of course men will seek to obtain a woman's consent and women will just show up, dictate terms, revise those terms retrospectively, and judge harshly without ever feeling the need to walk a mile in our moccasins.

I was out with friends one evening over the Christmas period, the one single person among couples. I ended up sitting next to the female half of one of the couples at one venue. She'd had a drink or two and was feeling a bit maudlin, and she complained that whenever she sat close enough to me to be touching, I moved so that we weren't touching any more. I had no conscious awareness of doing this. I gave her a hug and tried to reassure her that I didn't mean to upset her, but afterwards I got to thinking about it. I've been taught, implicitly, my entire life, that my touch is by default unwelcome, except in certain specific relationships and circumstances, and if someone is uncomfortable with it I've done something wrong. She's been taught that her touch is always a blessing to those she bestows it on, and if someone is uncomfortable with it that's an insult to her.

My "women are sacred, men are profane" hypothesis still has some explanatory value, I think.

Steps down from soapbox. Happy new year to the Pit and all who sail in her. I'm finally getting over the flu I probably caught on that pre-Christmas evening out. Humans in quantity, best avoided. Spent the week before Christmas in bed hallucinating about Sam Allardyce giving me dossiers of email addresses that it was vitally important I sorted into the right order. Kylo Ren was also involved. Then hosted the family Christmas dinner at my house! Fortunately my wee bro Simon pitched in and did most (just about all) of the cooking.

deLurch
.
.
Posts: 8447
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2012 6:11 am

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21489

Post by deLurch »

Service Dog wrote:
Thu Jan 04, 2018 11:25 am
https://galoremag.com/wp-content/upload ... re_mag.jpg

Won't someone please think of the underpriviledged models?
https://newyork.craigslist.org/mnh/zip/ ... 90537.html
:violin: :violin: :violin: :violin: :violin: :violin:
Craigslist? Looking for addresses & contact information of shitty models. This is either a stepping stone to an outright scam, or pure marketing for their products to desperate people looking to get ahead.

DrokkIt
.
.
Posts: 1327
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 4:01 pm
Location: Brit-Cit

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21490

Post by DrokkIt »

paddybrown wrote:
I was out with friends one evening over the Christmas period, the one single person among couples. I ended up sitting next to the female half of one of the couples at one venue. She'd had a drink or two and was feeling a bit maudlin, and she complained that whenever she sat close enough to me to be touching, I moved so that we weren't touching any more. I had no conscious awareness of doing this. I gave her a hug and tried to reassure her that I didn't mean to upset her, but afterwards I got to thinking about it. I've been taught, implicitly, my entire life, that my touch is by default unwelcome, except in certain specific relationships and circumstances, and if someone is uncomfortable with it I've done something wrong. She's been taught that her touch is always a blessing to those she bestows it on, and if someone is uncomfortable with it that's an insult to her.
No shit man I'd do the exact same, or risk a punch up with the dude.

Sunder
.
.
Posts: 3858
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2013 1:12 pm

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21491

Post by Sunder »

Conservatives complain about low native birthrates.
Conservatives also complain about tax credits aimed at encouraging larger families.

"Gay marriage" is so far down the list of concerns it's absurd to even consider it a factor. Shit, gay people can and do still find ways to reproduce.

Old_ones
.
.
Posts: 2168
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2013 3:46 pm
Location: An hour's drive from Hell.

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21492

Post by Old_ones »

John D wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote:

To be fair I think that the American system for financing schools is one of the reasons why the US is thoroughly screwed when it comes to addressing chronic poverty. How can you seriously claim that you're promoting meritocracy if the quality of your publicly-funded schools is determined by local property taxes? This system seems to me to be the perfect recipe to perpetuate perennial poverty in areas where poor people live.
Two decades ago Michigan started funding schools state-wide. Since then our school performance has dropped way down compared to other states. The solution is not so simple. While it is more "fair" to fund schools more evenly, it looks like this lack of local control damages all schools. The state sets the funding so the local districts have trouble arguing for more funding and they have more trouble with parent involvement. I think the effect is that the best school suffer and their performance drops. At the same time, any increase in funding to poor performing school doesn't help that much.... in many of these schools the funding is not the problem. The problem is a culture in families that do not value education. You can throw more money at some people and it makes no difference.

Of course, Michigan is just one lesson. Every place is different. Unfortunately, the citizens of Michigan do not value education as much as most states (proven using national surveys). So... even when the schools are well funded, the families of Michigan, who don't care as much, will produce less educated children. Michigan has a unique history as well. You used to be able to get a factory job in Detroit with a 6th grade education and buy a nice house and have a safe retirement. This whole economic model has collapsed. So, Detroit is stuck with a history of low education, but no longer has many factory jobs.
It also has to do with the culture and climate in the school and the school system. Detroit public schools started this school year with around 200 vacancies for teachers. Which means that there are a lot of schools with a bunch of long term subs who aren't actually certified to teach. They get their marching orders from other teachers, who have to take responsibility for some of the work these subs aren't qualified to do, in addition to the work they already have. So you get teachers showing up in those schools and leaving after a year because they have a harder job than any other teacher in the state, and DPS is among the lowest paying districts. So the kids get shitty instruction and don't know any of their teachers, because most of them don't hang around for very long. It compounds because the kids know their school is a shithole and that becomes a reason not to take school seriously, and the schools that have a reputation for being shitholes have a hard time recruiting teachers. The (new) superintendent is trying to recruit teachers to get the subs out and lower class sizes, but he still has upwards of 100 vacancies to fill. He wants to improve benefits and pay for teachers, but to me its unclear how he is going to fund that.

Its a complicated problem and there is much more to it than just money, for sure.

Tigzy
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 6789
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 6:53 am

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21493

Post by Tigzy »

paddybrown wrote: I was out with friends one evening over the Christmas period, the one single person among couples. I ended up sitting next to the female half of one of the couples at one venue. She'd had a drink or two and was feeling a bit maudlin, and she complained that whenever she sat close enough to me to be touching, I moved so that we weren't touching any more. I had no conscious awareness of doing this. I gave her a hug and tried to reassure her that I didn't mean to upset her, but afterwards I got to thinking about it. I've been taught, implicitly, my entire life, that my touch is by default unwelcome, except in certain specific relationships and circumstances, and if someone is uncomfortable with it I've done something wrong. She's been taught that her touch is always a blessing to those she bestows it on, and if someone is uncomfortable with it that's an insult to her.
Donkey's years ago, I went out on a date with this bird and it seemed to go okay. Nice dinner, a few good laughs and so on and so forth. No hanky-panky at all, cos it was a first date and decorum must prevail and all that.

When I spoke to her next, she expressed much disappointment that I hadn't grabbed her and snogged her. I muttered something about being a gentleman*, but couldn't help thinking that it is quite the ego to demand that someone risk at best a slap and at worse a sexual harassment charge simply for the tingles. 'I've been worried that I might be unattractive,' she went on, completely oblivious to the fact that it might not have been about her but about the risk I mentioned before. Anyways, I didn't make an issue of it, because she was okay but not all that, frankly.

That's quite some sense of entitlement there, though, ain't it. Really, not so far from, 'I haz a sad because you didn't risk your week's wages on the horse I knew to be a dead cert. Don't you trust my judgement, or something?'

*Not in an Eliot Rogers way - I was, after all, actually on a date with a real gosh darn woman here, as opposed to crying and wanking in the car my dad bought me.

free thoughtpolice
.
.
Posts: 11165
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 4:27 pm

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21494

Post by free thoughtpolice »

This sounds like a fun course: Queering the Bible.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... scripture/
Were the Nephilim intersex? Trannies on Noah's ark? Is Jehovah genderqueer.
Finally institutes of higher learning are beginning to teach young folks truly useful subjects.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21495

Post by Brive1987 »

Kirbmarc wrote:
jet_lagg wrote: #21449 Post by jet_lagg » Thu Jan 04, 2018 7:37 pm
When Malcolm X Met the Nazis. I wasn't around for that one, obviously, but the Hotep alliance with the alt-right feels much more chummy to me. I do
jet_lagg wrote: When Malcolm X Met the Nazis. I wasn't around for that one, obviously, but the Hotep alliance with the alt-right feels much more chummy to me. I don't know of any instances of Malcom X's crew saying the Nazi's were free to join up. It does make sense though. Both groups believe in self reliance and want the races to stick to their own communities. Dogmatic leftists hate this because it's better to have an integrated and self-professed miserable society that can at least theoretically one day achieve the multicultural utopian dream than it is to allow people to pursue a mutually desirable segregation.
... The real way to integrate people of different ethnic origin is to STOP FOCUSING on ethnicity so much.
Assuming they are integrating into the host environment then that baseline needs to be emphasised. Right now the opposite is true - we pretend there is no unique underlying ethnostate and then celebrate every ethnic foible that is introduced.

In short, try giving your advice to those wanting to embrace a new clime foreign to their point of origin.

I know my father in law got a visit from the cop shop the first time he beat the local Aussie cleaner with his sjambok. ;)

Tigzy
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 6789
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2012 6:53 am

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21496

Post by Tigzy »

free thoughtpolice wrote: This sounds like a fun course: Queering the Bible.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... scripture/
Were the Nephilim intersex? Trannies on Noah's ark? Is Jehovah genderqueer.
Finally institutes of higher learning are beginning to teach young folks truly useful subjects.
TBH, I'd be more interested in seeing them 'destabilize long held assumptions' in a Queering the Quran course. Which will never happen because it's a damn sight easier to destabilize the long held assumptions of people who aren't going to slay your ass for doing so.

Old_ones
.
.
Posts: 2168
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2013 3:46 pm
Location: An hour's drive from Hell.

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21497

Post by Old_ones »

Brive1987 wrote:
Old_ones wrote:
Brive1987 wrote: I'm a bit concerned my one vote per family concept hasn't gained traction. I hope this explaination clears things up.

[i.mg]https://i.imgur.com/5sXeDCN.jpg[/img]
That's the stupidest way to define productivity that I've ever seen given that our world is vastly overpopulated. Maybe we should be taking voting rights away from breeders on the theory that you all are too busy to use your brains, and therefore incapable of making an informed decision.
We are obsessed with population driven growth in the West. Good old GDP. But we have introduced pressures that have stopped us wanting or being able to reproduce. So we have a below replacement birth rate of 1.6 to 1.8 children per woman.

So. We have to import people, often from societies where there are no such inhibitions. And presto, we have cultural replacement and diversity actions.

Imagine if society actually defined self initiated replacement and cultural reinforcement as a mission - over immigration. And we balanced our ideas of mindless “growth” against individual quality of life. And we got all those good Indian doctors and accountants to ply their skills stabilising their own problematic countries.

Then you wouldn’t have the dynamic in the tweet below where net immigration (green) is a disproportional component of my states (NSW) “growth”, there would be less negative inter state flight of long term residents (orange) and natural growth (blue) is normalised. And maybe then we don’t have to level low density garden suburbs and replace them with high rise mass produced boxes for all the new comers.

So how do you create an environment where the means for natural growth (families) is assigned proper social and enonomic value?

Probably not through celebrating gay “marriage” via our NYE fireworks display eh?

Culture isn't transmitted through blood anyway. You can out breed the foreigners and stop immigration, but if your kids turn into SJWs, disown Australian culture and convert to Islam you end up with the same problem. If you want to defend your culture the answer is going to be to defend it on an intellectual level, rather than by crapping out more children.

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10933
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21498

Post by Steersman »

Kirbmarc wrote:
Mon Dec 25, 2017 1:55 am
Merry Christmas, ya filthy animals!

http://undergroundwebworld.org/reports/ ... ighter.jpg

To you too, Steers.

https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/en. ... 1228185230
Thanks - I think. :-) (more later).

But I hope y'all - Pitters (including those maybe sailing under false flags), lurkers, and Guests - had a decent Christmas, and have a safe, prosperous, and productive New Year.

However, while I can, generally, roll with the robot "punches", and while I'll concede that I might give some cause for those shots, you in particular, given your knowledge of and reference to the Peano axioms undergirding arithmetic, might at least might give some credence to the argument that logic is a worthwhile touchstone. Particularly as it relates (Tigzy - trigger warning: incoming ova!) to the definitions for female ("produces ova") and for woman ("human female"), although the distaff side of the population generally tends to be notably reluctant to countenance that view. But of some related interest, a tweet of a BBC interview with Germaine Greer, particularly for the interviewer's apparent perspective of "feelz before realz":



But you (all) might consider that such definitions are more or less like axioms - maybe there are better ones, but there's some value in putting a stake in the ground as a point of reference before starting out on a survey expedition. Somewhat analogous - "the core of cognition" - to the "axioms" undergirding Euclidean and non-Euclidean geometry.

Somewhat parenthetically, one might suggest that the creation of axioms is somewhat of a gestalt process, a process of creating hypotheses that might be adjusted or modified depending on subsequent observations. And that that process might well qualify as "other ways of knowing", particularly if the guess or intuition turns out to have been right as is frequently the case. Though dogmatically insisting that such axioms are gospel truth might well qualify as the hallmark of scientism - the axiomatic system does seem to have some notable limitations.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21499

Post by Brive1987 »

Old_ones wrote:
Brive1987 wrote:
Old_ones wrote:
Brive1987 wrote: I'm a bit concerned my one vote per family concept hasn't gained traction. I hope this explaination clears things up.

[i.mg]https://i.imgur.com/5sXeDCN.jpg[/img]
That's the stupidest way to define productivity that I've ever seen given that our world is vastly overpopulated. Maybe we should be taking voting rights away from breeders on the theory that you all are too busy to use your brains, and therefore incapable of making an informed decision.
We are obsessed with population driven growth in the West. Good old GDP. But we have introduced pressures that have stopped us wanting or being able to reproduce. So we have a below replacement birth rate of 1.6 to 1.8 children per woman.

So. We have to import people, often from societies where there are no such inhibitions. And presto, we have cultural replacement and diversity actions.

Imagine if society actually defined self initiated replacement and cultural reinforcement as a mission - over immigration. And we balanced our ideas of mindless “growth” against individual quality of life. And we got all those good Indian doctors and accountants to ply their skills stabilising their own problematic countries.

Then you wouldn’t have the dynamic in the tweet below where net immigration (green) is a disproportional component of my states (NSW) “growth”, there would be less negative inter state flight of long term residents (orange) and natural growth (blue) is normalised. And maybe then we don’t have to level low density garden suburbs and replace them with high rise mass produced boxes for all the new comers.

So how do you create an environment where the means for natural growth (families) is assigned proper social and enonomic value?

Probably not through celebrating gay “marriage” via our NYE fireworks display eh?

https.://twitter.com/brive1987/status/948776064632864768
Culture isn't transmitted through blood anyway. You can out breed the foreigners and stop immigration, but if your kids turn into SJWs, disown Australian culture and convert to Islam you end up with the same problem. If you want to defend your culture the answer is going to be to defend it on an intellectual level, rather than by crapping out more children.
Culture is the discernible output of a collective society. We organise societies by geography (national borders) and geographic place parameterises (and helps define) the lived experience of a group/people/nation. So no, blood does not literally carry culture though I appreciate your descent to the absurd. Rather shared history and society-centred shared traditions and aspirations provide the vessel within which culture is defended, nurtured and advanced. Sometimes, OMG, this geo-nature manifests in skin colour. Which is only a problem if you are white.

Intellectual arguments? Sounds like weak civic nationalism is your thing. Try replacing a football teams supporters with majority basketball fans, tell everyone all teams are equal and in fact football as a code is a bit of an embarrassment and then tell an old time fan to revive support for “club A” via intellectual arguments. The beer swilling, colour wearing, chanting super keen basketballers will look on you with the same contempt shown the elites by the deplorables. And you will fail. :lol:

So the solution here is to charmingly “crap” out more babies into, and reinforcing, a society that is proud and organised around its base culture, one which denies relativism and absolute equivalency. One which welcomes the injection of spice but not at the cost of the overall dish. One with the previous caps of 70k net migration not 250k. One where migration aims to strengthen and improve the existing culture not replace it. One where population group is properly planned and not just seen as fuel for commercial growth.

Sounds better than Importing other people’s cultural silos while glorifying self hate.

YMMV

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21500

Post by Brive1987 »

“Growth” not “group”.

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10933
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21501

Post by Steersman »

MacGruberKnows wrote:
Mon Dec 25, 2017 2:15 am
Kirbmarc wrote: Merry Christmas, ya filthy animals!

[.img]http://undergroundwebworld.org/reports/ ... ighter.jpg[/img]

To you too, Steers.

[.img]https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/en. ... 1228185230[/img]
If you could transplant a vagina into futurama santa you would have a women. and the women you ripped the vagina out of to put into santa would not be a women. because steersbot logic 101.
:) Close but no cigar. IF it were the case that the essential element of "woman" was in fact "vagina" then I'd cheerfully concede a "futurama santa" with a transplanted one would qualify as a woman. But by definition "woman" is defined as "human female (produces ova)" so "futurama santa" would fail right out of the chute for being a robot. In addition, even if you "transplanted" a vagina, or reasonable facsimile thereof, into, say, Bruce Jenner or Danny Muscato they still wouldn't qualify as it is the ovaries that "produce" ova. And I expect the likelihood of medical science being able to do that any time soon is somewheres between slim and none.

Ergo, the most that Bruce & Danny might hope for is to be better female impersonators, although making oneself into a eunuch seems a rather high price to pay to suggest one is sincere in one's flattery by imitation, or to have access to a harem, so to speak. A bridge much too far.

jet_lagg
.
.
Posts: 2681
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 1:57 pm

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21502

Post by jet_lagg »

Kirbmarc wrote:
Thu Jan 04, 2018 9:59 am
jet_lagg wrote: When Malcolm X Met the Nazis. I wasn't around for that one, obviously, but the Hotep alliance with the alt-right feels much more chummy to me. I don't know of any instances of Malcom X's crew saying the Nazi's were free to join up. It does make sense though. Both groups believe in self reliance and want the races to stick to their own communities. Dogmatic leftists hate this because it's better to have an integrated and self-professed miserable society that can at least theoretically one day achieve the multicultural utopian dream than it is to allow people to pursue a mutually desirable segregation.
I think that both groups are, quite frankly, idiotic and counterproductive. Segregation only produces ghettoes and authoritarian rule of "community leaders". The problem with SocJus multiculturalism is that it wants people to co-exist in a way that is all about guilt, shame and enhancing some identities. The real way to integrate people of different ethnic origin is to STOP FOCUSING on ethnicity so much.
Segregation in this context means ethno-states, not a situation like apartheid or the segregated south prior to the civil rights movement. I'm still against it, but mostly my arguments boil down to preference (I like the non-white people in my circle of friends and neighbors, thanks) and the fact that it's probably impossible to turn back the clock without drastic measures that will result in atrocities at least as bad as the ones you mention. Peaceful population transfers are peaceful right up until they're not.

I do fantasize about colonies or limited social experiments though. Maybe give BLM their own town somewhere. Same with the alt-right. Maybe put them right on the border with one another :D

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21503

Post by Brive1987 »

Civic nationalists out there may be interested in noting last years Cato report. Results indicated that in order to value that most basic of Western liberal values, free speech, one had to be in fact ...... Western. Amazing.

http://i.imgur.com/FrTCS2j.jpg

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21504

Post by Brive1987 »

jet_lagg wrote:
Kirbmarc wrote:
Thu Jan 04, 2018 9:59 am
jet_lagg wrote: When Malcolm X Met the Nazis. I wasn't around for that one, obviously, but the Hotep alliance with the alt-right feels much more chummy to me. I don't know of any instances of Malcom X's crew saying the Nazi's were free to join up. It does make sense though. Both groups believe in self reliance and want the races to stick to their own communities. Dogmatic leftists hate this because it's better to have an integrated and self-professed miserable society that can at least theoretically one day achieve the multicultural utopian dream than it is to allow people to pursue a mutually desirable segregation.
I think that both groups are, quite frankly, idiotic and counterproductive. Segregation only produces ghettoes and authoritarian rule of "community leaders". The problem with SocJus multiculturalism is that it wants people to co-exist in a way that is all about guilt, shame and enhancing some identities. The real way to integrate people of different ethnic origin is to STOP FOCUSING on ethnicity so much.
Segregation in this context means ethno-states, not a situation like apartheid or the segregated south prior to the civil rights movement. I'm still against it, but mostly my arguments boil down to preference (I like the non-white people in my circle of friends and neighbors, thanks) and the fact that it's probably impossible to turn back the clock without drastic measures that will result in atrocities at least as bad as the ones you mention. Peaceful population transfers are peaceful right up until they're not.

I do fantasize about colonies or limited social experiments though. Maybe give BLM their own town somewhere. Same with the alt-right. Maybe put them right on the border with one another :D
The last social experiment around ethno states was inconclusive. One trial produced the renaissance and the enlightenment. However other trials failed to produce even the wheel, stalling instead at cave finger painting.

More work is needed.

MarcusAu
.
.
Posts: 7903
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 11:49 am
Location: Llareggub

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21505

Post by MarcusAu »

The Alt-Right (or more specifically race-realists) view of culture is that it is inseperable from race. So that an ethno-state is necessary for a culture (or traditions, or however you want to define it) to be preserved (let alone thrive).

They may have a point - when they commit to such ideas that others see as beyond the pale - it fosters a sense of comradery or community with others that have done the same thing.

That's not to say there isn't also a downside to being perceived as racist neo-nazi white supremacists from the population at large.

Sunder
.
.
Posts: 3858
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2013 1:12 pm

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21506

Post by Sunder »

There's just something perverse to me about the idea that the best way to protect liberal, individualist values is through the application of conservative, groupish values to counter competing conservative, groupish values from elsewhere. Bit of staring in the abyss going on there.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21507

Post by Brive1987 »

MarcusAu wrote: The Alt-Right (or more specifically race-realists) view of culture is that it is inseperable from race. So that an ethno-state is necessary for a culture (or traditions, or however you want to define it) to be preserved (let alone thrive).

They may have a point - when they commit to such ideas that others see as beyond the pale - it fosters a sense of comradery or community with others that have done the same thing.

That's not to say there isn't also a downside to being perceived as racist neo-nazi white supremacists from the population at large.
I recoil from any concept of the magic of whiteness. It is my litmus test for when the discussion moves from social organisation and ethnic/cultural-realism to aryan weirdness. In fact right now I’m listening to the Sargon and Spencer live debate, they are arguing over whiteness and white race ethnic states and getting all confused and cranky.

Cause white magic race is where the Nazi label comes into play.

But consider, the Poles are (generally) “white” but their defined and valued culture didn’t come from this and certainly Hitler didn’t want them in his racial club.

There is an umbrella concept of aligned Western cultures “the west” which interoperate with a broad shared history and underpinning religion.

And while it is visibly accurate to generalise these ethnic groups as sun-deprived “white” this is not a useful causal flag and merely invites simple holocaust based rebuttals.

The alt-right has too many people using the race label and in many cases going down the Nazi rabbit hole. Not so much the Faith Goldie types who simply seek cultural neighbourhood where distinct cultures can thrive and the globe becomes a truly diverse meritocracy. Not an ethnic version of bubble and squeak. In this sense nation is an extension and aggregation of family with cultural definition. And family is in turn a microcosm of shared culture and mutually accepted tradition.

Revolutionary and disturbing stuff.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21508

Post by Brive1987 »

The Sargon / Spencer thing is gold. Spencer is right now explaining to Sargon how he thinks he is far more intelligent than he really is. Meanwhile Spencer is spouting goon-talk. Both are muppets.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21509

Post by Brive1987 »


MarcusAu
.
.
Posts: 7903
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 11:49 am
Location: Llareggub

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21510

Post by MarcusAu »

What's so special about whiteness? Do you have the same objections to non-white ethno-states?

Japan comes to mind as an example - curious to see how they somehow always dodge any nazi associations. (At least recently).

Israel, Zimbabwe and even South Africa also look to be friendly to the idea of becoming ethno-states (if they are not already).

China on the other hand is so keen on diversity they make great efforts to include other countries completely (see Tibet).

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21511

Post by Brive1987 »

[quote=Sunder post_id=452436 time= user_id=923]
There's just something perverse to me about the idea that the best way to protect liberal, individualist values is through the application of conservative, groupish values to counter competing conservative, groupish values from elsewhere. Bit of staring in the abyss going on there.
[/quote]
I think it’s simply correction to an overleveraged Application of social liberalism. Liberal values worked well inside the western bubble as pushback to absolute monarchy and religious domination of shadow power structures. Now it has the field of battle to itself and it is like a runaway melt down. The obsession with “muh personal freedoms” has collapsed our social scaffolds. Intersectional SJWism is the most obvious display of failure, but all the other forces I mentioned upstream have also filled the gap.

A collective never works as a bunch of entitled individuals. Not in business. Not on the sports field. Not in the army. There are always rules that supersede individual agency in many case for the greater good.

We dont need or want to go back to the Triumph of the Will. But unbridled left liberalism and fluid values based on feelz is possibly just as futureless. Because that leaves us vulnerable to better organised social collectives who do have purpose and mission.

How about a middle ground weighted to a historical collective cultural-realism?

free thoughtpolice
.
.
Posts: 11165
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 4:27 pm

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21512

Post by free thoughtpolice »

China on the other hand is so keen on diversity they make great efforts to include other countries completely (see Tibet).
And then populating with Han Chinese.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21513

Post by Brive1987 »

MarcusAu wrote: What's so special about whiteness? Do you have the same objections to non-white ethno-states?

Japan comes to mind as an example - curious to see how they somehow always dodge any nazi associations. (At least recently).

Israel, Zimbabwe and even South Africa also look to be friendly to the idea of becoming ethno-states (if they are not already).

China on the other hand is so keen on diversity they make great efforts to include other countries completely (see Tibet).
I though it was clear that the “Goldie model” positively celebrates other ethno-states. Korea, Japan and Taiwan defend their culture and do so because they don’t have the internal liberal blow back I described above or the post colonial consciousness inspired self hate

I guess South Africa will become an ethno state once the 6% white (down from 12% at referendum) is sorted in a way that doesn’t turn off the lights. Amazing how the west supports the processes here without intentional irony.

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10933
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21514

Post by Steersman »

Sunder wrote: There's just something perverse to me about the idea that the best way to protect liberal, individualist values is through the application of conservative, groupish values to counter competing conservative, groupish values from elsewhere. Bit of staring in the abyss going on there.
Bit of a paradox:



Though one might suggest that that "paradox" is more apparent than real: we don't tolerate violence and rape, yet will use the former to to curtail both in the general population, even its application is frequently "problematic". You might check out a Quillette post that elaborates somewhat on the theme:

http://quillette.com/2017/11/06/interse ... s-paradox/

Would you seriously argue that "protecting liberal, individualist values" should preclude the use of violence if necessary to do so?



As Sir William Stephenson ("A Man Called Intrepid") put it, there's a difference between being high-minded and being soft-headed.

But seems to me that part of the problem is the all-too-common tendency to conflate "groupish values" with groups themselves. Not all such values are created equal nor are all groups, and some of the latter have more justification for defending their values than do others, even if some methods of defense are deprecated under normal circumstances. Survival does tend to sharpen the mind wonderfully.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21515

Post by Brive1987 »

This is interesting take on the vacuum of liberalism. I understand the pitch here may not fly with the group. But who can argue with their contextualisation? Maybe replace “Christianity” with “Western” and “Secularists” with “liberals” to broaden the discussion.

What structures do we have to offer? Intersectional liberalism? The regressive left? Places like this where we push back against clear threats but only dare embrace Kirbs weak and ultimately meaningless one-sided civic nationalism?

http://www.crisismagazine.com/2018/islam-public-square
Secularists like to advise Christians that, for the sake of social harmony, they ought to keep their religion to themselves. Religion, they argue, is a private affair between an individual and his designated deity, and ought not to be dragged into the public square. Moreover, they helpfully add, it’s an imposition on others to confront them with beliefs that they may find offensive.

As for themselves, secularists have no qualms about imposing their own values on everyone within reach. They are convinced of the rightness of their beliefs, and consequently they don’t think twice about forcing Christian bakers, florists, and photographers to endorse gay weddings. They are also convinced that they know what’s best for your children. And what’s best for them, they are quite certain, is that they learn all the latest fashions in gender identity and marriage equality.

In his groundbreaking 1984 book, The Naked Public Square, Richard John Neuhaus argued that the public square can never be naked for long. In other words, it cannot be neutral about values: “If it is not clothed with the ‘meanings’ borne by religion, new ‘meanings’ will be imposed by virtue of the ambitions of the modern state.”

In short, the committed secularist won’t be satisfied with the removal of the crèche from the town square. He’ll insist that it be replaced with something that more accurately reflects American diversity—say, a monument to Margaret Sanger or a statue of James Obergefell. Of course, secular society’s reach extends well beyond the town green. The religion of secularism is constantly being advanced in a variety of venues—in courtrooms, school rooms, and in the newly remodeled bathrooms that accommodate the newly invented genders.

Fr. Neuhaus was right in predicting that “a perverse notion of the disestablishment of religion leads to the establishment of the state as Church.” The secular state quickly moves to enshrine whatever values it currently smiles upon. And it defends them as though they were divinely revealed dogma. But, despite his prescience, Neuhaus did fail to anticipate another development—namely, that the Judeo-Christian tradition might be displaced from the public square not only by the state, but also by another religion.

The possibility that Islam would one day be a contender for control of the public square probably didn’t enter his mind. That’s no surprise. Except for the blip caused by the Iranian Revolution, Islam wasn’t on anyone’s radar in the early eighties. Yet Islam is now well on its way to controlling the public square in parts of Europe. And, were it not for the election of Donald Trump and the defeat of the Muslim Brotherhood-friendly Clinton machine, the U.S. would now be playing catch-up.

As has often been observed, Islam is a political religion. Some, like Dutch MP Geert Wilders, contend that it is almost totally political with only a thin and deceptive veneer of religiosity. Whatever the exact proportion of politics to religion, it’s hard to deny that the political dimension looms large in Islam. Muhammad, after all, was a warlord. He conquered all of Arabia, and within a relatively short time after his death, his followers conquered an area larger than the Roman Empire. Sayyid Abul A’la Maududi, one of the most important twentieth-century Islamic theorists, wrote that “Islam requires the earth—not just a portion, but the whole planet.”

But, although Islamists think globally, they are patient enough to act locally. In European cities these days it’s not unusual to be forced to take a detour because the street ahead has been blocked by Muslims kneeling in prayer. Ostensibly, these gatherings are meant to demonstrate that there are not enough mosques, and that therefore the government must pay for more to be built. The ulterior agenda is to stake a territorial claim. It’s the Islamic version of “we’re here, we’re queer, and we’re in your face.” In this case, “We’re here, there are quite a number of us, and we’re ready for a confrontation. Give us what we want, or we can make your life unpleasant.”

Sometimes, the public square is literally a public square, or a street, or a park. Controlling the public square does not necessarily entail control of geographical territory, but it helps. And Muslims actually do control an increasing number of the public streets on the continent. When Muslims migrate to Europe, they tend to congregate in ghettos, some of which have earned the label “no-go-zones” because they are largely off-limits to non-Muslims. As Europeans are now discovering, such concentrated population pockets provide quite a bit of political leverage.

Some observers say that these Muslim enclaves are part of a deliberate strategy to Islamize Europe. They act to deter assimilation, and they allow Muslim leaders to gain a high degree of control over the Muslim population. In addition, the “zones” facilitate the formation of voting blocs and make it easier for Muslim activists to apply pressure to local and national governments.

Like secularists in the U.S., Muslims in Europe and the UK are accustomed to making demands, and equally accustomed to having their demands met. Whether the demand is for halal menus, prayer rooms in schools, special washing facilities, or exemption from Holocaust studies, European Muslims usually get what they want.

Islamists and secularists share a desire to monopolize the public square. Both also see Christians as a particular enemy of their expansionist ambitions. Consequently, both seek to minimize the influence of Christianity in the public square. Although Muslims in the West lack the numbers to directly limit the influence of Christians, they can do so indirectly by letting it be known that they are mightily offended by various Christian beliefs and practices. They can then rely on state and local authorities and lukewarm Christians to do the rest.

Thus, many of the traditional Christmas markets in Europe have been given new, non-offensive titles. Amsterdam’s Christmas Market is now “Winter Parade,” Brussels’ is now “Winter Pleasures,” and so on—“Wintermarkt,” “Winterville,” “Winter Festival”: anything but “Christmas Market.”

Secularists are already inclined to de-Christianize Christmas, and the fact that many Muslims are offended by Christmas gives them an excuse to speed up the process. In Luneburg, Germany a school Christmas party was postponed because a Muslim student complained about the singing of Christmas carols. In London, the All-Party Parliamentary Group on British Muslims issued a report aimed at drawing attention to the humanity of Muslims during Christmas. The report was titled “A Very Merry Muslim Christmas.” In Langon, France, teachers pulled 83 students out of a showing of The Star, an animated movie about the birth of Jesus, once it dawned on them that the subject was “too Christian.”

In Muslim-majority countries, restrictions on Christians are much more severe. Christians who try to take their religion with them into the public square risk jail or even execution at the hands of vigilante mobs. This attitude goes back to the beginnings of Islam—to the “Conditions of Omar” which were established by the second Caliph shortly after the death of Muhammad. The “Conditions” were a list of “dos” and “don’ts” that governed the lives of conquered Christians. Among other things Christians:

were not allowed to build or repair churches
were not to clang cymbals except lightly, and were not to sing loudly.
were not to display crosses on churches or raise their voices in prayer.
were not to make their religion appealing, nor try to convert anyone to it.

These rules, which are now being re-established in many Muslim countries, display an attitude toward Christianity that is quite similar to that of today’s secularists: keep it quiet, keep it to yourself, and keep it out of the public square. For the time being, Muslims and secularists are working in tandem to exclude Christians from the public squares. If and when that goal is accomplished, Muslims in the West will almost certainly move to push secularists to the sidelines. Once they have served their purpose, the services of committed secularists will no longer be needed.

But for the time being, Christians still have time to recognize the double threat and reassert their own values and beliefs. Thanks to Richard Neuhaus, many Christians do understand the importance of the public square. They realize that they can’t afford to confine their faith to church and home because if they do, they will eventually be safe neither at church nor at home. There are very practical reasons for Christians not to hide their light under a bushel.

Thanks to Christian thinkers such as Neuhaus, many Christians are well aware that secular society will grab every inch of the public square if they are allowed to do so. It’s high time that Christians also understand that Islam will do the same if given half a chance. Indeed, the subjugation of the public square to Allah is the raison d’être of Islam.
h/t Steersman

katamari Damassi
.
.
Posts: 5429
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 10:32 am

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21516

Post by katamari Damassi »

MarcusAu wrote: What's so special about whiteness?
Maybe ask the Thais.

http://www.newsweek.com/penis-whitening ... and-770962

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10933
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21517

Post by Steersman »

deLurch wrote:
Thu Dec 28, 2017 4:09 pm
VickyCaramel wrote:
Wed Dec 27, 2017 3:17 pm
InfraRedBucket wrote: Vicky, if we're both in the UK, unless you're on a VPN, how come I'm blocked?
Can you view the updated version?
https://HOOKtube.com/watch?v=07NMglQX6gE
I knew it. She's a hooker.

(Don't tell Steersman. We won't be able to get a word in edgewise... or anything else edgewise for that matter.)
:) Kind of doubt that, although she does bill her self as a "lady of leisure", and not that I would hold that against her if she was. Sex seems to have its pathological manifestations - Psychopathia Sexualis - but one might suggest the puritanical condemnation of "ladies of easy virtue" frequently seems equally pathological if not more so.

KiwiInOz
.
.
Posts: 5425
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:28 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21518

Post by KiwiInOz »

katamari Damassi wrote:
MarcusAu wrote: What's so special about whiteness?
Maybe ask the Thais.

http://www.newsweek.com/penis-whitening ... and-770962

KiwiInOz
.
.
Posts: 5425
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:28 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21519

Post by KiwiInOz »

Must remember to clear cache.

katamari Damassi
.
.
Posts: 5429
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 10:32 am

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21520

Post by katamari Damassi »

Steersman wrote:
Bit of a paradox:



Though one might suggest that that "paradox" is more apparent than real: we don't tolerate violence and rape, yet will use the former to to curtail both in the general population, even its application is frequently "problematic". You might check out a Quillette post that elaborates somewhat on the theme:

http://quillette.com/2017/11/06/interse ... s-paradox/
Why am I reminded of this?

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10933
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21521

Post by Steersman »

Brive1987 wrote: This is interesting take on the vacuum of liberalism. I understand the pitch here may not fly with the group. But who can argue with their contextualisation? Maybe replace “Christianity” with “Western” and “Secularists” with “liberals” to broaden the discussion.

What structures do we have to offer? Intersectional liberalism? The regressive left? Places like this where we push back against clear threats but only dare embrace Kirbs weak and ultimately meaningless one-sided civic nationalism?

http://www.crisismagazine.com/2018/islam-public-square
Secularists like to advise Christians that, for the sake of social harmony, they ought to keep their religion to themselves. Religion, they argue, is a private affair between an individual and his designated deity, and ought not to be dragged into the public square. Moreover, they helpfully add, it’s an imposition on others to confront them with beliefs that they may find offensive.

<snip>

The possibility that Islam would one day be a contender for control of the public square probably didn’t enter his mind. That’s no surprise. Except for the blip caused by the Iranian Revolution, Islam wasn’t on anyone’s radar in the early eighties. Yet Islam is now well on its way to controlling the public square in parts of Europe. And, were it not for the election of Donald Trump and the defeat of the Muslim Brotherhood-friendly Clinton machine, the U.S. would now be playing catch-up.

<snip>

But for the time being, Christians still have time to recognize the double threat and reassert their own values and beliefs. Thanks to Richard Neuhaus, many Christians do understand the importance of the public square. They realize that they can’t afford to confine their faith to church and home because if they do, they will eventually be safe neither at church nor at home. There are very practical reasons for Christians not to hide their light under a bushel.

Thanks to Christian thinkers such as Neuhaus, many Christians are well aware that secular society will grab every inch of the public square if they are allowed to do so. It’s high time that Christians also understand that Islam will do the same if given half a chance. Indeed, the subjugation of the public square to Allah is the raison d’être of Islam.
h/t Steersman
De nada. :-) But did you see that in my Likes? Was just in the process of skimming through it, partly - as you may have surmised - in relation to the issue of which groups have more credibility, but hadn't tweeted or commented about it yet. A lot to fault Christianity for, but some justification for arguing that it contributed substantially if inadvertently to the Enlightenment, as well as that it is a bulwark against the barbarisms of Islam. A portion of a Churchill Wikiquote that is my pinned tweet:
Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome.
Indeed - emphasis in the Wiki quote.

But, in related news, did you see the tweet of Australia's own "Imam of Peace"?



I was going to retweet that myself as he seems a credible reformer or at least an honest broker, particularly as subsequently he offered to follow anyone who did so, but not sure he's not part of the problem, whence:


Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10933
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21522

Post by Steersman »

katamari Damassi wrote:
Steersman wrote:
Bit of a paradox:

https: //twitter.com/Clark_Barrett84/status/772873701486395396

Though one might suggest that that "paradox" is more apparent than real: we don't tolerate violence and rape, yet will use the former to to curtail both in the general population, even its application is frequently "problematic". You might check out a Quillette post that elaborates somewhat on the theme:

http://quillette.com/2017/11/06/interse ... s-paradox/
Why am I reminded of this?
https: //www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5cQcmAtjJ0
:) Understandable and certainly of some relevance, although Keaton's argument suggests the tendency of philosophers to go in ever diminishing circles until they disappear up their own fundaments. But think her conclusion is essentially correct, although the question of which "god", or conception thereof, holds the high cards seems moot, seems to be the crux of the matter:



And even in a secular, ethical, or scientific context, the fact of the matter is that we can't really be entirely certain of virtually anything, particularly values and theories. So we have to "screw up our courage" and proceed more or less on faith - of one sort or another, although "blind faith" is probably to be deprecated:
WeinerFaithReason_Sctn1A.JPG
(54.37 KiB) Downloaded 179 times

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21523

Post by Brive1987 »

Yes Steers, your likes.

I couldnt really give a flying fuck about your certified ding-dong leader of wooly thinking. Aside from a brief thought that a stabilising Iraq really needs its son back, surely Australia is quantifiably alien and disruptive for a man of his culture?

............

Kirb,

Frau Goldilocks won’t send me a reference for her racial dot painting (or any braid-pics). But I unilaterally tracked it down to a pubmed article. So it must be accurate.

Can you (or someone else) rub their brain cells together as a favour and explain wtf it’s all about?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2945611/

The pic is figure 3.

Old_ones
.
.
Posts: 2168
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2013 3:46 pm
Location: An hour's drive from Hell.

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21524

Post by Old_ones »

Brive1987 wrote: Civic nationalists out there may be interested in noting last years Cato report. Results indicated that in order to value that most basic of Western liberal values, free speech, one had to be in fact ...... Western. Amazing.

http://i.imgur.com/FrTCS2j.jpg
I didn't read the report, but I don't draw the same conclusion from the figure that you posted. I read this and see that social justice ideology is more attractive to Latinos and Blacks (both groups I would consider western) than it is to Whites. That's not weird given that White people are the villains of social justice ideology. No weird conflation between the way a person looks and the way that they think is needed. Japan and South Korea have embraced enlightenment values, have freedom of speech, representative governments, and make respectable contributions to science. My undergraduate advisor advisor recommended that as a chemistry major I should consider taking German or Japanese in order to be able to read old chemistry literature. They still have traditions that are non-western there - different musical and literary traditions, different customs, but they are "western" in the ways I care about. No white majorities necessary. Maybe we have different priorities or I don't understand what culture you are trying to preserve.
Brive1987 wrote:Intellectual arguments? Sounds like weak civic nationalism is your thing. Try replacing a football teams supporters with majority basketball fans, tell everyone all teams are equal and in fact football as a code is a bit of an embarrassment and then tell an old time fan to revive support for “club A” via intellectual arguments. The beer swilling, colour wearing, chanting super keen basketballers will look on you with the same contempt shown the elites by the deplorables. And you will fail. :lol:
And this further confuses me. Football and Basketball fans have tribal identities that are completely unrelated to anything I care about. I'm completely uninterested in preserving some kind of white tribal identity if that is what you are on about. If in 100 years the USA has a 5% racial minority of recognizably White people and everyone else is a brownish mix of African, Latino, Asian and White, I don't give a shit. I want to know about whether those people value science, whether they have a free and open society, and whether they still debate issues. If the answer is, no, they all converted to Islam and stone people who don't believe that the Earth is the center of the solar system, that is the point where I get sad. I wouldn't call that civic nationalism, I would call it classical liberalism. Also, I don't see American culture as being tied to any race or ethnicity so I don't think ethnostate rhetoric makes any sense for us anyway. We've been ethnically diverse since the beginning and we have many kinds of cultural heritage, European and otherwise. We had waves of immigration in the 70s from Vietnam because a lot of those people wanted no part of communism and embraced western democracy and capitalism instead. Why would I want to discourage people like that from joining my country? The only people I want to keep out are those who have some kind of intellectual deficiency that compels them to attack our values and system of government.

deLurch
.
.
Posts: 8447
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2012 6:11 am

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21525

Post by deLurch »

If you thought solar roadways was hot, I won't be able to stop you from cracking open your wallets and tapping out your 401ks for this opportunity of a lifetime. We have some hot youtube scientists who have invented a new form of physics that enables them to create hoverboards and warp drives.

I know you are skeptical, but watch all the way through and near the end you will be treated with wave after wave of buzzword bingo that will have you rest assured that they clearly know what they are doing.



Let's see. Their theory for this who wish to bother:
http://www.hoverbrothers.com/theory/

The proposed experiments they wish to perform:
http://www.hoverbrothers.com/experiment/

And of course the link where you can "invest"/"donate" in their LLC where they plan to pay back each of their early investors with money from their 2nd round investors.

http://www.hoverbrothers.com/strategicp ... nvestments

free thoughtpolice
.
.
Posts: 11165
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 4:27 pm

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21526

Post by free thoughtpolice »

Old Ones: Why do you hate two spirited people? :cry:

KiwiInOz
.
.
Posts: 5425
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 3:28 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21527

Post by KiwiInOz »

free thoughtpolice wrote: Old Ones: Why do you hate two spirited people? :cry:
Surely Old_ones is plural. :ugeek:

free thoughtpolice
.
.
Posts: 11165
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 4:27 pm

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21528

Post by free thoughtpolice »

Stop calling me surely. :rimshot:

CaptainFluffyBunny
.
.
Posts: 7556
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 8:39 am
Location: Somewhere in the pipes

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21529

Post by CaptainFluffyBunny »

People's Paradox and limits on free speech both argue for your banishment, Steers. Seeing as you're a two-trick pony (Ovas and Islam) and that your continued presence here is simply a testament to the Pit's remarkable tolerance, you might wish to rethink your continued "limits on free speech" before it bites you in the ass.

But let me guess, you'll dismiss this with a bloated sense of the importance of your mission with a jibe that you repeat endlessly and yet still believe is clever.

CaptainFluffyBunny
.
.
Posts: 7556
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 8:39 am
Location: Somewhere in the pipes

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21530

Post by CaptainFluffyBunny »

People's Paradox, not People's.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21531

Post by Brive1987 »

Old_ones wrote:
Brive1987 wrote: Civic nationalists out there may be interested in noting last years Cato report. Results indicated that in order to value that most basic of Western liberal values, free speech, one had to be in fact ...... Western. Amazing.

[IMG]h.ttp://i.imgur.com/FrTCS2j.jpg[/IMG]
I didn't read the report, but I don't draw the same conclusion from the figure that you posted. I read this and see that social justice ideology is more attractive to Latinos and Blacks (both groups I would consider western) than it is to Whites. That's not weird given that White people are the villains of social justice ideology. No weird conflation between the way a person looks and the way that they think is needed. Japan and South Korea have embraced enlightenment values, have freedom of speech, representative governments, and make respectable contributions to science. My undergraduate advisor advisor recommended that as a chemistry major I should consider taking German or Japanese in order to be able to read old chemistry literature. They still have traditions that are non-western there - different musical and literary traditions, different customs, but they are "western" in the ways I care about. No white majorities necessary. Maybe we have different priorities or I don't understand what culture you are trying to preserve.
Brive1987 wrote:Intellectual arguments? Sounds like weak civic nationalism is your thing. Try replacing a football teams supporters with majority basketball fans, tell everyone all teams are equal and in fact football as a code is a bit of an embarrassment and then tell an old time fan to revive support for “club A” via intellectual arguments. The beer swilling, colour wearing, chanting super keen basketballers will look on you with the same contempt shown the elites by the deplorables. And you will fail. :lol:
And this further confuses me. Football and Basketball fans have tribal identities that are completely unrelated to anything I care about. I'm completely uninterested in preserving some kind of white tribal identity if that is what you are on about. If in 100 years the USA has a 5% racial minority of recognizably White people and everyone else is a brownish mix of African, Latino, Asian and White, I don't give a shit. I want to know about whether those people value science, whether they have a free and open society, and whether they still debate issues. If the answer is, no, they all converted to Islam and stone people who don't believe that the Earth is the center of the solar system, that is the point where I get sad. I wouldn't call that civic nationalism, I would call it classical liberalism. Also, I don't see American culture as being tied to any race or ethnicity so I don't think ethnostate rhetoric makes any sense for us anyway. We've been ethnically diverse since the beginning and we have many kinds of cultural heritage, European and otherwise. We had waves of immigration in the 70s from Vietnam because a lot of those people wanted no part of communism and embraced western democracy and capitalism instead. Why would I want to discourage people like that from joining my country? The only people I want to keep out are those who have some kind of intellectual deficiency that compels them to attack our values and system of government.
Apologies if my sport metaphor confused. And while there may be reasons for the graph, the fact remains that Hispanics and Blacks aren’t embracing your civic values in the manner a civic nationalist would approve. Which should cause an upside down smile.

The short answer is that you will be sad.

By themselves, Science!, “free and open” (whatever that means) and debate (free speech?) are weak markers for a collective values system / cultural identity. This flimflam will ultimately be replaced by a proper (ie more useful) tribal/collective reality. That’s how humans organise. But this will take longer for USA than elsewhere .....

I agree America is a global odd ball though I’d maintain your people story of “truth, justice and the American way” (ie enlightened exceptionalism and manifest destiny), is a euro based stew of Protestantism, secular humanism, Irish wilfulness and a dozen other ingredients set against your unique physical canvas. Your frontier based individualism and state rights fixation also help. Nonetheless the ethnic rainbow did result in cultural disengagement via white flight in the 1970s and 1980s after desegregation with segregation continuing via succession: https://www.sociologicalscience.com/dow ... 5to166.pdf. So it’s not all beer and skittles.

BUT America is too big and diverse to have the rules relevant to Canada, Australia, Britain and Europe applied wholesale. Your self identity is stronger, strong enough to appeal to Vietnamese etc. For now. And, critically there only 1% muslims - well below the 5% in UK and obviously a very different dynamic to Western Europe. So there isn’t an organised counter culture in play.

So mate. Lap it up. While you can.

http://i.imgur.com/tWZHzWM.jpg

Re debate. You are too late. Witness the pressure applied to this (hitherto willing) service provider that destroyed the conversation before it began. Witness also the pathetic triggering. “I was literally shaking” at this expression of a contrary point of view.

http://www.fightwhitegenocide.com/2017/ ... billboard/

http://www.fightwhitegenocide.com/wp-co ... ook_00.png

AndrewV69
.
.
Posts: 8146
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 7:52 pm

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21532

Post by AndrewV69 »

free thoughtpolice wrote:
Thu Jan 04, 2018 4:39 pm
China on the other hand is so keen on diversity they make great efforts to include other countries completely (see Tibet).
And then populating with Han Chinese.

China has his a small snag with a racist fact. Hypoxia. (I suspect I might have mentioned this before)
Here’s why the Chinese may never be able to fully populate Tibet

Interestingly, the study discovered that not a single Han birth happened above 12,500 feet, whereas Tibetan births happened at all altitudes. In fact, most Han who lived above that altitude descended to lower altitudes during the pregnancy, where they stayed for several years. Reasons cited for the move included health—like increased risk of pre-eclampsia—and family, such as a desire to be closer to family in China. The families typically returned to the high altitude when the child was three or four years old, said Moore.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21533

Post by Brive1987 »

Re the neo-libtard vs the jelly brained Nazi ....

With thousands of twitter votes in, the consensus is that both Spencer and Sargon were shit. But Sargon was an emotional retard who lost the intellectual joust.

And that makes for a huge defeat.

Really?
.
.
Posts: 6460
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 2:34 pm

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21534

Post by Really? »

Sunder wrote: Conservatives complain about low native birthrates.
Conservatives also complain about tax credits aimed at encouraging larger families.

"Gay marriage" is so far down the list of concerns it's absurd to even consider it a factor. Shit, gay people can and do still find ways to reproduce.
You make a good point. These poly agender asexuals who spend so much time regulating gender expression spend so little time teaching the next generation because they haven't thought that far.

Remember male Huffpo/Salon writer: you are there for the same reasons as Mic was willing to "pay" about their expose about what it is like to be a @ woman turned down by 80+% women .

Old_ones
.
.
Posts: 2168
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2013 3:46 pm
Location: An hour's drive from Hell.

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21535

Post by Old_ones »

KiwiInOz wrote:
free thoughtpolice wrote: Old Ones: Why do you hate two spirited people? :cry:
Surely Old_ones is plural. :ugeek:
Once upon a time in college I was out with a few other guys, strolling back to the dorm after having smoked in the woods. We came upon a second party going out to commune with nature, and one of my friends knew them. They were underclassmen, so I didn't know them. I began introducing myself. One of them said "Fubar!".
I tried to clarify.
"What was that"?
"Fubar."
"I'm sorry."
"We don't like our name, so we call ourselves Fubar."

I thought the guy was a little weird at the time. Told my roommate about him when I got back, and he buried his face in his palms. I never would have predicted that in 12 years my joking about this guy would be considered a hate crime in Canada.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21536

Post by Brive1987 »

Couple of typical tweets:








The skeptic camp needs to up its game. Kraut then this? The race based ethno argument should tank in under 60 seconds. I’m imagining Steve Novella vs Richard Spencer. Just to get some honour back. :popcorn: :lol: :lol:

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10933
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21537

Post by Steersman »

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: People's Paradox, not People's.
Third time's a charm - Popper's Paradox.
CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: People's Paradox and limits on free speech both argue for your banishment, Steers. Seeing as you're a two-trick pony (Ovas and Islam) and that your continued presence here is simply a testament to the Pit's remarkable tolerance, you might wish to rethink your continued "limits on free speech" before it bites you in the ass.
LoL. While it's true that "Ovas and Islam" are two salient strings on my geetar, they're hardly the only ones. As you would know if you weren't getting your knickers in a twist.

But even if the FT (PBUH) were to withdraw my posting privileges - and it's unlikely that he would do so just on your objections - that would hardly disprove my argument. Which, in case you hadn't noticed, is more focused on the manifest untruths and hate speech that is characteristic of Islam and the Quran. It would be a real stretch for you to argue that any of my arguments are in any way equivalent in exhibiting those aspects so it's unlikely, even if I were banned, that I would be hoist by my own petard.

You might consider that the issue isn't just a case of an absolute right to free speech, but one of what is actually being said and to whom. For some elaborations on the theme you might check out a recent Quillette post:
Does Free Speech Need Boundaries to Survive?
Wessie du Toit

<snip>

Ultimately this brings us to a broader problem faced by secular liberalism, whose emphasis on the rights and interests of individuals tends to undermine social solidarity. There have been recent attempts to square this circle, notably by Jonathan Haidt. In The Righteous Mind, Haidt asked those who see society in individualistic terms to “recognise that human flourishing requires social order and embeddedness,” and suggested they acknowledge the “binding” value of beliefs related to sanctity and loyalty. But as the philosopher Thomas Nagel commented, the interesting thing about this theory is where it falls short. Nagel points out that you can’t adopt beliefs simply because they are useful – they are only useful if you really believe them.

There are really no simple answers here. Liberal conventions such as free speech undermine the very social frameworks that they depend upon. But equally, you can’t impose a sense of community on a society from the top down. I’m inclined to agree with Karl Popper, then, when he emphasizes “the effort which life in an open and partially abstract society continually demands from us… to be rational, to forgo at least some of our emotional social needs, to look after ourselves, to accept responsibilities.” In the long run, maintaining freedom of speech will depend on persuading people to make that effort. But it will be a tough sell, and needs to be done carefully.
For balance, a rejoinder: Deliberation Not Boundaries: A Reply to Wessie du Toit even it looks rather impractical & unworkable.

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: But let me guess, you'll dismiss this with a bloated sense of the importance of your mission with a jibe that you repeat endlessly and yet still believe is clever.
Which "jibe" is that? I've made so many "clever" ones that it's hard to keep track ...

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10933
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21538

Post by Steersman »

Brive1987 wrote: Yes Steers, your likes.
Not a crime - just curious.
Brive1987 wrote: I couldnt really give a flying fuck about your certified ding-dong leader of wooly thinking. Aside from a brief thought that a stabilising Iraq really needs its son back, surely Australia is quantifiably alien and disruptive for a man of his culture?
As mentioned, I think the Imam is more a part of the problem than of the solution as he still seems to insist on the literal truth of much of the Quran as any other fundamentalist. And my tweet linked to Wikipedia article that raised a few flags on his claims. Just thought you, being closer to the action, might have some additional information on the topic.
Brive1987 wrote: ............

Kirb,

Frau Goldilocks won’t send me a reference for her racial dot painting (or any braid-pics). But I unilaterally tracked it down to a pubmed article. So it must be accurate.

Can you (or someone else) rub their brain cells together as a favour and explain wtf it’s all about?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2945611/

The pic is figure 3.
Looks like an interesting article and while I'm a long ways from having a good handle on the topic, much less being a pro from Dover, I kind of get the general idea. The figure (Figure 3) in question and some notes in it:
NCIB_HumanDiversity_Fig3.jpg
(77.17 KiB) Downloaded 151 times
Population relationships between the 40 populations
A) Neighbor-joining tree. Populations are color-coded based on their continental origins. The hypothetical ancestral population is shown. Bootstrap support values for most branches are larger than 95% (the bootstrap consensus tree is shown in Supp. Figure S1). B) Principal components analysis. First two principal components (PCs) are shown. Each individual is represented by one dot and the color label corresponding to their regional origin. The percentage of variance explained by each PC is shown on the axis. C) Individual grouping inferred by ADMIXTURE. Results from K = 4 and K = 12 are shown. Each individual’s genome is represented by a vertical bar composed of colored sections, where each section represents the proportion of an individual’s ancestry derived from one of the K ancestral populations. Individuals are arrayed horizontally and grouped by population as indicated.
As indicated, there are 40 different populations compared (the bottom of C section, Fig 3) with the top half of section C based on 4 "ancestral populations" - i.e., four colours - while the bottom half is based on 12 such populations (12 colours). For instance, the Pedi population (bottom left) is (maybe) 50% one ancestor (dark blue) and 50% another which seems Dogon.

And, in the preamble, they're talking about SNPs - "single-nucleotide polymorphisms" - which seem a (very) rough analog to protein encoding genes so likely to have some degree of phenotypic effects. So the graphs and article are comparing variations in those SNPs between different populations.

So subsequently in section B of Fig 3 they graph two "principal components" (PC1 & PC2), although I'm not sure how they are defined but there must be some more or less continuous variation in them to allow them to be graphed on the X & Y axes. Consequently, the graphs show or suggest that the African population shows little variation across PC2 but a 10% variation in PC1 while the Asian, European, & America populations show little variation in PC1 while approximately a 100% variation in PC2.

Still not at all sure how the "principal component analysis" technique works but it seems to identify, as suggested, those components which "account for as much of the variability in the data as possible".

deLurch
.
.
Posts: 8447
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2012 6:11 am

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21539

Post by deLurch »

Brive1987 wrote:
Thu Jan 04, 2018 8:19 pm
The skeptic camp needs to up its game. Kraut then this? The race based ethno argument should tank in under 60 seconds. I’m imagining Steve Novella vs Richard Spencer. Just to get some honour back. :popcorn: :lol: :lol:
The "skeptics" failure in the race based ethno arguments arena are the side affect of it being roundly a taboo subject. The topic is so hot that few people really look into the opposition's arguments, position and collections of information. Most people run in flailing at societally constructed strawmen instead of their real positions.

This is why many feminists fail so hard when put up against their opposition.

I would care more, but it is a taboo subject. And where you have taboo subjects, you are bound to have misinformation.

deLurch
.
.
Posts: 8447
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2012 6:11 am

Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#21540

Post by deLurch »

Brive1987 wrote:
Thu Jan 04, 2018 8:19 pm
The skeptic camp needs to up its game. Kraut then this? The race based ethno argument should tank in under 60 seconds. I’m imagining Steve Novella vs Richard Spencer. Just to get some honour back. :popcorn: :lol: :lol:
The "skeptics" failure in the race based ethno arguments arena are the side affect of it being roundly a taboo subject. The topic is so hot that few people really look into the opposition's arguments, position and collections of information. Most people run in flailing at societally constructed strawmen instead of their real positions.

This is why many feminists fail so hard when put up against their opposition.

I would care more, but it is a taboo subject. And where you have taboo subjects, you are bound to have misinformation.

Locked