Open Thread, Comment of the Week, etc.

Hello my friends. How has your week been?

I thought this was really interesting:

cxljmo2ukaafqoy

Since I don’t watch much TV that doesn’t involve Thomas the Tank Engine, I’ve never seen John Oliver and don’t really know who he is, but I am generally aware of Colbert and the Daily Show and such.

Comments of the week go to SFC Ton and Rhetocrates:

t3_5citho-3“I have seen a lot of failed nation states, up close and personal over the years. They always break down over tribal/ racial lines. …

It is inevitable that the usa will go through some version of Yugoslavia. The question is when and to what degree.” — SFC Ton

“I don’t think we’re going to turn into Yugoslavia. I think we’re going to turn into Syria.

The main difference is that Yugoslavia was already mostly segregated when the violence broke out. …

The US (speaking here of the largest segments of the population…) are not ethnically segregated.

… our dissolution – if not stopped – will look like Syria.” — Rhetocrates

 

 

The liberal solution to ethnic breakdown is “Stop being racist.” The conservative solution is “Avoid people you dislike.” Both solutions kind of work–until they don’t.

Hrm. Any interesting articles this week? How about a somewhat speculative but still very interesting reconstruction of an ancient Greek warrior’s face, plus a discussion of his grave goods?

One of my relatives died this week, so I’m going to go be sad, now. Please, if you have any fights with your relatives, try to make up if you can before they die. Sometimes people die a lot younger than you think they will.

And don’t let all of this election bullshittery drive you apart. Just don’t.

 

Advertisements

34 thoughts on “Open Thread, Comment of the Week, etc.

  1. I’m interested in the idea that the Minoans were pre-Indo-European while the Myceneans were Indo-European (do I have that right?) This guy sounds like he was shortly before the transition, ie, Minoan.

    Like

  2. I think a lot of people want to believe in some secret science that manipulates human brains, making them into mindless robots who don’t pursue their own interests. So far I have yet to see one backed up by replicated scientific studies.

    Mostly it seems like this commenter can’t really believe anyone disagrees with them on the merits, so they’re inventing stories why people are tricked into having the wrong position. This sort of thing makes a lot of the altright sound just like the SJ sphere they were fleeing from

    Like

  3. Adam Curry came up with this idea two shows ago that someone, somewhere, had been abusing ‘the children.’ The children being some of the protestors and/or complete idiots who allowed themselves to go completely hysterical while being videotaped for youtube or whatever. The responses to Trump’s win were insane.

    He does have a point- some of their statements are so at odds with reality that they must have suffered some brainwashing. I’ve heard in some schools you can’t actually get away from the ‘white privilege’ nonsense and some of the children actually have a breakdown, after which they get all p.c.

    But on the last noagenda, Adam focused on Oliver. Apparently clips of Oliver are what the youth take and send to their loved ones as ‘proof’ of whatever it is they think is true. Maybe so, but a good teacher could make children bulletproof to people like Oliver. A bad teacher does all the hard brainwashing work, making Oliver’s work very easy.

    But the abuse angle is an interesting one. Does cultural Marxism rise to the level of criminal abuse? I certainly hope so. I would like to see the regime in America’s schools brought abruptly to an end.

    Liked by 1 person

    • I don’t know if it does, but that’s an interesting angle. I’ve been thinking of it rather like a cult. When you’re in a cult, you’re encouraged to cut off contact with everyone outside the cult and get all of your self-worth from adherence to cult beliefs/customs. This is part of what makes it so hard to leave cults–to leave is simultaneously to reject everything that you thought made you “good” and to cut yourself off from all of the people you know in the cult (often everyone you know by then.)

      Any good cult involves some amount of brainwashing.

      Like

  4. I’m sorry for your loss.

    I was largely estranged from my grandfather in the few years before he passed. It probably was for the best, as he was a singularly challenging man. Since his passing, my relationship with my grandmother is better than at any point previous, so there’s that.

    I do not see how we turn into Syria, Yugoslavia, or any other ethnic civil war type failed state. The divide is not ethnic, generally, but religious. Meanwhile, the dramatic majority of military and police are on one side of the divide, and the other side is unarmed. Furthermore, red team is rural while blue team is urban (just look at the voting maps by county). All this apocalypse pr0n does no favors to anyone.

    Like

      • I find the closest comparison to be with Rome. If western birth rates don’t recover, we won’t have a military (unless it’s all robots). Typically, a great power only ever dies through suicide (assisted or solo).

        Like

      • When you think about it, there’s a certain logic to mounting the guns on robots instead of killable people. Which probably only works until the other guy starts doing it, but might buy us some time.

        Like

      • With nuclear weapons and some amazingly destructive conventional weapons, how big of an Army does Western nations need?

        Not very large. However a fucked up frogien policy mission sets drive military spending/ size which in turns drives the fucked up frogien policy stuff which drives military size/ spending which drives…..

        Automation in warfare will be limited for some time. To many officers, to many egos. Technology is there to replace fighter jets and pilots but that won’t happen because the airforce/ navy officer corps has egos to feed and a bunch of dorks worried they’ll never get laid again. Army/ usmc can’t feel self important standing in front of a formation of robots.

        Then comes the hippies and their bullshit. If you think about it, landmines are low tech military robots, and hippies pressure governments to stop using them. They are already warning about “killbots” malfunctioning and killing all of us.

        Emotion drives decsion making, not rational thought. Which is why common sense answers are rare

        Like

  5. Sorry for your loss. That’s some damn fine advice about making up with relatives but I will elect to ignore it

    Usually religious lines are tribal/ racial lines; the military is less rural and White every day and as I said before, the military never fails to fire on civilians.

    Like

  6. Usualy Leftists argue that Political correctness is just “being respectfull to everyone”. But then the question arises why it dosnt aply to whites and men who can be insulted, shamed and psychologicly broken at will.

    This is the main point why political correctness is called this way instead of just politness, it has a strong double standart.

    After all there is no more direct show of dominance then the ability to hit or insult someone and be protected from being hit back. For instance during Mongol rule in CHina any Mongol had the right to strike any southern Chinese without punishment while a Chinese striking a Mongol was punisheble by death. The left demanding the right for minorities to openly behave like total bastards towards whites without being punished dosnt exactly sound like “promoting politness” to me.

    If at all the leftist will then answer with a consequentionalist argument. By insulting white men their status is lowerd thus the unfair advantage they have eroded and this end justifies the means of being nasty to them.
    Also they argue that negative steryotypes about minorites lead to harm while about whites dont.

    Ofcourse this seems strange. Many minorities (asians mostly) and especialy women have positions of power over white men which they could exploit to their harm if they feel they are justified in practicing open gender/race nepotism.

    Now no leftist has yet made this argument to me but I think it is not weak: http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/04/20/social-justice-for-the-highly-demanding-of-rigor/
    it shows that women and blacks themselves usualy prefer papers written by white men and to hire white men. Would in such a case anti white male shaming and insulting campagins only help women and minorities to stop prefering white men and no longer harm their coethnics and cogender by a pro white men bias?

    I wonder what your take on the consequentinalism of “killallwhitemen” is?

    Like

    • It’s the basic bait and switch, where of course most people want to be polite (just like most people think women are human,) and those who don’t want to be polite aren’t going to engage in debates abut PC, anyway, they’ll just say something guaranteed offensive. But what happens if a polite person says something that they think is polite, but the other person doesn’t? PC generally advocates for caring more about whether or not the other person is offended than whether or not the speaker meant to give offense. Of course any reasonable person who values politeness would also care if they accidentally gave offense, but any reasonable listener would be understanding that the speaker was well-meaning and the offense was an accident.

      What people call PC generally goes well beyond that, or simple manners (ah, to have colleges just teach simple manners!) to “here’s how you need to think about, talk to, and talk about,” certain groups of people (“and if you don’t you’re a baaaad person!”) and yeah, it’s annoying.

      I don’t have a take on “killallwhitemen” except that it sounds like a terrible idea and a rude thing to say.

      How has your day been?

      Like

      • Im sorry I think i didnt make my point correctly.

        I was asking what your answer would be to the leftist argument that since whites have privileges and even non whites prefer to hire whites vs nonwhites shaming whites as a group would even the odds by lowering the privileges of whites and giving nonwhites greater self esteem and all the suffering it would bring to whites would be balanced out by the benifit for non whites in a purly consequentionalist and utilitarian way.

        Like

  7. The willingness to abandon flesh and blood relationships over an election that happened thousands of miles away and about which we’d hardly know anything except for mass media is…some kind of huge evil.

    Condolences to you.

    Like

  8. Serious bit: blood is thicker than water. Thanks for saying that.

    Non-serious bit: yay, I got comment of the week! Validation!

    As for the divide being more religious than ethnic, I don’t buy it. Go into a majority-White Catholic church, then a majority-Black Catholic church (they exist), then a majority-Hispanic Catholic church. Same religion, vastly different people.

    The divide only looks more religious than ethnic when you restrict your analysis to Whites, and then only if you don’t recognize ethnes within ‘White’.

    Which is not to say ethne and religion don’t inform and influence one another. Rather the opposite.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s