It is too soon to say whether Bush or Trump did more damage to the world and/or the USA.
Funny events in anti-woke world
- Thread starter Agema
- Start date
This twitter rant. This is just one out of 14, be sure to read the whole thing and be amazed.
And of course the real reason to post this ... the memes!
And of course the real reason to post this ... the memes!
Every tweet in that rant is a banger, and every tweet is more insane than the last, and it started with "elevating alternate sexual archetypes in the marketplace"
Is this what drugs feeling like?
Is this what drugs feeling like?
Trumpist county clerk barred after leak of voting-system passwords to QAnon
Peters lied about “consultant” who copied data; deputy clerk had cameras disabled.
arstechnica.com
Not sure how Ron is still legally allowed to run for Congress with all this shit. What a writhing mess.
Also, Peters is still in hiding, saying she "was trying to preserve records and to better analyze how Colorado conducts system updates" ...well why the fuck did you order the cameras to be turned off you disingenuous cowardly kunt?
Last edited:
I'm afraid there's no drugs left, Conrad ate them all. Apart from the benzos, Peterson had already finished those.
Normally I can at least understand where it's coming from even if I don't agree with some of the more out there things said.
This one though I can literally only guess at based on vague idea.
This is what I interpret it to mean and explanation as to what I think as to why they're saying it (and to be clear it sounds kinda insane)
For the left it's not about doing the work well be the appearance of being a good worker.
(See people on about how it's awful companies are employing coders who are terrible at interacting with people, because clearly the role of a coder is to smooth talk people not produce code right? However the boss who interacts with a coder will likely know them more than the coder who just pumps out masses of code thus a bad boss will see the smooth talker as having more value. You are a good worker not due to your work but you fitting into the company and seeming to be good)
You have nothing of you own in the end though because it is all shared, the techniques the methods etc nothing is truly owned or created it is all for the glory of the speedrunning community.
(I think this comes down to the idea of communism being about the achievement of the whole movement where the idea of personal achievement and success isn't as celebrated as what it means for the whole. From what I've seen of speed running there's often a lot of "This person found this thing what will it mean for the future of the community and runs" )
This is being used in speedrunning to create a new sexual desirability characteristic by making people well known or giving prestige for stuff.
(Believe it or not there's a lot of weird stuff going on in the speed running community such that even a moderately successful speedrunner can be seen as desirable to some in the community, no really it's a very weird world from the small amount I've seen such that a like 3,000 follower speedrunner of no real note ended up in a bizarre controversy where he shared a room with a girl to set her up to be banned from GDQ as a way to prove his love and dedicated to another girl he'd hooked up with several times)
Many whistleblowers will carry out technically illegal activities, which they will also attempt to conceal, in order to expose greater wrongdoing. After all, Peters arguably believed that the authorities were corrupt and would squash her attempts to expose corruption. Likewise we might accept that such releases may cause harm (e.g. to national interest) in some way. Thus was what she did in mechanism so different from Chelsea Manning? Were Peters exposing a genuine scandal, we would accept this subterfuge that she took.
The issue is really that she was delusional and made a colossal error of judgement, and now that it is clear she undermined election security for nothing, that she will not take responsibility for it.
Hm there are pretty noticeable differences, such as usually whistleblowers have actual insider knowledge they are trying to get out to the public, not reading baseless conspiracy theories online which then cause them to act without any knowledge or proof. Also whistleblowers go to as many trustworthy news outlets as possible to get the message out, not post to some creepazoid troll admin of a site known for hosting child porn and Nazi memes, etc etc.
It's not a "bill" to order resources; these things are usually handled departmentally in the UK. But sure, the usual stockpile level for insulin is 1.5 million doses, which is approximately 7+ weeks' worth.
It would need over 30 million votes. And that would need to be the norm for basically every resource the country needs on a weekly or monthly basis. That's pie-in-the-sky thinking.
So if it's an election, then you have elected representatives.
And if it's not, then you have no detail on the alternative.
That just simply isn't true. As a recent example, Chris Whitty & Patrick Vallance's formal advice to the UK government isn't just readily available.
Underlining mine, because for the umpteenth time, that isn't what I've been saying. There's nothing "inherent" about this; people are hired for a specific job. That doesn't make them supermen.
You're right in one sense, in that any suitably rational, invested, knowledgeable person, if given access to the same data and procedural stuff, is going to be able to fulfil the job. That's not what direct democracy is requesting, though, is it? It's requesting that every person in the country, regardless of rationality, investment or knowledge, have equal standing in fulfilling that job.
They're outnumbered, in the US, by an opposition who you also feel are an equal part of the problem. And they wouldn't be a "hairsbreadth" from ruling; they would be ruling in direct democracy, just as much as anybody else.
Their motions wouldn't somehow immediately start being rational, intelligent notions for the betterment of society, in complete contrast to how they've acted for the past 5 years.
There's accountability in that the citizenry can recall a representative (with as little as 10% triggering a process, here in the UK). There's accountability in that how every individual MP voted is a matter of public record and publicly available online (I check it frequently). We can see our MPs personally at surgeries. We can vote them out of office.
If everybody in the country is equally culpable? "Eh, it was just one vote. And besides it went bad cos of how it was handled, it's the civil service's fault".
It hasn't changed, because those aren't my words.
"If there are no objections"... sorry, from fucking who? If I'm just asking my mate, do I then shout in the street to see if anyone objects? And where do they take them-- just to City Hall, to sit among the hundred others awaiting a referendum?
Uhrm... do you actually know what an NGO is? A lot of them have direct relationships with governments. They're simply outside of gov control.
I told you. Limits on the docket. It's literally someone's job to stop this happening.
Ooooook. So you would elect people. To represent the interests. But it wouldn't be representative democracy.
They basically made Shadow sound like a bigger douche than his Sonic Boom (TV) incarnation.
Nah, I speak from experience that you're more coherent while on drugs.
Ugh, sorry, gotta share the despair before buggering off.
www.thedailybeast.com
Meet the Tomahawk-Toting QAnoner Terrorizing School Boards
Scott McKay has marshaled his fan base to engage in sometimes hostile activism at school board meetings against mask mandates.
Wow... That was fantastic.
First of all, hot take that Elon Musk is the most fuckable man in the world.
Second of all I absolutely love the fact that he talks about speed runners essentially handing people the tools to beat them, that a speed run is just built on the work people have previously done and therefore isn't the accomplishment of the speed runner. Like it's literally Kropotkins argument against private property.
Oh what's that? It's delegated and politicians don't have to know how many doses the country needs? Imagine my shock.
We've literally just established that politicians don't order resources directly, so that's bullshit.
D e l e g a t i o n.
In any case, as you've pointed out repeatedly, your whole argument is against someone else, someone who might have a silly idea of how horizontal hierarchy works. I didn't come in to make arguments on their behalf, I came in because you laid out broad arguments against the very idea of direct democracy which were stupid.
That's why I specified good democracy. Their statements to the government should absolutely be open to see for all.
Yet your actual arguments have said the opposite. You can deny it all you like, but you've been saying the equivalent of "I'm not racist, but"
Elected bodies carry a semi-random cross-section of the population they're elected from, by definition. They are equally as rational as the people they're drawn from. If you're saying politicians are statistically rational, then you have to admit the population they're drawn from are statistically rational. If you're saying the population is statistically irrational, you have to say politicians drawn from them will be statistically irrational.
They'd be allowed to vote, as they do now. But they would have to actually win on policy votes instead of personality ones. The actual race between Trump and Biden was close enough that they nearly won four more years of policy that would have been unpopular, with no way for the people to stop the policies, even the ones his voters hated. If you outsource your decision making, you don't get to complain when the person decides poorly.
Likely not, but they'd have less power to enact their bad policies.
It's ironic that the actual source of accountability in your system is direct democracy. Seeing how they voted is no source of accountability, neither is voting them out at the next election.
You mean what people do now in representative democracy, making this problem not at all unique?
They are your words.
Yes and yes. Generally we're going to be talking about more than a single household with an idea, and there's generally a more formalized setting for discussing ideas (like biweekly meetings or something, depending), but it is largely that straightforward. If you're picking someone to express your ideas to another body, you don't need a bunch of campaign promises and shrewd dealing, you need a guy to go over to the next town with a list. It doesn't need some big set of promises or formalized election, "Hey Bob, can you take this list we made to the next town?" is perfectly viable.
A few of them have disgusting ties to governments, but theoretically they aren't appointed by governments and while they can receive government commissions, they are supposed to be self-standing.
And this doesn't work in direct democracy, because...?
I never said that. I explicitly said you don't have to have elections to have democracy.
This is where we're at in America.
"Oh, nobody is REALLY advocating things like they say in /pol/, you're just being hyperbolic".
This is what happens when you have a For Profit prison system.
We Reported on a County That Has Jailed Kids for a Crime That Doesn’t Exist. Readers Reacted.
Significantly more children were sent to jail in Rutherford County than any other county in Tennessee. Almost nothing happened to the adults in charge. Here’s how some readers responded.www.propublica.org
This republican monster locked up likely politically powerless African American children for watching a fight.
That's capitalism baby.
The entire point of capitalism is to strip labour of value. That's what it's been doing for hundreds of years now, until we're at the point we are now where labour essentially has no value whatsoever. Very few of us will ever have any real stake, financial or emotional, in the outcome of our own labour, so why care about it? Caring about your work, worrying about doing the work well, taking pride in your own work, is a scam. After all, it's not your work, no part of it belongs to you. Companies and employers can and will pretend to be your friends, they can try to motivate you by appealing to your emotions and making you feel special, but I think most people kind of know on some level that it's a lie. So why bother? What compelling reason do any of us have to care about doing our work well?
Even if that were true. How is that different from other form of labour?
But I don't think it is true. Because ironically, being part of a community means that people do know who you are. If you achieve something, if you invent a new technique or just execute something really well, then other people in that community will notice. Community, even online community, is a very powerful thing. Creating something which other people will see and associate with you can meet a need. Heck, creating something purely for your own amusement and then sharing it voluntarily, rather than being coerced into doing something to make other people money, is a more tangible form of ownership than almost any of the actual paid work people do.
I mean, I know there's a certain breed of conservative men whose political views have made them so thoroughly repulsive to most women that they can't date or have normal sex lives, but most people have sex, which implies that most people are to some extent sexually desirable.
Like, I feel like what's really making conservatives mad here is the refutation of this weird red pill myth that women only experience physical attraction, and even then only for alpha chads with big muscles and ridiculous jawlines. If someone is successful at speedrunning, that's at least interesting. It's not really surprising to me that people who find the same things interesting hook up, and it probably shouldn't be surprising to anyone willing to give it any thought.
Speaking of conservatives getting mad, this makes a good segueway into another thing I've always wanted to address about the right and anti-woke types; this notion that, if people disagree with you or call your opinion shit, it's automatically validation and confirmation that you said nothing wrong and that you're "living rent free" in their heads.
Yes, I agree - Chelsea Manning had a vastly better case. But the basic mechanism of trickery and illegality to acquire the data to whistleblow is acceptable - or at least, defensible as long as the case (wrongdoing exposed) is.