|
Dapper_Swindler posted:I mean those edgy kids/teens/dudes/some girls who think if the world went to poo poo they would be able carve out and rule a fiefdom or someshit. I remember having a tremendously dorky sci-fi worldbuilding thing and a guy saying he'd prefer the nightmarish ancap hellhole with slave markets and PMC death squads over the social demcratic Space Sweden sort of state because he thought he was so ded 'ard that he'd make a name for himself as a PMC commander and get rich and it is just so terrible to live under Terran socialist tyranny with a 30 hour workweek and free healthcare.
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 00:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 16:02 |
|
|
Woolie Wool posted:I remember having a tremendously dorky sci-fi worldbuilding thing and a guy saying he'd prefer the nightmarish ancap hellhole with slave markets and PMC death squads over the social demcratic Space Sweden sort of state because he thought he was so ded 'ard that he'd make a name for himself as a PMC commander and get rich and it is just so terrible to live under Terran socialist tyranny with a 30 hour workweek and free healthcare. so "better a lord in hell then a citizen in heaven" kind of bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 00:15
|
|
|
divabot posted:oh god, that thing was in my school library. I would love to read it and compare it to the overly self-centered screeds we see posted on the Internet today.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 00:18
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:so "better a lord in hell then a citizen in heaven" kind of bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 01:04
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Milton's Satan's quote is "better to reign in Hell, than serve in Heaven" though, which given what we know of the Old Testament God, I might be inclined to agree. The other thing to note is that the full quote also kinda said 'Hell is what you make of it.'.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 01:10
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Milton's Satan's quote is "better to reign in Hell, than serve in Heaven" though, which given what we know of the Old Testament God, I might be inclined to agree. thats the one.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 01:22
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Milton's Satan's quote is "better to reign in Hell, than serve in Heaven" though, which given what we know of the Old Testament God, I might be inclined to agree. Yeah, well, being poor in Space Sweden sounds way nicer than being any human at all in Old Testament God's Heaven, even when you include the existence of space-surströmming.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 01:26
|
|
|
Ratoslov posted:Yeah, well, being poor in Space Sweden sounds way nicer than being any human at all in Old Testament God's Heaven, even when you include the existence of space-surströmming.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2016 01:34
|
|
|
hahahahaha https://twitter.com/pinchicagoo this HAS to be a troll account
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 20:43
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Actually, I think you'll find they call themselves autarchists now. I cannot understand the mental block that these guys use to convince themselves that property ownership doesn't translate directly to power, in such a system. How is "autarchy" anything but an ideological fig leaf for oligarchy? 
Jeedy Jay fucked around with this message at 22:27 on Mar 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2016 22:24
|
|
|
The biggest name in ancaps is Hans-Hermann Hoppe, a guy who wants literal feudalism and an "intellectual" forefather of neoreaction. Do you think he doesn't know?
|
|
#
?
Mar 10, 2016 16:32
|
|
|
I thought this thread would be a good place to ask since there's been discussion of IQ and also it revolves around a lot of people who are not necessarily dumb but believe ridiculous things. Has anyone ever tried to make an IQ test that specifically attempts to trigger emotional bias? I'm thinking some series of tests like giving a group of people a regular IQ test, a test that measures authoritarianism,* a test or quiz that makes them reveal their political orientation and other major interests, and some other irrelevant psychological tests. Then inviting them back and giving them each an IQ test that is tailor-made, based on the answers they gave to the other surveys, to include references to their pet issues. I think it would be interesting to see if people who have no problem giving the correct answer to "all fish live in the sea, sharks live in the sea, therefore all sharks are fish" would still be able to do so if the question was changed to be about a shibboleth of a particular political ideology. I thought of this when I was talking to a DE person recently and he was becoming enraged that I wouldn't accept that black people commit more crime for biological reasons. I accepted that statistics authoritatively show that black people are arrested at much higher rates, and also said that I strongly suspect that they are actually committing a disproportionate amount of violent crime (at least of some types, I'm not sure about crimes that are hard to convict like DV and acquaintance rape) despite the fact that the statistics are not as clear. I then said that we need a bunch of qualitative data and statistics about other things in order to infer why this is happening. We don't have many clearly established facts about the "why" and "how" of this, which is why there have been multiple factors implicated and a thriving debate. Even if one factor turns out to be dominant, the others could still have an influence anyway. According to him, "we don't need any further data to see that they are biologically predisposed to violence when the statistics showing they commit more crime are so authoritative. It's Occam's Razor, this is the simplest explanation." I was amazed by this because this person doesn't lack the intellectual resources to prevent him from saying something so stupid. He almost certainly has a higher IQ than me, probably a decent EQ as well, and shows sound reasoning when discussing topics that aren't as controversial. But it seems like when he tries to put together intuition and logic, or figure out the reasons behind something he has emotional investment in, his brain turns to poop. *Authoritarianism is already correlated with being bad at deductive reasoning. A lot of those tested couldn't give the right answer to the shark question or understand why, since sharks ARE fish, you're supposed to say "no." But obviously, some authoritarians are smarter than others, and it could be that the ones whose reasoning skills are fine in a neutral context just fall to pieces in real life when you introduce other factors. Weldon Pemberton fucked around with this message at 01:17 on Mar 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 01:08
|
|
|
This phenomenon is what George Orwell called crimestop. It's protective stupidity that an authoritarian uses to avoid thinking the wrong thoughts. You cannot reason with this person.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 01:22
|
|
|
Tesseraction posted:Which is true, but not necessarily something that disproves the assertion that the person doesn't tie their self-worth to an arbitrary definition of 'masculinity.' What should a person tie his self-worth to? Note the qualifier: 'self'. And ask yourself whether you have actually considered the phrase 'arbitrary definition of masculinity', and what any bepenised person would benefit from your opinion of it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 06:20
|
|
|
What are you doing here Maoist
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 06:29
|
|
|
Arguing with people on the internet. How are you?
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 06:36
|
|
|
What if Space Sweden is really dull and it isn't the sort of environment where people are self-actualized and its really just an agnostic telling of Protestant Heaven?
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 06:39
|
|
|
Maoist Pussy posted:What should a person tie his self-worth to? Note the qualifier: 'self'. And ask yourself whether you have actually considered the phrase 'arbitrary definition of masculinity', and what any bepenised person would benefit from your opinion of it. Well if we're being really collectivist then a person should probably tie his self worth to his ability to  produce (or benefit) others in his/her community. Instead of the whole capitalist narrative of "create wealth" though I guess you could also talk about producing art in its various forms, educating others, decreasing socio-economic inequality, or something else. I just dislike the idea of self-worth being tied to fetishizing some stupid inter-personal trait. "I'm a dude... maybe I should be proud of that!"
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 10:51
|
|
|
Maoist Pussy posted:What if Space Sweden is really dull and it isn't the sort of environment where people are self-actualized and its really just an agnostic telling of Protestant Heaven? Does that mean no free blowjob robots?
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 12:43
|
|
|
The only external requirement of self-actualization is that there is a challenge, so space sweden is just as capable of providing that as anywhere else. Additionally, space sweden would be more than capable of fulfilling other desires, ergo people are going to be happier. There's no reason not to prefer it, other than simple familiarity with the poo poo world we have now, which is fine, change is scary, but change is necessary, so deal with it. Also it's would be healthier in general if people tied their self-worth to actually useful and helpful ideas, bepenised or not. Don't correlate it with having a dick, your brain is the actually important organ. Have you considered that this person isn't as smart as you think? Because they've pretty erroneously deployed parsimony, for basically no other reason than to shut you out. Honestly, it seems more likely they've learned a couple to tricks and a few bits of jargon, then talked themselves into confirming their predisposed biases. Don't let his handwaving bullshit fool you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 13:55
|
|
|
Twerkteam Pizza posted:Well if we're being really collectivist We aren't being "really collectivist", so, no.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 22:59
|
|
|
rudatron posted:The only external requirement of self-actualization is that there is a challenge, so space sweden is just as capable of providing that as anywhere else. Being a man is a challenge. Many people fail at it. I suspect that the residents of Space Sweden would fail at it in impressive numbers.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 23:02
|
|
|
Xand_Man posted:Does that mean no free blowjob robots? I don't want to gently caress a robot. Robots can't cry. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 23:03
|
|
|
Maoist Pussy posted:Being a man is a challenge. Many people fail at it. I suspect that the residents of Space Sweden would fail at it in impressive numbers. Only if you're FtM
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 23:03
|
|
|
Maoist Pussy posted:Being a man is a challenge. Many people fail at it. I suspect that the residents of Space Sweden would fail at it in impressive numbers. How do you define "being a man?" Presumably having a penis and testicles doesn't suffice, since nearly half the population is born with them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 23:18
|
|
|
No definition would mean anything to you. You haven't the ears.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 23:23
|
|
|
Pththya-lyi posted:How do you define "being a man?" Presumably having a penis and testicles doesn't suffice, since nearly half the population is born with them. Well it starts with being swift as a coursing river. With all the force of a great typhoon With all the strength of a raging fire Mysterious as the dark side of the moo~oon.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 23:25
|
|
|
Maoist Pussy posted:Being a man is a challenge. Many people fail at it. I suspect that the residents of Space Sweden would fail at it in impressive numbers.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 23:25
|
|
|
Enthusiastically and largely arbitrarily. E: actually going with louis xiv: having the sexiest legs in tights and wearing the most fabulous red high heels.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 23:25
|
|
|
Maoist Pussy posted:No definition would mean anything to you. You haven't the ears. But perhaps it would mean something to the potential men reading this thread, so why don't you tell me anyway? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 23:26
|
|
|
Pththya-lyi posted:But perhaps it would mean something to the potential men reading this thread, so why don't you tell me anyway? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 23:29
|
|
|
So being a man means expecting others to understand something without being explicitly told Just like a woman, amirite fellas? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 23:36
|
|
|
I don't expect you to understand anything. The message is not for you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 23:38
|
|
|
If you don't actually have an answer then just say so.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 23:39
|
|
|
Maoist Pussy posted:I don't expect you to understand anything. The message is not for you.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 23:42
|
|
|
Nessus posted:so to whom, exactly, are you signalling? They're very obviously trolling, so probably other trolls to tell them "Get over here".
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 23:48
|
|
|
Trolling D&D is itself pretty shameful though. Oh man you managed to troll the forum devoted to actually serious things that people care a lot about. Good going.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 23:50
|
|
|
Nessus posted:so to whom, exactly, are you signalling? I am signalling to you that your discussion of 'masculinity' is as meaningful as a toad's discussion of meteorology.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 23:52
|
|
|
Maoist Pussy posted:Being a man is a challenge. Many people fail at it. I suspect that the residents of Space Sweden would fail at it in impressive numbers. Maoist Pussy posted:No definition would mean anything to you. You haven't the ears. Next up, 
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 23:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 16:02 |
|
|
Maoist Pussy just wants to retain the masculine mystique
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2016 23:53
|
|