|
Yeah, it's always pretty obvious when someone is working off of the dictionary definition of anarchism, rather than the actual philosophical tradition.
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 19:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 17:50 |
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNmnZGegaeE Top Comment: 1433 I was thinking of posting this in the Libertarian thread but, well, we're talking about Libertarians anyway and this is on YT and I just found it on Garrett's Twitter feed. I certainly agree with him that it does a good job of explaining how Libertarians become Fascists. Combined with ThatGuyT's poo poo, it looks like it's all the fault of Triple H and Social Conservatism. They want freedom...but not freedom for "degenerates." Those people expressing their basic rights is too much for a free society. They have to be "peacefully" forced out of the utopian society to come. As if these idiots wouldn't be the first ones in chains or just dead.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
Falstaff posted:Yeah, it's always pretty obvious when someone is working off of the dictionary definition of anarchism, rather than the actual philosophical tradition. Yeah, I got nothing on the left version of that. I'm sorry for assuming any of you were as dumb as stuff like An Caps, who I think we can all agree are poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
Falstaff posted:Yeah, it's always pretty obvious when someone is working off of the dictionary definition of anarchism, rather than the actual philosophical tradition. The 'oh you actually got something useful for your student debt' discussion issue.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:42
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:I never understand this. $24K a year is a poo poo salary, and going by your model that's all someone should expect from a Patreon. If I think an object or service is valuable, its value is 100% untied to how much the person who created it makes. I don't donate to much of the stuff being discussed here, but I am in the $5-10 monthly for a few podcasts I enjoy. I look at it closer to a public radio donation style system, where you donate to the stuff you like so that the costs in getting it made are covered, along with money to support people enough that they don't just use that time to do something more valuable. If someone makes something that has actual broad appeal and makes $100K a year from it, good for them. I think it depends upon the product and circumstances to a degree. I was just thinking of artists who produce tangible products and also make money from selling those products, so in that case the Patreon is more of a "something in addition to what they make from sales to make it easier for them to do this full-time" rather than direct payment for a service (since I'll just directly buy the specific things I want from them). For someone who relies entirely on Patreon, I agree that it probably makes sense to want them to make more money than what I stated. One thing I may have also forgotten to consider is taxes. I'm assuming they have to pay taxes on whatever they make from the Patreon? The reason I mentioned ~$2k is that, despite my on-paper wage being $17.50/hr, my take-home after taxes and health insurance is only about $2,100-2,200/month, and I consider what I make to be at the bottom end of what should be considered a living wage. But if they're paying taxes after that $2k then I should probably readjust that figure to more like $3,000-$4,000, or more if they rely entirely on Patreon. I guess my more general point would be that I generally don't see any benefit to providing anyone more than about $60-70k per year in the form of strict donations (as opposed to transactions that actually get you a product). Like, there's a point where it becomes dumb to make a person who already has a comfortable life even more comfortable if you're not getting anything directly in return, since you may as well put that money towards someone who actually needs it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
It varies greatly by country but as a rule of thumb after payroll and income tax you can presume that they keep half.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:46
|
|
|
What about triple h
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 20:49
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:It varies greatly by country but as a rule of thumb after payroll and income tax you can presume that they keep half. In America you keep 2/3 because we live in hell.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 21:02
|
|
|
business hammocks posted:In America you keep 2/3 because we live in hell. But you losers also pay for your healthcare so it evens out when you get inoperable lung cancer, start a meth-dealing operation and due to increasingly contrived circumstances end up ruining the lives of everyone you've ever loved or cared about.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 21:04
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:True. Well, that's part of it. For many of these people, being racist is now the edgy, counter-culture thing. Having grown up in schools and a society that, at least conceptually, condemned racism, they start to think that maybe the edgy, hardcore reality is that some races are genetically inferior or whatever. I think that many of these people get a feeling of enjoyment from openly and boldly asserting things that society generally condemns. edit: It's like the political version of someone loudly shouting racial slurs for the "thrill" of it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 21:08
|
|
|
NikkolasKing posted:I was thinking of posting this in the Libertarian thread but, well, we're talking about Libertarians anyway and this is on YT and I just found it on Garrett's Twitter feed. I'd say it's less the fault of those people and more just that a lot of people choose their philosophies dishonestly. Libertarianism has a big push for the whole Freedom of Association thing in most modern communities, which is the end of civil rights effectively. Add in that Ron Paul published stuff that would make Klansmen blush in his newsletter, and you have a lot of people who got into the movement because it provides a much more philosophical backing for genuine old school racism. Think of it like the Bell Curve style racists-- they had the answer they wanted get to, and have worked backwards to develop a system that supports it. The idea of starting from end goals and working backwards is fine, but you should judge the person on the end result instead of the flowery language he uses to create a smokescreen for it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 21:13
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:But you losers also pay for your healthcare so it evens out when you get inoperable lung cancer, start a meth-dealing operation and due to increasingly contrived circumstances end up ruining the lives of everyone you've ever loved or cared about. You and the rest of the world need to understand that we all found that premise utterly plausible at the time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 21:20
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:Well, that's part of it. For many of these people, being racist is now the edgy, counter-culture thing. Having grown up in schools and a society that, at least conceptually, condemned racism, they start to think that maybe the edgy, hardcore reality is that some races are genetically inferior or whatever. I think that many of these people get a feeling of enjoyment from openly and boldly asserting things that society generally condemns. They believe (or at least say that) they're being counter-cultural by shocking people with racism in the same way hippies used to shock squares by growing long hair.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 21:23
|
|
|
mojo1701a posted:They believe (or at least say that) they're being counter-cultural by shocking people with racism in the same way hippies used to shock squares by growing long hair. What they fail to realize is that racism isn't shocking, it's boring
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 21:25
|
|
|
business hammocks posted:You and the rest of the world need to understand that we all found that premise utterly plausible at the time. I remember there being op-ed about Breaking Bad which joked that if the show took place in Sweden then the plot would be over in 10 minutes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 21:25
|
|
|
Calico Heart posted:If I remember right he actually was really hurt by all the negative flak though, he wasn't actually some rear end in a top hat who hated women or whatever. Correct me if I'm wrong but I remember reading he was wearing a goofy shirt that his friends got him specifically as a joke to lightly rib him on and it was a stupid mistake to wear it on TV. He seemed really really socially awkward from the interview too so i could see him not getting what was going on. I don't know if I missed anything but he seemed genuinely sorry when he appeared literally crying and apologizing because he dumb choice of shirt overshadowed maybe the greatest personal achievement of his life counterpoint: dumb internet people could feel smart and good for dunking on someone, in this case the self-described progressive internet people
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 21:27
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
mojo1701a posted:They believe (or at least say that) they're being counter-cultural by shocking people with racism in the same way hippies used to shock squares by growing long hair. Yes, and I think that many/most of the hippies weren't really fundamentally much better people; it was just more or less a coincidence that the culture they were rebelling against was actually bad. Of course, this generation went on to enthusiastically gut safety nets and weaken the power of labor, since their ideology was defined primarily by opposition to things they associated with "old stodgy conservative Republicans".
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 21:33
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:I'd say it's less the fault of those people and more just that a lot of people choose their philosophies dishonestly. Libertarianism has a big push for the whole Freedom of Association thing in most modern communities, which is the end of civil rights effectively. Add in that Ron Paul published stuff that would make Klansmen blush in his newsletter, and you have a lot of people who got into the movement because it provides a much more philosophical backing for genuine old school racism. Think of it like the Bell Curve style racists-- they had the answer they wanted get to, and have worked backwards to develop a system that supports it. The idea of starting from end goals and working backwards is fine, but you should judge the person on the end result instead of the flowery language he uses to create a smokescreen for it. Good point and I agree. But at the same time, isn't that sort of '"working backwards to justify your belief" common? I'm nota scientist or philosopher but it seems self-evident to me that people aren't blank slates. Take the death penalty for instance. No one starts completely neutral to the idea then reads some books and says "hm, yes, I'[m for/against it now." I don't know if intuition is a scientific thing but I always got the impression ethics and other beliefs are something we just develop and then reinforce as we get older. Naturally people can change their minds - I have been schizophrenic with my political ideas all my life, including some shameful time on the Right. But I wonder sometimes how many people really "think" about what they believe or they just gravitate to a group that reinforces everything they were taught growing up.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 21:36
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:Well, that's part of it. For many of these people, being racist is now the edgy, counter-culture thing. Having grown up in schools and a society that, at least conceptually, condemned racism, they start to think that maybe the edgy, hardcore reality is that some races are genetically inferior or whatever. I think that many of these people get a feeling of enjoyment from openly and boldly asserting things that society generally condemns. I believe you are overthinking this. It's the same thing as always with racism. A bunch of dudes with fairly low value need to have something so that they aren't at the bottom. Race is a good fallback if you're white, because it has a huge and long history. It's not edginess or anything like that, it's simply people trying to get a dishonest dollar or two.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 22:01
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:Libertarianism has a big push for the whole Freedom of Association thing in most modern communities, which is the end of civil rights effectively. It's what the alt-right would mock as a safe space, but it was necessary, and there probably wouldn't ever have been state recognition of LGBT rights beyond bland centrist 'tolerance' if there wasn't those non-state societies of free association. What the libertarian right has done is latch onto that kind of thinking and say "well where's my straight space?" and telling them that most of the country is a straight space won't shut them up because now they can just go on about the roving gangs of homosexuals who can force them to bake a cake. It's dumb as hell, and a predictable consequence, but historically the left libertarian concept of Freedom of Association without hierarchy has been a good thing and the right libertarian concept of Freedom of Association based on property leads to sundown towns.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 22:02
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:I never understand this. $24K a year is a poo poo salary, and going by your model that's all someone should expect from a Patreon. If I think an object or service is valuable, its value is 100% untied to how much the person who created it makes. I don't donate to much of the stuff being discussed here, but I am in the $5-10 monthly for a few podcasts I enjoy. I look at it closer to a public radio donation style system, where you donate to the stuff you like so that the costs in getting it made are covered, along with money to support people enough that they don't just use that time to do something more valuable. If someone makes something that has actual broad appeal and makes $100K a year from it, good for them. i would assume someone who's making youtube videos has a full time job so that 24k on top is enormous. like sargon poo poo takes literally zero effort and only the same amount of time as the length of the video. i could easily do what he does, have my full time job, and have loads of free time. 30k or whatevrr he gets in just extra money would be sick.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 22:10
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:i would assume someone who's making youtube videos has a full time job so that 24k on top is enormous. Even low-effort content takes a surprising amount of time when you account for constantly scavenging for material and interacting with your fan-base.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 22:14
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:i would assume someone who's making youtube videos has a full time job so that 24k on top is enormous. Yea, a lot of the rationals don't edit or do the bare minimum of editing/post production work. Funny enough, the "SJW Squad" actually tend to have higher production values.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 22:14
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:I believe you are overthinking this. It's the same thing as always with racism. A bunch of dudes with fairly low value need to have something so that they aren't at the bottom. Race is a good fallback if you're white, because it has a huge and long history. It's not edginess or anything like that, it's simply people trying to get a dishonest dollar or two. It depends what specific demographics you're talking about; I'm mainly referring to the sort of young people who heavily use the internet and post on websites like 4chan. They're obviously different than, say, a conservative Baby Boomer who is a big fan of more typical, establishment Republican racism. As a side note related to your post, I really don't like this "lol dumb poor whites want more than they deserve and don't realize they're worthless" stuff. It's fine to condemn the bad views people actually have, but using some super classist bizarre inverse version of a welfare queen argument isn't going to make you any friends. Part of the reason I dislike liberals so much is that I work with and know a whole bunch of people who basically fit the mold of "white person born into a middle or upper class family who received a higher education and now works in an academic/professional field", and the extent to which they disdain people on the basis of being poor and/or rural is downright scary. Pretty much any cultural identifier associated with poverty that isn't also tied to an ethnic minority is mocked*. When they're among people they believe to be peers they start "joking" about how we should sterilize poor rednecks or whatever. If you spent a lot of time around people like this, it quickly becomes very obvious that they genuinely enjoy the feeling of being able to freely look down upon others. All of this ties into my general belief that Democrats/liberals represent the attitudes and interests of the "comparatively smart/educated wealthy" while Republicans/conservatives represent the interests of the "stupid, actively malicious wealthy." The former is unquestionably superior to the latter, but neither are really allies to people who lack wealth and power. *Actually, many liberals will also mock certain minorities, though they tend to do it along a combination of racial and class lines (for example making fun of "saggy jeans" or whatever). Groovelord Neato posted:i would assume someone who's making youtube videos has a full time job so that 24k on top is enormous. Depends what kind of Youtube videos. There's a difference between people who just ramble into a mic (like Sargon, etc) and folks like HBomberguy and Contrapoints that at least make some attempt to produce something more complex and interesting (in terms of presenting material in a way that isn't just rambling speech). Ytlaya fucked around with this message at 22:21 on Jun 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 22:15
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:Even low-effort content takes a surprising amount of time when you account for constantly scavenging for material and interacting with your fan-base. i spend more time and effort poo poo posting online than sargon does recording/editing/tweeting. and i do this poo poo for free without even a single thank you. Ytlaya posted:Depends what kind of Youtube videos. There's a difference between people who just ramble into a mic (like Sargon, etc) and folks like HBomberguy and Contrapoints that at least make some attempt to produce something more complex and interesting. yeah i meant the sargon type. harold bomberguy's sherlock video alone probably required more editing and effort in general than every "rational" video combined. sargon doesn't even read any of the articles and poo poo he makes videos about for cryin out loud.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 22:17
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Yea, a lot of the rationals don't edit or do the bare minimum of editing/post production work. Funny enough, the "SJW Squad" actually tend to have higher production values. They also seem to be having more fun with it, which makes it easier to put in that extra effort
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 22:22
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Yea, a lot of the rationals don't edit or do the bare minimum of editing/post production work. Funny enough, the "SJW Squad" actually tend to have higher production values. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 22:23
|
|
|
NikkolasKing posted:Good point and I agree. But at the same time, isn't that sort of '"working backwards to justify your belief" common? I'm not a scientist or philosopher but it seems self-evident to me that people aren't blank slates. I agree completely with this. But the societal expectation is the exact opposite, where we think people's beliefs are worth protecting even if the end result is pretty transparent racism, misogyny, or homophobia. I don't know how to get past this, since it seems like people's first suggestion is that arguing from the bottom up is weaker. Guavanaut posted:It's dumb as hell, and a predictable consequence, but historically the left libertarian concept of Freedom of Association without hierarchy has been a good thing and the right libertarian concept of Freedom of Association based on property leads to sundown towns. But how do you stop the former from becoming the latter? I mean, without actual protections, is a community of people without hierarchy saying "No Jews" really any better than doing so with a hierarchy? The former seems easily possible if it comes from some mutually agreed principle, like a religion. Civil Rights are directly in opposition to Freedom of Association, and I can't really see any reason why the latter should be given special consideration given how it's been used in the past.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 22:25
|
|
|
SHY NUDIST GRRL posted:They also seem to be having more fun with it, which makes it easier to put in that extra effort Also they're engaged with the world and have experienced intimacy and joy, which gives them energy and will to create something, rather being angry outsiders who only condemn and rage at what others do.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 22:27
|
|
|
I mean the alt-right is undeniably a counter-culture, they've adopted racism and misogyny as their core tenets they're not really the point at the end of the day - it's contrarianism. Being seen pushing back against liberal democratic values that have saturated popular culture for the last 20 or so years. You find a consensus and then resist it because consensus can only be reached through groupthink and groupthink is for sheeple. The good news is that the alt-right as we know it will not survive its recent brush with the mainstream - they got their president, they got their congress, they got their liberal tears, they have "arrived" and already you're seeing the schism between the true believers and the chaos magick fucks who thought the election was a meme. Note that I'm not saying they aren't racist or misogynist in a literal sense - no such thing as performative irony, etc. I just don't think those are hills most of them are willing to die on at the end of the day.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 22:33
|
|
|
but how is it a counter culture when it runs the entire government.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 22:34
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:but how is it a counter culture when it runs the entire government. That was my point (probably expressed poorly) - a counter-culture that aims to seize any degree of political power can't do so while staying true to their ideals, and I think they're realizing this. That doesn't mean that I thin there's hope for the Pepes or anything, they'll probably fall for a worse sham down the line, but I don't view these people as the movers and shakers they view themselves as.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 22:38
|
|
|
you're certainly right. they just believe they're strong because their guy is in charge - it's like sports. i have no connection to tom brady but i felt great when he mounted his comeback because it's my team.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 22:44
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:Anarchy and small government leftism are mirages. As soon as the state steps back, King Assholes step in and that's the end of a leftist dream. The lack of government isn't some worker's paradise, it's Somalia. Well that's the entire history of anarchism squarely defeated in one hot take. Ytlaya posted:Well, that's part of it. For many of these people, being racist is now the edgy, counter-culture thing. Having grown up in schools and a society that, at least conceptually, condemned racism, they start to think that maybe the edgy, hardcore reality is that some races are genetically inferior or whatever. I think that many of these people get a feeling of enjoyment from openly and boldly asserting things that society generally condemns. Yes but I also learned addition in school and my response to that in adulthood was not to refuse to believe in the concept of numbers. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 22:48 on Jun 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 22:46
|
|
|
We all feel great when mounted by Tom Brady
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 22:46
|
|
|
Groovelord Neato posted:i would assume someone who's making youtube videos has a full time job so that 24k on top is enormous. Not necessarily. There's a whole bunch who are full time youtubers. Ytlaya posted:It depends what specific demographics you're talking about; I'm mainly referring to the sort of young people who heavily use the internet and post on websites like 4chan. They're obviously different than, say, a conservative Baby Boomer who is a big fan of more typical, establishment Republican racism. lemme distill your post down to the essentials Ytlaya posted:it quickly becomes very obvious that they genuinely enjoy the feeling of being able to freely look down upon others.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 22:49
|
|
|
Deified Data posted:We all feel great when mounted by Tom Brady i'd rather ride the gronk bus.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 22:58
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:It depends what specific demographics you're talking about; I'm mainly referring to the sort of young people who heavily use the internet and post on websites like 4chan. They're obviously different than, say, a conservative Baby Boomer who is a big fan of more typical, establishment Republican racism. Again, it ties into that search for value. The channers are as a group pathetic. No/low employment and education, low prospects romantically, and little life beyond AAA video games and anime. They are the people rightfully left behind by the economy, and instead of turning the blame inward where it belongs they lash out at better people who have succeeded where they have failed. quote:As a side note related to your post, I really don't like this "lol dumb poor whites want more than they deserve and don't realize they're worthless" stuff. It's fine to condemn the bad views people actually have, but using some super classist bizarre inverse version of a welfare queen argument isn't going to make you any friends. Part of the reason I dislike liberals so much is that I work with and know a whole bunch of people who basically fit the mold of "white person born into a middle or upper class family who received a higher education and now works in an academic/professional field", and the extent to which they disdain people on the basis of being poor and/or rural is downright scary. Pretty much any cultural identifier associated with poverty that isn't also tied to an ethnic minority is mocked*. When they're among people they believe to be peers they start "joking" about how we should sterilize poor rednecks or whatever. If you spent a lot of time around people like this, it quickly becomes very obvious that they genuinely enjoy the feeling of being able to freely look down upon others. Sorry, but I legit believe in meritocracy. These guys don't have the state or society making GBS threads on them, so they don't have an excuse for being as unsuccessful as they are. I got out of that culture (grew up in the lovely hills in western MD, though you couldn't tell so much now with 40 years of growth from DC showing up) and gain some level of success. Why the hell should I offer to bail them out to the guy who's just going to poo poo on me because I got out, gave up god, and found out I liked screwing dudes? Doubly so when it's going to cost us immigration, which is the primary way we've stayed a step ahead of other parts of the world. I don't want to see any sterilized, but I do think that free and effective birth control and abortion will basically decimate that population. It's just like the "opioid crisis". People started giving a poo poo exactly when the cute white girl who goes to church and loves mama and apple pie started shooting up. Sorry, you don't get to poo poo on everyone else and then stop the train when it's finally your turn to get screwed. The poor white community doesn't get to be suddenly woke on economic issues just as soon as they start to become economically obsolete. Especially since they've been making GBS threads on the welfare state because doing so helped them get an unfair leg up on minorities right up until now. It's entirely transparent to me that this is going to go the same way it went during the New Deal-- i.e. poor whites get a leg up and than hit the betray button as hard and fast as possible. And I don't much feel like being the sacrifice given up for it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 23:42
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:It's entirely transparent to me that this is going to go the same way it went during the New Deal-- i.e. poor whites get a leg up and than hit the betray button as hard and fast as possible. And I don't much feel like being the sacrifice given up for it. Why? Why is this taken as a given now? Don't you think poo poo has changed from the New Deal era? Do you think we could get away with passing "welfare but only for whites" without a shitload of lawsuits and challenges from the courts? This is the most frustrating assumption, that just because we were racist the last time we did a welfare state, we will be again. Not to say that everything will go perfectly with no issues whatsoever, but I think it's doable.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 23:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 17:50 |
|
|
Poor people in america are more racially diverse than any other class so I don't really get the hate for poor people, generally.
|
|
#
?
Jun 28, 2017 23:47
|
|
