TheRPGSite

Fan Forums => The RPGPundit's Own Forum => Topic started by: Neoplatonist1 on October 12, 2021, 11:06:03 AM

Title: What will divide us next?
Post by: Neoplatonist1 on October 12, 2021, 11:06:03 AM
Many years ago I wondered what the next minority victim group was going to be. Turned out fat people and transsexuals became the new minorities, along with a few others.

Now the holistic politics around this victim cult has invaded my hobby, creating mutually hostile camps. That one side exists in bad faith, and revels in conveniently hating the correct people, doesn't matter for the purpose of this question, which is:

What will divide us next? What new victim groups are being prepared for rollout? What new issue will your erstwhile friend, brother, or fellow-gamer find that will pit him against you? What novel and arcane ideological technicality will further atomize society and push us further into this repulsive alien political landscape?
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Horace on October 12, 2021, 04:01:04 PM
Pedophiles, or "Minor-Attracted Persons," are already being positioned for normalization. You'll see a big push for pedophilia tolerance once the Left thinks they can get away with it.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 12, 2021, 04:03:19 PM
Sex offenders in general, IMO.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/loudoun-county-schools-tried-to-conceal-sexual-assault-against-daughter-in-bathroom-father-says

Try not to break things after reading this.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: RandyB on October 12, 2021, 04:24:33 PM
Sex offenders in general, IMO.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/loudoun-county-schools-tried-to-conceal-sexual-assault-against-daughter-in-bathroom-father-says

Try not to break things after reading this.

That's "just" the public schools closing ranks. Still disgusting, but nothing new.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Shasarak on October 12, 2021, 04:26:40 PM
Many years ago I wondered what the next minority victim group was going to be. Turned out fat people and transsexuals became the new minorities, along with a few others.

Fat people are not a minority.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on October 12, 2021, 04:28:47 PM
It will be some made up thing. I think we have 20 or so years before P becomes the next thing, but we have some time before that.

People that identify as vehicles I think.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: SHARK on October 12, 2021, 04:33:30 PM
Sex offenders in general, IMO.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/loudoun-county-schools-tried-to-conceal-sexual-assault-against-daughter-in-bathroom-father-says

Try not to break things after reading this.

Greetings!

Oh, no, we don't want to hear about *THAT*. That terrible episode where a fucking trans freak wearing a skirt raped a 9th grade girl in the girl's bathroom at their local high school? Nah, we don't want to hear about any of that. Like the rainbow cunt at the meeting said, "She doesn't believe his daughter was raped".

That goes against the precious narrative of all the Trans people being nice and sweet!

Notice how the corrupt fucking school board wanted the father silenced and arrested?

All of these evil fucking school boards need to be cleaned the fuck out. Too bad the good folks over there didn't just go berserk and put the fear of God in every schoolboard member there.

I read about some rapist fuck down in Brazil that raped a 12 year old girl. The people of the neighborhood caught him, led by the mother and several other neighborhood women, the rapist was severely beaten, and then burned alive right there on the spot, in the center of the urban neighborhood, for everyone to see.

In many foreign countries, people there don't fucking tolerate monsters raping their little kids.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: RandyB on October 12, 2021, 04:54:55 PM
Sex offenders in general, IMO.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/loudoun-county-schools-tried-to-conceal-sexual-assault-against-daughter-in-bathroom-father-says

Try not to break things after reading this.

Greetings!

Oh, no, we don't want to hear about *THAT*. That terrible episode where a fucking trans freak wearing a skirt raped a 9th grade girl in the girl's bathroom at their local high school? Nah, we don't want to hear about any of that. Like the rainbow cunt at the meeting said, "She doesn't believe his daughter was raped".

That goes against the precious narrative of all the Trans people being nice and sweet!

Notice how the corrupt fucking school board wanted the father silenced and arrested?

All of these evil fucking school boards need to be cleaned the fuck out. Too bad the good folks over there didn't just go berserk and put the fear of God in every schoolboard member there.

I read about some rapist fuck down in Brazil that raped a 12 year old girl. The people of the neighborhood caught him, led by the mother and several other neighborhood women, the rapist was severely beaten, and then burned alive right there on the spot, in the center of the urban neighborhood, for everyone to see.

In many foreign countries, people there don't fucking tolerate monsters raping their little kids.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

The police do not protect the law abiding from criminals. They protect criminals from the law abiding. Despite the genuine desires of many police officers.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: oggsmash on October 12, 2021, 07:41:39 PM
  If that story is true, and they covered it up, they should all be killed.  If that story is true, and the father did as is being relayed...NOT pushing to make it a police matter...I think he may be lacking as a man.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: FelixGamingX1 on October 12, 2021, 08:47:01 PM
I heard this story on the radio today. What a nightmare!
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: zircher on October 12, 2021, 09:34:32 PM
Yeah, it that was my daughter, I would have ventilated that punk by now.  He gets as much mercy as he showed my child.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Zelen on October 12, 2021, 09:37:39 PM
Keep in mind that the dad in question, Scott Smith, was included in the National School Board Association (NSBA)'s list of parents that it wants the FBI to consider "domestic terrorists."

Regardless of the merits of this guy's claims (which I believe, but which aren't yet proven), to slander and attempt to criminalize a distraught father like this shows a degree of malice I'm barely able to comprehend.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Aglondir on October 12, 2021, 10:26:35 PM
https://www.dailywire.com/news/loudoun-county-schools-tried-to-conceal-sexual-assault-against-daughter-in-bathroom-father-says

Then a woman in a rainbow shirt yelled out "Believe women!"

<loopy slide whistle>
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Pat on October 12, 2021, 11:05:03 PM
Keep in mind that the dad in question, Scott Smith, was included in the National School Board Association (NSBA)'s list of parents that it wants the FBI to consider "domestic terrorists."

Regardless of the merits of this guy's claims (which I believe, but which aren't yet proven), to slander and attempt to criminalize a distraught father like this shows a degree of malice I'm barely able to comprehend.
NPR did an extensive bit today on how terrible and oppressed and deeply suffering educators are, and how they need to be protected from these extremists parents, and then segueyed into a bit about "early childhood educators" (infant and child care workers) and how they also need more money and the government needs to intervene to give them more money and more benefits because the government lockdowns screwed everything up and led to a market failure proving the market doesn't work and the government needs to intervene to set things right and oh we're just going to ignore that we just mentioned this whole thing was caused by the government not the market. One particularly ironic moment was when one of the people they invited to speak (I'm not going to say interview, because an interview should involve at least one question that isn't a complete softball) talked about how the salaries they offered were low but they offered benefits and opportunities to advance, yet all the examples of advancement were being managers or directors or something like that. Even their own profession thinks teaching is a dead end, instead of the whole point of having an educational apparatus.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: GriswaldTerrastone on October 12, 2021, 11:12:47 PM
Pedophilia must be normalized. Maybe not today or next week, but it will.

Leftists have literally painted themselves into a corner. They cannot oppose it.

Go ahead- right now take a piece of paper, draw a line down the middle.

On one side write every argument you can for pedophilia (bear with me here).

Now, on the other, write down every argument against pedophilia.


Do you see where I'm going here?

Every one of those arguments have been used already with gay marriage, transsexuals, normalizing homosexuality, etc. etc. In every case the elite and activist judges have decided that those against are never enough while those for are enough.

Why would it be different now?

Leftists will be too scared of being called "bigot" to speak out, and Republicans will be useless as they have been for decades (how do you think we got here?).

Get ready for a dystopian future that will make "Brave New World" look like "The Brady Bunch."


It is no coincidence that everything has become subjective (transsexuals e.g.). Recently there have been tests to "determine" your actual age, making that subjective. Therefore, you can identify as a seven-year-old, even if you are forty. I shouldn't have to tell you where THAT is going.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Shrieking Banshee on October 12, 2021, 11:20:52 PM
Pedophilia must be normalized. Maybe not today or next week, but it will.

Well simpler then that: Leftists believe any morality that can be flawed or have glitches is simply invalid morality or invalid principle.
Which is every moral or principle ever.

But fortunately enough (for as thin of a silver lining this is), they are also inconcistent in the application of their own rules of having no rules. I ultimatly believe that women will still be higher on the progressive totem pole then transgenders. Its gonna take some persnickering, but as long as the woman identifies as trans (and they will be made to be so to some degree) they will reclaim their natural spot.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Shasarak on October 13, 2021, 12:01:58 AM
Pedophilia must be normalized. Maybe not today or next week, but it will.

Leftists have literally painted themselves into a corner. They cannot oppose it.

I bet you can find leftists on this very forum that will refuse to denounce pedophilia.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: oggsmash on October 13, 2021, 12:54:22 AM
  I would also say, that very issue, allowing men into women's restrooms and locker rooms is the exact same issue that pulled me into voting for a republican for the first time in any election.  My concerns were that it would be cover for predators, and it is chilling that now, we are starting to see victims to these woke points people want to rack up.   I can tell you, this will not be something I tolerate where my kids go to school.  They are getting yanked and straight to private school should it happen, and I will do everything in my power to form a literal lynch mob for the local school board.   

    The fact that masks and CRT motivated these parents and NOT dudes in girls bathrooms honestly has me a little ticked off.   Maybe we need sabre tooth tigers running around again to help everyone make common sense decisions again.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Armchair Gamer on October 13, 2021, 08:04:56 AM
   My more cynical side says we would have seen the push for pedophilia more already if it hadn't been for the scandals in the Catholic Church, which both showed the real harms it caused and provided a stick to beat the Church with.

   And it's been festering in areas adjacent to our hobby, at least, for years. Read Moira Greyland's The Last Closet if you have the stomach for it, and be aware that a lot of people in the early days in the hobby are also part of the old California sci-fi fandom and SCA crowd.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 13, 2021, 08:17:28 AM
   My more cynical side says we would have seen the push for pedophilia more already if it hadn't been for the scandals in the Catholic Church, which both showed the real harms it caused and provided a stick to beat the Church with.

   And it's been festering in areas adjacent to our hobby, at least, for years. Read Moira Greyland's The Last Closet if you have the stomach for it, and be aware that a lot of people in the early days in the hobby are also part of the old California sci-fi fandom and SCA crowd.
Yup. It's the reason DragonCon rebranded, and became FAR less liberal as a result politically.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: RandyB on October 13, 2021, 08:33:19 AM

   And it's been festering in areas adjacent to our hobby, at least, for years. Read Moira Greyland's The Last Closet if you have the stomach for it, and be aware that a lot of people in the early days in the hobby are also part of the old California sci-fi fandom and SCA crowd.

And now realize that this same crowd still exists, and owns and controls the D&D property.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Armchair Gamer on October 13, 2021, 08:37:52 AM
And now realize that this same crowd still exists, and owns and controls the D&D property.

 They're definitely of the same breed, but are there any direct links between WotC and the older SF/SCA crowd?
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: RandyB on October 13, 2021, 09:48:06 AM
And now realize that this same crowd still exists, and owns and controls the D&D property.

 They're definitely of the same breed, but are there any direct links between WotC and the older SF/SCA crowd?

Can't confirm or deny direct links. "Same crowd" = "same breed" to a close enough approximation, especially considering the issues with Magic judges.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Armchair Gamer on October 13, 2021, 09:53:34 AM
And now realize that this same crowd still exists, and owns and controls the D&D property.

 They're definitely of the same breed, but are there any direct links between WotC and the older SF/SCA crowd?

Can't confirm or deny direct links. "Same crowd" = "same breed" to a close enough approximation, especially considering the issues with Magic judges.

  Fair enough. I asked only because we do have direct links to those people for a lot of early gaming folks, although AFAIK, no one's been accusing of participating or abetting any of the misdeeds.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: RandyB on October 13, 2021, 10:00:11 AM
And now realize that this same crowd still exists, and owns and controls the D&D property.

 They're definitely of the same breed, but are there any direct links between WotC and the older SF/SCA crowd?

Can't confirm or deny direct links. "Same crowd" = "same breed" to a close enough approximation, especially considering the issues with Magic judges.

  Fair enough. I asked only because we do have direct links to those people for a lot of early gaming folks, although AFAIK, no one's been accusing of participating or abetting any of the misdeeds.

"What did they know and when did they know it?" is a largely unanswerable question by now, short of someone else in those early circles coming forward.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 13, 2021, 10:02:08 AM
And now realize that this same crowd still exists, and owns and controls the D&D property.

 They're definitely of the same breed, but are there any direct links between WotC and the older SF/SCA crowd?

Can't confirm or deny direct links. "Same crowd" = "same breed" to a close enough approximation, especially considering the issues with Magic judges.

  Fair enough. I asked only because we do have direct links to those people for a lot of early gaming folks, although AFAIK, no one's been accusing of participating or abetting any of the misdeeds.

"What did they know and when did they know it?" is a largely unanswerable question by now, short of someone else in those early circles coming forward.
The closest thing we have of that was Moira Greyland's aforementioned writing. A lot of the worst offenders, I suspect, have died off.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: RandyB on October 13, 2021, 10:20:32 AM
And now realize that this same crowd still exists, and owns and controls the D&D property.

 They're definitely of the same breed, but are there any direct links between WotC and the older SF/SCA crowd?

Can't confirm or deny direct links. "Same crowd" = "same breed" to a close enough approximation, especially considering the issues with Magic judges.

  Fair enough. I asked only because we do have direct links to those people for a lot of early gaming folks, although AFAIK, no one's been accusing of participating or abetting any of the misdeeds.

"What did they know and when did they know it?" is a largely unanswerable question by now, short of someone else in those early circles coming forward.
The closest thing we have of that was Moira Greyland's aforementioned writing. A lot of the worst offenders, I suspect, have died off.

Exactly. Unless someone else comes forward, that's all we'll ever be able to confirm.

And that kind of behavior, once introduced into and not expelled by a community, tends to perpetuate past the original offenders. Without eyewitnesses, though, we each have to make our own judgment call as to what we believe to be true.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Kiero on October 13, 2021, 10:41:34 AM
Next? Have you not noticed what they're trying to use to divide us right now?

The unvaccinated are an acceptable Other, according to pushers of the narrative. In Germany they're talking about making them wear a yellow label, with no sense of historical irony at all.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 13, 2021, 10:44:01 AM
Hey guys, remember back in 2016 when Shia Labeouf did his 'He Will Not Divide Us' performance art?
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: jhkim on October 13, 2021, 01:18:49 PM
Pedophilia is a regular accusation that goes back and forth from both sides. Epstein was a hated figure from people of all politics, with ties to both party's elite. I don't think it's an actual dividing opinion among ordinary people of either side.

Thankfully, the trend in all states has been to *raise* the age of consent, which historically was much lower. All states now have at least 16 as the age of consent, and many states have raised their age of consent from 16 to 18. The next challenge is in outlawing child marriage, which still occurs even for age differences that would otherwise be statutory rape, and is still legal in 44 states. I'm a supporter of the push to outlaw this throughout the country.

https://www.unchainedatlast.org/united-states-child-marriage-problem-study-findings-april-2021/
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Joey2k on October 13, 2021, 01:28:26 PM
Pedophilia is a regular accusation that goes back and forth from both sides. Epstein was a hated figure from people of all politics, with ties to both party's elite. I don't think it's an actual dividing opinion among ordinary people of either side.

As recently as 5 years ago I would have said the same thing about men using women's restrooms.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 13, 2021, 01:36:39 PM
Yeah, Epstein was so hated dozens if not hundreds of political figures were connected to him.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Horace on October 13, 2021, 01:39:24 PM
Pedophilia is a regular accusation that goes back and forth from both sides. ... I don't think it's an actual dividing opinion among ordinary people of either side.
As recently as 5 years ago I would have said the same thing about men using women's restrooms.
And irreparably harming children with drugs and surgery (i.e. "transitioning").
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Ghostmaker on October 13, 2021, 01:41:38 PM
Found what will be the next big divider.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10088083/Inflation-rate-rises-5-4-matching-13-year-high-set-summer.html

Get ready for that right-up-the-ass stagflation, kids.

(https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2021/10/13/15/49124949-10088083-image-a-10_1634134869812.jpg)

But hey, according to Bloomberg, this is a GOOD thing!

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-10-11/transitory-inflation-the-fed-should-strive-to-make-it-permanent

Jesus Christ. Forget the lawyers, let's kill the economists off first.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: oggsmash on October 13, 2021, 02:36:50 PM
  People willing to surgically mutilate kids, well under the age of consent do not inspire confidence in me as to their distaste for pedos.  I do not include present company, but speaking in the more broad political context.  I think age of consent is just that, and not an amorphous line where we get to move it for woke points...because that is how it will get shifted for pedos down the line. 

   
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Kiero on October 13, 2021, 05:20:58 PM
Pedophilia is a regular accusation that goes back and forth from both sides.

In the 1970s, figures in the mainstream British left (right up to Labour party MPs) were openly supportive of the Paedophile Information Exchange (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paedophile_Information_Exchange). That's not just an "accusation" that's a fact.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Neoplatonist1 on October 13, 2021, 06:54:33 PM
Found what will be the next big divider.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10088083/Inflation-rate-rises-5-4-matching-13-year-high-set-summer.html

Get ready for that right-up-the-ass stagflation, kids.

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2021/10/13/15/49124949-10088083-image-a-10_1634134869812.jpg

But hey, according to Bloomberg, this is a GOOD thing!

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-10-11/transitory-inflation-the-fed-should-strive-to-make-it-permanent

Jesus Christ. Forget the lawyers, let's kill the economists off first.

Save one economist (https://larouchepub.com/), who is actually worth his salt.

Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Trond on October 14, 2021, 02:52:50 PM
What will divide us? They will come up with something.

Conan the lesbian woman of color? (maybe I shouldn't spread these ideas into the ether  ;D)
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: jhkim on October 14, 2021, 02:59:05 PM
  People willing to surgically mutilate kids, well under the age of consent do not inspire confidence in me as to their distaste for pedos.  I do not include present company, but speaking in the more broad political context.  I think age of consent is just that, and not an amorphous line where we get to move it for woke points...because that is how it will get shifted for pedos down the line.

Thanks about not specifically including me, but I don't think that I'm different from most other progressives on this point. I have a number of friends with transgender kids, and I think everyone just want what's best for their kids. I gather you consider transgender adults existing to be a great moral wrong, so if that is your belief, I can see where you're coming from. But the parents of transgender kids also just want their kids to grow up healthy and happy.

I don't know for sure what the best approach as a parent is. I know in the time and place when I grew up, gay and transgender kids would get beaten and bullied a whole lot, and I consider that approach wrong. So this is a place where I don't subscribe to older values. (If we go to *much* older and/or to other cultures, many societies have had a traditional role in which gay and transgender people are accepted - though I would also want modern things like science and democracy.)


I'm not sure I understand your last point. Age of consent is inherently a semi-arbitrary legal line, like age of majority, voting age, and military draft age. Historically, these have varied from country to country and state to state, and have changed over time. I'm not clear what you're advocating for in this.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: oggsmash on October 14, 2021, 03:18:55 PM
  People willing to surgically mutilate kids, well under the age of consent do not inspire confidence in me as to their distaste for pedos.  I do not include present company, but speaking in the more broad political context.  I think age of consent is just that, and not an amorphous line where we get to move it for woke points...because that is how it will get shifted for pedos down the line.

Thanks about not specifically including me, but I don't think that I'm different from most other progressives on this point. I have a number of friends with transgender kids, and I think everyone just want what's best for their kids. I gather you consider transgender adults existing to be a great moral wrong, so if that is your belief, I can see where you're coming from. But the parents of transgender kids also just want their kids to grow up healthy and happy.

I don't know for sure what the best approach as a parent is. I know in the time and place when I grew up, gay and transgender kids would get beaten and bullied a whole lot, and I consider that approach wrong. So this is a place where I don't subscribe to older values. (If we go to *much* older and/or to other cultures, many societies have had a traditional role in which gay and transgender people are accepted - though I would also want modern things like science and democracy.)


I'm not sure I understand your last point. Age of consent is inherently a semi-arbitrary legal line, like age of majority, voting age, and military draft age. Historically, these have varied from country to country and state to state, and have changed over time. I'm not clear what you're advocating for in this.

 OK.  If this is in good faith, try not to start off  like that.  I do not care how any adult lives. You instantly implying I have any issue with how someone "exists" is a big fucking red herring and completely off putting out of the gate.  That said, an ADULT makes ADULT decisions.  Making irreversible decisions for very young kids, when they really have no say, or have no further information or experience is IMO a great moral wrong.  So out of the gate, you do NOT see where I am coming from, you start this off in bad faith.  Let's fix that, and then maybe we can have a discussion.

 
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: jhkim on October 14, 2021, 03:58:50 PM
OK.  If this is in good faith, try not to start off  like that.  I do not care how any adult lives. You instantly implying I have any issue with how someone "exists" is a big fucking red herring and completely off putting out of the gate.  That said, an ADULT makes ADULT decisions.  Making irreversible decisions for very young kids, when they really have no say, or have no further information or experience is IMO a great moral wrong.  So out of the gate, you do NOT see where I am coming from, you start this off in bad faith.  Let's fix that, and then maybe we can have a discussion.

Fair enough. I won't say anything more about your position.

I largely agree about surgery on very young kids. The common cases of irreversible surgery for young kids that I know about are circumcision for boys, as well as the long-standing practice of genital surgery on intersex babies and toddlers. I am against both of these. I was circumcised without my consent as a 1-year-old, and I did not do that to my son.

In all of the cases of transgender kids that I know of, the kids have had to insist on it themselves. It has only come up after the child is able to talk and express themselves. No one decides for the kid - and if they did, then I would agree it is child abuse (which sadly happens to a lot of kids).
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: oggsmash on October 14, 2021, 04:04:02 PM
OK.  If this is in good faith, try not to start off  like that.  I do not care how any adult lives. You instantly implying I have any issue with how someone "exists" is a big fucking red herring and completely off putting out of the gate.  That said, an ADULT makes ADULT decisions.  Making irreversible decisions for very young kids, when they really have no say, or have no further information or experience is IMO a great moral wrong.  So out of the gate, you do NOT see where I am coming from, you start this off in bad faith.  Let's fix that, and then maybe we can have a discussion.

Fair enough. I won't say anything more about your position.

I largely agree about surgery on very young kids. The common cases of irreversible surgery for young kids that I know about are circumcision for boys, as well as the long-standing practice of genital surgery on intersex babies and toddlers. I am against both of these. I was circumcised without my consent as a 1-year-old, and I did not do that to my son.

In all of the cases of transgender kids that I know of, the kids have had to insist on it themselves. It has only come up after the child is able to talk and express themselves. No one decides for the kid - and if they did, then I would agree it is child abuse (which sadly happens to a lot of kids).

  I know kids that insist on eating chocolate cake every meal.  Or who eat their own boogers.  I am not so sure a young kid really should have much say until they get a bit older.

  I will add this, you should just apologize for assuming I have some hatred or animus towards transgenders. I do not.  I have only a couple issues with the whole subject, bathrooms, sports, and kids too young to decide permanent consequences (there is a reason you have to be 18 to enter into a contract).
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: jhkim on October 14, 2021, 04:44:14 PM
I largely agree about surgery on very young kids. The common cases of irreversible surgery for young kids that I know about are circumcision for boys, as well as the long-standing practice of genital surgery on intersex babies and toddlers. I am against both of these. I was circumcised without my consent as a 1-year-old, and I did not do that to my son.

In all of the cases of transgender kids that I know of, the kids have had to insist on it themselves. It has only come up after the child is able to talk and express themselves. No one decides for the kid - and if they did, then I would agree it is child abuse (which sadly happens to a lot of kids).

  I know kids that insist on eating chocolate cake every meal.  Or who eat their own boogers.  I am not so sure a young kid really should have much say until they get a bit older.

  I will add this, you should just apologize for assuming I have some hatred or animus towards transgenders. I do not.  I have only a couple issues with the whole subject, bathrooms, sports, and kids too young to decide permanent consequences (there is a reason you have to be 18 to enter into a contract).

I apologize for assuming any animus towards transgender people.

I agree about some kids being too young to decide permanent consequence. From my view, young kids aren't ready to make decisions, so they shouldn't have irreversible surgery done on them until they are old enough. For example, my son is 21 now. If he wanted to get circumcised now, that's for sure his choice. I just wasn't going to force that on him as a baby. The same applies to intersex kids.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: oggsmash on October 14, 2021, 04:54:08 PM
I largely agree about surgery on very young kids. The common cases of irreversible surgery for young kids that I know about are circumcision for boys, as well as the long-standing practice of genital surgery on intersex babies and toddlers. I am against both of these. I was circumcised without my consent as a 1-year-old, and I did not do that to my son.

In all of the cases of transgender kids that I know of, the kids have had to insist on it themselves. It has only come up after the child is able to talk and express themselves. No one decides for the kid - and if they did, then I would agree it is child abuse (which sadly happens to a lot of kids).

  I know kids that insist on eating chocolate cake every meal.  Or who eat their own boogers.  I am not so sure a young kid really should have much say until they get a bit older.

  I will add this, you should just apologize for assuming I have some hatred or animus towards transgenders. I do not.  I have only a couple issues with the whole subject, bathrooms, sports, and kids too young to decide permanent consequences (there is a reason you have to be 18 to enter into a contract).

I apologize for assuming any animus towards transgender people.

I agree about some kids being too young to decide permanent consequence. From my view, young kids aren't ready to make decisions, so they shouldn't have irreversible surgery done on them until they are old enough. For example, my son is 21 now. If he wanted to get circumcised now, that's for sure his choice. I just wasn't going to force that on him as a baby. The same applies to intersex kids.

  Appreciated.   The same applies how?  You are OK with a 10 year old making a life long decision, or you think it is best for the kid to be an adult and be certain (like at age 18) before doing something that can not be undone? 
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Shasarak on October 14, 2021, 05:16:30 PM
A Christian church should be protecting children (excepting Catholic church of course), not standing by allowing their parents to ruin their lives.

Sad.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: jhkim on October 14, 2021, 09:56:17 PM
I agree about some kids being too young to decide permanent consequence. From my view, young kids aren't ready to make decisions, so they shouldn't have irreversible surgery done on them until they are old enough. For example, my son is 21 now. If he wanted to get circumcised now, that's for sure his choice. I just wasn't going to force that on him as a baby. The same applies to intersex kids.

  Appreciated.   The same applies how?  You are OK with a 10 year old making a life long decision, or you think it is best for the kid to be an adult and be certain (like at age 18) before doing something that can not be undone?

I am not OK with a 10 year old making irreversible surgery decisions for themselves.

To be clear, with intersex kids, they have natural physical gender characteristics that are different from the norm. So it's a very different case than is typical for transgender kids, who are distinguished by their mental state. With intersex, the common traditional practice is that doctors and parents decide to do surgery on them as a baby -- usually changing their genitals to conform to what is considered normal for male or female, such as surgery to reduce a very large clitoris that could be considered a penis. The recent movement encouraged by intersex adults is to discourage this, and that babies should be left as they are unless there is a vital health reason.

The question for intersex kids is - how old do they have to be before surgery can be considered? I don't have an absolute answer to this. It depends on the extent of the surgery, the kid, and the family.

A ten-year-old can't make decisions by themselves, but they can understand the issues and should have input into what is being decided for them. As they get older and understand better, they should have greater input - though the final say still rests with the parents until they are 18. I know two intersex adults who both resent the surgery done on them as a baby. On the other hand, there might be some intersex pre-teens who want their body to become more typical before puberty.

Should parents allow an intersex kid to have corrective surgery before 18? For example, if an intersex 13-year-old wants a more typically-sized clitoris instead of something that looks like a micropenis, should they get it? I don't have an answer for that. It seems like a complex moral and medical question.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Eirikrautha on October 15, 2021, 04:06:27 PM
I agree about some kids being too young to decide permanent consequence. From my view, young kids aren't ready to make decisions, so they shouldn't have irreversible surgery done on them until they are old enough. For example, my son is 21 now. If he wanted to get circumcised now, that's for sure his choice. I just wasn't going to force that on him as a baby. The same applies to intersex kids.

  Appreciated.   The same applies how?  You are OK with a 10 year old making a life long decision, or you think it is best for the kid to be an adult and be certain (like at age 18) before doing something that can not be undone?

I am not OK with a 10 year old making irreversible surgery decisions for themselves.

To be clear, with intersex kids, they have natural physical gender characteristics that are different from the norm. So it's a very different case than is typical for transgender kids, who are distinguished by their mental state. With intersex, the common traditional practice is that doctors and parents decide to do surgery on them as a baby -- usually changing their genitals to conform to what is considered normal for male or female, such as surgery to reduce a very large clitoris that could be considered a penis. The recent movement encouraged by intersex adults is to discourage this, and that babies should be left as they are unless there is a vital health reason.

The question for intersex kids is - how old do they have to be before surgery can be considered? I don't have an absolute answer to this. It depends on the extent of the surgery, the kid, and the family.

A ten-year-old can't make decisions by themselves, but they can understand the issues and should have input into what is being decided for them. As they get older and understand better, they should have greater input - though the final say still rests with the parents until they are 18. I know two intersex adults who both resent the surgery done on them as a baby. On the other hand, there might be some intersex pre-teens who want their body to become more typical before puberty.

Should parents allow an intersex kid to have corrective surgery before 18? For example, if an intersex 13-year-old wants a more typically-sized clitoris instead of something that looks like a micropenis, should they get it? I don't have an answer for that. It seems like a complex moral and medical question.

Which has nothing to do with the question of "transgendered" children at all.  The choices that must be made for the minuscule number of children with intersex birth defects are tragic and difficult.  They are also irrelevant to whether or not a 10 year old should be allowed to take puberty blockers because they "feel" like the opposite sex.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Spinachcat on October 15, 2021, 04:18:34 PM
Right now, we've got the Vaxxed vs. the Purebloods. That division is going to get really fun in the coming months (and years).

As for the freak brigade pushing pedo-acceptance, that's obviously next up on their agenda with the "love is love" and "love knows no age" propaganda. The SF gay choir even sang "we're coming for your children" so you'd have to be brain dead to not see the writing on the wall.

It's not enough for toddlers to "choose" their gender. They need to "choose" to get fucked by Biden's best.

This degenerate clown car and leftist acceleration will either the fuel the murderous rage necessary to save Western civilization, or result in our total collapse as the masses submit to each descending step of our "new normal".

Hopefully, the red states will secede before all is lost, but I'm not holding my breath.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Horace on October 15, 2021, 08:53:24 PM
Hopefully, the red states will secede before all is lost, but I'm not holding my breath.
The Communist states would never allow them to secede without a fight, and only a few (Texas) stand a chance of winning their independence. But even if they won that battle, the newly independent states would be under constant threat of annihilation a la Taiwan or South Korea, because Communists aren't content to live and let live; for some reason, the thought of people living in freedom galls them beyond all reason.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: deathknight4044 on October 16, 2021, 07:33:57 AM
I agree about some kids being too young to decide permanent consequence. From my view, young kids aren't ready to make decisions, so they shouldn't have irreversible surgery done on them until they are old enough. For example, my son is 21 now. If he wanted to get circumcised now, that's for sure his choice. I just wasn't going to force that on him as a baby. The same applies to intersex kids.

  Appreciated.   The same applies how?  You are OK with a 10 year old making a life long decision, or you think it is best for the kid to be an adult and be certain (like at age 18) before doing something that can not be undone?

I am not OK with a 10 year old making irreversible surgery decisions for themselves.

To be clear, with intersex kids, they have natural physical gender characteristics that are different from the norm. So it's a very different case than is typical for transgender kids, who are distinguished by their mental state. With intersex, the common traditional practice is that doctors and parents decide to do surgery on them as a baby -- usually changing their genitals to conform to what is considered normal for male or female, such as surgery to reduce a very large clitoris that could be considered a penis. The recent movement encouraged by intersex adults is to discourage this, and that babies should be left as they are unless there is a vital health reason.

The question for intersex kids is - how old do they have to be before surgery can be considered? I don't have an absolute answer to this. It depends on the extent of the surgery, the kid, and the family.

A ten-year-old can't make decisions by themselves, but they can understand the issues and should have input into what is being decided for them. As they get older and understand better, they should have greater input - though the final say still rests with the parents until they are 18. I know two intersex adults who both resent the surgery done on them as a baby. On the other hand, there might be some intersex pre-teens who want their body to become more typical before puberty.

Should parents allow an intersex kid to have corrective surgery before 18? For example, if an intersex 13-year-old wants a more typically-sized clitoris instead of something that looks like a micropenis, should they get it? I don't have an answer for that. It seems like a complex moral and medical question.

Intersex usually refers to people with birth defects like a micropenis, enlarged clitorus, or internal testes. These are rare medical anomalies and aren't all that relevant to the debate about giving children drugs and eventual surgery to modify their genitalia so that it more closely resembles the opposite sex.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: jhkim on October 20, 2021, 04:32:29 PM
Which has nothing to do with the question of "transgendered" children at all.  The choices that must be made for the minuscule number of children with intersex birth defects are tragic and difficult.  They are also irrelevant to whether or not a 10 year old should be allowed to take puberty blockers because they "feel" like the opposite sex.
Intersex usually refers to people with birth defects like a micropenis, enlarged clitorus, or internal testes. These are rare medical anomalies and aren't all that relevant to the debate about giving children drugs and eventual surgery to modify their genitalia so that it more closely resembles the opposite sex.

Even though intersex children are rare, I think they involve the same ethical issues that oggsmash was talking about - such as (a) whether kids should have irreversible, not-physically-necessary genital surgery done to them before 18, and (b) to what extent kids should have input into the surgery done to them.

----

As for transgender children,

(1) Both transgender children and transgender adults exist, and have always existed historically, in many different types of societies. Some people consider them a moral wrong, but their existence is clearly documented.

(2) From experience, I have known many transgender people including some very good friends. Regarding kids, my neighbor's kid Jayden is transgender as is my old friend's kid Joe. The transgender people I've known well have all been perfectly functional and nice people. They have also been quite well informed about the science of biological gender. (I've also met some transgender assholes, including a few friends of friends.)

(3) The question is how do we treat such people. It's possible to demand that they act their originally assigned gender - but "just don't be transgender" seems to be the same as "praying the gay away". I don't think that these approaches work. Kids still turn out transgender and/or gay even if they have parents who firmly tell them not to be.

(4) I don't claim to know the best approach for dealing with transgender kids, but as far as I can tell, the parents of transgender kids that I know are handling it reasonably. They want what is best for their kids.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Zelen on October 20, 2021, 07:05:09 PM
Sorry, but this degree of blatant falsehood and lying earns an "Ignore" from me.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Shasarak on October 20, 2021, 07:12:10 PM
Turns out that Munchausen syndrome by proxy is much more prevalent then intersex children.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: deathknight4044 on October 21, 2021, 02:24:15 AM
Quote
Even though intersex children are rare, I think they involve the same ethical issues that oggsmash was talking about - such as (a) whether kids should have irreversible, not-physically-necessary genital surgery done to them before 18, and (b) to what extent kids should have input into the surgery done to them.
This is akin to conflating someone being blind with someone who wants to remove their eyes due to BIID.
Quote
(1) Both transgender children and transgender adults exist, and have always existed historically, in many different types of societies. Some people consider them a moral wrong, but their existence is clearly documented.
But rapid onset gender rapid onset gender dysphoria isn't the same thing as eunuchs or castratos existing.
Quote
(2) From experience, I have known many transgender people including some very good friends. Regarding kids, my neighbor's kid Jayden is transgender as is my old friend's kid Joe. The transgender people I've known well have all been perfectly functional and nice people. They have also been quite well informed about the science of biological gender. (I've also met some transgender assholes, including a few friends of friends.)
These people attempt suicide at obscenely high rates and are disproportionately riddled with drug problems and mental illness. Someone mutilating their genitalia and crying every time they see themselves in a mirror isn't a normal person.
Quote
(3) The question is how do we treat such people. It's possible to demand that they act their originally assigned gender - but "just don't be transgender" seems to be the same as "praying the gay away". I don't think that these approaches work. Kids still turn out transgender and/or gay even if they have parents who firmly tell them not to be.
Did you notice that rates of suicide and mental illness were much lower when we did just that,, and didn't entertain people LARPing as the opposite sex and butchering their sex organs?
Quote
(4) I don't claim to know the best approach for dealing with transgender kids, but as far as I can tell, the parents of transgender kids that I know are handling it reasonably. They want what is best for their kids.
Quote
Turns out that Munchausen syndrome by proxy is much more prevalent then intersex children.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: SHARK on October 21, 2021, 02:55:16 AM
Greetings!

Geesus. There are so very many people in our society that need to be sent to a Happy Farms Asylum, isolated and locked up there for their own safety, where they are regularly pumped *FULL* of Happy Pills, and strictly supervised 24/7 by highly-trained, disciplined professionals that don't coddle fucking mentally ill freaks. The Happy Farms Asylum should also be fully equipped with straight-jackets, padded rubber rooms, and good, Conservative Christian ministers and preachers that thoroughly supervise these mentally ill people.

Meanwhile, there are droves of brain-damaged fucked up parents that need to be charged with neglect, Child Abuse, Child Endangerment, and I imagine several other charges as well. They need to be locked up hard. Their children then need to be taken by the state and placed in Conservative, Christian Child Centers and Adoption Agencies.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: jhkim on October 21, 2021, 01:43:20 PM
(3) The question is how do we treat such people. It's possible to demand that they act their originally assigned gender - but "just don't be transgender" seems to be the same as "praying the gay away". I don't think that these approaches work. Kids still turn out transgender and/or gay even if they have parents who firmly tell them not to be.

Did you notice that rates of suicide and mental illness were much lower when we did just that,, and didn't entertain people LARPing as the opposite sex and butchering their sex organs?

No, I don't. First of all, worldwide, suicide rates are going down from a peak in the 1990s.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/suicide-death-rates-by-sex?country=~OWID_WRL

That's a good thing overall. Depending on country, though, rates may be going up or down.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/Suicide_rates_in_G20_countries.svg)

Over the last 20 years, the rates have gone up in the U.S. and South Korea, but down in England, France, Russia, and Japan. But that is almost entirely non-transgender people. So the question is, are non-transgender Americans killing themselves more just because transgender people are more accepted? I think the simpler explanation is that the change is caused by factors other than transgender acceptance. As one data point, I would note that the California suicide rate has risen less than the overall U.S. rate, and California has one of the lowest suicide rates of all the states.

For suicide of transgender people specifically, the rate has always been high. That is, transgender people have risks different than non-transgender, but there's no indication that these problems are made better by taking a tough "pray the gay away" approach. I don't find many statistics broken down by year. The study below is from Holland, and it found a decreasing rate among trans women, and the same rate for trans men.

Quote
Out of 5107 trans women (median age at first visit 28 years, median follow‐up time 10 years) and 3156 trans men (median age at first visit 20 years, median follow‐up time 5 years), 41 trans women and 8 trans men died by suicide. In trans women, suicide deaths decreased over time, while it did not change in trans men. Of all suicide deaths, 14 people were no longer in treatment, 35 were in treatment in the previous two years. The mean number of suicides in the years 2013–2017 was higher in the trans population compared with the Dutch population.
Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7317390/

If you have a source for American trans people, I'd be interested - I couldn't find one by search.

Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: jhkim on October 21, 2021, 01:52:08 PM
!
There are so very many people in our society that need to be sent to a Happy Farms Asylum, isolated and locked up there for their own safety, where they are regularly pumped *FULL* of Happy Pills, and strictly supervised 24/7 by highly-trained, disciplined professionals that don't coddle fucking mentally ill freaks. The Happy Farms Asylum should also be fully equipped with straight-jackets, padded rubber rooms, and good, Conservative Christian ministers and preachers that thoroughly supervise these mentally ill people.

I don't know what your church is like, SHARK - but in my experience, good Christian ministers are likely to preach tolerance and acceptance. I know I learned about gay and transgender acceptance at my Presbyterian church growing up. I'd encourage listening to Mark Wingfield, a Baptist minister in Texas, who talks about his journey with transgender people from his church.

https://baptistnews.com/article/baptist-minister-unlikely-advocate-for-transgender-community/
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: GriswaldTerrastone on October 21, 2021, 05:04:42 PM
On the one hand all we hear about is endless babble about SCIENCE.

Yet on the other we are told that "transsexuals" are not crazy and yes there are 76 different "genders?"

No. Just no.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Zelen on October 21, 2021, 05:22:27 PM
I encourage people here, particularly those aren't using social media, to watch and observe this video demonstrating how the Woke religion uses the "Gender" lie & social media to create psychic contagions that cause children to damage their own minds & bodies. This is particularly prevalent among young girls.

https://odysee.com/@iHypocrite:d/fake-disorder-cringe-(explained):6 (https://odysee.com/@iHypocrite:d/fake-disorder-cringe-(explained):6)
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: jhkim on October 21, 2021, 06:14:28 PM
I encourage people here, particularly those aren't using social media, to watch and observe this video demonstrating how the Woke religion uses the "Gender" lie & social media to create psychic contagions that cause children to damage their own minds & bodies. This is particularly prevalent among young girls.

https://odysee.com/@iHypocrite:d/fake-disorder-cringe-(explained):6 (https://odysee.com/@iHypocrite:d/fake-disorder-cringe-(explained):6)

Hi, Zelen. That link didn't work for me. Do you have a different source for the content?
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: DM_Curt on October 21, 2021, 07:11:20 PM
Link works here, FWIW.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Shasarak on October 21, 2021, 07:42:27 PM
Link works here, FWIW.

Works for me also.

Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Pat on October 21, 2021, 07:59:21 PM
Loads for me, but there was a note at the bottom of the page: "odysee.com performance may be degraded. You can try to use it, or wait 5 minutes and refresh. Please no crush us."

Aka if at first you don't succeed, try again later.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: jhkim on October 21, 2021, 08:11:29 PM
I encourage people here, particularly those aren't using social media, to watch and observe this video demonstrating how the Woke religion uses the "Gender" lie & social media to create psychic contagions that cause children to damage their own minds & bodies. This is particularly prevalent among young girls.

https://odysee.com/@iHypocrite:d/fake-disorder-cringe-(explained):6 (https://odysee.com/@iHypocrite:d/fake-disorder-cringe-(explained):6)

OK, I can access it now, and checked the referenced links.

https://adc.bmj.com/content/106/5/420

https://thefrontierpsychiatrists.substack.com/p/dsm-5-tiktok

This is about behavior of young TikTok influencers - spreading misinformation about Tourette's and Dissociative Identity Disorder. It seems like at least one of the influencers claimed to be transgender as well as DID, but that doesn't say anything about transgender people in general.

It seems to me that the whole point of the video is that TikTok influencers are *not* representative of whatever category they claim to represent. So one shouldn't watch TikTok influencers to learn about what Tourette's Syndrome is really like, for example.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: HappyDaze on October 21, 2021, 11:41:24 PM
It seems to me that the whole point of the video is that TikTok influencers are *not* representative of whatever category they claim to represent. So one shouldn't watch TikTok influencers to learn about what Tourette's Syndrome is really like, for example.
Internet videos are telling me that I shouldn't listen to what internet videos are telling me. Isn't there a good Futurama meme for this?
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: deathknight4044 on October 22, 2021, 01:24:11 AM
Quote
No, I don't. First of all, worldwide, suicide rates are going down from a peak in the 1990s.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/suicide-death-rates-by-sex?country=~OWID_WRL

That's a good thing overall. Depending on country, though, rates may be going up or down.

Talking about what the entire planet isn't a real answer to the fact that everything from suicide, depression, divorce has spiked in the US, which is the primary pioneer of this brave new world.

Quote
Over the last 20 years, the rates have gone up in the U.S. and South Korea, but down in England, France, Russia, and Japan. But that is almost entirely non-transgender people. So the question is, are non-transgender Americans killing themselves more just because transgender people are more accepted? I think the simpler explanation is that the change is caused by factors other than transgender acceptance. As one data point, I would note that the California suicide rate has risen less than the overall U.S. rate, and California has one of the lowest suicide rates of all the states.

This seems like another deflection. There are a range of reasons why people kill themselves, from trauma experienced during military service to drug addiction to divorce. This dosent change the fact that homosexual and especially transsexual people have incredibly high rates of suicide.


Quote
For suicide of transgender people specifically, the rate has always been high. That is, transgender people have risks different than non-transgender, but there's no indication that these problems are made better by taking a tough "pray the gay away" approach. I don't find many statistics broken down by year. The study below is from Holland, and it found a decreasing rate among trans women, and the same rate for trans men.

Firstly, multiple studies say the majority of teenagers with gender dysphoria de transition by adulthood.

http://www.sexologytoday.org/2016/01/do-trans-kids-stay-trans-when-they-grow_99.html?m=1

Keeping in mind that we are experiencing a trend of rapid onset gender dysphoria due to children being impressionable and exposed to disgusting propaganda, why would we encourage these kids to permanently butcher their bodies and massively increase their chance of suicide?
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: jhkim on October 22, 2021, 01:06:58 PM
No, I don't. First of all, worldwide, suicide rates are going down from a peak in the 1990s.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/suicide-death-rates-by-sex?country=~OWID_WRL

That's a good thing overall. Depending on country, though, rates may be going up or down.

Talking about what the entire planet isn't a real answer to the fact that everything from suicide, depression, divorce has spiked in the US, which is the primary pioneer of this brave new world.

Are you implying that the U.S. is a world leader in transgender acceptance? From what I see, much of Western/Northern Europe and Canada have generally been more open to transgender rights. By this survey, for example, the top countries for transgender acceptance were Spain, Sweden, Canada, and Argentina.

https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/publications/trans-rights-23-country-survey/

And those countries haven't seen the same trend in suicide rate as the U.S. Sweden's, Canada's, and Argentina's rates have gone down, and Spain's is stable. According to your view, countries that are the most culturally liberal and accepting of transgender should have a higher and rising suicide rate, and that is not the case.

The same thing is true of states within the U.S. You imply that rising suicide in the U.S. is caused by cultural leftism -- but California and New York have some of the lowest suicide rates of all the fifty states. From what you say, California should have a much higher and faster-rising suicide rate, but that isn't true.


Over the last 20 years, the rates have gone up in the U.S. and South Korea, but down in England, France, Russia, and Japan. But that is almost entirely non-transgender people. So the question is, are non-transgender Americans killing themselves more just because transgender people are more accepted? I think the simpler explanation is that the change is caused by factors other than transgender acceptance. As one data point, I would note that the California suicide rate has risen less than the overall U.S. rate, and California has one of the lowest suicide rates of all the states.

This seems like another deflection. There are a range of reasons why people kill themselves, from trauma experienced during military service to drug addiction to divorce. This dosent change the fact that homosexual and especially transsexual people have incredibly high rates of suicide.

I don't disagree that transgender people have a higher suicide rate. The question is what approach improves that suicide rate. My view is that there is no sign that demanding they "pray the trans away" makes things better. Both in the past and in the present, transgender people are frequently called disgusting freaks and ostracized, which I also don't think improves their suicide rate.


For suicide of transgender people specifically, the rate has always been high. That is, transgender people have risks different than non-transgender, but there's no indication that these problems are made better by taking a tough "pray the gay away" approach. I don't find many statistics broken down by year. The study below is from Holland, and it found a decreasing rate among trans women, and the same rate for trans men.

Firstly, multiple studies say the majority of teenagers with gender dysphoria de transition by adulthood.

http://www.sexologytoday.org/2016/01/do-trans-kids-stay-trans-when-they-grow_99.html?m=1

Keeping in mind that we are experiencing a trend of rapid onset gender dysphoria due to children being impressionable and exposed to disgusting propaganda, why would we encourage these kids to permanently butcher their bodies and massively increase their chance of suicide?

From your link -- in the larger, post-2000 studies, about one-third of kids with gender identity disorder went on to be transgender adults. So I think it shouldn't be assumed that kids with gender dysphoria will grow up to be transgender, but conversely, it also shouldn't be assumed that they *won't* be transgender as adults. One-third is a large chance.

Your assumption here is that if kids are just firmly told "don't be trans" that they'll stop being transgender and their suicide rates will improve. I don't think that assumption is warranted. I don't have statistics specific to U.S. transgender kids, but the study that I've seen is that the historic rate of transgender suicide was just as high. I don't claim to know what approach is best, but as I noted earlier - the country and state trends don't support your view that cultural leftism results in higher suicide generally.

In the U.S., the overall teen suicide rate decreased from 1995 to 2007 or so, and then increased from 2007 to the present - and are now back up to close to the early 1990s levels.

(https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/66/wr/figures/m6630qsf.gif)
Source: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/66/wr/mm6630a6.htm (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/66/wr/mm6630a6.htm)

I don't think this trend is as simple as anything about left vs right. I think it is being driven by other trends.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: FingerRod on October 30, 2021, 10:03:30 AM
Bleh not worth it.

Furries will be the next.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: DM_Curt on October 30, 2021, 12:48:03 PM
Bleh not worth it.

Furries will be the next.
Local HS has a standard dress code policy (No hats, no distracting or offensive clothing, must cover certain amounts of the skin, etc.), but allows fake tails and animal ear headbands, because they "want to be inclusive of the sexuality".

A sexuality.   Of pretending to be animals. Sexually.

No word of them replacing the football team's fight song with "Yiff! Yiff! Yiff!" (Repeat 12x)
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: SHARK on October 30, 2021, 03:48:49 PM
Bleh not worth it.

Furries will be the next.
Local HS has a standard dress code policy (No hats, no distracting or offensive clothing, must cover certain amounts of the skin, etc.), but allows fake tails and animal ear headbands, because they "want to be inclusive of the sexuality".

A sexuality.   Of pretending to be animals. Sexually.

No word of them replacing the football team's fight song with "Yiff! Yiff! Yiff!" (Repeat 12x)

Greetings!

I'm not surprised anymore. I imagine that soon, our fucked up, depraved society is going to be embracing bestiality. Bestiality and Pedophilia. Both of these are coming, an sooner rather than later.

The depraved ideology is ultimately rooted in unrestricted hedonism. Anyone voicing resistance or disapproval is to be branded a bigot an full of hate, and will thus be trampled upon as our society becomes more and more depraved. There will be no taboos, no restrictions. NONE.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: FingerRod on October 30, 2021, 06:32:46 PM
Bleh not worth it.

Furries will be the next.
Local HS has a standard dress code policy (No hats, no distracting or offensive clothing, must cover certain amounts of the skin, etc.), but allows fake tails and animal ear headbands, because they "want to be inclusive of the sexuality".

A sexuality.   Of pretending to be animals. Sexually.

No word of them replacing the football team's fight song with "Yiff! Yiff! Yiff!" (Repeat 12x)

Get out of here. Seriously?

So species and gender dysphoria. Well they are near each other in the DSM-V for a reason I suppose.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: jhkim on November 01, 2021, 02:36:10 PM
I imagine that soon, our fucked up, depraved society is going to be embracing bestiality. Bestiality and Pedophilia. Both of these are coming, an sooner rather than later.

The depraved ideology is ultimately rooted in unrestricted hedonism. Anyone voicing resistance or disapproval is to be branded a bigot an full of hate, and will thus be trampled upon as our society becomes more and more depraved. There will be no taboos, no restrictions. NONE.

For me, this fails a basic reality check. The LGBT people I know are not depraved hedonists any more than the straight people I know. There are some hedonistic gay people -- but there are also plenty of hedonistic straight people.

It's a generic and baseless argument that if someone is opposed to *any* law or taboo, that therefore they must believe in complete anarchy.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Wrath of God on November 01, 2021, 08:16:37 PM

Quote
I'm not surprised anymore. I imagine that soon, our fucked up, depraved society is going to be embracing bestiality. Bestiality and Pedophilia. Both of these are coming, an sooner rather than later.

The depraved ideology is ultimately rooted in unrestricted hedonism. Anyone voicing resistance or disapproval is to be branded a bigot an full of hate, and will thus be trampled upon as our society becomes more and more depraved. There will be no taboos, no restrictions. NONE.

Well bestiality is IIRC totally legal in Germany nowadays, and well while technically not pedophilia and withing Good Ol' Times marriage standards, there are countries of Europe with 14 y.o. being consent age.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Rafael on November 02, 2021, 02:45:23 AM
Well bestiality is IIRC totally legal in Germany nowadays

Your source for this, I'd really like to know. Always suspected my elderly neighbor was pulling his Shepherd's line all too hard.

---

What's going to divide folks next is not a social space or an ideology - it's gonna be a wealth space. The West is going to look a whole lot more like the 19th century than the 20th, in the coming decades. Transportation and travel is going become less and less affordable for normal people, as is access to "premium" education; on the other end, prenatal testing and computer technology are going to enter a territory we've only known so far from science-fiction. Give this another twenty years while Western population increasingly obsesses about political correctness and our own Romanticized ideas of proper statehood (second ammendment, yadda, yadda) and we're going to wake up in a world that looks way more like the Joel Kinnaman "Robo Cop" movie, or even "Blade Runner".

You can have all the guns - or all the trans babies, for that matter - that you want as long you leave the drone soldiers, the fuel, and the books to me. Oh, yeah, and the healthier children, of course, because you can't afford that on YOUR salary, mate. Give this a hundred years, and we're going to move from the mildly Orwellian to the outright Melnibonean.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Neoplatonist1 on November 02, 2021, 09:52:09 AM
What's going to divide folks next is not a social space or an ideology - it's gonna be a wealth space. The West is going to look a whole lot more like the 19th century than the 20th, in the coming decades. Transportation and travel is going become less and less affordable for normal people, as is access to "premium" education; on the other end, prenatal testing and computer technology are going to enter a territory we've only known so far from science-fiction. Give this another twenty years while Western population increasingly obsesses about political correctness and our own Romanticized ideas of proper statehood (second ammendment, yadda, yadda) and we're going to wake up in a world that looks way more like the Joel Kinnaman "Robo Cop" movie, or even "Blade Runner".

You can have all the guns - or all the trans babies, for that matter - that you want as long you leave the drone soldiers, the fuel, and the books to me. Oh, yeah, and the healthier children, of course, because you can't afford that on YOUR salary, mate. Give this a hundred years, and we're going to move from the mildly Orwellian to the outright Melnibonean.

What's the alternative? What would have to happen to avoid this division?
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Ghostmaker on November 02, 2021, 11:52:45 AM
Rafael has a point. Check this shit out.

https://www.independent.com/2021/10/28/architect-resigns-in-protest-over-ucsb-mega-dorm/

Stay in your box, peasant. Eat bugs and own nothing and be happy.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Neoplatonist1 on November 02, 2021, 12:52:24 PM
Rafael has a point. Check this shit out.

https://www.independent.com/2021/10/28/architect-resigns-in-protest-over-ucsb-mega-dorm/

Stay in your box, peasant. Eat bugs and own nothing and be happy.

What's the alternative?
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: jhkim on November 02, 2021, 01:18:41 PM
What's going to divide folks next is not a social space or an ideology - it's gonna be a wealth space. The West is going to look a whole lot more like the 19th century than the 20th, in the coming decades. Transportation and travel is going become less and less affordable for normal people, as is access to "premium" education; on the other end, prenatal testing and computer technology are going to enter a territory we've only known so far from science-fiction. Give this another twenty years while Western population increasingly obsesses about political correctness and our own Romanticized ideas of proper statehood (second ammendment, yadda, yadda) and we're going to wake up in a world that looks way more like the Joel Kinnaman "Robo Cop" movie, or even "Blade Runner".

You can have all the guns - or all the trans babies, for that matter - that you want as long you leave the drone soldiers, the fuel, and the books to me. Oh, yeah, and the healthier children, of course, because you can't afford that on YOUR salary, mate. Give this a hundred years, and we're going to move from the mildly Orwellian to the outright Melnibonean.
Rafael has a point. Check this shit out.

https://www.independent.com/2021/10/28/architect-resigns-in-protest-over-ucsb-mega-dorm/

Stay in your box, peasant. Eat bugs and own nothing and be happy.
What's the alternative?

I think the alternative is for those who are opposed to corporate overlords to unite and make practical changes to reduce the increasing power of the wealthy. Within the U.S., at least, wealth and income inequality have been increasing for many decades - since the 1980s. The wealthy's common response is that "a rising tide lifts all boats" -- i.e. that we shouldn't care about how the rich are getting richer, because the middle class and poor still getting better smart phones and TVs and so forth. I don't agree about this. The cost of housing and higher education, especially, are increasing markedly for most people -- and cheaper smart phones are no substitute.

Neither the mainstream Democrats nor Republicans are doing anything effective to change this.

I think the alternative is for there to be a push from voters to demand real action about this - rather than just blind loyalty to party or faction. There's a large fraction of both Democrats and Republican voters who are on board with limiting corporate power and reducing the corrupt advantages of the wealthy.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: oggsmash on November 02, 2021, 01:41:27 PM
What's going to divide folks next is not a social space or an ideology - it's gonna be a wealth space. The West is going to look a whole lot more like the 19th century than the 20th, in the coming decades. Transportation and travel is going become less and less affordable for normal people, as is access to "premium" education; on the other end, prenatal testing and computer technology are going to enter a territory we've only known so far from science-fiction. Give this another twenty years while Western population increasingly obsesses about political correctness and our own Romanticized ideas of proper statehood (second ammendment, yadda, yadda) and we're going to wake up in a world that looks way more like the Joel Kinnaman "Robo Cop" movie, or even "Blade Runner".

You can have all the guns - or all the trans babies, for that matter - that you want as long you leave the drone soldiers, the fuel, and the books to me. Oh, yeah, and the healthier children, of course, because you can't afford that on YOUR salary, mate. Give this a hundred years, and we're going to move from the mildly Orwellian to the outright Melnibonean.
Rafael has a point. Check this shit out.

https://www.independent.com/2021/10/28/architect-resigns-in-protest-over-ucsb-mega-dorm/

Stay in your box, peasant. Eat bugs and own nothing and be happy.
What's the alternative?

I think the alternative is for those who are opposed to corporate overlords to unite and make practical changes to reduce the increasing power of the wealthy. Within the U.S., at least, wealth and income inequality have been increasing for many decades - since the 1980s. The wealthy's common response is that "a rising tide lifts all boats" -- i.e. that we shouldn't care about how the rich are getting richer, because the middle class and poor still getting better smart phones and TVs and so forth. I don't agree about this. The cost of housing and higher education, especially, are increasing markedly for most people -- and cheaper smart phones are no substitute.

Neither the mainstream Democrats nor Republicans are doing anything effective to change this.

I think the alternative is for there to be a push from voters to demand real action about this - rather than just blind loyalty to party or faction. There's a large fraction of both Democrats and Republican voters who are on board with limiting corporate power and reducing the corrupt advantages of the wealthy.

  I do not think it is as simple to say "wealthy", because by world standards, almost everyone in the USA is wealthy, and you for example I am certain would probably be considered wealthy even according to Wealth standards in the USA.   Should we limit the massive influence of conglomerates that really run the country?  Yes, but saying wealthy IMO hides the people who want to run things who also happen to have access to resources. 
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: oggsmash on November 02, 2021, 01:43:45 PM
   As for things that might divide people, I would say the Rittenhouse trial is going to draw some sharp lines between people for sure.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Pat on November 02, 2021, 02:39:11 PM
Rafael has a point. Check this shit out.

https://www.independent.com/2021/10/28/architect-resigns-in-protest-over-ucsb-mega-dorm/

Stay in your box, peasant. Eat bugs and own nothing and be happy.
Those would be great floorplans for a mini-arcology in Gamma World.

Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: HappyDaze on November 02, 2021, 03:33:18 PM
Rafael has a point. Check this shit out.

https://www.independent.com/2021/10/28/architect-resigns-in-protest-over-ucsb-mega-dorm/

Stay in your box, peasant. Eat bugs and own nothing and be happy.
Those would be great floorplans for a mini-arcology in Gamma World.
And incredibly boring to search again and again and...
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Neoplatonist1 on November 02, 2021, 03:46:08 PM
What's the alternative?

I think the alternative is for those who are opposed to corporate overlords to unite and make practical changes to reduce the increasing power of the wealthy. Within the U.S., at least, wealth and income inequality have been increasing for many decades - since the 1980s. The wealthy's common response is that "a rising tide lifts all boats" -- i.e. that we shouldn't care about how the rich are getting richer, because the middle class and poor still getting better smart phones and TVs and so forth. I don't agree about this. The cost of housing and higher education, especially, are increasing markedly for most people -- and cheaper smart phones are no substitute.

Neither the mainstream Democrats nor Republicans are doing anything effective to change this.

I think the alternative is for there to be a push from voters to demand real action about this - rather than just blind loyalty to party or faction. There's a large fraction of both Democrats and Republican voters who are on board with limiting corporate power and reducing the corrupt advantages of the wealthy.

Something like this?

https://www.rdwolff.com/wealth_inequality_ancient_egypt (https://www.rdwolff.com/wealth_inequality_ancient_egypt)
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Shasarak on November 02, 2021, 03:50:36 PM
Rafael has a point. Check this shit out.

https://www.independent.com/2021/10/28/architect-resigns-in-protest-over-ucsb-mega-dorm/

Stay in your box, peasant. Eat bugs and own nothing and be happy.

Why cant Charlie just stick to the Spruce Moose if he wanted a boondoggle legacy?
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Pat on November 02, 2021, 05:14:39 PM
Rafael has a point. Check this shit out.

https://www.independent.com/2021/10/28/architect-resigns-in-protest-over-ucsb-mega-dorm/

Stay in your box, peasant. Eat bugs and own nothing and be happy.
Those would be great floorplans for a mini-arcology in Gamma World.
And incredibly boring to search again and again and...
Only if you have a bad referee. I was thinking badders throwing up barriers and gates barriers, knocked down walls, walls that were chewed throught by something, collapsed holes in the floor, giant trees growing up through the building, flooded levels, a death machine crashed into the side of the building muttering something about bubble car fuel doesn't melt duralloy, etc.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: HappyDaze on November 02, 2021, 05:44:57 PM
Rafael has a point. Check this shit out.

https://www.independent.com/2021/10/28/architect-resigns-in-protest-over-ucsb-mega-dorm/

Stay in your box, peasant. Eat bugs and own nothing and be happy.
Those would be great floorplans for a mini-arcology in Gamma World.
And incredibly boring to search again and again and...
Only if you have a bad referee. I was thinking badders throwing up barriers and gates barriers, knocked down walls, walls that were chewed throught by something, collapsed holes in the floor, giant trees growing up through the building, flooded levels, a death machine crashed into the side of the building muttering something about bubble car fuel doesn't melt duralloy, etc.
So just your ordinary university dorm then?
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Pat on November 02, 2021, 05:49:47 PM
Rafael has a point. Check this shit out.

https://www.independent.com/2021/10/28/architect-resigns-in-protest-over-ucsb-mega-dorm/

Stay in your box, peasant. Eat bugs and own nothing and be happy.
Those would be great floorplans for a mini-arcology in Gamma World.
And incredibly boring to search again and again and...
Only if you have a bad referee. I was thinking badders throwing up barriers and gates barriers, knocked down walls, walls that were chewed throught by something, collapsed holes in the floor, giant trees growing up through the building, flooded levels, a death machine crashed into the side of the building muttering something about bubble car fuel doesn't melt duralloy, etc.
So just your ordinary university dorm then?
Some PCs will roll crippling disabilities. So, yes.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: jhkim on November 03, 2021, 02:06:39 PM
I think the alternative is for those who are opposed to corporate overlords to unite and make practical changes to reduce the increasing power of the wealthy. Within the U.S., at least, wealth and income inequality have been increasing for many decades - since the 1980s. The wealthy's common response is that "a rising tide lifts all boats" -- i.e. that we shouldn't care about how the rich are getting richer, because the middle class and poor still getting better smart phones and TVs and so forth. I don't agree about this. The cost of housing and higher education, especially, are increasing markedly for most people -- and cheaper smart phones are no substitute.

Neither the mainstream Democrats nor Republicans are doing anything effective to change this.

I think the alternative is for there to be a push from voters to demand real action about this - rather than just blind loyalty to party or faction. There's a large fraction of both Democrats and Republican voters who are on board with limiting corporate power and reducing the corrupt advantages of the wealthy.

  I do not think it is as simple to say "wealthy", because by world standards, almost everyone in the USA is wealthy, and you for example I am certain would probably be considered wealthy even according to Wealth standards in the USA.   Should we limit the massive influence of conglomerates that really run the country?  Yes, but saying wealthy IMO hides the people who want to run things who also happen to have access to resources.

How would you phrase it, then? The top 1%, maybe?

I think the core point is that corporate influence on the country is huge -- and has been increasing, driving greater inequality. The question is, do we divide ourselves further or recognize this as a common cause, even if we have other differences?

For what it's worth, I'm in the top 10% of wealth and income, but not the top 5% or 1%.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: 3catcircus on November 03, 2021, 03:11:21 PM
I think the alternative is for those who are opposed to corporate overlords to unite and make practical changes to reduce the increasing power of the wealthy. Within the U.S., at least, wealth and income inequality have been increasing for many decades - since the 1980s. The wealthy's common response is that "a rising tide lifts all boats" -- i.e. that we shouldn't care about how the rich are getting richer, because the middle class and poor still getting better smart phones and TVs and so forth. I don't agree about this. The cost of housing and higher education, especially, are increasing markedly for most people -- and cheaper smart phones are no substitute.

Neither the mainstream Democrats nor Republicans are doing anything effective to change this.

I think the alternative is for there to be a push from voters to demand real action about this - rather than just blind loyalty to party or faction. There's a large fraction of both Democrats and Republican voters who are on board with limiting corporate power and reducing the corrupt advantages of the wealthy.

  I do not think it is as simple to say "wealthy", because by world standards, almost everyone in the USA is wealthy, and you for example I am certain would probably be considered wealthy even according to Wealth standards in the USA.   Should we limit the massive influence of conglomerates that really run the country?  Yes, but saying wealthy IMO hides the people who want to run things who also happen to have access to resources.

How would you phrase it, then? The top 1%, maybe?

I think the core point is that corporate influence on the country is huge -- and has been increasing, driving greater inequality. The question is, do we divide ourselves further or recognize this as a common cause, even if we have other differences?

For what it's worth, I'm in the top 10% of wealth and income, but not the top 5% or 1%.

But what does that really mean?  You can be in the top 10% as compared to the rest of the US ( which automatically makes you in top 10% across most other countries as well) but you could be struggling - it's the same problem whether you are a person or a government - it's not how much you take in, it's what are your expenses.

"My mortgage is $300,000" is a shitbox in NJ, NY, LA, SF, DC, etc. but is a palacial estate in Nebraska, Mississippi, or Wyoming.  Even within the same state it might be a vast difference in what you get for the same price depending upon which town you live in.

Given that inflation continues to rise, we'll soon all be Venezuelan millionaires...
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: SHARK on November 03, 2021, 08:43:25 PM
Greetings!

"GET FUCKED! Confederate Country!" The chief of social media operations of candidate McAulliff's gubernatorial race campaign tweeted out to Republicans that oppose the Liberal, cock-sucking Democrats and their hate-filled ideologies and policies.

Such love, tolerance, and respect from a filthy, Liberal cock-sucking Marxist.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/get-f-confederate-country-mcauliffe-staffer-goes-on-graphic-social-media-tirade-following-youngkin-win/ar-AAQhUTf?ocid=spartanntp

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: SHARK on November 03, 2021, 10:44:24 PM
Greetings!

So beautiful! The Liberal Democrats get *crushed* in Virginia.

All of the Dmeocrat bitches are crying that McAuliffe lost because of so many white racists in Virginia! "White Supremacy!" That damned Conservative Youngkin wrapped his campaign in a LIE, by using promoses of championing EDUCATION as a racist dog whistle!

Ummm...but Virginia just voted in a BLACK AMERICAN WOMAN as Lieutenant Governor of the state of Virginia. She is also a veteran of the US Marine Corps, and regularly takes photos carrying an AR-15 "Assault Rifle." I understand she's very Conservative, very pro-gun, and very much against the cock-sucking SJW's.

But according to the Democrats in the media--the Democrats lost big everywhere in Virginia because of white racists!

Fucking morons. Hypocrits, lying, cock-sucking Marxist morons.



Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: SHARK on November 03, 2021, 11:15:54 PM
Greetings!

Here is a very interesting commentary on the victory of the Taliban in Afghanistan, and underlying dynamics connected also to the Liberal Democrats defeat in the Virginia elections.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Pat on November 03, 2021, 11:17:15 PM
Winsome Sears is the black face of the Old White Dominion.

(Love her name, BTW.)

Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Rafael on November 03, 2021, 11:53:34 PM
What's the alternative?

The alternative - at least as I see it - is the kind of "social democratic" movement we had in Europe in the 1970s. "The light that failed", if you will - and I'm not using that expression randomly. You know, de-privatize, de-globalize, and de-tribalize - but within rational measures. I'm no US citizen, and I can tell you that public healthcare is simply a pretty good thing. And, talking about globalization, maybe society should have a vote on whether we want the current generation of billionaires to own their own space stations, especially when they could also use that kind of money for more pressing issues. (And I'm pretty sure any issue is more pressing than a private space station. Unless you're Magneto.)

And, talking about societal tribalism - that's the most lo-fi issue, but also the hardest one because it forces us to change our own behavior; let's start, maybe, with stating that one can well dislike that new "Masters of the Universe" cartoon is crap without necessarily being "anti-women". And likewise, let's make a start by saying that, at least in the beginning, Colin Kaepernick taking a knee was probably not more and no less than Johnny Cash wearing black clothes, back in the day.

You know, just turn down the noise, and start focusing on coming together and actually get shit done. Ever since the Bush years in the US, there is this worldwide political trend that it is more important to constantly virtue-signal to your following than to actually solve the problems the entirety of society is facing. Whenever that has happened in history, from the Trump years to pre-WWI (yeah, "one") Germany, and to the French Revolution, the results of such behavior have always been disastrous. So, it's not about micro-analyzing whose fault this might possibly have been: It's about making this stop. Otherwise, it's gonna be a new, mildly Lovecraftian dark age. Not that people wouldn't be able to manage, but if we're talking anime-style dystopias, I'd strongly prefer "Legend of the Galactic Heroes" or "Cowboy Bebop" to "Bubble Gum Crisis" and "Vampire Hunter D".

Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Pat on November 04, 2021, 01:59:56 AM
And, talking about globalization, maybe society should have a vote on whether we want the current generation of billionaires to own their own space stations, especially when they could also use that kind of money for more pressing issues. (And I'm pretty sure any issue is more pressing than a private space station. Unless you're Magneto.)
So you want history to stop? We can never spend money on something that might advance the human race, and allow us to escape this planet? We have to spend all our money on wasteful projects run by politicians and their buddies who get rich while pointing to the misery they caused and claiming that yes, just another $100 trillion more and it'll be fixed, we swear, this time?

That's literally the most evil thing I can imagine.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Ratman_tf on November 04, 2021, 02:21:28 AM
What's going to divide folks next is not a social space or an ideology - it's gonna be a wealth space. The West is going to look a whole lot more like the 19th century than the 20th, in the coming decades. Transportation and travel is going become less and less affordable for normal people, as is access to "premium" education; on the other end, prenatal testing and computer technology are going to enter a territory we've only known so far from science-fiction. Give this another twenty years while Western population increasingly obsesses about political correctness and our own Romanticized ideas of proper statehood (second ammendment, yadda, yadda) and we're going to wake up in a world that looks way more like the Joel Kinnaman "Robo Cop" movie, or even "Blade Runner".

You can have all the guns - or all the trans babies, for that matter - that you want as long you leave the drone soldiers, the fuel, and the books to me. Oh, yeah, and the healthier children, of course, because you can't afford that on YOUR salary, mate. Give this a hundred years, and we're going to move from the mildly Orwellian to the outright Melnibonean.
Rafael has a point. Check this shit out.

https://www.independent.com/2021/10/28/architect-resigns-in-protest-over-ucsb-mega-dorm/

Stay in your box, peasant. Eat bugs and own nothing and be happy.
What's the alternative?

I think the alternative is for those who are opposed to corporate overlords to unite and make practical changes to reduce the increasing power of the wealthy. Within the U.S., at least, wealth and income inequality have been increasing for many decades - since the 1980s. The wealthy's common response is that "a rising tide lifts all boats" -- i.e. that we shouldn't care about how the rich are getting richer, because the middle class and poor still getting better smart phones and TVs and so forth. I don't agree about this. The cost of housing and higher education, especially, are increasing markedly for most people -- and cheaper smart phones are no substitute.

Neither the mainstream Democrats nor Republicans are doing anything effective to change this.

It's always boggled me that people put stock in government acting "better" than private citizens. We see the President, and congress, etc, flying about in private jets, enjoying health care perks, and making deals with corporations that secure their wealth and power while doing a half-assed job on the occasional project or plan that they campaigned on.
This is my non-partisan critique of all government, not just "those people". Both parties are guilty, and both get re-elected because they've locked down the process where we nominate new candidates.

Quote
I think the alternative is for there to be a push from voters to demand real action about this - rather than just blind loyalty to party or faction. There's a large fraction of both Democrats and Republican voters who are on board with limiting corporate power and reducing the corrupt advantages of the wealthy.

And the people they elect will do just enough to hold onto their power, but not too much to rock the boat, and jepoardize their positions. Or maybe the occasional maverick will try, and get crushed by both sides.

And the voters participate by buying those cell phones and ipads and think that voting every X years is enough participation, and leave the government to police itself. *eye roll here*
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Rafael on November 04, 2021, 03:20:10 AM
So you want history to stop? We can never spend money on something that might advance the human race, and allow us to escape this planet? We have to spend all our money on wasteful projects run by politicians and their buddies who get rich while pointing to the misery they caused and claiming that yes, just another $100 trillion more and it'll be fixed, we swear, this time?

That's literally the most evil thing I can imagine.


Naah. That's just your Reaganism struggling to explain things beyond its limits. This is not about "history stopping"; it's a Botswana Hunting Trip (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juan_Carlos_I#Botswana_hunting_trip) question. "With great power comes great responsibility" - only for plebeians like you and me, or also for these modern patricians? Or does their high bank account exempt them from scrutiny as long as they're bold?

Also, the key word in what you're saying there is "might". Are you seriously expecting Jeff Bezos to help YOU escape the planet? Like, ever read up on working conditions at Amazon's warehouse facilities? Are you sure you want a guy who is cool with that to spearhead "human advancement"? --- Because I'm not so sure I want that. Rather than that, I'd have Bezos give the same money to NASA; he can have his face plastered on the whole thing, for all I care, but the actual decisions should be made by people who are educated in the field, not by rich guys who've been watching too much "Starcom".
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Shasarak on November 04, 2021, 03:30:46 AM
What's the alternative?

The alternative - at least as I see it - is the kind of "social democratic" movement we had in Europe in the 1970s. "The light that failed", if you will - and I'm not using that expression randomly. You know, de-privatize, de-globalize, and de-tribalize - but within rational measures. I'm no US citizen, and I can tell you that public healthcare is simply a pretty good thing. And, talking about globalization, maybe society should have a vote on whether we want the current generation of billionaires to own their own space stations, especially when they could also use that kind of money for more pressing issues. (And I'm pretty sure any issue is more pressing than a private space station. Unless you're Magneto.)

If we dont have private space stations then what are we going to use to stop the asteroid?

Your so called public healthcare is going to look pretty stupid then.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Rafael on November 04, 2021, 03:52:09 AM
It's always boggled me that people put stock in government acting "better" than private citizens. We see the President, and congress, etc, flying about in private jets, enjoying health care perks, and making deals with corporations that secure their wealth and power while doing a half-assed job on the occasional project or plan that they campaigned on.
This is my non-partisan critique of all government, not just "those people". Both parties are guilty, and both get re-elected because they've locked down the process where we nominate new candidates.

Completely agree with you there. Government is made by people, and they are going to act just as selfishly as anyone else if you let them. Just take this story, from a year ago:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/03/congress-insider-trading-problem/608488/

But that's why we supposedly have a system of checks and balances in place. And if the system has stopped working as it should, then we need to adapt it so it works more efficiently again. If politicians are doing a "half-assed job", it's the public's responsibility to properly motivate them - for example, by reducing their possibilities to connect every decision they make to them making some sort of extra salary. That's what the democratic system is literally designed for. 
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Rafael on November 04, 2021, 03:52:49 AM
What's the alternative?

The alternative - at least as I see it - is the kind of "social democratic" movement we had in Europe in the 1970s. "The light that failed", if you will - and I'm not using that expression randomly. You know, de-privatize, de-globalize, and de-tribalize - but within rational measures. I'm no US citizen, and I can tell you that public healthcare is simply a pretty good thing. And, talking about globalization, maybe society should have a vote on whether we want the current generation of billionaires to own their own space stations, especially when they could also use that kind of money for more pressing issues. (And I'm pretty sure any issue is more pressing than a private space station. Unless you're Magneto.)

If we dont have private space stations then what are we going to use to stop the asteroid?

Your so called public healthcare is going to look pretty stupid then.

 ;D
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: 3catcircus on November 04, 2021, 09:21:44 AM
It's always boggled me that people put stock in government acting "better" than private citizens. We see the President, and congress, etc, flying about in private jets, enjoying health care perks, and making deals with corporations that secure their wealth and power while doing a half-assed job on the occasional project or plan that they campaigned on.
This is my non-partisan critique of all government, not just "those people". Both parties are guilty, and both get re-elected because they've locked down the process where we nominate new candidates.

Completely agree with you there. Government is made by people, and they are going to act just as selfishly as anyone else if you let them. Just take this story, from a year ago:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/03/congress-insider-trading-problem/608488/

But that's why we supposedly have a system of checks and balances in place. And if the system has stopped working as it should, then we need to adapt it so it works more efficiently again. If politicians are doing a "half-assed job", it's the public's responsibility to properly motivate them - for example, by reducing their possibilities to connect every decision they make to them making some sort of extra salary. That's what the democratic system is literally designed for.

But isn't that the root of the problem?  "The Government" or "The Company" is treated like a person without having the accountability of a person.  No, the government didn't decide on something - the *people* elected or appointed or hired into that government made the decision.  Likewise, a corporation didn't make a decision, the C-suite or board of directors made a decision or set a policy.

The collective *we* need to stop blaming nameless, faceless entities and start holding accountable the people shielded by their association with those entities. Name names. Fire people. Try and convict people. Make it so that corrupt people will no longer see government "service" as a viable career. Make it so that sociopaths are weeded out from positions of authority in publicly-held corporations.  It would help to have term limits for elected officials and it would help if interlocking corporate directorships were unlawful.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: KingCheops on November 04, 2021, 09:43:12 AM
Ummm...but Virginia just voted in a BLACK AMERICAN WOMAN as Lieutenant Governor of the state of Virginia. She is also a veteran of the US Marine Corps, and regularly takes photos carrying an AR-15 "Assault Rifle." I understand she's very Conservative, very pro-gun, and very much against the cock-sucking SJW's.

She's originally from Jamaica so she understands and loves what makes America so special and unique.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Pat on November 04, 2021, 10:41:29 AM
So you want history to stop? We can never spend money on something that might advance the human race, and allow us to escape this planet? We have to spend all our money on wasteful projects run by politicians and their buddies who get rich while pointing to the misery they caused and claiming that yes, just another $100 trillion more and it'll be fixed, we swear, this time?

That's literally the most evil thing I can imagine.


Naah. That's just your Reaganism struggling to explain things beyond its limits. This is not about "history stopping"; it's a Botswana Hunting Trip (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juan_Carlos_I#Botswana_hunting_trip) question. "With great power comes great responsibility" - only for plebeians like you and me, or also for these modern patricians? Or does their high bank account exempt them from scrutiny as long as they're bold?

Also, the key word in what you're saying there is "might". Are you seriously expecting Jeff Bezos to help YOU escape the planet? Like, ever read up on working conditions at Amazon's warehouse facilities? Are you sure you want a guy who is cool with that to spearhead "human advancement"? --- Because I'm not so sure I want that. Rather than that, I'd have Bezos give the same money to NASA; he can have his face plastered on the whole thing, for all I care, but the actual decisions should be made by people who are educated in the field, not by rich guys who've been watching too much "Starcom".
Reaganism? Oh, you're one of those idiots who sees the world as two boxes, and anyone who disagrees with you is stuffed in the box you label "other". That box is random collection of all the random things you don't like. You're incapable of listening to what other people say or understanding what they believe, because in your hypersimplistic view everything that's not You gets lumped together and possesses the exact same properties.

Bezos has created an efficient system. So efficient, that billions of people have voluntarily given him billions of dollars. It's democracy in its purest form, with people voting with their money. Name one government that has done the same. While there are fuckloads of problems with wealth inequality, but here's the trick: Almost all of the problems were caused by the government. You're blaming Bezos, when you should be blaming people like Pelosi or McConnell. Most of those issues are rooted in special favors for cronies that favor the rich over the ordinary people, combined with massive debt and monetary manipulation.

The government does not create comparably efficient systems. The 1960s and 1970s were glorious exploration, but what were the 1980s? A shuttle service. And then they turned American astronauts into hitchhikers. The unmanned programs have been successful, but at a huge cost. In contrast, Space X, Blue Origin, and so on are taking people to space again, and doing it on a shoestring budget.

And you're on the side of perpetual totalitarianism. Yay.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Pat on November 04, 2021, 10:46:40 AM
It's always boggled me that people put stock in government acting "better" than private citizens. We see the President, and congress, etc, flying about in private jets, enjoying health care perks, and making deals with corporations that secure their wealth and power while doing a half-assed job on the occasional project or plan that they campaigned on.
This is my non-partisan critique of all government, not just "those people". Both parties are guilty, and both get re-elected because they've locked down the process where we nominate new candidates.
Anyone who wants to see how it works should search for "Pelosi stocks".

It's only insider trading if you're in the private sector.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Chris24601 on November 04, 2021, 12:25:03 PM
It is no coincidence that everything has become subjective (transsexuals e.g.). Recently there have been tests to "determine" your actual age, making that subjective. Therefore, you can identify as a seven-year-old, even if you are forty. I shouldn't have to tell you where THAT is going.
A bit far back in the thread, but THIS is the answer to the latest mandate insanity. I hereby identify as a four-year old and therefore am ineligible for all jabs and urge everyone else to identify as four as well.

Use their own logic to mock them.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: SHARK on November 04, 2021, 01:00:02 PM
Ummm...but Virginia just voted in a BLACK AMERICAN WOMAN as Lieutenant Governor of the state of Virginia. She is also a veteran of the US Marine Corps, and regularly takes photos carrying an AR-15 "Assault Rifle." I understand she's very Conservative, very pro-gun, and very much against the cock-sucking SJW's.

She's originally from Jamaica so she understands and loves what makes America so special and unique.

Greetings!

Hah! She's from Jamaica? SWEET! That's awesome! She sounds outstanding, in every way. Oh, I also heard that the racist, evil white people of Virginia *also* elected a Latina woman as the States Attorney General. Yeah, that's the chief Law Enforcement Authority.

A Black Jamaican woman as Lieutenant Governor, and a Latina woman as State Attorney General. What kind of racism is that? *Laughing*

Good! More and more Americans are waking up to how pathetic and insane the fucking Liberal Democrats are. Their whole ideology, their entire world view, all of their policies, goals and perspectives, are sickening. They are corrupt, poisonous, and fucking bullshit. The Liberal Democrats must be stopped. They must be resisted, crushed, and broken, driven into the gutter to wallow in the filth where they belong. America needs to rise, and be strong, prosperous, and united.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Pat on November 04, 2021, 01:02:33 PM
It's always boggled me that people put stock in government acting "better" than private citizens. We see the President, and congress, etc, flying about in private jets, enjoying health care perks, and making deals with corporations that secure their wealth and power while doing a half-assed job on the occasional project or plan that they campaigned on.
This is my non-partisan critique of all government, not just "those people". Both parties are guilty, and both get re-elected because they've locked down the process where we nominate new candidates.

Completely agree with you there. Government is made by people, and they are going to act just as selfishly as anyone else if you let them. Just take this story, from a year ago:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/03/congress-insider-trading-problem/608488/

But that's why we supposedly have a system of checks and balances in place. And if the system has stopped working as it should, then we need to adapt it so it works more efficiently again. If politicians are doing a "half-assed job", it's the public's responsibility to properly motivate them - for example, by reducing their possibilities to connect every decision they make to them making some sort of extra salary. That's what the democratic system is literally designed for.

But isn't that the root of the problem?  "The Government" or "The Company" is treated like a person without having the accountability of a person.  No, the government didn't decide on something - the *people* elected or appointed or hired into that government made the decision.  Likewise, a corporation didn't make a decision, the C-suite or board of directors made a decision or set a policy.

The collective *we* need to stop blaming nameless, faceless entities and start holding accountable the people shielded by their association with those entities. Name names. Fire people. Try and convict people. Make it so that corrupt people will no longer see government "service" as a viable career. Make it so that sociopaths are weeded out from positions of authority in publicly-held corporations.  It would help to have term limits for elected officials and it would help if interlocking corporate directorships were unlawful.
The "company as a person" problem is overstated, and mostly a distraction. In some ways, a company is legally treated as a person. But only in a very narrow fashion, for specific reasons.

And how exactly would you choose which individuals to hold responsible? Large bureaucracies, including governments and corporations, are systems designed to widely distribute responsibility. Some things can be pinned on specific people, but many other things are the result of systems in place that create certain outcomes, and it's not clear who created the systems, and even if it were they're often long gone anyway. The CEO and C-suite can set direction to a certain degree, but have to deal with a lot of inertia and can't just redesign the system from scratch. This is even more true in the federal government, which is morass of overlapping responsibilities created by accretion over centuries that allows blame to be shifted around like quicksilver in a beaker.

(And I say that as a person who believes we should throw a lot more executives, and many, many, many more government officials, in jail. But it's not a solution to the underlying problems.)

It's even harder to blame the voters, because any political system that's created will immediately attract the busybodies and other people who think they should have a say over what their neighbors are doing, and they'll immediately start tweaking the system to ensure they remain in power. They'll spend their entire lives doing this, making the system as opaque and murky as possible to disguise what they're doing. Conversely, the general public make poor watchdogs, because the improvements they can make in their own lives by learning all they can about the different candidates will be marginal, but require a vast expenditure of effort, thus leading them to the rational conclusion that it's in their best interest to throw up their hands and do nothing. It's not about "letting" the cronies and crooks in power get away with anything; it's that there seems to be no way to stop them, and all the sound and fury aimed in that direction amounts to nothing.

These are all systemic problems, not personal problems. We can't fix the problem that corrupt people will be attracted to loci of political or managerial power, so the solution isn't just better people or a magically more attentive public. No, the real solutions have to be systemic. In this case, limit the appeal of government to the power hungry. Circumscribe their powers, by hard limits and massive decentralization. If there's less power in one place, worming yourself into power provides less benefit; and having to lobby 50 or 70,000 different governments for corporate favors is a lot harder than lobbying just 1. Replace arbitrary discretion and fudging with clear rules that are applied consistently. If your job is just applying rules with little leeway allowed, then you can't benefit by granting boons to your friends or further employers.

These would be hard changes to make. It will require taking on the seemingly overwhelming number of people who screech when a single redundant program is threatened with excision, and the even larger number of moral busybodies who think they should be able to tell everyone else what to do. And even harder, it would require converting many of them. That's education, and the mission of a generation or two, not a quick fix.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: 3catcircus on November 04, 2021, 01:19:13 PM
It's always boggled me that people put stock in government acting "better" than private citizens. We see the President, and congress, etc, flying about in private jets, enjoying health care perks, and making deals with corporations that secure their wealth and power while doing a half-assed job on the occasional project or plan that they campaigned on.
This is my non-partisan critique of all government, not just "those people". Both parties are guilty, and both get re-elected because they've locked down the process where we nominate new candidates.

Completely agree with you there. Government is made by people, and they are going to act just as selfishly as anyone else if you let them. Just take this story, from a year ago:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/03/congress-insider-trading-problem/608488/

But that's why we supposedly have a system of checks and balances in place. And if the system has stopped working as it should, then we need to adapt it so it works more efficiently again. If politicians are doing a "half-assed job", it's the public's responsibility to properly motivate them - for example, by reducing their possibilities to connect every decision they make to them making some sort of extra salary. That's what the democratic system is literally designed for.

But isn't that the root of the problem?  "The Government" or "The Company" is treated like a person without having the accountability of a person.  No, the government didn't decide on something - the *people* elected or appointed or hired into that government made the decision.  Likewise, a corporation didn't make a decision, the C-suite or board of directors made a decision or set a policy.

The collective *we* need to stop blaming nameless, faceless entities and start holding accountable the people shielded by their association with those entities. Name names. Fire people. Try and convict people. Make it so that corrupt people will no longer see government "service" as a viable career. Make it so that sociopaths are weeded out from positions of authority in publicly-held corporations.  It would help to have term limits for elected officials and it would help if interlocking corporate directorships were unlawful.
The "company as a person" problem is overstated, and mostly a distraction. In some ways, a company is legally treated as a person. But only in a very narrow fashion, for specific reasons.

And how exactly would you choose which individuals to hold responsible? Large bureaucracies, including governments and corporations, are systems designed to widely distribute responsibility. Some things can be pinned on specific people, but many other things are the result of systems in place that create certain outcomes, and it's not clear who created the systems, and even if it were they're often long gone anyway. The CEO and C-suite can set direction to a certain degree, but have to deal with a lot of inertia and can't just redesign the system from scratch. This is even more true in the federal government, which is morass of overlapping responsibilities created by accretion over centuries that allows blame to be shifted around like quicksilver in a beaker.

(And I say that as a person who believes we should throw a lot more executives, and many, many, many more government officials, in jail. But it's not a solution to the underlying problems.)

It's even harder to blame the voters, because any political system that's created will immediately attract the busybodies and other people who think they should have a say over what their neighbors are doing, and they'll immediately start tweaking the system to ensure they remain in power. They'll spend their entire lives doing this, making the system as opaque and murky as possible to disguise what they're doing. Conversely, the general public make poor watchdogs, because the improvements they can make in their own lives by learning all they can about the different candidates will be marginal, but require a vast expenditure of effort, thus leading them to the rational conclusion that it's in their best interest to throw up their hands and do nothing. It's not about "letting" the cronies and crooks in power get away with anything; it's that there seems to be no way to stop them, and all the sound and fury aimed in that direction amounts to nothing.

These are all systemic problems, not personal problems. We can't fix the problem that corrupt people will be attracted to loci of political or managerial power, so the solution isn't just better people or a magically more attentive public. No, the real solutions have to be systemic. In this case, limit the appeal of government to the power hungry. Circumscribe their powers, by hard limits and massive decentralization. If there's less power in one place, worming yourself into power provides less benefit; and having to lobby 50 or 70,000 different governments for corporate favors is a lot harder than lobbying just 1. Replace arbitrary discretion and fudging with clear rules that are applied consistently. If your job is just applying rules with little leeway allowed, then you can't benefit by granting boons to your friends or further employers.

These would be hard changes to make. It will require taking on the seemingly overwhelming number of people who screech when a single redundant program is threatened with excision, and the even larger number of moral busybodies who think they should be able to tell everyone else what to do. And even harder, it would require converting many of them. That's education, and the mission of a generation or two, not a quick fix.

I don't necessarily agree.  The collective we allows people to hide behind institutions instead of actively forcing them into accountability.  As someone who works intimately with the federal government, I see exactly how federal employees operate.  If 10 fed employees, 1 is competent and qualified, 1-2 are complete morons, and the other 7-8 are barely capable - to the point that contractors do their jobs for them while they perform the official but largely ceremonial duties.  And I'm not talking about ambassadors and such - I'm talking about GS-12 to GS-14 or so. 

A contractor does all of the heavy lifting to, say, put together a study or report, and the government employee hits the "send email" button on it.  Should that document get delivered to who it shouldn't (in a legal sense), the government employee isn't going to get in any trouble but the contractor would go to jail.

That's the point - as you go up in power and influence in government or industry, there needs to be *more* scrutiny, not less.  And it isn't a systemic problem - it's a character defect problem with the people that gravitate towards government service or float to the top (like shit in the toilet) into suites in industry.  At a broad level, it's all because of laziness in pursuing potential empoyees, in getting political candidates, and in interaction with lobbying groups.  People won't do the hard job of due diligence because they don't *want* to find out what might come up as a result.  This laziness and fear allows the corrupt(ible) to make bolder and bolder moves the further up the food chain they rise.  A guy who cuts a few corners as a middle manager ends up running Enron. A Hillary Clinton email server full of classified documents operating in a closet without an ATO is accepted.  It isn't until they reach the point that their own praetorian guard stabs them that their terrible behavior ends.  At that point, it's too late.

Prevention needs to be the order of the day.  The only way I know how to do that is term limits for the elected and preventing people from sitting on multiple corporate boards while employed in the c-suite of other corporations in a quid pro quo.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Rafael on November 04, 2021, 01:32:49 PM
The collective *we* need to stop blaming nameless, faceless entities and start holding accountable the people shielded by their association with those entities. Name names. Fire people. Try and convict people. Make it so that corrupt people will no longer see government "service" as a viable career. Make it so that sociopaths are weeded out from positions of authority in publicly-held corporations.  It would help to have term limits for elected officials and it would help if interlocking corporate directorships were unlawful.

Exactly. Checks and balances. Panama Papers, Paradise Papers, Pandora Papers - and no significant backlash until very recently. Stories in newspapers, and mildly bad PR - but nothing beyond that. Many taps on many noses when what's needed is a proper, old-fashioned exorcism. Not a "socialist revolution", but the democratic systems all over the world actually doing what they were designed to do, which is to kick the butts of overly corrupt people. This will surely create a lot of drama - but so does cleaning out your own attic; sometimes, it's gonna be dirty.

Reaganism? Oh, you're one of those idiots who sees the world as two boxes, and anyone who disagrees with you is stuffed in the box you label "other". That box is random collection of all the random things you don't like. You're incapable of listening to what other people say or understanding what they believe, because in your hypersimplistic view everything that's not You gets lumped together and possesses the exact same properties.

Bezos has created an efficient system. So efficient, that billions of people have voluntarily given him billions of dollars. It's democracy in its purest form, with people voting with their money. Name one government that has done the same. While there are fuckloads of problems with wealth inequality, but here's the trick: Almost all of the problems were caused by the government. You're blaming Bezos, when you should be blaming people like Pelosi or McConnell. Most of those issues are rooted in special favors for cronies that favor the rich over the ordinary people, combined with massive debt and monetary manipulation.

The government does not create comparably efficient systems. The 1960s and 1970s were glorious exploration, but what were the 1980s? A shuttle service. And then they turned American astronauts into hitchhikers. The unmanned programs have been successful, but at a huge cost. In contrast, Space X, Blue Origin, and so on are taking people to space again, and doing it on a shoestring budget.

And you're on the side of perpetual totalitarianism. Yay.

Oh, come on. Words do actually have meaning. And what you're describing is just another spin on the faerie tale of trickle-down-economics - just supposedly from the Moon, this time. And for that matter, if you're really regarding your personal understanding of "efficiency" as more important than constitutionality - then you're the totalitarian, not me.  :P
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Pat on November 04, 2021, 02:32:22 PM
The collective *we* need to stop blaming nameless, faceless entities and start holding accountable the people shielded by their association with those entities. Name names. Fire people. Try and convict people. Make it so that corrupt people will no longer see government "service" as a viable career. Make it so that sociopaths are weeded out from positions of authority in publicly-held corporations.  It would help to have term limits for elected officials and it would help if interlocking corporate directorships were unlawful.

Exactly. Checks and balances. Panama Papers, Paradise Papers, Pandora Papers - and no significant backlash until very recently. Stories in newspapers, and mildly bad PR - but nothing beyond that. Many taps on many noses when what's needed is a proper, old-fashioned exorcism. Not a "socialist revolution", but the democratic systems all over the world actually doing what they were designed to do, which is to kick the butts of overly corrupt people. This will surely create a lot of drama - but so does cleaning out your own attic; sometimes, it's gonna be dirty.

Reaganism? Oh, you're one of those idiots who sees the world as two boxes, and anyone who disagrees with you is stuffed in the box you label "other". That box is random collection of all the random things you don't like. You're incapable of listening to what other people say or understanding what they believe, because in your hypersimplistic view everything that's not You gets lumped together and possesses the exact same properties.

Bezos has created an efficient system. So efficient, that billions of people have voluntarily given him billions of dollars. It's democracy in its purest form, with people voting with their money. Name one government that has done the same. While there are fuckloads of problems with wealth inequality, but here's the trick: Almost all of the problems were caused by the government. You're blaming Bezos, when you should be blaming people like Pelosi or McConnell. Most of those issues are rooted in special favors for cronies that favor the rich over the ordinary people, combined with massive debt and monetary manipulation.

The government does not create comparably efficient systems. The 1960s and 1970s were glorious exploration, but what were the 1980s? A shuttle service. And then they turned American astronauts into hitchhikers. The unmanned programs have been successful, but at a huge cost. In contrast, Space X, Blue Origin, and so on are taking people to space again, and doing it on a shoestring budget.

And you're on the side of perpetual totalitarianism. Yay.

Oh, come on. Words do actually have meaning. And what you're describing is just another spin on the faerie tale of trickle-down-economics - just supposedly from the Moon, this time. And for that matter, if you're really regarding your personal understanding of "efficiency" as more important than constitutionality - then you're the totalitarian, not me.  :P
You claim that words have meaning, and then in same the sentence refer to a fairy tale form of economics that doesn't exist and I never advocated? You don't just live in la la land, you can't even compose an argument or defend what you're saying without making up shit.

If you read what I've said -- which clearly you haven't -- it would be crystal clear I support strong constitution protections against the nightmarish totalitarian regimes you seem to favor.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Pat on November 04, 2021, 02:41:27 PM
It's always boggled me that people put stock in government acting "better" than private citizens. We see the President, and congress, etc, flying about in private jets, enjoying health care perks, and making deals with corporations that secure their wealth and power while doing a half-assed job on the occasional project or plan that they campaigned on.
This is my non-partisan critique of all government, not just "those people". Both parties are guilty, and both get re-elected because they've locked down the process where we nominate new candidates.

Completely agree with you there. Government is made by people, and they are going to act just as selfishly as anyone else if you let them. Just take this story, from a year ago:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/03/congress-insider-trading-problem/608488/

But that's why we supposedly have a system of checks and balances in place. And if the system has stopped working as it should, then we need to adapt it so it works more efficiently again. If politicians are doing a "half-assed job", it's the public's responsibility to properly motivate them - for example, by reducing their possibilities to connect every decision they make to them making some sort of extra salary. That's what the democratic system is literally designed for.

But isn't that the root of the problem?  "The Government" or "The Company" is treated like a person without having the accountability of a person.  No, the government didn't decide on something - the *people* elected or appointed or hired into that government made the decision.  Likewise, a corporation didn't make a decision, the C-suite or board of directors made a decision or set a policy.

The collective *we* need to stop blaming nameless, faceless entities and start holding accountable the people shielded by their association with those entities. Name names. Fire people. Try and convict people. Make it so that corrupt people will no longer see government "service" as a viable career. Make it so that sociopaths are weeded out from positions of authority in publicly-held corporations.  It would help to have term limits for elected officials and it would help if interlocking corporate directorships were unlawful.
The "company as a person" problem is overstated, and mostly a distraction. In some ways, a company is legally treated as a person. But only in a very narrow fashion, for specific reasons.

And how exactly would you choose which individuals to hold responsible? Large bureaucracies, including governments and corporations, are systems designed to widely distribute responsibility. Some things can be pinned on specific people, but many other things are the result of systems in place that create certain outcomes, and it's not clear who created the systems, and even if it were they're often long gone anyway. The CEO and C-suite can set direction to a certain degree, but have to deal with a lot of inertia and can't just redesign the system from scratch. This is even more true in the federal government, which is morass of overlapping responsibilities created by accretion over centuries that allows blame to be shifted around like quicksilver in a beaker.

(And I say that as a person who believes we should throw a lot more executives, and many, many, many more government officials, in jail. But it's not a solution to the underlying problems.)

It's even harder to blame the voters, because any political system that's created will immediately attract the busybodies and other people who think they should have a say over what their neighbors are doing, and they'll immediately start tweaking the system to ensure they remain in power. They'll spend their entire lives doing this, making the system as opaque and murky as possible to disguise what they're doing. Conversely, the general public make poor watchdogs, because the improvements they can make in their own lives by learning all they can about the different candidates will be marginal, but require a vast expenditure of effort, thus leading them to the rational conclusion that it's in their best interest to throw up their hands and do nothing. It's not about "letting" the cronies and crooks in power get away with anything; it's that there seems to be no way to stop them, and all the sound and fury aimed in that direction amounts to nothing.

These are all systemic problems, not personal problems. We can't fix the problem that corrupt people will be attracted to loci of political or managerial power, so the solution isn't just better people or a magically more attentive public. No, the real solutions have to be systemic. In this case, limit the appeal of government to the power hungry. Circumscribe their powers, by hard limits and massive decentralization. If there's less power in one place, worming yourself into power provides less benefit; and having to lobby 50 or 70,000 different governments for corporate favors is a lot harder than lobbying just 1. Replace arbitrary discretion and fudging with clear rules that are applied consistently. If your job is just applying rules with little leeway allowed, then you can't benefit by granting boons to your friends or further employers.

These would be hard changes to make. It will require taking on the seemingly overwhelming number of people who screech when a single redundant program is threatened with excision, and the even larger number of moral busybodies who think they should be able to tell everyone else what to do. And even harder, it would require converting many of them. That's education, and the mission of a generation or two, not a quick fix.

I don't necessarily agree.  The collective we allows people to hide behind institutions instead of actively forcing them into accountability.  As someone who works intimately with the federal government, I see exactly how federal employees operate.  If 10 fed employees, 1 is competent and qualified, 1-2 are complete morons, and the other 7-8 are barely capable - to the point that contractors do their jobs for them while they perform the official but largely ceremonial duties.  And I'm not talking about ambassadors and such - I'm talking about GS-12 to GS-14 or so. 

A contractor does all of the heavy lifting to, say, put together a study or report, and the government employee hits the "send email" button on it.  Should that document get delivered to who it shouldn't (in a legal sense), the government employee isn't going to get in any trouble but the contractor would go to jail.

That's the point - as you go up in power and influence in government or industry, there needs to be *more* scrutiny, not less.  And it isn't a systemic problem - it's a character defect problem with the people that gravitate towards government service or float to the top (like shit in the toilet) into suites in industry.  At a broad level, it's all because of laziness in pursuing potential empoyees, in getting political candidates, and in interaction with lobbying groups.  People won't do the hard job of due diligence because they don't *want* to find out what might come up as a result.  This laziness and fear allows the corrupt(ible) to make bolder and bolder moves the further up the food chain they rise.  A guy who cuts a few corners as a middle manager ends up running Enron. A Hillary Clinton email server full of classified documents operating in a closet without an ATO is accepted.  It isn't until they reach the point that their own praetorian guard stabs them that their terrible behavior ends.  At that point, it's too late.

Prevention needs to be the order of the day.  The only way I know how to do that is term limits for the elected and preventing people from sitting on multiple corporate boards while employed in the c-suite of other corporations in a quid pro quo.
The system is designed that way. Do you have a nonfunctional department, or is your department riddled with useless people? Can't fire them, hell no. The best solution is often creating an new department with some vague name and purpose, sending all the people you don't want over there, where they check in each day, check out, and collect a paycheck for the rest of their lives. While generating reams of paperwork that mean nothing and saps the will of anyone reading them. I am not fabricating an example. This is a serial numbers filed off version of a story I've heard from people in the trenches.

The only solution is to shrink the bureaucracy. And the only way to that is to change the system, and change the incentives, to prevent the bureaucracy from ever growing to that extent. A few scapegoats won't change anything, term limits are one of those ideas that sound great, but have very little practical effect, and blaming it on laziness is absurd.
Title: Re: What will divide us next?
Post by: Shasarak on November 04, 2021, 03:58:03 PM
Oh, come on. Words do actually have meaning. And what you're describing is just another spin on the faerie tale of trickle-down-economics - just supposedly from the Moon, this time. And for that matter, if you're really regarding your personal understanding of "efficiency" as more important than constitutionality - then you're the totalitarian, not me.  :P

"Faerie tale of trickle down economics" answered in on easy to understand picture

(https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/styles/pubs_2x/public/download-remote-images/utopiayouarestandinginit.files.wordpress.com/12887037698/facebook_1545459214128.jpg1463564623570218211.jpg?itok=1bofgxm6)