CuriousCat Archive Page 28 of 202

  1. It's like this kind of weird hero worship of authority. They assume that the actions of those in power were always the most optimal, most moral, most well-reasoned. They think of the the actions of authority as being puzzles from on-high that they have to decipher the meaning of. And in doing so, they demonstrate that they, too, are smart.

    in response to (diff anon) He's clearly not arguing it would have been "going too far", he's arguing it would have been *impossible to achieve* at that time.

  2. Do you think men have to be trained or conditioned on how to behave properly with women?

    men have to be untrained from treating women poorly

  3. Do you think there’s an anti-American leftist pipeline on the internet? Being so opposed to America’s foreign policy that they support any group/government that’s an enemy of the U.S.

    there are people who feel that way and they sometimes influence others to feel that way, but PIPELINE? no.

  4. have you considered Venezuela tho

    in response to The centralization of its economy?

    great instrument, the vuvuzela

  5. (diff anon) He's clearly not arguing it would have been "going too far", he's arguing it would have been *impossible to achieve* at that time.

    in response to Why? My point was that liberal centrists don’t always compromise for compromise’s sake (although admittedly they often do). sometimes compromise is based on what is possible at the time given the circumstances. Lincoln didn’t have the power to enforce a complete emancipation proclamation in 1863, but he did have the power to free millions of people. What should have he done, waited until the union army had the power to enforce it everywhere? I agree that too many liberal centrists don’t really believe in anything, but not aiming for maximal goals because you don’t have the power or leverage to achieve them doesn’t automatically mean you believe in nothing.

    I swear y'all motherfuckers just say shit assuming it's true, you have no idea if it is. it's like "doing the right thing was infeasible" is your starting position and you work backwards from there.

  9. Toby Keith

    in response to Toby Fox

    Keith David

  10. Why? My point was that liberal centrists don’t always compromise for compromise’s sake (although admittedly they often do). sometimes compromise is based on what is possible at the time given the circumstances. Lincoln didn’t have the power to enforce a complete emancipation proclamation in 1863, but he did have the power to free millions of people. What should have he done, waited until the union army had the power to enforce it everywhere?

    I agree that too many liberal centrists don’t really believe in anything, but not aiming for maximal goals because you don’t have the power or leverage to achieve them doesn’t automatically mean you believe in nothing.

    in response to I agree with all three points, but I don’t necessarily agree that c was the wrong thing to do given the circumstances. A complete emancipation proclamation might have pushed the border states to join the confederacy and then the union might not have been able to win the war—Washington DC would have been cut off from the union. If that happened, the confederacy would have become and independent slave empire, and no one would have been freed, at least not for a minimum of several more decades. The emancipation proclamation appeased the boarder states enough while still freeing a huge number of people and completely shaking up the status quo. It built up the momentum for the 13th Amendment to completely ban slavery (except of course for the prisoner exception) 2 years later.

    you're the "Emancipation Proclamation could have been too severe" guy I hypothesized upthread, tell us more about how freeing ALL the slaves would've been going too far

  11. The centralization of its economy?

    in response to (Different anon) I think you got it backwards. If we didn’t care about other people, we wouldn’t be doing "imperialism" on other countries. We would just mind our own business. Countries like Vietnam, Korea, and Cuba never meant much to us and had very few resources we could exploit; North Korea is totalitarian monarchy now, and Cuba is one of the poorest countries in the world with some of the worst press freedoms. Would a cop be doing "imperialism" by raiding a crime den? Would a superhero be doing "imperialism" by infiltrating a villain’s base?

    rhymes with schlembargo

  13. Is it better to log off or to dunk the poster who was wrong

    it's usually best to log off, but at all indulge from time to time

  14. I agree with all three points, but I don’t necessarily agree that c was the wrong thing to do given the circumstances. A complete emancipation proclamation might have pushed the border states to join the confederacy and then the union might not have been able to win the war—Washington DC would have been cut off from the union. If that happened, the confederacy would have become and independent slave empire, and no one would have been freed, at least not for a minimum of several more decades.
    The emancipation proclamation appeased the boarder states enough while still freeing a huge number of people and completely shaking up the status quo. It built up the momentum for the 13th Amendment to completely ban slavery (except of course for the prisoner exception) 2 years later.

    in response to I don't think prev anon was arguing it could've been "too severe", only "greater than it was" or "more severe than it was." The Emancipation Proclamation, for instance, could've freed slaves in Maryland and West Virginia rather than just the confederacy, or it could've granted equal rights to former slaves.

    dude fuck you

  15. This is a complete tangent, but are you familiar with the Ni’ihau incident? It is important context for the Japanese internment during World War II. Basically, one of the Pearl Harbor bombers crash landed on the western Hawaiian island of Ni’ihau, and was rescued by native Hawaiians and a Japanese American couple on the island. The rescuers were unaware of the attack, but when they found out, the pilot took a Hawaiian man and woman hostage and was helped by the Japanese American couple. The Hawaiian couple killed the pilot and the Japanese American man killed himself.

    The Japanese American man helping the pilot set off the wave of racist panic that resulted in FDR interning all Japanese Americans in the western United States. I only learned about this incident a few years ago. I believe liberals and leftists are hesitant to discuss it because it feels like you are justifying the internment. I was not taught it in school, but it is essential context. How do you think it should be discussed?

    in response to How much would you have liked FDR if he didn’t do the Japanese internment camps?

    how is that essential context?

  17. If the Houthi's were nazi's would you still feel the same about them attacking ships in the red sea.

    this is such a nothing question. Nazis would not be trying to prevent a genocide of brown people. this is like asking "if Satan were trying to save the Palestinians you'd be against it!" yeah if shit were different shit might be different.

  18. Why do leftists want the only Jewish state to give up its arms and let Hamas terrorists massacre Israel? Is there a word for this type of hatred towards Jewish people?

    claiming Israel is a Jewish state is, in fact, deeply racist

  19. I don't think prev anon was arguing it could've been "too severe", only "greater than it was" or "more severe than it was." The Emancipation Proclamation, for instance, could've freed slaves in Maryland and West Virginia rather than just the confederacy, or it could've granted equal rights to former slaves.

    in response to Given that any possible amount of reform could theoretically be greater than what it is, your arguments that liberals don't want "too much" of reform could be applied to any political group. In fact, every law ever passed could be more severe than it was, but clearly that doesn't mean that every political group ever formed lacks conviction.

    and a) that would have been a good thing, and b) it's what many abolitionists demanded, but c) it was compromised by liberal centrism

  20. A genetic anomaly doesn't mean that someone isn't a biological man or woman (why are you so hard to offend :( )

    in response to You can find an exception to any rule. The average number of human legs in the world is less than 2 since some people are missing a leg, but that doesn't mean having 2 legs isn't normal/expected.

    exactly! and there is a genetic anomaly where a small fraction of men are born with XX chromosomes and a fraction of women with XY, and they may take hormones or have surgeries to correct it.

    transexuality fits perfectly within the framework you provided! :D

  21. Do you think... Lucy gets any joy from taking that football from Charlie Brown? Like, we know she's obligated to do it, but is the obligation all there is?

    I think Lucy is like the commenter that posts "first!" it is entirely obligatory, and yet there is genuine joy in the obligation.

    I truly wonder how many times she fully intended to let Charlie Brown kick the ball and then, at the last second, couldn't help herself. it's probably what she was so good at convincing him: she believed what she said when she said it. but the heart wants what it wants.

  22. I'll grant that you could interpret "severe" as having negative connotations, but other terms I considered using like "radical" or "extreme" also do. Just to clarify, I'm saying that there could exist a version of every policy that would be a version of it to a higher extent and I am not suggesting that the theoretical version would necessarily be worse, just that it could exist.

    in response to I thought that you would be able to understand that "too" carries a negative meaning (e.g. "too loud") but "more" does not (e.g. "more loud"). As such, it should be evident that I'm not suggesting that any reform, such as the Emancipation Proclamation, could go "too far" but rather that it could theoretically go further. As an example, the Emancipation Proclamation could have changed the legal status of slaves in Union slave states, such as Kentucky.

    the idea that "radical" carries a negative connotation is not helping your case

  23. How much would you have liked FDR if he didn’t do the Japanese internment camps?

    that's a 10/10, would fully support not doing that

  24. why not just respond to their point tho

    in response to I thought that you would be able to understand that "too" carries a negative meaning (e.g. "too loud") but "more" does not (e.g. "more loud"). As such, it should be evident that I'm not suggesting that any reform, such as the Emancipation Proclamation, could go "too far" but rather that it could theoretically go further. As an example, the Emancipation Proclamation could have changed the legal status of slaves in Union slave states, such as Kentucky.

    I reject the premise of their point, which is predicated on the idea that all beliefs are in some way centrist, softly implies that this is desirable, and flattens the conversation to imply liberal centrism isn't THAT different from any other belief system. it is not an interesting or well-thought-out point, and I suspect they just wanna argue.

  25. Thoughts on Adolf Hitler?

    aside from the usual "mass-murdering fuckhead"?

    it's the least of his crimes but he ruined a perfectly good 'stache

  27. personally i wouldn't want to date anyone who's not a cutie patootie but that's just me

    you asking me out?

  28. I thought that you would be able to understand that "too" carries a negative meaning (e.g. "too loud") but "more" does not (e.g. "more loud"). As such, it should be evident that I'm not suggesting that any reform, such as the Emancipation Proclamation, could go "too far" but rather that it could theoretically go further. As an example, the Emancipation Proclamation could have changed the legal status of slaves in Union slave states, such as Kentucky.

    in response to I didn't say "too severe", I said "more severe." There's a difference.

    ooh, if where talking about connotations, what does "severe" connote, genius?

  29. (DA) I wonder if this anon is one of the people who claim they're "just following the science."

    Because while I have no scientific background whatever, I am aware that ignoring a natural variance because it's found in a tiny minority of the population goes against scientific principles.

    in response to You can find an exception to any rule. The average number of human legs in the world is less than 2 since some people are missing a leg, but that doesn't mean having 2 legs isn't normal/expected.

    thing is, they're ACCEPTING a fractional deviation from the rule, but have decided trans people (who make up like 0.5% of the population) are NOT an acceptable variation, but three-chromosome folks are. they can't offer any justification for why one is legit and the other not that isn't just their own biases, but are trying to claim scientific rigor.

    sad.

  30. You can find an exception to any rule. The average number of human legs in the world is less than 2 since some people are missing a leg, but that doesn't mean having 2 legs isn't normal/expected.

    in response to There’s a 99.9% chance that theirs are lacking a Y chromosome, I’m good lol.

    so you DON'T refuse to date people with the same chromosomes

  31. I didn't say "too severe", I said "more severe." There's a difference.

    in response to Given that any possible amount of reform could theoretically be greater than what it is, your arguments that liberals don't want "too much" of reform could be applied to any political group. In fact, every law ever passed could be more severe than it was, but clearly that doesn't mean that every political group ever formed lacks conviction.

    don't ask me to explain the meaning of your own sentences to you

  32. Given that any possible amount of reform could theoretically be greater than what it is, your arguments that liberals don't want "too much" of reform could be applied to any political group. In fact, every law ever passed could be more severe than it was, but clearly that doesn't mean that every political group ever formed lacks conviction.

    in response to Political plurality, freedom of speech, equality of the law, consent of the governed, need I go on?

    tell me how the Emancipation Proclamation could have been too severe

  33. Why would dating your clone/twin be bad

    in response to I refuse to date anyone with the same chromosomes as me

    you know, I guess I was operating on some assumptions here, but unpacking them would require weighing in on incest to a degree I'm not comfortable with

  34. I'm talking bout that shit that goes reeeeeeeeeeeerrrrrr right into my mouth from mommas spoon

    in response to What's the deal with airplane food?

  35. Did another man show up

    in response to Ever read any Brian K Vaughan?

    actually yeah, a few, but that wasn't the issue

    if you know, you know

  36. There’s a 99.9% chance that theirs are lacking a Y chromosome, I’m good lol.

    in response to I refuse to date anyone with a Y chromosome (I’m a man)

    something tells me, if you found out one of the women you dated had the genetic anomaly of being XXY, you would say that doesn't count

  37. (Different anon) I think you got it backwards. If we didn’t care about other people, we wouldn’t be doing "imperialism" on other countries. We would just mind our own business. Countries like Vietnam, Korea, and Cuba never meant much to us and had very few resources we could exploit; North Korea is totalitarian monarchy now, and Cuba is one of the poorest countries in the world with some of the worst press freedoms.

    Would a cop be doing "imperialism" by raiding a crime den? Would a superhero be doing "imperialism" by infiltrating a villain’s base?

    in response to What’s so bad about imperialism?

    hey quick question: why is Cuba poor?

  38. what are your full thoughts on ultrakill? i've seen you reference it variously but would be interested to know your general position on the game a la that one fps thread you made

    it's amazing. I haven't played a ton of it cuz it's HARD, but it's a good-ass game.

  39. Hi, Ian! I hope you're doing well. I was wondering if you have any plans as to what you'll update on YouTube/Nebula/Patreon this year? By all means, I don't really care if you don't update, your health and well-being are of the outmost importance of course. The lack of vids doesn't make my life worse, but their existence does make it a little bit better for a while. Anyway, hugs and kisses from a very sleep deprived Spaniard!

    I've got a big Patreon update coming soon with a LOT of plans for the coming year, and I'm about 80% done with the next mini Alt-Right Playbook. and I may have a small Nebula/Patreon exclusive thing soon, if things shake out right this weekend.

    generally, there is a lot in the works and I think the first of it will be hitting soon.

  40. You're making a convincing argument that the Democratic Party doesn't live up to the ideals previous anon lists, but might the Democratic Party just be insufficiently liberal? Are there alliances or parties in other times or countries or power levels which call themselves liberal and do live up to those ideals?

    in response to Political plurality, freedom of speech, equality of the law, consent of the governed, need I go on?

    I would give some room for "these are the aims of liberalism that it fails to achieve" if liberalism had ever claimed these are things it was fighting for.

    like, when has the liberal establishment actually SAID it believes in free speech? as, like, a broad goal. they'll support it in individual cases, and they'll take credit for wins that free speech advocacy groups made within liberal governments, but have they ever claimed the mantle of The Free Speech Party? or take immigration: they oppose a lot of Trump- and Bush-era immigration policy, but have they ever claimed to be The Pro-Immigrant Party? can you even articulate what the Democrat position on immigration IS beyond "not as bad as Republicans"?

    if you are claiming these are actual liberal goals, not just things liberals have sometimes supported when it was politically expedient to support them, I'ma need evidence.

  41. Political plurality, freedom of speech, equality of the law, consent of the governed, need I go on?

    in response to What’s so bad about liberal democracy?

    liberalism doesn't believe in any of those things. a lot of Americans believe in those things, and so they have to vote for liberals because conservatives want the opposite. but liberals only believe in a vague agreeableness where "doing things" is good. it matters what the things AREN'T - they can't be the EXACT SAME THINGS conservatives want - but it doesn't really matter what they ARE so long as they aren't TOO radical.

    so! liberals have, at times, been the party of free speech, but was also famously the party of Tipper Gore's crusade against obscenity. they have been the party of "consent of the governed," but also do incredibly unpopular, unilateral things like Biden's support for the bombing of Gaza (currently opposed by a majority of BOTH PARTIES). they believe in political plurality but hate their own left wing and alternately collaborate with or demonize conservatives; they support equality of the law but also built the extrajudicial drone warfare program, jail whistleblowers, and STILL won't shut down Guantanamo; they want loan forgiveness but not too much, immigration reform but not too much, affordable healthcare but not too much... all they want is to be SOME degree preferable to the alternative and otherwise not make a ruckus.

  42. Can we change that?

    in response to What’s so bad about liberal democracy?

    I used to think so. I became a leftist when I stopped believing it was feasible.

  43. What's the deal with airplane food?

    in response to What’s so bad about liberal democracy?

    y'all are getting food on your airplanes???

  44. I refuse to date anyone with a Y chromosome (I’m a man)

    in response to I refuse to date anyone with the same chromosomes as me

    I would bet good money you haven't seen evidence of any of your partners' chromosomes (assuming you've ever dated anybody)

  45. What’s so bad about liberal democracy?

    it doesn't believe in anything

  46. No, that democratic centralism wasn’t the reason for the excesses that occurred in the Stalin era.

    in response to Democratic Centralism started with Lenin tho

    sure, in the sense that capitalism wasn't the REASON for the excesses of the Tsars. the point is it allowed for and rewarded those excesses, and a system which allows and rewards subjugation and vindictive violence by a largely unchecked, centralized power is, ah... bad? it's bad. it's a system where, if you don't have a Stalin, it's not because the system is antithetical to Stalinism; you've just been lucky so far.

    capitalism CAN give you an FDR, it CAN give you the Boom Years, it CAN give you the labor movement... but it's not built for that, and they won't be sustainable. and that's Democratic Centralism. if you've got a Lenin, yeah, it might not be what I want but could be worse... but you're just hoping and praying no Stalin comes along. and fuck that! I didn't become a socialist because I love centralized power! I don't believe in "worker's rights (so long as the guy in charge isn't pissed at the workers this week)!" fuck Stalin and fuck any system that makes Stalin likely.

  47. I refuse to date anyone with the same chromosomes as me

    I agree you should not date your twin and/or clone

  48. But the U.S. and most capitalist countries are guilty of those same things, and often times far worse. What reasonable alternative was there at the time?

    in response to Can you explain what's actually wrong with democratic centralism?

    the whole point of overthrowing capitalism was to NOT have those things anymore

  50. Why hasn’t MLK had a spiritual successor?

    MLK was the most hated man in America until several years after he was murdered. in the years since, Black culture has made itself harder for white folks to sanitize.

  51. Can you explain what's actually wrong with democratic centralism?

    I feel like you have probably already heard some of the things people don't like about Stalinist Russia

  52. Is ginger a slur?

    in response to Is cracker a slur?

    no

  54. Considering the impact of HBomberguy's plagiarism video, should video essayists be less averse to work that addresses other video essayists, and could be thought of as "drama?" Harry was openly uncomfortable having made the video, but it seems like it was necessary to get Somerton to experience consequences for plagiarizing

    I think Harry's discomfort is reasonable. like, yes, it was necessary to get Somerton to experience consequences, but, as the saying goes, "there is no tool without blood on it." what we would LIKE is for YouTube to actually give a shit about plagiarism, for people to actually be compensated for their work, for the financial incentives NOT to reward content mills, for some kind of justice system that even knows what to do with these problems. Harry knows that a public callout may be the only way to invoke consequences, but he also knows it will probably cause an extreme backlash, could lead to harassment, might get seized on by homophobes, may draw attention to creators who didn't want to make a stink about Somerton, and will popularize more (and more tenuous) accusations of plagiarism and callout content (which is already happening!).

    drama vids may be the best tool we have, but that's an indictment of the toolbox. there are unavoidable negative consequences to making that kind of content, and everyone should think long and hard before making one about whether it's justified. I think Harry did the right thing, but I wouldn't want him to do it unthinkingly.

  55. Ever read any Brian K Vaughan?

    I've read all of Y: The Last Man, and I will never forgive him for the ending

  56. Is an anti-carceral stance necessarily anti-punitive justice? What do you think of the idea that a just system would seek to rehabilitate those who have harmed others, but that rehabilitation can't meaningfully occur without the perpetrators of harm being harmed in some way?

    I think the difference between punishment and rehabilitation is, in punishment, the harm is the point. in rehab, harm may occur in the process but is not the aim and is, where possible, avoided.

  57. Is there a term for guys who generally aren't shitty to women, but get really mad when women don't take them at their word on that? Like, when they realize women view them as potential dangers, or feel uncomfortable setting boundaries with them, bc in their minds they know they aren't threatening and they expect women to just agree with them about that? I feel like "Nice Guy" would be a good label but it seems to just mean guys who think being nice to women makes them entitled to sex

    thinking that "being nice" entitles you to sex and thinking "being nice" entitles you to trust are related enough that I'm fine using "Nice Guy" for both

  59. (different anon)
    What I've observed is more or less the opposite of the original question. Fascists don't care what people think of the idea of fascism because the plan is to convince their followers that they aren't fascist.

    in response to Why do communists get to say "that wasn’t real communism" when someone brings up the deaths that socialist states caused, but fascists don’t get to say "that wasn’t real fascism" in the same scenario?

    do not mistake the face they show to you for the face they show each other. their plan is to drop the mask once the follower is deep enough.

  60. Why do communists get to say "that wasn’t real communism" when someone brings up the deaths that socialist states caused, but fascists don’t get to say "that wasn’t real fascism" in the same scenario?

    because the fascists are proud of the deaths

  61. Their missiles were shot down. They don't get a pass for being bad a violence. Also, where did I call civilian mass death in Gaza "unfortunate"? Israel is doing a genocide, plain and simple. I just don't see how a far-right militia, that reintroduced slavery on the territory they control, doing piracy, helps the situation. Like, if they stop a norwegian ship moving palm oil, how's that damaging to Israel and how does it force them to stop?

    in response to How's far-right guys shooting missiles at the civilian vessels based?

    I feel like you're asking me to explain things to you that you could google. but it is functionally a trade sanction; it is making the war in Gaza extremely costly for global capital, which creates greater pressure on the US and Israel to bring about a ceasefire.

  62. What’s the difference between framing and composition?

    Tried googling this, but I still don’t get it

    in what context?

  63. How's far-right guys shooting missiles at the civilian vessels based?

    in response to What’s your opinion/analysis of the blockade in the Red Sea by the Houthis?

    well Israel shooting missiles at Gaza is very not based, and the trade route disruption has so far killed 0 people, so it's a non-fatal way of penalizing genocide, which is pretty fuckin' impressive in my book. and the liberal urge to call property damage "violence" and bomb people over it but call mass civilian deaths in Gaza "unfortunate" while paying for it is pathetic.

  64. Is cracker a slur?

    cracker was coined by rich white people to denigrate poor white people

  65. Is there a difference between markets and commerce? I know I could Google but like also you write words if you feel like it

    in response to Is there a difference between capitalism and markets in your view? And if there is, what is it?

    the main thing is, once upon a time, the market was a specific place, where money was exchanged for goods and services. and, outside of that place, people mostly shared goods and services without much that could be called "commerce." feudal peasants had to care for the community; farmers made sure everyone was fed, blacksmiths made sure all the farmers' animals were shod, carpenters made sure everyone's houses were in good shape. money/barter were for the market, which was mostly for trading with merchants who went from community to community.

    this thing where clothes, food, housing, services, etc. all have to be BOUGHT, and "the market" is not a specific place but a shorthand for commerce, which now intersects with every part of your life... THAT'S what capitalism added.

  66. Is social democracy the moderate wing of fascism?

    that's harsh! it's either the progressive wing of liberalism or the moderate wing of socialism, depending on which fight you wanna start.

  67. Under what circumstances, do you think, is a hierarchy good? Under what circumstances is it worth trying to topple an existing hierarchy?

    I think hierarchy can serve useful functions when they are situational and dissolve immediately when their function has been performed. if we're talking about overthrowing one, that means it's not dissolving itself. so maybe a rule of thumb would be, any hierarchy that would NEED to be toppled, SHOULD be toppled.

  68. Why are games with sexual content so much more controversial than games with violent content?

    it's the same with movies in the US. we're way more prudish about sex than violence.

  69. What fighting archetype would You be (zoner, rushdown, etc)

    fastfaller

  70. What’s your opinion/analysis of the blockade in the Red Sea by the Houthis?

    based

  71. have you ever talked/dove into Disco Elysium publicly?

    a tweet here and there, a brief note in my "things that got me through a year of quarantine" video, but nothing substantive

  72. If "most people are racist" then racism is more or less mankind's natural state. Surely that can't be what you mean.

    in response to Since you believe that capitalism is a racist ideology (feel free to correct me if you don't believe that) and that believing in a racist ideology makes you racist (which you have just claimed in your previous answer), it would necessarily follow that you believe that all supporters of capitalism (which, statistically speaking, is most of the world and an even greater proportion in America specifically) are racist. If most people are racist according to your definition of racism, then the definition that you are using for racism seems really ineffective.

    surely you can't think that's what I mean. that's like saying "most people live in cities so clearly cities are mankind's natural state."

    commonplace ≠ natural

  73. Is there a difference between capitalism and markets in your view? And if there is, what is it?

    oh my god, yes! there is a difference between capitalism and markets! markets have existed nearly as long as trade has existed! capitalism's only been around for ~350 years!

    I recommend this book: https://www.versobooks.com/products/1782-the-origin-of-capitalism

  74. If North Korea isn’t socialist, then what is it?

    North

  75. Are all Marxist-Leninists tankies?

    I don't think there's consensus on whether "tankie" refers to *all* ML's or just the worst ones

Anon commented:
Ian replied: