CuriousCat Archive Page 31 of 202

  1. What makes fascism inherently bad aside from the extreme racism of the Nazis?

    ...

  3. Dead Island, Dead Rising, or Dead Space?

    Dead Alive

  4. It doesn't necessarily have to the police, but I think there's an argument that whoever does it needs to have some kind of authority in order to be effective. Otherwise you can get a response of "shut up you're not my dad". I think police are currently the only ones granted the authority to MAKE you stop RIGHT now.

    in response to Different anon. But here’s an example. Recently on a relatively busy street near where I live, a group of middle school-aged boys were throwing rocks and things like that at cars driving by. Understandably, this upset several people, so they called the police. The police came and stopped the boys. As far as I know, they called the kids’ parents and gave them the scared straight talk. This is not an argument that police are good and necessary and I shudder to think what would have happened if any of the boys were black, but it is reasonable to ask who could have been called in an alternate justice system.

    and where does that authority come from. what special authority do cops have that other adults don't. and do you genuinely believe that it is the only way to get kids to stop throwing rocks.

  5. How did you start to build your viewership? Did you share it with friends and family and go from there, did you post in online in places where you thought it would land well? I assume that at some point, a channel gets big enough to be picked up by the algorithm and, with luck and good quality videos, you can grow organically from there (?), but what were your first steps to grow in that direction?

    I'm not a good case study. a number of things outside my control went right for me and my first video went viral. (well, "viral" by 2014 video game youtuber standards.) it took a while to release a follow-up and it did not do NEARLY as well, and it was years before I matched the numbers that first video did. but I had a big head start on most people.

  6. Who killed JFK?

    beauty

  7. Who was more effective, MLK or Malcolm X?

    yes

  8. What's the best Beck album?

    I have not listened to enough to say. of the ones I know: Odelay.

  9. What is the first word in your favourite album of all time?

    "when"

  10. Different anon. But here’s an example. Recently on a relatively busy street near where I live, a group of middle school-aged boys were throwing rocks and things like that at cars driving by. Understandably, this upset several people, so they called the police. The police came and stopped the boys. As far as I know, they called the kids’ parents and gave them the scared straight talk. This is not an argument that police are good and necessary and I shudder to think what would have happened if any of the boys were black, but it is reasonable to ask who could have been called in an alternate justice system.

    in response to I would just like to ask how laws would be enforced in your police free Society

    how is that a thing only police can do? like, why do the people you call for that have to be police? it's walking up, talking to some kids, and calling their parents. how is that not something literally ANY ADULT could do? why does it need to be someone authorized to kill people?

  12. in your video on the arsenal, you use quake as an example for a "distilled" example of the arsenal. is there any reason you didn't use doom as an example when it has a pistol and quake doesn't? was it explicitly to call attention to quake's lack of a pistol?

    Doom's arsenal is a little less distilled. Quake has a simple "melee, two shotguns, two machine guns, two explosives, bfg," which is perfect for illustrating my point. Doom has two melee weapons, the second of which doesn't serve the same function of "amplify both strengths and weaknesses," the chainsaw really is just a replacement for fists. Doom 1 only has the single chaingun, shotgun, and rocket launcher; Doom 2 introduces the super shotgun, and the plasma rifle kiiiiiiinda works as the more powerful version of the chaingun, but it uses a different ammo type and isn't hitscan, so it's not as clear an illustration. and you still only have the one explosive.

    still COULD have used Doom! but Quake felt like a cleaner illustration of the point.

  13. Was Obamacare a failure?

    I have insurance because if it

  14. Is saying "Israel should not exist" antisemitic?

    the phrase is used antisemitically often, and the "anti-settler colonial" arguments in favor of it are not WRONG but rarely applied to any other settler colonial state, so the singling out of Israel for being erased rather than radically transformed is sus

    if someone's stance is that no settler colonial power should exist, or supports worldwide abolition of nation-states, and they are talking about Israel in THAT context? sure, fair! they should be sensitive to the eliminationist arguments that they may be interpreted as making, but, when discussed responsibly, the founding of Israel and the attendant conversation around settler colonialism is worth having.

  15. You prefer to be neck or waist?

    in response to What make hug good?

    varies, but I'm mostly a waist man

  17. I'm trying to find any substance in your argument for police abolition beyond asserting that American police are racist and sexist (which they are) and don't singlehandedly solve crime (which they're not supposed to nor should they be). And I'd expect given that it's a fringe view you'd have some more fleshed out thoughts.

    in response to The way an arrest works is that the police arrest you, you're booked, you sit in jail until arraignment, and at the arraignment then if the judge doesn't find probable cause and the prosecutor doesn't drop the charges then the judge sets bail and often in DV cases gives a no-contact order. If someone only sits in jail for 24 hours and then goes back to beat his wife, that's the prosecutor or judge's fault. Police don't really have a say in bail or length of sentence or even charges, they just find probable cause and then do the forceful stuff necessary to ship you, and if you want a wife beater to be restrained at all then force is necessary.

    in this thread I have asserted that police are not only racist and sexist but have been racist and sexist for their entire existence, mentioned the statistic that increasing police presence actually increases crime, and pointed out that the justice system does not actually perform the duties we claim it's for (e.g. stopping domestic violence).

    happy to restate what I've said elsewhere: I believe crime is best treated as a public health issue, with interventions from social workers having far more effect than police, and dealing with poverty and patriarchy has far more preventative effect than using prison as a deterrent. the institution of policing, prisons, and the punitive justice model is an abject failure and is defended purely for philosophical reasons. people find the idea of prevention, restorative justice, and rehabilitation offensive, because punishment and authority is all they've ever known.

    I do not believe any incarnation of "police" can be trusted.

  18. I would just like to ask how laws would be enforced in your police free Society

    I'm willing to bet there are a lot of laws you follow without intervention from police

  19. as a floridian: it's not hard. depict us naturally and it's already funny

    personally i'm ashamed that i've got childlike glee for how they're depicting the florida keys, they have the bridge i passed and crossed every day going to school

    in response to GTA VI trailer is out and it shows my city let's fucking gooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

    that's the problem: Florida can't be exaggerated. Florida is Poe's Law incarnate.

  20. GTA VI trailer is out and it shows my city let's fucking gooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

    how does one parody Florida?

  21. The way an arrest works is that the police arrest you, you're booked, you sit in jail until arraignment, and at the arraignment then if the judge doesn't find probable cause and the prosecutor doesn't drop the charges then the judge sets bail and often in DV cases gives a no-contact order. If someone only sits in jail for 24 hours and then goes back to beat his wife, that's the prosecutor or judge's fault. Police don't really have a say in bail or length of sentence or even charges, they just find probable cause and then do the forceful stuff necessary to ship you, and if you want a wife beater to be restrained at all then force is necessary.

    in response to I didn't say prison I said jail. Wife beaters get frequently thrown in jail, actually in many states it's pretty easy because they have rules where in certain DV calls they have to arrest someone (e.g., even if they aren't sure who the aggressor was, or even if both parties agree it was nothing). "Doing time" is up to the judge, not police's job.

    what is the point of this argument

    what do you think we're talking about right now

  22. Also idk if you're suggesting that police should get the right to hold wife beaters for longer without an arraignment, but that sounds like it'd just make the system more abusive.

    in response to I didn't say prison I said jail. Wife beaters get frequently thrown in jail, actually in many states it's pretty easy because they have rules where in certain DV calls they have to arrest someone (e.g., even if they aren't sure who the aggressor was, or even if both parties agree it was nothing). "Doing time" is up to the judge, not police's job.

    does that sound like what the police abolitionist is saying. does it.

  23. What's something about you you wish more people knew about?

    I guess it'd be nice if more people realized the Alt-Right Playbook guy and the Smash video guy were the same guy. beyond that, I wish people knew less.

  24. What make hug good?

    compatible technique. can't both be waist-huggers or neck-huggers, gotta be one of each. or else you do one-arm-up, one-arm-down chest hug, which is always functional but rarely exciting.

  25. do you ever have sushi, or does being vegan mean your options are too limited for it to be worth it? if you do, what sort do you like

    loads. my necessities are Idaho maki (tempura-fried sweet potato) and inari nigiri (rice in a sweet fried tofu skin). most places will have cucumber, avocado, and maybe gourd, so those can fill out an order. VERY happy when they have an ume shiso (pickled plum and shiso leaves). surprisingly few have shiitake, but when they do it's WONDERFUL. and I like a mango roll when I can find one! get some vegetable gyoza/shumai and/or a seaweed salad, you got a good meal.

  26. Serious question: should I feel ashamed to be Cuban-American? My family fled in 1961. No, they did not own slaves.

    no one ever needs to feel ashamed of who they are or what they were born. we all inherit a legacy: what is or isn't shameful is what we DO with that.

  27. Do you care if the left appeals to men?

    um. I mean... not as such? I care that the Left appeals to *people*. I care that the Left have moral aims. I care that the Left have concrete goals. I care that the Left actually stand for the things it purports to stand for. if, in doing those things, it finds that men are less drawn to it? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    being that I am a man and the Left appealed to me, it's obvious the Left appeals to SOME men. so it's not like men's concerns are gonna be absent from it. so we're just talking about whether it's going to have a lower-than-average proportion of men. which, honestly, I don't give a fuck. like, I'm down for people to make affordances to men insofar as it does not hinder the morality, intent, or integrity of the Left. but if a large number of men decide they just aren't down with social and economic justice? it's no great loss.

    I think a Left that is willing to alienate men is more valuable than a Left that wants to placate them.

  28. I'm curious what has led to making smaller ARPB vids? Not that I'm complaining, they're good bite sized lessons.

    I got very daunted by the length of my list of topics, and then realized a bunch of them didn't actually need to be 20-40 minutes long. so I made a list of all the ones that could probably be smaller, and intended to do, like, a "lightning round" video, that just burned through all the topics weren't Big Video topics and hadn't found their way into any other videos.

    but I finally decided to release them as shorts because a) I was sick of spending months and months on giant videos and just wanted to start putting stuff OUT again, b) I wanted to be able to link people to specific arguments and, even if I did the longer lightning round video, I was gonna make an unlisted playlist of each piece individually for that purpose, and c) I would get more traffic/ad revenue with small, steady releases than with one big one, and my income has... suffered... in the last couple years.

  29. I didn't say prison I said jail. Wife beaters get frequently thrown in jail, actually in many states it's pretty easy because they have rules where in certain DV calls they have to arrest someone (e.g., even if they aren't sure who the aggressor was, or even if both parties agree it was nothing). "Doing time" is up to the judge, not police's job.

    in response to If that were true there'd be no wife beaters in jail.

    lol so your argument is "when cops have literally no choice they will stop a man from beating his wife for 24 hours and then send him home"

    gosh, how could any other system hope to rival the supreme efficacy of policing?

  30. (diff anon) It may be a real thing a person can believe, but that doesn't mean it isn't naive. You're essentially arguing for the abolition of punitive justice, and no serious person can reasonably expect victims of violent crime not to desire punitive justice against their assailants.

    in response to My understanding was that the latter tends to contain many of the former, so you've got me curious a bit now (perhaps curious as a cat!)

    I *am* a victim of violent crime and do not desire punitive justice against my assailants. I would have much preferred preventative justice because then I might not have had my jaw broken and would still have full feeling in my lower lip. and, if I DID want punitive justice, I wouldn't think my reactive desire born of fear and trauma should be guiding policy.

    I am under no illusion that the guy who broke my face in half on the way home from the train station getting sent to jail for 6 years and then getting out would accomplish anything. like, yay, he did something bad to me so then something bad happened to him. is he rehabilitated? or is he broke and unemployable and even more likely to break someone else's face for their bag like he did me? I don't want revenge, I want a fucking solution.

    also, that was the second violent mugging in two weeks, and, both times, the cops did fucking nothing. they took a statement (incorrectly writing down what I said) and then never contacted me again.

    you don't know anything about what cops do or don't, or the experience of people who've dealt with violent crime, or that of people who deal with the criminal justice system. don't call me naive.

  31. Wow I really thought the point of enders game was "If you focus on military solutions, they're the only solutions you will find". I guess that's what I brought into it more than anything

    in response to It's been like a decade since I read enders game but wasn't one of Ender's friends gay and Ender was accepting of his affection? I remember something like that standing out and thinking "oh, how nice, two boys showing affection for each other without it being homophobic". Additionally, I thought the entire point of Enders journey at the end is that the whole war was one big mistake because the aliens were a hive mind that didn't understand that humans weren't and it wasn't until it was too late that was clear and that the whole war could have been avoided if we just communicated better? I'm not saying your wrong, and I was never that big a fan of the book tbh so it's not like I'm trying to defend it, but how wrong can I remember the story lol?

    what it means to YOU is still valid! what it means to Card isn't the end-all be-all.

  33. Have you heard of the card game Inscryption?

    yeah, and I get the sense I'd probably like it a lot! but... it's spoopy...

  34. How do you stop transgressors before they’ve gotten help? For example, how do you stop a man from beating his wife? Yes you can treat him, but what if he doesn’t get help voluntarily?

    in response to No need to mock people. When your system works, you will need police. So it's a bit disingenuous for you to say police are evil and abolish police when you'll one day want a very similar structure in place to enforce what's good. It'd be more honest to say, "dismantle the entire system and rebuild it from the ground up". The drawback is that that sounds more far-fetched, and it forces people to consider how they contribute to an oppressive system.

    I don't know. but I promise you: neither do cops.

  35. I'd like to mention another reason people have difficulty imagining a society without police, which is that they think "What happens when there's a mass shooter that needs to stopped? What happens when a violent criminal flees in order to avoid the consequences of their actions? What happens when someone receives death threats?"

    There are answers to these questions. For example, an active shooter could be treated as a public emergency akin to a fire, and a group of civilians akin to fire fighters could be equipped with body armor , shields, and handcuffs if it's necessary to subdue the shooter by force). Perhaps there could be a role that people take on temporarily (like a Juror) if the community deems it necessary to track down and apprehend a suspect, a charged person, or a convicted person. And of course detectives aren't synonymous with police. We definitely need people around who are able to bring to justice sexual predators while society is dealing with the misogyny problem. But police are utterly inept at preventing sexual assault.

    in response to No need to mock people. When your system works, you will need police. So it's a bit disingenuous for you to say police are evil and abolish police when you'll one day want a very similar structure in place to enforce what's good. It'd be more honest to say, "dismantle the entire system and rebuild it from the ground up". The drawback is that that sounds more far-fetched, and it forces people to consider how they contribute to an oppressive system.

    police are also utterly inept with mass shooters and fully apathetic to death threats, and the majority of crimes in this country go unsolved, so those people fleeing are, by and large, getting away. even if we didn't have answers to "who deals with these problems if not police?" there'd still be the simple fact that police have only ever dealt with these problems IN THEORY.

  37. My understanding was that the latter tends to contain many of the former, so you've got me curious a bit now (perhaps curious as a cat!)

    in response to In a case such that the More True a statement *is* the Less True it is *percieved as* and vice versa, how in the hell is one to convince people of true statements?

    indeed it does! but, if someone is treating a true statement with skepticism, it means they have some worldview, some base assumption, that makes it look false. so you'll need to dig into what those are.

    here on CC I am currently having one such conversation with someone who rejects out of hand that "the police should be abolished" is a true statement. not just that they disagree with it, but they believe I am being disingenuous when I say it. to them, it seems democracy CANNOT exist without police; if the law is the expression of the public will, then police will be necessary to carry out the law. obviously, I must want the public will carried out by some kind of organized force with special authority, and I'll just structure it a bit differently and call it something else. but it will still be "police" in all but name.

    so, okay, by talking more, I can see where some of our base assumptions split: I DON'T believe public will can only be expressed by force, and I DON'T believe special authorities can be trusted to work in service of the public. I believe that most crime can be treated with public services, that most criminals can be rehabilitated. and, to continue talking, I need them to CONCEIVE of the idea that someone could really and truly want a world without police. of how that world could operate. I also need them to interrogate whether they have any evidence that police DO express the public will, or EVER HAVE, or if this is just conventional wisdom. has it ever been DEMONSTRATED?

    so, for something to APPEAR true, one has to have a worldview in which it is possible and acceptable to believe. if you're finding a person rejects a truth out of hand, it means their worldview is otherwise, and it will take some discussion to unpack what assumptions they're working with. and you'll have to present them with a frame through which the statement can be seen as true.

    I may not convince this person that police should not exist. but I hope I can convince them that, when I say "abolish the police," it's not a euphemism or poetic hyperbole: I sincerely mean "abolish the police." that is a real thing a person can believe.

  38. No need to mock people.

    When your system works, you will need police. So it's a bit disingenuous for you to say police are evil and abolish police when you'll one day want a very similar structure in place to enforce what's good. It'd be more honest to say, "dismantle the entire system and rebuild it from the ground up". The drawback is that that sounds more far-fetched, and it forces people to consider how they contribute to an oppressive system.

    in response to So your problem isn't police, it's legislative process. Just say that.

    I wasn't mocking you, I was repeating my own prior beliefs.

    and, no, I will not want police in any new system. there will need to be some means to express the public will, but I do not want that will be be expressed by force, and I intend to treat crime as a public health issue to be addressed holistically by treating its underlying causes and using rehabilitation/restorative justice for transgressors. what happens when people cannot be reformed is an open question, but I don't believe the issue will be so rampant that anything like a police force or prison system will be needed.

    please stop calling me disingenuous and telling me what I will or won't want in a hypothetical future. if you're going to say "force is the only way to express public will," please justify that belief. you are treating it as a truism and begging the question of why you believe it.

  39. what subject would you be most okay with yourself becoming a crackpot theorist in

    I feel like the Paul is Dead folks are having more fun than most crackpots

  40. So your problem isn't police, it's legislative process. Just say that.

    in response to (Different anon) Yeah they seem to assume will of the ruling class is the collective will. Police only help to consolidate power

    this is the kind of liberal argument I used to make. the problem isn't capitalism, it's the way we're DOING capitalism! the problem isn't policing, it's the LEGISLATIVE PROCESS!

    it's when I watched all the attempts to reform these systems fail, watched them trend back towards the broken form they were in before reforms, and read enough history to realize they have not once - in CENTURIES - actually been this thing they are "supposed" to be, that I realized brokenness was how these systems WANTED to operate. they are not neutral tools that will work however the people in charge want them to work; they are systems of rules and incentives, living economies of power, that will always trend towards their most optimal, efficient form. and I have ample evidence that the optimal form of capitalism is exploitation, and the optimal form of policing is brutality.

  41. (diff anon) What about police in other countries? Surely not all police forces are as militarized and corrupt as the U.S. For example, police in the U.K don't even carry guns.

    in response to Police's job is not limited to safety, it's more generally enforcing the collective will by force. Lot of that stuff you listed is not solely their fault (though it is in part) Just think you're being a little extreme, there's a reason why no country has 0 police and the only communities that have 0 police are tiny. You can't scale without any structured force

    do they reduce crime?

  42. What eccentric outfit(s) would you wear out in public if you knew there wouldn't be any negative consequences?

    I went to art school. I wore a white-and-green striped blouse with brown bell-bottoms. I wore a purple velvet suit with a pink tuxedo shirt and a red bowtie. I wore cargo pants, a corduroy v-neck, and a bucket hat. I wore tight pink pants, a black t-shirt, and a bowler.

    there is nothing I've wanted to wear I haven't worn.

  43. (Different anon) Yeah they seem to assume will of the ruling class is the collective will. Police only help to consolidate power

    in response to Police's job is not limited to safety, it's more generally enforcing the collective will by force. Lot of that stuff you listed is not solely their fault (though it is in part) Just think you're being a little extreme, there's a reason why no country has 0 police and the only communities that have 0 police are tiny. You can't scale without any structured force

  44. In a case such that the More True a statement *is* the Less True it is *percieved as* and vice versa, how in the hell is one to convince people of true statements?

    at that point you might have to move from "statements" to "conversations"

  45. Police's job is not limited to safety, it's more generally enforcing the collective will by force.
    Lot of that stuff you listed is not solely their fault (though it is in part)
    Just think you're being a little extreme, there's a reason why no country has 0 police and the only communities that have 0 police are tiny. You can't scale without any structured force

    in response to This is really similar to reactionary thought where the solution to every social problem is to dismantle the structure allegedly causing the ill rather than improve it (the structure usually being "wokeism", globalism, etc etc). Tech is full of fraud that you could argue screws people over a whole lot more than police ever will but people still build tech, for example. Why is the concept of improving in a broken system different in this specific case?

    the police have never actually performed that job

  46. It's been like a decade since I read enders game but wasn't one of Ender's friends gay and Ender was accepting of his affection? I remember something like that standing out and thinking "oh, how nice, two boys showing affection for each other without it being homophobic". Additionally, I thought the entire point of Enders journey at the end is that the whole war was one big mistake because the aliens were a hive mind that didn't understand that humans weren't and it wasn't until it was too late that was clear and that the whole war could have been avoided if we just communicated better? I'm not saying your wrong, and I was never that big a fan of the book tbh so it's not like I'm trying to defend it, but how wrong can I remember the story lol?

    in response to I know he's a raging conservative now, but wasn't he more liberal when writing it? I thought he kind of did a hard turn to the right at some point, but was mild or centrist before then

    while Ender's Game feels VERY homoerotic in places, no character is outright gay that I recall. and the validity of the Bugger War is kind of immaterial? Card believes immense suffering in war is justified, that people SHOULD make the sacrifices Ender makes. the tragedy that it was not, in this case, necessary doesn't refute the logic. (and the Bugger xenocide is still played, I think, as "tragic necessity," since there was no way to solve the communication problem in time. going off what the humans knew at the time, Card thinks the war was justified.)

  47. Btw you also made a point to respond to the most ridiculous example I provided, one that I even put quotes around to emphasize that I think it's absurd. Didn't mention tech once.

    in response to This is really similar to reactionary thought where the solution to every social problem is to dismantle the structure allegedly causing the ill rather than improve it (the structure usually being "wokeism", globalism, etc etc). Tech is full of fraud that you could argue screws people over a whole lot more than police ever will but people still build tech, for example. Why is the concept of improving in a broken system different in this specific case?

    I wanted to, but there's a character limit. I'm trying to demonstrate the method for interrogating an argument, you can apply it to tech if you feel like thinking for yourself!

    but the problem in tech are not problems with tech, they are problems with unregulated capitalism, which definitely SHOULD be replaced. the tech is fine, it will continue to be made in more equitable systems.

  48. This is really similar to reactionary thought where the solution to every social problem is to dismantle the structure allegedly causing the ill rather than improve it (the structure usually being "wokeism", globalism, etc etc). Tech is full of fraud that you could argue screws people over a whole lot more than police ever will but people still build tech, for example. Why is the concept of improving in a broken system different in this specific case?

    in response to Do you think people who willingly choose to become cops are bad people?

    sure, ok! how do we interrogate a claim? the Right says "wokeism" is broken, the Left says policing is broken, how do we know the difference?

    we can look at impact: the bluntest way is to ask, "how many people do police kill in a year, and how many do The Wokeists kill?" (I don't have numbers on this but I'm gonna say the latter is, ah... less.) but, more broadly, we can compare the stakes - the (alleged) threat of wokeism is censorship of ideas, division in culture, people getting cancelled for having the wrong opinions. if The Wokeists run amok we'll have a rhetorical police state where people are criticized for wrongthink! if the police are left to run amok, we have a LITERAL police state where people are LITERALLY arrested for stepping out of line.

    we can look at history: what impact have social justice movements had on society? what happens when they are running as expected, and what happens when they stray from their goals? what are our worst- and best-case scenarios with wokeism, and, proportionately, how much of their history has been best-case and how much has been worst-case? well, when running "correctly," social justice movements have gotten rights for the disadvantaged, changed laws, staged peaceful protests, given famous speeches. different people disagree on whether securing rights or being peaceful are more important - is the movement better when it is peaceful but slow to secure rights, or when it secures more rights but is less peaceful? - which will affect what parts of history you think are "best-case." and some people sincerely believe that securing rights for the disadvantages is WRONG, and therefore the ENTIRE MOVEMENT is bad. but, even in their worst-case, they can only point to how the movement has shaped society in ways they don't like. conversely, what is the worst-case for police? an unrestrained, heavily-militarized, racist, classist, sexist, xenophobic force that can and will kill with impunity. and the best-case - a police force that serves the public, does not discriminate against its citizens, solves and prevents crime, keeps neighborhoods safe - what percentage of history have they served that purpose? right: none. police in this country have NEVER not been racist. RIGHT NOW Black people make up 13% of the US population but 31% of police shootings, and this is arguably the LEAST racist cops have ever been (I mean, it's not their job to round up escaped slaves or enforce segregation anymore). so the best-case scenario has existed for 0% of history, the norm is not great, and the worst-case is common.

    and we can look at aims: the goal of The Wokeists is an egalitarian society. and, provably, they sometimes make society more egalitarian. the (ostensible) goal of police is a safe society. provably, they do not make society safer - in fact, many studies show that increasing police presence makes communities MORE DANGEROUS. and some of us believe safety-by-force is a broken concept at its core.

  49. How did you learn Kissinger died

    Twitter

  50. I know he's a raging conservative now, but wasn't he more liberal when writing it? I thought he kind of did a hard turn to the right at some point, but was mild or centrist before then

    in response to Can conservative art be good? and if so could you give some examples

    he has become more outspoken and rampant in his conservatism, but he's always been a weirdo Mormon. he has always believed homosexuality is evil. his guiding philosophy of Ender's Game is that war is hell but also necessary, and Ender's suffering is tragic but justified. I remember reading his blog after 9/11 where he defended the bombing of children in Iraq. he's never been a moral person.

  51. Any *not* games you're looking forward to?

    clearly most of the big ones.

  52. Can conservative art be good? and if so could you give some examples

    I mean, sure? Orson Scott Card is a pretty raging conservative in a lot of areas, but I loved Ender's Game.

  53. Thoughts on Alex Garland’s movies?

    I liked Annihilation a lot! Ex Machina was more a good premise than a great execution (and kinda white feminist), Devs was kind of a mess.

  54. Obamna

    you said it

  55. No mention of Another Crab's Treasure? I know you're probably not aware of every single game or indie dev team that exists, but Aggro Crab's first game, Going Under, is such a fun little anticapitalist roguelike dungeon crawler that I'd be really surprised if they somehow slipped your radar.

    in response to Any games you are looking forward to?

    I've heard of Going Under, and wanna check it out, but haven't gotten to it yet! probably why the team's next game isn't on my radar. looks charming as heck tho!

  56. Do you think that biological parents should have fewer rights and that community child rearing should be normalized?

    I support the second thing, dunno why it would require the first thing

  58. Why is inflation still happening?

    last I heard inflation is normal and the goal is to keep it around 2%

  59. Any games you are looking forward to?

    Silksong. always Silksong.

    also:
    Old Skies
    Core Decay
    Radio the Universe
    Skin Deep
    Tiny Money
    Tobin's Tale
    Savior
    Open Roads
    Loco Motive
    The Drifter
    Dead Horizon
    Fallen Aces
    The Last Exterminator
    Disdain
    Captain Wayne
    Cookie Cutter
    New Game+
    the rest of Adaca
    the rest of Supplice
    the full release of Ultrakill
    the full release of Selaco
    the full release of Project Warlock II
    the full release of Viscerafest
    the full release of Fortune's Run

    and hoping Lionheart Drive, To Azimuth, In the Valley of Gods, PiAwk, and Columnae are not abandoned

    I realize a bit list of titles of mostly indie games is maybe not very helpful! lemme know if you want more info about any of them, happy to elaborate.

  60. Thinking about checking out Nuclear Throne, and wanted to ask if it's a game that plays well with a controller, since I want to get in on Nintendo Switch.

    I dunno. I played it with mouse and keyboard. aiming in a general direction instead of putting the mouse OVER THE TARGET feels unnatural to me, but it's just because I played it the other way for 1600 hours.

  61. In your video on the beginner's guide you talk about semiotics and link an indiana.edu paper for further reading. The link is now dead. Do you still remember what it was? Better yet, do you have any reading recommendations about semiotics for a total beginner who hasn't engaged much with humanities before, much less art theory? Books that go in depth into these topics especially welcome, thanks in advance <3

    I'll update the link: http://www.visual-memory.co.uk/daniel/Documents/S4B/

  63. Does causation imply correlation?

    in response to Can violence cause videogames?

    I hadn't considered that World War II games might've happened even if the actual war didn't, that's a lot to think about

  64. The Fall?

    in response to Daggerfall? Titanfall?

    it's not streaming anywhere!

  65. Can violence cause videogames?

    given the number of World War II games, I guess!

  67. Would you mind explaining the punchline for the dumdums like myself?

    in response to What do you mean when you say you are a "monogamist ally"?

    I'm polyamorous. I think it's funny to pretend monogamists are a minority in need of support.

  68. Daggerfall? Titanfall?

    in response to Have you played Dreamfall?

    Daggerfall, no. Titanfall, only the sequel.

  69. Have you played Dreamfall?

    I watched/read an LP of Dreamfall cuz I didn't have an XBox or a PC that could run it. I don't think it's very good, but I have a softness for it regardless. frankly I don't think The Longest Journey is ACTUALLY very good but I find myself moved by it.

  70. What do you mean when you say you are a "monogamist ally"?

    is a joke

  71. What do you think about this quote about capitalism?

    "You want to have a meritocracy. You want to have initiative, risk, talent, the ability to create new products, new services to be rewarded ... It's always been about competition. That's what human progress is about. You want to siphon it into productive ways."

    "human progress is about competition" is an exceedingly false thing

  72. Do you think people who willingly choose to become cops are bad people?

    I think some people become cops because they believe they can do good things. either they are ignorant of how rotten the system is, or they think the solution to the rottenness is for people like them to become good cops and change things from the inside. but being cops will require them to uphold a broken system, so they will be people doing bad things. and at some point it will be clear that the system is actually broken in ways individual cops cannot fix, and they will either ignore that fact, rationalize it somehow, or quit. if the first two, they have consciously chosen to continue doing bad things.

    a person who chooses to keep doing harm is not behaving morally. you can decide for yourself whether that qualifies them as a "bad person" or not.

  73. Diff. anon., do conservatives enact ANY policies?

    in response to Did Hitler enact conservative policies, like being pro-market and shrinking the government's role in the economy. On that note, can you prove that fascism is "diet conservatism" (especially considering the different variants of conservatism, like libertarian conservatism and fiscal conservatism)

    yes, constantly, even when not in power, yet curiously they're always expanding the government into private life and spending shitloads of money on war, surveillance, bailouts, and cops 🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔

  74. “Conservative policies, like shrinking the government’s role in the economy.” Since conservative politicians value reducing the government’s role in the economy, I’m sure that they don’t want the government to interfere with business practices that they personally disagree with, like Disney, for example. They certainly wouldn’t want the state to interfere with “woke capital”, since the government interfering in the economy is unambiguously wrong to them. And they couldn’t in good conscience, as conservatives, dream of harming the corporate brands of celebrities who speak out against them. Why, if they did, then that would mean that conservatives don’t hold that value at all!

    in response to Did Hitler enact conservative policies, like being pro-market and shrinking the government's role in the economy. On that note, can you prove that fascism is "diet conservatism" (especially considering the different variants of conservatism, like libertarian conservatism and fiscal conservatism)

  75. Would you say TMBG is roughly the same type of thing as The Mountain Goats and/or The Decemberists? Would you recommend them in particular to fans of one of those other 2 bands?

    I would say there is overlap in the fanbases and a certain sensibility is going to like all three. they share some lyrical playfulness and tendency to storytell. but, no, they are not the same type of thing. TMBG is much nerdier, sillier, funnier, and WEIRDER than those acts. while I can imagine The Mountain Goats writing a song about a divorce using the metaphor of a crane tearing a house down, or The Decemberists writing a song about Belgian painter James Ensor, the songs would sound VERY DIFFERENT. The Mountain Goats would NOT write the song as a jaunty bop and The Decemberists would KNOW pop music about a long-dead painter is an odd topic. but these decisions are not just unique to TMBG, but, to the Johns, they are OBVIOUS.

Anon commented:
Ian replied: