CuriousCat Archive Page 45 of 202

  1. Thoughts on senior Bush and junior Bush?

    đź‘Žđź‘Žđź‘Žđź‘Žđź‘Žđź‘Ž

  2. Are Turkish ppl white

    in response to The context of the question was Would you care at all if

    Turkey is a multi-ethnic state made up primarily of Turks, Kurds, and Arabs. Arabs are, at this point in time, heavily racialized. the "race" of Turks and Kurds is ambiguous and usually depends on what argument (white) people are trying to make; they're brown when conservatives wanna be racist against them, but white when a mall somewhere has a Black Santa and they wanna claim Chris Kringle as their own.

    I will reiterate that the boundaries of whiteness are made up and will shrink or expand depending on what racists think will benefit them in a given moment. another reason I wouldn't mourn if the whole concept disappeared.

  3. The original question was case about X group going extinct what you asked was a clarification if this happened fast or slow meaning my question was would you care if indigenous not had children who carry on their cultural tradition etc and went extinct

    in response to The context of the question was Would you care at all if

    indigenous people have indigenous kids regardless of what "race" white people say they have, because Native Americans don't adhere to European ideas of who is and isn't kin. they go extinct when racists strip them of their land, language, and religion, not when they keep all that but their skin tone is slightly different.

    your question is unanswerable because the thing you've described is not extinction

  4. The context of the question was Would you care at all if

    in response to How about if all the indigenous people had kids with non-indigenous people so within a few generations no one was "indigenous" anymore?

    would I care if all the white people had children who carry on their cultural traditions, remember their ancestors, carry their names? like, Irish kids are still Irish, Christian kids are still Christian, Southern kids are still Southern, but they no longer fit a nebulous definition of "pure white"?

    no, I would not care at all. literally nothing would be lost. my kids would still be Danskins.

  6. Lee or Chan?

    I'm polyamorous

  7. Started it almost last week made $140 already. How much has youtube made you? I'm saving to buy hustlers university

    in response to I am only 18 but I have been making steps (started a dropshipping business). Tate inspired a generation.

    between patreon, ads, and sponsorship my last video brought in $7,360, and that's a small-ish release by my standards, and I'm not even particularly big

    anyway don't spend your $140 all in one place

  9. Hate furries?

    quite the opposite

  15. what are some of your favorite BFG equivalents in shooters? i'm partial to anything that takes time to wind up

    the Serious Sam cannon and the Blood lifeleach come to mind

  16. So I think you've discussed this before, but I haven't found a way to properly search CuriousCat: why do you prefer approval voting? I've heard arguments that both IRV (the usual method being talked about when ranked choice comes up) and approval voting are prone to strategic voting, but the latter seems much more prone to people trying to vote around what they think the results will be.

    in response to what do you think about ranked choice voting? My city might be voting on it in the near future

    well, no system is perfect, and both IRV and approval voting have drawbacks. but I can tell you why I came down on the side of approval voting.

    from what I've looked into, IRV mitigates a lot of the problems of plurality voting without resolving them. strategic voting continues, just, instead of "who do I give my vote to?" it's "who do I give my top spot to?" the problem of trying to anticipate what the other side will do persists, as well as the issue of vote splitting if too many similar candidates are in the race. it does address the spoiler effect pretty well, though.

    approval voting's "just say yes to everything you like" does more to mitigate the strategizing, and much more effectively avoids splitting. the tradeoff is a mild trend towards centrism (don't need more of that), but it's very effective at making hated candidates with small but ardent fanbases - like Trump - inviable, while making candidates with broad support but a lot of hesitance - like Sanders - more viable. basically, it lops off the worst case scenario, and, while it nudges away from the best case scenario, the best case is still POSSIBLE in a way it isn't now.

    approval voting hasn't been tried in as many places as ranked choice, so this may prove less true with practice. what data we have is promising.

    but, yes, either one is better than plurality, and, if IRV is a viable option where you are, don't hold out for approval! better is still better.

  17. Have you ever considered designing a video game? Even just considering how it would work and what mechanics would be fun

    I have design documents for like 6. I've tried several times to make one, but never had the programming skills to do it solo, never had the money to pay a programmer, never had a programmer reliable enough to stick around working for percentages, and haven't had the time since becoming a YouTuber.

    :(

  19. what do you think about ranked choice voting? My city might be voting on it in the near future

    it's superior to what we have now, though I prefer approval voting

  20. How about if all the indigenous people had kids with non-indigenous people so within a few generations no one was "indigenous" anymore?

    in response to Would you care at all if white people went extinct?

    you're talking about indigenous people having children, raising them with their own culture and heritage, continuing their language and spiritual practices for generations, and then imposing white standards on them so you can claim there's some sort of loss because melanin content and bone structure have changed slightly

  21. Would you care at all if white people went extinct?

    you mean if everyone who is perceived as "white" died all at once? or do you mean if all the white people had kids with nonwhite people so within a few generations no one was "white" anymore?

  23. All the antifa does is LARP. They are not hard, just a bunch of sheltered kids in large groups armed with stupid baseball bats who will actually cower when they see actual nazis.

    in response to This reads like a very sheltered person with no first hand experience of violence. By all means, go sucker punch a nazi in the back of his bald head. That is definitely a thing you can do without any fatal consequences whatsoever.

    lol

    https://metro.co.uk/2017/09/18/watch-man-wearing-a-swastika-armband-gets-knocked-out-cold-6937648/

  24. Thoughts on pretend-scabs signing onto jobs whose usual workers are striking, only to turn around and immediately join the picket line?

    as a sole contractor I don't know a ton about union politics, but it sounds good on paper. you should ask the union if it's helpful before attempting, obvs.

  25. How do we defeat Elon Musk?

    no one can defeat elon musk but elon musk, and he's doing a GREAT job of it

  27. I'm really sorry you're having to deal with all these people

    I don't *have* to, properly speaking

  28. lol idk why that's weirdly specific, one would expect someone who memes about punching people a lot would accept an MMA match. those are definitely pretty funny comebacks though

    in response to Just show me some leftists accepting MMA matches against worthy nazi opponents and I'll be happy. It doesn't have to be all of them, you can still sucker punch some and run away or have some be clearly physically weaker. Just show a few matchups that show that the PAN people aren't just bullies and cowards

    bro said punching a Nazi would get your ass kicked, then shifted the goal posts to "win an mma cage match," and now we're on to me in specific doing a cage match.

    I don't intend to personally fight a Nazi with martial arts, that's what baseball bats are for.

  30. (Diff anon) "If you have money issues and don’t want a Bugatti I have no sympathy" you'd think a guy vouching for some on the basis of he is helping other men would be more sympathetic.

    in response to If you have money issues and don’t want a Bugatti I have no sympathy. You could sell the Bugatti to buy other stuff

    or anteing up a single way Tate's "advice" has materially helped him. like, what color is HIS Bugatti?

  31. (different anon)
    What kind of volume of questions do you get here in a typical day? Troll or otherwise

    in response to do you think some manosphere guy made a video on you and that's attracted a bunch of their followers to your curiouscat or do you think it's just one dude who stumbled upon it and has a vendetta

    varies. some days there's none, some days there's 30. I think I get a steady trickle of 5-7, but it goes up the more I engage.

  32. Hotline Miami, yay or nay?

    yay

  33. Just show me some leftists accepting MMA matches against worthy nazi opponents and I'll be happy. It doesn't have to be all of them, you can still sucker punch some and run away or have some be clearly physically weaker. Just show a few matchups that show that the PAN people aren't just bullies and cowards

    in response to This reads like a very sheltered person with no first hand experience of violence. By all means, go sucker punch a nazi in the back of his bald head. That is definitely a thing you can do without any fatal consequences whatsoever.

    lol, okay, right after you show me antifa punching a Nazi in the street and getting their ass kicked. while we're creating weirdly specific hypotheticals, show me a photo of eichmann in a poofy pink dress and I'll quit youtube!

  34. This reads like a very sheltered person with no first hand experience of violence. By all means, go sucker punch a nazi in the back of his bald head. That is definitely a thing you can do without any fatal consequences whatsoever.

    in response to Lol yes picking fights with braindead skinheads is clearly the move. See how well that goes for you.

    dude, what are you basing this on? the left been punching nazis since they started showing up in public again.

  36. Why do you respond to obvious trolls?

    in response to do you think some manosphere guy made a video on you and that's attracted a bunch of their followers to your curiouscat or do you think it's just one dude who stumbled upon it and has a vendetta

    my curious cat is a little oasis where things don't spread very far of I don't forward my answers to Twitter, so it's one of the only places it feels safe to engage with the other side. I don't expect to win an argument, but I tend to learn a lot.

  37. Any tips for keeping the knees, lower back, and skin of your 20s into your 30s?

    in response to I'm 28 and feel like I'm past my prime, talk some sense into me

    knees: no idea, my knees are okay
    back: keep you core strong, like do planks and stuff and don't sit at a desk for hours without standing up
    skin: sunscreen and moisturizer

    I learned all of this late

  38. If you have money issues and don’t want a Bugatti I have no sympathy. You could sell the Bugatti to buy other stuff

    in response to When we say "What color is your Bugatti" we're not literally asking about the color of your Bugatti. What we're saying is "What do you have to offer us that Tate doesn't offer" I want women, Tate has hundreds of women. I want money, Tate has more cash than I could ever spend in a lifetime. I want a nice house, Tate owns property in the most beautiful places in the world. I want nice cars, Tate has 33 luxury vehicles. Tate has everything I could ever want, and he started Hustlers University to help people like me get these things. He could have just sat back, enjoyed his millions, and done whatever he wanted to benefit himself. But instead, he chose to help people like me, and in doing so became one of the most hated men in the world. Most people would have given up and quit due to the harassment, but he continues to fight for the guys like me. So I'll ask one more time, what color is your Bugatti?

    I didn't ask for sympathy. I have a good life. how's yours?

  39. do you think some manosphere guy made a video on you and that's attracted a bunch of their followers to your curiouscat or do you think it's just one dude who stumbled upon it and has a vendetta

    the quantity I'm getting is small enough that it could just be a tweet or a reddit post. or it could be one guy. this just happens from time to time.

  40. How long until the revolution? I’m tired of waiting.

    "the revolution" isn't a thing you wait for, it's not the rapture

  41. What do you think about the right's claim that leftism and woke ideology have taken over our universities to indoctrinate students into Marxism?

    wish it were true

  43. You're missing out on being a multi millionaire.
    Keep your "community of loving friends, a few emotionally and physically intimate relationships, a job I like, mutual admiration with my peers, and a couple of cats"

    in response to When we say "What color is your Bugatti" we're not literally asking about the color of your Bugatti. What we're saying is "What do you have to offer us that Tate doesn't offer" I want women, Tate has hundreds of women. I want money, Tate has more cash than I could ever spend in a lifetime. I want a nice house, Tate owns property in the most beautiful places in the world. I want nice cars, Tate has 33 luxury vehicles. Tate has everything I could ever want, and he started Hustlers University to help people like me get these things. He could have just sat back, enjoyed his millions, and done whatever he wanted to benefit himself. But instead, he chose to help people like me, and in doing so became one of the most hated men in the world. Most people would have given up and quit due to the harassment, but he continues to fight for the guys like me. So I'll ask one more time, what color is your Bugatti?

    are you a millionaire?

  45. Punch a nazi is stupid because 99% of the people who say it wouldn't accept a fight against a nazi their size if asked, they'd only accept a fight against one who's clearly weaker

    lol, Richard Spencer got clocked in the head once by a skinny Black kid and it ruined his life

  46. Hey Ian, if California has high taxes and is always making the news for it’s progressive policies, then why is the cost of living still so expensive there?

    because capitalism

  47. Do you also condone pedophilia like the rest of your ilk?

    which of my ilks do you think condone pedophilia?

  48. I admire the self restraint you have of not asking what has Tate really done aside from posturing and charging for self help discourse...

    in response to When we say "What color is your Bugatti" we're not literally asking about the color of your Bugatti. What we're saying is "What do you have to offer us that Tate doesn't offer" I want women, Tate has hundreds of women. I want money, Tate has more cash than I could ever spend in a lifetime. I want a nice house, Tate owns property in the most beautiful places in the world. I want nice cars, Tate has 33 luxury vehicles. Tate has everything I could ever want, and he started Hustlers University to help people like me get these things. He could have just sat back, enjoyed his millions, and done whatever he wanted to benefit himself. But instead, he chose to help people like me, and in doing so became one of the most hated men in the world. Most people would have given up and quit due to the harassment, but he continues to fight for the guys like me. So I'll ask one more time, what color is your Bugatti?

    you can't win that argument

  49. What do you do when Jehovah's Witnesses knock on your door?

    I ain't had no jehos

  50. (Different anon) So, by this line of reasoning, would it be better to vote for liberal candidates on the grounds that they're easier to scare the shit out of? Or would it be worse because they'd prevent more revolutionary solutions to the problems we face? I feel like I hear both arguments from leftists and I kind of get where both camps are coming from, but what do you think?

    in response to Why do the democrats want the party to keep going back to the center? Please don’t tell me the political situation is hopeless, there has to be a way out.

    I generally err on the side of "true progress is easier with liberals in office" because, all else aside, they are more reluctant to shoot us all. but I don't believe true progress is easier with liberals central to your movement. they have a nasty habit of allying with leftists when mobilizing and then shooting them in the back once the fascists are out of power.

  51. Would you consider Hitler as an (evil but nonetheless) revolutionary or a reactionary?

    both

  52. When we say "What color is your Bugatti" we're not literally asking about the color of your Bugatti.
    What we're saying is "What do you have to offer us that Tate doesn't offer"
    I want women, Tate has hundreds of women.
    I want money, Tate has more cash than I could ever spend in a lifetime.
    I want a nice house, Tate owns property in the most beautiful places in the world.
    I want nice cars, Tate has 33 luxury vehicles.
    Tate has everything I could ever want, and he started Hustlers University to help people like me get these things.
    He could have just sat back, enjoyed his millions, and done whatever he wanted to benefit himself.
    But instead, he chose to help people like me, and in doing so became one of the most hated men in the world.
    Most people would have given up and quit due to the harassment, but he continues to fight for the guys like me.
    So I'll ask one more time, what color is your Bugatti?

    Tate has status symbols, but the guy picks Twitter fights with 19-year-olds and loses. like, setting aside the human trafficking/getting arrested thing, does Andrew Tate seem happy to you?

    I don't have a Bugatti. I don't want a Bugatti. I have a community of loving friends, a few emotionally and physically intimate relationships, a job I like, mutual admiration with my peers, and a couple of cats.

    I take public transit and I am happier than Andrew Tate.

  53. I'm 28 and feel like I'm past my prime, talk some sense into me

    overwhelmingly, my 30s have been better than my 20s. most thirtysomethings I know say the same. a friend told me on my 30th birthday: your 30s are where you get to iterate on your 20s, which, if we're being honest, are usually hit and miss.

    I long for the knees and lower back and skin I had in my 20s, but I don't long to be the person I was back then.

  54. Why do the democrats want the party to keep going back to the center? Please don’t tell me the political situation is hopeless, there has to be a way out.

    there are a few explanations I've heard that seem plausible. one is that the Republicans keep getting more radical, which alienates moderates. this leaves Democrats trying to appeal to everyone from moderate Republicans to hardcore anticapitalists. the range of beliefs Republicans appeal to keeps getting narrower while Democrats' keeps getting wider, and a vague centrism seems the safest way to appeal to so many different beliefs.

    I think that's part of it, but, primarily, I think it's that liberalism is, itself, a centrist position. I've talked about this before, but conservatism is the philosophy of "capitalism good." it is very ideologically consistent with capitalism: the market stratifies people by wealth, and conservatives *like* stratification. it pits people against each other for survival in the market, and conservatives *like* competition. it privileges people who start out with resources, and conservatives *are* the people with resources, and they *like* being privileged by them.

    liberalism tries to pose an alternative to this. it ostensibly believes in egalitarianism, in cooperation, in fairness. but all of these are antithetical to capitalism. the only way to have them in a capitalist society is to pass a bunch of laws reigning capitalism in. and committing hard to any one of them will inevitably raise the question: hey, if all the things we believe in are in conflict with capitalism, is capitalism maybe... bad? but liberals are *still capitalists*. they want all these things that capitalism clashes with, *and* they want to keep capitalism. and it's not just a class thing - it's power. they want an egalitarian society without giving up imperialism; they want an anti-racist society but don't want to pay reparations to African Americans or give land back to Native Americans. they want equality for women but don't want to give up the ways patriarchy privileges them.

    they want to be an alternative to conservatism, but not *too much*. so it's in their nature to hedge. it's a philosophy of centrism.

    it's not hopeless, and there are ways out, but I don't look to the Democrats for solutions anymore. liberals move away from the center pretty much only when there is a *lot* of boots-on-the-ground mobilization from people far to their left, making demands far beyond what liberals would put forward. you don't get the Civil Rights bill without decades of radical organizing from Black Americans. you don't get the New Deal without decades of socialist mobilization. Northern Europe didn't get social democracy without massive general strikes.

    your power is not in your vote, it's in scaring the shit out of your representatives.

  55. Democrats are further left on Climate Change now than they were 10 years ago. Ditto for gay rights, trans rights, and abortion.

    in response to I know you aren’t big on “vote harder” but surely, primary-ing the fuck out of as many incumbent democrats would make the message clear that they need to put up or shut up, right? Yes they’ll throw a tantrum & blame voters, but they’re still losing votes and money, so eventually they’re going to have to work harder?

    that is true in some senses and untrue in others. care to elaborate on which sense you are invoking?

  57. I know you aren’t big on “vote harder” but surely, primary-ing the fuck out of as many incumbent democrats would make the message clear that they need to put up or shut up, right? Yes they’ll throw a tantrum & blame voters, but they’re still losing votes and money, so eventually they’re going to have to work harder?

    I mean, I'm always in favor of primarying centrists, and I pretty much always vote for the leftiest candidate in a primary. but we know how it usually plays out: a leftier candidate tries to primary an incumbant centrist. if they lose the primary, then the centrist is fine; it doesn't "cost them votes" because primaries are winner-take-all. it doesn't matter if you won by a large or narrow margin, you still won. and common wisdom is that a leftier candidate won't win the general election, so there's always a lot of hesitance among liberals to vote for one in the primary.

    if the lefty candidate WINS the primary, things go one of two ways:
    - they lose the general election to Republicans, the Democrats blame the lefties, and swing back towards the center
    - they win the general election, take office, and, when their term is up, the Democrats push hard for a centrist to take their place so they can swing back to the center

    then there's the times the centrist wins the primary but the lefties refuse to vote for them, they lose to the Republican, blame the lefties, and swing back towards the center.

    across the board, the Democratic Party's goal is always, ALWAYS, to swing back to the center. this has been their MO my entire life; if they ever did anything different, it's before I was born. on paper, primarying them and/or refusing to vote for them SHOULD push them left, but they always respond by demonizing the Left and, instead of catering to us, trying to shore up the votes they lost with moderate conservatives and bully us into voting for them because the alternative is fascists.

    so, like... yes, primary the shit out of them! it's a good thing to do. and sometimes it works! but there are reasons I've stopped focusing on that as the primary path forward. it's supposed to push the Party leftward, and I haven't seen that happen.

  58. I think the main thing is that what passes for analysis from Orwell is painfully shallow. He's not exactly a reformist, but his tendency to prioritize immediate concerns over long term goals leads him in that direction. This is where his support for the popular front comes from. Damn the revolution, we have to beat the Fascists! And of course he's right that we have to beat the fascists, but the official communist line at the time was explicitly to hold back the revolution in order to secure the support of the liberals, never mind that at the beginning of the war the sections of the Spanish bourgeoisie who hadn't already gone over to Franco were practically a non-entity, never mind that in rebuilding the Spanish state the official communists created an inevitable conflict with the revolutionary Marxists and anarchists, after which Franco would roll right over them. That Orwell eventually recognized this is *only coincidence*! He happened to be part of a unit which was being betrayed for holding to the revolutionary line, and if he had initially joined up with a unit which actually shared his politics he would have taken exactly the opposite view. He doesn't have a lot of strong ideological commitments, and the few he does have are generated by happenstance. That's not the mark of a strong theorist.

    Especially after reading Wigan Pier, which is pretty critical of the way socialists present themselves to the masses, my inclination would be to categorize him as a pioneer in a strain of left thought that is today primarily interested in attacking radicals for being too subcultural or countercultural. "Just be normal" socialism. And in my experience that leads to being subsumed by the "normal" scope of political opinion and the associated theories of change. He wasn't then and wouldn't be today an enemy, exactly. He's just not a leader, either.

    in response to Coming to the right conclusion by accident as opposed to coming to the right conclusion deliberately suggests a deeper weakness with his analysis, because we are about usefully examining and acting in the world, not just picking sides.

    I dunno what to tell you. I haven't read Wigan Pier. Down and Out in Paris and London was formative in my understanding of class, the way poverty is bred by systems rather than individual decisions, and I found his concept of "the boulot" useful. The Alt-Right Playbook is DEEPLY indebted to Politics and the English Language. I owe much of my respect for anarchists and my distrust of liberals to Homage to Catalonia. I agree with Animal Farm's denouncement of Stalinism. I agree with 1984's awareness of how fascism manipulates language and culture and what its ultimate aims are. I agree with Why I Write's beliefs about the role of politics in art. and, while he and I differ on a lot of points in The Lion and the Unicorn, his comments about how culture can have more power than class or politics, and the ways socialists can use this to imagine postcapitalist futures, are insightful.

    I'm not gonna die on hill for him or anything, he had some bad takes and did some shitty things. but he was my gateway to leftism, and, when I look back over the work that impacted me, it holds up. I still agree with it.

    and I just like the way he writes.

  59. Globalization is defined as the process of interaction and integration among people, companies, and governments worldwide. Even if you take companies and governments out of it, the fact is we live in a globalised, connected world. The opposite of globalism is isolationism. Surely you're not suggesting we go back to living in small, isolated communities just to reduce the consolidation of power?

    in response to The problem with relying on small-scale authority is that it would mean the end of globalization. You need a large centralized authority to govern on a large scale, and when you give that centralized authority more power over more people, what do you get? More corruption.

    "globalism" as you just described it is entirely possible with the smaller, non-hierarchical forms of authority we've been discussing

  60. Elon Musk went from being the Henry Ford of our generation (admired carmaker, salesman) to being the Henry Ford of our generation(conspiracy theorist, Nazi-enabler)

  61. What are you going to do first in Tears of the Kingdom?

    I have too much on my plate to get sucked into TOTK so I'm trying not to think about it :(

  62. Who's Dan why do you have his Skin

    I could keep a running tally of this joke but y'all would just start doing it more

  63. Coming to the right conclusion by accident as opposed to coming to the right conclusion deliberately suggests a deeper weakness with his analysis, because we are about usefully examining and acting in the world, not just picking sides.

    in response to He did that almost by accident. If it weren't for the fact that his not-quite-Trotskyist militia ended up getting shot at by the Stalinists at the same time as the CNT-FAI, he could easily have ended up on the opposite side of that fight. Orwell is quite explicit in Homage to Catalonia that his actual politics at the time aligned more with the official communist line (the popular front, which as you note ended disastrously for the anarchists and genuine revolutionary Marxists in Spain). He just joined the first militia which would have him, and was attempting to transfer to an official communist controlled unit at the time of the first outbreaks of violence between the government and the anarchists.

    do you have any critiques of his actual analysis or are you sticking with ad hominem? cuz I've read a lot of the analysis and have found it broadly useful, though I disagree with him in areas.

  64. How do I stop resenting women and especially trans women for getting to experience superior female orgasms? It feels like nature gave us men the finger in the sex department. We have much higher sex drives but lamer orgasms with a refractory period. I would link it with evolution, but I know that’s something you don’t want to hear.

    some women don't experience orgasms at all

  65. The problem with relying on small-scale authority is that it would mean the end of globalization. You need a large centralized authority to govern on a large scale, and when you give that centralized authority more power over more people, what do you get? More corruption.

    in response to Priests and tribal leaders are good examples. I don't see how it's possible to have a society without necessarily giving some people power over others. And the larger a society gets, the more people have to be put in positions of power to administrate it. Which grows the divide between those with power and those without, and always carries the potential for corruption.

    what is the need for globalization?

  67. "In addition to real property rights, Northwest coast tribes
    have long recognized extensive ownership rights in personal property, both tangible and intangible. In particular, intellectual property has been extremely important in Pacific coast cultures, with
    families holding exclusive rights to the use of particular names,
    carvings, paintings, and crests connected with the family's
    history. Violation of these rights-apparently the equivalent of
    copyright-could result in violence and bloodshed."

    I'd post the link but curiouscat doesn't let me

    in response to Yeah. They didn't believe land could be privately owned and when the Europeans arrived and claimed otherwise, the Native Americans didn't have as much violence as the Europeans to have their views prevail. That's not how it should be, but I don't see how that's not the realpolitik

    while I know technically the term "property" exists in both contexts, we were clearly talking about land

  68. He did that almost by accident. If it weren't for the fact that his not-quite-Trotskyist militia ended up getting shot at by the Stalinists at the same time as the CNT-FAI, he could easily have ended up on the opposite side of that fight. Orwell is quite explicit in Homage to Catalonia that his actual politics at the time aligned more with the official communist line (the popular front, which as you note ended disastrously for the anarchists and genuine revolutionary Marxists in Spain). He just joined the first militia which would have him, and was attempting to transfer to an official communist controlled unit at the time of the first outbreaks of violence between the government and the anarchists.

    in response to Orwell is one of my favorite writers, and my most cringe lib take is that my favorite book is 1984, but his time in Spain really did break his brain and his anti-Stalinism got so intense he did do that liiiittle thing of telling the UK government about some communists he knew. If you read The Road to Wigan Pier his classism really comes through, as well.

    coming to the right conclusion by accident is still coming to the right conclusion

  70. thoughts on Post Void? I've seen you mention it in passing, but I was wondering if you've gotten any deeper into it

    I really like it, but I fell off because it's, like, REALLY STRESSFUL, and I can't handle as much adrenaline as I could in my Nuclear Throne days

  71. Orwell is one of my favorite writers, and my most cringe lib take is that my favorite book is 1984, but his time in Spain really did break his brain and his anti-Stalinism got so intense he did do that liiiittle thing of telling the UK government about some communists he knew. If you read The Road to Wigan Pier his classism really comes through, as well.

    in response to When will you understand that George Orwell was a garbage writer and an even worse individual?

    I'm not gonna defend Orwell narcing on communists, but being anti-Stalinist and defending the anarchists who were slaughtered by their allies in the Spanish Civil War is based actually

  72. Yeah. They didn't believe land could be privately owned and when the Europeans arrived and claimed otherwise, the Native Americans didn't have as much violence as the Europeans to have their views prevail. That's not how it should be, but I don't see how that's not the realpolitik

    in response to Any legal definition of property rights requires a consolidation of violence in order to be enforced, and that includes when that definition is, "there are no property rights."

    and what about the centuries before the Europeans came, where they coexisted without the concept of property rights?

  73. When will you understand that George Orwell was a garbage writer and an even worse individual?

    I dunno, but did you think just stating in with a condescending tone was gonna do it?

  74. Much thoughts on Reciever?

    in response to So like a less intense version of Reciever on a sense?

    love it in concept, wish there was something more interesting to do in it than shoot drones and collect nonsense audio logs

  75. Any legal definition of property rights requires a consolidation of violence in order to be enforced, and that includes when that definition is, "there are no property rights."

    in response to I think the anarchist premise is closer to the truth, the problem (in my view, at least) is that a functioning society can't exist without the consolidation of power. How do we resolve that contradiction?

    do you feel this was true of the 400-500 Native American tribes that lived in California prior to contact with Europeans?

Anon commented:
Ian replied: