comic is a bit crass but makes the broad point:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CqAUeIXWAAcaWUB.jpg)
Not infrequently, I hear some surprising news... I google it, and the top hits are NY Times, Washington Post, and Fox News. The first two articles are behind a paywall, and the Fox news framing is not. And I think this is a bit of a synecdoche.
I see it online all the time too - there's a common attitude that if you don't already get it, you're not gonna get it, so go get fucked. The long-arc consequence being that the right wing perspective is more accessible. And the world is confusing and oversaturated with information, so accessibility is, all by itself, a powerful persuasive force.
To be clear, I'm not talking about the phenomenon where some bad-faith jagoff is "just asking questions" and demands a bunch of answers and citations that they're not going to read anyway.
Also to be clear, I'm not putting myself in this lofty position of judgment, but of self-criticism... I'm observing this phenomenon in myself via a childhood friend with Bad Opinions who really wants to chat my ear off. I don't want to talk to him, I think he's an asshole. But we're in a special moment right now. If I did the work, I might be able to get through to him. I don't want to though!
I wouldn't dismiss the bad faith "just asking questions" sea-lioning (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning) so easily.
That's precisely the reason this behavior occurs so much, especially in marginalized spaces, and it's not just because of trolling. Think about it like when some new kid shows up on PD and starts in with Reality Tunnel 101, or wants to talk about quantum ESP. While it may be new to them, I really don't want to go through the fundamentals of the Standard Model and decoherence yet again; I want to talk about the next thing, whatever that is. Combine that with the ubiquitous presence of sea lions, and it's really difficult to muster the energy to respond other than dismissively.
There will occasionally be someone who sounds generally curious about the basics, and I'll do my best to explain stuff, but if I get even a whiff of willful ignorance, it's over.
(http://wondermark.com/c/2014-09-19-1062sea.png)
(https://media.giphy.com/media/l3nW8CdFXPlQbqrqE/giphy.gif)
The more progressive you are, the harder it is to get away from bad faith arguments. You start out shiny and hopeful: yes! I can get everyone on board, it's so simple, of course they'll agree once they understand!
After the thousandth chud with a trollface grin who is engaging entirely in bad faith, you get worn down and you cannot, cannot summon that enthusiasm up.
Also, some experiences literally cannot be explained. If you have never been through actual, factual trauma, you absolutely cannot understand what it does to you. This isn't even a "kinda" thing. A "maybe" thing. You can't understand. Explaining it in a way that gets across just how damaging having had a traumatic experience is is impossible. Words fail.
And when you talk about things that can cause trauma, you sound silly. Because trauma is everywhere, waiting to be stumbled across.
So no, in some cases you literally cannot understand.
This may cause an accessibility gap, but there is no real fix for that. People are broken and wounded from years and years of failure, and summoning up that courage just to get slapped down again? When you might be talking about things that are impossible to describe to someone who hasn't experienced them, or talking to a chud and not know it?
People should instead get used to relying on non-human resources. I mostly point people to RationalWiki these days, and tell them to ask questions there, since I didn't write it.
I have gotten to the point where I just don't have the energy to engage with people I don't know on these subjects. And the only chuds I have to deal with are other leftists. Being on the front lines of that discussion would kill me as surely as a gun, those people deserve to be able to say "no, I will not explain to you on this thing today." Even if it causes an "accessibility gap".
Especially especially when most of the arguments you can make boil down to "have a little fucking empathy, you tool."
As a sweeping generalisation, based on observation. The right tend toward, the exact, over simplistic interpretations that uneducated people crave. "The simple truth". Much more compelling and easy to swallow than a whole bunch of complex and nuanced shit that takes decades to fully understand. The left on the other hand, are generally supercilious twats who look down their noses at anyone with the audacity to espouse a point of view that has a rational counterargument.
The right operate on a more basic and visceral primate level where might=right and the application of physical violence is the ultimate trump card to solve any difference of opinion. The right generally abhor violence and, as a result, on aggregate, aren't very good at it. They prefer the psychological equivalent, belittling, demonising and dehumanising verbally until the point is driven home.
Turns out the pen is not actually the best weapon to be holding in a sword fight so the left are generally trampled by the right in any deadlock situation, their main defence being to retreat away from the gunfire and write toothless, scathing criticism from a "safe space"
The balanced approach would be to accept that there's a time to impart words of wisdom and a time to kick a hole in the other guy's face. The belittling, demonising and dehumanising thing? That's intellectual wanking. Feels good and might well get you laid if some patchouli scented substitute teacher happens to overhear you laying on a verbal smackdown but, ultimately it doesn't solve anywhere near as many problems as the other two bullets in your arsenal.
There's also something to the context of the two scenarios. In the first, the marginalized group is in a confrontation. These typically begin with either noticing and trying to correct perceived bad behavior (not respecting pronouns), or by being challenged ("why can't white people use the n-word?"), or simply commenting on some injustice. The so-called Obvious Answer Which Has Been Available Online Through Hundreds Of Articles is easy to find, and it's exasperating to have to go back again to square one.
The second scenario is recruitment. They aren't being challenged, they aren't challenging, they're feeding the person's head with misdirections and fallacies to get them to follow along with their bad behavior. It's way easier to do that.
Lastly, especially speaking from a political POV, it's easier to win when you don't give a shit about cheating. This is an over generalization, but they way it seems to play out is the Left tends to be reluctant to flatly lie to people and contradict previous positions. Yes, 'both sides do it', but one side accepts Mitch "fuck your standards of decency" McConnell as a respected peer.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on May 06, 2020, 03:59:25 PM
As a sweeping generalisation, based on observation. The right tend toward, the exact, over simplistic interpretations that uneducated people crave. "The simple truth". Much more compelling and easy to swallow than a whole bunch of complex and nuanced shit that takes decades to fully understand. The left on the other hand, are generally supercilious twats who look down their noses at anyone with the audacity to espouse a point of view that has a rational counterargument.
Was just talking to a friend whose mother bombards him with youtube links from antivax channels.
He told her that YET AGAIN, she's listening to conspiracy theory bullshit which is 100% false.
She said that he's closed minded, he's dismissed it before listening to it--which is not critical thinking.
so neither of them got anywhere, it's a net zero
But I couldn't help notice that within their relationship, the effort to convince the other only goes one way. The mom sends her son bullshit conspiracy theories, but the son is not sending the mom "good info" or trying to discuss it with her.
I don't know that sending her "good info" would change anything--but I wonder how common this dynamic is.
We need more resources like The Non-Libertarian FAQ. http://world.std.com/~mhuben/faq.html
Because the sealioning and so on is so tiresome, having the arguments collected together in such a way provides not only easy reference, but it means if someone is acting in bad faith, the opportunity cost of responding is much lower.
I know a lot of people are doing good work on Youtube, but it's much harder to reference a Youtube lecture when halfway through a comment section on Facebook or Reddit.
Quote from: LMNO on May 06, 2020, 04:47:25 PM
Lastly, especially speaking from a political POV, it's easier to win when you don't give a shit about cheating. This is an over generalization, but they way it seems to play out is the Left tends to be reluctant to flatly lie to people and contradict previous positions. Yes, 'both sides do it', but one side accepts Mitch "fuck your standards of decency" McConnell as a respected peer.
Great point. Especially in a climate where the truth is generally a pretty bitter pill for a lot of people to swallow. I've been telling left leaning people to fight bullshit with bullshit for decades now. It's falling on deaf ears. I'm actually doing some pretty epic work right now with facial capture and photorealistic digital humans. I have a few ideas for shorts and one that sprung to mind was Trump reminiscing about this one time he was fucking ivanka in the ass... My thinking is that, although it would be instantly discredited as fake, the deeper human psyche would find itself in a - can't unsee - scenario. Use the root of prejudice against the fuckers for a change.
Lurk more isn't hard and people shouldn't be offended when they're told to do it. Bite me.
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on May 06, 2020, 09:08:32 PM
Lurk more isn't hard and people shouldn't be offended when they're told to do it. Bite me.
Whenever I hear "people shouldn't" I immediately think of Hans Christian Andersen
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on May 06, 2020, 09:08:32 PM
Lurk more isn't hard and people shouldn't be offended when they're told to do it. Bite me.
Also this.
Right now I'm talking to some person that knows im an analyst, asking me if i like Freud or Jung, what i think of evolutive tarot, gestalt and Jodorowskian psychomagic.
And I'm playing along till I get tired/bored or see clearly what theyre looking for.
The framing of their questions already tells me it's doomed, but eh, it doesnt cost me too much energy or sanity so its ok.
In the sea of knowledge, there's the lost, there's the misguided, many many sealions and the confirmation bias autists... and we cant tell from the start what a given subject is.
Quote from: altered on May 06, 2020, 03:04:13 PM
The more progressive you are, the harder it is to get away from bad faith arguments. You start out shiny and hopeful: yes! I can get everyone on board, it's so simple, of course they'll agree once they understand!
After the thousandth chud with a trollface grin who is engaging entirely in bad faith, you get worn down and you cannot, cannot summon that enthusiasm up.
Also, some experiences literally cannot be explained. If you have never been through actual, factual trauma, you absolutely cannot understand what it does to you. This isn't even a "kinda" thing. A "maybe" thing. You can't understand. Explaining it in a way that gets across just how damaging having had a traumatic experience is is impossible. Words fail.
And when you talk about things that can cause trauma, you sound silly. Because trauma is everywhere, waiting to be stumbled across.
So no, in some cases you literally cannot understand.
This may cause an accessibility gap, but there is no real fix for that. People are broken and wounded from years and years of failure, and summoning up that courage just to get slapped down again? When you might be talking about things that are impossible to describe to someone who hasn't experienced them, or talking to a chud and not know it?
People should instead get used to relying on non-human resources. I mostly point people to RationalWiki these days, and tell them to ask questions there, since I didn't write it.
I have gotten to the point where I just don't have the energy to engage with people I don't know on these subjects. And the only chuds I have to deal with are other leftists. Being on the front lines of that discussion would kill me as surely as a gun, those people deserve to be able to say "no, I will not explain to you on this thing today." Even if it causes an "accessibility gap".
Especially especially when most of the arguments you can make boil down to "have a little fucking empathy, you tool."
Perhaps we should sealion the nazis more so they get burnt out too?
Hey Jim,
Remember the privilege threads? Sure you do. It was a hoot. People would line up and scream at you for privilege, without explaining what it meant. If you reacted badly, even with good intent, you were "part of the problem," and if you reacted properly, you were a "cookie seeker." No bastard would explain what anything meant until Corbet Et Renard took literally less than three sentences to explain it...But that seemed to suck all the fun out of the situation (almost , so all that was left was a bunch of miseryguts sitting around lamenting the state of the world and their role in it.
So I've been looking at this whole MAGA business and giving it a second thought. And then a third thought. And speaking as an old school discordian, I have to say that it does not suit my interests for these knucklefucks to actually, you know, get the point. I hate them and they hate me, and we're all very comfortable with that arrangement.
You have your discordia, I have mine.
Love,
Vern
Quote from: Doktor Howl on May 07, 2020, 03:42:35 PM
Hey Jim,
Remember the privilege threads? Sure you do. It was a hoot. People would line up and scream at you for privilege, without explaining what it meant. If you reacted badly, even with good intent, you were "part of the problem," and if you reacted properly, you were a "cookie seeker." No bastard would explain what anything meant until Corbet Et Renard took literally less than three sentences to explain it...But that seemed to suck all the fun out of the situation (almost , so all that was left was a bunch of miseryguts sitting around lamenting the state of the world and their role in it.
So I've been looking at this whole MAGA business and giving it a second thought. And then a third thought. And speaking as an old school discordian, I have to say that it does not suit my interests for these knucklefucks to actually, you know, get the point. I hate them and they hate me, and we're all very comfortable with that arrangement.
You have your discordia, I have mine.
Love,
Vern
This! We have a over supply of dumb, programmable fucknuggets and I'm not even bordering on liberal or humanitarian so I have significantly less than zero compunctions about exploiting their gullibility to make them give me money or inject weedkiller in their carotid, just for the lulz.
I almost posted "honest question: what is sea-lioning?"
But then I thought, maybe I should re-read and see if I see an explanation. And I found a handy link. Now I'm not sure if and how funny it would've been for me to continue as planned and post "honest question: what is sea lioning?" Which no longer would've been an honest question. These are the things I wrestle with.
Although I think a lot of miscommunication occurs due to misconstrued motives.
The fact I literally posted a link to the definition in my first response would have either made it funnier, if it turned out to be funny in the first place.
I guess we'll never know.
Quote from: rong on May 08, 2020, 07:33:40 PM
Although I think a lot of miscommunication occurs due to misconstrued motives.
You have in the past made your motives perfectly clear.
Quote from: LMNO on May 08, 2020, 07:59:11 PM
The fact I literally posted a link to the definition in my first response would have either made it funnier, if it turned out to be funny in the first place.
I guess we'll never know.
I know right? Such a dillemma
Quote from: Doktor Howl on May 08, 2020, 08:07:35 PM
Quote from: rong on May 08, 2020, 07:33:40 PM
Although I think a lot of miscommunication occurs due to misconstrued motives.
You have in the past made your motives perfectly clear.
This sounds very much like a conclusion
Quote from: rong on May 08, 2020, 08:54:24 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on May 08, 2020, 08:07:35 PM
Quote from: rong on May 08, 2020, 07:33:40 PM
Although I think a lot of miscommunication occurs due to misconstrued motives.
You have in the past made your motives perfectly clear.
This sounds very much like a conclusion
Not an unreasonable one, given your history here.
Quote from: LMNO on May 06, 2020, 02:50:59 PM
I wouldn't dismiss the bad faith "just asking questions" sea-lioning (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning) so easily.
That's precisely the reason this behavior occurs so much, especially in marginalized spaces, and it's not just because of trolling. Think about it like when some new kid shows up on PD and starts in with Reality Tunnel 101, or wants to talk about quantum ESP. While it may be new to them, I really don't want to go through the fundamentals of the Standard Model and decoherence yet again; I want to talk about the next thing, whatever that is. Combine that with the ubiquitous presence of sea lions, and it's really difficult to muster the energy to respond other than dismissively.
There will occasionally be someone who sounds generally curious about the basics, and I'll do my best to explain stuff, but if I get even a whiff of willful ignorance, it's over.
(http://wondermark.com/c/2014-09-19-1062sea.png)
(https://media.giphy.com/media/l3nW8CdFXPlQbqrqE/giphy.gif)
Yoink (that is the sound of me starting to understand how a meme works, I think)
Quote from: LuciferX on May 09, 2020, 01:43:00 AM
Quote from: LMNO on May 06, 2020, 02:50:59 PM
I wouldn't dismiss the bad faith "just asking questions" sea-lioning (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning) so easily.
That's precisely the reason this behavior occurs so much, especially in marginalized spaces, and it's not just because of trolling. Think about it like when some new kid shows up on PD and starts in with Reality Tunnel 101, or wants to talk about quantum ESP. While it may be new to them, I really don't want to go through the fundamentals of the Standard Model and decoherence yet again; I want to talk about the next thing, whatever that is. Combine that with the ubiquitous presence of sea lions, and it's really difficult to muster the energy to respond other than dismissively.
There will occasionally be someone who sounds generally curious about the basics, and I'll do my best to explain stuff, but if I get even a whiff of willful ignorance, it's over.
(http://wondermark.com/c/2014-09-19-1062sea.png)
(https://media.giphy.com/media/l3nW8CdFXPlQbqrqE/giphy.gif)
Yoink (that is the sound of me starting to understand how a meme works, I think)
Yoinksec could always use more recruits. Here's a badge if you want it. Everything after that is your show. We don't coordinate on purpose.
Quote from: LMNO on May 06, 2020, 02:50:59 PM
(http://wondermark.com/c/2014-09-19-1062sea.png)
(https://media.giphy.com/media/l3nW8CdFXPlQbqrqE/giphy.gif)
God dont you hate it when youre talking shit about someone and they have the nerve to defend themselves? What kind of fucking asshole would do something like that.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on May 06, 2020, 03:59:25 PM
As a sweeping generalisation, based on observation. The right tend toward, the exact, over simplistic interpretations that uneducated people crave. "The simple truth". Much more compelling and easy to swallow than a whole bunch of complex and nuanced shit that takes decades to fully understand. The left on the other hand, are generally supercilious twats who look down their noses at anyone with the audacity to espouse a point of view that has a rational counterargument.
Spending
decades of your life meditating with manbunn "male feminist' sexual predators in a panera bread on a mountaintop so you can understand sentences like:
"Bratz: Girls Rock(2008) for the GBA makes promising inroads for asexual representation but unfortunately continues the series history of erasing the nonbinary."
"You might think my complete inability to defend my wordlview against critical questions makes me a 'dumbass' or a 'dipshit'. But you greatly underestimate the EMOTIONAL LABOR of talking to people who disagree with me."
And yet, somehow, as the comic in the OP points out, the forces of evil seem to never feel the intense toll of this emotional labor. Maybe, just maybe, when you have a coherent belief system explaining yourself isnt "labor". Its when you have to keep a million plates of bullshit spinning at once that answering simple straightforward questions about what you believe("sea lioning") is so exhausting.
the forces of evil never feel the toll of emotional labor because their side of things is incredibly easy compared to the person answering. A lot of the time sealioning comes with a lot of dismissal and willful ignorance baked in. You give the straightforward answer, they act like they've never heard of systemic racism or misogyny or question its very existence, and demand you explain it from scratch. So now, YOU have to improvise a PolySci lecture within the context of a FB post, while he sits back and waits to call all your sources fake news. The leftist has the burden of being right, the fascist has no such burden, and just has to keep playing dumb in order to completely derail the convo, and soon enough he has a neat little screenshot of the exchange to show all his Nazi friends and any potential recruits he might find as evidence of how incoherent, emotional, and RUDE The Left is. And after a while you realize that you've essentially become one of the dipshits determined to argue with the guy who has made up his mind that sharks are smooth, and stop feeding into it. Which is pretty much where were at.
For anyone not getting the shark reference:
Sharks are smooth as hell https://imgur.com/gallery/ad3je
This thread is actually quite insightful. Thanks, a number of things make more sense now, also I had no idea what "sealioning" was until today.
If your whole approach to the world hasn't already been gone over ten billion times then you're probably not going to feel like it's been gone over ten billion times when somebody asks about it. I'm absolutely delighted when someone asks me to explain how things work. I don't understand what sea lioning is - if somebody asks for evidence I give it to them. if you're so exhausted by your own worldview maybe that's something you should consider. and by "your" I mean, reading the topic here, it's clear we're talking about truths that have nothing to do with your own conjecture.
Quote from: Odibex Grallspice on October 21, 2020, 04:31:31 AM
If your whole approach to the world hasn't already been gone over ten billion times then you're probably not going to feel like it's been gone over ten billion times when somebody asks about it. I'm absolutely delighted when someone asks me to explain how things work. I don't understand what sea lioning is - if somebody asks for evidence I give it to them. if you're so exhausted by your own worldview maybe that's something you should consider. and by "your" I mean, reading the topic here, it's clear we're talking about truths that have nothing to do with your own conjecture.
What do you mean by exhausted by your own worldview?
Quote from: Odibex Grallspice on October 21, 2020, 04:31:31 AM
if somebody asks for evidence I give it to them.
Alice: There is systemic racism in the US policing and justice system, and I have a plan to fix that.
Bob: What do you mean by "Racism"?
Alice: ***insert 20 minute historical review of racism in America***
Bob: But weren't the Irish slaves, too? They're white, it sounds like it wasn't about skin color.
Alice: ***insert 30 minute explanation about the difference between chattel slavery and indentured servitude***
Bob: Yeah, but they
were white, right?
Alice: ***insert 40 minute diatribe about the social construction of "whiteness", and who is allowed to be white***
Bob: So what makes it "Systemic"?
At this point, Alice has spent an hour and a half talking, and never got to the main issue at hand. And this was precisely what Bob wanted to happen. Bob is Sea-Lioning.
Quote from: LMNO on October 21, 2020, 03:17:44 PM
Quote from: Odibex Grallspice on October 21, 2020, 04:31:31 AM
if somebody asks for evidence I give it to them.
Alice: There is systemic racism in the US policing and justice system, and I have a plan to fix that.
Bob: What do you mean by "Racism"?
Alice: ***insert 20 minute historical review of racism in America***
Bob: But weren't the Irish slaves, too? They're white, it sounds like it wasn't about skin color.
Alice: ***insert 30 minute explanation about the difference between chattel slavery and indentured servitude***
Bob: Yeah, but they were white, right?
Alice: ***insert 40 minute diatribe about the social construction of "whiteness", and who is allowed to be white***
Bob: So what makes it "Systemic"?
At this point, Alice has spent an hour and a half talking, and never got to the main issue at hand. And this was precisely what Bob wanted to happen. Bob is Sea-Lioning.
Alice should have initiated the conversation with a brick.
Obidex thinks insincere requests for information are fine.
I think you all know what this means.
Quote from: LMNO on October 21, 2020, 03:17:44 PM
Quote from: Odibex Grallspice on October 21, 2020, 04:31:31 AM
if somebody asks for evidence I give it to them.
Alice: There is systemic racism in the US policing and justice system, and I have a plan to fix that.
Bob: What do you mean by "Racism"?
Alice: ***insert 20 minute historical review of racism in America***
Bob: But weren't the Irish slaves, too? They're white, it sounds like it wasn't about skin color.
Alice: ***insert 30 minute explanation about the difference between chattel slavery and indentured servitude***
Bob: Yeah, but they were white, right?
Alice: ***insert 40 minute diatribe about the social construction of "whiteness", and who is allowed to be white***
Bob: So what makes it "Systemic"?
At this point, Alice has spent an hour and a half talking, and never got to the main issue at hand. And this was precisely what Bob wanted to happen. Bob is Sea-Lioning.
That is indeed sealioning with the addition of weaponized what-about-ism... which makes me wonder if they're inseparable if sealioning is to be an effective strategy.
Quote from: Cain on October 21, 2020, 04:18:11 PM
Obidex thinks insincere requests for information are fine.
I think you all know what this means.
Quote from: The Johnny on October 21, 2020, 02:29:32 PM
Quote from: Odibex Grallspice on October 21, 2020, 04:31:31 AM
If your whole approach to the world hasn't already been gone over ten billion times then you're probably not going to feel like it's been gone over ten billion times when somebody asks about it. I'm absolutely delighted when someone asks me to explain how things work. I don't understand what sea lioning is - if somebody asks for evidence I give it to them. if you're so exhausted by your own worldview maybe that's something you should consider. and by "your" I mean, reading the topic here, it's clear we're talking about truths that have nothing to do with your own conjecture.
What do you mean by exhausted by your own worldview?
Quote from: Odibex Grallspice on October 21, 2020, 04:31:31 AM
if you're so exhausted by your own worldview maybe that's something you should consider.
Maybe you should kiss my ass until it blisters.
Quote from: The Johnny on October 21, 2020, 02:29:32 PM
Quote from: Odibex Grallspice on October 21, 2020, 04:31:31 AM
If your whole approach to the world hasn't already been gone over ten billion times then you're probably not going to feel like it's been gone over ten billion times when somebody asks about it. I'm absolutely delighted when someone asks me to explain how things work. I don't understand what sea lioning is - if somebody asks for evidence I give it to them. if you're so exhausted by your own worldview maybe that's something you should consider. and by "your" I mean, reading the topic here, it's clear we're talking about truths that have nothing to do with your own conjecture.
What do you mean by exhausted by your own worldview?
This.
I mean, are we insisting that our worldviews should be simplistic enough to be described with little effort or energy? Because that's how you get InfoWars and ZeroHedge.
If your understanding of the world is
easy to explain, it's probably worthless.
And I'm not talking about concision, of course. If there are concepts within your world view that can be explained with less words and effort,
accurately, that should be the goal. But when you're talking about complex topics like the ones brought up previously, there aren't usually simple ways to explain it. Hence the need for people to do actual Research to understand all the intricacies and nuance. Over-simplification of those intricacies results in shitty arguments that turn opponents away for good. I would know - I'm a fucking
professional at shitty arguments and making opponents hate me.
Quote from: PoFP on October 21, 2020, 05:01:12 PM
Quote from: The Johnny on October 21, 2020, 02:29:32 PM
Quote from: Odibex Grallspice on October 21, 2020, 04:31:31 AM
If your whole approach to the world hasn't already been gone over ten billion times then you're probably not going to feel like it's been gone over ten billion times when somebody asks about it. I'm absolutely delighted when someone asks me to explain how things work. I don't understand what sea lioning is - if somebody asks for evidence I give it to them. if you're so exhausted by your own worldview maybe that's something you should consider. and by "your" I mean, reading the topic here, it's clear we're talking about truths that have nothing to do with your own conjecture.
What do you mean by exhausted by your own worldview?
This.
I mean, are we insisting that our worldviews should be simplistic enough to be described with little effort or energy? Because that's how you get InfoWars and ZeroHedge.
If your understanding of the world is easy to explain, it's probably worthless.
And I'm not talking about concision, of course. If there are concepts within your world view that can be explained with less words and effort, accurately, that should be the goal. But when you're talking about complex topics like the ones brought up previously, there aren't usually simple ways to explain it. Hence the need for people to do actual Research to understand all the intricacies and nuance. Over-simplification of those intricacies results in shitty arguments that turn opponents away for good. I would know - I'm a fucking professional at shitty arguments and making opponents hate me.
"Explain to me why illegals being thrown into cages bothers you when you're not an illegal."
This question, asked 50 times per day.
"Explain to me patiently, throughly and in a civil manner why me calling <<Antifa>> a fascist organization, while im promoting authoritarianism and social exclusion is a flawed proposition?"
Quote from: Doktor Howl on October 21, 2020, 05:05:54 PM
Quote from: PoFP on October 21, 2020, 05:01:12 PM
Quote from: The Johnny on October 21, 2020, 02:29:32 PM
Quote from: Odibex Grallspice on October 21, 2020, 04:31:31 AM
If your whole approach to the world hasn't already been gone over ten billion times then you're probably not going to feel like it's been gone over ten billion times when somebody asks about it. I'm absolutely delighted when someone asks me to explain how things work. I don't understand what sea lioning is - if somebody asks for evidence I give it to them. if you're so exhausted by your own worldview maybe that's something you should consider. and by "your" I mean, reading the topic here, it's clear we're talking about truths that have nothing to do with your own conjecture.
What do you mean by exhausted by your own worldview?
This.
I mean, are we insisting that our worldviews should be simplistic enough to be described with little effort or energy? Because that's how you get InfoWars and ZeroHedge.
If your understanding of the world is easy to explain, it's probably worthless.
And I'm not talking about concision, of course. If there are concepts within your world view that can be explained with less words and effort, accurately, that should be the goal. But when you're talking about complex topics like the ones brought up previously, there aren't usually simple ways to explain it. Hence the need for people to do actual Research to understand all the intricacies and nuance. Over-simplification of those intricacies results in shitty arguments that turn opponents away for good. I would know - I'm a fucking professional at shitty arguments and making opponents hate me.
"Explain to me why illegals being thrown into cages bothers you when you're not an illegal."
This question, asked 50 times per day.
Right
I mean, there's definitely some concepts you can get through in seconds, like "It would be absolutely horrible if I were to be thrown into a cage for trying to escape a country whose ills are mostly the result of the cage-owner's actions. So it would be disgusting of me to support the same thing being done to someone else."
But the problem is, someone else has already over-simplified illegal immigration for a lot of people to: "Illegal mean bad. So illegal immigration bad. So illegal immigrants bad. So cages good."
- Which, of course, requires less brain activity than the first response, and is therefore the go-to for all knuckle-draggers.
In the same way that Prions are an alternative low-energy state that some molecules can re-position themselves into during initial stabilization, Right-Wing talking points are those that are alternatively low-effort compared to the simple correct answers. And just like in the case of Prions, they can be EXTREMELY toxic and contagious.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on October 21, 2020, 05:05:54 PM
"Explain to me why illegals being thrown into cages bothers you when you're not an illegal."
This question, asked 50 times per day.
Quote from: PoFP on October 21, 2020, 05:24:24 PM
But the problem is, someone else has already over-simplified illegal immigration for a lot of people to: "Illegal mean bad. So illegal immigration bad. So illegal immigrants bad. So cages good."
Well i actually have taken up a very sick hobby, which is arguing with people in 9gag posts... at first i tried speaking like a human being, but with those fascist, white-supremacist incels you CANT. So what did i resort to? Basic propositions in less than 6 words.
Following your example, what would i answer? "MEXICAN BAD, CHEAP LABOUR GOOD"
This style of response is of course, a response to bad faith arguments, which is an evolution of the "Ok boomer" response millenials and the youglings have created... the "Ok boomer" argument in synthesis is "You're just a fucking dinosaur that is detached from current social reality and adaptation to technology" and just dismisses the oppositions argument without even engaging with it.
But this other form of arguing does engage the opposition, frames the debate, and cuts thru the bullshit to get to the core issue.
Quote from: The Johnny on October 21, 2020, 05:38:15 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on October 21, 2020, 05:05:54 PM
"Explain to me why illegals being thrown into cages bothers you when you're not an illegal."
This question, asked 50 times per day.
Quote from: PoFP on October 21, 2020, 05:24:24 PM
But the problem is, someone else has already over-simplified illegal immigration for a lot of people to: "Illegal mean bad. So illegal immigration bad. So illegal immigrants bad. So cages good."
Well i actually have taken up a very sick hobby, which is arguing with people in 9gag posts... at first i tried speaking like a human being, but with those fascist, white-supremacist incels you CANT. So what did i resort to? Basic propositions in less than 6 words.
Following your example, what would i answer? "MEXICAN BAD, CHEAP LABOUR GOOD"
This style of response is of course, a response to bad faith arguments, which is an evolution of the "Ok boomer" response millenials and the youglings have created... the "Ok boomer" argument in synthesis is "You're just a fucking dinosaur that is detached from current social reality and adaptation to technology" and just dismisses the oppositions argument without even engaging with it.
But this other form of arguing does engage the opposition, frames the debate, and cuts thru the bullshit to get to the core issue.
I gave up trying to positively influence people years ago.
Now I just want to make a bagger too angry to sleep.
Quote from: The Johnny on October 21, 2020, 05:38:15 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on October 21, 2020, 05:05:54 PM
"Explain to me why illegals being thrown into cages bothers you when you're not an illegal."
This question, asked 50 times per day.
Quote from: PoFP on October 21, 2020, 05:24:24 PM
But the problem is, someone else has already over-simplified illegal immigration for a lot of people to: "Illegal mean bad. So illegal immigration bad. So illegal immigrants bad. So cages good."
Well i actually have taken up a very sick hobby, which is arguing with people in 9gag posts... at first i tried speaking like a human being, but with those fascist, white-supremacist incels you CANT. So what did i resort to? Basic propositions in less than 6 words.
Following your example, what would i answer? "MEXICAN BAD, CHEAP LABOUR GOOD"
This style of response is of course, a response to bad faith arguments, which is an evolution of the "Ok boomer" response millenials and the youglings have created... the "Ok boomer" argument in synthesis is "You're just a fucking dinosaur that is detached from current social reality and adaptation to technology" and just dismisses the oppositions argument without even engaging with it.
But this other form of arguing does engage the opposition, frames the debate, and cuts thru the bullshit to get to the core issue.
:lulz:
That actually sounds like a pretty effective strategy for the simpler topics. Might take that for a spin.
That likely would have been effective when I was calling Bootlickers out as Communists when they brought up regulating what Facebook/Twitter can say/block in response to the Hunter Biden story suppression. They immediately went to "So you agree that we can turn down gays when they apply for marriage?"
There's an obvious difference this argument ignores, and "OHH OKAY GAYS AND INTERNET POSTS SAME THING. BIG SORRY FOR CONFUSION." would have been much more effective at exposing that than the 2-page rant on Constitutional Rights and Legal Precedent I gave instead, that they clearly ignored in its entirety.
There's also this:
Alice: There is systemic racism in the US policing and justice system, and I have a plan to fix that.
Bob: What do you mean by "Racism"?
Alice: ***insert 20 minute historical review of racism in America***
Alice: There is systemic racism in the US policing and justice system, and I have a plan to fix that.
Chris: What do you mean by "Racism"?
Alice: ***insert 20 minute historical review of racism in America***
Alice: There is systemic racism in the US policing and justice system, and I have a plan to fix that.
Dave: What do you mean by "Racism"?
Alice: ***insert 20 minute historical review of racism in America***
Alice: There is systemic racism in the US policing and justice system, and I have a plan to fix that.
Elias: What do you mean by "Racism"?
Alice: ***insert 20 minute historical review of racism in America***
Alice: There is systemic racism in the US policing and justice system, and I have a plan to fix that.
Fred: What do you mean by "Racism"?
Alice: ***insert 20 minute historical review of racism in America***
Alice: There is systemic racism in the US policing and justice system, and I have a plan to fix that.
Greg: What do you mean by "Racism"?
Alice: ***insert 20 minute historical review of racism in America***
Alice: There is systemic racism in the US policing and justice system, and I have a plan to fix that.
Howard: What do you mean by "Racism"?
Alice: ***insert 20 minute historical review of racism in America***
Alice: There is systemic racism in the US policing and justice system, and I have a plan to fix that.
Irving: What do you mean by "Racism"?
Alice: ***insert 20 minute historical review of racism in America***
Alice: There is systemic racism in the US policing and justice system, and I have a plan to fix that.
Jeff: What do you mean by "Racism"?
Alice: ***insert 20 minute historical review of racism in America***
Alice: There is systemic racism in the US policing and justice system, and I have a plan to fix that.
Kevin: What do you mean by "Racism"?
Alice: ***insert 20 minute historical review of racism in America***
Alice: There is systemic racism in the US policing and justice system, and I have a plan to fix that.
Larry: What do you mean by "Racism"?
Alice: ***insert 20 minute historical review of racism in America***
Alice: There is systemic racism in the US policing and justice system, and I have a plan to fix that.
Mike: What do you mean by "Racism"?
Alice: ***insert 20 minute historical review of racism in America***
Alice: There is systemic racism in the US policing and justice system, and I have a plan to fix that.
Otto: What do you mean by "Racism"?
Alice: ***insert 20 minute historical review of racism in America***
Alice: There is systemic racism in the US policing and justice system, and I have a plan to fix that.
Pete: What do you mean by "Racism"?
Alice: ***insert 20 minute historical review of racism in America***
Alice: There is systemic racism in the US policing and justice system, and I have a plan to fix that.
QANON: What do you mean by "Racism"?
Alice: ***insert 20 minute historical review of racism in America***
Alice: There is systemic racism in the US policing and justice system, and I have a plan to fix that.
Russ: What do you mean by "Racism"?
Alice: ***insert 20 minute historical review of racism in America***
Alice: There is systemic racism in the US policing and justice system, and I have a plan to fix that.
Steve: What do you mean by "Racism"?
Alice: ***insert 20 minute historical review of racism in America***
Alice: There is systemic racism in the US policing and justice system, and I have a plan to fix that.
Trevor: What do you mean by "Racism"?
Alice: ***insert 20 minute historical review of racism in America***
Alice: There is systemic racism in the US policing and justice system, and I have a plan to fix that.
Usef: What do you mean by "Racism"?
Alice: ***insert 20 minute historical review of racism in America***
Alice: There is systemic racism in the US policing and justice system, and I have a plan to fix that.
Victor: What do you mean by "Racism"?
Alice: ***insert 20 minute historical review of racism in America***
Alice: There is systemic racism in the US policing and justice system, and I have a plan to fix that.
Wes: What do you mean by "Racism"?
Alice: ***insert 20 minute historical review of racism in America***
Alice: There is systemic racism in the US policing and justice system, and I have a plan to fix that.
Xander: What do you mean by "Racism"?
Alice: ***insert 20 minute historical review of racism in America***
Alice: There is systemic racism in the US policing and justice system, and I have a plan to fix that.
Yeardly: What do you mean by "Racism"?
Alice: ***insert 20 minute historical review of racism in America***
Alice: There is systemic racism in the US policing and justice system, and I have a plan to fix that.
Zed: What do you mean by "Racism"?
Alice: ***insert 20 minute historical review of racism in America***
Quote from: PoFP on October 21, 2020, 05:50:34 PM
:lulz:
That actually sounds like a pretty effective strategy for the simpler topics. Might take that for a spin.
That likely would have been effective when I was calling Bootlickers out as Communists when they brought up regulating what Facebook/Twitter can say/block in response to the Hunter Biden story suppression. They immediately went to "So you agree that we can turn down gays when they apply for marriage?"
There's an obvious difference this argument ignores, and "OHH OKAY GAYS AND INTERNET POSTS SAME THING. BIG SORRY FOR CONFUSION." would have been much more effective at exposing that than the 2-page rant on Constitutional Rights and Legal Precedent I gave instead, that they clearly ignored in its entirety.
"BIG GOVERNMENT BAD, PATERNALISM GOOD"
aaand:
"CIVIL RIGHTS BAD"
Part of it is translating what theyre saying into caveman speech and exposing an existing incongruent dialectic, without misrepresenting it.
Ill try to keep tihs thread in the back of my mind and ill share some 9gag experiences if i find new ones or i remember some.
In the past I've tried to dream up a meme to redeem the supreme-icists. It didn't work. It wasn't work. It was fun, obviously - it was masturbation after all.
Most minds I've met tightly clinging to an ideology are locked into it by a mixture of unaddressed trauma and love and fear of losing access to individuals within the tribal family which feeds upon and replicates via upholding the ideology. You can't touch this with a sandwich board and megaphone and a busy street corner. Neither can you defeat fascism with biting wit and excellent font placement.
The hard work is work. It's engaging one-on-one, getting to know deplorable people, improving their lives in tangible ways like freelance social work pirates. Healing as much trauma as possible dangerously selflessly without and before expecting them to back out of the only corner they know.
And I certainly don't have time for any of that.
Things that any well-studied and well-trained therapist could manage to do without even needing to resort to anything unethical like brainwashing.
But those types of people avoid any kind of introspection or psychic work like the plague (well, they don't actually even avoid the plague like the plague, but you know what i mean).
Its also worth asking the question "where is this energy best put to use?" Because, frankly, saving nazis from themselves is less worthy a cause than making sure enough brown people have access to the voting booth that politicians just stop listening to nazis. I do not want to put too much energy into making a world where we continue to listen exclusively to white people, but the white people are nicer. That's a personal choice, and I don't spend time shitting on those trying to fight fascism in the hearts of whites, I just recognize it's work and I'd rather work elsewhere.
Quote from: The Johnny on November 13, 2020, 10:24:04 AM
Things that any well-studied and well-trained therapist could manage to do without even needing to resort to anything unethical like brainwashing.
It's not a scalable answer though - there aren't enough well-trained therapists to do the work necessary. I've had many conversations about applying machine learning to avoid certain mental health barriers.. but I wouldn't be surprised if it takes as long as until 2030 for competent AI therapists to become widely available and accepted.
Quote from: The Johnny on November 13, 2020, 10:24:04 AM
But those types of people avoid any kind of introspection or psychic work like the plague (well, they don't actually even avoid the plague like the plague, but you know what i mean).
Exactly :)
Quote from: Q. G. Pennyworth on November 13, 2020, 07:19:02 PM
Its also worth asking the question "where is this energy best put to use?" Because, frankly, saving nazis from themselves is less worthy a cause than making sure enough brown people have access to the voting booth that politicians just stop listening to nazis. I do not want to put too much energy into making a world where we continue to listen exclusively to white people, but the white people are nicer. That's a personal choice, and I don't spend time shitting on those trying to fight fascism in the hearts of whites, I just recognize it's work and I'd rather work elsewhere.
Same. Both sides of the same shitty sandwich. Inescapably though - it's an awful job and somebody has to do it - so until the problem is solved by an army of competent AI therapists, I vote for non-marginalised white men. As long as education remains a privilege whilst being a right, I find the sentiment "it's not my job to educate you" more problematic than "it's not my job to endlessly debate you".
Look, this is really simple. So simple that some iron age hippie figured it out.
"Do not cast your pearls before swine."
If you are dealing with someone that is genuinely trying to learn, and you say "it's not my job to educate you" or "I don't owe you the emotional labor," then you are a shitsack who shouldn't be explaining anything to anyone, because you yourself are counterproductive. You have nothing to say to anyone; you are not being firm, you're being an asshole.
On the other hand, there is no sense trying to educate someone who is listening just long enough to launch an appeal to ridicule, because they aren't listening. That is in fact a waste of time and effort that could be more profitably used ridiculing them.
If you can't tell the difference within 2 minutes, then it's back to school for you. You aren't ready to instruct anyone.
I'll admit, when I first came here I was a shit-sack libertarian, but I did genuinely want to understand. Eris provides however, and provided by tossing me out on my ass with the homeless so I could get a first-hand look at what's really going on. I think it was a necessary growing process. Now I see libertarian views as a danger to the fabric of our society. It's amazing I didn't see it before, really, but I account that to being a thick-skulled lunatic who needed help pulling his head out of his ass.
I'm still here to learn, I just realize I need to say less and lurk more. Shhh, the adults are talking. I know people are hostile to me and, probably with good reason. I've had to go out and carve my own niches where I can fit in, and I have successfully de-radicalized a few normies. If I can do that with a few, I can do it with more, all I need is time. Sadly the numbers are low so, well, unless there's a lot of us trying to do this thing then not much will be done. It takes time and patience to defuse a ticking bomb.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on November 13, 2020, 08:29:51 PM
Look, this is really simple. So simple that some iron age hippie figured it out.
"Do not cast your pearls before swine."
If you are dealing with someone that is genuinely trying to learn, and you say "it's not my job to educate you" or "I don't owe you the emotional labor," then you are a shitsack who shouldn't be explaining anything to anyone, because you yourself are counterproductive. You have nothing to say to anyone; you are not being firm, you're being an asshole.
On the other hand, there is no sense trying to educate someone who is listening just long enough to launch an appeal to ridicule, because they aren't listening. That is in fact a waste of time and effort that could be more profitably used ridiculing them.
If you can't tell the difference within 2 minutes, then it's back to school for you. You aren't ready to instruct anyone.
This.
What Doc said
I have a friend who is constantly coming to me with "okay is this problematic?" questions, that he genuinely wants answered and he actually listens and engages and passes the information on to other people in his circles. It's the OPPOSITE of labor to talk with him, even when he's not the wokest guy in the room, because it's good faith and we have a lot of trust in each other.
If you're the wokest guy in the room you have to ask yourself some serious questions. If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him.
Quote from: Fujikoma on November 13, 2020, 11:53:34 PM
If you're the wokest guy in the room you have to ask yourself some serious questions. If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him.
That sounds like Buddha-talk to me.
*stares in motherfuckershutup*
Yes, it's that other guy who is the Buddha, not me. You might call him Lucifer X, I hear he's right down for that sort of shit, me I'm too old.
Quote from: Fujikoma on November 14, 2020, 01:26:16 AM
Yes, it's that other guy who is the Buddha, not me. You might call him Lucifer X, I hear he's right down for that sort of shit, me I'm too old.
Could you educate me regarding this statement? It makes absolutely no sense to me without understanding any of the references.
It was a dumb statement, on many levels, as it was intended to be. Nobody likes that guy for one.
EDIT: It comes back to the Buddha on the Road thing. I was saying I was too old for that sort of shit in response to The Wizard Joseph. There's an old Zen Buddhist saying that "If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him", which is like saying "There are no masters anywhere", sort of. It's more a warning to look within the self, and if you see the Buddha in yourself, you need to realize you're quite likely full of shit. Though I suppose it could be taken literally which was why I was like "Yeah, get that other dude, I'm too fucking old for this shit."
EDIT: Asking someone to explain a zen Buddhist quote is almost as backwards as someone trying to explain it. The irony is not lost on me. I get it, it's clever, it's funny, it's quite witty. It also makes me look like a total idiot, not like I needed much help there.
Thanks for taking the time to elaborate. Ok, so on the surface it looks like you have more self-awareness than impulse control. Relatable. My other question would be - where is that energy coming from behind the behaviour pattern that you identify? Is it internally, or the constraints of other peoples rigid expectations of you, messages from Sirius, or something else?
The energy behind my behavior pattern comes from my male inability to admit defeat, would be nice if it weren't a thing, I know, snip snip and it's over. My impulse control is ever a problem. Thanks for recognizing my self-awareness.
Quote from: Fujikoma on November 14, 2020, 01:34:03 PM
The energy behind my behavior pattern comes from my male inability to admit defeat, would be nice if it weren't a thing, I know, snip snip and it's over. My impulse control is ever a problem. Thanks for recognizing my self-awareness.
I mean, I could ship you some testosterone blockers today which i no longer need, but do you really think that is the culprit? Masculinity doesn't require testosterone, as much as having testosterone doesn't automatically make you a man. I can think of plenty of people who don't identify as a man but still can't admit defeat.
Your self-awareness is obvious, which makes it all the more curious to me why you ignore it. Any unresolved conflicts gnawing at you?
Quote from: Fujikoma on November 13, 2020, 11:53:34 PM
If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him.
I met Buddha on the road and had a pleasant conversation about the 2nd amendment and how people just randomly assault people these days.
I agree with Dok for the most part, the tricky part is that some trolls like sealioning enough that they've gotten good at appearing to be the first type of person- engaged, ready to learn, looking for honest debate, but after those 2 minutes even if you recognize their shitneckery, they may have already laid the groundwork to convince whoever else is on a given thread. All they want is an audience, after all. not saying one should give up on trying to educate anyone on anything ever, but this is a thing I've noticed.
"Can you explain to me why you think submittiing my will and desires to a tyrant is a bad idea? Genuinely curious, pls answer. BTW, i think democracy is socialism and the weak should perish."
Quote from: Chelagoras The Boulder on November 16, 2020, 03:55:31 AM
I agree with Dok for the most part, the tricky part is that some trolls like sealioning enough that they've gotten good at appearing to be the first type of person- engaged, ready to learn, looking for honest debate, but after those 2 minutes even if you recognize their shitneckery, they may have already laid the groundwork to convince whoever else is on a given thread. All they want is an audience, after all. not saying one should give up on trying to educate anyone on anything ever, but this is a thing I've noticed.
True. Is this surprising given how many seem to choose going online as a form of entertainment to comfort and reinforce not challenge their view of reality? The most effective way to engage with such people is one-on-one, offline.
But it's a dirty job and I'm no longer doing it.
Quote from: purpleXi on November 14, 2020, 02:04:46 PM
Quote from: Fujikoma on November 14, 2020, 01:34:03 PM
The energy behind my behavior pattern comes from my male inability to admit defeat, would be nice if it weren't a thing, I know, snip snip and it's over. My impulse control is ever a problem. Thanks for recognizing my self-awareness.
I mean, I could ship you some testosterone blockers today which i no longer need, but do you really think that is the culprit? Masculinity doesn't require testosterone, as much as having testosterone doesn't automatically make you a man. I can think of plenty of people who don't identify as a man but still can't admit defeat.
Your self-awareness is obvious, which makes it all the more curious to me why you ignore it. Any unresolved conflicts gnawing at you?
I appreciate the offer but I'd probably just keel over without testosterone. You are correct that plenty of people don't admit defeat when they possibly should. That said I should likely show others respect and shut the fuck up. It seems like there's something everyone else gets that I'm missing, been that way my whole life, still waiting for that magical piece of the puzzle that is so easy for others to access, but not everyone is so offended that I have a few loose screws.
I know what that feels like. Is it more likely that everyone else has found the same magical puzzle piece, or just found a set of reality filters that happens to work for them in their daily interactions?
How likely is it that shutting the fuck up is going to grant you the understanding you seek?
It's actually unusually practical, I can listen to these folks ramble and glean little bits of knowlege from what they say.
To answer your first question though... I don't know. In my mind that magical piece doesn't exist, it's just something everyone else seems to have, I suppose it's a shared hallucination.
Progress involves first learning history, then repeating the same mistakes. Don't listen to the clowns who say you can learn without falling on your face :)
You need at least 10 learys of acid to pull off a half decent shared hallucination. That's hard to obtain - it's easier to find The Others. Where do you feel like you most belong?
I was actually a test subject for a friend who dealt acid back in the early nineties, I did a LOT of it.
But me and where I belong, it feels like wherever I get accepted I have to tear my way in with my teeth. It's definitely not something that's just a given, not something that happens overnight, but I really, actively have to force my personality on everyone until they get used to me, that's not gonna happen here, for pretty obvious reasons.
Quote from: Fujikoma on November 17, 2020, 03:36:20 AM
But me and where I belong, it feels like wherever I get accepted I have to tear my way in with my teeth. It's definitely not something that's just a given, not something that happens overnight, but I really, actively have to force my personality on everyone until they get used to me,
Does it bother you that an approach where you
force anything is by definition non-consensual - or am I misunderstanding you? Is this something you are aware of in the moment, or a post-event narrative?
This is a world of force. We're edging away from that but it has always been about force. It will be about force for as long as we solve problems with ballistics. To argue otherwise is to be a victim, and who wants that? This world is hard, lonely, fucked up, and you take whatever you can get from it, because it only gets worse from here. One day, you're going to get older, and waste away and die. Nobody is going to remember Alexis the graceful soul but they will never forget Alexis the horrific savage.
Quote from: Fujikoma on November 17, 2020, 04:00:59 AM
This is a world of force. We're edging away from that but it has always been about force. It will be about force for as long as we solve problems with ballistics. To argue otherwise is to be a victim, and who wants that? This world is hard, lonely, fucked up, and you take whatever you can get from it, because it only gets worse from here. One day, you're going to get older, and waste away and die. Nobody is going to remember Alexis the graceful soul but they will never forget Alexis the horrific savage.
Needs MOAR angst.
Quote from: Fujikoma on November 17, 2020, 04:00:59 AM
This is a world of force. We're edging away from that but it has always been about force. It will be about force for as long as we solve problems with ballistics. To argue otherwise is to be a victim, and who wants that? This world is hard, lonely, fucked up, and you take whatever you can get from it, because it only gets worse from here. One day, you're going to get older, and waste away and die. Nobody is going to remember Alexis the graceful soul but they will never forget Alexis the horrific savage.
I have to go wash my hair now, but if you expound upon this theory in a separate thread - I'll argue the fuck out of it later.
Damn Dok, she was being nice and civil, more angst would be fucked up, or was that sarcasm? Fuck if I know, I do know I want to sit down and have some discussions with purpleXi.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on November 17, 2020, 04:05:18 AM
Quote from: Fujikoma on November 17, 2020, 04:00:59 AM
This is a world of force. We're edging away from that but it has always been about force. It will be about force for as long as we solve problems with ballistics. To argue otherwise is to be a victim, and who wants that? This world is hard, lonely, fucked up, and you take whatever you can get from it, because it only gets worse from here. One day, you're going to get older, and waste away and die. Nobody is going to remember Alexis the graceful soul but they will never forget Alexis the horrific savage.
Needs MOAR angst.
Do i hear Nietzsche hanging out at Hot Topic? Where he preaches the death of punk for we have killed him?
On second thought I should be concerned when Doktor Howl starts cheering me on. Can I just take back all the dirty gritty shit I just said?
Quote from: Fujikoma on November 17, 2020, 04:22:55 AM
On second thought I should be concerned when Doktor Howl starts cheering me on. Can I just take back all the dirty gritty shit I just said?
No. That's why I used the quote function. Things come, things go, cringe is forever.
Quote from: The Johnny on November 17, 2020, 04:19:51 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on November 17, 2020, 04:05:18 AM
Quote from: Fujikoma on November 17, 2020, 04:00:59 AM
This is a world of force. We're edging away from that but it has always been about force. It will be about force for as long as we solve problems with ballistics. To argue otherwise is to be a victim, and who wants that? This world is hard, lonely, fucked up, and you take whatever you can get from it, because it only gets worse from here. One day, you're going to get older, and waste away and die. Nobody is going to remember Alexis the graceful soul but they will never forget Alexis the horrific savage.
Needs MOAR angst.
Do i hear Nietzsche hanging out at Hot Topic? Where he preaches the death of punk for we have killed him?
I was thinking more about how when you're rich people hate you because you buy new shirts and that deaf-mute girls are really bad at warning you of disasters.
Quote from: Fujikoma on November 17, 2020, 04:22:55 AM
Can I just take back all the dirty gritty shit I just said?
That's an interesting question - can you? Like, does and should it make a difference whether:
- it's something that still resonates with you but no longer seems practical to defend, or
- it's something that resonated with you, but no longer feels right, or
- it's something that didn't resonate with you, but sounded good "in-style," or
- it's something less explicable?
Whether or not you succeed, you can try - and that alone has value, does it not?