Yes... the BEES do that. Not the frame that holds the hive.
If redditers want to brigade and shame other subreddits that is fine. That's organic. That's free speech.
if you start censoring people... you will split the community... there are many competitors to Reddit just BEGGING for the management of reddit to piss the members off a bit more. Their competitors are waiting. They want nothing more than for Reddit to do it. They're touching themselves with anticipation.
So disagree... Do it. Do it good and hard and don't stop.
Think of the idiots that would like to ban porn links from Google. Seem like a good idea? For the children? What about removing hate speech links from google? I mean, you can find neo nazis or jihadi terrorists on google.
Should google censor their search results?
Of course not. Because there at least you understand that if google did that they'd be less valiable as a search engine. Same thing with reddit. You want to contain as many communities as possible under the same roof. You start kicking out the undesirables and its like filtering the porn links out of google. If google does that and Bing doesn't... what happens? Bing becomes a superior search engine because it isn't censored. And then suddenly what is everyone going to use? Not google.
Google understands this. If reddit doesn't... then they're going to drive the bees out of the hive... and then no more honey.
As to birth rates, those born and socialized into our culture. I believe you're fishing for me to make a racist comment. You'll not find it. I am not racist. I don't care what color people are... My issue is what society you were socialized into.
If those socialized into my culture die out and are replaced by another culture... then my culture dies.
And that is the same culture that gives so much a rat fart about feminism or female liberation. If my society falls... what replaces it will not care about these things to any great extent.
Islam is looking to replace most of Europe and south American Catholicism is looking to replace the US. Neither cultural group takes this political correctness shit seriously... at all.
As to what I find objectionable about south american Catholicism... what do the japanese find objectionable about chinese culture? Would you say it was racist if the Japanese wanted to maintain their culture instead of having it annihilated by chinese culture?
Its the same thing. I'm growing tired of you transparent attempts to find some political correctness violation I've made. Its not intellectually meaningful.
As to what must be done... we must stop using gender relations and family relations as political weapons against each other. We have poisoned the field that grows our grain with the rotting bodies of past battles.
The fields stink with the rotting dead of a thousand skirmishes. It must stop. Certain things must be left alone. Using gender relations as a political weapon for short term political advantage is coming at the price of poisoning gender relations in general which damages our ability to sustain ourselves as a society at all.
The only demographics that are doing okay in this are the ones that utterly ignore the discussion.
The religious groups are breeding. And the various foreign cultures that immigrate and don't take the gender discussion seriously are breeding.
Everyone else is not. The facts are self evident in the statistics. We are in the middle of a hegemony wide population crash. The whole first world is not reproducing. Countries with tight immigration have rapidly declining populations and countries with permissive immigration are getting subsumed.
As to Thebes, the issue was the low population growth rate of Sparta. They were just barely able to meet population replacement rates which is unacceptable in a warrior culture that suffers attrition from battles.
What happened in those battles is that you'd form a battle line... a shield wall. And on the right you'd have your newbs and on the left you'd have your veterans... or it was the other way around. I forget. But there was a convention.
The idea was that the worst fighters of either side would fight the best fighters of the opposing side. This would cause the battle line to WHEEL as the better fighters on both sides chewed into the newbies.
Nearly all deaths were suffered from inexperienced fighters not just because they were inexperienced but because they were fighting people completely out of their skill class.
Thebes decided to do something different. They put their best fighters against the best fighters of Sparta and their shitty fighters against the shitty fighters from Sparta.
They also sent about 10 times as may people to the fight as Sparta.
The Spartans were better... they gave better than they got. But they were out numbered and their best fighters were fighting the best Thebes had to offer. Thebes was not as good... but by putting the best against the best... the Thebans didn't break. It was common for one side at a certain point to run away. Well... the Veterans weren't running away. And they were keeping the Spartan elite busy.
The result was that the Spartan army was basically wiped out to the last man.
And the Spartan's couldn't recover. The Thebans invaded their territory and freed the slaves the Spartans used to do everything in their society. Sparta was very much a slave culture. Slaves farmed, cooked, cleaned, built things... everything but fight and rule.
Well... the cream of the Spartan elite destroyed and their slaves freed and gone... Sparta never recovered.
Had Sparta had greater numbers... everything would have been different.
Why one society has numbers and another doesn't doesn't really matter to me. You just need to have them.
If you don't have the numbers you're going to have problems that aren't going to be solved by wealth or technology or skill. Look at the Spartans... they could kill their enemies at horrifying ratios in most cases. Impossibly small numbers of Spartans could kill much larger forces. But it wasn't enough.
They were crushed by farmers with little more than weight of numbers.
Its like removing all the porn links from google. You only think you're doing something that won't horribly backfire if you don't understand the business you're in.
As the man said "The internet intepretes censorship as DAMAGE and routes around it." You can't censor people on the internet.
And if you turn your site into a corporate friendly disneyland then many of the content creators will leave, you'll give a niche for competitors to exploit, and the viewers that like that content will leave with them.
Think of Reddit like a bee hive. The content creators like bees. And the 99 percent of users that don't actually contribute anything as the Honey.
The problem with bees is that they sting. So somewhere along the way they said "wouldn't it be cool if we could get rid of the bees and just keep the hive and the honey!"... well... sure. But then you'd just have a box of honey. It doesn't work that way though.
The bees make the honey. And the hive is only as good as it makes the bees happy and productive. Fuck with the bees and you get no honey.
That is no where a requirement of any western code of law so much as a tendency.
What is more, you are ignoring that what is "western" law extends back in time quite a bit farther than you appear to be aware. Consider the Romans for example. A quite valid citation as a lot of modern western law is based on Roman legal concepts.
And while i don't hold them as having the best legal system for a lot of reasons, they were not a stupid people.
And you can't get any more Western than the WESTERN Roman empire.
I am a great fan of Diogenes... some would say the father of western philosophy. And... his antics were largely involved with dealing with societies that had been taken over by such people.
The Sophists... or in English "The Wise"... they ruled the thoughts and thinking and discussions of their day. And it took the Cynics and the Stoics to break them.
From the Cynics we learn true introspection. Real consideration. Real thought. And from the Stoics we have gotten things like Science... true clear reason.
But the war of the mind is never over. The sophists were never completely destroyed and they thrive quite comfortably in politics, certain portions of academia, a fair portion of the legal profession, etc.
It is the cynic that stands naked before the man in silks, titles, and gold bangles... and says "you're a liar and you know you're a liar"
And it is the stoic that stands before mystics, the moralists, the holy men, and says "not only are you not holy or divine but you're also an idiot."
These are the intellectual traditions I value. I know the struggle will never end.
But the Sophists are parasites. They breed, they infect, they corrupt... but they do not strengthen or improve things. They drain the strength out of everything they touch.
And eventually their corruption destroys anyone stupid enough to support them. We see this throughout the western world.
Look at all the communities... poor communities... promised success... promised jobs... promised education... and that they were promised 30 or 50 years ago... and in that time they've only grown poorer, jobs have become scarcer, education standards have slipped farther and farther, crime has gotten out of control...
You can spot the parasites without even having to pay much attention but looking for the rot rather than the people spreading it. Then you just follow the corruption inward.
We've had past events of increased wealth that didn't correspond to falling birth rates... same thing for medicine etc.
Female education is somewhat linked... anything that upsets the gender status quo can effect that.
The Spartans had a similar issue... they are known for having a very liberal attitude towards female equality... their society ultimately was crushed by larger population of Thebes. The Spartans are known for being quite excellent soldiers. The Thebes are less well known but their stock and trade was agriculture. Farmers. The Spartans came demanding tribute. And the response from Thebes was basically just to swam the Spartans and destroyed them.
Appreciate, I am a 21st century western man. I believe in female equality as much as anyone else in my society. However, I am also gifted and cursed with an ability and a need to see beyond myself and to see things in a wider perspective.
The problem is that whatever your moral beliefs there are imperatives. Certain things MUST happen. And if they don't... the society dies.
So long as the birth rates are reasonable, we can maintain the status quo. If they do not improve however... the society will collapse or get supplanted through immigration... and whatever either of us believes will be irrelevant because we'll be dead and there will be no one to carry on after us.
Think. You are arguing with the Sun, the Moon, waters, and the winds.
These things don't care what you believe. We are all insects under the heavens. If we do not improve the birth rate our society dies and other cultures will absorb our territory, our technology, and rewrite our history.
Islam for example appears to be well positioned to inherent everything we've built. You are I am sure quite aware of the values of Islam regarding women? That is the very likely future for most of europe at this point.
For the US... we're more likely to adopt a south American Catholic perspective... also not especially friendly to your views or mine.
This rift between our camps is destroying our society... it is time to stop being petty children... and take some responsibility for what must happen.
As to your sad attempt to introduce socialism as the solution... it isn't working in Sweden. For all your subsidies, you're not improving the situation.
Why is that? Because your subsidies are all about supporting SINGLE mothers. Unattached women don't want to have children in the first place. That isn't an ideal situation to sit there on government welfare raising your child in a single parent household.
No amount of subsidies is going to resolve that situation.
The homes that produce replacement levels of well adjusted children that go to school and attain something in their lives are not the families you seem to want to be the future. That's just a fact. Cross reference the prison population with singe parent house holds. You'll find that the overwhelming majority of the prison population comes from such house holds.
Cross reference kids that don't graduate high school with single parent house holds. Again the overwhelming majority... etc.
You're breeding failure. We don't just need numbers or the immigration would be able to deal with it. We need socialized upwardly mobile adults. And by socialized, I mean socialized into our society. Not just any random jackass from anywhere in the world. That isn't going to be helpful.
Get the fuck out of your mental box... and think outside of it for a moment. Try. Just TRY to think outside that box.
as to the equviliency of sentences... If you serve a lower sentence for attempted murder than successful murder, then so be it. Simply cite the person for that and have them serve the time. However this is not simply perjury or lying or slander. This is an attempted assault on someone else.
if you can prove they did that in court with intent to harm someone, then they should be held accountable for that attempted harm, the subversion of the court, and the perjury.
If you're okay with that then we are in agreement.
As to the difficulty of proving rape, that is not an argument for lowing the burden of evidence. That simply notes that the crime is subjective and evidence is difficult to come by.
Historically there were different ways of dealing with this problem.
100 years ago in the US, it was understood that a young lady was not to be alone with a young man. And if she were so by her own consent then that was largely taken as consent should the issue come to trial and there not be evidence of a struggle.
For this reason if a young woman was to be with a young man, she would either have that meeting happen in a public place or do so with friends that could validate her story if something happened.
The problem you're having now is that young women are spending time alone with young men and there is no presumption of sexual intimacy in that. Which historically there would be.
The old rules whatever you might think of them, dealt with the problem. Islam of course has its own solution which is typically useless... the whole X numbers of male witnesses or whatever which is a stupid rule.
In the West, the old rule we used to have was that young ladies did not spend time ALONE with young men that they were not intent on a sexual relationship with in the first place.
Now, unless you're willing to bring back rules like that, the problem you're going to run into here is that you're trying to prove things that you don't have the evidence to actually prove.
And the burden of proof is on the accuser.
So you sort it out. How do you want to move forward here? I'm open to any solution you want to propose. But if your solution is reversing basic legal precedent and having the accused bear the burden of proof... I don't see why that is a good idea.
You'd create an atmosphere of fear where sociopathic women could dominate men simply by making specious rape claims.
My primary problem with that is not the injustice of it. As I said to other people, I am not an MRA. My issue is not male rights. My issue is rather that that atmosphere of fear further poisons male/female relations which will depress the birth rate further... and cause the sexes to have less social contact than they already do.
The problem I have with so many of these ideas is that they're unaware of the unintended consequences or the scope of the issue in which they're operating. If your intention is to make rape either a less common crime than it is... and it is a generally uncommon crime when compared to other types of crime or the population in general. But if you want to make it less common still... and you want women to feel comfortable to make the claim... etc.
Certain proactive steps need to be take on the part of women and those that educate women so that they deal with this situation in a more responsible and productive manner.
The current methods clearly are creating confusion more than anything. The whole "teach men not to rape" campaign was comically naive.
So you tell me... how do you want to deal with this?
Forget what other people in the thread said. I'm not interested in people brigading to give false legitimacy to a point simply because two or three people agree with something on a given forum against one. That's no indication of political popularity or the inherent wisdom of the argument.
Just on your own two feet... tell me what you agree with, disagree with, and how you would address the problem in so far as you see one?
No you didn't. You quoted me and then said that constituted all the proof required. What I said was never in dispute.
You have not actually made an argument here.
Lets say we were in a court case... would you simply be expected to cite something and then rest your case? You think you're going to prove anything that way? Obviously not.
So why don't you ACTUALLY make a real argument. I'm waiting.
Not really. I'm not the sort of person that obsesses about the tools used to do a thing. I don't care about guns for example because I don't think guns cause crime. I think they are TOOLS used by criminals.
In this case, we're talking about lies being used as tools. But I don't care about the lies themselves. I care about the intent behind them. If your intention is to lock someone away for 30 years... I don't really care what tool you wanted to use to do that. A roll of duct tape and a shotgun against the head... or a lie. The intent is the crime not the tool.
As to a lie hurting me... I've rarely been personally hurt by lies actually. I'm very good at not giving dishonest people leverage over me. It has happened to friends and family though. Only so much you can do.
As to bad experiences... what makes a lie harmful is the harm the lie causes. There is nothing special about lies. It is just a tool. A means to an end.
What hurts is the intent. If someone lies to spare my feelings or help me that doesn't hurt.
If someone lies to hurt me.. THAT hurts because they had the intent to hurt me. Do you understand?
Every culture on earth has unforgivable sins in its past.
The mark of society is not being without sin for we are all sinners.
The mark of a society is what it builds and what it does in the world.
You sit in front of a computer with an Intel or AMD processor... using windows or macos or linux... running a browser likely written in the US... firefox or chrome or something.
And you sign into a US tech message board and tell me American culture is irredeemable?
We built the modern world, insect. If you don't appreciate what we've done then do my a favor and try to live a week without anything we invented for provided for you.
Literally HALF of all the inventions in the last 120 or so years have all been patented by Americans.
You say we are irredeemable? Who is better?
Cite a nation and I'll thumb through the histories to find their sins. And keep in mind that the sins of a nation are relative to its power. tiny countries with no power are not going to genocide continents because they can't... even if they want to.
What country are you from, little flea? Cite your nation of origin. I will cite your sins and then by your own logic you'll have to admit your culture is unsalvagable.
Or admit you're an illogical lackwitted hypocrite.
Which of course... is merely a matter of time since that is a forgone conclusion. Your argument is a trite one. I've seen it many times and it always hides the same bitterness born of indoctrination and bitterness. You are pitiable. But please... answer my questions so you know what I say for the truth it is.
That's fine... you want equality before the law... I think that's fine in theory but it isn't my primary requirement. If one sex or the other didn't have equality but gender relations were stable and both genders were doing their jobs... I would take that as better than if there were equality but the relationship were poisoned.
As to populations... We're dealing with something that moves over decades. Most people can't deal with things that move more slowly than a few years at most. To follow the patterns of generations you must see things in terms of generations... in blocks of time about 30 years each.
Its already very bad... and its getting worse. We are running out of time. The only thing keeping us going at this point is immigration. And that is a stop gap. It won't help us in the long run at this rate. If we can increase our own population replacement a bit and slow the immigration a bit... then it will be fine. The internal population replacement rate doesn't have to be 100 percent. But it can't be 50 percent. That's too low.
As to me sounding like something... This is more pathetic ad hominem on your part. If you're personally unable to have an honest discussion without devolving immediately to identity politics then you're incompetent to have this discussion - period. Your brand of rhetoric has grown tiresome and I think you're even starting to realize that I am far from alone in having no patience for it.
Understand me. If you want to have a real discussion. I am here. if you want to play identity politics games.. I will blow through your argument like a freight train through a paper mache float parade.
The ad hominems are useless. You can't use them against me. And if that's all you've got... you'll have nothing. And I will be utterly without mercy in ripping your argument apart.
Last chance. Make an argument.
I am not an MRA. I explained that above.
Even if I were an MRA, and I am not, but even if I were, it would not give you the ability to invalidate my position.
Feminists and MRAs are two sides of the same coin. The one judging the other is laughable. I represent neither. If can't grasp that there are view points out side of your cartoonish dichotomies then you've got no hope of sustaining an argument against anyone with a mature position.
How long do you think it will take before the buyers start insisting that something extra be attached to the horn?... like part of the skull? Maybe a little dried flesh and some blood?
In a market floodeded with fakes, the poachers will have an incentive to demonstrate they have the real thing.
I am pulling fool proof ways to show you have a REAL horn out of my ass. Your master plan is not as clever as you think it is.
Its not a question of the planet. Most of the planet isn't feminists is it?
And what survives of our culture and our civilization if we all die out and are replaced by people from where ever?
If we could assimilate them as fast as they were coming then... maybe. But we can't. And even the systems in our society that were designed to do just that have been sabotaged by the whole multiculturalism movement that basically says it is discriminatory to expect people that immigrate to your country to adopt your culture. Never mind that every other country on earth has that as core expectation of anyone that immigrates.
The western world DOES have a huge under population issue. Italy is basically dying out and it is not alone. Replacing everyone in europe with North Africans and people from the middle east means France is GONE. Sweden is GONE. Italy is GONE. etc. You either have a core majority in each of those countries that can at least sustain replacement or they're all gone.
And Japan is going through a similar problem. Their population is crashing. Their are villages that are ghost towns all over the place. Don't be fooled by the people living in increasingly tiny apartments in Tokyo. If you squeeze the whole population into a couple cities you'll have a shadow of the population that they had when it was spread out.
This is an issue throughout the Western Hegemony. Our entire super civilization... the whole first world is doing this to itself right now. And it is not sustainable.
As to no one being without sin... I didn't say I was without sin, you trite little punk. Your whole philosophy is something I could have red off the back of a box of crackerjacks.
Either step up your game... or who can really take this mickey mouse shit seriously?
I am well aware of my biases sport. But the great civilizations of history were not built by people just looking after their own interests.
George Washington could have been king. He chose to be a term limited president. Your notions of the limitations of the human mind and soul are childishly simplistic.
Going over your next quote where you give me another crackerjack response... you sound like this guy: https://youtu.be/b5I94bT23cQ?t...
This this is sad.
As to grandfatherly views... yes... the wording of it is not old timey and the profanity is likely making you think you have a point. But you don't... because another way of saying what I said is this:
"Life isn't fair. We all have our own burdens and we all have our own problems. We all have to make the best of the situation and muddle through as best we can."
How does that strike you? Same fucking concept which you'd know if you didn't have your head completely up your own ass.
As to marxism, it is related to modern feminism... the brain trust of the modern academic feminist movement is entirely marxist feminists... self described. I don't even have to label them that. That is how they label themselves.
As to MRA, I didn't bring that up. I was accused of being an MRA and then some other person that is an MRA said something positive about MRAs... I did not bring up MRAs.
As to current accusations getting out of hand... its dominated the media in various forms for about a year. You apparently don't read the news.
Had the south given up slavery the civil war wouldn't have happened.
I'm not really interested in what seems to me to be a rewriting of history to white wash ugly events in the past.
Everyone has done horrible shit at various points in history. America in general genocided the native americans. That's just a fact. There's no hiding it. Accept it.
The Confederacy is HOPELESSLY tarnished by its association with slavery. It has ZERO hope of redeeming itself at this point. Its done. Abandon the fucking boat.
If you actually want to move things forward in a constructive way in the 21st century... you need to distance... or ideally utterly divorce yourself from pro confederacy rhetoric and form a new argument that isn't going to get you instantly blacklisted.
Please... don't be stubborn. Just see the wisdom and do the smart thing. Because the alternative is the dumb thing... and the dumb thing loses.
I'm beyond tired of you strawmanning me, AmiMoJo. Its gotten fucking old.
The concept here is that someone tried to throw you in a box for 30 years.
What is the punishment for trying to do that? To lock someone away and steal thirty years of their life?
Forget the lying. Forget the purgury and the slander.
Just focus for a moment on what this person ACTUALLY tried to do to you with their lies.
I'm not punishing them for their lies. I'm punishing them for what they tried to do. And that is a well established legal principle. Attempted assault. attempted murder. attempted kidnapping... etc.
So what I'm hitting them with are a couple things at once.
1st... I'm hitting them with the perjury. 2nd... I'm hitting them with the slander etc. BOTH. 3rd... I'm hitting them with the attempt to inflict some kind of harm on someone equivalent to the sentence they were attempting to sustain with their lies.
You add that up and its going to be a lot of lonely years in jail.
That is what I'm hitting them with... not eye for an eye.
That doesn't even make sense. Eye for an eye would mean convicting them of rape. I'm not doing that. I'm acknowledging that they TRIED to do something that would have hurt someone and that was extremely illegal. I then citing them for that offense.
That's all.
No more strawmen out of you. I've got all the rhetorical napalm in the world... your strawmen will get ashed if you even try it. I've done that every single time to them and I will do it every single time going forward. Everyone sees what you're doing and you're getting cited for this with some regularity.
1. So far as I understand the horns are being ground down mostly for chinese penis pills or something. So... printing the horns is pointless.
2.Even if the horns are ornamental, the real deal will fetch a higher price.
3. Clearly there are already established manufactuering methods for making horns that are cheaper and give a better finished product using less expensive manufacturing equipment.
4. The actual way you protect the Rhinos is by giving the people in the area OWNERSHIP of the Rhinos. This has been done in a few other places and the poaching stops if the local people literally own the animal. They don't put it in a cage or something. But it is on their land and they understand that they own it. And in addition to that they are owed a share of any safari money or whatever comes from tourism or scientific whatever in the area. You enter my zone... I have responsibility for X animals there are Y total animals... X is some ratio of Y... when you come to the area for a safari I get a proportional share of that money. Then you have people come out and audit how many of the animals are still alive and on the property. The locals are thus rewarded proportionately for how many of these animals live in their area. This has been done in a few places and it always works. The local governments don't like to do this because they want the money. But then they spend a lot of it on anti poaching police that don't actually work because the locals live with these animals and if they want money they just either go out themselves and kill the animal or get paid to turn a blind eye by some poachers. If the locals are getting paid to keep the animals alive the poaching stops.
This is a dumb project for clueless 1st world idiots that makes them think they're accomplishing something by playing with their toys.
I'd be sorry for being harsh if I weren't even more disgusted at the fucking stupidity.
Come kids... we didn't build these big rich ass countries by being morons. Be practical or we're going to lose it all.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't see anyone outside of the US military using it... and even them using it is a stretch.
Short of that... Nope.
Yes... the BEES do that. Not the frame that holds the hive.
If redditers want to brigade and shame other subreddits that is fine. That's organic. That's free speech.
if you start censoring people... you will split the community... there are many competitors to Reddit just BEGGING for the management of reddit to piss the members off a bit more. Their competitors are waiting. They want nothing more than for Reddit to do it. They're touching themselves with anticipation.
So disagree... Do it. Do it good and hard and don't stop.
Think of the idiots that would like to ban porn links from Google. Seem like a good idea? For the children? What about removing hate speech links from google? I mean, you can find neo nazis or jihadi terrorists on google.
Should google censor their search results?
Of course not. Because there at least you understand that if google did that they'd be less valiable as a search engine. Same thing with reddit. You want to contain as many communities as possible under the same roof. You start kicking out the undesirables and its like filtering the porn links out of google. If google does that and Bing doesn't... what happens? Bing becomes a superior search engine because it isn't censored. And then suddenly what is everyone going to use? Not google.
Google understands this. If reddit doesn't... then they're going to drive the bees out of the hive... and then no more honey.
As to birth rates, those born and socialized into our culture. I believe you're fishing for me to make a racist comment. You'll not find it. I am not racist. I don't care what color people are... My issue is what society you were socialized into.
If those socialized into my culture die out and are replaced by another culture... then my culture dies.
And that is the same culture that gives so much a rat fart about feminism or female liberation. If my society falls... what replaces it will not care about these things to any great extent.
Islam is looking to replace most of Europe and south American Catholicism is looking to replace the US. Neither cultural group takes this political correctness shit seriously... at all.
As to what I find objectionable about south american Catholicism... what do the japanese find objectionable about chinese culture? Would you say it was racist if the Japanese wanted to maintain their culture instead of having it annihilated by chinese culture?
Its the same thing. I'm growing tired of you transparent attempts to find some political correctness violation I've made. Its not intellectually meaningful.
As to what must be done... we must stop using gender relations and family relations as political weapons against each other. We have poisoned the field that grows our grain with the rotting bodies of past battles.
The fields stink with the rotting dead of a thousand skirmishes. It must stop. Certain things must be left alone. Using gender relations as a political weapon for short term political advantage is coming at the price of poisoning gender relations in general which damages our ability to sustain ourselves as a society at all.
The only demographics that are doing okay in this are the ones that utterly ignore the discussion.
The religious groups are breeding. And the various foreign cultures that immigrate and don't take the gender discussion seriously are breeding.
Everyone else is not. The facts are self evident in the statistics. We are in the middle of a hegemony wide population crash. The whole first world is not reproducing. Countries with tight immigration have rapidly declining populations and countries with permissive immigration are getting subsumed.
As to Thebes, the issue was the low population growth rate of Sparta. They were just barely able to meet population replacement rates which is unacceptable in a warrior culture that suffers attrition from battles.
What happened in those battles is that you'd form a battle line... a shield wall. And on the right you'd have your newbs and on the left you'd have your veterans... or it was the other way around. I forget. But there was a convention.
The idea was that the worst fighters of either side would fight the best fighters of the opposing side. This would cause the battle line to WHEEL as the better fighters on both sides chewed into the newbies.
Nearly all deaths were suffered from inexperienced fighters not just because they were inexperienced but because they were fighting people completely out of their skill class.
Thebes decided to do something different. They put their best fighters against the best fighters of Sparta and their shitty fighters against the shitty fighters from Sparta.
They also sent about 10 times as may people to the fight as Sparta.
The Spartans were better... they gave better than they got. But they were out numbered and their best fighters were fighting the best Thebes had to offer. Thebes was not as good... but by putting the best against the best... the Thebans didn't break. It was common for one side at a certain point to run away. Well... the Veterans weren't running away. And they were keeping the Spartan elite busy.
The result was that the Spartan army was basically wiped out to the last man.
And the Spartan's couldn't recover. The Thebans invaded their territory and freed the slaves the Spartans used to do everything in their society. Sparta was very much a slave culture. Slaves farmed, cooked, cleaned, built things... everything but fight and rule.
Well... the cream of the Spartan elite destroyed and their slaves freed and gone... Sparta never recovered.
Had Sparta had greater numbers... everything would have been different.
Why one society has numbers and another doesn't doesn't really matter to me. You just need to have them.
If you don't have the numbers you're going to have problems that aren't going to be solved by wealth or technology or skill. Look at the Spartans... they could kill their enemies at horrifying ratios in most cases. Impossibly small numbers of Spartans could kill much larger forces. But it wasn't enough.
They were crushed by farmers with little more than weight of numbers.
No. I validated my position. Your snarky comments are not a rebuttal. You're just showing that you're stubborn... which is not a good quality.
Censoring people undermine's reddit though.
Its like removing all the porn links from google. You only think you're doing something that won't horribly backfire if you don't understand the business you're in.
As the man said "The internet intepretes censorship as DAMAGE and routes around it." You can't censor people on the internet.
And if you turn your site into a corporate friendly disneyland then many of the content creators will leave, you'll give a niche for competitors to exploit, and the viewers that like that content will leave with them.
Think of Reddit like a bee hive. The content creators like bees. And the 99 percent of users that don't actually contribute anything as the Honey.
The problem with bees is that they sting. So somewhere along the way they said "wouldn't it be cool if we could get rid of the bees and just keep the hive and the honey!"... well... sure. But then you'd just have a box of honey. It doesn't work that way though.
The bees make the honey. And the hive is only as good as it makes the bees happy and productive. Fuck with the bees and you get no honey.
That is no where a requirement of any western code of law so much as a tendency.
What is more, you are ignoring that what is "western" law extends back in time quite a bit farther than you appear to be aware. Consider the Romans for example. A quite valid citation as a lot of modern western law is based on Roman legal concepts.
And while i don't hold them as having the best legal system for a lot of reasons, they were not a stupid people.
And you can't get any more Western than the WESTERN Roman empire.
Oh I know.
I am a great fan of Diogenes... some would say the father of western philosophy. And... his antics were largely involved with dealing with societies that had been taken over by such people.
The Sophists... or in English "The Wise"... they ruled the thoughts and thinking and discussions of their day. And it took the Cynics and the Stoics to break them.
From the Cynics we learn true introspection. Real consideration. Real thought. And from the Stoics we have gotten things like Science... true clear reason.
But the war of the mind is never over. The sophists were never completely destroyed and they thrive quite comfortably in politics, certain portions of academia, a fair portion of the legal profession, etc.
It is the cynic that stands naked before the man in silks, titles, and gold bangles... and says "you're a liar and you know you're a liar"
And it is the stoic that stands before mystics, the moralists, the holy men, and says "not only are you not holy or divine but you're also an idiot."
These are the intellectual traditions I value. I know the struggle will never end.
But the Sophists are parasites. They breed, they infect, they corrupt... but they do not strengthen or improve things. They drain the strength out of everything they touch.
And eventually their corruption destroys anyone stupid enough to support them. We see this throughout the western world.
Look at all the communities... poor communities... promised success... promised jobs... promised education... and that they were promised 30 or 50 years ago... and in that time they've only grown poorer, jobs have become scarcer, education standards have slipped farther and farther, crime has gotten out of control...
You can spot the parasites without even having to pay much attention but looking for the rot rather than the people spreading it. Then you just follow the corruption inward.
No.
We've had past events of increased wealth that didn't correspond to falling birth rates... same thing for medicine etc.
Female education is somewhat linked... anything that upsets the gender status quo can effect that.
The Spartans had a similar issue... they are known for having a very liberal attitude towards female equality... their society ultimately was crushed by larger population of Thebes. The Spartans are known for being quite excellent soldiers. The Thebes are less well known but their stock and trade was agriculture. Farmers. The Spartans came demanding tribute. And the response from Thebes was basically just to swam the Spartans and destroyed them.
Appreciate, I am a 21st century western man. I believe in female equality as much as anyone else in my society. However, I am also gifted and cursed with an ability and a need to see beyond myself and to see things in a wider perspective.
The problem is that whatever your moral beliefs there are imperatives. Certain things MUST happen. And if they don't... the society dies.
So long as the birth rates are reasonable, we can maintain the status quo. If they do not improve however... the society will collapse or get supplanted through immigration... and whatever either of us believes will be irrelevant because we'll be dead and there will be no one to carry on after us.
Think. You are arguing with the Sun, the Moon, waters, and the winds.
These things don't care what you believe. We are all insects under the heavens. If we do not improve the birth rate our society dies and other cultures will absorb our territory, our technology, and rewrite our history.
Islam for example appears to be well positioned to inherent everything we've built. You are I am sure quite aware of the values of Islam regarding women? That is the very likely future for most of europe at this point.
For the US... we're more likely to adopt a south American Catholic perspective... also not especially friendly to your views or mine.
This rift between our camps is destroying our society... it is time to stop being petty children... and take some responsibility for what must happen.
As to your sad attempt to introduce socialism as the solution... it isn't working in Sweden. For all your subsidies, you're not improving the situation.
Why is that? Because your subsidies are all about supporting SINGLE mothers. Unattached women don't want to have children in the first place. That isn't an ideal situation to sit there on government welfare raising your child in a single parent household.
No amount of subsidies is going to resolve that situation.
The homes that produce replacement levels of well adjusted children that go to school and attain something in their lives are not the families you seem to want to be the future. That's just a fact. Cross reference the prison population with singe parent house holds. You'll find that the overwhelming majority of the prison population comes from such house holds.
Cross reference kids that don't graduate high school with single parent house holds. Again the overwhelming majority... etc.
You're breeding failure. We don't just need numbers or the immigration would be able to deal with it. We need socialized upwardly mobile adults. And by socialized, I mean socialized into our society. Not just any random jackass from anywhere in the world. That isn't going to be helpful.
Get the fuck out of your mental box... and think outside of it for a moment. Try. Just TRY to think outside that box.
as to the equviliency of sentences... If you serve a lower sentence for attempted murder than successful murder, then so be it. Simply cite the person for that and have them serve the time. However this is not simply perjury or lying or slander. This is an attempted assault on someone else.
if you can prove they did that in court with intent to harm someone, then they should be held accountable for that attempted harm, the subversion of the court, and the perjury.
If you're okay with that then we are in agreement.
As to the difficulty of proving rape, that is not an argument for lowing the burden of evidence. That simply notes that the crime is subjective and evidence is difficult to come by.
Historically there were different ways of dealing with this problem.
100 years ago in the US, it was understood that a young lady was not to be alone with a young man. And if she were so by her own consent then that was largely taken as consent should the issue come to trial and there not be evidence of a struggle.
For this reason if a young woman was to be with a young man, she would either have that meeting happen in a public place or do so with friends that could validate her story if something happened.
The problem you're having now is that young women are spending time alone with young men and there is no presumption of sexual intimacy in that. Which historically there would be.
The old rules whatever you might think of them, dealt with the problem. Islam of course has its own solution which is typically useless... the whole X numbers of male witnesses or whatever which is a stupid rule.
In the West, the old rule we used to have was that young ladies did not spend time ALONE with young men that they were not intent on a sexual relationship with in the first place.
Now, unless you're willing to bring back rules like that, the problem you're going to run into here is that you're trying to prove things that you don't have the evidence to actually prove.
And the burden of proof is on the accuser.
So you sort it out. How do you want to move forward here? I'm open to any solution you want to propose. But if your solution is reversing basic legal precedent and having the accused bear the burden of proof... I don't see why that is a good idea.
You'd create an atmosphere of fear where sociopathic women could dominate men simply by making specious rape claims.
My primary problem with that is not the injustice of it. As I said to other people, I am not an MRA. My issue is not male rights. My issue is rather that that atmosphere of fear further poisons male/female relations which will depress the birth rate further... and cause the sexes to have less social contact than they already do.
The problem I have with so many of these ideas is that they're unaware of the unintended consequences or the scope of the issue in which they're operating. If your intention is to make rape either a less common crime than it is... and it is a generally uncommon crime when compared to other types of crime or the population in general. But if you want to make it less common still... and you want women to feel comfortable to make the claim... etc.
Certain proactive steps need to be take on the part of women and those that educate women so that they deal with this situation in a more responsible and productive manner.
The current methods clearly are creating confusion more than anything. The whole "teach men not to rape" campaign was comically naive.
So you tell me... how do you want to deal with this?
Forget what other people in the thread said. I'm not interested in people brigading to give false legitimacy to a point simply because two or three people agree with something on a given forum against one. That's no indication of political popularity or the inherent wisdom of the argument.
Just on your own two feet... tell me what you agree with, disagree with, and how you would address the problem in so far as you see one?
No you didn't. You quoted me and then said that constituted all the proof required. What I said was never in dispute.
You have not actually made an argument here.
Lets say we were in a court case... would you simply be expected to cite something and then rest your case? You think you're going to prove anything that way? Obviously not.
So why don't you ACTUALLY make a real argument. I'm waiting.
Why don't you talk to someone? I found out how fast coral can grow. It can double every month.
Now its your move.
you think you're going to 3d print the bone, dried flesh, and dried blood?
Okay. good luck with that.
I am not. If you have a case to make, then make it.
the intent to harm someone is the crime. Not the means.
Not really. I'm not the sort of person that obsesses about the tools used to do a thing. I don't care about guns for example because I don't think guns cause crime. I think they are TOOLS used by criminals.
In this case, we're talking about lies being used as tools. But I don't care about the lies themselves. I care about the intent behind them. If your intention is to lock someone away for 30 years... I don't really care what tool you wanted to use to do that. A roll of duct tape and a shotgun against the head... or a lie. The intent is the crime not the tool.
As to a lie hurting me... I've rarely been personally hurt by lies actually. I'm very good at not giving dishonest people leverage over me. It has happened to friends and family though. Only so much you can do.
As to bad experiences... what makes a lie harmful is the harm the lie causes. There is nothing special about lies. It is just a tool. A means to an end.
What hurts is the intent. If someone lies to spare my feelings or help me that doesn't hurt.
If someone lies to hurt me.. THAT hurts because they had the intent to hurt me. Do you understand?
The lie is just a means... like this pencil:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
The meaning is the intent.
Every culture on earth has unforgivable sins in its past.
The mark of society is not being without sin for we are all sinners.
The mark of a society is what it builds and what it does in the world.
You sit in front of a computer with an Intel or AMD processor... using windows or macos or linux... running a browser likely written in the US... firefox or chrome or something.
And you sign into a US tech message board and tell me American culture is irredeemable?
We built the modern world, insect. If you don't appreciate what we've done then do my a favor and try to live a week without anything we invented for provided for you.
Literally HALF of all the inventions in the last 120 or so years have all been patented by Americans.
You say we are irredeemable? Who is better?
Cite a nation and I'll thumb through the histories to find their sins. And keep in mind that the sins of a nation are relative to its power. tiny countries with no power are not going to genocide continents because they can't... even if they want to.
What country are you from, little flea? Cite your nation of origin. I will cite your sins and then by your own logic you'll have to admit your culture is unsalvagable.
Or admit you're an illogical lackwitted hypocrite.
Which of course... is merely a matter of time since that is a forgone conclusion. Your argument is a trite one. I've seen it many times and it always hides the same bitterness born of indoctrination and bitterness. You are pitiable. But please... answer my questions so you know what I say for the truth it is.
That's fine... you want equality before the law... I think that's fine in theory but it isn't my primary requirement. If one sex or the other didn't have equality but gender relations were stable and both genders were doing their jobs... I would take that as better than if there were equality but the relationship were poisoned.
As to populations... We're dealing with something that moves over decades. Most people can't deal with things that move more slowly than a few years at most. To follow the patterns of generations you must see things in terms of generations... in blocks of time about 30 years each.
Its already very bad... and its getting worse. We are running out of time. The only thing keeping us going at this point is immigration. And that is a stop gap. It won't help us in the long run at this rate. If we can increase our own population replacement a bit and slow the immigration a bit... then it will be fine. The internal population replacement rate doesn't have to be 100 percent. But it can't be 50 percent. That's too low.
As to me sounding like something... This is more pathetic ad hominem on your part. If you're personally unable to have an honest discussion without devolving immediately to identity politics then you're incompetent to have this discussion - period. Your brand of rhetoric has grown tiresome and I think you're even starting to realize that I am far from alone in having no patience for it.
Understand me. If you want to have a real discussion. I am here. if you want to play identity politics games.. I will blow through your argument like a freight train through a paper mache float parade.
The ad hominems are useless. You can't use them against me. And if that's all you've got... you'll have nothing. And I will be utterly without mercy in ripping your argument apart.
Last chance. Make an argument.
I am not an MRA. I explained that above.
Even if I were an MRA, and I am not, but even if I were, it would not give you the ability to invalidate my position.
Feminists and MRAs are two sides of the same coin. The one judging the other is laughable. I represent neither. If can't grasp that there are view points out side of your cartoonish dichotomies then you've got no hope of sustaining an argument against anyone with a mature position.
How long do you think it will take before the buyers start insisting that something extra be attached to the horn?... like part of the skull? Maybe a little dried flesh and some blood?
In a market floodeded with fakes, the poachers will have an incentive to demonstrate they have the real thing.
I am pulling fool proof ways to show you have a REAL horn out of my ass. Your master plan is not as clever as you think it is.
Its not a question of the planet. Most of the planet isn't feminists is it?
And what survives of our culture and our civilization if we all die out and are replaced by people from where ever?
If we could assimilate them as fast as they were coming then... maybe. But we can't. And even the systems in our society that were designed to do just that have been sabotaged by the whole multiculturalism movement that basically says it is discriminatory to expect people that immigrate to your country to adopt your culture. Never mind that every other country on earth has that as core expectation of anyone that immigrates.
The western world DOES have a huge under population issue. Italy is basically dying out and it is not alone. Replacing everyone in europe with North Africans and people from the middle east means France is GONE. Sweden is GONE. Italy is GONE. etc. You either have a core majority in each of those countries that can at least sustain replacement or they're all gone.
And Japan is going through a similar problem. Their population is crashing. Their are villages that are ghost towns all over the place. Don't be fooled by the people living in increasingly tiny apartments in Tokyo. If you squeeze the whole population into a couple cities you'll have a shadow of the population that they had when it was spread out.
This is an issue throughout the Western Hegemony. Our entire super civilization... the whole first world is doing this to itself right now. And it is not sustainable.
Good luck with that. If you really think they can't tell then I've got a bridge to sell you.
As to no one being without sin... I didn't say I was without sin, you trite little punk. Your whole philosophy is something I could have red off the back of a box of crackerjacks.
Either step up your game... or who can really take this mickey mouse shit seriously?
I am well aware of my biases sport. But the great civilizations of history were not built by people just looking after their own interests.
George Washington could have been king. He chose to be a term limited president. Your notions of the limitations of the human mind and soul are childishly simplistic.
Going over your next quote where you give me another crackerjack response... you sound like this guy:
https://youtu.be/b5I94bT23cQ?t...
This this is sad.
As to grandfatherly views... yes... the wording of it is not old timey and the profanity is likely making you think you have a point. But you don't... because another way of saying what I said is this:
"Life isn't fair. We all have our own burdens and we all have our own problems. We all have to make the best of the situation and muddle through as best we can."
How does that strike you? Same fucking concept which you'd know if you didn't have your head completely up your own ass.
As to marxism, it is related to modern feminism... the brain trust of the modern academic feminist movement is entirely marxist feminists... self described. I don't even have to label them that. That is how they label themselves.
As to MRA, I didn't bring that up. I was accused of being an MRA and then some other person that is an MRA said something positive about MRAs... I did not bring up MRAs.
As to current accusations getting out of hand... its dominated the media in various forms for about a year. You apparently don't read the news.
Had the south given up slavery the civil war wouldn't have happened.
I'm not really interested in what seems to me to be a rewriting of history to white wash ugly events in the past.
Everyone has done horrible shit at various points in history. America in general genocided the native americans. That's just a fact. There's no hiding it. Accept it.
The Confederacy is HOPELESSLY tarnished by its association with slavery. It has ZERO hope of redeeming itself at this point. Its done. Abandon the fucking boat.
If you actually want to move things forward in a constructive way in the 21st century... you need to distance... or ideally utterly divorce yourself from pro confederacy rhetoric and form a new argument that isn't going to get you instantly blacklisted.
Please... don't be stubborn. Just see the wisdom and do the smart thing. Because the alternative is the dumb thing... and the dumb thing loses.
Its not an eye for an eye.
I'm beyond tired of you strawmanning me, AmiMoJo. Its gotten fucking old.
The concept here is that someone tried to throw you in a box for 30 years.
What is the punishment for trying to do that? To lock someone away and steal thirty years of their life?
Forget the lying. Forget the purgury and the slander.
Just focus for a moment on what this person ACTUALLY tried to do to you with their lies.
I'm not punishing them for their lies. I'm punishing them for what they tried to do. And that is a well established legal principle. Attempted assault. attempted murder. attempted kidnapping... etc.
So what I'm hitting them with are a couple things at once.
1st... I'm hitting them with the perjury.
2nd... I'm hitting them with the slander etc. BOTH.
3rd... I'm hitting them with the attempt to inflict some kind of harm on someone equivalent to the sentence they were attempting to sustain with their lies.
You add that up and its going to be a lot of lonely years in jail.
That is what I'm hitting them with... not eye for an eye.
That doesn't even make sense. Eye for an eye would mean convicting them of rape. I'm not doing that. I'm acknowledging that they TRIED to do something that would have hurt someone and that was extremely illegal. I then citing them for that offense.
That's all.
No more strawmen out of you. I've got all the rhetorical napalm in the world... your strawmen will get ashed if you even try it. I've done that every single time to them and I will do it every single time going forward. Everyone sees what you're doing and you're getting cited for this with some regularity.
Stop it.
1. So far as I understand the horns are being ground down mostly for chinese penis pills or something. So... printing the horns is pointless.
2.Even if the horns are ornamental, the real deal will fetch a higher price.
3. Clearly there are already established manufactuering methods for making horns that are cheaper and give a better finished product using less expensive manufacturing equipment.
4. The actual way you protect the Rhinos is by giving the people in the area OWNERSHIP of the Rhinos. This has been done in a few other places and the poaching stops if the local people literally own the animal. They don't put it in a cage or something. But it is on their land and they understand that they own it. And in addition to that they are owed a share of any safari money or whatever comes from tourism or scientific whatever in the area. You enter my zone... I have responsibility for X animals there are Y total animals... X is some ratio of Y... when you come to the area for a safari I get a proportional share of that money. Then you have people come out and audit how many of the animals are still alive and on the property. The locals are thus rewarded proportionately for how many of these animals live in their area. This has been done in a few places and it always works. The local governments don't like to do this because they want the money. But then they spend a lot of it on anti poaching police that don't actually work because the locals live with these animals and if they want money they just either go out themselves and kill the animal or get paid to turn a blind eye by some poachers. If the locals are getting paid to keep the animals alive the poaching stops.
This is a dumb project for clueless 1st world idiots that makes them think they're accomplishing something by playing with their toys.
I'd be sorry for being harsh if I weren't even more disgusted at the fucking stupidity.
Come kids... we didn't build these big rich ass countries by being morons. Be practical or we're going to lose it all.