top

dailydogma #psycho #wingnut themotte.org

[Unlimited freedom is a hellish dystopian society. You could say it’s freedom for alcohol companies to target customers by identifying alcoholics by having mobile alcohol trucks setting up outside someone’s house offering the first drink for free at 9 am and ratcheting up temptation. Mobile phones can be like that.]

Okay. Alcoholism is a genetic disease. I would rather they filter themselves out than make fit people live under tyranny. Although I would support keyhole solutions out of charity, I can't stand the parasitism of ruining everything for most people so that a sickly minority gets catered to.

[Young children often don’t have great temptation control. I don’t think having shitty parents means that children should be offered vices at 8 year olds. There is always a temptation between freedom and security.]

Same logic here. Kids with bad parents have parents with bad genes. But they get their genes from their parents. No more taking from beautiful ones to provide protection from selection for the hässlich. I would support keyhole solutions out of noblesse oblige, but everyone showing their identity card to every website so neglectful people don't see a nude body when they are young is not that.

omw_68 #sexist themotte.org

Ultimately, the feminist concept of "objectification" is based on the idea that male desires are illegitimate or unimportant. From the feminist perspective, men are just supposed to serve women without asking for or expecting anything in return. Without having their own independent and legitimate desires.

In other words, the concept of "objectification" is itself rather objectifying.

In any event, "objectification" is like any other feminist concept in that it doesn't stand up to scrutiny. The actual core principles of feminism are (1) more goodies (money, power, status, etc.) for women; and (2) punishment and humiliation for men. Of course, feminists don't like to admit to themselves or others that there's is an ideology of naked selfishness and hate. So they come up with concepts like "objectification" to act as philosophical fig leaves.

wqnm #wingnut themotte.org

Cynically, I think you’re thinking about this all completely wrong, in that you are taking the words of the envious as you call them at face value. Ultimately, for these people, the point is not to take money from really rich people (ostensibly to help the poor), no, that is incidental; the point is to hurt really rich people. They are Marxists, and these are their eternal class enemies. As always, “to help the poor” is the cover story, many couldn’t actually care less about the well being of those they claim to fight for beyond what they offer as a political tool in the realm of realpolitik. This is how democrats in Minnesota can get millions of dollars for “educating underprivileged children”, clearly without giving a rat’s ass whether it was actually used for this purpose.

There is no say-when point in $ where they will be appeased; a well reasoned new tax, a number of 0′s off Elon’s net worth, where they’ll say “oh yeah that’s actually fair, we’re good”. That point is not a dollar value or a percentage, it’s the point where their social media fueled class bloodlust against the capitalist feels quenched; Elon can’t just be a bit less wealthy on paper and that’s it, Elon must suffer in some way. Be brought down a peg; humiliated, if need be. Any amount of money taken that still allows Elon his ability to exist as an influential public figure will not be enough. You’re trying to apply a rational, economic solution to a religious problem. They aren’t “too rich”, they are infidels to Marxism, and must repent or be crushed.

Honestly, Elon and the rest’s best bet would probably be to employ some kind of Br’er Rabbit strategy. I think the amount of humility required to allow the Twitter Marxists to even think they won is beyond them though.