Juice

joined 1 year ago
[–] Juice@midwest.social 2 points 1 day ago

As long as he is alive he can be propped against a podium to say racist, upsetting shit, then Stephen Miller and more clandestine moneyed interests like David Koch and Peter Theil pull the strings of the party and movement. Its probably better for operators heavily invested in Trump if he's less intellectually competent.

[–] Juice@midwest.social 4 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

If you're on the right you think he's a Marxist commie, and don't like commies.

If you're a commie you don't think he's a commie, you think he's full of shit and uses left wing intellectual language to hide that he's an apologist for liberal social democracy, but in a bad way where social democracy is a step toward capitalization and away from revolutionary socialism.

If you're an anarchist probably think he's an avatar for a certain kind of former Soviet bloc intellectualist elitism, and he actively discourages direct action (I've never spoken to an anarchist about him, I might have to ask one.)

Gender critics and feminists don't like him because he's more than a little chauvinistic, and a vocal critic of Judith Butler.

If you're apolitical you think he's annoying and incomprehensible.

I think he appeals to a certain sort of budding or wannabe left intellectual. Someone who doesn't completely understand his work as a decades-long project, probably because they are still discovering it, and the political consequences of that project. Like he says things that are interesting and sort of novel because he's a Hegelian and Hegelian analysis can be full of all kinds of cool insights. When you assemble his arguments together as a body of work though it has a much different character than some of his more interesting points in isolation. But as a moderate Hegelian he neither fits with the right "end of history" Fukuyamist Hegelians or the left Marxist Hegelians, and he is critical of both groups.

I think he understands intellectualism as a social force, and likes to bother different stripes of intellectuals. He's controversial enough to stay relevant, and good at working the media. I think he is very intentional with all this stuff.

But he broke Jordan Peterson when they debated, and got him out of the spotlight for like a year or two and that was pretty funny

[–] Juice@midwest.social 3 points 2 days ago (2 children)

He is not going to leave willingly.

[–] Juice@midwest.social 6 points 2 days ago

Its such a trope in movies and TV shows though. I call it the Khan trope. The narrative makes a huge deal about how unfathomably intelligent a villain is, and then when the villain is finally revealed they're like comically evil with the most superficial and pathetic philosophy. I think its just hard for dumb TV writers (no offense) to write intelligent villains.

To me a much better villain is someone who cares a great deal about something real, and is actually very intelligent and determined, but is just deeply confused about something. People like Tulsi Gabbard or Amy Coney Barret are good examples, they were raised in these weird cults and now they have no understanding of anything outside their narrow view, and have been conditioned to reject anything that contradicts their social beliefs. A lot of people think they are doing good, the people whom they love tell them all the time how proud they are, etc. But because of their intelligence and determination they just are all twisted up in knots inside a house of mirrors that they were forced into before they had the chance to question any of it.

And yeah these people may not be super intelligent, just opportunistic and smart/determined enough and groomed to take power. But it resembles actual intelligence more than "only the strong deserve to survive heh heh heh twirls moustache villainously" that we usually get from this slop.

[–] Juice@midwest.social 3 points 2 days ago

Abusers try to stigmatize sympathy and empathy, because as long as it is a stigma then people won't talk to each other about their own abuse, then the abuser gets away with it. But no matter how strong and powerful an abuser is, even a fairly small number of dedicated, close-knit victims and their supporters can make the abusers lives extremely difficult, if not tip over their power completely.

[–] Juice@midwest.social 3 points 2 days ago

Wow I wonder what will happen to all those people who have been producing wonderful documentaries, education, interviews and children's programming for several years, if not decades? I bet they'll be upset, so much that it might change their views on things somewhat.

Unrelated, but have you heard of these wildly popular social media platforms called tiktok and YouTube where people are able to produce their own programs? Technology sure is is wonderful.

[–] Juice@midwest.social 39 points 2 days ago

The fact that this act is directed toward children is especially telling, and not the least bit surprising

[–] Juice@midwest.social 22 points 3 days ago

Mormons are so funny, I legit feel bad for all the people who have been traumatized by these weirdos, but like these children are called "elders."

They have all these weird rules where premarital sex is totally not permissible, but they be fucking, and then be like "its not sex with a condom on" or of course soaking. Like straight faced "I'm saving myself for marriage," and I'm like "we've had sex 6 times this week, Genevieve."

I was at a party in college and this Mormon dude who always did these awkward, overly complicated jive handshakes that felt really violating, was sitting outside upset and depressed holding a half-empty beer. He was like "its all over I've sacrificed everything I believe in, for what? So I can drink a beer at a party??" It was one beer he wasn't even finished with it. Its like relax dude, I'm like 19 and spiraling into alcoholism I think you'll be okay this one time.

Ive heard so many horror stories, but I've only had good and very funny experiences with Mormons. And none of this even gets into the magic underwear or like you get your own planet in the afterlife.

Idk how people believe in this stuff sober

[–] Juice@midwest.social 8 points 3 days ago (2 children)

I’ve never had a gay guy wake me up too damned early on a Saturday to talk about sucking dick.

Skill issue

[–] Juice@midwest.social 17 points 3 days ago (1 children)

You can always count on the ceos of smaller companies that are owned by larger mega corporations to tell it to ya straight with no bias

[–] Juice@midwest.social 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Well I guess its like $130 usd per month, which would only take 146,730,769 years give or take a few mil to pay off. Chances are he's got about 1/3 of his wealth squirrelled away in the cayman islands or some shit, so lets say a nice round 200,000,000 years to pay it off. My spite says that's not long enough, but it's hell which is supposed to be eternal torment and suffering, so at that point he can be transferred to the level of hell where you are walking through a dark house looking for the bathroom, and you really have to go but you keep smashing your bare toes and shins into furniture , but you never actually find the bathroom

 

view more: next ›