Since liberalism is the process of freeing yourself from any and every responsibility as an infringement on your rights and freedoms as a fully liberated individual, its end state can only result in anti-natalism and thus self-destruction
The high fertility of the nobles/high burghers during the Middle Ages/Renaissance is almost certainly what *led* to liberalism, an exploding middle class of people who demanded more representation of their abilities through republics and (very quickly) more direct democracies
Now that liberalism has reached its logical End State, and is no longer interested in reproducing itself, let alone expanding the middle class born from the same age that birthed its beliefs, it makes perfect sense that it's over, ready to be overtaken by some new ideology
High Liberalism isn't the fatalistic end-state of the inevitable accumulation of human knowledge. It was the product of a highly specific time and group of people
If you want to preserve whatever might have been good about it, you must figure out how to undo whatever has led to the masses of people, in the comments to the OP, insisting that waking up at noon, popping a K-pod, with zero responsibilities to anything, is the actual Good Life
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
It was so obvious the media was lying about 1/6 that it was possible to know that Officer Sicknick wasn't actually killed by right-wing lunatics in the very moment the media was reporting it
It took *weeks* before they began to walk back the lie
Or the "Russian collusion" hoax, which a plurality of the public almost certainly still believes is true despite being a mega-Watergate political-media scandal that should have resulted in mass arrests and [unintelligible fedposting]
What do you call it when you have a formerly normal place where violence is suddenly and inexplicably just "happening," and the law is doing nothing to protect that place and its people from that outbreak of violence?
If the government refuses to protect you from violence, it either lacks the power to protect you, or *wants* you to suffer that violence
In either case, a legitimate government no longer exists. By this "combat veteran's" logic, we are now immediately in fedposting territory
An ideology that refuses to protect you from violence, but then displays that it still has the power to prosecute and destroy you for protecting *yourself* from violence, exposes exactly what it is, and what it intends for you
Yes, this is 100% true. Rosenbaum raped multiple young boys.
After being cut loose from a mental facility, he then went to Kenosha, set fire to property, violently threatened bystanders, and [court testimony that can get you banned]
If he hadn't violently threatened + then assaulted [name redacted], it's almost certain no one would have died that night. All deaths stemmed from Rosenbaum
The questions that need to be answered are why was he let out, + why was he not immediately re-arrested for his new crimes
The answers are all indictments of the regime. That's why the regime had to put [name redacted] on trial
The regime continually commits crimes against its own citizens. So when its own citizens resist these crimes, the people must be made to answer for these crimes instead
After some discussion with him, I think the enjoyment of Dune is directly proportional to whether you think Fellowship was the best or the least of the LOTR trilogy
I go Fellowship. Nemets goes Return of the King. There's a clear aesthetic judgment at play here
ROTK is about the Actions of the Decisive Moment, aka the ultimate climax, what this says about its actors and their values and how they acquit themselves, along with the resulting catharsis that is the consequence of all the things that has led up to this moment
When Theoden shows up to the deciding battle of ROTK, and gives his final speech, this is the most powerful singular moment of the trilogy. You can imagine yourself being goaded into battle by his words. That's incredible cinema and storytelling, total buy-in
The deeply ironic thing here is that the Supreme Court decision which asserted the people have a Constitutional right to privacy with specific regards to the choice to make personal medical decisions free of state interference would be... Roe v. Wade
"States restricting your private right to make a personal medical choice? Oh you better *believe* that's unconstitutional. *The* state *stripping* your private right to make a personal medical choice? Oh you better BELIEVE that's constitutional!"
Like I get all the hypocrisy arguments, this is just about raw power etc, but this is just too funny. These people are a joke, they have no moral authority, any time they point to the Constitution and its law is only made in the attempt to undermine it
Dang I liked Dune. I had the feeling Villeneuve was the guy to pull off how big and foreign the universe is but he created one of the most vivid film-worlds I've ever seen
I liked Bladerunner 2049 a fair bit but didn't *love* it. But something about how he presented that world made me think that if anyone could handle Dune it was him
I read several reviews today to take in the consensus and even the most snark- and irony-poisoned critics who wanted to dislike it could only take a few light swings at it
Because the mood somehow *is* just as cyclopean as its visuals. Far outside what they're used to