Dude wtf
As I said before, it's not a trick I want to understand exactly what he's advocating for
I think he is already advocating for things which are destructive and dangerous, but couches it in language like "seize the means of production" to distract from the actual violent impact of the actions
Destroy everything
How’s that for not distracting
Actually, what I propose is not ideological, hence why it's post-Left. It's a metaphysical interpretation of the world. The purpose is to theoretically understand abstract processes. Applications of it doesn't mean it's concerned with political goals
To clarify the argument was because instead of improving his understanding of the topic when I provided new info he dug in on all of his original assumptions, which were fairly nonsensical, then googled to try and "prove" the things he was saying rather than just reading about the topic. So ill-formed argument went on for like a week
well, posting anything encouraging a specific person to do illegal things is illegal i think.
so tacitly encouraging someone to post illegal things is a no-no in my book. but i agree it makes ewiz rhetorically more appealing to gloss over the implications of what he is saying (its okay to burn certain buildings when they meet certain criteria)
I think ewiz is naturally suited for the concrete over the theoretical and most of his issues stem from confusing the two
1 Like
What do you mean?
Everything
Destroy it
All th enominees of worst 2019 posters
Destroy em
Wrath of god no regen allowed
S^n is the set of all possible strategy permutations: an outcome literally doesn't exist in the set. You have to define an outcome space that the function maps to, then provide an ordering on it
He's not actually telling us to do something. We are asking what actions he means to suggest when he says things like "seize the means of production"
When has this happened with you or hbotz?
I don't like when people post glibly non-specific defenses of violence. If you're going to advocate violence say "I think it is justified to burn down and loot all the businesses in Chicago" or whatever
also man i asked this before but why do you want to destroy starbucks? starbucks is a building already carefully constructed to efficiently serve coffee. its okay that you think the coffee profits are going to the wrong people, but destroying the means of coffee production because you dont think its fair just seems bad for everybody. we can turn it into a public coffee building or wall it off for future redistribution or something but you should not physically break things. physically breaking things destroys value.
1 Like
Essentially people talking around an issue but implicitly endorsing it (without facing the actual horror of it) is how genocide happens
maybe its cuz i used to be a huge physicsmathphilo nerd and majored in physics n shit but economists/gametheorists who rationalize capitalism with confbiasy models and heavy assumptions and premises r pretty triggering
ewiz is like who i wouldve been if i didnt burn tf out and wasnt as lazy in the first place
his level of exactingness in definitions appeals to me
i'm less invested in the social/political stuff but it's clear ewiz is still way more well read and hbotz is still like... layperson level on most of that shit
its also clear hbotz/asoul value order and stability way more than ewiz and i'm not sure i buy it's actually for principled reasons (asoul seems to claim so; dont think hbotz necessarily does)
"I would be OK with being gassed, having my skull shattered with rubber bullets, raped - because violence is inexcusable and I know that the legal system will notice the stark contrast of their tactics against my flaccid martyrdom and finally punish the people it's been protecting for years."
This sounds fucked up but it's actually what he's saying.
1 Like