Form: Argument

  • Richard All cognitively feminine leftists engage in projection because they are

    Richard
    All cognitively feminine leftists engage in projection because they are incapable of prediction of the opposition’s instincts, intuitions, and reasoning, because the left has a short time horizon and the right is always looking at the distant time horizon.
    Feminine empathizing in time and avoidance of responsibility vs masculine systematizing over time and demand for responsibility..

    Reply addressees: @RichardHanania


    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-21 17:38:16 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1859652562343034882

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1859309415448576348

  • The Europe is Poor discourse is due to (a) germany carrying the continent and th

    The Europe is Poor discourse is due to (a) germany carrying the continent and the risk the german economic model going forward, and (b) the failure of europe to mobilize capital without the support of the state in the production of technological production and technological economies. Europe’s two decades behind.

    And Japan is the highest trust society extant today. If you fully account for costs (balance sheet accounting) across the full spectrum of demonstrated human interests, japan is far wealthier than either the USA or Europe with the exception of say, Finland.

    When we finally get to the point where every european VC isn’t asking you how to explain how to move your company to the USA in exchange for a round of funding then europe will have exited the ‘poor’ stage. That said, while the USA has Louisiana and Alabama, they’re still in better condition than greece and slovenia.

    (btw: Hi Samo) 😉

    Reply addressees: @SamoBurja


    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-21 17:35:22 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1859651834077741056

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1859475332388225206

  • Stephen: The cause of revolution is always the same. One can alleviate the press

    Stephen:
    The cause of revolution is always the same.
    One can alleviate the pressure through radical change (The roman reforms, the current american reforms).
    One can alleviate the pressure through incremental change (redistributive policies).
    So, the question is whether we…


    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-19 19:32:16 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1858956477681324408

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1858880768946147517

  • Weak men are one thing, but they’re another when the state is sufficiently large

    Weak men are one thing, but they’re another when the state is sufficiently large and powerful, AND women are enfranchised and vote against men, and the financial sector, media, entertainment, universities and education benefit from conspiring against men in order to profit from women. So I mean, you know, second amendment matters but only when you reach an extreme condition. Otherwise systematically the enemy wins. So weak men might be true but they’re also facing overwhelming opposition unless they vote in large enough numbers or fight in large enough numbers to make a difference.

    Reply addressees: @BillHess78


    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-17 01:17:41 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1857956240036605954

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1857954211175997903

  • If person A’s policies favor a stronger economy, lower debt load, and stronger g

    If person A’s policies favor a stronger economy, lower debt load, and stronger geostrategic security (material consequences), and person B’s policies favor the marxist sequence of equity (equality), diversity (non-homogeneity), lawlessness, homelessness, drug use, immigration, in oder to bring about central management of the economy, then why would anyone choose person B’s policies for any reason other than immaturity and ignorance?

    Reply addressees: @RobTheLandi @RichardDawkins


    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-13 15:38:28 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856723310199091200

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856719773846921725

  • The addition of women to the franchise, the economy, education, and university,

    The addition of women to the franchise, the economy, education, and university, and finally business, marketing, and the state has had the predictable effect (the effect traditionally expected prior to enfranchisement) that they would destroy each system because women are naturally predisposed to risk evasion, responsibility and accountability evasion, conflict evasion, and resort to undermining and disapproval rather than debate and constructive argumentation. Ergo women have destroyed education and policy and are presently destroying norms traditions and economy. After having destroyed the family dating and reproduction. I don’t like this but it’s the pessimistic expression of repeating the problem of adding new classes to the franchise without recognizing that they behave differently, since the difference between call classes is the capacity to bear responsibility for increasingly large numbers and increasingly abstract capital.

    Reply addressees: @Diasporalgargoy


    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-13 02:58:17 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856532004231360513

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856523353084817795

  • What war did we start rather than seek to settle? How do americans live off anyo

    What war did we start rather than seek to settle? How do americans live off anyone else? Explain it. We have, since the end of the second world war, sought to stop the spread of the plague of communism, stop the spread of its reformation in it’s adoption by islamic fundamentalism, continued the program of ending empires of conquest by fostering responsible cooperation between nation states, and done so by baiting people into international market cooperation and free trade that has lifted the world out of poverty. And we have done it at the expense of the american worker. When we try to withdraw from policing world human rights, borders, finance, and free trade, everyone other than the remaining empires begs us not to. No one wants the american order to end. They want us to end ‘woke’, riding on it, and they want us to soften our use of the economic power of the dollar and sanctions to let them ally with the remaining empires when it suits them. Look at europe terrified that they have to carry their own weight. Look at all the countries that talk trash in public but in private say that they will have an economic and political catastrophe without american defense of finance transport trade and international law.

    The reason americans want to stop is that you’re thankless. No more american lives, no more american jobs, no more american technology gifts, no more spent on those who are thankless for our burden.

    So Trump is stopping it. And the truth is, whether you know it or not, the USA will profit the more chaos that results. The more wars that result. The less trade that results. The more military buildup that results. The better off the USA. Because we are energy and trade autarkic, live on a vast island defended by seas, and have a government for whatever faults it has, that defends property so that private sectors can organize witout fear of governmetn intrusion.

    Reply addressees: @NarataStudio @RichardDawkins


    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-13 02:51:42 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856530347355451392

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856523956800352607

  • NO TRUMP IS NOT A RAPIST. (AND “WOMEN SHOULDN’T BE BELIEVED”) Donald Trump has n

    NO TRUMP IS NOT A RAPIST. (AND “WOMEN SHOULDN’T BE BELIEVED”)

    Donald Trump has not been convicted of rape in a criminal court. However, there has been confusion or misrepresentation regarding this topic stemming from various legal proceedings.

    The jury voted for sympathy, not based on criminal evidence.

    “The jury’s decision to find in favor of Carroll for sexual abuse and defamation rather than rape was possibly influenced by the legal definitions they were given. They might have felt her account was convincing for sexual abuse (which includes any non-consensual sexual contact) but not for rape under the narrow legal definition (which requires penile penetration) they were instructed to use.”

    E. Jean Carroll’s Civil Case: In May 2023, a jury in a civil case found Trump liable for sexually abusing and defaming E. Jean Carroll but not liable for rape under New York’s legal definition which requires penile penetration[[24][20][17][15][14][13][8][5][4][3][1][0]].

    Despite the jury’s verdict, Judge Lewis A. Kaplan later clarified that based on the common understanding of the term, Trump’s actions constituted rape, as he was found to have forcibly penetrated Carroll with his fingers[[11][8][5][0]].

    Public Perception and Misinformation:

    The misunderstanding likely arises from:
    Misinterpretation or oversimplification of legal outcomes in civil cases versus criminal convictions.
    Media coverage and social media discussions which might not always distinguish between civil liability for sexual abuse and criminal conviction for rape.
    Statements from some individuals or media outlets that might blur the line between legal definitions and public understanding of sexual assault terms.

    Allegations and Legal Actions: Numerous women have accused Trump of sexual misconduct over the years, but these allegations have not resulted in criminal rape convictions. For instance, Jill Harth accused him of attempted rape, but the lawsuit was settled outside of court[[6][2]]. There have been other allegations, but none have led to a criminal conviction for rape.

    The idea that Trump has been convicted of rape might stem from confusion over the legal terminology used in civil cases, public discourse on social media, and possibly from the political rhetoric surrounding these legal battles.

    Remember, “conviction” refers specifically to a finding of guilt in a criminal case, which has not occurred in relation to rape charges against Trump.

    Reply addressees: @Ineedtime8 @RichardDawkins


    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-13 00:27:35 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856494079242317825

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856492585721721205

  • I won’t really come after you for the femininity of this response but I’ll limit

    I won’t really come after you for the femininity of this response but I’ll limit myself to this: What are the negative traits of feminine cognition and behavior?

    If the difference between the sexes is:
    Feminine Empathizing in time while evading risk and responsibility that causes risk, while using undermining and reputation destruction in defense.
    Masculine systematizing over time while seeking risk and responsibility that comes from bearing risk, while using argument and force in defense.

    Feminine intuition does not scale up and male intuition does not scale down.
    All sex differences are reducible to this difference.

    What are the sex differences in instinct, intuition, cognition and behavior: (Attached)

    https://t.co/hbTYMyC5hl

    Reply addressees: @rebeccavrse @CollinRugg


    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-12 19:58:52 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856426455884017666

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856414465966911703

  • “What was the reasoning that led to opening european and american borders to imm

    –“What was the reasoning that led to opening european and american borders to immigrants?”–

    Answer:
    Economic Exploitation, Political Manipulation, Demographic manipulation, and Ideological Globalism:

    Economic Exploitation:

    Cheap Labor: Rather than addressing labor shortages out of necessity for growth, immigration might have been encouraged to keep wages low and profits high by exploiting immigrants who were often willing to work for less under harsh conditions. This perspective sees immigration policies as a means to keep the workforce compliant and underpaid.

    Depression of Local Wages: Immigrants could also be seen as competitors for jobs, potentially driving down wages for everyone, which benefits employers more than the economy as a whole.

    Political Manipulation:

    Vote-Bank Politics: Political entities might have seen immigrants as future voters who could be swayed by parties or politicians offering them rights or support, thus using immigration as a tool for political gain rather than for humanitarian or economic integration.

    Refugee Policies as Political Statements: Accepting refugees could be interpreted as a way for countries to score political points on the global stage, demonstrating moral superiority or commitment to certain ideological battles, rather than a genuine effort to help those in need.

    Demographic Manipulation:

    Cultural Dilution: From a pessimistic viewpoint, opening borders could be seen as a strategy to dilute or change the cultural, ethnic, or racial makeup of a nation, potentially leading to social tensions or loss of national identity.

    Cultural and Ideological Conflicts:
    Selective Integration: While nations might celebrate being built by immigrants, there’s a darker side where certain groups might not be welcomed as warmly, leading to selective immigration where only those who can quickly assimilate or are from ‘preferred’ backgrounds are encouraged.

    Globalization’s Dark Side:

    Economic Dumping Ground: Countries might open their borders not out of benevolence but because they see an opportunity to offload surplus population from other countries, essentially treating immigration as a way to manage global population distribution without addressing root causes like conflict, poverty, or environmental degradation.

    Neocolonialism: Immigration could also be viewed as a new form of colonialism where labor is imported from less developed countries to serve the economic interests of developed nations, continuing a cycle of dependency and exploitation.

    This view frames immigration policies as potentially self-serving, focusing on the negatives like exploitation, cultural erosion, and political manipulation, rather than the positive aspects of cultural enrichment, economic growth, and humanitarian aid.


    Source date (UTC): 2024-11-12 15:49:34 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1856363716822097920