posted on November 23, 2022 07:53 PM by
u/textlossarcade
61
Hard to say, but don’t I sound smart equivocating on this question
about experitise? Also, pretend I took 11,000 words to do so, and my
sources I linked don’t really say what I say they say.
u/dgerard16 pointsat 1669311780.000000
Here’s three examples! The first two are haha that’s ridiculous,
could the third be the one I really like??
Also coin some novel terminology that describes things leftist
academics have already developed terminology for. But twists the
perspective into a centrist (I.e. crypto right wing) viewpoint (the
problems not capitalism, it’s coordination failure in general! Moloch,
etc.).
Basically you have 2 types of people, the thinkies, and the feelies. And the thinkies are eeuw and don't do the feely, which is superior correctly. This is my new thing, Empathionalism. And the conclusion is we should eradicate all the thinkies.
well the important thing is you clearly stated that you came to the conclusion of murdering the outgroup through pure logic from first principles, so anyone who accuses you of irrational prejudice instead of analyzing your reasoning on your terms is just conceding the debate
It is also important, for the survival of the species, to never exclude any ideas forever. You never know when those ideas suddenly become very valuable. Unless they are leftwing ideas which always sucks and 70% of all leftwingers are crazy. E: you esp shouldn't listen to the Bullies at r/Jeerclub. (wait wtf somebody made that joke already (did that person get banned from sneerclub or something. It seems to be a 'I can fix rationalism' person))
Wording this very carefully to avoid drawing negative mod attention.
One of my favorite sub genres on the internet is a rationalist type person trying to first principles their way into a reprehensible position and discovering that the appropriate social response is either shunning or a threat of violence. If someone tries to logic their way into advocating for a fascist overthrow of democracy or a genocide, the correct response is to clearly state that there will be *consequences* for such talk, now kindly shut the fuck up and leave. They always act so shocked and offended, and never seem to realize that the problem is them.
Remember to take an extended detour into an analogy you just made up to make the problem more relatable, and then assert that the characters you invented in your analogy would never behave that way, and then at the end circle back and use the characters from your own analogy as evidence in favor of your argument.
idk I think it's an interesting concept. Coordination failure is definitely an issue, but I don't think that necessarily means that capitalism isn't the problem or a problem. I think the concept goes beyond any sort of economic system or philosophy.
But I'm full of shit. Ive never gotten too deep into his writing.
A lot of his examples of Moloch are capitalism and there is a large body of leftist thought and literature which would be useful for understanding it, but Scott overlooks this because he is libertarian (and likely crypto-fascist and crypto-reactionary as well).
The way I like to describe *Meditations on Moloch* is a guy who is physically incapable of saying "Capitalism Bad" trying to do an anti-Capitalism. There's stuff in there that is sort of interesting, but he ends up in this place that is making a bad version of an argument that it is obvious to everyone but him he's making.
I read it a very long time ago before I realized exactly what kind of web-log I had gotten myself into, and I'm certainly not going to go back and reread it now, but what I took away from it was the rhetorical usefulness of personifying the aimless and purposeless human tendencies that cause so much destruction in the world without even meaning to - so much harm is wrought by huge numbers of ordinary people just following their immediate instincts and incentives without thinking about the big picture, not by evildoers with a specific plan to hurt someone. You could describe capitalism that way but there are plenty of other examples that fit too.
Then it was interesting to see how quickly the fandom switched to identifying certain groups of people as Moloch, defeating the purpose and missing the point.
Moloch was already used as a metaphor for capitalism, among other things, for that matter.
When I'd first heard that Scott used that as a word I'd figured he'd actually read Ginsberg.
Love to republish posts from my widely read blog under my full name and then claim I tried very hard to keep my last name separate from the blog pseudonym and that The NY Times has doxxed me
Here’s three examples! The first two are haha that’s ridiculous, could the third be the one I really like??
Also coin some novel terminology that describes things leftist academics have already developed terminology for. But twists the perspective into a centrist (I.e. crypto right wing) viewpoint (the problems not capitalism, it’s coordination failure in general! Moloch, etc.).
Birds aren’t real