I’ve gotten the impression that, despite center-left majorities in legislatures, it was common in many mid-century western countries for the center-left to rely on courts in order to bypass conservative resistance in the legislature, because they wouldn’t have been able to implement their agenda otherwise. It wasn’t only the US, which is to say it seems like it was a feature of mid-century liberalism worldwide.

Welcome news: California bans private prisons.

It’s not a bank run, it’s just the lender of last resort providing liquidity because customers withdrew more money from their accounts than expected.

Actually, right of center content brings them lots of viewers even when it's not as violent as Antifa rhetoric.



Well, to be honest, I don't really follow any of them that unrealistically push the boundaries. Of course everyone has heard about Alex Jones and I'm not a fan of his but he's the best example of deplatforming I know of. I have heard of the Milo guy but never paid much attention. As far as people I think that have been treated unfairly my best examples are Steven Crowder whom they've only demonitized and McInnes whom they (YouTube) seems to have let back on. But I do feel that social media publishing is going to have to be addressed legislatively to preserve freedom of speech. If social media publishers don't like it, they are free to close their operations.

Seriously, though, boycotts (over speech) are so dumb. A bunch of people that either would never have bought the product anyway or will continue to do so even though they say they won't actually influencing companies' policies is hilariously dumb.

Violent Nazi organizer Gavin McInnes has been mistreated.

Ok, whatever you say.

I don't agree with that summary but If you feel that is true then we'll just agree to disagree. I wouldn't say I listened to him a lot but more than several times. I don't recall any of the extreme rhetoric and since I find that sort of thing repugnant I think I would remember if I heard it. I've also listened to his responses to allegations and believe what he says. To me he comes across as a comedic commentator anyway and comedy usually has some latitude for offensive comments. Or at least used to. Funny that I decided to login to Twitter for the first time in awhile today and found that SNL fired somebody that hadn't even been on the show yet.

I logged into Twitter because unlike Facebook, I assume, you actually get the content from the entities you follow. I still don't see myself using it much now, full of too much fluff. I only noticed the SNL guy because somebody retweeted something from that guy that was in A Fork in the Tale. I was actually going to ask where people go for general news now. I haven't actually seen a news website that appeals to me but admittedly I haven't looked that much.

Which part, the part where I said you think he was mistreated, or the part where I called him a violent Nazi organizer? Because, um, all three of those things are a matter of record, so if you “disagree” it means you just don’t know what you’re talking about and are too lazy to look him up.

Well your hero, the violent Nazi Gavin McInnes, says that justified violence feels great, and that his social club goes out looking for faces to beat in. So I don’t really see why you’d have a problem with violent rhetoric at all. Sounds like you quite like it.

Perhaps it’s not the violence of antifa that you have a problem with, but the fact that they oppose the people you idolize and the policies that you secretly want?

I've "looked him up" but out of context partial quotes aren't particularly convincing compared to just listening to him especially considering his comedic demeanor but, whatever.

I'm already hearing people complain that it is a secret bailout I'm hoping some juicy conspiracies will come from it.

Well it’s been rebranded since the 1930s, but central banks papering over the moral hazard of fractional reserve on demand deposits has always been a bail-out, but not a secret one.

yeah people used to say the same thing about hitler.

How can Gavin McInnes possibly be a nazi, he makes so many insightful and hilarious jokes about how women belong in the kitchen, arabs are an inferior race, and how the holocaust didn't happen (but Jewish people did cause the holodomor). How could he possibly be a nazi when I laugh at and agree with so many of the things he says???

I highly doubt he doesn't believe in the Holocaust but I would be surprised if he hasn't joked about islamists and progressives that do believe or demean that.

Here are some more quotes from your hero to low-key agree with

https://www.canadalandshow.com/rebel-media-star-gavin-mcinnes-has-theories-on-jews/

“Antisemitism doesn’t really exist, it is actually Jews who hate white people for their genetic purity”, while smirking. Indeed, a hilarious joke, and not representative of a position he sincerely believes in and has probably successfully convinced you is true.

I'd rather watch the original content. You wouldn't happen to have a link would you?

I'm sure a lot of those quotes will be a lot more palatable with his comedic delivery or in, y'know, the proper context.

Ironic antisemitism is the safest way to express antisemitic views. Any time you're questioned, just back off and claim irony.

Which is why Sarah Silverman should have been put in jail long, long ago...

who who whoa just because someone has a different political opinion than you they belong in a cage? Why don't you just use logic and reason and debate them.

Because I said all ironic antisemitism is actually antisemitism, right?

OK, fair point.

I'm sure Gavin Mcinnes only has the best of intentions.

Hey, I'm sure some people even found Bill Cosby controversial when he started to become popular

Hahaha

what about ironic anti-antisemitism?

more into anti-ironic semitism, myself

grandpa. I’m non-binary

Internet’s just a big performance art piece whose meaning is that words (especially passionate and moralizing words) don’t mean anything?

Also anything wookie06 posts for some reason.

I see what you did there.

https://gizmodo.com/google-says-its-achieved-quantum-supremacy-a-world-fir-1838299829

If all possible universes are randomly generated, then aren't all possible languages also randomly generated? If so, according to this clown, some "text will pop up" and tell me that I'm in a simulation. But then, a.) what language will the text be in, and b.) what on earth is the purpose of the text if I can't understand it? Or do I have a separate brain that can understand this alternative language, which is currently disabled, but can interpret this alien language???

Wow thats what you latched on to there huh?

Unfortunately yes.

For what it's worth, I think the most likely scenario is that the universe itself is simulating the laws of physics.

nice

Never try to reason with 'simulation' cranks. It's people who take a thought experiment and try to make it real, and it's all a big waste of time.




What is even gained from making this claim? What distinction is being made here?

“If it takes 10,000 years for a supercomputer to verify that a quantum computer got the right answer” except all problems in NP are polynomial time verifiable, so unless they went out of their way to choose a problem that isn’t, this shouldn’t be true.

If you order all humans by date of birth, past and future, I am most likely to be the middle human. Therefore, because of population growth, humans will be extinct soon.

:science: