UOC (Discord ID: 246370747906260992), page 1
Security Advisory: Links in messages may lead to maliciously operated websites that could track your IP address and reveal your identity, or they may contain harmful files. The DiscordLeaks team does not check links and cannot make any statements about the safety of following these links.
Some ways to protect yourself are:
- Do not open files downloaded from links, and do not run any programs that try to download themselves to your computer.
- Use anonymization measures such as Tor Browser or a VPN.
If you are using the Privacy Badger or other privacy extensions, you may need to whitelist Discord and related domains in order for the images to load.
5,679 total messages. Viewing 250 per page.
Page 1/23 | Next
Do you guys have some kind of policy platform that you're attempting to develop or implement
I mean, is this 100% shitposting, or can I talk about how regulation of electric utilities should work
Hebrews in Egypt is a great story. Not only political and social, but also personal drama.
depends on who you're working for and how you do it. But we broadly deserve our bad reputation ha
another evil profession vaguely implies non-evil professions. But I don't really disagree about employment.
Cool article. I listened to Nespithe yesterday, unrelatedly.
The naturalistic or stoic principle would more reasonably lead you to eat locally / hunt / homestead your own food since you're living more within the natural cycle and in accordance with your biology
taylor swift's only distinction is the dubious honor of exemplifying how modernist degeneracy turns women into vapid whores fixated on ephemeral male attention as a way to pretend to themselves that they have some value or purpose.
do you guys ever get frustrated that FERC won't just fucking say what is or is not an LEO
it's like why have a regulatory state at all if it's going to play hide the ball
wait is the thesis that Beethoven Brahms and other euros wmploying polyrhythm got it from black folk music?
seems like putin should just revive the title of tsar for himself
but a push toward diversity is the outgrowth of a fundamental lack of understanding of how culture/identity and inter-group interactions develop
how to ensure each following generation maintains that truth with vigilance?
finally, an alt-righter with a god damn policy position
It seems like it should be obvious that to get ahead (barring big inheritances, jewish nepotism, etc) you have to do things in a way that other people aren't.
Like not spending all your money on alcohol and car payments, for example
There are plenty of reasons to do it, synergistically. And different measurements of "ahead."
Especially if your professional community or town is small, like mine. Nobody but my wife knows my political thoughtcrimes.
you'll never remove 100 millions. You need policy that creates asymmetrical incentives. For example, offer better tax incentives for people who have kids. People who don't pay taxes will receive no value for tax breaks. People who pay taxes will be incentivized to have kids.
create employment laws that favor natives or make hiring immigrants difficult. then migrants remove themselves
remove the "family" allowances from immigration laws - if you come, that doesn't give your family a free pass in
let them pay for their own removal and count themselves happy to leave
culture war must be fought parallel to this obviously since politics is downstream
I don't think you're wrong. I would be happy with removal if that's the way things went.
Maybe elsewhere. In the US, there will be no removal. It would be the most extreme and unthinkable thing that has happened here. More extreme than Lincoln freeing slaves.
The nation doesn't have the stomach for it. If there is a clash, white america will just put them in jail and prison companies will profit. Their families will be free.
Not but if you imagine them reasonably those preconditions are hundreds of years away. It's not in the DNA of american law. How would we do it? We have to prove the guilt of each person, because they have guaranteed "rights" and it's worse if they are citizens because then we would not remove them we'd just jail them.
We know how to fight an army but we have no tools to fight corruption from within because we pretend everyone is equal and of equal worth
have any of you guys ever read "The Masks of God" by Campbell
i'm in the middle of it right now. Enjoying it a lot. Not directly alt-right or anything but certainly informative
my fiance does medical malpractice litigation and has a lot of really interesting insights into this field
doctors don't know you by name because general practitioners are dying out and the field is fracturing into nothing but specialist doctors who see endless patients
It's partially and indirectly legislative in the US. pan-agency regulations on the field heavily favor the transition to specialist medicine and gigantic health conglomerates over the traditional "town doctor" kind of model. The same is true with law and many other fields as you point out. The impetus has been there for decades - the results are just becoming really clear
he has a good point when he talks about real vs. fake freedom
I don't mean to bump Zizek. I'm just saying that "freedom" can mean different things and sometimes the freedom we get isn't really the freedom we want
Do you guys think 27 is too old to join the military...
Army and Navy are 34/35 so I still have time... I wouldn't be enlisting either. I feel guilty about going through life as a civilian. I feel like I'm missing out on something shitty but ultimately irreplaceable.
Like in high school when you were stuck at a track meet for twelve hours in the heat getting sunburned and shit but you wanted to be there anyway to hang out with your buddies.
Sure. I would agree with your statement. But there is also, for example, the "school choice" illusion. If you are given the choice to send your children to any of 10 shitty schools, what kind of freedom is that? Is it more "free" than having only one, good school to send your children to?
If "freedom" has any purpose, removing the achievability of the purpose makes freedom meaningless.
It is more freeing to people to take choice away from them - bad choices, useless choices, choices they don't want.
I do. We're agreeing. I'm just making the policy argument because I don't trust people to come to the realization on their own
you can parse the word freedom however you want. I'm only talking about it in the colloquial sense of choices available to an individual
but the rightists will argue that More Choices = More Freedom
I've agreed with you this entire time @The Enlightened Shepherd
It's usually in peoples own interest. i limit my own choices because I am unhappy if I face endless meaningless choices
Absolutely. Some clinical research also supports the notion that limited choices and limited resources also result in greater creativity and problem solving ability.
Presentation of choice and presentation of information is a major issue in policy discussions too.
Golden Bough is excellent. Good primer for lots of Joseph Campbell's work. Reading article now.
I read it years ago. Agree that it served as diving board for some Jungian mythopoetic / spiritual pondering
Taubes et al would disagree. I'm not keto forever. I cycle reasonable carbs back in once in a while. But low carb doesn't disagree with me.
a "ketogenic" diet is a diet that is low in carbohydrates to the extend that the body begins producing ketone bodies for energy instead of relying on glucose
There is a lot of argument about it. Paleo and Keto do seem to overlap since I think both would reject a lot of modern food and grains. But I don't think paleo has the same problem keto has with sugar. They are two different philosophies that from a distance look similar
But "keto" refers to a specific metabolic state that Paleo doesn't really consider
That would be a keto-friendly position. They and other low carb dieters argue that the diet should be roughly 70% fat and as little carbs as possible, especially as little refined carbs and sugar as possible.
the argument made by more literate dietary science people is that carbs interrupt the hormonal cycles of insulin and other weight regulation hormones, driving obesity and some bad health.
@Deleted User 57835c2c that's a good point that would need to be answered. But let me ask you this: why do men get bellies but women deposit fat on their hips and ass and tits?
@Deleted User 57835c2c my argument is not that it's calories. My argument is that food intake, among other factors, drives the body's hormonal state, which can result in dietary problems. Saying that "people get fat because they eat more calories than they burn" is true but meaningless. It's like saying "this room got crowded because more people entered than left." Why did that happen?
@Deleted User 57835c2c when you begin to digest carbohydrates your body produces various hormones to effect certain processes like 1) removing sugar from the blood 2) storing excess energy in fat cells 3) telling the brain you are full etc. Those hormonal states can be either optimal for leanness, or not optimal for leanness. Part of that depends on what you eat. There are other factors like trauma depression etc. I can recommend you a book on the subject if you're interested or i can link you research papers but that will take me some time since I'm at work haha.
I'm not arguing that fatties aren't responsible for being fat. It's just a little more complicated
Okay well as a medical doctor, you know better than I do that field specialization means you don't have to know anything about human nutrition lol
my understanding is that calorie restrictive diets are well known to fail at regulating obesity over the mid- and long-terms
but I haven't argued that calories don't matter. My point is just that the thermodynamic view of calories is meaningless
isn't the fourth year of med school all clinical work tho
that's cool. I started college intending to do medicine but ultimately diverted.
Privacy is important but undisturbed focus is what I miss most right now because i am in the middle of raising two naughty puppies
and another outlet (NBC?) reported it was a suicide bomber
guessing muzzies is the probablistically correct guess in these circumstances
No. I don't have a problem with muslims though. I broadly agree with your point about natural selection.
@custer you just gotta remind yourself that everyone in here is a random dude with a socially unpalatable opinion and not get too wrapped up in the distorted internet personalities
Can't pick your family, or the people who share your paranoid underground beliefs 😃
My politics is less friendly. I don't need good ones or bad ones. I don't see the need.
That's a great book. I think probably the first book that made me cry actually
Everyone was angry that Trump said he hoped Comey would see that Flynn is a good guy and drop the probe but I respected that loyalty. Same with his defense of Lewandowski over that Breitbart reportress's assault fib
yeah. they try to slide stuff past people without the rhetorical tools to see the trick.
I deal with the same thing at work all day. it would be funny or interesting if it weren't so sinister
dunno. cultural tradition of rabbinical / hermeneutics text-parsing coupled with a constant feeling of being on the outs?
anyone think anything will come of Kim Dotcoms announcement about Seth Rich today?
here's a question though:
What is the benefit of a delineated and known caste system vs. a "de facto" caste system that functionally exists but isn't written down and enforced legally
Right but do those borders have to be clear and legal
what's the argument for making them true legal boundaries
for example, supreme court upholding disparate impact challenges under the fair housing act
I like my job. but i'm in a specific niche I made a lot of sacrifices to get into
it's a big field. there are greasy areas and fine areas. diversity_is_racism is right about lawyers and leadership/policy. They shouldn't be making decisions.
I didn't sacrifice my soul. I'm doing exactly what I wanted to do and it's really interesting. But I know a lot of people who did.
most lawyers defending child molesters get paid dogshit by the state as public defenders
well arguments about the definition of "law" are kinda esoteric and the picture you linked makes no argument. It just says what does and doesn't count as law. But jurisprudence scholars like Hart or Dworkin would disagree on many points.
But I'm asking what the picture you linked is relevant to?
I just want to know what the picture is relevant to haha. It's a topic I'm interested in.
you're right broadly but you also seem to be somewhere with ridiculously right zoning. and an HOA?
who has been left behind by the left and often says true things about the nature of women or whatever that would get him fired if he didn't own his own business
I admire the extent to which he acts based on principles he claims
not economic principles, generally haha, since he is a dirty owner of capital
Yes. I have no billable hour requirements and I work in a position that I genuinely enjoy. I can work from home, from traveling, or take whatever time off I want
I recognize I'm an exception. I agree with what you guys are saying broadly
no, I sue states and force them to enforce a set of federal and state statutes collectively known as PURPA
I don't need to be different but I am effectively different because everyone around me hates their job and spends their money on fast food and cable tv
I am in a small town for the first time and it's a world of difference
yeah. it feels that way. I have plans to move back to a city in a year or two but I'm trying to slither out of it. after a year of walking to work I can't imagine getting in a car and joining the freeway of ants
it's funny how a long commute --> magnets --> no seratonin
a person I work with has been out of the office for two days at a critical time
which would normally not bother me except that knowing he has asthma really makes his thrice daily smoke breaks look pretty fucking stupid
The only people hurt by my job are the corporate structure of power companies
Man. I could go on about this for days. It all starts with the concept of how power companies make money.
The state sets a price that includes a certain percentage of profit. This gives power companies a perverse incentive to develop unnecessary projects then recoup those costs + profit margins through raised electricity rates.
To answer your question, there is a ton of bureaucracy. De-regulation could solve a lot of that but also presents certain problems.
I think it's unlikely that the grid is developed enough that everyone could have reasonably affordable power on demand with a fully de-regulated grid right now. Maybe in the near future.
From a climate change standpoint, I'm not really qualified to address the question. I am skeptical of climate models. On the balance though, I would prefer a power source with non-deleterious effects on my local environment. I respect nature and think there are good reasons to preserve it.
The problem is more of an economic and political one. Renewable energy is not developed right now to the point that you can simply replace high-capacity baseload generation (coal, natural gas) with renewables and have all the nice things we have now, like all the power we want for cheap whenever we want it. This is true because we haven't solved certain fundamental problems (efficient transport, storage, intermittency).
Nuclear power could solve many of our issues but is politically unpopular.
I deal with the feds once in a while. I worked for a state government previously
who then require the utility companies to buy the power we generate
since we can't sell directly to customers, since the utilities have a monopoly
btw is your avatar the Minas Morgul album cover? that's awesome
Yeah. it's a weird industry. it's really under the hood for most people.
crazy how much it takes to make the light go on when you flick the switch
all music, but people usually say "all music" then mean "not metal and not country'
English lit was not the best choice and not the worst choice. I would say I missed a lot of opportunities in college due to left-wing / modernist brainwashing, but I also avoided major pitfalls thanks to a reasonable upbringing and old school parents
I think I agree. Can you give an example of a dishonesty bothering you?
Is it like r/The_Donald pretending like LEGAL immigrants are great?
the new right is just a smaller version of the dynamic of the old right. At least in the US. It's a coalition. In the old right, the an-caps and the christian fundies have to vote for the same guy, even though they share basically no beliefs. In the new right, dark enlightenment types are yolked to people who want to restore the monarchy or whatever. No two people agree on everything.
traditionalists feel like you're attacking their utopian family ideal I guess
He's saying that the modern "conservative" conception of masculinity in the family context is that of a "provider" role. He makes the money and provides for the material needs of the family.
sure but I'm just summarizing your comments about the role of the male in the family context.
I listen to a lot of black, OSDM, thrash, and power, roughly in that order
Summoning, Spectral Lore, Saor, Ihsahn, Necrophagist, Rotting Christ, Obituary, Testament, Kreator, Whiplash, Twilight Force, Lost Horizon
some proggy stuff like Ephel Duath, Dysrhythmia, Godrian Knot
haven't heard: Absurd, Cadaver, Demigod, Demoncy, Fleshcrawl, Havohej, Ildjarn, Pathologist, Sinister, Varathron
If I'm interpreting the chart wrong lemme know.
I misspoke. I've heard their Walpurgisnacht album, now that I look into it
I recognize the cover art. But it's been a while. I'll relisten. I'm old enough that I have holes in my lists because I used to have to order CDs from label catalogs
my queue right now is Eleven Dragons by Acrimonious -> Grave Ekstasis by Ikrallian Oracle -> Thrash and Destroy by Hirax -> Emperor of Sand by Mastodon -> Jumalten Aika by Moonsorrow
haha okay Varathron after Acrimonious since that one's already playing
I perceive a problem with abortion in the US on the horizon as new medical tech pushes "viability" earlier and earlier until Roe v. Wade is meaningless
@custer there is an alt-right split on the question you asked. Some camps suggest following a writer named Julius' Evola's concept of "riding the tiger" which means just protect yourself and try to enjoy the decline of civilization
Other camps want to try to do something about it, but nobody agrees on what to do.
And everything everyone suggests is really improbably
white identity groups creating rankings among themselves is a waste of time. It's a mirror of the ideological purity tests rampant on the left right now.
It's just a waste of time to say "white people are great, but fuck slavs though" or "fuck irish." They share more interests than they don't.
@The Enlightened Shepherd yeah. That's my understanding. Opposition is pointless and meaningless. It's a storm to be weathered as best one can
MK is right that massive violence is one option. It strikes me as exceptionally unlikely though. At least for the next hundred years or so
@MK maybe. I could see it happening that way. My worry is that the rot will not become clear enough (in the US anyway) in 10 years. Maybe Europe. I'm unknowledgeable about Europe.
initial problem is opportunity costs. individuals fear to speak uncomfy truths from fear of censure. similarly, individuals fear to incite violence because white violence is punished while POC violence is lauded
5,679 total messages. Viewing 250 per page.
Page 1/23 | Next