It's also why it's all so authoritarian. Much as the European monarchies crushed opposition, you've got the emergence of a stable elite who want a form of distributing status and rewards in society.

One corollary. You might think on this chat you're "left-wing" or "right-wing." But I'd actually wager everyone here is more-or-less the same side.

Generally anti-social justice and identarian orientation. Strongly free speech. Against the notion that an organization like the education system should be the sole distributor of status.

We are the same side on a lot of things but I expect there are many differences policy-wise.

Welcome to political coalitions.

Want to know why so often congress gets hung? Well, now you know.

This also is partially why small 3rd parties tend to stay small. They get caught up in purity contests and never branch out to where they have to deal with policy differences.

Also, one quick note. This probably sounds silly and nonsensical (a small set of institutions deciding your place in society, for example). But if you look at it, that's the norm. Most classical civilizations and civilizations pre-enlightenment had strong hierarchies reinforced by some kind of sorting institution and ideology. And they tended to last.

Here's the thing, @pratel : You can either be accused of not being principled and just going along with the party, in which case you're just a party stooge, OR, you can think for yourself and ask for yourself and then get accused of being a traitor or selfish or whatever. You can't win with politics I find.

Pretty much.

My point is that at least recognize when there is a fight to win and know the fight is worth picking.

Alot of libertarian/classic liberals I find seem to think that the fights worth picking are among each other over minutiae of doctrine. While they lose all the major fights in the real world and can't figure out why they get censored/fired/silenced/harrassed/un-elected/etc.

I've come to the stance that it's better to go along 50% of the time to get 50% of what you want, than get into a pointless purity spiral and lose it all.
But that means I might not necessarily like the 50% I don't choose.

easier to fix 50% later than continue to battle 100%

Basically the sentiments of those who signed the Constitution

What I find is that those who complain most about identiarianism and groupthink and tribalism tend to be the ones most guilty of it, inasmuch as they are the first to start kicking out people or ideas they don't approve of. It seems to be a plague of modern thinking, people don't know how to make allies except over that which they oppose. So they don't work constructively, they just think about what they want to eliminate. (Whcih is the entire career of a Sargon or a Jimmy Metokur, for example).

If you're smart, you start identifying not the things you DISAGREE with, but rather, the things you agree on, the things you can live with. Most people can't do that anymore it seems.

I agree there Max- too many people think labels come before intent, which is a big thing I've tried to talk to my friends about. A lot of my friends agree on general topics and values, e.g. a desire for better healthcare, but disagree on how we can achieve it, e.g. private or public. They concentrate more on the fact they have different ways of thinking rather than the fact they have the same goal, and if they worked constructively maybe they'd find an answer they could agree on

What it requires you to do is prioritize the things you DO want, rather than simply make a long list of the things you DON'T want. Everyone can list things they don't like. It's positive solutions that require you to be constructive, and work with people you may not agree withm.

Yeah, I feel you. People forget we all want improvement, yknow? Which is why dialogue is so important. Well said, man

well said max

Like, even right now is an example. We had disagreements the other day, sure, but we can agree to disagree on some things and move past those disagreements since we prioritise being constructive and the bigger picture

👍

I think this ist he best conspiracy theory t here is: the world does not exist at alL!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CyN8rYdX6g

The fights I find it worth fighting with *anyone* are generally over truth vs. lies

Sure, I'll debate against an unprincipled stand, - one of my core principles is don't advocate for a policy that could be weaponized against you

And I've convinced people against kneejerk reactions with that principle

But I find it incredibly important to fight back against Conservatives when they're pushing bullshit.

And even more to challenge leftists when THEY are pushing bullshit

Question everything, and never stop questioning. Just because something still holds today, doesn't mean it will tomorrow

Max actually brings up an interesting point. And I had an interesting extension. If you can only agree what you hate, the only course of action is to eliminate it. Which might even be why there's been such a turn to censorship.

My complaint to this board is that the tendency is to gripe and whine about identitarianism and then even agree on the alternative ("we're all the same and should just drop all this stupid labeling nonsense"). But no one proposes steps *to actually bring about that end goal.* And it turns into a bunch of pointless disagreements (which alienates people or otherwise kicks them out).

And then there's stuff where there's disagreements, but some sub-agreements ("it would sure be nice if YouTube got replaced by something you couldn't possibly censor, like BitChute") but there's no analogue to MassTagger or something to assist in that goal.

Are funds mismanaged in the US military? As badly as I've been told? I'm not sure I trust the people who told me that it was as bad as they say it is, they didn't source anything

They said apparently they have ridiculous amounts of tanks that they're not doing anything with, and keep building more for no reason, which didn't sound right

They also explained that the way the budget works, they HAVE to spend all of their allocated budget, resulting in wastage since they have leftover money, which sounds a little crazy

Yes and no.

I'm especially sceptical since I called them out on military spending increases, they made it sound super horrible but I asked them if it was more money or a higher percentage and they stopped responding

The US military isn't nearly as corrupt as some (like South Korea) but it does have a good bit of bureaucratic largesse.

Gotcha

The "have to spend all the allocated budget" is a fact in all levels of American government.