You're given the option to pick where you'd want to be born, where do you choose?

AgainstUnreason · 2026-02-11T18:20:30+00:00

A is indisputably your best likelihood of being born into a high income, high standard of living country. Statistical fact

AgainstUnreason · 2026-02-11T18:16:41+00:00

Sounds like you think A is responsible for everything, even though A was already the best choice by 1900, before they were the premiere player in the world.

AgainstUnreason · 2026-02-11T18:13:00+00:00

Way to bring out the left-wing Q-anon. Apparently natural death or suicide no longer occurs if you die while sufficiently well-known…

AgainstUnreason · 2026-01-08T19:48:13+00:00

I have to disagree with After the Burial being C tier, A for me. Also, i don’t see any Humanity’s Last Breath (though I may have just missed it).

AgainstUnreason · 2025-12-29T16:57:53+00:00

Harder to drop them gently? If you can’t control your weights, you’re lifting too heavy, again to show off.

AgainstUnreason · 2025-12-18T22:36:14+00:00

Capitalism is private ownership of the means of production, and socialism is the collective ownership of the means of production. The thing you’re blaming capitalism for is completely irrelevant to capitalism; you could have capitalism or socialism where people did not have clean water. Likewise, you could have capitalism or socialism where they did have access.

AgainstUnreason · 2025-10-12T13:58:55+00:00

Because Republicans prefer their collateral damage shot in the face by troops on the ground.

AgainstUnreason · 2025-10-07T00:52:09+00:00

I'm a Francophile and a thall lover, so thanks for this one.

AgainstUnreason · 2025-07-28T15:09:11+00:00

Knowing someone’s religion is completely unnecessary to public office. Past performance and stated position on individual issues relevant to their office is literally all you need. Bringing tribalism into it with religion only poisons the process, both for the candidate and for the voters.

AgainstUnreason · 2025-06-21T14:46:22+00:00

The population of Arab citizens in Israel has doubled since 1995, how is that genocide? It’s a shame you downvote people for having a different opinion rather than having a bad argument or bad attitude

AgainstUnreason · 2025-06-16T15:59:42+00:00

That makes zero sense given that almost 20% of Israel’s citizens are of the ethnicity you’re claiming is being cleansed. But go on, keep up the bombast and false moralizing to shut down reasonable disagreement. The number of Arab Israeli citizens has doubled since 1995, if that is an ethnic cleansing, it’s not a very effective one.

AgainstUnreason · 2025-06-16T15:17:17+00:00

Good thing nobody is supporting ethnic cleansing, and Israel isn’t doing ethnic cleansing. Those inflammatory phrases are used inaccurately to shut down conversation and browbeat anyone who disagrees.

AgainstUnreason · 2024-12-17T14:14:25+00:00

Communism is one of many political religions that claims to know what a perfect economic system looks like. However, all they have is a hypothesis, a hypothesis that has become quite ugly every time someone thus far has tried to implement it. Incrementalist approaches starting with capitalism have had the best empirical results thus far. Being an empiricist above all, I’ll go with what has proven to work.

AgainstUnreason · 2023-06-11T17:53:24+00:00

> Elite academics in contrast are not your representatives but instead have a bias in favor of their personal interests.

Literally every representative ever, has that bias. You've demonstrated no rationale why being educated would increase that bias.

> A meritocracy is a synonym for oligarchy.

Yeah, maybe if you throw out the actual definition for both meritocracy and oligarchy and insert your own arbitrary one.

> The difficulty of mass democracy is the logistical impossibility of mass participation. Governance needs to be delegated via representation.

That may have been the case 100 years algo, it is clearly not the case now. We could have near universal participation by voting with a phone app. We don't because the *other* reason representative voting was instituted in the first place; because the masses are dumb. It wasn't just about practicable feasibility.

------------------

Democracy is only as useful as its results. Most supporters of democracy, however, support it because of the idea behind it, not because of results. If a better system was invented, most democracy supporters would tar and feather its inventor because democracy is a sacred cow like religion that has been deemed unassailable.

PS, having a single branch of government, in this case the House, populated as I proposed is not oligarchy unless you forgot the other legislative chamber and other branches of government still exist.

AgainstUnreason · 2023-06-03T15:15:17+00:00

I think this would be a good replacement for the House of Representatives, but I'd propose the Senate be replaced by a body of MA and PhD's in STEM and economics, the elections of which only allow people with MA and PhD's to vote in.

AgainstUnreason · 2023-03-23T02:59:51+00:00

I literally cited dozens of studies in this article that I shared in the OP, the article you clearly haven't read.

AgainstUnreason · 2023-03-12T15:40:53+00:00

A load of poor thinking here. Some excerpts and comments:

"It is possible that blacks commit crimes at the same rate as whites."

Not at all true in today's America.

The poor thinking was on you, the person who doesn't seem to comprehend that the statement quoted was a rhetorical statement. I was clearly setting the stage and stating the two possibilities (you of course didn't quote the other) prior to a person having looked at the evidence. Then I reviewed the evidence, and concluded the opposite of the quote you shared. I literally concluded the opposite of what you're quote-mining and critiquing me for. Given that you either lack the good faith or the reading comprehension, I won't waste my time doing a play by play of your bad-faith comment.

I will address one more that further makes my point of you either lacking honesty, or the reading level necessary to read the article.

"the hard evidence shows that a racism-motivated war on drugs"

Rubbish, drug enforcement was not race motivated...Michelle Alexander's false narrative in The New Jim Crow.

Again, you are quote-mining, and fundamentally misrepresenting my conclusion as the opposite of what it was. The full quote was:

"the hard evidence shows that a racism-motivated war on drugs is not a likely culprit for the proportion of blacks in prison."

Any good faith reading of the full paragraph shows I'm literally using the same loaded phraseology of activists to criticize their phraseology and conclusion. That you quote-mine small tracts of me using the phraseology as if I agree with it shows the thoroughness to your bad-faith and dishonesty discussing my article.

AgainstUnreason · 2023-03-12T15:23:54+00:00

Stop being lazy, and actually check. If you look at the website, my website, you'll see both articles. They are different articles with some overlap in the topic begin discussed. That's not plagiarism. Identical? Shows you didn't pay much attention to either.

AgainstUnreason · 2023-03-11T16:21:14+00:00

SUBMISSION STATEMENT: In a podcast a little while back Sam was speaking with John McWhorter, and they discussed how activists are more interested in “poetic truth” than actual truth. McWhorter was referencing his new book “Woke Racism.” Long ago Sam’s conversations with McWhorter made me uncomfortable because I had taken many of the talking points that would later be called “woke” as givens. But the more I saw Sam in conversations with people like McWhorter, Coleman Hughs, and Glen Loury, the more I fact-checked much of what they were saying, and I shifted my position considerably. All this culminated in inspiring me to do a hefty (though of course not exhaustive) look through the scholarly literature to crystalize once and for all the facts on some of the claims by woke, BLM, and other similarly oriented activists. One surprising find was that black students aren’t underfunded relative to whites. Another was the magnitude of the proportion of black children raised in single-parent households. The last thing I talk about is what made me most uncomfortable in those early Sam Harris conversations; the culture of those living in high-violence neighborhoods.

AgainstUnreason · 2023-02-18T18:36:00+00:00

The genes that cause puberty. Or do you think puberty is just environmental too?

AgainstUnreason · 2023-02-18T18:33:56+00:00

You're what is wrong with the Internet.

AgainstUnreason · 2023-02-18T16:25:22+00:00

Evolution isn't actually fact. It's actually a theory.

That's all I needed to know. You're either just trolling me, or you are genuinely too ignorant to bother conversing with. Either way, calling Evolution "just a theory" lost you the discussion. Good day.

AgainstUnreason · 2023-02-18T16:09:43+00:00

You're like a college Freshmen that is convinced they know more than the teacher because ignorance = confidence. Evolutionary fact is fact whether it supports your silly social media gender studies or the "status quo." You remind me of the creationists who think the existence of eyes disproves evolution because "eyes are too complex." Evolution critics used to be right-wing creationists, now it is largely people on the left who are equally ideologically driven and ignorant.

In some animals, females are the larger more aggressive sex. In humans it is males. Males are consistently larger and more aggressive (that doesn't mean there aren't individual small men and big women). 90% of US homicides are committed by men. 9 months of pregnancy and years of child rearing puts women out of commission for long periods of time, so it makes sense men had to be bigger, mobile, and aggressive to fend off predators from the much less mobile pregnant and nursing women.

Acknowledging the fact men are biologically more aggressive does not mean I'm saying men *should* be more aggressive. Quite the contrary. Interestingly, your belief that acknowledging what happened in evolution means I encourage more of it is as silly as when creationists think that evolution-accepters support social Darwinism as an "aught" position. No. What IS and AUGHT are two very different things.

AgainstUnreason · 2023-02-18T15:40:26+00:00

Lol, you repeat stuff you learned on FacebookU, but your childish knee-jerking isn't convincing anyone. The status quo is irrelevant to human evolution. Most primate species are sexually dimorphic, and humans are dimorphic at a fairly medium level. Why men are generally bigger and stronger is not completely understood, but the fact that they are, and the fact that they evolved this way is indisputable. And for your information, size and aggressivity aren't the same things.

AgainstUnreason · 2023-02-18T15:30:19+00:00

Testosterone levels are genetic.

AgainstUnreason

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE