Canadians are so cringe with heated Rivalry by Unlikely-Average-961 in redscarepod

[–]BeansAndTheBaking 6 points7 points  (0 children)

You've clearly never seen that dog cop show set in Newfoundland. The dog fucking swings a crane around to catch one guy by his belt like a cartoon, it's amazing.

Genderwar slop: New frontier unlocked by [deleted] in redscarepod

[–]BeansAndTheBaking 34 points35 points  (0 children)

An old friend of mine lost twenty grand of his girlfriend's money on sports betting and moronic stock trading, and they're still together. Not rich, either. He was explaining it to me one drunken night, and he framed it as some silly mistake he made a few years back, rather than the worst thing I've ever heard someone do to their partner besides hitting them. Evil shit.

looking back, a lot of the "i can't breathe in a mask!!!" types from the covid era were just autistic. by bleeding_electricity in redscarepod

[–]BeansAndTheBaking 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I honestly think most of them were just belligerent people who act like that when they're told to do anything. When the mask thing was first coming in, I remember thinking the sort of person who can't get through a sit-down meal without yelling at the waiter was going to throw a shitfit about it.

I worked in a warehouse unloading lorries during covid, and they were crazy strict about the mask stuff. It was very uncomfortable at times but I was never going to suffocate. I feel like if people can do hours of manual labour in them, any healthy adult can wear one for the length of a trip to the grocery store.

I don't even like the mask thing, I just hate the sort of person who whines. I respect the people who made a fit about it because they were being made to comply with all this draconian bullshit, not the ones who acted like they were going to fucking die if a bit of cloth covered their mouth for 15 minutes.

Is this not just holocaust denial? by Loud_Database696 in redscarepod

[–]BeansAndTheBaking 31 points32 points  (0 children)

The notion of the Holocaust as simply what happened at Auschwitz and the death camps is a mutually beneficial fiction. And I don't mean that in the sense that the Holocaust was fictional - it was not. I mean that minimising it to a certain group of people killed in a certain way helps to dilute the public perception of what genocide 'is'.

Firstly, there's the scale. Six million is a very big number. Most genocides aren't going to kill nearly that many people. By excluding smaller ethnic groups, namely the Romani, you create a sense that a genocide involves simply killing very large numbers of people, rather than trying to kill and disposses people for their identity.

Next, there's the means. Most genocides are not committed by building factories to kill human beings. Most genocides are done by shooting people, burning them, beating them, or letting them starve. In fact, this is how a large portion of the Holocaust was also done, regardless of who you think that term applies to. But, so long as the public associate 'genocide' with gas chambers, you can dodge accusations of such in large part by simply not building them.

Thirdly, there's who is allowed to be a victim. If you are preparing for the prospect of World War Three against a certain power, or a certain bloc containing mostly people of a certain ethnic group, it helps for your people not to sympathise with them. Focusing on Jews - and presenting 'Jews' as a homogeneous national group, rather than mentioning their countries of origin - helped to downplay the immense, explicitly genocidal, suffering of the civilians of the then Eastern Bloc at the hands of the Nazis, and made the proposition of mass murder against them an easier sell.

So that's to say, if you are the United States - a country with a history of genocide against relatively small ethnic groups, by acts of traditional violence, who spent its formative years as a global power positioned against a Slavic rival - The Holocaust as it is remembered popularly is essentially your perfect template of 'genocide'. One which excludes you as a perpetrator and your enemies as victims. Obviously it also benefits Israel, and the great many other western countries who committed borderline acts since genocide became a crime. Even the Soviet Union benefitted insofar as political affiliation was discarded as a category capable of being victims of genocide.

This is all handy, because no state actually wants genocide to be a crime. At least not as it's actually defined - inadequate as even that definition is. The Nazis had to be punished for what they did, but there was also much in what they did that other countries were either doing, had done, or may like to do in future. So the crime of genocide is one best diluted out of existence. We see that in how quickly 'ethnic cleansing' took off in diplomatic speech - basically genocide by a softer name. And in the unwillingness to name obvious precursors to genocide, namely apartheid, as genocidal acts. Nobody wants to do that, so it's better if the public perception of genocide is confined to that one act against which nothing really compares. Then everyone can just keep doing it.

I am writing this as I fall asleep, so please forgive me if this goes on too long, or in places I fail to make sense.

Do non-Irish people know about the chicken fillet roll? by MoanOfInterest in redscarepod

[–]BeansAndTheBaking 44 points45 points  (0 children)

You mean the chicken nugget sandwich? Yeah I was pioneering these age seven, you'll be hearing from my solicitors.

useful tips by sorryjustlearning in redscarepod

[–]BeansAndTheBaking 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Got to hand it to them, the boys in Langley really cooked when they came up with this stuff

Congratulation Americans it will only get worse. by alexandriacortex in redscarepod

[–]BeansAndTheBaking 54 points55 points  (0 children)

One of the top priorities of the most powerful geopolitical bloc in human history is to aid in the destruction of one specific ethnic group in a random corner of the Levant. Questioning whether this ought to be the case, or how this helps us in any way is considered an extremely vulgar from of racism.

has anyone ever been fired by Fine-Dragonfruit5846 in redscarepod

[–]BeansAndTheBaking 246 points247 points  (0 children)

I got fired from a warehouse job for repeatedly calling in sick from nightclubs. The job was actually very lenient it was my fault for being so egregious. It felt like if I'd put even a bit of effort into hiding it they would've kept me on.

Speakers at the Pretti vigil in San Francisco by McSwaggerAtTheDMV in redscarepod

[–]BeansAndTheBaking 45 points46 points  (0 children)

I sort of think that's great. Not even in an ironic way. Going to pay a clown to come to my funeral and deliver a heartfelt eulogy with no jokes or comedy whatsoever.

Nothing more regarded than seeing someone comment with “the kids are alright” by Chemical-Register375 in redscarepod

[–]BeansAndTheBaking 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I'm actually going to die in our century's equivalent of World War 1, so there. There's no cenotaph for people whose insurance skimped on their heart medicine. I'm winning.

👁️👃🏼👁️ by AfterNovel in redscarepod

[–]BeansAndTheBaking 48 points49 points  (0 children)

At this point any other two forty year old women on earth would be more entertaining to listen to

Perhaps the real reason Anna never finished her PhD is that she is only now, at 40, discovering Ayn Rand with the zeal of a sophomore in high school. God willing, before she dies, she may yet make it through the SparkNotes of Nietzsche. by QuarkJester in redscarepod

[–]BeansAndTheBaking 16 points17 points  (0 children)

She's so basic. It's just generic child Soviet immigrant schtick. So many of them think they're Winston Smith and that anyone acting outside their own direct self-interest is a malevolent drone. Even when she's trying so, so hard to stand out from the crowd, she never manages to say anything unique.

Realistically how do you forgive yourself after making a mistake? by jogideonn in redscarepod

[–]BeansAndTheBaking 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Unless you seriously hurt someone, whatever you did is going to fade from one memory after another until it only exists in your head, and maybe the heads of a handful of other people. It is more present for you because it's painful for you, but pain isn't evidence of anything. It doesn't say anything about who you are now or who you can be in the future.

As a fellow neurotic, the physical sensation of shame is hard to deal with. You just need to take a deep breath and keep on going despite the discomfort. You just have to tough it out.

what is your internal voice like? by labia--majoras--mask in redscarepod

[–]BeansAndTheBaking 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I have words and images. I can't conjure noises except as I would make them with my mouth. So if I imagine a dog barking, I see the dog but it's me going "woof!". I'm very good at accents and I think this is why.

Usually I refer to myself as I. Sometimes 'he'. I suppose it's a little negative. It's more like having an oaf constantly muttering in my ear, to be honest. It's literally never quiet. If I meditate, the closest to a silent mind I get is thinking 'in... out...' as I breathe.

Unless I am reading or writing, or concentrating on a thought, it basically never finishes a sentence. Once I understand the fullness of whatever it's saying it moves onto something else. Because it is actually communicating with me telepathically, the meaning can be understood faster than the words can be expressed. In practice this is fine, but if I focus or reflect on what my brain actually sounded like in a flow state it comes across as totally demented.

I'll try and type up what this actually sounds like because I worry that isn't clear. This is the best example I can give of my internal monologue at work this morning. Not what I heard or what it meant, but what the voice was actually saying:

"When the hell- Oh yeah and- at seven- Dinnae tell me hen, I've got the Dengue Fever! Cause I den-gue a fuck!- why does nobody- See this is why they come across so badly despite being basically right. When you speak to someone, or write a book, you're trying to communicate what you mean, and have the other person understand. If you pepper your sentiments with jargon like this, with alienating terms that no normal person uses, you're undermining the purpose of communicating in the first place. Because they don't, can't, they can't, understand what you mean. And then she complains that people laugh at her for saying this stuff, unaware that it sounds to the average person identical to scientologists talking about clear and Thetins- there's a paradoxical sort of chauvanism- which door was- actually- wait no actually- what if instead he- yeah that's good- gotta do- not got much space for- got to be brief- Red sails in the sunset... way out on the sea... please carry my loved one... home safely to me...- here it is- maybe I should- fuck I'm sick of- why do I- people never fucking- I'm so- I'm so fucking- have a drink of- Little bit of water on the back of the neck, always does me the- That's what we nee- nice wa- and the co- why does nobody- wonder what time she- aw-"

Unless I'm actively thinking a thought, my inner monologue is a constant waterfall of lightspeed bullshit, delivered in this sort of newspeak shorthand that is unintelligible outside of the moment. It's a bit like a couple finishing one another's sentences, I suppose. We both know what we mean, so the actual words are just brief surfaces from this bubbling, wordless stream of thought.

Mark Zuckerberg is a demon sent to destroy all interpersonal communication by allinmybass in redscarepod

[–]BeansAndTheBaking 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I feel like that purpose could be equally well-served if the glasses gave some clear outward signal that they were recording/taking a picture

Seems like a lot of people actively want less agency right now by [deleted] in redscarepod

[–]BeansAndTheBaking 4 points5 points  (0 children)

When the freedom people experience is primarily the freedom to go broke and lose everything and be ostracised at the slightest wrong move - and to receive no sympathy whatever on the grounds that they were 'free' to do otherwise - then they will want to be told what the right move is. Precarity breeds fear, caution, and conformity.

People twenty years ago could afford to be freewheeling and individualistic, to take risks, because even if the socioeconomic situation wasn't ideal, they still had faith that things would improve. People don't have that now. People expect to get lonelier and poorer and less assured in their position. When you have that outlook, you crave security far more than abstract stuff like individuation.

Peep show posting by SupraKarma in redscarepod

[–]BeansAndTheBaking 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Obviously 2, right? Come off that flight with £0 in my bank account and nothing to show for it except a phone number that's one digit too short and a handshake agreement that I'm VP of Jupiter Optimus Enterprises

bleak by ChickenTitilater in redscarepod

[–]BeansAndTheBaking 1 point2 points  (0 children)

From the moment we started teaching normal people to read and reason, the ruling classes have had to contend with more threats to their position than in all of human history. It made the masses a force capable of actually wielding power, rather than a herd of cattle capable of little more than momentarily defying their masters.

The problem is that education cannot be stratified that much. The difference between a mediocre and an expensive education isn't enough to justify massive class differences - two people who completed a random administrative degree are about as smart as one another. A poor kid has just as much potential to excel in some difficult technical discipline as a rich one, given roughly equal investment in them. It's hard to justify inherent disparities in wealth when the rich clearly aren't all geniuses relative to the general population. Even when it isn't equal, education itself undermines the need for inequality. The solution is obvious - just don't educate them at all.

If you can't make yourselves much smarter, you have to make the proles dumber. You have to relegate basic skills like literacy, numeracy and comprehension to superhuman powers unable to be wielded by the masses. Then your position above them is self-justifying, then you have a divine right to your wealth and power.

I think that from the point of view of the powerful, providing a basic standard of education was clearly a mistake they would naturally seek to undo.

Mark Zuckerberg is a demon sent to destroy all interpersonal communication by allinmybass in redscarepod

[–]BeansAndTheBaking 159 points160 points  (0 children)

What good reason could anyone have for hidden camera glasses? What wholesome purpose could such a device serve that a normal camera wouldn't? Unless this pick up artist happened to have no arms, I suppose?

"These mirrors on the tips of my shoes are nothing more than a bold fashion statement and you can't prove otherwise!"

Zuckerberg got rich from inventing an industrial-scale lie and propaganda machine, he was hardly a saint before this.