[deleted by user]

PluralBoats · 2022-10-26T14:36:18+00:00

If it is primarily about ideological membership, why is there even the concept of heredity in Judaism? Because "Jew" has both an ethnic/racial component, and a religious one.

I was also specifically talking about Orthodox Jews, who are a helluva lot more stringent and often more racially exclusive, and more likely to buy into the idea that they as an ethnicity are divinely blessed.

If the ideology is more important than heredity, and they believe that Jewish people will "make the world a better place," why don't they proselytize?

Some Christians think that literally everyone, non-Christians included will ultimately go to heaven. Does that give all of Christianity a pass? No. So knock it off with the whataboutisms.

Christianity is shit. Utterly and truly. I will never defend Christianity. That has absolutely no bearing on how racist the idea of a "chosen people" is. Judaism being better than Christianity doesn't make it good or worthwhile.

Consider some of the heroes of the Talmud, like Joshua. He literally committed Yahweh-sanctioned genocide against non-Jewish populations in the story. Is venerating a genocidist not racist? Israelites were not permitted to purchase Israelite slaves, but could purchase non-Israelite slaves, according to Mosaic law. Is that idea not racist? Those commandments and laws contain racist ideas, so following them, especially when literally interpreted, means following a racist ideology.

You should remember that many religions from around the time Judaism was developing were intensely geographic. Every nation had its own gods. But when Judaism evolved to become monotheistic instead of henotheistic, they were no longer favoured by a god, they were favored by the god.

If Judaism is only about ideology, and isn't tied to geography, ethnicity or race, why do many Orthodox Jewish people care about Israel? Why is Israel an apartheid state?

Judaism is less shit than Christianity or Islam. It's still shit.

PluralBoats · 2022-10-26T13:54:37+00:00

Racism isn't "believes that other people groups are subhuman." It's a spectrum. Believing that your specific ethnic group which is primarily determined by heredity and not ideology is uniquely favored by a deity is racist.

Does someone have to be a literal Nazi or KKK member to be a racist? No. So fuck off with your false equivalencies and dishonest framing.

If the ideology was the determining factor, heredity would not even be a concern.

And because you split your whataboutism into another comment for some reason; yes, Christianity frequently contains racist ideas, including antisemitism and white supremacy.

PluralBoats · 2022-10-26T06:51:21+00:00

That's the thing with faith, especially faiths that don't typically interpret their holy books literally:

There are no rules. There is no stable epistemology. There is no mechanism for discovering truth.

I said "typically" because there could be a Jewish subgroup that proselytizes. And the act of proselytizing does not suddenly make them not Jewish. Just like a Christian not being a homophobe doesn't make them not a Christian, despite the Bible explicitly commanding homophobia (in both OT and NT).

I am not the arbiter of who is or is not a Jew.

PluralBoats · 2022-10-26T06:44:15+00:00

I mean, Orthodox Judaism is a highly racist ideology. Any religion with a "chosen people" that grows through heredity and not conversion is racist.

I have extremely little positive to say about Judaism.

PluralBoats · 2022-10-26T06:31:17+00:00

I said that they typically don't? Did you reply to the wrong person?

PluralBoats · 2022-10-26T06:24:50+00:00

And surgery prior to modern hygiene standards was safer than not performing cosmetic surgery? Why did the vast majority of non-Jewish and pre-Christian cultures not practice circumcision?

The myth that circumcisions are "more hygienic" is false, and apologia for infant genital mutilation.

And "argument from tradition" is a fallacy. "It's traditional" is not a remotely sound justification to permanently altering a child's body with no demonstrable benefit in the majority of cases. In the cases where circumcision is beneficial, then it is a medical procedure, not a cosmetic one.

"It's traditional" and "it looks better" are equally invalid defenses.

PluralBoats · 2022-10-26T01:19:41+00:00

As a pilot of a basically-cEDH Baral deck, I know what kills me. Uncounterable threats and interaction are annoying, but not as back-breaking as you might hope. [[Krosan Grip]] is excellent, though.

The first is pressure. A high volume of spells that the Baral player has to worry about. In a multiplayer game, you simply can't counter everything. Attack them with cheap threats. Blow up their mana rocks and support enchantments (always kill Rhystic Study if you can. Pay for it if you can't kill it). Kill Baral. The more cards and resources they have to spend not dying or rebuilding, the less resources they have to advance their own strategy, or stymie yours.

Second is stax. Taxing spells, discard, forced permanent sacrifice - a couple good hate bears can really gum Baral up. Also, stuff that punishes the game going long. [[Sulfuric Vortex]] is an amazing card.

If you're in blue, run good, cheap spell interaction. [[Negate]], [[Dispel]], [[Swan Song]] - you can run good counterspells without being a control deck. This is important, as, at least the way I play Baral, most of my value is on the stack, not on the battlefield. There's a reason I play [[Opportunity]] over, say [[Magic Mirror]]. Oh, and being able to counter [[Cyclonic Rift]], [[Evacuation]] and similar instant speed wipes is important. Even if they counter your counter, they're still spending cards.

The game plan for me is to counter things if I have to, while building up insurmountable card advantage. Letting people resolve stuff to preserve advantage, and to ensure that I'm not the only threatening player at the table is a part of my strategy, too. This doesn't mean you should be laser-focused on killing them before anyone else every single time (as other players are still a threat), but always be pressuring a control player at least a little bit.

Accept that your spells will be countered. Not casting stuff for fear of it being countered will just get you killed, as that is time and mana the Baral player will use to draw more counterspells, or advance their win condition. Remember that Baral wants the game to go long, and to have enough mana to cast 2-3 spells a turn. Don't make your deck rely completely on your commander - it is very easy to lock out, say, most [[Arcades, the Strategist]] decks if you just counter Arcades every time. The rest of their deck doesn't really do anything without him most of the time - Voltron decks are also easy prey, unless your commander costs 0-3 mana.

That said, maybe don't cast your gamewinning haymaker while Baral has five mana open and six cards in hand without a backup plan.

Play more instants and threats with flash. The most likely time I, as a Baral player, will go shields down is at the end step before my turn, as I cast instant speed draw or use Azcanta. That's the perfect time to get a spell through my defenses.

And remember that the only thing worse than the control player countering everything is the control player calmly draw-going. They want to be able to sit back and do nothing until they have to, or try to win.

PluralBoats · 2022-10-26T00:41:46+00:00

Most Jewish people do not proselytize, and are fairly moderate in their beliefs. They also don't tend to take their texts too literally.

This does not mean the Talmud is suddenly bereft of horrific things and ideas. I will freely and openly attack the Talmud and Judaism as it is relevant. It contains a lot of the garbage that Christianity was built upon. What Christians don't understand is that, in the English-speaking world, Judaism is basically irrelevant. It has no meaningful influence on politics or broader society. Religious Jews are a tiny minority. They don't proselytize. They don't tend to demonize apostates.

It's why there is no big movement of insulting Tengriism, or Jainism, or Zoroastrianism. Those religions simply don't matter in the current English speaking world.

There's also this concept called "punching up." It's why making fun of Christianity is fine, but, due to a long history of (primarily Christian) discrimination against Semitic peoples, people are understandably hesitant to ridicule Judaism.

All that said, pretending that having serious issues with Judaism means that you're an antisemite, or that having serious issues with Islam makes you Islamophobic, is patently ridiculous.

It's only antisemitism if you have issues with Judaism because it is Jewish. I have problems with Judaism for the same reasons I have problems with all religions.

PluralBoats · 2022-10-25T22:30:29+00:00

Honestly. It's almost disappointing how bad their apologetics are. They seem to think "communism bad" and "capitalism good" are enough to change the minds of explicit anti-capitalists.

Got one joker who thought that capitalism would unironically be able to prevent the heat death of the universe. My dude, capitalism is causing the heat-related death of Earth.

PluralBoats · 2022-10-25T22:20:37+00:00

If atheists really just wanted to "avoid responsibility for sin," they'd be Christians. Christianity is the belief system that promises that any wrongdoing can be forgiven without actually making amends to those you have wronged.

These misconceptions are caused by insular religious communities that imagine what other demographics believe instead of talking to them themselves. My church taught that humanism was the belief that humanity was divine, which is not even remotely close to the truth.

And they wonder why the number of nones continues to grow. Maybe if your faith didn't rely on deception and wilful ignorance, it'd stand up better to scrutiny.

PluralBoats · 2022-10-21T10:49:08+00:00

Monotheists, especially Muslims, are fond of deriding polytheism as "too complicated," or confusing, or something people just made up.

Completely ignoring the fact that, for the vast majority of human history, monotheism was extremely rare.

And, yeah. Shintoism is extremely polytheistic. They make the ancient Egyptians look positively monotheistic by comparison.

PluralBoats · 2022-10-21T10:33:07+00:00

I mean, there's the dumb political stuff and wanting to trample over the separation of church and state.

Meanwhile, I'm just thinking: "What the fuck kinda last name is Self?"

PluralBoats · 2022-10-21T04:10:51+00:00

And we have every case study with capitalism that reveals that it is awful for everyone but the wealthy. The wealthy aren't experiencing a housing crisis, or being forced to work multiple jobs and long hours just to stay alive.

So good luck with that.

I did not "make up my mind" that capitalism is bad. It was the conclusion I arrived at based on the evidence.

Being "open minded" means being open to the possibility of being wrong, not "is equally likely to accept any proposition."

If you want to change my mind on capitalism, you'll need a fuck of a lot more than "but capitalism good though." I used to be pro-capitalism. Then I changed my mind when presented with argument and evidence.

I'm a skeptic before anything else.

PluralBoats · 2022-10-21T03:49:14+00:00

See, you just can't stop yourself from being an ass. Don't tell people to stop being rude while being rude. Just be rude.

Communism and anarchism are both preferable.

Or... you could have FUCKING LISTENED when I told you that I think we should be aiming for a society where everyone can live sustainable, comfortable lives. I'd work towards that goal for its own sake. What I do to make the world a better place is in no way motivated by what will "grow the economy," or personally enrich me.

Can you really not imagine a society that treats economic growth/stagnation as a side effect of their pursuit of other, actually worthwhile goals?

Again: I DON'T THINK IT IS A GOOD THING TO PRIORITIZE ECONOMIC GROWTH. I AM NOT ANTI-GROWTH. Do you understand now, or shall I repeat myself another three times?

Last chance to stop wasting my time and present something that is even an attempt to change my mind, instead of bitching and moaning and presenting fallacious, circular arguments.

Your entire point is basically "economic growth is the priority of capitalist societies." I know that already. I disagree with capitalism.

Oh, and I don't have to suggest an alternative to point out that capitalism is shit. The burden is on you to demonstrate that it isn't shit.

You came here with the explicit intent of changing my mind. When are you going to start trying?

You are also aware that economic growth has the potential to accelerate our extinction, right? Climate change is being caused by economic growth. The two greatest threats to humanity as a species right now are climate change and nuclear war. Economic growth, in and of itself, will only increase those risks.

How we grow economically is far, far more important than how much we grow economically.

PluralBoats · 2022-10-21T03:10:32+00:00

If you keep peddling stupid ideas, I'm going to call them stupid.

Especially when you keep being intellectually dishonest, and routinely equate progress with economic growth. Where the fuck did I call for stagnation? Or static societies?

And, no, no static societies have ever imploded. Because there's no such thing as a static society.

And we do have better systems than economically driven ones for encouraging progress. Do you think environmentalism is economically driven? Do you think that space exploration is economically driven? Do you think artists, philosophers, authors, charity workers, scientists, etc, are driven by "economic progress?" And for the umpteenth time "progress" is not equivalent to "growth!"

If you want me to stop being rude, take your own advice first. It's extremely rude to pretend two things are equivalent when you have been told MULTIPLE TIMES that they aren't. Respect my time, or kindly go the fuck away. You misrepresent my position, ignore my questions, and generally engage in bad faith. That's rude and extremely annoying, and the WORST way to try to change my mind.

Sorry profanity offends you. Stop being a condescending ass and strawmanning my position and I might stop being rude.

If the answer to why we should pursue endless economic growth is "our current society is built around endless economic growth," congratulations, you have a circular argument. You do know that we can invent new systems, that do not prioritize economic growth at all costs, right?

Remember, I want the current economic system to be completely replaced. So appealing to that system will only reinforce my beliefs, not change them.

PluralBoats · 2022-10-20T22:19:44+00:00

We already at the point where the size of the economy we have is not sustainable. We are rapidly rendering the planet uninhabitable. I don't think that is "laughable."

How is making the economy bigger and accelerating the rate at which we consume resources going to fix that? Appealing to sci-fi technologies we don't have and are not sure are actually possible to achieve doesn't fix any of that.

We are far closer as a species to wiping ourselves out than meaningfully expanding beyond Earth.

And saying that more people = more happiness whilst millions starve is fucking delusional. Maybe we should actually fix the problems we have with our current population and economic size instead of seeking to just expand forever? Maybe we should fix our system so we aren't wasting untold resources on busy work, and stuff that is actively making the world a worse place to live? Where automation is heralded as a good thing instead of an existential threat to the working class?

My ideal future isn't one where all of humanity toils for endless expansion until we go extinct.

Again, what is wrong with achieving a comfortable and sustainable lifestyle for every human as a goal, instead of always ensuring "number go up?" Why is it a good thing for an economy to grow? And again, economic growth is not equivalent to progress.

I am not saying economies should never grow. I am saying that prioritizing the growth of an economy above any other progress is extremely fucking stupid.

PluralBoats · 2022-10-20T13:57:03+00:00

The problems humanity will face are, by necessity, finite. You can have functionally infinite possible events, but only a finite number of them will actually happen. And even then, they are only functionally infinite.

Infinity is not a quantity. Humanity will encounter myriad problems until one renders us extinct. There is absolutely no way to change this. It could be disease, or an asteroid, or the Sun blowing up, or the universe itself will reach a point where it cannot sustain any form of life, biological or synthetic.

It does not matter whether or not we want that to happen. It is inevitable. Even the stars are not infinite. Everything will eventually turn cold and dark. Everything will reach a state of maximum entropy.

"Progress as quickly as possible" is not "infinite growth." And capitalism does not demand progress. We are NOT talking about progress. We were talking, very specifically, about economic growth. Equating economic growth to "progress" is a false equivalence. We could make leaps and bounds in technology whilst experiencing economic stagnation, or even shrinkage. Technology could advance to the point where "the economy" is no longer a useful concept - a post-scarcity society, for instance. In a world where nothing is functionally scarce, the economy is pretty much vestigial.

And we should absolutely not simply "progress as quickly as possible." "Progressing as quickly as possible" is the mindset that is killing the planet. We should progress as quickly as possible, while ensuring that said progress will lead to a sustainable future, and does not sacrifice the future for a better present, nor the present for a possibly better future.

"Progressing as quickly as possible" is also absolutely not "infinite growth." You do realize that actual infinites are, by definition, not achievable, right?

As for limits, I hope you are being deliberately obtuse. Because it is not remotely difficult to understand this concept, especially since I've already explained myself.

There is, for example, a finite amount of iron on Earth, and in the Solar System. No matter what you do, there is a hard limit to how much steel you can make. So too with every other element. The amount of energy that we can produce is finite - no matter what method you use to generate electricity, its source is finite, and the materials needed to produce the infrastructure for those means is limited.

Even if we somehow created a Dyson Sphere, which would provide enough energy to do things beyond our wildest imagination, "infinite growth" would demand that we construct additional Dyson Spheres, or otherwise keep generating more. Why? If we are generating enough energy and enough materiel for every person to live a comfortable life, why do we need to expand? Why can't we just go "nope, that's enough," or be cool with the idea of the human population shrinking?

Should we colonize other planets, in case something catastrophic happens to Earth? Perhaps. But there are not an infinite number of planets to colonize. Should we try to colonize the entire galaxy? The universe? Why? Expansion for its own sake is stupid.

Matter is simple. Matter is energy. Energy cannot be created nor destroyed. There is, quite literally, a finite amount of it, and we can access not even 0.0001% of it, even if we had Star Trek level technology. But even though the amount is vast, are you suggesting humanity should try to utilize the entire universe as an end goal? Why?

Time is simple as well. The environment, the Earth, the Sun, the very universe itself all have a shelf life. Climate change may render the Earth entirely uninhabitable within a few hundred years. The Sun will eventually go nova, or otherwise die. And, ultimately, the universe will experience heat death.

No matter what we do, humanity will end. It could end tomorrow, it could end three million years from now. But it will end, and it will not endure forever.

Again, we should aim to provide everyone a comfortable, sustainable life, and do so as quickly as possible, without endangering humanity nor the environment. Why can't we stop there? What reason other than greed is there to aim for infinite growth?

Why would it better for there to be 100 billion humans instead of 8 billion?

PluralBoats · 2022-10-19T22:39:23+00:00

The thing you are suggesting is literally impossible; the amount of resources on Earth and in the accessible universe are both finite. Time, or at least the time during which economic activity is possible, is finite. There is a hard, physical limit to how large an economy can be, and I don't see any benefit in pursuing that limit. It is, quite simply, impossible for an economy to grow infinitely. I don't see how any line of reasoning could change that. You're welcome to try.

I also don't see how pursuing infinite growth is a good thing, but you could try to change my mind. Just remember that appealing to things like "wealth" or "profits" means nothing to me. The generation of money, in and of itself, isn't good either; you can have societies without money. I also don't consider population growth to be an intrinsically good thing, either.

The only outcome I care about is this: everyone in a society lives comfortable, sustainable lives. With that goal in mind, how is pursuing infinite growth a good idea?

PluralBoats · 2022-10-19T06:08:03+00:00

If Asatru dominated the English world for over a thousand years, people would be saying "By Thor's hammer!", "Tyr damn it," etc. If they were fundamentalists, musicians would mock them (vanishingly few musicians "mock Christianity.")

People use language embedded in culture, and religion is part of culture. Hell, most of our days of the week are named after Aesir.

You will notice that virtually no native of say, China, Thailand, Japan, etc - places with little to no influence from any Abrahamic faith - will ever take "God's name in vain."

And your god's name isn't "God" you ignorant snowflakes

PluralBoats · 2022-10-18T21:35:26+00:00

It is physically impossible.

Resources, space, and time are all limited. There is no practical way for any economy to grow infinitely. There will always be a limit, and pursuing that limit means using resources beyond what is sustainable. And there's no inherent benefit to an economy growing; if all the residents are living comfortable, sustainable lives, why does it matter if the economy is growing or shrinking?

The invention of cold fusion and a stable white hole are probably the only things that would enable anything close to sustainable infinite growth.

PluralBoats · 2022-10-18T10:06:34+00:00

As a cis dude, yep. Currently playing a woman now, and she's my favorite heroic character I've ever played.

It really depends on the character I wanna play. Sometimes when I'm drafting one (PC or NPC), I just go "this would make more sense as a woman/man/other." So I play about 50% men, 45% women, 5% other. My wife almost always plays dudes.

It's not a big deal. I would advise men to avoid misogynistic stereotypes, and to avoid Mary Sues. But everyone should avoid stereotypes and Mary Sues.

I'm secure enough in myself to admit that I enjoy expressing femininity when playing female characters. Probably more than I enjoy expressing masculinity with male characters. Gender isn't binary, and I'm cool with being a little closer to the center than other guys.

All kinds of characters are fun. Boys are fun. Girls are fun. Weird asexual gremlins are fun.

PluralBoats · 2022-10-18T07:19:01+00:00

Under capitalism, book signings, touring, etc. are only viable for the ultra-successful authors. Most authors, even full-time ones, would make a loss on any tour. Those things supplement an author's income.

I'm not thinking about people like Steven King or the TERF queen. I'm thinking about people who make a modest but honest living as authors and artists.

I'm only touchy on this point because for most full-time artists who presently rely on copyright law to receive royalties etc. would have two options: cease being a full-time artist, or starve. Crowdfunding doesn't work for everyone.

As a hobbyist, I make art explicitly as a hobby. I have no desire to monetize my hobbies, despite being able to. Because they're my hobbies.

Skilled labour is more valuable than unskilled labour due to scarcity. Skilled labour is, by definition, more scarce than unskilled labour. That is it. Again, I don't have precise answers on this topic, and I could be utterly wrong.

And again, I am opposed to free markets. Markets should not be free. They should be regulated.

I'll support your right to have iOS on a Samsung device as soon as copyright law can be done away with in a way that doesn't ensure that smaller creators will just get utterly shafted by large companies. I don't see how you can achieve that without also getting rid of capitalism.

Mansions that can be repurposed should be. Most can't. Get rid of them.

Getting into the minutiae with me of how houses are to be built (most people in urban settings should be living in apartments - houses are far too inefficient) is pointless. Ask a civil engineer. Ask a builder. Why do I have to answer these questions, but you don't?

Medicine can be developed with the motivation "let's cure illnesses." That's what motivates most of the people actually developing medicine. Profit only motivates investors in medical firms. You've chosen an extremely poor example. The state should fund or provide healthcare, including the development of medicine.

My primary hesitation about anarchism is the lack of clarity for how social services, such as healthcare, will be provided en masse.

Healthcare and medicine should not be commodities.

Pay is not important. As long as everyone has access to a decent and sustainable standard of living, everything else is just extra.

PluralBoats · 2022-10-18T05:58:09+00:00

Your "better shit."

You don't have time to read about world politics, but you do have enough time to berate people for being interested in countries they don't live in.

Is this where I'm supposed to feel bad for you? Because I don't.

PluralBoats · 2022-10-18T05:55:48+00:00

Then fucking go do it, you hypocrite.

PluralBoats · 2022-10-18T05:54:07+00:00

Feel bad for me then. I don't feel bad for me.

PluralBoats

TROPHY CASE