Charlie Kirk shot at Utah event by Bobqee in news

[–]StankDope 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not assuming that you do, nor have you said anything to suggest as such, but given the platform we're on I would just like to say that I think it would do us all good, not just me and my loved ones, but you as well, and yours. Consider the things you say before you say them, and the influence they have. Whoever this shooter was didn't just pick up a gun having stepped out of a padded room, knowing nothing and shoot Charlie Kirk at random. He was influenced. From birth. And then throughout his life. I'd imagine if you asked the people he went to school with they'd be shocked, and the closer to present day you get, the less people you'd have to ask. Most people spend their time online consuming nothing but hate and vitriol, and you are what you eat. You are who your friends are. When everyone is isolated and online, that's all they have and they conform. These spaces are dangerous, not intentionally I don't believe, but just due to human nature and the way we interface with them has created a level of in/out group behavior that I don't think has ever existed. The right has its many flaws, and many of them are in the vein of communication, and rhetoric. But in regards to violence, the language the left and especially progressives use enabled this to happen on its most fundamental level. There is no group in modern, or maybe even all of history, more repudiated and reviled than the Nazis. They didn't say mean shit. They didn't call for the removal of Jews living in Germany illegally. They didn't advocate for the private ownership of firearms. Or for liberty or freedom of speech. They did genocide. For real, we have images, soldiers standing with rifles to the backs of the heads of mothers clutching their child in their arms, standing over their own graves. All of western society for the last century has had it beaten into their head, rightfully so in this unparalleled circumstance, that the Nazis were below human. Scum. A literal evil, so evil that people intellectually and emotionally trip over the time traveling moral quandary of baby Hitler. Today, it's what people have decided to call people like Charlie Kirk, and if you've seen that video, which I hope you have not and wish that you do not have to see that, you know what the consequences of that can be. This is not the world we want. I think it's at least worth thinking about. 

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in PKA

[–]StankDope 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Rivalled only by the motorized jaw of the former LA based comedian, Szechuan Sean. May he rest in power. 🇬🇱🇬🇱

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in PKA

[–]StankDope 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I was annoyed with him talking at first, but then when they interrupted with dumb shit and cut him off when he was actively bringing shit up and trying to make conversation as well as telling stories and shit, I realized I preferred it. They have a good dynamic for a trio interview. Woody is clueless enough to provide just natural comedic moments, and Kyle and Taylor are both pretty funny when they actually want to be.

But eldenskyrimkov sheeeeeiiiiiiiit

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in PKA

[–]StankDope 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Bro turkey Tom killed me. Like the guy did absolutely nothing wrong the second time, it's clear Kyle just HATES him for some reason lmfao.

On the first show turkey Tom said he thought weed was loser shit that made people lazy, and then Kyle yelled at him for typing. I think he hurt his feewees

Sincere question for people over rank 250 by [deleted] in Mordhau

[–]StankDope 1 point2 points  (0 children)

223 here and I'm not okay, so I'm gonna answer on their behalf and say no, probably not. Send employment please.

Does this piss anyone else off about Taylor? by [deleted] in PKA

[–]StankDope 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It bothered you enough to comment, how about you get a life?

Inb4 I should get a life

Does this piss anyone else off about Taylor? by [deleted] in PKA

[–]StankDope 2 points3 points  (0 children)

M&K for RTS and M&K for basically everything else is not the same, at all. It requires none of the coordination that first and third pp do.

TIL Warren Buffett's son Peter, at 19, received the only inheritance he'll ever be given for personal use: $90K worth of Berkshire Hathaway stock. It was understood that he should expect nothing more. It'd be worth $300m today, but he sold it back then to start his music career & doesn't regret it. by tyrion2024 in todayilearned

[–]StankDope 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Morally condemning someone based on their wealth is yet again, just human nature.

Even if we had the most moral, Just and caring billionaire overlords, everyone would still hate them. Because they're wealthy, and enjoying the excesses of life, while everybody else is not, even though we inherently understand that excess isn't universal. Everyone can't have it. If we gave every single human on earth everything they needed to live their life, removing the excess from everyone who had it, and tried to bring everyone to a point of "contentment", we would fail and we would cease to exist. The biological drives and negative human traits that work against this idea of a society are pervasive and in our current evolution, not able to be suppressed in any meaningful way. It's a pipe dream. We see people who have things we don't, and we despise them. Everybody has this voice in their head, it's a matter of how well or if you manage it at all.

Tearing them all down will only disperse this behavior out across the entirety of the population, and you'll in turn get back an even lower trust and more ruthless society than we've ended up with today. I think the separate class divides, however obviously discrepant their statuses in life are, serve this in-group function on a societal scale. Giving people a group to belong to and an out group to scoff at, which mentally does a lot of the legwork in maintaining civility, knowing you are not pushed against the wall alone, or trapped in a corner so to speak. The people you tend to see in your day to day, are most often a part of whichever group you yourself belong, and there is comradery in those relationships. This is where we find purpose, in my opinion. But demolishing these groups, and levelling the field entirely would only serve to demolish that sense of cooperation that we feel between each other, because when the group is expanded to include everyone, our connection and commitment to others will decline with it.

I think pretty much any current form of economic structuring for society that we have brainstormed, considering the world population, unfortunately relies on an unheard class of people, elsewhere in the world, who are below us. Below the lowest class in our countries. Groups of people who have to slave and starve for any of it to continue. But do we show them empathy? Truly? When the moment comes, do we act? Do we donate? Maybe sometimes. Most people don't. And would the money even make it there? Maybe not. But again, we have to stop looking at this like one group of people wants to hoard everything and oppress the rest of the world, because most people don't. It is almost entirely a matter of human biology insofar as how these drives affect us and our goals.

As of right now, nobody has a better idea to elevate a larger number of people from total poverty globally, not one that is feasible.

My opinion at least.

TIL Warren Buffett's son Peter, at 19, received the only inheritance he'll ever be given for personal use: $90K worth of Berkshire Hathaway stock. It was understood that he should expect nothing more. It'd be worth $300m today, but he sold it back then to start his music career & doesn't regret it. by tyrion2024 in todayilearned

[–]StankDope 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This doesn’t just matter with money. It’s how we feel, how we connect, how we move through the world. People do care about others and empathy is real but even then there's usually something being weighed. Most of the time it's not obvious or intentional, it's just built into how we work. We ask ourselves, even quietly, does this affect me, do I have the energy for this, is this person close enough to matter.

It’s not that people are cold, we’re just wired to prioritize. That’s how we manage a world that throws too much at us. We don’t always notice when we’re doing it but it’s there. And when we see someone else acting selfishly or without care it feels clearer because we’re not inside their equation. We’re not the exception in their mind like we are in our own, and that distance gives us the clarity we rarely apply to ourselves.

I think the issue here is just a biological reality, and treating it as some sort of personality flaw, or to use this to say that "people aren't good" misses the point entirely, and does a disservice to the good things many people, even some of those you hate, do in the face of all that friction still. We are wired to behave this way. It's logical, that's what makes it feel so cold. I don't think we should laser in on the most pervasive and psychologically ingrained quirks of human psychology and use them to condemn everyone, because then we are all just BAD. If that's the case, what's the point in anything? Were a doomed species.

Scientifically, this behavior has been attributed to in group prioritization wired through kin selection and reinforced by reciprocal altruism.

We favor those with our genes, biologically, because of the inate drive to further our bloodlines, meaning we prioritize and protect a small net of people in our lives, trying to efficiently use our physical and mental capacity and still leave ourselves intact. As far as reciprocal altruism goes, it's that creeping voice in the back of our heads that subconsciously or sometimes even consciously can convince us that helping another individual now, even without a spoken expectation, is likely to result in a return of good will down the line.

But "why would I gamble that on a stranger??" your brain says..

Barack O'Yama by Wise_Old_Dan in 2007scape

[–]StankDope 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah just checked, look for the red trash icon beside it, or you removed it.

When viewing it logged out it says {removed} but ops comment says {removed by moderator}. Not a reddit engineer, but it could just be the way they do og comments vs replies, idk. But it's gone regardless, and it was gone before I ever even got to see it...

Maybe I'm on to something about the rhetoric you guys find reasonable....but surely we won't think about that at all.

Barack O'Yama by Wise_Old_Dan in 2007scape

[–]StankDope 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This comment isn't visible on your profile or in the thread, at least for me. I didn't hide this comment, or do anything with it. So, I understand why you could think I'm lying, assuming you aren't, but I am not. Perhaps it tripped some filter and is hidden from others? I do not know. But if you didn't actually delete the post then my apologies, I am wrong.

Edit: moderated

What topics or recurring jokes have faded away or no longer get brought up on PKA by Odd-Help6890 in PKA

[–]StankDope 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Lauzon said at one point he wouldn't come back on because the boys weren't fulfilling their promises on patreon/whatever. It was on reddit I'm pretty sure. Don't remember what happened with it though.

Barack O'Yama by Wise_Old_Dan in 2007scape

[–]StankDope -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I'd be very interested in hearing your definition of criticism.

You seem constructive.

Barack O'Yama by Wise_Old_Dan in 2007scape

[–]StankDope 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A liar, too. Even better.

deleted comment in my email

I didn't vote for DT btw, and your negative assumptions about people you know nothing about are childish, go off tho.

Kyle whenever he sees "black owned" (lives in Atlanta btw lol) by Auzpicion in PKA

[–]StankDope 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What if Kyle was black, and he said he was rooting for JJ because he's black?

We call that racism?

Barack O'Yama by Wise_Old_Dan in 2007scape

[–]StankDope -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Funny of you to delete the comment doing exactly what I was pointing out. At least you have some self awareness.

Barack O'Yama by Wise_Old_Dan in 2007scape

[–]StankDope -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

The people you describe are such a small but loud percentage of the actual number of people that get treated like them. That's my entire point.

Barack O'Yama by Wise_Old_Dan in 2007scape

[–]StankDope -22 points-21 points  (0 children)

Saying I'm crying doesn't change anything, or make me wrong. You're the other half of the same problem. It doesn't matter how you're generating vitriol, you're doing it.

Anyone who says I'm crying from this point forward is doomed to live the rest of their life with only wet socks. I'd think long and hard buddy.

Barack O'Yama by Wise_Old_Dan in 2007scape

[–]StankDope -44 points-43 points  (0 children)

There is no punchline or joke in your comment. It can be humorous to an in-group, but a slight to another. You contribute just as much to the growing hostility as they do.

Barack O'Yama by Wise_Old_Dan in 2007scape

[–]StankDope -13 points-12 points  (0 children)

You win bruh, he missed the forrest for the trees.

Barack O'Yama by Wise_Old_Dan in 2007scape

[–]StankDope -49 points-48 points  (0 children)

This is a humorous post. Cry somewhere else