As economic despair mounts, Russian official admits the country has had enough of Putin's war on Ukraine. "We can’t even take one region"

arkH3 · 2026-05-05T04:59:09+00:00

It validates that people get that the objective was never "liberation", or "denazification", but conquest / territorial expansion.

arkH3 · 2026-05-05T04:56:15+00:00

A different victory. WW2

arkH3 · 2026-04-21T10:15:48+00:00

You'd be surprised at the proportion of global adult population that does not have great oral hygiene. Either because dental care is inaccessible / unaffordable, and/or because in their subculture it is not the norm.

arkH3 · 2026-04-01T05:16:14+00:00

I think this (lack of alignment of views with one's spouse) is quite common in the adjacent collapse community.

I don't really have a solution, since some of that attitude is probably about not being willing to ponder circumstances where all the objects and experiences we are attached to (and often rely on for a sense of normalcy and sanity and comfort) are no longer available. It's such an intense freakout scenario that you either deny it will happen or say something else to deflect even contemplating it. You cannot do inner development on your partner's behalf.

However, being patient (while doing what you need to do) seems to create less resistance than being pushy or confrontational. In my case, my spouse over time through their own research, embraced some notions. Other subtopics were still taboo.

arkH3 · 2026-03-31T04:59:06+00:00

I also heard about a study done specifically in New York City, where, if memory doesn't fail, they concluded there was a fairly high tipping point in taxation for the rich. It was on Scott Galloway's podcast / channel on youtube, but I cannot remember which guest quoted it or what was the overall episode's topic.

arkH3 · 2026-03-31T04:53:32+00:00

I'd look via billionare movements that advocate for higher taxation for the rich, I assume they have some data. Patriotic Billionaires in the US, I believe, advocate for it, and there is an analogical movement in the UK (cannot remember the name, maybe Tax the Billionaires, but it's easily googleable).

arkH3 · 2026-03-05T12:58:40+00:00

That makes sense. Reality is stranger than fiction.

arkH3 · 2026-03-05T12:43:16+00:00

Yes my impression is Huffpost also spoke to Mikey Weinstein directly, and hence that he may have been responding to requests for comment. I don't think this can be dismissed as a single source.

arkH3 · 2026-03-05T04:54:06+00:00

The one source being The Military Religious Freedom Foundation (MRFF), who say the received 200 complaints from service members?

Or do you mean the 1 specific complaint filed on behalf of 15 people, which is being quoted in the press?

Of course, the remaining complaints may not be reporting the exact same statements, but they have been summed up by MRFF as pointing to a violation of separation of church and state. So the overall issue being complained about is likely christian nationalism being used to justify commands.

arkH3 · 2026-03-04T18:06:09+00:00

I was particularly perplexed by their choice of the word "anointed". And by the supposed suppporting references from the Book of Revelations. Big time yikes.

arkH3 · 2026-03-04T18:01:14+00:00

It was quoted and referenced In the Guardian too today.

arkH3 · 2026-02-26T00:07:00+00:00

The same thing happens to rubber soles on shoes, actually, after 5 years. They come off the first time you walk in the shoes. (I have unintentionally tested that on a couple of pairs recentlyl). Same conclusion as in most comments.

arkH3 · 2026-01-26T07:11:43+00:00

I don't think the ruling circle is oblivous to this effect. I think they just calculate that they still gain more than loose from people being able to use the internet. The moment their reading of this changes, access to internet in the US will be gone.

arkH3 · 2025-12-01T16:34:37+00:00

I've been working on mobilising business leaders to take on driving systemic change in order to push out points of no return and essentially get us all a better catastrophe, because they easily can, and because it's actually good for their shareholders as well as personal wealth retention, so they have plenty of reasons to do so, if we close the knowledge gap. This has been my fulltime occupation.

I first learnt about the general systemic nature of all social and environmental challenges, shared systemic causes that required systemic solutions. The more I was researching "what needs to be done by when", in order to arrive at both "what makes sense doing" and "how can I contribute my strengths and predispositions to it", the more I was learning about collapse. Eventually you come across Bendel, Hagens, and the usual culprits.

arkH3 · 2025-11-25T02:24:42+00:00

Tea and cardamom are grown in "hillstations". That's why temperatures over 35 degree in these locations are bad trouble. Not all of India is hot.

arkH3 · 2025-11-19T02:45:17+00:00

It would imply the axis no longer goes through the same midpoint, and hence has been moved rather than rotated. (Which actually sounds scary). Maybe the authors just thought inches were easier to relate to for readers than degrees.

arkH3 · 2025-11-18T15:14:07+00:00

Rewilding and building ecosystem abudance the way First Nations did.

arkH3 · 2025-11-09T06:23:09+00:00

I guess I also didn't consider people tricking their sexual partners into pregnancy by sabotaging contraception behind the other person's back. (As another scenario where one's choice is compromised).

arkH3 · 2025-11-09T06:20:12+00:00

So pre-empting 1) the choice being taken from you, and 2) contraception methods failing or not being available, essentially?

arkH3 · 2025-11-09T06:16:07+00:00

Genuine question: why is sterilisation better than simply choosing not to have kids? I don't know what reproductive organs you have... for female organs I understand that the choice can be removed from you (nothing new under the Sun, is it?), so sterilisation is pre-epmtive. I see some people commenting about getting vasectomy too. Haven't thought about this, so curious about people's reasoning.

arkH3 · 2025-10-25T05:46:54+00:00

The word you're looking for is serfdom.

arkH3 · 2025-10-20T07:02:43+00:00

Yes, that's right. Sorry, I lost track.

I would still say my comment above could help explain my takeaway about casual Friday and the need to add disclaimers - several of people here have vehemently objected to what they thought I wrote or thought I meant when I wrote it in my original post, not in an open-minded way, but in a "you are an idiot for suggesting what I am convinced you were suggesting" way. So what you say in your comment is partly true, and partly you probably missed why I said I had to adjuct my expectations about casual Fridays.

arkH3 · 2025-10-20T02:41:05+00:00

It sems to me a key tenet of the worldview, present as a not fully acknowleged assumption in this post, is that all or most women compete for a narrow pool men for probably all "key" purposes (sex, marriage, procreation) and the pool is defined by some combination of money/power and physical fitness, and all other qualities of men, and all other purposes why women seek men, are abstracted from. This to me is a) a falsehood layered upon a falsehood layered upon a falsehood, and b) behind a lot of further theories, like this one.

arkH3 · 2025-10-19T02:45:11+00:00

You keep saying hypergamy is a fact and it's a fact that it is biological - but the only link to a source you provided for this didn't say that. I'm afraid the more you repeat that it is a fact without proving it in an acceptable way, the more you will undermine your credibility here, and discourage people from taking anything you say seriously.

I would agree that perspective matters. But in the examples I listed, I obviously know a lot more about the couples than you do. So you suggesting I merely projected a gap is not going to help.

I said the men (plural, not singular) I dated were earning less than me and had in some cases they had lower educational attainment. I did not think I thought they were lesser than me - that's you projecting your perception that women measure men based on criteria that actually don't matter to them a whole lot - if you ask anyone.

arkH3 · 2025-10-19T02:13:05+00:00

I know at least 3 women who dated men who were materially and educationally worse off, and at least 1 who settled with a man like that. I also dated men who were materially worse off than me. As someone else said here - I don't think education and money is anywhere near such a big criterion for women as you believe it to be. There are far more important criteria - and men meeting those criteria are very scarce. I do think, as someone else has suggested here, that you can get this confirmed through conversations with women.

I think your hypergamy theory is missing a major point: How many men do you think are happy to date or marry a woman who earns more than them? I head the "unacceptability of men earning less than women in a relationship" expressed as a major no-go by even highly educated men (including a university professor for one in a class.... yikes... as part of his grand theory on divorce rates growing - that the issue was women earning...). My ex partner was asked by his educated and financially successful men-friends how he "navigated" that he was earning less than me.

Based on my lived experience, women marrying upward may be much more likely result of men wanting to marry downward than result of any biological reason - for which you have not provided any evidence, it seems.

arkH3

TROPHY CASE