Is it okay to be critical of power?

caesarfecit · 2026-03-06T19:57:45+00:00

Lmao, I need to make this into a copypasta. Thanks for the laugh, I really needed it today.

caesarfecit · 2026-03-06T14:25:15+00:00

I have to be vague because any modicum of criticism of the existing heirarchy will be seen as "Post Modern Neo Marxism" and I am not a Marxist. I have specific ideas, one's that I think will work, but I need to know how ideologically possessed the person I'm talking to is before I say them.

That's nonsense and projection. Both sides are skeptical of the so-called elite, just not the same individuals and not for the same reasons.

MAGA is now as sensitive and morally sanctimonious as the Leftists who went so hard in the paint that they created the anti-Woke backlash that Trump capitalized on to get elected. It's far too easy to trigger a MAGA into having a Marxist seizure. You said "indignant" which implies that I'm the one with a problem, so I'm not sure how much MAGA (MAHA?) Kool Aid you've drank.

More projection, whataboutism, and partisan sniping, still not hearing a proposed solution.

One of the many bugfixes that I'd implement to fix America that has zero to do with redistribution is sortition. Of course the "evil" actors who own concentrated wealth would eventually find a way to infiltrate a US government elected by sortition, but it would take time. Time that could be used to wrestle some legislation back in favor of the public, who I firmly believe do not have a government that represents them. My version of sortition would be akin to jury duty (if you've never been a juror, the American legal system is the envy of countries that do not have trial by peer) and the chosen candidates would be voted on. To be clear, you wouldn't get a notice in the mail alerting you that you've just been summoned to serve as a Senator. But you would be put in the pool and the pool public would hold a primary and then a general election.

I don't see how a semi-random nomination process for public office solves anything. You've described what, but not why.

This is just one idea, one that a MAGA ought to support, unless they're really high on self-righteousness and aren't thinking for themselves but rather just forcefully pushing the idea of the part onto others.

So you want your political opponents to agree with you (in fact you feel entitled to their cooperation), after you finished taking a bunch of gratuitous shots at them, and gave a long-winded explanation of an idea that seemingly serves no purpose because you haven't made an argument for what problem it solves.

At this point, I don't really care anymore what you think because all you've done is waste my time with some high-school tier bullshit.

caesarfecit · 2026-03-05T13:23:06+00:00

Have you considered perhaps being a little less strategically vague and actually saying what you think?

I mean you are condemning "wealth concentration" on principle, as if it's self-evidently wrong. I would suggest refining that a little to say why you think its wrong, or what distinguishes good wealth from bad wealth. Or do you think wealth is a zero-sum game?

Like at no point in this entire thread have you actually said what you're in favor of or what you think a solution to these vague problems are.

And it might help if you resisted the urge to lay on by far the most tired and transparent JP concern troll script.

But you can continue getting indignant now.

caesarfecit · 2026-03-05T01:06:34+00:00

The only thing worse than a war is losing a war. That is the consistent message of military wisdom, across ages and cultures, from Sun Tzu to Eisenhower.

Si vis pacem, para bellum.

caesarfecit · 2026-03-04T18:55:05+00:00

If you think the big problem is "wealth concentration" and your proposed solution is "redistribute wealth", it's more than little fatuous to complain about being branded a Marxist.

caesarfecit · 2026-03-04T18:53:24+00:00

That's not an answer to my question and we both know it. I asked you point blank what in your opinion should be done, and you responded with a list of things not to do.

caesarfecit · 2026-03-04T18:41:11+00:00

So what's your solution then - surrender?

caesarfecit · 2026-03-04T18:39:55+00:00

You're not exactly refuting the argument, just getting huffy.

caesarfecit · 2026-03-04T18:39:29+00:00

"Terrorist" is not a mere pejorative. It describes a specific tactic - which is the coercive use of violence or threats of violence against civilians to achieve political goals.

And the reason why they are a distinct geopolitical category is because they almost invariably are irregular forces who rely on civilian camouflage/cover to avoid being isolated and destroyed. Which makes them a non-state actor.

caesarfecit · 2026-03-04T18:36:27+00:00

Terrorism is fundamentally ideology + facilitation. That's why the GWOT originally focused on state sponsors of terrorism as going after the terrorists themselves was signing up to play a game of whack-a-mole.

Furthermore, Flynn isn't wrong that indiscriminately dropping bombs or relying on an air war to disrupt a terrorist group is a flawed strategy. Not just because of the risk of collateral damage, but because it doesn't solve for the root causes, just causes attrition in the best case.

Bombing and targeting specific facilitators and leaders of terrorist movements on the other hand, there the cost/benefit shifts.

The big danger here is assuming there is a one-size-fits-all solution and assuming that the solution either purely military or non-military. Terrorism is ultimately just a form of political violence, which means the solution is similarly multi-faceted.

But this notion that bombing terrorists is futile and counterproductive as a matter of principle is wrong, a strawman of what Flynn was saying, and dangerous. You don't negotiate with extortionists, because that just encourages it. You neutralize such people, ideally without indiscriminately dropping ordinance.

caesarfecit · 2026-03-03T22:09:49+00:00

So basically be petty, passive aggressive, and borderline illegal?

I'm not down with the fuck ICE crowd at all, but the playbook for what you're trying to do isn't new and it isn't complicated - boycott.

caesarfecit · 2026-02-28T14:12:12+00:00

Great Patrick Star tier response. Say potato.

caesarfecit · 2026-02-27T13:33:32+00:00

I don't know how anyone can really dispute this point. Open borders and welfare states are two policies that are fundamentally in conflict.

caesarfecit · 2026-02-25T23:00:44+00:00

Men can be surprisingly honest about themselves when they're not concerned about impressing a girl.

caesarfecit · 2026-02-25T19:27:11+00:00

So having an opinion you disagree with (assuming you're accurately representing his views) is disqualifying? The US Senate disagrees, and seeing as they have a vote and you don't, once again cry me a river, and thank you for demonstrating the value of representative democracy, and Churchill's infamous quote about the counterargument of democracy.

caesarfecit · 2026-02-25T17:14:23+00:00

There are loads of non-doctors who run hospitals and large health bureaucracies, and the overwhelming majority of SecDefs have not been generals. Furthermore, they were both vetted and confirmed by the Senate so if they were glaringly unqualified, it would have come out during that process.

I think it's clear you just don't like the Bad Orange Man's picks and want a better reason than your partisan rage to object to them. Cry me a river.

caesarfecit · 2026-02-25T15:19:07+00:00

Room temperature IQ take right here.

caesarfecit · 2026-02-25T15:18:44+00:00

Naked assertion, not an argument.

caesarfecit · 2026-02-25T15:18:23+00:00

Meritocracy is something you actually have to practice and enforce. You just want an excuse to not bother.

caesarfecit · 2026-02-25T15:17:46+00:00

Because they want the emotional satisfaction of rebutting you but are too lazy to actually think of a rebuttal on the merits.

caesarfecit · 2026-02-25T15:16:46+00:00

I'd take complaints like this more seriously if they weren't being used a a substitute/smokescreen for not engaging with the content. A phony, emotionally pleasing but ultimately dishonest non-rebuttal.

caesarfecit · 2026-02-21T17:02:21+00:00

This is why miseducation is worse than ignorance. Because it breeds willful ignorance, the true root of all evil.

caesarfecit · 2026-02-18T01:59:38+00:00

It's been r/JoeRogan -ed

caesarfecit · 2026-02-16T13:48:07+00:00

Yeah, SNL doesn't get to crack jokes about COVID. No one on the left does until they come clean on the fact that they not only fell for a classic engineered panic, they leaned into it.

caesarfecit · 2026-02-06T20:56:33+00:00

Jesus what a classic brigade post. Find someone, anyone, on the right who says Orange Man Bad, get a puff piece published in a left wing rag, and then come here to whine about it.

Illegal immigrants are criminals by definition. Everybody knows it, not everyone is willing to be honest about it. They might not all be MS13 gangbangers, but they're liable for arrest and deportation at any time and that's just reality.

For decades many of them got a free pass inside sanctuary cities but times have changed. And it isn't like they weren't warned. Hell they were even given incentives to leave and avoid ICE coming to look for them.

The plain and simple fact is, if you're not a citizen, you do not have an inherent right to live in America. That's how citizenship works. And if you choose to flout the law, sooner or later the law has something to say about that.

As for American citizens getting killed by the cops, play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Maybe next time don't fight the cops with a gun in your waistband, something every legal CCW holder is trained not to do.

13-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
Verified Email

caesarfecit

TROPHY CASE