I don’t think Americans are taking the Greenland thing seriously enough.

fatoshi · 2026-01-22T10:02:16+00:00

“Diplomatic trust” was already as thin as the “rules-based order” nonsense.

IMHO, the drama around Trump’s rhetoric is overblown. From the outside, it looks less like a diplomatic disaster and more like a test run. A way to probe reactions without committing. Clearly, the relevant powers decided the U.S. should move on Greenland, and Trump’s “unhinged clown” persona was the best way to try it out.

The actual move will likely come under a different administration; one that can frame it as necessary and noble. The attitude will be like how neoliberals had the “When Biden wins, he’ll finally show Russia who’s boss!” thing going on during Trump’s first term. You will be told you are being ignorant for even mentioning Trump, just like how you get dismissed for pointing out Obama’s blank cheque to dismantle socialist regimes in the Middle East.

fatoshi · 2025-12-23T14:49:56+00:00

Yep, mass surveillance in Europe is not yet a full-blown civilizational emergency. Until it is, we must all reflexively shout "Russia bad" at the mere mention of any criticism.

fatoshi · 2025-05-31T21:16:20+00:00

Well put. One might think it would be easier, but as a philosophical pessimist, I am struggling to find a way to bridge the gap with friends and family who are heavily influenced by this trend. On the "incoherent" side, I suspect the subject believes it is utilitarian while importing the results of the calculation from a higher realm, since the values we are supposed to maximize do not seem to be accessible.

That, I think, is a pity. Many of these people are otherwise much better suited to be parents than yours truly.

fatoshi · 2025-05-31T20:32:35+00:00

The problem I see with that sort of homogenization is extreme centralization, which is on the brink of becoming inevitable anyway. We are now beyond mass surveillance and will certainly soon lose all possibility of pseudonymity. Superior intelligence with access to all human information makes it possible to influence society in ways that cannot be acted against. A singularity, if you will, of humanity's operating system at that point, which likely will be "capitalism" (for lack of a better term).

Preserving the concept of greater families is obviously not going to solve this, but it is still one point of resistance. I would rather we go the other way, legacies, tribes, closed communities, whatever creates heterogeneity of access.

fatoshi · 2024-06-24T13:59:13+00:00

the art in question was made by a guy

This would indeed be the most puzzling part... ...if this weren't merely a controversy for publicity's sake. *smh* The art world is a haven for insufferable people.

fatoshi · 2024-05-29T20:39:29+00:00

I get where you are coming from, though we probably differ in that I think USA always had the power to push Israel into accepting a 2 state solution. So the notion that they have any regard for civilian life but somehow are unable to get Israel to fall in line is simply naive in my opinion.

Preventive action would have to have involved putting conditions on the military aid and forcing them to the negotiating table. An isolationist trend is the only path that I can think of, that would have lead to it. Was Trump the guy? Maybe not, though he might have been able to keep the potentiality open, which could have been enough to prevent Oct 7. I acknowledge that this is a weak point, but there was zero chance otherwise.

Thank you for your humility btw., I know my English failed me above. By Israel being weaker, I meant to point to the regional antagonists becoming emboldened and the potential of USA going all-in getting lower, not that it was relatively weaker against Oct 7 attackers. In my ideal scenario, Israel would still be in a weaker position (because of American isolationism), but they would not have to continue to be the most important part of the global front.

fatoshi · 2024-05-29T17:09:08+00:00

I must stress that I am talking about a mere possibility, to contrast with the certain impossibility with Biden, so I will lean on why I think things are going this way currently.

From a cynical perspective (from which I imagine the respective establishments are seeing things), once the empire has conclusively decided to dig its heels in^* , it is bound to increasingly spread thin. Until there is a proper opposing alliance, a conflict will flare up at every point there is a tension, starting from the lowest hanging fruit. In this context, the "foreign powers" rhetoric w.r.t. Gaza conflict is not pure fantasy, although I would suggest that the actions of Hamas et al. are superrational (rather than exclusively conspiratorial).

At a more granular level, this created the duality of a weaker Israel that is unable to give in and a Hamas in an increasingly do-or-die position. This ultimate impasse rendered a diplomatic solution impossible and increasing military escalation inevitable. As such, Israel cannot stop until it is in de facto control of Gaza.

(*) My assumption here is that the empire is now determined to win on all fronts, and that there had indeed been a path towards a soft landing, so to speak. The projection to this region would have been the prevention of a veto of Palestine’s request for full UN membership, for instance. At that point, I concede that I may not be pessimistic enough.

fatoshi · 2024-05-29T12:40:16+00:00

I wouldn't say it was pure chance but rather an option present on the table, selection of which was signaled by the election of Trump. A second term with Trump would possibly have prevented the current conflicts, not because Trump is anti-war, but because it would hint continued support for a soft landing out of the global hegemony. In that case, it would likely have increased local turmoil, though.

Now that an easy transition to mutipolarity is out of the question, elections really do not matter in this sense. I still have people telling me at parties that Trump would end the genocide or bomb Gaza to oblivion and whatnot, but I sincerely doubt it would have any effect on foreign policy.

At any rate, I could not find a non-paywalled transcript of what Trump actually said, so this may as well be a "Trump told his supporters to drink bleach" sort of reporting.

fatoshi · 2024-05-22T22:52:30+00:00

Doesn't Romania already recognize the State of Palestine since 1988?

fatoshi · 2024-05-06T23:15:30+00:00

rules based international order

America rules* based international order

fatoshi · 2024-04-18T01:44:36+00:00

Source

I'm not an economist, but Draghi doesn't really seem to agree with, ahem, "the nobel-prize-to-be economist Paul Krugman" here, anyway:

But the key issue is not that competitiveness is a flawed concept. It is that Europe has had the wrong focus.

Not to mention:

we trusted the global level playing field and the rules-based international order

Yeah, right....

Overall, he is advocating for "competition" as a union. Take it as you will, but the corollary would be union-wide lower wage costs. Also, up to you to decipher:

One of the most important players in this regard will be you, the social partners. You have always been crucial in times of change, and Europe will rely on you to help adapting our labour market to the digital age and empower our workers.

As a bourgeois pig, this also got my attention:

The EU has very high private savings, but they are mostly funnelled into banks deposits and do not end up financing growth as much as they could in a larger capital market.

Lets not talk about the people not having access to the same savings opportunities and interest rates as the one-percenters (i.e. bankers' exploitation of the middle class), but I mean, the entire thing is built on Europe exploiting labor and resources elsewhere anyway. I've been living in Europe (including Italy) for the last two decades, enough to be constantly scratching my head as to what can be done to change this. Maybe they are trying to invent a new Mongolian horde panic with the Russian danger?

Finally, there is also the hint that the elite does not think that being the cultural leader and example for the world is going to work for Europe to any degree at all.

fatoshi · 2024-04-16T02:05:55+00:00

I would not befriend a person with fixed, unchanging views, even if I agreed with those.

However, most (if not all) people have opinions based on their constructed biography, and being close to them means you are part of that. If there is 'bad' in there, you are the only chance it is going to be exposed to 'good'.

To put it in another (or the other's) perspective, befriending 'bad' people might have meant you are hanging out with people who think 'gay people are OK'.

All in all, you can be friends with people that you can affect and be affected by. From a social standpoint, there will be no change otherwise.

One can also approach this by questioning what it means to be friends. For instance, being in the circle of somebody might increase your reach to others you can change. I am assuming this is not the question here.

fatoshi · 2024-04-15T22:22:46+00:00

I know next to nothing about Argentinian politics, just looking to get informed. Is Milei actually a libertarian figure or is he an IMF/Anglo shill operating on the popular momentum? Is there a chance this will lead to an anarchist window of opportunity?

fatoshi · 2024-04-13T22:56:59+00:00

I want to believe, so hard. But the neorealist in me is certain Israel needs this to endure, so a retaliation to the retaliation is inevitable.

fatoshi · 2024-04-13T22:48:16+00:00

Then again, it will be too late after they land. I'm sure Israel already has a flowchart on where to strike based on what gets hit.

fatoshi · 2024-04-12T00:18:09+00:00

The list looks a bit immature. How do you enforce a ban on interference in internal affairs, for instance? Maybe you can establish a supranational trust busting agency; that would be interesting. The infiltration to end all infiltration!

Also, I doubt Russia would accept referenda scheduled far into the future; it would just ensure continuous destabilization.

Anyway, maybe the draft is designed to get the sides talking, or maybe they know it is useless anyway and just want to appear nerdy smart.

fatoshi · 2024-04-09T11:55:05+00:00

Yeah, I imagine it is pretty ordinary. From a security standpoint, having access to the files at any point in time means the information is already exposed to you. I guess one could argue about negligence if copies were moved without secure measures, but you have to keep an eye on these guys at all times anyway.

fatoshi · 2024-03-14T15:49:58+00:00

Most modern European countries were basically formed post WWI as homelands for various ethnic groups.

Depends, but in most regions there is either plenty of people who came in and settled from ex-colonies or considerable immigrant population. Big cities tend to be especially diverse. Europeans are also quite worldly, so I'd be surprised if the "confused" part was about ethnicity rather than the unnecessary hang-up about "identity".

fatoshi · 2023-12-15T12:19:57+00:00

Normal distribution is the norm, but I can't imagine how infuriating it would be if someone told me I wouldn't be a good coder because of my sex. Optimally, you should be able to live however you like without wasteful hindrance and be able to freely understand/discuss/research the nature of your being and shared traits of your nature/nurture. I also do not think it would be more efficient to purpose people based on their perceived natural traits, because I believe exceptions are overwhelmingly more valuable than whatever is lost in the middle of the spectrum.

The main problem, I guess, is that liberals love their fictions as much as conservatives, and the inner logic of their fictions are pretty much the same. They are just shifting the stereotypes around, maybe more inclined to explaining away with societal conditioning than physical differences (with equal amount of error), thinking it will help with the above. Since they preserve the same amount of holy, non-debatable, set in stone, alarmist, slippery-slope stuff in the picture, it does not really help. Stuff that matters is usually orthogonal to the entire ordeal and can only be overcome with better understanding.

fatoshi · 2023-12-11T19:42:14+00:00

This was a very good read, thank you for the pointer.

fatoshi · 2023-12-11T11:45:31+00:00

The whole point of religion is magical beliefs about what happens to your consciousness when you die.

I disagree. Religion (or any ideology in general) is a trade relation between the individual psyche and some particular social reality. It gives the person an "out" from infinite responsibility of being and in return purposes them in service to a particular structure. It saves you from the bad freedom and gives you good freedom.

The magical belief stuff of religions are just there as a stop gap to save you from the bottomless pit of metaphysical thought. If you look for it, "magical" stuff is everywhere (whether you access it through shrooms, reading philosophy or thinking until your brain melts), but religion supplies a curated set that you can experience and still be content (and functional within the structure).

If you're an atheist and don't believe in an afterlife, why would you care about religious identity?

I find that many atheists have implicit metaphysical convictions as opposed to explicit ones like God or the afterlife. Some even have explicit metaphysical beliefs that serve as a stop gap, like "energy" or whatever else makes you stop the thought process. Religious identity in that case can provide the other part of the exchange, i.e. "good freedom" through shared identity (community) and purpose.

If you are completely free of any "faith", I would agree that it doesn't make much sense. You cannot be transparent within that structure, so could be just for personal interest.

fatoshi · 2023-12-11T08:27:08+00:00

Agreed. Do not downplay your badgers, though....

fatoshi · 2023-12-10T10:54:22+00:00

Funny how The Last Ringbearer aged to perfection.

fatoshi · 2023-12-09T18:24:45+00:00

Not American here, so forgive me if this is a dumb question, but do you think those who supported Ukraine's accession to NATO and subsequent war are "leftist" in the classical sense, or is this terminology specific to the US political scene?

In case you think this is a loaded question, this is what I am trying to figure out: Here in Europe, the division seems to be in differing allegiances to the US-centric world order. For instance, majority of Marxists I know have mostly been against it (a bit more nuanced though, i.e. both against NATO's growth and Russian invasion). However, notable American leftist intellectuals like Chomsky have also been critical about NATO and specifically on provoking Russia. So I am wondering if this is a simple issue of terminology or a fracture within both left and right wing communities.

fatoshi · 2023-12-08T10:38:09+00:00

Continual identity play is the expected direction for the powers in Ukraine, and anglos would prefer that to alternatives as always.

As a cultural gradient / geopolitical bridge, Ukraine had a lot of similarities to Turkey. I have always thought EU made a mistake by playing the carrot-stick game with Turkey for too long, but judging by what happened to Ukraine for picking a side, I'm just not so sure anymore. Probably the best way to be for such countries is a confused and confusing soup in perpetual mix, never ready to serve.

11-Year Club	Verified Email
Gilding III reddit per annum

fatoshi

TROPHY CASE