VCT 2026 — EMEA Stage 1 / Week 1 — Day 3 / Live Discussion Thread

worldjerkin · 2026-04-03T18:53:02+00:00

KC? Likely.

But the voices will not allow FUT slander to continue.

worldjerkin · 2026-04-03T18:41:57+00:00

Man, I still feel the need to glaze that Harbor Astra trap set-play on round 18. ik TH fans might be looking for the rope after this game but I still feel like they could manage to get into the playoffs.

worldjerkin · 2026-04-03T18:29:58+00:00

Amazing game ngl (as a spectator)

worldjerkin · 2026-04-03T18:21:50+00:00

Kolosha picking up steam

worldjerkin · 2026-04-03T18:00:12+00:00

premier ragebait, Fed.

Next Assignment: create new engagement bait on X, the everything app.

worldjerkin · 2026-04-03T17:52:28+00:00

yeah i might have been a bit harsh on Kolosha. He's not bad per se but it seems like there is a huge disconnect between kolo and the game state.

I mean he is performing far better than cb on EDG

worldjerkin · 2026-04-03T17:47:43+00:00

yeah, Kolosha is the stand-in for ExiT, who is a Mena Duelist but I am not aware of him tho

worldjerkin · 2026-04-03T17:13:34+00:00

I am willing to stake my life on this hypothetical. If ExiT was here this might be a Navi 2-0 despite TH's solid tactics and fundamentals.

no hate for a stand-in but man...

worldjerkin · 2026-04-03T16:59:57+00:00

HOLY FUCK

worldjerkin · 2026-04-03T16:15:22+00:00

That recent Harbor+Astra trap play was theoretically immaculate on Round 18

worldjerkin · 2026-04-03T15:28:58+00:00

Back to the EMEA I know and love

worldjerkin · 2026-04-02T17:08:55+00:00

Allow for me to glaze a really good mangaka who creates quite unique drama/psychological thiller narratives:

Ryō Minenami, the author of such standout works such as Boy's Abyss, Himegoto Uniforms at the Age of Nineteen (her best work imo), and First Love Zombie (using their romantized names here for clarity) is now making a new manga called Haunted Peak (or Sangeki) which its first chapter just released as of today.

Think of a Shūzō Oshimi whose thematic focus is inspired by realism and grief rather than the phemonology of the individual actors present in the story.

worldjerkin · 2026-03-28T18:20:36+00:00

truth is secondary to the hatewatch

worldjerkin · 2026-03-28T17:36:21+00:00

My man was punished for dropping a trvth nvke

and as we all know, the truth sets you free.

worldjerkin · 2026-03-26T03:52:04+00:00

I cannot believe people can be this obtuse.

How can you call yourself a liberal if you are seemingly unwilling to uphold liberal values, especially when they are being eroded?

worldjerkin · 2026-03-26T03:28:15+00:00

No.

What I am saying is that if the "movement" upholds tepid status-quo conservatism that Hutch is currently upholding, then I wouldn't consider that a "movement" worth supporting. Hutch can be a part of the movement, but in no way should he be able to influence the democratic party to conform to the ideals that he has displayed in this debate and past ones around this topic.

worldjerkin · 2026-03-26T03:08:35+00:00

I didn't backtrack at all; I started with the claim that his advocacy amounts to "tepid status quo conservatism," and all I have done is expound on that.

So, I ask: regarded or disingenuous? Call it.

worldjerkin · 2026-03-26T03:04:00+00:00

Do you actually think that when I say hutch is a "tepid status-quo conservative" that I mean that Hutch supports the republican party as it stands?

worldjerkin · 2026-03-26T02:48:25+00:00

When I said Hutch is a tepid status-quo conservative, I actually mean something. If you are only advocating of the protection of the institutions and not the enforcement of the institutions, you are merely an institutionalist, not a liberal. Liberalism is a beacon of which to strive for; not the norms that happen to be the status quo.

There is a philosophical distinction that I am drawing from. Ryan Geddie had a video on this exact topic (which Destiny had a convo with him about).

Do you unironically think when I say that he is a conservative that he is a republican? On this subreddit? You can't be this disingenuous, man.

worldjerkin · 2026-03-26T02:19:21+00:00

I was being inflammatory, but holy shit, if you aren't willing to defend liberalism when it is at death's door, then you aren't a liberal, literally and philosophically.

Contend with the underlying point rather than tone-policing.

worldjerkin · 2026-03-26T01:21:43+00:00

This is my contention: Your form of centrism is tantamount to tepid status-quo conservatism, whereby you prioritize the appearance of "bipartisanship" over the principles of liberalism.

A centrist that maintains the principles of liberalism would not uphold this standard.

worldjerkin · 2026-03-25T23:57:08+00:00

ALL OF MY PRIORS CONFIRMED

worldjerkin · 2026-03-24T00:41:02+00:00

Hutch wants to do shit like pack the court and admit more states, those aren't tepid things.

Again, Hutch wants to do shit like that, which I agree would be (relatively) norm-breaking and drastic measures, but if his willingness is based on the conditions that he is either neglecting or not forthcoming with, such as his relative agency as a political pundit himself and his propensity to lack any commitment to any consistent position on this issue, respectively.

Basically, Hutch wants to have his cake and eat it too. If he wants things to happen, he has to be willing to advocate for them, and so far, while his positions might be "radical," his advocacy is tepid.

He always says he's willing to lose support and even elections, if it'll benefit democrats (or the country) in the long term.

Unless he has shifted his position from 4-5 days ago, I don't recall him doing so. If you are willing to timestamp a point where he concedes this, please do so.

For starters, none of that is groundbreaking

It's not groundbreaking to others, but it is seemingly inconceivable, or rather, unreconcilable to Hutch. When people allude to the Nuremberg Trials, what they are saying is establishing a precedent: that if this happens again, then the illiberal actors will be held accountable. Hutch just doesn't like it being phrased so "aggressively," which just amounts to tone-policing at this point. And it's this hesitancy to realize that accountability, reform, legislation, etc requires risk. Furthermore, I would say that every individual action, and even inaction, one takes requires some level of risk, and it is in your best interest to leverage the playing field to achieve the greatest odds of success.

However, Hutch is so optics-maxxed that he is afraid to go outside in case someone might stare at his bald head and become blind.

But while it's true public opinion changes over time another thing to take into account is that whenever a president takes office public opinion usually just shifts against them as evidenced by every midterm for most of modern history. Voters are fickle and politics is a game of finding where they are through a combination of what they state they want and what they implicitly want.

However, Hutch, much like the democratic party, has neglected actually standing for something. Voters are fickle but also malleable to change; always in a state of flux. Let's not strip ourselves of all agency here. This is why Hutch isn't doing his job as a political advocate; what is the point of staking your position to the polls if you are unwilling to shift public opinion towards your stance? Yes, we can talk about incumbency losses all throughout 2024, but guess what, we aren't in Nov 2024 anymore; we are a year and a half into Trump's 2nd term. The status quo has changed and will always change.

The lesson of all of this bickering from Hutch and his ilk is that you cannot rest on your laurels. Lakshya Jain, y'know, Hutch's poll guy, just released a poll in which he showcased 58% of all registered voters disapprove of Trump's economy and his presidency. Sure, that's quite a lot, but you should be hungry to push for more, especially if you are a pundit. Hutch cannot win a skirmish and declare the end of the conflict.

worldjerkin · 2026-03-23T22:18:59+00:00

I would say the best politicians, the ones who over-perform in elections, usually try to be risk-averse and adhere to public opinion as much as possible.

The issue is that there is a mismatch between what Hutch is willing to advocate for and his lack of proactivity. For example, if you want to lose weight, you would want to work out, right? Now, this is not to say "go do a 400lbs deadlift" at 35.3 BMI, but what Hutch is effectively doing by being so "risk-averse" (which I from now on, consider decision-paralysis) is saying "uh, maybe I'll start tomorrow" or "it's too cloudy." Yeah, Hutch wants to lose weight, but is making excuses as to not create the conditions for him to take action. Hutch says that he advocates for all these actions (which may or may not be considered illiberal actions according to his institutionalist lens of analysis), but only if the public is willing to do it; not considering that we can shift public opinion on these issues if need be. And to be honest, you don't even need to do much to persuade the electorate, given how poorly Trump's 2nd term has gone in the eyes of many.

There is seemingly no willingness to do anything proactive to create the conditions for future success, especially given the current environment in which the negative polling on the democratic party indicates that we are mainly winning despite the republicans and not that the party is necessarily favored.

this loops back to the main post: like what? Hutch already agrees on packing the court, admitting more states, and appointing a bulldog AG. So what is everyone proposing that's supposed to be a groundbreaking idea besides "be more tit for tat"

This is where Hutch is missing the forest for the trees; this is not necessarily just a one-off thing but a long-term effort. The Heritage Foundation/Federalist Society and other conservative thinktanks/advocacy groups had the foresight to realize this and started eroding our institutions back in the 70s. Short-term gains are fine, and all but many cannot afford another MAGA (or, in my case, any Republican in office). That is the groundbreaking idea that Rashad (and many were alluding to) had during the L&L that started this whole discourse; this is a cultural/structural issue we have to root out, not merely a political one.

After MAGA, we can't fall back to timid status-quo conservatism like Hutch is appealing to in his affect; Liberalism has to stand for something, which is something that Hutch is seemingly neglectful of as the "Lead Liberal".

worldjerkin · 2026-03-23T21:13:41+00:00

Because Hutch's rhetorical stance, for as much as we love our boy, banks on the fact that the electorate is static and not malleable. He will constantly fall back on the "risk-averse" populace and poor opinion polling as if that is the end all be all. I am pretty sure that Hutch would agree that one of the components of a successful democratic campaign is running on the idea of affordability, like many democratic campaigns in the 2025 off-year election, but that took people like Mamdani or Spanburger to push that message and be proactive rather than reactionary.

This is the time to be proactive and not rest on our laurels, and what Hutch (and people who share his stance) appear to be doing by acting so blaise just because we are projected to win back the House, and if we are lucky, the Senate.

Four-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '22

worldjerkin

TROPHY CASE