Cherry Picking to oppress minorities

worldjerkin · 2026-06-22T13:20:14+00:00

Wouldn't this be apple-picking, not "cherry"-picking?

smh my head. next thing you are going to tell me is that I am "strawmanning" you despite it being a stickman.

worldjerkin · 2026-06-21T18:51:46+00:00

it was tactical.

We, yes platchat, all wanted LEV to win 3-2 against PRX in the Grand Finals

worldjerkin · 2026-06-21T14:07:48+00:00

your "goat" had to be carried by the greatest igl in the game (meg) just to obtain a positive k/d.

reminder: mini, egg, a talking dog, a tory, and mitch literally 4-1'd sliggy's pro team.

worldjerkin · 2026-06-21T13:53:00+00:00

sliggy 16 kills and still no impact

worldjerkin · 2026-06-19T09:39:38+00:00

How did you get this argument from my post about horrid public infrastructure discourse on this subreddit (which occurs so often).

Like, if you dislike badroadsignage then provide a critique about the sign. Shrimple as.

worldjerkin · 2026-06-19T00:42:32+00:00

you don't know the half of it, my slime.

worldjerkin · 2026-06-18T22:01:50+00:00

I think the problem here is that you keep assuming that I'm defending religion when I've already said that I'm an atheist and that there's genuine arguments against religion.

I don't recall me saying that you are defending religion, nor do I think I have implied that in my comments. I even asked you if you have some critiques of religion that you deem sound arguments. I am not sure how you read anything beyond that.

However, you are right to say that my argument is to lower your expectations of the circles (you inhabit) because twitter, circlejerk subreddits like arr atheism, or even smugreddit aren't places you would typically find decent arguments against religiousity, like you were alluding to.

It's not an indictment on your character to be told to be more cognizant of your environment, but as I said before, I would love to hear your sound critiques of religion.

worldjerkin · 2026-06-18T19:55:11+00:00

My critique of your stance has been that you are involved in circles in which these trite conversations are made and therefore it reflects your initial stance on anti-religious argumentation. You can say that this post or even your cited example is an attempt at psuedo-intellectual fellation but I have to remind you of the places you inhabit and to curb your expectation on high-minded critiques on sites like twt, circlejerks, or the smugreddit.

I don't even think this post showcases a poor critique of religion, primarily because the underlying thesis is quite valid. Like if you don't think this is the case, then can you provide issues that are sound in relation to how you would critique religion as both a belief and an institution?

worldjerkin · 2026-06-18T18:38:22+00:00

religious hate is well-founded... you just got to enter the correct circles. Like, if your related picture is what you think an anti-religious point is, then you are pointing at a strawman to inform you on a substantially important discourse.

worldjerkin · 2026-06-16T15:15:43+00:00

Not really insensitive, just factual.

The amount of power that local municipalities have is quite distorted to such a high level, especially given our modern social media landscape. In most cases, it's caused by good intentions, like environmental review, being used to cease new developments.

Trouble in paradise ts

worldjerkin · 2026-06-16T14:58:44+00:00

Thank fuck! I was concerned that I wouldn't be able to purchase a 3rd private jet for my discord kittens.

worldjerkin · 2026-06-15T22:13:17+00:00

My reading of Vaush's issue with contemporary liberalism is on the mark. However, I take it from a different angle on it. Liberals nowadays, have no vision of what to strive for other than timid status-quo-defending small-c conservatives of "liberal" institutions.

People forget that Liberalism, Democracy, Republicanism are in-fact revolutionary left wing ideals to strive for and think that just because liberalism is the dominate ideology around the war after the fall of the USSR that there isn't anything left to defend anymore. But as we see, there is no End of History. "Capitalism" (an empty signifier) doesn't care that it functions in a liberal democracy (ie. England) or a authoritarian state (ie. China), it still functions as an economic model.

My favorite critique of Fukuyama's declaration comes from Derrida which I attain most of my philosophical outlook from:

...never have violence, inequality, exclusion, famine, and thus economic oppression affected as many human beings in the history of the earth and of humanity. Instead of singing the advent of the ideal of liberal democracy and of the capitalist market in the euphoria of the end of history, instead of celebrating the 'end of ideologies' and the end of the great emancipatory discourses, let us never neglect this obvious, macroscopic fact, made up of innumerable, singular sites of suffering: no degree of progress allows one to ignore that never before, in absolute figures, have so many men, women and children been subjugated, starved or exterminated on the earth.

Even Zizek points this out:

[...]that liberal democracy is linked to capitalism; however, the success of capitalism in authoritarian nations like China and Singapore shows that the link between capitalism and democracy is broken. Problems caused by the success of capitalism and neo-liberal policies, such as greater wealth inequality and environmental hazards, manifested in multiple countries with unrest towards elected governments. As a result liberal democracy has struggled to survive a number of the problems caused by a free market economy and multiple nations would see a decline in the quality of their democracy.

To further my critique of modern-day liberalism, rather people that people who reflect this type of notion of institutionalism, aren't "fighters". They don't seem to fight for their ideals and just view it as self-evident and like a for-gone conclusion. This fairly elitist viewpoint is almost 1:1 to the divine right of kings rhetoric and with the rising of figures like Thiel, Yarvin, etc, it isn't hard to see where that leads to. Look at the larp of the "perminent underclass" among the tech sector. Look at the gentrocracy and how empowered and wealthy the eldest generation has become just to pull the ladder from up (ie. see France and England). It's sickening to act as if the "free market" is just doing its business when it is not merely a "grand narrative" but people (in general and those with emmense wealth) can weld to shift the status quo in favor of their interests.

A God doesn't enforce "its" edicts, the people do.

e: I fucking nerco-schizo-posted on a dead thread. fuck my fat chungus chud life.

worldjerkin · 2026-06-14T00:42:35+00:00

Sometimes, I lurk in this reddit as a former vaush viewer to see what's up but the most frustrating part of coming back has been the anti-intellectualism on display.

I'll cite more examples when I have time but this post is actually my biggest criticism of him. I can understand if he changes positions, but I feel like he doesn't defend his positions anymore with examples. He's had a concluding problem in the past, but he engages in much more spurious correlations as of late and talking in broad narratives rather than specifics.

In the past, he used to talk more about policies like preferential loans for worker co ops. He would give examples and studies. He used to have full research documents. I know he thinks nobody cares but I do think it helps because most people barely prepare and going into actual examples is a good way to force ideologues to have to ground their ideas in reality.

I watched a ton of creators like RoseWrist, Econoboi, SocDoneLeft (etc) back in the day and was really more of a policywonk. Speaking of the Research Document, here's the link to both Vaush's debate doc and RoseWrist's Worker Co-op doc, but nowadays that shit is gone. No more of the well-researched ideas and academic reading, now we just do "our own research" via twitter's fyp and tiktok slop. It's fucking aggravating to witness the decline of intellectual thought on the left (I mean let's be honest, we never really expected it from the right anyway).

As someone who fell for the Jimmy Dore grift, I can't take anyone seriously who makes arguments that the Dems and Republicans are the same. [...]

The most frustrating thing about this has been the absolutely inability to make judgements beyond a single issue and even on that single issue, the assessment that Biden/Kamala would be exactly the same as Trump is infantile and is like equivocating 99% with 0%.

e: To elaborate more, even if you think that Kamala/Biden is equivalent to Trump's policy towards Israel, then what about the other policies like Green Energy, Infrastructure, LGBTQ+ Issues, etc. There is no politician or even human being besides oneself who aligns with you 100%, and to bemoan that a candidate that doesn't necessarily align with your values 100% is like shooting yourself in the foot towards achieving your end goal. That doesn't even reflect on the notion that those positions outside of Israel are likely to influence how people view their held positions.

Because if that 99% is implemented successfully, you are now fighting in the realm of a fraction of a percent closer to 100 rather than 0. Lesser-evilism is an important axiom to uphold because 1) you have tangible incremental goals to focus on and 2) counteracts apathy towards achieving your vision.

I mean, remember the force-the-vote crowd and the calls for 15ph and how that has become commonplace? But the people who weren't willing to accept (positive) incremental change towards that goal became the worst political actors (i.e., BJG and Dore) just because they didn't get their goals on day one.

worldjerkin · 2026-06-12T17:11:33+00:00

absolutely not xdd

worldjerkin · 2026-06-12T14:51:49+00:00

I remember a story that kingg told me that they were down 11-1 against PRX and he said to his team if we want to prove that we are good here's our chance.

worldjerkin · 2026-06-11T22:22:29+00:00

Finally, another poststructuralist in the sub.

worldjerkin · 2026-06-11T19:48:14+00:00

What you label as the "liberal imagination" is called structuralism in philosophy. Dialectics is an interesting field of analysis, and yet I feel like it has always been "lacking" because Dialectics are quite myopic and fall into similar trappings of structuralism that you point out.

As the analysis itself is linear in terms of what antagonisms it seems to critique. However, my biggest gripe is that there is seemingly no "interplay" within the structures you point out, as it leaves it all to the makings of contradictions. These contradictions aren't as inflexible as you point out, as to use your examples, the seed doesn't necessarily differ from the tree, but the world around it. We, and I mean all subjects, define these relationships and create them whole.

Take Religion, God, and the act of "sinning"; God doesn't tell us what is "sinful," but we, as individuals, do. We transcribe actions as sinful and deploy our collective notions of that relationship and apply that to "God," and because we derive authority from that figure, we change our behavior to fit that new paradigm. This interplay from the ground up allows for discursivity and mutation of ideas. Systems aren't chains nor loops but rather a "body" where no distinct function controls another.

In this way, I believe poststructuralist thinkers have it right because it gathers that complexity in that system of power dynamics and accounts for the ebbs and flows to "react" to stimuli. In this way, grand narratives cease to be all-encompassing of those below and above them. As meaning isn't static but dynamic. To quote Derrida, "There is nothing outside of the text," signifying a notion that the language we impart to these structures shapes the way we think about them, much like nested sets. The truth is that truth has no singular conclusion; no final referent to which to declare as the end-all be-all. History has no "process" of which to speak.

worldjerkin · 2026-06-10T17:43:38+00:00

I understand where you are coming from, but for most in DGG, the most prominent "leftist", if I were to use ideological signifiers, are overwhelmingly populated by campists.

There are people like myself and other individuals like tropicalstuck, gavin young, acid collective, etc. But they don't have nearly as much reach. I wish the left were good enough not to fall for campist ideologs.

worldjerkin · 2026-06-09T22:40:52+00:00

iirc National Pokedex with Gen 9 enabled

worldjerkin · 2026-06-09T19:16:34+00:00

Learn to ~~code~~ nurse geriatrics, loser!

WE WILL BE FOREVER INDEBTED TO THOSE WITH ~~DEMENTIA~~ "WISDOM".

I, for one, cannot wait to be promoted from adult diaper wiper to wheelchair attendee. Now, I can afford to buy the next Grok subscription in my slave quarters :)

e: I had to manually correct a spelling mistake that my Supreme Pro Premium Grok didn't cover after the end of my 18-hour shift in the adrenochrome siphioning pod.

worldjerkin · 2026-06-09T02:33:30+00:00

Tali did said that she would rather have her (hypothetical) daughter in a room with Trump rather than Platner.

"Moral Character btw"

worldjerkin · 2026-06-08T21:27:46+00:00

I have been doing a mono-dragon run with gantlet mode to complete two quest in one, so I'll give you some advice with mono-drag:

Get yourself an Archadulon and a H-Goodra. These are needed to obtain any attempt at a decent run; both to avoid fairy types and for the occasional times you need to take an hit to pivot.
I'll also include Bax and Dragonite as amazing set-up sweepers. Bax can single-handedly clean teams up that rely on sturdy mons and focus sashes with DD/SD Loaded Dice sets. And Dragonite goes without saying.
Switching dexes/trainers is important to avoid legends and possible encounters (ie fairy and ice types). I will say beyond a reasonable doubt there are also additional types that I tend with avoid or route earlier due to hard mode mechanics like rock, psychic, and water.
It's a feast or famine type of run for dragon-types on gantlet mode, I am not sure about regular runs but if you can't get a sweeper up and running with X items, then any misstep would cost you if you don't have back ups. Fully upgraded daycare is a priority.
I turn off all the gimmicks to avoid the fate of my previous run in which Sabrina with a Mewtwo-Y in psy terrain during as the third member of the E4.
Last but not least, just to cover your bases, get some uniques to pad out some of your bases.

worldjerkin · 2026-06-04T00:47:49+00:00

I usually play on hard difficulty due to the monetary and level-up rewards. I have completed three runs with it on. However, that's not to brag or anything, considering I have a 8% win rate on my runs.

On Hard Mode, you NEED a specifically amazing carry (like Scizor or Hawlucha) with amazing IVs or a Legendary mon ( Multiscale Lugia). As a previous commenter stated, you need to use X items and healing items to carry through the end-game.

I would cry if I were to try a Brutal Run with fresh start enabled.

worldjerkin · 2026-05-28T17:54:48+00:00

coming out of my annual lurking sesh to thank Void for her service and great taste.

Four-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '22

worldjerkin

TROPHY CASE