jvandreae

> It's amazing how much leftist discourse is just them pretending not to understand things, thus making discourse impossible. > https://x.com/MillennialWoes/status/1893134391322308918

> they successfully export the social contradictions of mass production

Because the West used to have tons of manufacturing and unusually large amounts of social unrest? Shitholes are gonna shithole. No one is stopping them from being the next South Korea or Singapore (if they really wanted it, lol) except themselves.

> At most, they'll last until the end of Trump's presidency

Eh, you don't think Vance will keep them going when he wins in 28? I do agree that the uncertainty is an issue.

We don't want any more immigrants, and we don't care whether they contribute or not.

Ah, yes, the Orwellian newspeak that is the phrase "Department of Defense" is something worth protecting. What next, the Ministry of Truth?

I don't really give any weight to what a leftist considers a vice or a virtue.

I - and thankfully, it appears, the current administration - don't accept your definition of who is "my countrymen".

> losers and crybabies

Luckily, for now, at least, it appears to be your side that is losing and crying.

Ah, yes, just like he hates Japan and Italy for being run by women.

> American men feel entitled to women, as from birth they’re told that they are.

Outside of lower-class men (who tend to have more machismo/less to lose) and presumably unusually attractive men (who can get away with it), I have literally never heard anyone express this even once. Maybe lay off the smut?

> Women know this, and (rightly!) hate it, and thus some of them pull away from relationships with men — or with entitled men

You absolutely should not engage with "entitled" men, insofar as they aren't a figment of your imagination.

> Men are, by far, the more emotional / hysterical sex

Lol, you are projecting again.

IME, women are overwhelmingly more entitled (in a general sense) than men, sorry.

Sure, women having to deal with a few "entitled" "predators" sucks and we should do something about that but the vast majority of men have no such entitlement - although obviously this is different in the context of a marriage.

There have always been certain rights granted to and duties expected from men and women. Leftism and feminism have weakened the expectations placed on women (and to a lesser extent men) and now the scales are unbalanced.

I believe this is touched upon in https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/04/22/right-is-the-new-left/

Female/leftist projection at its finest. There is no single group more entitled than the AWFL.

The simple fact is that values are partially heritable, and if you believe your values to be superior (you should!) then having children and encouraging people who share those values to have children is a good way to propagate those values. This works for ~any set of values.

The past is a foreign country. I do not believe "quality of life" in economic terms is a sufficient explanation. The simple Darwinian fact is that, if your culture did not value reproduction sufficiently, through whatever means, it would not have survived to the present. Remember, infanticide was widely practiced historically, and while not as convenient as birth control, provides a significant fraction of the same "benefit".

I do find it a bit ironic that "free child slave labor" is considered a better reason to have kids these days than, say, ancestor worship or nietzschean vitalism.

> unchecked climate change is going to mean for kids born today

No amount of climate change today could compare with the threat of war and famine in the past, and yet they still had kids.

Louise Perry even goes so far as to hypothesize that the distinct lack of threat contributes to low fertility, under the term "mortality salience": https://x.com/Louise_m_perry/status/2014296167262126192

> The good part is spawning another entity which has to slog through mindless work and consumption cycle, (experience the misery of aging, wither and die) - just so you can feel good about yourself?

The future belongs to those who show up. I do wonder what percentage of antinatalism is simply mate/fertility suppression. The rest being "mad at God for the crime of being", of course.

That article seems a bit misleading. While some sweetener packets, such as equal and splenda contain some sugar, I don't believe this is necessarily true when they are used in other products. A quick google implies that, for example, Diet Coke (my beloved) does not contain any real sugar, only aspartame. So it seems disingenuous to compare the metabolic impact of a sugar/aspartame blend to pure aspartame.

The problem with docker is less the containerization and more the half-baked build system.

"Progress for the tick is not progress for the dog."

> These are the same individuals who empower fascists—whether in the US, Germany, Argentina, or Italy

Correct, madame.

Yep, just the age-old trick of creating a problem and then selling an ineffective solution. Unbounded profit!

They know they're being talked about derisively and don't like it. They want to keep doing what they're doing, but they need you to not talk about it, so they can get away with it, so they attack the term. They know exactly what they're doing.

Compare also:

一 / 1 (one stroke vs three)

十 / 10 (two strokes vs four)

万 / 10,000 (three strokes vs seven)

> Countries are for the people living in them, regardless of where they were born.

If the country is composed of people who don't want to give up their culture or ethnic majority to foreign migrants, then shutting down foreign migration is completely justified. Thank you for admitting that.

> countries are only for the people born to them

Who are countries for, if not the people, then? The "international community"? America, as the global hegemon[0]?

> easy way to deflect blame for your country's problems onto an already marginalized minority.

Ultimately, the blame for allowing minorities into a country is on the people of the country for letting it happen.

[0]: https://www.reddit.com/r/funny/comments/4q4tm7/every_country...

I think all three contribute, not necessarily equally. Anecdotally, I'd probably weight it at 2:1:1, but I imagine it varies a lot by individual and location.

> Has anyone written on this issue dispassionately?

Chris Williamson of the Modern Wisdom podcast has interviewed many public intellectuals from different sides on the subject in a fairly even-handed way.

I'm currently reading Mary Harrington ("Feminism against Progress") and Louise Perry's ("The Case Against the Sexual Revolution") books on the subject, and find them fairly convincing.

> This baby brained “men bad” or “women bad” discourse belongs in the dumpster.

Amen.

Also covered by Huell Howser, if you are a fan: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b645RQuD6lI