I'm neither pro nor anti-natalism since I have deep misgivings about both, but I will say that the biggest practical concern is pro-natalism and also the 'pro-natalism for me but anti-natalism for thee' crowd. There isn't now, nor has there ever been, a significantly large number of people who believe in universal anti-natalism. It's just not a thing. It's not a meaningful political threat.
In the same way virtual particles "become" real the longer they exist (their mass and energy get closer to their "on-shell" values), the more effort you put into an online account the harder it is to just dispose of them and start fresh.
#physics #philosophicalmusings #internet
I think that ultimately the only humane way to treat others is to not ascribe value to people based on 'usefulness', as a means, but rather to value others for themselves, as an end. If people don't have intrinsic worth, if their value is based only on what they can do for others, then they are being seen only as a commodity, as an object.
I think a lot of times people mistake support of the status quo for practicality when there are many times these things couldn't be more different.
And if we're talking about the geopolitical situation of the world today, this is absolutely the case. The current state of affairs is entirely unsustainable. Continuation of current trends ensures an inevitable collapse. Even if we just look at the situation with climate change alone, we can see this.
Rapid change is inevitable and unpreventable. The best way to find both hope and practical answers lies not in digging our heads in the sand and ignoring that fact, but in accepting the necessity of change and helping to move that change in a more positive direction. Each of our contributions individually may be small, but together they can add up to more than the sum of their parts.
It's a lot better to argue against opposing positions by steelmanning them than by strawmanning them. This can enable you to not only more effectively argue against an opposing position, but to better understand your own position, as it will call to mind many nuances that are often overlooked for the sake of simplicity. It is however also easy to think an argument isn't being strawmanned if you're using a real argument.
But the truth of the matter is, most of us make bad arguments all the time. I don't think most of the arguments that I or anyone else make on an average day would stand up to scrutiny if properly and rigorously analyzed. I think the truth is that we (many times quite understandably) simply choose to devote our brainpower to other matters. Making a good argument is hard--making a good argument compelling doubly so. Making bad but compelling arguments can often be more effective than making good ones, which further undercuts the motivation for people to make good arguments.
My point is that even arguments people are legitimately making can be selected in a way so as to strawman that position, and in fact this is the easiest way to select arguments to refute. Don't mistake sincerity for quality.
I often see the sentiment expressed that a person cannot afford to worry about others if they have their own problems. And I have to say, that in my experience the opposite is true: when I focused the most on myself, that worry spiralled larger and larger, interfering even with my ability to address those personal issues that were so important to me. And even small failures might loom large in my mind, making a mountain from a molehill.
But now that I do occupy myself much more with doing what I can in the face of the enormity of the problems our world faces, I have also been able to better address my own personal problems before they overrun me.
It turns out that that the more practice you have solving problems, the better you become at it. And that caring for others can also help you better care for yourself.
Why I hate YouTubers
So as I mentioned in my previous post, I deeply dislike YouTube commentators.
To be clear, my issue with YouTube commentators* isn't that they're ordinary people expressing their opinions online. I'm an ordinary person expressing my opinion online, for better or worse. And I actually think it's good that it's not just a few people who have wealth or connections who can find a platform to opine on. Most people could use exposure to a wider variety of perspectives, in my opinion.
No, my issue with linking (and thus promoting) YouTube commentators is that I feel it's become part of the cursed celebrity culture that gives weight to certain opinions because of who those opinions come from rather than how well thought out they are or whether they have any basis in reality whatsoever. I take issue with people treating their parasocial relationships with these creators as if they grant those creators some greater legitimacy than the average person on the street who wouldn't know the first thing about how to be charismatic on YouTube or is just too principled to sell out to ghouls like Better Help. To make it worse, there's the rampant astroturfing. Because these people often present themselves as 'just some regular guy'* they obscure the vast amount of workers who support and are at times exploited by them. Because the truth is that the vast majority of YouTubers with fairly polished videos are supported by considerable $$$ and an impressive production studio that most regular guys do not and will never have. And even when that is not the case (which it often is), they often present their deeply status quo or marginally left-of-far-right opinions as somehow revolutionary. And even when this is not the case, they are often unapologetic edgelords.
So even beyond YouTubers with reprehensible behavior and opinions, I think the culture of promoting YouTubers is a problem in and of itself. That said, I do think some of them say worthwhile things at times, so I'm thinking of sharing more of them occasionally, but I can't help but think of coming up with and adding some sort of copy-paste blurb to each one to express my distaste of the monster that late-stage capitalism has turned the 'YouTube commentator' into.
* that is, some individual expressing their political or pholosophical opinions on YouTube. This does NOT describe news outlets or other orgs or people affiliated with said outlets or orgs. This is not to lend special legitimacy to news outlets or other orgs purely by their existence as a group or individual--I can certainly have issues with them, too, of course, but that's a different dynamic.
with sometimes extraordinary $$$, especially when they have a high tolerance for selling out.
*and many of them are men, though being an exploitive sellout is a choice that certainly cannot be excused by being from an oppressed gender, either. unspeakablehorror: The War in Ukraine: The Only Correct Opinion
So, first, a short preamble. This is a video expressing staunch support of Ukraine from a leftist perspective. While I very much agree with the opinion here, I hesitated to link this sort of video because I abhor uplifting random YouTube personalities, which is what this guy is. Few things grate more to me than the edgelord ethos of the average YouTube commentator, even when I agree with what they are saying. Nevertheless, he expresses his support of Ukraine very articulately (with sources!) from a principled anti-imperialist perspective. And though I would prefer to instead articulate my own reasoning, I admit that I lack the time, energy, and skill to do so even remotely as well as has been done here. So, with that out of the way, here's the edgelord summary of this video:In this video I talk about the Russian invasion in Ukraine and how the only correct opinion is to be a full Z orc/Zelenskite-Banderite hybrid Support
Sources:
[1] https://ukraine.un.org...
[2] https://www.politico.e...
[3] https://www.bbc.com/ne...
[4] https://www.aljazeera....
[5] https://www.cnbc.com/2...
[6] https://www.theguardia...
[7] • Gaza Death Toll Denial...
[8] https://www.universite...
[9] https://www.newsweek.c...
If you wish to contest any of the specific facts he's cited, feel free to do so, but you'll have to cite your own sources if you want me to take your claim seriously.
The War in Ukraine: The Only Correct Opinion
by BadEmpanada
So, first, a short preamble. This is a video expressing staunch support of Ukraine from a leftist perspective. So while I very much agree with the opinion here, I hesitated to link this sort of video because I abhor uplifting random YouTube personalities, which is what this guy is. Few things grate more to me than the edgelord ethos of the average YouTube commentator, even when I agree with what they are saying. Nevertheless, he expresses his support of Ukraine very articulately (with sources!) from a principled anti-imperialist perspective. And though I would prefer to instead articulate my own reasoning, I admit that I lack the time, energy, and skill to do so even remotely as well as has been done here. So, with that out of the way, here's the edgelord summary of this video:
In this video I talk about the Russian invasion in Ukraine and how the only correct opinion is to be a full Z orc/Zelenskite-Banderite hybrid SupportSources:[1] https://ukraine.un.org...[2] https://www.politico.e...[3] https://www.bbc.com/ne...[4] https://www.aljazeera....[5] https://www.cnbc.com/2...[6] https://www.theguardia...[7] • Gaza Death Toll Denial... [8] https://www.universite...[9] https://www.newsweek.c...If you wish to contest any of the specific facts he's cited, feel free to do so, but you'll have to cite your own sources if you want me to take your claim seriously.
The War in Ukraine: The Only Correct Opinion
So many reviews of A Half-Built Garden complaining about too much gender politics in the story. I can only shake my head at this. Problem with the gender politics isn't that Emrys leaned too hard into it, but that she didn't lean hard enough into it, politically and philosophically speaking. Too content to confine herself to the shallows when she should have been exploring the deeps.
unspeakablehorror
Flounder
SpringGnoll