The only thing that would have made that reply better is if they reassured them they can relax and that pixels can't actually hurt them

They can have a few literal cucks sprinkled in there too, it's only fair at this point.

It was due to be the debut title of internal studio Paradox Tectonic, formed in 2019 and led by former Electronic Arts executive vice president Rod Humble.

It just keeps getting worse, Paradox management got beaten with the stupid stick.

Literally laughing in the public's faces about fulfilling their duty.

Pay your taxes and follow mandates or get the boot, but living up to our side of that bargain? You're having a giggle.

Ahh, what I meant there was that if the masses are unthinking in their racialism, then it only takes one charismatic leader, one popular movement to turn the one into the other.

Ah, got it. Yeah, that's always a risk. It's definitely not a perfect, risk free approach, which is why I was so insistent that it was only one potential response not the only one. But lacking any better ideas coming up in the meantime, we're already approaching the line where that risk may be better than the alternative.

I would say it's only a potential risk rather than an inevitable next step, especially for racialism adopted for tactical defensive reasons. That is a tool you consciously choose with the intention of putting it down when the job is done and the dust has not only settled but been swept up. It's "unthinking" in target selection but not in base rationale, so coming in with the same target selection but a completely different rationale is not necessarily going to trick everyone into changing tack unless it's done by a sufficiently proficient manipulator and competent pushback is absent.

Anyway, if you want out I'm satisfied I understand where you're coming from now. Good talk 🤜

They also had the audacity to count a capital cop who went home fine but had a stroke several days later as "killed by J6 insurrectionists" and added him to the count.

Except where the venn diagram of both overlaps, like Kris.

To the ADL question, on a belief level no, because I believe the ADL is not simply an overtly racialist institution but also surreptitiously a supremacist institution and an aggressor, and their tactics reflect that. If I believed they were simply acting simply as a racial defence institution I would be more sympathetic to mirroring them.

And to “do you see how having a belief of absolute racial supremacy is debatably synonymous with an unthinking belief?" No, I do not see those as synonymous. I can see how you could have an unthinking belief in racial supremacy, or you could reason yourself into it. It needn't necessarily automatically unthinking. Even if you want to debate that racial supremacy is always unequivocally wrong, doesn't mean it has to be unthinking, plenty of people can spend a long time thinking about something and still come to the wrong conclusion. Furthermore I wouldn't consider all unthinking beliefs to be synonymous just by virtue of being unthinking, the content of those beliefs still differentiates them from one and other.

And finally and most importantly I don't think unthinking racialism needs to be a belief system at all, it can be a conscious tactical defensive choice. If you look at a system pragmatically and judge that constant hesitation and case by case consideration will inevitably lead to immense suffering for those you care about and total loss of agency at the hands of more hasty aggressors. Then you can decide to adopt the inverse of the racialist heuristic used to rapidly organize against you so you can collectively react faster and defend yourselves more effectively. It's like a boxing coach telling a timid prospect "stop thinking about how to hit him and just hit him!" You'd say that knowing that the accuracy of his punches is going to drop if he listens to you, but understanding the higher quantity of his counter attacks is going to outweigh the reduced quality, and that might be the difference between him walking away to work on his accuracy and refine better techniques for the next fight, or ending his career flat on the canvas tonight.

As if that kind of dancing around would fly in court

What flies in court tends to be determined more by which direction it's facing than it's aeronautical soundness these days.

Glad you're happy. Not even sarcastic there. I prefer productive communication too. Looking forward to the return.

I still maintain the right to fight my corner to not be misrepresented though, I'm not gonna be anybody's passive bitch just for the sake of imaginary civility. And I don't exactly enjoy being condescended to either but whatever, let bygones be bygones I suppose.

What do you think race is?

Because to me, race is a shorthand for a fuzzy distribution of genetic predispositions that can affect a persons physique, behaviour and performance in tangible ways. It's a heuristic of a person's nature where the full analysis would be a battery of psychological analyses, intelligence tests and physical examinations followed by measuring and normalizing for environmental factors that can also affect those same outcomes.

The value of a heuristic is that it's fast and moderately accurate. The value of a full analysis is that it's very accurate albeit much slower. If you're not going to take any action based on the heuristic before doing the full analysis, then it's pointless to even consider the heuristic at all. If you're going wait for the full analysis (I.E. looking at the whole picture), you're losing a heuristic's only comparative benefit of speed. Your "thinking racialism" would be functionally indistinguishable from "racially agnostic decision making" with really bad PR and both would be incredibly weak at preventing "unthinking racialism" of an outside group from overtaking them.

"Thinking racialism" would only have any value if you think race itself had some secret innate and unique value that needs to be considered separately because no other considerations can encapsulate it.

Also you're out by one level for your supposed outcomes of "thinking" and "unthinking" racialism.

One nation one race is the quintessential form of unthinking racialism. You don't get a racially monolithic nation by considering race alongside other factors for citizenship. You get that by considering race as the only factor of citizenship.

And why the fuck would a racialist nation have some pathological need to conquer the world? Nobody wants to be at war and there's no need to enter conflict on the side of your own race in other parts of the world when your own race are all inside your own nation. What you're describing there is absolutist racial supremacy which is a whole different kettle of fish.

So:

"Thinking" racialism = early 1970s America where meritocracy still predominated and some racial disparities in outcome were understood to be acceptable if equal opportunity was demonstrated. People weren't segregated dejure, but still self-segregated to a large degree.

Thinking Unthinking racialism = a nation for every race and a race for every nation.

Unthinking racialism Absolute racial supremacists = we need to go conquer the world and spread our ideals and culture racial genetics through force no matter what.

You can't have thinking racialism, that's an oxymoron. If you only sometimes support people of a certain race because in that particular instance you thought about it and decided they deserve your support for other reasons that's not racialism anymore, that's just a damned coincidence. If those coincidences lead you to decide to support one race disproportionately more than another, that's still not racialism, it's just proof that race isn't just a social construct.

It's only racialism if your decision was based on their race. That's both the great flaw of it, it gives less accurate answers, and the power of it, it gives much faster and more consistent answers across the entire group. It frees up time and effort so that if a situation calls for group intervention you can immediately reach consensus and self-organize into action in large numbers quickly. Non racialist decision making instead leaves you handwringing about the details and investigating the wider context so long that by the time you reach any kind of consensus you realize racialists of a different stripe have already organized, raided a police station and stomped a guy's head in for being the wrong side of a racial divide. There's no putting humpty Dumpty back together at that point. Where you have the time and the luxury of waiting to get the best answer we can discard racialism for it's flaws. But when you need expedience to race against a group who will rapidly decide against you 100% of the time, some inaccuracy is a secondary concern to not letting that group make every choice for you.

I let the "unthinking racialism" slide because I supposed a little harmless tautology for emphasis is nothing to quibble over. But now you're trying to invent a "thinking racialism" so you can have your cake and eat it as you deny words you plainly said and pretend you can silo off the good parts of racialism from the bad without completely neutralizing it, I guess I need to go back and correct that too.

Are you taking the piss now?

You're still fucking misquoting me and I can only assume maliciously at this point, since every browser has a fucking copy paste function.

I said it might be the best tool for the job, not might be the only tool. That is not a trivial quibble. It's a fundamental distinction of formal logic that I kid you not even goddamn pigs can learn. That is the difference between opening your soup with a can opener and trying to eat your soup with a can opener.

Trying to make bullshit like that go unchallenged is the first step to building a fundamental lie that propaganda can be built on, and I'm not buying that you're doing it accidentally anymore.

Is English your second language or something?

You keep making non-sequitur replies like they're supposed to mean something and I keep trying to figure out the steps you skipped under the presumption that your short term memory isn't more stroked out than Biden's and you aren't schizophrenically reading words that aren't there.

For example you didn't ask where the only salvation is overpowering was established. You asked where the only salvation is unthinking racialism was established. Those are two completely different, unlinked statements. They're not interchangable unless you completely redefine multiple words' meanings.

Insisting you can't just redefine meanings retroactively isn't being spastic, it's just not being someone's stupid bitch. It's the same principle by which I won't let someone put words in my mouth that a man with his dick tucked in a dress is a woman.

There's a fundamental misunderstanding of empathy there. Empathy is an innate and instinctual feeling. It's not something that is lost just because you don't enslave yourself to coddling that feeling 100% of the time. Disgust at unhygienic waste is also an innate and instinctual feeling that overall serves a good purpose in society, but parents must learn to temporarily suppress it to clean their children's mess and surgeons need to learn to suppress it to an even greater degree to operate. Empirically, that doesn't make parents of surgeons suddenly morph into disgusting pigs rolling in filth in the rest of their life. Learning to control your emotions and disregard unhelpful instincts for rational goals is part of becoming a healthy, productive adult. People who refuse to do so are just manchildren and liabilities only capable of living under the protective umbrella of others, not shining examples of moral character. People should aspire be higher beings standing on the foundation of their feelings, not a worm crushed under them.

It's not that empathy is bad, having an innate high empathy is good for cooperative societies and history has already proven the overall competitive edge cooperative societies gain. But it's just a crude instinct that gives false positives sometimes. Saying doing what empathy tells you to is always good is like saying shooting people is always bad. That's a path that leads to being the useless idiot trying to stop someone from shooting at someone attempting murder and saving lives. Having high empathy and an adult's emotional control and sense of responsibility is what lead to much of the world having it's first taste in centuries of someone strong enough to depose the marauding warlords not becoming the next marauding warlord. Having high empathy and a child's emotional control and sense of responsibility is what degenerated that into marauding rapists giving the west it's first taste in centuries of the visceral reality of a low trust society.

What? Ok maybe I do need to tone down the reading difficulty.

You put made up words in my mouth about how racialism was the only solution, to then attack that statement. That is what a strawman is.

Autistically hyperfocusing on another word in the sentence doesn't make the claim that I said racialism is the only answer any less fabricated.

Literally a straw man, I said your only salvation is fighting back. Then said racialism might be the best tool for the job

Can’t be both can it?

Of course it can. We're not mental children, we can grasp simple multi-contextual concepts.

Being an unthinking racial blob can be bad in the context of having a society of free and vibrant individualism. But also good in the context of living in a society where the systemic guards of individualism have already been crushed and unthinking racial blobs of a different flavor have invaded and are looking to force you into second class citizenship in the country your grandfathers built. When your only salvation is overpowering a people unified in their desire to enslave you, the coordinated strength of an unthinking racial blob might just be the right tool for the job.

I feel attacked, this guy keeps telling me I look at things like an Asian. I'm not that much of a weeb goddamnit.

Yes, email them. Let them know one of their staff is trying to sabotage their business.

He stretched this morning and even his own shadow did a Trump salute. The enemy is everywhere, so of course the Cardinals' DJ mime celebration was a actually a secret right wing death squad dogwhistle.

Cultural-industrial enrichment programs.

Even if they intend to steal, every vote they have to fraudulently match is resources they have to spend, paid patsies are cheap but they aren't free y'know.

Even if you don't expect to win a battle, at least make them pay as dearly as you can

Until we remove religion we won't advance as a civilization.

That'll go about as well as the idea that until we remove greed we won't advance as a civilization. It's human nature for some portion of the population to be more motivated by belief than empiricism, just like it's human nature for some people to be more motivated by greed than empathy or loyalty. And I really mean nature, these are not learned behaviours, that's why religions have sprung up independently across the entire globe all through history.

So by "remove religion" you have to understand that will require a multi generational global eugenics effort to fundamentally change human nature. Which is ambitious to the point of absurdity. Not to mention the potentially devastating side effects, could we ever be inventive again if we breed out the tendency to believe in things we cannot see? Would that cripple the intelligence that let humans take over the world?

You'd be far more successful accepting that part of the human condition and building a society that can withstand and mitigate things like religion or greed. Better yet, stick a saddle and harness on them and maybe even get some net good out of them.

To be fair Shinto barely is a religion, at most it's the preserved corpse of one.

No central leadership, no modern progressive reinterpretive movements, no weird Shintoist zealots evangelizing. Just a bunch of harmless superstitions and festivals that they can use as a nice cultural touchstone and a shared national identity.