One good way forward is to try to push them to affirm lunacy that is currently out of bounds for the mainstream, like getting them to affirm a white man can identify as a black man, or a person can identify as some endangered animal and demand habitat protection: "this is not a human dwelling, it is a beaver lodge and I demand it get the proper respect it deserves!"
Yes, they will go there eventually, but maybe if it gets pushed fast enough people will push back on them more.
When they whine about "Global South" not getting enough opportunities, it is because their English is garbage at best. Many years ago when I did it a little, the best paying jobs required a US IP because they wanted a native English speaker.
Anyone who has interacted remotely with Indians who are "fluent" in English all know their "English" is a very different sub-dialect. Of course there are plenty of Indians who have great English, but they almost all move to Western countries.
The big thing many ignore is the importance of religious morality in these discussions. As John Adams famously said, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious People. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” This was not a fringe viewpoint among those who wrote the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
One of the more pathetic arguements I've heard recently was Matt Walsh on Joe Rogan trying to argue against legalized gay marriage without invoking the Bible or God; Rogan smoked Walsh. Moreover, it was disingenuous from Walsh: he is a devout Catholic, and had even said so earlier on the podcast, yet his ego made him think he could make a moral argument without using the foundation of his views.
Individuality without the bounds of something like Christian morality cannot build a cohesive society, as it just leads to everyone doing what is right in his own eyes. There needs to be a collective set of moral rules that everyone in a society agrees upon for that society to be both free and civil. If not, the only way for structure is through authoritarianism, like how Saddam held Iraq together. Not ideal, but it was better than pretending that splintered society was capable of self governance under an elected government.
I agree, they try to cover up all their horrible character flaws as if they are somehow part of their sexual identity, but when they gather together it just ends up being a bunch of mean, miserable people awkwardly interacting.
In California, I still see some teachers wear masks, especially young, fresh out of college substitutes. The only students and teachers that still wear masks seem to all be asian, although the majority of asians don't mask, but it still is an obvious correlation.
Similarly, when I see people walking in the morning some still wear masks, again mostly asian, but overall almost no adults going about their day wear masks except for the early 20's and asians.
I've been thinking that the winning move for a western gaming company would be for a bunch of talented people to start a new company in Japan so that they have no need to meet diversity quotas. Obviously would need to hire Japanese people to handle all the local laws, leases, and whatever, but the game design team could be built solely on talent.
I've told leftists I know that I won't engage in deep discussions with them if they can't agree with me on things like the existence of absolute moral truths, as we have no common ground at a foundational level.
Why discuss politics with someone who thinks men can be pregnant, it is a waste of time until you can get them to agree there is objective reality.
I think that would back fire just like the Andrew Tate thing, as calling it an evil nazi platform will cause teenagers to flock to it at least once to check it out. If it is a quality platform, many would stick around.
"I'm from Laos"