5
Piroko 5 points ago +5 / -0

Why’d he attack France?

France had a complex history with the USSR.

Officially, the French opposed the Bolsheviks in the 20's. But the French government was very unpopular with the French. Between 1920 and 1940 there were 17 French governments as various coalitions formed and collapsed to keep the French communists from participating in any government.

By the 1930's, the government had to acknowledge the reality that a significant minority of the French DID NOT and WOULD NOT perceive the Soviets as enemies, but rather as the continuation of the Revolution, and so shifted towards a policy of communist containment and a weak alliance with the USSR.

The whole of Europe was aware of France's situation. That of all the European countries, France was the most predisposed to fall to communism, and that the French government was weak because it was spending all its effort simply keeping the socialists out of power.

7
Piroko 7 points ago +7 / -0

Growing up in Iowa, one of the default rural states the left loves to mock, nobody I knew watched PBS. If they didnt have cable or satellite, it was by choice and they watched the Iowa Public Broadcast System

Okay, a couple things there friend, cuz I'm also from Iowa and you're neglecting a few things there.

  1. Iowa Public (IPT) is a PBS affiliate.
  2. IPT was consistently THE TOP American contributor to the Red Green Show for basically the show's entire run.
  3. IPT most definitely holds the record for the longest continuous airing schedule of Doctor Who (beating even the BBC, who didn't air reruns during the 90's).
  4. When SyFy tried to get an exclusive license for Doctor Who, the BBC refused ON THE BASIS of IPT's (then) 40 year continuous run of the show.
  5. IPT was I believe the only PBS station to buy BBC 2's Neverwhere adaptation.

Friday night IPT in the 90's was legit. Red Dwarf, classic Doctor Who, and Blake's 7.

3
Piroko 3 points ago +3 / -0

Men 2 years over the age of majority must do the same.

See now that's where you lose me because China knows full well a few dozen million men will be SOL through no fault of their own. By all means tax the women into marriage. But not men. Not while the ratio is out of whack.

2
Piroko 2 points ago +2 / -0

Mhmmm. That's certainly the ideal.

But because of my particular faith I never rule out the hypothetical possibility of people being willing to die for dumb ideas.

7
Piroko 7 points ago +7 / -0

Chinese women mandated to pick a husband or they will be assigned one via lottery.

In turn, jurispuridence on domestic disputes is rolled back to the 19th century norms.

6
Piroko 6 points ago +6 / -0

Reverse the phrasing. State mandated patriarchy.

No matter what, China has excess men. Only time or war will solve that.

3
Piroko 3 points ago +3 / -0

I have every confidence in the Chinese government's capacity to unalive excess men. Either directly or by giving them some foreign beach to storm.

8
Piroko 8 points ago +8 / -0

The oversupply of men is not an issue at all.

The problem is that the women they have are opting to be single. The state need only take that choice out of their hands.

This will probably trigger a civil war between the idealistic white knights who would die for women to be free of the state, and the pragmatic statists who will gamble their lives for a state patriarchy is the law. That quite conveniently solves the oversupply problem.

18
Piroko 18 points ago +18 / -0

How?

Do what the Germans did. Kick them out of the workplace.

The problem isn't the imbalance, it's that the women they do have aren't reproducing.

If China wants results, they need only drop the pretense that they care about the individual's rights at all, and make it both illegal and impractical to be a single woman. They HAVE the government apparatus to feasibly do this.

16
Piroko 16 points ago +16 / -0

country grappling with plunging marriage rates

Are they though? Of all nations, China has the most practical power to solve that problem by force if they have the will to do so.

5
Piroko 5 points ago +5 / -0

I call this pose the "cordite chain smoker".

4
Piroko 4 points ago +4 / -0

The codex does not support this action.

3
Piroko 3 points ago +3 / -0

https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2014/12/15/nothing-succeeds-like-liberal-secession-blue-america-without-red-america-would-be-a-basket-case-n1931175

Old topic, we know how it would end.

Fracking was outlawed in Blue America; Red America became the world’s number one petroleum exporter. Blue America laws banning nuclear and coal power led to the “Kentucky Line” of coal plants running parallel the state’s northern border with Blue Ohio, selling Blue America the power it refused to generate itself. The ban on GMO crops and many pesticides cratered Blue American food production, a void Red American farmers were happy to fill. All the while, Denver, Dallas, Atlanta and other cities grew their own tech and entertainment industries built on refugees from Silicon Valley and Hollywood looking for an environment where success was not penalized. Red America began to supply itself with what Blue America used to provide. Blue America’s deficit exploded even as Red America balanced its budget, per the one new amendment it had added to the Constitution.

1
Piroko 1 point ago +1 / -0

If you read into the judge's ruling...

The judge chews out the plaintiffs pretty ruthlessly for setting the bar of their argument so low that he basically had to side with Meta.

"This ruling does not stand for the proposition that Meta’s use of copyrighted materials to train its language models is lawful. It stands only for the proposition that these plaintiffs made the wrong arguments and failed to develop a record in support of the right one." -Judge Chhabria

He then went on to spell out exactly what argument the authors SHOULD have made, and that other, smarter plaintiffs should consider themselves fortunate that THIS batch of plaintiffs didn't get a class action certification.

2
Piroko 2 points ago +3 / -1

However, it appears they also launched more missiles at Israel after that tweet, so who knows?

As I've said elsewhere, I would not at all be surprised if there are gaping holes in Iran's chain of command right now. It's entirely possible the field commanders of Iran's missiles are not in communication with the government.

1
Piroko 1 point ago +1 / -0

(Shrug)

Until we know who spoke to who, I'm inclined to believe the chain of command in Iran has collapsed and the field commanders are just doing whatever the fuck they feel like.

10
Piroko 10 points ago +10 / -0

I guarantee you their capacity to maintain interception over critical infrastructure is one of, maybe even the primary factor in how long they can sustain a campaign.

37
Piroko 37 points ago +37 / -0

What's Israel's angle with the ceasefire?

Almost out of interceptor missiles.

1
Piroko 1 point ago +1 / -0

And you're making the mistake of thinking that the right would come out on top.

In America, there is no question, the right would win.

In Europe... I don't take that as a given. Let's do a hypothetical. Suppose the Dutch succeed in getting a far right government, pull out of the Schengen area, and start mass deporting immigrants.

You're asking me to believe two things:

  1. That the Germans WON'T assemble an EU army and invade them Donetsk style.
  2. That there won't be a significant fifth column of Dutch who welcome them (again, Donetsk style).

The problem in Europe is that the far right is not an outright majority, but rather barely a plurality. In the US, the right as both enormous real power and enormous territorial dominance; the left is divided in a few city-state enclaves, but two thirds of the states have bright red, outright majority conservative governments. We've won before we've started, we're just telling California and New York to get on with it and secede already.

That isn't the case in Europe. The only territorial concentration of the far right is East Germany.

1
Piroko 1 point ago +1 / -0

Even Hitler didn't succeed because he got elected

But he still had to get elected.

8
Piroko 8 points ago +9 / -1

For long enough to inhibit a response.

When Europe flips to muslim plurality, the flip will happen pretty quickly. Unless massive quantities of women go true believer far right, there won't be a window of opportunity for western men to elect a regime that takes action fast enough to reverse things.

To put it another way, by the time the muslim percentage becomes high enough to deprive women of franchise, it will already be too late to elect a government that will reduce the muslim percentage.

The conflict is against irrational compassion on the part of women.

13
Piroko 13 points ago +13 / -0

Europeans will just roll over and die?

As long as women have a say in politics?

Yes.

1
Piroko 1 point ago +1 / -0

"Aren't they a democracy?"

"A People's Democratic Republic..."

"AH. So a communist dictatorship."

-Yes, Minister

2
Piroko 2 points ago +4 / -2

Bush attacked Iraq to distract from the fact that Saddam started out as our madman.

A madman we put in place as part of our (then) new "Fuck Iran" policy.

Being a Gen X'er, I have no problem with us bombing Iran; we've been talking about doing it almost as long as I've been alive. If it was this easy, why did we wait so long to do it?

view more: Next ›