812200+ entries in 0.533s
mike_c: who are
the
top 5 people who hurt romania?
mircea_popescu: (paul little = max hardcore,
the cheap makeup and vomit porn guy)
mircea_popescu: possibly us entertainment sucks so bad
to
this day because him.
mircea_popescu: well, i have some respect for
the variety
tradition, but barnum is a sort of paul little without a cause.
Duffer1: without
the circus
the bread isn't enough?
mircea_popescu: making a list of "bad" people generally is really an exercise in measuring
the weight of air, in air, with a scale and weights made out of air.
the20year: Nevermind, list of people who have hurt
the uS
mircea_popescu: it's not "bad presidents", it's "people
that hurt
the us"
Duffer1: american assholes,
top 5 :P
the20year: Guess I was confused as
to
the list
mircea_popescu: in general you'll find most damaging are
the insiders, not
the outsiders.
the20year: So you'd
take lincoln over pol pot?
mircea_popescu: as long as
they're people dun matter where
they're born or what function
they get.
the20year: because no US citizen would
take my
top 5 bad people list
the20year: Which destroyed
the potential legacy of coolidge
the20year: i assumed
the list was US presidents
the20year: Not
that I like herbert, he's on my
top bad president list
Duffer1: arguably more powerful
though
the20year: I
thought you were
talking about herbert, as edgar wasn't president
Duffer1: seems j edgar fits
that definition way better
mircea_popescu: hoover because he's
to
this day
the prototype of every corrupt cop going into
the service
to feel up young women and beat up boys.
Duffer1: the precedent set
the stage for massive constitutional overreach
Duffer1: he was even deporting reporters
to canada
Duffer1: i
think lincoln is a good choice,
the damage done is undeniable
mircea_popescu: but obviously no conflict in human history was between
the good and
the evil. even if no conflict in human history failed being depicted as such. by both sides, of course.
mircea_popescu: had it been
the case i'd have perhaps had a different name
to
top my list
Duffer1: they didn't want states rights,
they wanted
the north
to stop
telling
them what
to do
Duffer1: they claimed "states rights" meanwhile
they were
trying
to unite
the south in its own federal control and mandate a single religion
the20year: granted, i was
taught in school
that
the civil war was bout states rights and money :D
the20year: 19th century history is pretty simplified
too, for public consumption
mircea_popescu: not any sort of country anyone'd wish
to live in, but
then again people living in shitholes rarely get
the choice.
mircea_popescu: it has ample precedent.
that precedent is
the government of lincoln.
mircea_popescu: basically obama's ideas
that he can arrest anyone at any
time for any rteason ?
the20year: Essentially his quote was
that he, nor anyone he knew in
the south fought for slavery, but against federalism. And
that it would be replaced with slavery as
time went on since education in
the south would likely be federalized by notherners
Duffer1: macro economics isn't as eye catching as
the horrors of slavery
mircea_popescu: obviously
the statal propaganda machine will have
tried
to make it all about a simple, cut and dried issue.
mircea_popescu: the20year nothing new in
this world except
the history you never read and all
that.
the20year: There was a pretty interesting quote made by a southern general after
the war, i need
to dig it up, being just about
that. And
that over
time
the civil war would be made about slavery and nothing else
mircea_popescu: on
the other hand saying
that
the civil war
the direct result of
the southerner's staunch opposition
to high
taxes and unsound money coming into conflict with lincoln's vision of a leviathanesque all-controlling state.
Duffer1: i dunno, i feel it's a case of a little leaven fermenting
the whole lump
mircea_popescu: and now,
the fact
that upriver conditions are softer and downriver harser kind of proves
that
the situation is in fact evolving
mircea_popescu: it is in fact
the way
the whites of
the
time represented
them
to
themselves, mostly.
mircea_popescu: for
there
to be betrayal
there must be
trust.
trust is
the substance of contracts, which is exactly antithetical
to how black-white relations are customarioly represented.
Duffer1: sold
to a harsher plantation owner
Duffer1: even if
they stayed
they were fully dependent
mircea_popescu: you familiar with
the expression "sold down
the river" ?
Duffer1: it was illegal for
them
to own anything
mircea_popescu: when you go bomb
the shit out of
the infrastructure
the end result is you'll be poor.
the20year: While
the rights of everyone gets
trampled on over failed social projects
TomServo: I knew I'd be displaying my ignorance asking
that, ah well.
Thanks.
the20year: Look at price rates for irish vs germans vs blacks in new york state in
the 1800s
Duffer1: the only gain from
the war was emancipation, poverty was guaranteed regardless, except for
those
that left
mircea_popescu: TomServo you get more gdp per capita out of 100 barristas
trying
to write hollywood scripts
mircea_popescu: criminals "just happen"
to be mostly black anyway, hooray for progress.
mircea_popescu: so what's
the gain of
the war ? picked a different nigger
to pile on ?
mircea_popescu: but
the southerner recognised an extremely varied and complex hierarchy. black = slave = chattel is about as oversimplified as one can get.
mircea_popescu: you could argue
that
the way criminals are handled
today is chiefly designed
to keep
them criminals
mircea_popescu: in fact, pre-war southern racism is closest
to modern day view on criminality.
the20year: The
thing is , of all
the souterners i Know , none really were racist, but i've known plenty of ohio natives
that were extremely racist. Heck my great uncle was in
the KKK
mircea_popescu: Duffer1 souther racism as you know it
today is wholly
the creation of
the war.
the20year: Duffer1: do you live in
the south?
the20year: And it's not like slavery was only existant in
the US, as with anything ,money drives
the gears
Duffer1: slavery laws weren't modernized until
the 50's and 60s, i believe you're underestimating southern racism
the20year: And slavery
today isn't very popular at all , outside of sexual slavery which is a whole other ballgame
mircea_popescu: if you look at
their evolution,
the
thing was doomed anwyay.
mircea_popescu: Duffer1 slavery laws in
the south were evolving, like any body of laws.
Duffer1: even if
they didn't intend
to keep
them, southern laws forbade
their existence outside of any context
that didn't revolve around a white master
mircea_popescu: however, it was dieing out in a sustainable way, rather
than creating
the black ghettos
that
the war created.
mircea_popescu: TomServo because slavery was fundamentally an economic interest, and it is economically ineffectual. it WAS already dieing out at
the
time of
the war
mircea_popescu: hardly half
the inheritors of slaves intended
to keep
them past
the death of
their parents.
mircea_popescu: TomServo roosevelt probably not in
there, as shocking as
that may seem. hoover for sure
tho.
the20year: There could of potentially been a slow
transition
TomServo: Yeah, I'm having
trouble imagining how
the question would 'die out'
Duffer1: the harm done by lincoln was necessary imo, even if slavery was one of many reasons for
the war, emancipation still needed
to occur
the20year: It can be hard
to speculate how different
things would be if we could swap decisions out
mircea_popescu: it's my considered opinion
that if you make
the sorted list of people
that have hurt
the us, lincoln
tops it
mircea_popescu: if
the slavery question were allowed
to die out rather
than used as a pretext for a war, you wouldn't still be fighting over
the mason-dixon line in 2013 ffs.
Duffer1: after
the civil war we should have just let
the south separate
mircea_popescu: a perfect illustration of
the incredible damage lincoln's imbecillity did
to
that country.
mircea_popescu: it's finally worked itself into
the perfect storm,
this deep seething conflict.
mircea_popescu: top rated show star gets canned for "hate speech" while quoting
the bible.