Random Thread

[bradrn]

What about the knowledge that the entire project of emancipatory politics and Enlightenment philosophy is about to enter the ashcan of history just in time for global warming to kill us all?

Certainly not. I consider suicide acceptable in no circumstances short of imminent torture and betrayal in a war (as mentioned by Travis).

[keenir]

Out of curiosity, what would people here consider a legitimate reason for me to commit suicide?

You get handpicked to be President of North Korea. Though, in such an event, wouldn't you want to use your power to improve things there?

If the existing slate of catastrophes facing the world and by extension me does not suffice, then what would?

I used to say "It is always morning somewhere."

This was not my punning on the British Empire saying; it was me making sure that I - and the people around me - managed to remember that there is always some good thing happening, having happened, and-or was about to happen......its often not easy to notice or detect or even hear about (this is, after all, a globe of great size)


Yes, there is the saying "they came for the __ and I said nothing, for I was not a __." But if you take every single negative thing in world news personally, yes its going to wear you down. Even moreso if you - as I did - believe in an extreme form of causality (how many steps I took to cross a road, where and how I crossed it, etc, would impact whether or not the corner store would be out of ice cream by the time i got there; you can imagine my what/how did i do??? when 9/11 hit)

I survived because I had people I could talk to, I had places I could retreat to.

Right now pretty much every country in the world has either embraced some form of reactionary authoritarian politics or will in their next election

You mean they are embracing again. It ended before, and it will end again.

[bradrn]

Out of curiosity, what would people here consider a legitimate reason for me to commit suicide?

You get handpicked to be President of North Korea. Though, in such an event, wouldn't you want to use your power to improve things there?

Huh? That would be a massive opportunity to do good. How could any rational person prefer to commit suicide over taking that role?

[keenir]

Out of curiosity, what would people here consider a legitimate reason for me to commit suicide?

You get handpicked to be President of North Korea. Though, in such an event, wouldn't you want to use your power to improve things there?

Huh? That would be a massive opportunity to do good. How could any rational person prefer to commit suicide over taking that role?

that was kinda my point - its a massive opportunity......the downside was that Malloc got hand-selected, and to run North Korea of all places.
(i figured the sheer odds against both coming true, were infinitesimal enough to stop Malloc's question)

[malloc]

You mean they are embracing again. It ended before, and it will end again.

It only ended because the Axis powers picked a fight with multiple superpowers ideologically opposed to fascism in some way. Currently the only major power still committed to liberal democracy is the EU and they could hardly defeat the US, Russia, and so forth in hypothetical world war.

[keenir]

You mean they are embracing again. It ended before, and it will end again.

It only ended because the Axis powers picked a fight with multiple superpowers ideologically opposed to fascism in some way.

I wasn't referring to WW2, actually.
(and I've heard Stalin described as a pretty fascist individual...though that person oft conflated authoritarianism and fascism, among other things, so I'm not sure)

Come on, if countries can legalize dueling, while having majorities both opposed and supporting it, I see no reason why the world is doomed to be stuck in a morass of evil.

Currently the only major power still committed to liberal democracy is the EU and they could hardly defeat the US, Russia, and so forth in hypothetical world war.

Marvel's claims of Earth 616 aside, not all evil nations are united with puppetmasters calling out the marching orders, jackboots or none.

Also, why not South Korea? They've managed to do pretty good, even with North Korea right next to them, constantly yelling in their ear.

[malloc]

Who do you imagine defeating the US in battle and reinstating liberal democracy the way the Allies did in Germany after WWII? There simply aren't any liberal democracies left willing and capable of such a thing.

Come on, if countries can legalize dueling, while having majorities both opposed and supporting it, I see no reason why the world is doomed to be stuck in a morass of evil.

Partly because the oligarchs of today have perfected the art of propaganda. All major media in the US is owned by billionaires aligned with Trump or at least unwilling to criticize him. Consider how Putin has convinced 80% of Russians to support him. Trump will achieve the same thing.

[keenir]

Who do you imagine defeating the US in battle and reinstating liberal democracy the way the Allies did in Germany after WWII? There simply aren't any liberal democracies left willing and capable of such a thing.

And why is open war the only way to do something? Kermit Roosevelt isn't the only person in modern history who managed to change a large nation without going to war.

Come on, if countries can legalize dueling, while having majorities both opposed and supporting it, I see no reason why the world is doomed to be stuck in a morass of evil.

Partly because the oligarchs of today have perfected the art of propaganda. All major media in the US is owned by billionaires aligned with Trump or at least unwilling to criticize him. Consider how Putin has convinced 80% of Russians to support him. Trump will achieve the same thing.

I remember not too long ago, people were saying that Russian hackers were influencing the US election...now, Russia and the US are not the only nations with...how did some movies phrase it?...with hacking technology. (or am i thinking of Stellaris and Civilization?) either way.

and that 20% leaves a lot of opposition...I doubt they're all Luddites.

[malloc]

And why is open war the only way to do something? Kermit Roosevelt isn't the only person in modern history who managed to change a large nation without going to war.

Because there is simply nothing else that can defeat an authoritarian regime on this scale. Trump will have the entire military, every police department, and tens of millions of heavily armed followers fighting to keep him in power. A minority of dissidents cannot possibly defeat him.

and that 20% leaves a lot of opposition...I doubt they're all Luddites.

The hell it is. You can't win an election or even wage an insurrection with only twenty percent.

[keenir]

And why is open war the only way to do something? Kermit Roosevelt isn't the only person in modern history who managed to change a large nation without going to war.

Because there is simply nothing else that can defeat an authoritarian regime on this scale. Trump will have the entire military, every police department, and tens of millions of heavily armed followers fighting to keep him in power. A minority of dissidents cannot possibly defeat him.

I believe the expression I need here is "Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaa?"

You do realize that in the US, we have an out for all military officers who don't want that: the requirement that they are only obligated to obey lawful orders. A bit extreme, but if Trump decides to call for the army to slaughter all the Amish, the military doesn't have to do squat.

Trump can call himself "a dictator on Day One" all he wants, and his buddies can gleefully boast of how they're going to tear up all the federal departments at the same time......but they keep forgetting that this country relies on paperwork at least as much as - if not more than - guns. This is particularly true for trying to get rid of so much as a tiny wing of a single department -- imagine how much their heads will recoil at all the paperwork for the massive things they want to get done.

as for the "tens of millions of heavily armed followers"...widely dispersed across the nation, if i understand rightly. so they can't be called up to use their sheer numbers, because once they assemble in one area, they aren't in the other areas.

and that 20% leaves a lot of opposition...I doubt they're all Luddites.

The hell it is. You can't win an election or even wage an insurrection with only twenty percent.

Roosevelt argues otherwise.

also, how many hackers did Putin have the last time Trump got elected? I don't think it was more than 20% of the US population.

[Ares Land]

Out of curiosity, what would people here consider a legitimate reason for me to commit suicide? If the existing slate of catastrophes facing the world and by extension me does not suffice, then what would?

Aw man. Seriously, nothing. Nothing at all. Go get some help; there isn't that much we can do here over the internet, except telling you to get help.

Also, Trump or not, you got the right to have a life of your own.

[linguistcat]

I'm someone who believes that self-determination and consent are the most important aspects of making a decision, but I will point out to you malloc that depression often clouds and distorts our perceptions of the world and ourselves. Suicide is something that cannot be undone OR remedied if you realize it was the wrong choice, while almost anything else can either be undone with time or remedied to some extent.

That includes a Neo Nazi clown being elected president. I've already seen plenty of people losing the blinders that made them think Trump would be a good candidate. People are also backing "the Adjuster" and Luigi, whether or not those two people are the same individual. People are angry with the Dems but instead of running to the Republicans for once, I've seen people starting new parties that are explicitly anti-billionaire and pro-working class (the main one being The Working Families Party that I'm personally interested in joining). We're at a point that if Trump seriously tries shit, it will blow up on him.

[Linguoboy]

The hell it is. You can't win an election or even wage an insurrection with only twenty percent.

And you're basing this on...?

How about you look at what actual research has to say on this subject before making wild generalisations.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9q7Bd-C_4-o

[malloc]

The hell it is. You can't win an election or even wage an insurrection with only twenty percent.

And you're basing this on...?

Basic arithmetic. 80% is considerably larger than 20% so logically it should win a civil war unless the smaller side has some astonishing advantage. That is hardly the case for liberals who are not exactly known for their firepower or charisma. How do you defeat someone who outnumbers you hour to one and has all the guns and media?

[Raphael]

The hell it is. You can't win an election or even wage an insurrection with only twenty percent.

And you're basing this on...?

Basic arithmetic. 80% is considerably larger than 20% so logically it should win a civil war unless the smaller side has some astonishing advantage. That is hardly the case for liberals who are not exactly known for their firepower or charisma. How do you defeat someone who outnumbers you hour to one and has all the guns and media?

You forget that having 20 percent doesn't necessarily mean you're up against 80 percent. There may be a lot of undecideds or neutrals as well.

[malloc]

Not when the dictator has overwhelming propaganda and has managed to convince the vast majority of people to support him and hate whoever he hates. Putin for instance has consistently won 80% of the vote because all major media only reports favorably on him and his agenda. People honestly believe everything Putin does is good and necessary and will never turn against him.

[Raholeun]

You are categorically uninterested it seems in heeding our advice, so every well meant word spent will fall on deaf ears. However, since this might serve as general advice: if you indeed feel so deeply hopeless and depressed, please don't seek the cure for it on a conlang forum.

[alice]

Out of curiosity, what would people here consider a legitimate reason for me to commit suicide? If the existing slate of catastrophes facing the world and by extension me does not suffice, then what would?

Seriously, none. Any reason you might come up with is trumped (pun not intended) by one simple fact: the world is a better place with you in it.

[Torco]

Sure but it was hardly that long ago when the far right was taboo instead of winning pretty much every election where it has appeared on the ballot. Right now pretty much every country in the world has either embraced some form of reactionary authoritarian politics or will in their next election. There are no longer any redoubts of liberal democracy, let alone signs that we can advance beyond it. Your neighbors in Argentina have enthusiastically and overwhelmingly taken up the cause of far right libertarianism. How long do you think Chile will withstand the reactionary tide?

fair enough, we're currently in a wave of things going to shit... but i mean, that's common in history too: sometimes things are improving, sometimes they're going to shit, in this sense and that. and at least by political standards the fash are, yeah, currently winning. they've been winning since the eighties. I don't thing the distinction between libertarian and fascist all that relevant. I don't think we'll fare better here than you'll do over there in the imperial core, if we're honest. my point isn't that reality isn't shit, it's that it's kind of always been shit? sure, the us might cease "being a democracy", but while it was it engaged in its fair share of human rights violations, in north america and then elsewhere. sure, the future looks pretty grim, but would you really trade it for, say, 1983? 1907? 1663? 1492? 814? it only makes sense to think of the past as better (and thus, that we're in a downwards spiral from the past to the future) if we think of "the past" generally. as long as you compare the present and probable future with a specific point in space in the past the illusion breaks. let's say 1559 mexico. would you trade it for what you expect 2159 will be like either in mexico or where you live?

It only ended because the Axis powers picked a fight with multiple superpowers ideologically opposed to fascism in some way. Currently the only major power still committed to liberal democracy is the EU and they could hardly defeat the US, Russia, and so forth in hypothetical world war.

sure but geopolitics is not a battle over who imposes their political system on the rest of the world all the time. that's just the tale the gringos tell in order to justify their regime changes etcetera: the official policy of the chinese is to not care about what kind of governments other countries have, and that's been their policy throughout deep time: a world where china is the hegemon, whatever it ends up being (likely bad, amongst other things), will likely not be one in which china imposes sanctions on nigeria because they refuse to adopt the hegemon's political system. and even if they try to enact such a policy of political system evangelism, they're way too weak to get away with it for the foreseeable future. the us spends a looooooooooot of money maintaining the empire, which china won't be able to afford for at least a century: russia may be able to impose *its* political system on big chunks of europe... but then again, not further than warsaw, surely, not in the next 100. israel might carve out big chunks of the middle east, but it seems unlikely that it'll turn the entirety of it into a settlements: there aren't enough jews to give the land to (though they may broaden the criteria to europeans, americans and aussies, i wouldn't be surprised). iran might grow too, and it seems possible the EU might break apart in the next 100. in the same period there's probably going to be a big war, like WW2, and with similar or higher casualties both military and otherwise. nukes might even fall, and climate change will displace millions upon millions causing extensive famines and so on. yes, all of this seems likely.

point is, yeah, the 21th isn't going to be great. but then again neither was the 20th, or the 19th, or the 18th... so the answer to this

Out of curiosity, what would people here consider a legitimate reason for me to commit suicide? If the existing slate of catastrophes facing the world and by extension me does not suffice, then what would?

at least includes not the state of the world unless the state of the world was also a good reason to commit suicide in 1983, 1907, 1667 etcetera. i don't think it was, do you ?