Posts
Wikitag Contributions
Since you mention "race relations," if you mean antisemitism as a kind of racism, no, not really. The Groypers remain a fringe group of internet trolls without any real influence; they're useful to both sides, to either trigger the libs or make the Republicans look bad, so they get hyped up far out of proportion to their actual importance.
What is ascendant on the Right is America First populism, a combination of anti-elitism and anti-globalism, both of which might be mistaken for antisemitism if you engage in reckless noticing, but they hate Fauci and Gates as much as any comparable Jew[1].
There's also a much more recent anti-Israel sentiment due to concerns they might drag the US into war against Iran, but I expect that to be transient, and not worth much discussion here. This might eventually become antisemitism of the kind you're asking about if the war comes to pass, but at the moment "anti-Zionism" seems almost exclusively a cause of the Left (proximately driven by the Gaza Genocide™ in their case).
- ^
With the one exception of George Soros, whom, yes, they have a particular hatred of. But come on, he's personally working towards to the utter ruination of all they hold dear.
The old SSC essay, How the West Was Won, seems relevant.
I am pretty sure there was, at one point, such a thing as western civilization. I think it included things like dancing around maypoles and copying Latin manuscripts. At some point Thor might have been involved. That civilization is dead. It summoned an alien entity from beyond the void which devoured its summoner and is proceeding to eat the rest of the world.
Even EY didn't expect it to look this bad this soon
The doctor says, "Cheer up! The great AI Safety researcher Yudkowsky is in town. Attend his lecture, and you'll feel better."
1Worse then merely immoral, "air con" is considered American. The proud people of Europe would die first.
I don't have a detailed writeup, but this seems straightforward enough to fit in this comment: you're conducting your moral reasoning backwards, which is why it looks like other people have a sophisticated intuition about neurobiology you don't.
The "moral intuition"[1] you start with is that insects[2] aren't worth as much as people, and then if you feel like you need to justify that, you can use your knowledge of the current best understanding of animal cognition to construct a metric that fits of as much complexity as you like.
- ^
I'd call mine a "moral oracle" instead. Or a moracle, if you will.
- ^
I'm assuming this post is proximately motivated by the Don't Eat Honey post, but this works for shrimp or whatever too.
If you're concerned about deleting negative comments, you should see blocking the people making them as effectively deleting their comments from every future post.
1all genetic mutations are bad.
You might be rediscovering Fisher's geometric model. A refinement to your current model you could consider is that close to, but not exactly at, the local optima, sufficiently small mutations have a 50% chance of being beneficial.
Why not the more obvious solution of simply charging an application fee?