Leo Gura

A second axis has its utility. I don't want to reduce reality to any single-axis model. But the 2-axis model sometimes obscures that Nazis/Hitler was fundamentally conservative. Regarding Stalin and Mao, the issue there is complicated. The issue is that leftist ideals can be worn as wolves in sheeps clothing. There is a deep asymmetry between embodiment of left vs right. It's much easier to embody the right because it purely serves survival whereas left ideals are utopian. Therefore, many power-hungry people can cloak themselves in leftist ideals without the ability to embody it. Stalin, Mao, Castro, Ghaddafi, and pretty much all 20th century leftist revolutionaries used leftist ideals to grab power but then since those ideals were totally beyond the development level of their societies, they turned into classic power hierarchies. The key is that power was never actually shared, it was brutally consolidated -- which is actually a conservative way of governance. When left ideals fails conservative reality rules. What matters is not the words they say but whether they actually share power with the weak. If power is not shared then it's just bullshit and effectively conservative. Stalin can say he was a leftist, but he didn't have the development level to be actually be a leftist. Being a true leftist is way harder than being a rightie. That's the rub that right-wingers do not understand. When shit hits the fan everyone acts like a selfish animal, no matter how left their ideals are. Being truly left requires surrendering yourself, which only sages can do. So the load in my view is not carried by one axis but also by distingushing ideological rhetoric from developmental embodiment. There is the selfish vs selfless axis which transcends politics.

It's not quite the same since Israel's base land was designated by international treaty and UN resolution. Settlements violate international treaties and laws. But I understand what you meant.

@Daniel Balan Cheers! Don't use my insights to hate others. Thanks.

If the UN voted to give Palestinians band-aids, the US would veto.

It is an interesting observation that the less dignified the society (more rapists around) the more women must be "decent" (cover up).

Off to a promising start.

@Carl-Richard Are you not entertained?

I want to watch Jordan Peterson wrestle with a gorilla.

Sport of the Gods.

They will live out their sci-fi fantasies while you slowly get poorer and poorer and completely useless to them.

My sport idea: Kangaroo polo Someone please AI this.

It's hard for exiled leaders to be accepted by their own people.

Self-deception before psychedelics, self-deception after psychedelics. Self-deception always and forever.

Well, the whole doomer argument basically assumes that mankind is greedy enough to commit suicide. How true is that? Hard to say. I don't know how this whole AI thing will play out. Could be great, could be hell.

Israel will assassinate him. This is such a serious and stubborn problem in this whole situation. Any peaceful but serious political leader who rises up in Palestine will be targetted by Israel precisely because peace threatens the Zionist project. The hardcore Zionists prefer radical Palestinian leaders so they have a reason to keep bombing and expanding settlements. A peaceful leader is dangerous to the settlement project.

If you want to make sports truly fair you gotta give everyone handicaps based on hormone levels and physical size. How it is fair to play basketball against Shaq? It's a cruel joke.

Nevermind 95% unemployment. Even just 30% unemployment would catastrophic for society. 95% unempolyment would be near exitinction level for the human species.

I've gotten a lot more realistic from a deep study of human corruption and depravity. I spent the last few years deconstructing many progressive fantasies for myself. Which is why you see me being much more critical of the left and their ideas than I used to be.

This is a fantasy. Without employment humans will devolve into drug addicted animals, not enlightened sages. Do not assume that billionaires will give you any of their money. If you are not employed you have no way of making money. Do not assume that you are unemployed but you magically have money.

Inflation alone is 7% and you have to pay tax on interest. Good luck with that.

And there's no problem with proposing theories outside string theory.

Yes, I know. Sorry, I don't have a reassuring answer for you guys. We are entering unknown-land. But be careful with doomerism, as you could blackpill yourself on the future and miss out on good opportunities.

There is no reasoning with Tech Bros. They are drunk on greed and power and sci-fi fantasies. They have no solutions for wealth inequality or redistribution. They are politically clueless. Like Musk and Zuckerberg.

Dude, if we ever reach 95% unemployment, that's WW3. 95% unemployment is the end times. That is a doomsday scenario. It was a post about AI doomerism. Not some hippie UBI pipedream. AI doom means we all dead. I am not saying it's going to happen, I am imagining worst case scenarios if super AGI. You should think through what super AGI means for employment.

This is a deep systemic problem to which mankind does not yet have a solution. Sorry to hear that.