2024 ELECTION THREAD
The next presidential race will be here soon! Please see current Bovada odds. Thoughts?
The last time democrats won the presidency without Biden on the ticket was 1996
btw this is a real tweet
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
I am very surprised that the Democrats, who fought a hard and valiant fight in the 2020 Presidential Election, raising a record amount of money, didn’t have lots of $’s left over. Now they are being squeezed by vendors and others. Whatever we can do to help them during this difficult period, I would strongly recommend we, as a Party and for the sake of desperately needed UNITY, do. We have a lot of money left over in that our biggest asset i
Lol on so many levels, but mostly that he forgot what year it was.
When democrats talk about dog whistles, they are right about illegals. Republican anti-illegal strategy is predicated on whites being afraid of "ethnical substitution", there is no reason to deny that.
When instead it's latinos voting against illegals because they deal with them frequently, that's truly a different topic. Less racist, more nativist, perhaps what Trump always meant, but not what motivates people in Nebraska to vote red if you get what i mean
When democrats talk about dog whistles, they are right about illegals. Republican anti-illegal strategy is predicated on whites being afraid of "ethnical substitution", there is no reason to deny that.
When instead it's latinos voting against illegals because they deal with them frequently, that's truly a different topic. Less racist, more nativist, perhaps what Trump always meant, but not what motivates people in Nebraska to vote red if you get what i mean
Yeah I get the subliminal part of it, but obviously they aren't explicitly saying that stuff. I expect they stuff they are explicitly saying is probably not far off the reasons why legals dislike illegals.
Then again, with this "poisoning the blood of the nation" rhetoric, I guess at least some factions have gone full mask off and actually are explicitly saying that stuff. The presidential faction, to be more specific.
It’s not anti-humanity, a higher population can be sustained on a plant based food system
A lot of what makes us human, men especially, is predicated on big game hunting and cooking and eating the pieces of that game. It's anti-human in the sense that it is something that goes against hundreds of thousands of years of our species on this planet and the corresponding biology.
Eating plants only to pack more people on the planet is the equivalent of treating humans as industrially farmed chicken.
A lot of what makes us human, men especially, is predicated on big game hunting and cooking and eating the pieces of that game. It's anti-human in the sense that it is something that goes against hundreds of thousands of years of our species on this planet and the corresponding biology.
Eating plants only to pack more people on the planet is the equivalent of treating humans as industrially farmed chicken.
I like a steak as much as the next guy, but this logic about liking meat being evolutionarily tied to hunting seems a bit ludicrous. I'm sure that there are plenty of things we did in our hundreds of thousands of years on this planet that we no longer do due to technological advances, and I don't think you'd argue that makes us any less human at all.
I like a steak as much as the next guy, but this logic about liking meat being evolutionarily tied to hunting seems a bit ludicrous. I'm sure that there are plenty of things we did in our hundreds of thousands of years on this planet that we no longer do due to technological advances, and I don't think you'd argue that makes us any less human at all.
I actually think it does. Like walking very little is anti-human, it deprives us of very basic elements of our biological nature. We are losing a proper relationship with death in our culture because we are delaying it artificially so much, so that when normal, otherwise routine deaths happen (like the death of a child or the early death of a parent) we can't cope appropriately. And so on. When technology detaches us from biology it deprives us of our nature.
We need to constantly over-adjust for those elements in our highly technological life or we end up as soul-less bureaucrat midwit democrats like some poster around here.
Even the pill devastatingly changes our relationship with sex
I actually think it does. Like walking very little is anti-human, it deprives us of very basic elements of our biological nature. We are losing a proper relationship with death in our culture because we are delaying it artificially so much, so that when normal, otherwise routine deaths happen (like the death of a child or the early death of a parent) we can't cope appropriately. And so on. When technology detaches us from biology it deprives us of our nature.
We need to constantly over-adjust for
Probably some aspects of truth there but there are plenty of people who love meat who have never picked up a gun in their lives and have zero interest in hunting.
A lot of what makes us human, men especially, is predicated on big game hunting and cooking and eating the pieces of that game. It's anti-human in the sense that it is something that goes against hundreds of thousands of years of our species on this planet and the corresponding biology.
Eating plants only to pack more people on the planet is the equivalent of treating humans as industrially farmed chicken.
Part of what also makes us human is identifying and classifying edible plants
As far as masculinity, there were also plenty of men that were artistic intellectuals that advocated for organized society, so I don’t consider building a better, more ethical, more sustainable world to be anti-masculine.
Probably some aspects of truth there but there are plenty of people who love meat who have never picked up a gun in their lives and have zero interest in hunting.
But at least they eat it. Detached but not severed from human nature. They eat it and mostly they get that feeling when you touch the raw piece of meat and smell it and put it on the fire and smell the changes and get dingled in the very deepest parts of your subconscious, connecting instantly with 1k + generations of ancestors before you which did something very similar feeling the very same things and raving the piece of meat till the bone where the best part it.
Which is something almost only women did for 200k years, and only as a small support function for the overall diet exactly. Crucial perhaps for some micro-nutrients. Life saving when everything else failed sure. Which would make it insane to avoid "greens" in diet (as some sick people do) sure.
You get your slab of fire cooked meat and you get your greens and herbs and that's how you are human
Also just as a philosophical issue, it doesn’t make much sense to appeal to evolution as an argument for how to organize society. There needs to be additional consideration attached to that which will oftentimes be empirical in nature.
Which is something almost only women did for 200k years, and only as a small support function for the overall diet exactly. Crucial perhaps for some micro-nutrients. Life saving when everything else failed sure. Which would make it insane to avoid "greens" in diet (as some sick people do) sure.
You get your slab of fire cooked meat and you get your greens and herbs and that's how you are human
Well the benefits of diet to evolution sort of stopped once we reached the niche of syntactical communication. There was a certain point where **** sapiens sapiens evolved and whatever organizational benefits of big game hunting became irrelevant once we found proxies for those benefits. Or there were unforeseen benefits that evolved by accident. It really doesn’t matter because your premises does not lead to your conclusions, they are faulty.
well I guess what I mean is that I don’t think his argument leads to his conclusion if he formalizes it.
p1 humans evolved eating big game animals
p2 we ought to eat how humans evolved to eat
c we ought to eat meat
the c doesn’t follow from p1 and p2. In reality if would be that we ought to keep hunting big game animals. which as far as I’m aware he is not advocating. and even then we can dispute p2
well I guess what I mean is that I don’t think his argument leads to his conclusion if he formalizes it.
p1 humans evolved eating big game animals
p2 we ought to eat how humans evolved to eat
c we ought to eat meat
the c doesn’t follow from p1 and p2. In reality if would be that we ought to keep hunting big game animals. which as far as I’m aware he is not advocating. and even then we can dispute p2
His argument is more Jungian than ev psych based.
P1. Our ancestors ate meat.
P2. When we eat meat we experience a primal connection with our past (....through the collective unconscious).
C. We should eat meat.
I think the fact that his argument is essentially a non sequitur probably blurs the line between faulty premises and fallacious reasoning.
Kamala Harris underperformed in every demographic although i think she still polls will with illegal immigrants in prison who want to change sex /
... And now London Breed pronouns are She/gone
I tried to buy some hot dogs today but for whatever reason they were out of Hebrew National and my hot dogs have to be blessed by rabbis or I'm not touching them.
His argument is more Jungian than ev psych based.
P1. Our ancestors ate meat.
P2. When we eat meat we experience a primal connection with our past (....through the collective unconscious).
C. We should eat meat.
Nope missing the biology part.
P1 our ancestors ate meat for so long, a lot of our biology is over-tuned and precisely fitting hunting and eating meat.
P2 When we hunt or at least buy meat and cook it and then eat it, we reactivate enough neural pathways which are wired inside us exactly for those purposes and our body resonates in the same way a horse is in it's place when he can run randomly on a field of grass
C we should eat meat because if we don't, those portions of our body will signal us distress constantly generating a plethora of disgraceful effects (ie not eating meat is anti-human, same as never having sex is for adults before old age)
Using fire is a big part of it btw. We are wired to enjoy fire burning. And burning meat especially. Same as horses like apples.
A plant based diet is more healthy than meat and there are vegan communities that are some of the longest lived people. I just eat meat because it tastes good though. But it's not healthier for you.
His argument is more Jungian than ev psych based.
P1. Our ancestors ate meat.
P2. When we eat meat we experience a primal connection with our past (....through the collective unconscious).
C. We should eat meat.
It could be but then we’d be having a metaphysical argument which is always boring. I’m not even sure that’s what his argument is since he seems to be engaging in a naturalist metaphysic.
