Basman

I think there is untapped potential to cater to these Morrowind neckbeards. A spiritual successor that captures the open-endedness and detail could be a huge hit within its niche, and it wouldn't need to have good graphics or crazy visuals, so it is well within the scope of an indie studio to make it. Hardcore RPG fans will put up with a lot of jank if the writing is good and the atmosphere is rich (and act as if it is not jank but charm). It also helps if you can mod it. You could for example have NPCs be sort of AI chatbots, making the player actually talk to NPCs and have wholly unique experiences every time. In general, I think there should be more spiritual successors as opposed to sequels. There are a lot of niches that are underserved currently.

Fair point. I think I have an overall issue with the tribalistic angle. You have something else in mind then I what I meant. By economist populism, I mean policy that raise the living standards for the average person by better management of resources.

I'm loving all this stuff on fake "woh-woh" spirituality. I remember when I had hipster hippie phase that ordinary people would cringe at all the spiritual stuff. I think to a certain degree, they cringe because it comes off as phone and insincere. It is a lot of feel-good wordplay, so fair enough.

Contribution is one of the most surefire ways to feel a sense of fulfillment. It makes you valuable to the community and is arguably necessary for a certain extent as certain social goods can not be achieved through without an aspirational drive, like conservation of endangered species or helping the homeless and disadvantaged. Helping people with their personal issues is rarely really worth it from an altruistic sense in my experience because you need a strong desire for better on a personal sense. Spoon feeding people self-help/spirituality tends to be a one ways street if they don't seek it out first. And people tend to stubbornly cling to their dysfunctional patterns because it is all they know.

The point is that they don't spend it on public goods. That is not unique to American conservatives. I believe the issue is way overstated. Focus should be on addressing basic policy of how public goods are funded and regulating the excesses of capitalism, etc. That is how you improve the situation for poor people. They are the same.

I have an instinctual aversion and disgust for alarmist rhetoric. It is almost always a manipulation tactic or highly exaggeratory for political reasons.

Conservative do budget cuts all the time. Of course, the political party for small government is going to negatively effect the poor. The state of racism is only improving in America. It's already improved tremendously in a matter of decades. The real progress is in economic populist policy.

One is way easier than the other. Changing how education is funded is no small feat which most politicians don't want to touch. Most of the issues with Afro-Americans is just poor people issues which require significant changes to solve. I find race to be largely a distraction and I hate how trigger happy people are with racism label. The solutions for Americas social issues are universal. Not racial.

It is actually for regime security reasons. It is about political control. But the point is that it makes sense from a partial US perspective. It is not a justification. You need to be able to put yourself into the perspective of state actors without freaking out and inserting your own biases if you want to understand them. From a partial Russian perspective, the Ukraine war is defensive as opposed to offensive, in contrast to what most of the free world thinks. You could argue that installing puppet governments in third world democracies is smart because it is good for the economy and stabilizes otherwise disparate regions. You could also argue that it undermines US legitimacy and also potentially causes more chaos due to power vacuums and the erosion of institutions in these third world countries, like with ISIS. They are both correct.

It makes logical sense for the US to back dictatorships in certain third world countries because they are more stable than the alternative and can be manipulated to align with US interests. A tribalistic society is inherently incompatible with democracy and it tends to lead to military coups. Then you get instability, communism and generally unfavorable conditions. Then it is better to install your own puppet dictator given the options you have.

I think it is kind of great that people keep asking if these forum is a waste of time. It shows a serious streak that is kind of rare.

You can learn a lot from engaging with philosophical topics that you haven't given much thought previously. You also learn to be constructive when dealing with others. These are valuable things.

Your not far-right, giraffe. Your just pissed at the regressive side of really woke people and feminist cu***. Certain industries and institutions attract those kind of people. It is a mix of genuine ideology and concern trolling to get leverage over people. I've experienced 1st hand concern trolling to get petty revenge via HR with bogus claims. You got to differentiate between being politically liberal and being personally liberal. In my opinion, you should really be right-wing on a personal level but liberal on a political level. That is the best of both worlds. You get the fortitude and groundedness for dealing with life on a personal level and you get the vision to build a better society for tomorrow. You should really not get this miffed about these whiny woke cu***, really. You should have goals to work towards if you are a proper conservative. The core of the beliefs of wokies are true and correct, or at least well intentioned.

Russia just needs to be stonewalled militarily. Very simple actually. NATO commitments needs to be ironclad and Europe needs to be able to wage war independent of the US. Russia poses a risk is to Europe's unity. In order to effectively maintain security Europe needs to likewise resist authoritarian sentiment at home and checks and balances of power being eroded. There is a growing fatigue with technocratic incompetence. We could have more severe setbacks on a societal scale like with Brexit in the UK which make it impossible to effectively resist Russian escalation in the future. It will be security and economic downturn for everyone involved. I don't know about China relative to Europe. Isn't that more America's problem? I can imagine that Europe is broadly interested in maintaining the status quo relative to regional stability in the Pacific but doesn't want China as an enemy necesarilly. China is a valuable business partner.

You're right. I respect that choice when it is appropriate. When there is no alternative. But frankly, I don't want you to come to that conclusion on your own because of how limited the imagination of an ill mind can be. If you can't imagine a better future then of course suicide seems appealing. However, if the mind's imagination is too limited to see a better future when a better future is actually available then suicide is a premature decision. I would argue that a better future is almost always available unless you have some kind of severe mental illness, like serious schizophrenia or something. You want to naturally live. It is only when you perceive one's situation to be in inescapable with nothing to look forward to that people get suicidal. I see it as symptom. Are you receiving any help currently with your issues? Also, is there anything that you looking forward to currently? Just in general (games, movies, anime, events, dates, etc.).

I think it is unproductive to dwell to much on the failures of one's parents. In a sense they did the best they could and focusing on their failures could just make you feel miserable. As long as you understand your own childhood and how it shaped you and your parents as people, perhaps. You can love your parents or don't. It's fine either way, really. If you can stomach them as people I would recommend love just because it feels good. Your parents can be some of your greatest allies. My own parents failed me by being neglectful, long and short of it. Just not available and generally uninvolved, busy in their own little world. They failed to protect me from sibling abuse and to give me the mentorship and emotional closeness I needed. They are good people nonetheless but they wouldn't have had kids if they understood their proclivities and tendencies better. A lot of people have drawn the short stick in life. Don't sugarcoat it. If anything it is a privilege to have children. Honor yourself.

The advice that you need to divvy up your emotional energy is excellent advice. Guys do tend to go from 0 to a 100 and it is scaring the hoes. It is how you get those cringey confessions that get left on read. I think it could potentially prevent a lot of guys from killing themselves if they where more calibrated with sharing their emotions.

It's crazy how banking isn't considered an essential service legally. Companies like Mastercard and Visa can shutter you completely if they think what you are selling is too spicy, even if its legal. It is undemocratic and should be illegal. Payment processing is completely essential to modern life. It needs to be considered and protected as a public good. Also, the irony of censoring rape and incest games for PR is that it has brought a lot of bad PR to these companies itself. Streisand effect.

Because humans are a social species that help their weak and vulnerable there is a lot less pressure on pregnancies being optimal. Human pregnancy is quiet flawed and human babies are relatively underdeveloped even though they are already pushing the limit for how large a head you can push a head through a pelvis. Ideally, babies would gestate for longer. But it is good enough for reproduction. Human pregnancies are almost parasitical in nature. Other mammals can pause or terminate their pregnancy and reabsorb the fetus. It's funny, because a lot of pro-lifers think abortion is unnatural when the case it that it is mostly just difficult for humans specifically. Other animals abort/reject/eat their young all the time if conditions are unfavorable. Human pregnancy is quiet pernicious biologically, so it makes sense that women tend to be indirect and obtuse about their likes because an unfavorable pregnancy is such a huge disadvantage. There is little you can do about it besides medical intervention once you are pregnant and you are highly dependent on others for survival. It makes sense that women are obsessed with status because it is the greatest sign of social resources.

I would argue that should be the default. It is a democratic failure if people feel like their state isn't working for them. Really, you should stay within the circle of concern of the wider population broadly speaking, which is more national than global.

Oh no, not nationalism 😵.

I think human dimorphism boils down to the huge cost of human reproduction selecting for a division between reproductive and survival responsibilities. In other species, the role of the male is often more or less to just be the strongest genes available through fierce competition and territorial control, like tigers, lions, bears, gorillas, etc. Humans are intrinsically a social species. Such division between reproductive and survival responsibilities has worked for millions of years and is expressed in our genes. Women are generally much more dependent on social resources due to the vulnerability inherent to reproduction and size difference. Abstract thinking is generally a matter of finding solutions to material survival and doesn't mesh well with socializing, so you see less women gravitate towards it. Human dimorphism is quiet obvious to see, but there seems to be this belief circulating that tries to erase gender differences. Like it is all just cultural. I think it as a reaction against historical patriarchy or something. Not sure. At least against the vulnerability inherent to womanhood, I believe, but at that point your engaging in magical thinking. Like, it is obvious that men are bigger. It's a fact.

Well, maybe not that granular kind of politics. I could probably have phrased myself better. Trump himself used some broad economic talking points during the race, like wanting to protect working class people economically. There is a precedence for it.