Fragmatism

Hmm ... maybe I invented a new word here. And it kind of plays into the topic ... which ... I don't really have a headline for. It is a layered subject, where at the heart of it I practically meant to discuss the concept of BDE (Bick Dick Energy) from a Spiritual angle. With the real topic being about the player and the played.
But alas, one thing led to the other and now I'm kind of back at feminism. That's because ... sometimes you have to be careful whom you give credit for what; And how much. Like, I know how much (harm) sympathy can do to someone that's socially underdeveloed; Because I've been there myself; Which is merely a function of how they read it versus "how it was meant". Though it's not really a matter of meaning.

It's similar to part of the bigger problem these days; Where Fragmatism is to mean as much as: The practice of finding ways to dunk on someone. To then ... dunk on that one.


And so ... I was actually tense to write something a few days ago; Though to me it has become a difficult matter to engage with issues held on to by "the fandom menace" because ... I don't respect them anymore.
And I can't blame it all on "the good old russian infiltrator". Yet in as far as I yield my experience from anonymous posts online ... there's always a chance that I'm reflexibly reacting to an agitator. Which is also why I mean to layer my expressions such, that the agitated is more so in the focus.

I mean - the situation right now is that while I can sympathize with the "fandom menace" at its core, the people involved therein - in my own opinion - have no business doing so because, let's face it, women are as alien to them as the Xenomorph to the human crew of the Nastramu - or what's its name - at the beginning of Alien 1. And it almost seems as though they'd have a similar reaction to one. Maybe it's more of a certainty rather than a probability at this point also.
And while I'd also throw some shade the other way; Given the kinds of stuff that some people just so happen to be into; We have to be careful with our targets but Stellar Blade is one of those cases that's ... practically presenting itself for free. Where ... yea, I don't care about the gameplay! I really don't! Maybe it has good gameplay and maybe I'm a hypocrite - but I'd also a hypocrite when arguing that art direction has no bearing on the quality of a product either. And let's be real here: "Those people" certainly are not just 'all about the gameplay' either. I mean, saying that you like the game could be viewed as a guilty pleasure; But if you're not even a little bit ashamed of yourself - that's like a debuff that turns your Riz score into a negative value. And that's just it. It's like ... "tell me you're a loser without telling me you're a loser". And to that all we can tell you is: "Don't stand in the fire" - but ... that also has to first sink in for a moment.


To the other side it has to be made clear that they're not necessarily talking to ... well ... a socially adept breed of people. Though there is a bit of a laugh to be had arguing that this implies that they are, which is kind of the thing I wanted to get to.
I mean - these "SJW folks" (Looking at YOU, Folding Ideas and a few others), they're a little bit like Flat Earthers when it comes to understanding Nerd Culture. Their concept of the Patriarchy or this ominous Gamergate they're talking about ... is on par with how a Flat Earther relates to NASA.


The following may not be very Fragmatic, but I think it's neccessary background
I mean ... sure. Obviously there was a very anti-feminist core to the whole drive of the Anti-SJW folks during that "SJW versus Anti-SJW" era; But to see it as this black and white battlefield where some hate fueled internet mob that'd dunk on everything that's not conforming to patriarchaic gender norms was all there is, that's just bad. Like, there was at least a little bit of communication and course correction going on - such that eventually some people made a distinction between feminism and "third wave feminism". Sure, the "intellectuals" among the die hard misogynists picked up on that distinction too, while still coloring their "acceptable form of feminism" in a very ... classical, patriarchic way.
So, a kind of feminism that portrays the woman as compatible with fascistic ideals - so, not letting go of the misogynistic core at it - while still being paradable as a figurehead to gain sympathies with the feminine sex.

And yea, that course correction I mentioned eventually led so far, as that some seem to have shut up about it entirely. The whole community thereby eventually collapsed in on itself - with, most prominently, TJ Kirk, Thunderf00t and Chris Ray Gun essentially leaving the premises. And Disney might be the sole reason why the husk that was left behind is still somehow breathing.


I mean, a part of the whole Anti-SJW bubble was very ... "Liberalistic". Liberal concepts certainly were on the forefront of every Anti-SJW influencers mind - with the primary critique against feminism being that it was a very top-down, crying to the parents while pointing fingers type of thing. Or still is. This third-wave feminism that is. Let's call them "A-Sarks" for some reason. And during that time a lot of gamers felt powerless, I'd argue, and so a kind of culture that rejoyced over feminist failures developed.
But - I suppose the reason why I'm still writing about it is because I've seen it in a ... well ... bigger context; And some aspects of that thing are still very much a thing. I mean, there barely is a thing left that isn't - or so it seems.

Anyway ... so,


---
I write this the next day. 23rd. Well, actually it's the 24th.
Because maybe there isn't enough of a thread, a consistent throughline or a point to any of this. There's supposed to be something that ties these topics together. I can smell it. But ... I don't get it just yet.
But, maybe this is just pointless rambling at any rate.

Like, why does any of this matter?

I think what people need to realize is how serious these things actually are. Like, how some dipshits on the internet, whatever flag they're waving, can shape culture in ways that lead to bigger problems later down the road. The examples are very much in our face these days.

And we're so used to all these crazy things right now, that people back when things were only pretty much batshit crazy ... thought were impossible. Or absurd. Like anyone back then was in the right minds of making such calls. And everyone who was ... well ... probably didn't care because what's the point in engaging with all these crazy people on the internet?!


The real problem there I think is organization. Or ... well, a term that came to my mind is "the culling". It's a registered phenomenon by now, that there are ongoing misinformation campaigns that aim at mobilizing gullible individuals into some kind of "rage against the machine". From whatever background, people seem to come together being 'against' a particular thing while finding unity in this ... other thing that presents itself as the solution - though anyone who pays even just a little bit of attention to what that thing is will find out that it's certainly no solution of any kind.
And we might call it a culling since individuals are like ... removed from the population to fuel that rampage. And it's literally fascim, etymologically, which - if I remember correctly - has similar roots to the other f word ... as in: 'bundle' (of sticks). "Together monkey strong".
So, like fascism itself this isn't about much but the consolidation of a few individuals to power ... to maybe produce some fantasy world in which everyone can get behind some common goal - which could be anything that allows good to be perceived in a radical, totalitarian and violent opposition to anything that is disliked by the strong majority. Well, if it's a majority.

And while that culling is going on, it would also be smart to prevent the enemy from getting their own act together. And ... that's where a lot of my disdain over things that might appear to be fair and smart and rational is coming from. Maybe I'm overreacting, reacting wrongly; But ... that aside, it is in deed difficult, I'd argue, to produce a proper response to this issue that isn't really just the same. Probably another problem in and of itself.


So, nothing new here.
But, I've so been (starting to) watching Angela Collier's review of Picard and was reminded of the thing I started to write a few days ago. And one hour into that review, she brought up an example where some Starfleet captain was asked to kill two synthetics, did it, couldn't live with it and killed himself. Pointing out that it's like the 56th or so suicide. And I had to really laugh there. I mean, it's absurd. For an hour I've listened to her; And it was at that moment where I was able to somehow process what I've been hearing for the past 30 minutes or so - which had me question: Who wrote this shit? Like, yea - I suppose I might as well repeat all the words she said about Star Trek going into the review - but that summary ... it's like a wild fever dream. Like ... every bit of it is so ... not Star Trek. It's like someone asked: What would happen in an actual Star Trek show - and did the opposite.
I assume there are defenses like ... it's more relatable. Or more down to earth. Or ... showing a different side of Star Trek. It's all horseshit anyway. So, I don't really care.
But this is at any rate part of that bigger picture I was telling you about. Firstly I'd write about Star Wars, but ... this has more substance in the context.

So, I tried watching Picard but was pretty much turned off immediately. To be fair, mostly on a 'vibes' basis; "Fingerprints", personal Biases, whatever. But from what I heard I've been doing well to not stick around to find out whether or not it maybe becomes good eventually.
The issue is ... why is it so depressing?
And a lot of other stuff.

Is it conspiratorial to say that it's part of the culling? Or to disrupt "the enemy" from ... having anything to come together around? Something that isn't toxic and splintered and filled with morons?

And this fear strikes familiar beats. So, the fears from Gamers that "dyed hair feminists" come to infiltrate and hijack their hobbies and things they like, turning them into something that it isn't supposed to be.
"Go woke, go broke" being another mantra from the sentiments grown within the trenches.

And this whole culture war has been going on for so long now - a whole new Generation is like ... maturing these days that pretty much grew up with it. And among the youths ... I observe some odd fascination for the past that I certainly didn't have growing up. I mean, when I grew up ... old was mold. Lame. The cool stuff was all the new and exciting stuff. Michael Jackson over the Beetles, Star Wars over Battlestar Galactica, NES over Commodore. And it was some while ago where I ... I might have written about it at some point ... would have said that this "shittification" - or currently known as something along the lines of "Top-down incompetence" (Corporate Greed, profit driven decision making, that kind of stuff) - will lead to more and more people tuning out. And as it seems, that might have been the plan all along. Or ... something that "also works". Because, if everything sucks and we tune out ... what are we ... going to do? What are we going to tune into? How are we going to connect if nobody on the internet can be of the same mind about a thing, except at the two extremes of intelligence perhaps?

To say, what is the ordinary person left with if they think that entertainment sucks? The answer being: Social Media. Which is like ... pretty much a fascistic propaganda machine in a lot of ways at this point.

And so I feel like it isn't just me being old that I'm under this impression that the past was better. Well, rationally: It wasn't better. A lot of things are better now. But ... some ... possibly important and key things ... really suck hard nowadays.

And I suppose the youths of today feel that somewhat. How most of everything nowadays is just ... shlop ... unlike "back in the day" when movies were still "real" and ... intelligent in a way that you barely see anymore these days, if ever.

All that then is another sentiment that the A-Sark driven woke-mob has a hard time dealing with. This 'niche' ... whereby critics of this development can inject their own spin on things. I mean ... apparently Strange New World sucks actually. And yes. It isn't TNG for sure and here and there suffers the same symptoms as any other "modernized" franchise (like, that Star Trek CGI show ... I tried to watch ... I had to turn off because I felt like I was watching a Star Wars knock-off vaguely inspired by Stargate) - but it's not THAT bad. And so these people can harp on about how it isn't Star Trek and ... have me agree with them ever so often. I mean, Star Trek at this point feels like ... a dead child that some Necrophiliacs have a good ol time with. It's like ... those few that have a clue of what should be going on are surrounded by crazy people - and slowly corrupted by some nonsensical "nothing matters" type of attitude. It's not that it's "woke" - obviously. Though some might blame it on that. It goes beyond that. It's just that "woke" is used to justify all those ... nonsensical choices that are being made. It's ... utterly ... bewildering.

I mean - pretty much from the get go Picard starts off with this big red flag that says: "Hey! Starfleet sucks now!". So, why am I watching Star Trek again?
But oh, it's serious and telling uncomfortable stories and maybe I'm too sensitive and ...

What happened? I'm curious. I mean, this doesn't look like natural development to me. Or natural progression.
Like ... I get it. We're like ... supposed to be woke and dislike authority and see reality for the shitty place it is and all that; But instead we have to trust these cringe strangers that are dead-set on throwing a hissy fit over anything that they don't like because of some McGuffin~esque property that they never had to show or prove in any way?


And that's like the worse of it all. These Characters I keep seeing that get pushed into the spotlight. These, well, Mary-Janes and their cringe male-stereotype tag-alongs. "Strong Women" either written by men, or by "Feminists" that blame the concept of work and effort on the patriarchy.

I mean, the amount of shit that I've seen people pull out of their arses over the last few years does make Randy Marsh look like an amateur!

Well, I suspect that a part of these problems is that most actually competent artists have somehow been culled from making it in.

And on top of it all, it reeks of decadence.


Like, what else am I supposed to make of it? Oh yea, Star Trek is like the perfect canvas to let some avant garde artists loose on. It's supposed to be inclusive and tolerant and all of that hip lib shit.
"Relax! Why so serious?".


I feel like dealing with "these people" would give me an aneurysm.
I mean, I feel like the concept of principles would be like rocket science to them. Something like trying to explain discipline to a toddler.

And yea, it's like a sinking ship while the captain is like high on meth. Or it's exactly that.


I mean - whether it's dark and serious or bright and cheerful - the message ever only seems to be that principles don't matter. And all that without any pay-off other than that nothing matters. Well, that certainly seems to be the formula.
Like ... a pattern.
That shows up with some ... consistency.
Which ... might suggest that it is more than just co-incidence!


But enough about that.


======


Third-wave feminism was the worse thing that could have happened to feminism. It's ... actually quite literally Marcy D'Arcy turned into real life human beings. To the point where everyone trying to criticize them is a Bundy.

And I ... I don't know what to do. I'm lost. Seriously so! And the right play seems to be to just ignore them.

returning to the (non Fragmatic) text from "yesterday":
---


There isn't really an A-Sarkism pipeline, like the Alt-Right pipeline. It's more like a Mind-Virus that basically turns someone into a Tankie, except for the seriously held adherance to Communism I suppose. So, they're very totalitarian in their rhetoric. Their typical reaction to "the great collapse" is usually ignorance; And while they might acknowledge certain aspects of the mind-set that led people to abandon Anti-SJWism, there's still a very strong "not woke enough" type of attitude about it.
And what that leads to - Tankieism and A-Sarkism that is - is that it gives fodder to the fascists. And while they might laugh about "Leftie Mind-Virus confirmed", having Brainrot is certainly not better.

I mean ... for a while there was a real chance for things to have gone differently. I mean, to A-Sarks, MAGA was certainly a God-Sent because that turned minds enough for them to be taken seriously without having to change anything about their demeanor. That also because it turned enough minds the other way, such that attempted discussions on egalitarianism and meritocracy for instance just went poof. It's like with free speech. When concepts are defended by people who don't really adhere to them, they lose their meaning. So, when egalitarianism is presented from an angle that is upset over help for disadvantaged people ... it's not the kind of stuff that good people want to get behind! So: The implied action is different from an egalitarianism that thrives towards a lived experience of color-blindness; Yet eventually still hides behind the rhetorical goodness that it once carried.
And that right-wing brainrot is one that eats away at people's ability to make such distinctions.
Like ... when everything that might maybe be socialism is considered bad.

If Irony had legs ... this one could walk on Jupiter.

It's like ... hailing the brilliance of South-Park while yelling "They tkrJobs".
With lefties and Disney it's a little bit more complicated. Well ... an IQ Gap I'd call it.

The Player and the Played - Part 1

I find that this is a difficult subject. Or at least in as far as I'm concerned, because there's a 'thing' - a or the point that's ... firmly lodged between a diverse cast of nuances.

But, there's still lots to talk about eventually.
"The Player and the Played" is a Gnostic concept - as I've yielded it from one of my ... I suppose I've committed to making it a big mystery ... so ... books. Not books I've written, but books I got a hold of somehow. The NHC is a part of that stash.

The idea, in principle, is similar to "Unplugging" in terms of the Matrix movies. So: Blue Pill ~ Plugged in ~ the Played. Red Pill ~ Unplugged ~ the Player.
And that, in its simplest form, is a way to talk about Unification. It's not as much an unplugging as it is a plugging in; But ... either way the transition is towards a higher understanding of actual reality. And it can merely be that knowledge that then also keeps trickling in and piling up that makes all the difference. Because if you have a very intimate and living relationship with God, the question for who has the highest authority in your life is ... effectively mute. It even defies the mortal discussion over it. I mean, it's not as much a decision ... or anything worth considering. Like, what is authority and do we like it? Well "whatever". There certainly is a hierarchy - like it or not - but my appreciation for God certainly doesn't hinge on a mortal understanding of whether or not authority is good.

And yea, people might try to argue that this condition is akin to being played by God. If you aren't enlightened enough that might seem reasonable to you; But at the same time are they the ones attempting to play you. Because, well ... what's the tangible good of their agenda? Like, the light at the end of the tunnel or anything remotely of meaning to you in the immediate and the distant?

I mean - there's this ... higher scope of reality that requires an intimate engagement with God. So, a lot of esoteric stuff that revolves around God's existence and our fate as having been spawned at some point. And the why isn't as important as the fact - which is the thing we have to somehow deal with. Starting with the question of whether or not there is a God ... it has more or less no real importance to you unless you care enough to care. So, there is a way of saying that all knowledge outside of it is pointless. It might help us live our mortal lives - but knowing that God exists doesn't matter if you're not willing to engage with it.

And ... for rhetoric completion's sake: "Please spare me your "why this?" and "why that?" or other "if so and so then ... I'm too smart for this"s".

All of that nonsense is you getting played - partly by your own ignorance. But sure - it's like a game within the game. To take ownership of being played - and find a way to become a player therein. But ... that's a different thing. In all simplicity is there this higher thing - the divine - and there's a way in - and while the words that try to capture you in your ignorance sound sweeter to you, well ... that's that!
Yea, sure - blame us because this and that; The facts don't change.

I mean ... because I'm such a kind and helpful person: The atheist tries to argue that the flaws of this world speak critical of the existence of a God. Essentially they're asking: Why we no paradise? While the Bible literally starts with Paradise. And if you then want to go on ignoring all the human flaws that make us incompatible with paradise ... well, go ahead. "Have Fun!". On the off chace you're still listening - or you do care at least a little: For us to live up to our "potential", our 'freedom' - we yet have to tackle the reality of Good versus Evil; A struggle where all the virtues only help to get you "so far". It's a victory that cannot be handed out for free!
So: You have to become a player - rather than let yourself be played!

Whenever you or someone says or implies as much as that "human beings are vile creatures" - you're "so close" to getting it.

About that BDE

First up, to get that out of the way, to me - the epitome of BDE is Helen Magnus, Sanctuary, Season 4. Specifically Episode 4. Now, that's Goals!

And it is one of those types of Episodes that takes that look at the whole concept of power. You know, Money, Men with Guns, that kind of stuff.

I mean - when thinking of BDE outside of my own tastes, I usually think of a Billionair rattling their keychain in their pockets. Or ... the President of the USA stepping onto the Tarmac with the Airforce one behind them. Possibly while casually tagging their shades for that camera shot. So, it's either of two thing: The biggest money or the biggest guns.


It's ironic then, that wielding that BDE is nothing you'd get to simply by 'willing' it - which is what BDE would mean for the casual. And yea, many have said it: It's like compensatory for actual SDE.
But it all depends. In games you eventually increase a number far enough so you deal "Chunks" of damage as opposed to "Bits" of it. And if that alone won't do ... it's a Skill issue.

But without trying to be insulting, BDE is all about being a player that successfully plays the game. And depending on what kind of game that is, it requires an amount of witts. It's about "sitting in the driver seat", 'feeling' that your actions have an effect. That you cause ripples in the water; And that you can 'make' things work for you.

In Biblical terms, that's "to invest your talents". So, there's that parable where three people received talents. One invested them to great returns and God is pleased with them. Another burried them and made nothing and God is displeased with them.


Yet, truly pleasing God is certainly about more than just being good at Capitalism.
Like, if you have a lot of money while all you do is being a cancer on the planet; What are you really making of what has been given to you?

Oh sorry: "What was TAKEN ... BY you"?


So, there's a little bit of a thing here. I mean, BDE is certainly - for once - a 'phallic' way to describe the thing, which - further - is also something more universal. So, it is no surprise that the concept would show up here and there in different ways. And I suppose it is also no surprise that it might bear associations with masculinity.
And it seems that ... uhm ... in the less civilized world - so, (parts of) the USA or less integrated migrant cultures here in Europe, for instance - this association goes so far that it is the bottom-line for what masculinity is, wholesale. Men who don't have it are considered pathetic and women can't have it.

And ... I'd call that a contaminated understanding. That is ... it, as a concept, is very ... uhm ... entangled with things that make it more exclusive, for instance. And if you take it to the Bible with that on mind; You can find it to be more emancipated than you might have expected. At least can we look at the Parable of the 10 Virgins and think of it as some kind of Trojan horse. I mean, it is an explicit parable on the End-Times; Which in contrast to those where men are the actors doesn't feature a "Master:Servant/Slave" condition. It may focus more-so on wisdom, but that, as we may have learned, is one important aspect of BDE. And it is those that brought the extra oil, that made it to the end. Having successfully played a game.


It is the contamination of being hyper-fixated on masculine self-determination that would however taint one's reading of the Bible; Though it should be very obvious that the woman that follows "the man" into damnation isn't really doing any good either. And to imply that she has no right to try to do any better - that her salvation hinges on how good of a little bitch she is - ... well. Is it? Complicated? Simple? "Jezebel did nothing wrong"?


Well, to leave that aside for now, the first problem with BDE is of course the focus on male potency; And that in a way that lends itself to foolish stubborness; More than anything else. Stepping away and thinking for even just a bit about a thing is like ... counter-intuitive to that. Often enough it would also require SDE - which is often times referred to as "being the bigger person". And so, before we can get to a clean understanding that way, a whole lot of stuff has to first be untangled. Which is why Gender-abolitionism is a smart stance ... actually. I mean, if gendering is inevitable, it'll come back in. But if we didn't let it go in the first place, we're more likely to inherit all of its negativity still.

Anyway - I advocate for some kind of "Soft GA" - to lean more towards the "Gender as a Suggestion" way of thinking.


And with what God wants to tell us through scripture, it's similar. I mean, the constant need to consult scripture is bad if it prevents you from gaining the insight needed to answer your questions. I mean, I suppose I could sit here all day quarreling over what the Bible says; If your insights are only what you 'think' God wants ... you're in no real position of telling me what God really wants!

But sure ... . Why would I - or how would I - sympathize with the idea that being a woman is all about shutting up and waiting for instructions? I guess it'd take a man that defies everything I believe in a man should do - which is to be cool with a woman that is intimate with God ... how?

Especially if I have ... well ... talents that might not be appreciated, or ... if I see a play I could make as opposed to playing myself for a fool.


And ... the thing is ... that ... this antagonism between men and women should strike us as REALLY REALLY odd! I mean, I suppose women make good plays as good women in heterosexual relationships all the time. And I suppose at occasion that involved some kind of poison. Yes, sure - most of the time "the poison of Love" - with everything else being more so on the controversial side, so ... 'twas meant as a joke, so ... moving on ...

So yea. At the bottom of it all - what I try to say here boils down to "playing for the team". And ... being a control freak is like ... antithetical to that.


----
Back to today:


So, I leave all this in, mainly because I'm lazy.
The thing that ties these two issues together is contained within that "bigger picture". Of course.

And the threat I perceive - it's a force that tries to pull us apart by our sanity.

Well, so it seems.
It might have started innocently. With Star Wars. Or Ghostbusters. Whatever.
And it's not like people haven't tried to mediate. But it's also not like ... easy to find anyone that's responsible. That's not how the internet works it seems.

If you let it linger for a while, there's a joke in there!


And so, there are two "sides" that are consistently bad at acknowledging their own mistakes. And on the one side that is further stressed by implying as much that they're no mistakes. On the other, ... well.
If I had to explain in more detail why I compare A-Sarks to Flat Earthers, it's similar to how your typical conservative is tendentially an actual Flat Earther. I mean, if there's a strong display of unwilligness to engage with any topic without requiring the conversation to be had on their terms ... we run into problems once those terms are ill-informed. I mean, if it's like forbidden to find a common language ... and anything that doesn't piss people off is considered cringe ... and diversity is only good so that there's always someone to ignorantly dunk on - nothing is left but cynicism. And while conservatives are cynically evil - comically so - A-sarks are cynically progressive.
And there's something dark about being upset about someone else's incompetence when they themselves couldn't do any better.

I mean - there's this Flat Earther that calls himself a demonstrable realist; And all he ever does is repeat that the earth is demonstrably flat and that anything that could prove the opposite is therefore wrong. It can be excluded from the realm of possibility. But to go and check to either have another demonstrable fact or yet again something "unexplainable" that might expand our horizon ... no, that seems absurd. I haven't done a lot of digging, but one of the fundamental principles of this demonstrable reality seems to be that "water always finds its Level". And that goes along the whole ... inability to grasp the concept of Gravity. Instead they say "buoyancy" - without any need to define where up and down come from ... in that model.
So, all the Globe-earthers are idiots because they don't acknowledge that water always finds its Level ... and if you bring up any explanation at all you're a brainwashed moron regurgitating NASA propaganda. The only solution they present is some suggestion - implied or otherwise - that is utterly bizarre; But if you're not on board with it you're somehow vile or evil.

So, this amalgamation of a person has no need to be competent at anything. Or so their rhetorical antics. You have to explain to them the the thing that they rule out from the get go - but you cannot say the "wrong" thing because it's ... you know ... "wrong".

And yes, I'm saying that A-Sarks are like that, except not in the way some Conservative would. Because they're also insane. Even more so. Probably 'legitimately' insane. Like ... clinically. When it comes to their rhetoric, they certainly have to be treated as much. If they turned out to be an actual Flat Earther ... that wouldn't make what they say any more crazy. There is like ... no room underneath the bar.

So, if want to say that A-Sarks are effectively like that, but not entirely, the thing is simply that they happen to be on what's in about the 'right' side. There so is a bottom line ... which is like ... the thing that yet keeps this world running. And even if they're trying to pull the bar further down, there's an innate opposition to that, that keeps them from accomplishing that. Yet.
Until the world collapses I guess ... which kind of seems to be the point. Like ... all that money people spent on their doomsday bunkers gots to be good for something, right? Right?

So, A-Sarks aren't as progressive as they want to come accross. They are also very anti-realist. As a naturally occurring phenomenon, they're like ... searching for that magic Kingdom that can never be. Because ... anything that could be is in some way, shape or form built on something they don't like ... and anything else would first have to turn everything else to rubble. And that's a real "GRAVITY!" moment.
I guess voting Democrat is fine for them because that's what you do in a two-party system when the opponent is republican while you don't really know what to do either - and they don't because everything that requires a little bit commitment is real ... and ... that's problematic. A real Flat Earther moment right there!


Vaush describes this as "an allergy to winning". Maybe it's because most terminally online lefties have ADHD and deal with Anxiety issues; While also being somewhat reverse psychologied into a perplexity over how being all practical is like a right-wing thing. And there so is this vacuum of competence that has made room for ... like ... almost literally monkeys to be regarded as some kind of intellectual elite.
So, the good news is: We can't sink any lower than this!

And the bad news: This might be as optimistic of a note as I can leave this with.