President Donald Trump
I assume it's still acceptable to have a Trump thread in a Politics forum?
So this is an obvious lie - basically aimed at
I imagine that if ideocracy was made today it would highlight people asking chatgpt inane questions like "is ideocracy considered funny" and proudly parroting the results
All caused by a genetic drift toward objectively worse people because they reproduced more. Not by culture. It was *entirely* explained by IQ by the movie itself.EDIT: linking here because of error message https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sP2tUW0H...They literally put the IQ of people on the screen, with the high IQ dying off, the low IQ multiplicating
You have the causation backwards. Were the low IQ people reproducing in the future society or the present society? Intelligent people reproducing is downstream of culture causally according to the movie. And you don’t need a genetic theory of IQ to believe that either!
The message is that society failed normal men so much, even a warped insane meggage like Durden message was better than what society had left them with: a void, the horror of a life without any meaning.
The message was society is going to collapse if you don't have structures that allow normal men to find meaning in their life.
Except the point was that “Jack” or the unnamed protagonist already had the girl, and Robert Paulson was turned into a martyr when he never had to be. They already had everything they needed in each other, but tricked themselves into thinking they were missing the dominance and survival of the fittest mentality. It’s a warning against toxic masculinity and valuing the wrong things in manhood!
I imagine that if ideocracy was made today it would highlight people asking chatgpt inane questions like "is ideocracy considered funny" and proudly parroting the results
Lol was about to post something like this.
Right wing illiteracy is incredible to see. I am fairly certain its intentional though. Weaponizing the weapons used against you
lol. OK so we've found another thing on the list you're terrible at--literary critique. Shocker. Probably haven't even read the book have you?
I imagine that if ideocracy was made today it would highlight people asking chatgpt inane questions like "is ideocracy considered funny" and proudly parroting the results
Ouch... HN got checked harder than Lucy blaming the EU for not knowing how to embed while posting 300 times per day.
The ideocracy [sic] check was a hard one.
Imagine making the statement that it was never considered funny.
Sorry for providing a broad-based result rather than a NY Times link.
Goddam EU regulators! First they put Mason in the poorhouse with their insane book tariffs, and now they’re blocking Lucioms free speech!
I have been unable to access content on USA sites countless of times because of EU regulations so i thought it was that (2+2 not being compliant with gdpr)
The message is that society failed normal men so much, even a warped insane meggage like Durden message was better than what society had left them with: a void, the horror of a life without any meaning.
The message was society is going to collapse if you don't have structures that allow normal men to find meaning in their life.
Gotta agree with Luciom but not necessarily as a critique of society so much as the individual. If you're referring to the dullness of Norton's life and his desire to fill it with material possessions an anti capitalist message, I understand where you're coming from, but that illustrates how mundane his life is and the excessive materialism, not that capitalism is bad. Yes, there are ways to draw a line from one to the other, but they're not the same thing. When he meets Tyler and adopts Tyler's anti establishment, anti materialistic, anarchist philosophy, it turns out to be even more shallow and destructive than his previous life, lacking any real meaning or character. It's about a kind of spiritual crisis, not a political statement.
Patrice O'Neal had a great take. Chuck Palahniuk put it on his YouTube page.
Believe it or not Patrice O'Neal's opinion of what it's 'really about' means very little to me 😀 But those ideas are in there. If Palahniuk didn't fully articulate it for you(or you need an outside view) to understand may be down to him actually just not being that great a writer. I've read more than enough of his books to form my own opinion on that one. And there's zero chance he's going to be featured among the elite writers in the halls of history lol
I don't think anyone paying attention is surprised by the reality that tyler and the gang would likely be running around in maga hats these days. Completely missing the point is entirely on brand see Matrix etc 😀
Chuck putting it on his youtube page could've been for reasons beyond 100% agreement with what's said btw.
Believe it or not Patrice O'Neal's opinion of what it's 'really about' means very little to me 😀 But those ideas are in there. If Palahniuk didn't fully articulate it for you(or you need an outside view) to understand may be down to him actually just not being that great a writer. I've read more than enough of his books to form my own opinion on that one. And there's zero chan
Nor should it matter, but it's a funny and interesting take. And absolutely. Chuck sharing it doesn't mean he agrees with everything. He had his intentions but may not have articulated them, and there's also a subjective element. I just call it like I see it, and sometimes writers aren't even conscious of themes in their books. It's been twenty years since I read any of his novels, so I can't say for sure, but I'm thinking you're right in that he won't go down as a great.
Tyler and Co. could just as easily be part of any mob that engages in violent and destructive behavior because they're discontent and trying to find meaning in the wrong place, giving up their individual identities to the crowd.
I'd love to talk about The Matrix, but since this is the politics forum, I'll make this the last movie comment.
I just watched it 😀 And ya there's some funny stuff in there--but only referencing the movie. But going back to my orig reply to luci who claimed the thing is entirely devoid of anything in that regard is just a silly take imo.
Really?? Who has supported that?
Idiocracy has never been considered funny. The only reason its currently relevant is because it accurately predicted anti-intellectualism
I thought it was great!
it predicted that low IQ (=worse) individuals were having more children and THAT, the genetic distopian trend, would destroy society.That's literally the beginning of the movie: objectively worse people on every dimension that human beings evaluate people for, having more children, subsidized by the better people (they intelligently avoided racial issues by using whites on both
These are absolutely not the reasons given in the film for the smarter people not having children.
These are absolutely not the reasons given in the film for the smarter people not having children.
There is literally a piece about the low IQ life being saved by high IQ doctors (to then go on to multiply again). Do you think the low IQ paid out of pocket for the procedure?
Meanwhile the high IQ delay having the kid for economic reasons: would that delay have been the same with dramatically lower taxes on them (0 redistribution to low iq people) and plenty of cheap servants to hire (low iq people who would die of starvation at no welfare otherwise)?
There is literally a piece about the low IQ life being saved by high IQ doctors (to then go on to multiply again). Do you think the low IQ paid out of pocket for the procedure?Meanwhile the high IQ delay having the kid for economic reasons: would that delay have been the same with dramatically lower taxes on them (0 redistribution to low iq people) and plenty of cheap servants
You're assuming all of the stuff you said about welfare. Or making a projection at least; again that stuff isn't mentioned.
As to reasons that are given - one is the smarter people delaying having children for economic reasons, though the only specific reason given is that the stock market hasn't been performing well, nothing about high taxes. And the low IQ people have more children partially because they don't understand birth control. The main guy could have a very high income for all the info that is given.
It is a fantastic movie. Though, I think a lot of people misunderstand why it is such a cult movie. They presume it is because of the central plot-line, but that is not it at all.
Like many other cult movies it achieves this status by being filled to the brim with details, references and clever little jokes that are easy to miss. And not in the overbearing "uhm, actually" vein of Fight Club, but more in the "this is so good, why didn't I notice this before" vein of Spinal Tap. There is something endearing about a stupid movie with clever details.
It is a type of film-making which is rare, especially what is superficially a forgettable comedy. It would be far cheaper / easier to make if they just did without the details and just catered to the "watch once and forget about it"-market.
The very best people...
Less than five years after urging rioters to "kill" police at the Capitol, a former Jan. 6 defendant is working as a senior adviser for the Department of Justice, which has been dramatically remade under the second Trump administration.
This guy is toadie personified. I've seen him on the business channel. Pretty sure we won't be seeing fed independence in the not so distant future.
https://www.nbcnews.com/business/economy...
President Donald Trump on Thursday announced he would nominate Council of Economic Advisers Chairman Stephen Miran to fill the open governor role at the Federal Reserve until the term expires in January.
Specifically taking children from families and then sterilizing the parents? No one publicly... yet; the concept of extreme authoritarianism by way of force? Damn near everyone in the administration.
I just find it odd that you're anti-Trump, but then say shiit that makes you sound like the devil on Steven Miller's shoulder.
More stupids in the news...
https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/us-o...
Energy Secretary Chris Wright falsely claimed the link between rising temperatures worldwide and extreme weather is "nonsense," as Bloomberg detailed.
I don't generally dive into the transgender discussion, but this is absolute bullshit. You serve for 18 years and now they say, too bad-so sad? Really
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Air Force said Thursday it would deny all transgender service members who have served between 15 and 18 years the option to retire early and would instead separate them without retirement benefits. One Air Force sergeant said he was "betrayed and devastated" by the move.
