Jump to content

injurai

Members
  • Posts

    2573
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    13

Posts posted by injurai

  1. What We Do In the Shadows TV trailer (mirror, since the official FX one is region locked)

     

     

    Looks more a straight TV adaptation of the movie than Wellington Paranormal was.

     

    I do wonder how much mileage they'll get out of this premise though. Seems like you'd run out of material to deconstruct fast and it'd turn more into a sitcom about goths but they do occasional supernatural ****.

  2.  

    We need a new rule, to at least summarize the salient bits of those stupid "news regurgitation" videos. Or better yet, disallow them in general. We should keep this as news, not speculation and personality pundits.

     

    agree about summary, at other hand, noone is forcing you to click on them... disallow means ban right? You just want to control other people, how... normal of you :)

     

     

    Darn, you foiled my attempts to disproportionately punish Sonic.

  3. I agree with the_dog_days.

     

    Obs is finishing up their last independent game. The next in the pipeline is probably a new venture for Microsoft. Further exploring what they have in their IP portfolio would likely come after that, but for all we know that could be TOW2. It all depends on how many teams Obs gets to run going forward. We know they've had up to 4.5 teams at one point. I'm sure they'll keep a team around that makes use of their awesome ground work on the new-era infinity-like stuff.

  4. It's all about candor and what the tone infers.

     

    "If we make the same number of sales on a platform that yields higher margins, we'll make more money. That's why this platform is your only choice. If our PC enthusiast fans that made us what we are today, don't even buy our game in protest of the platform, the say goodbye to use making a game for the PC market again!"

     

    vs.

     

    "We are a small studio that struggles loosing 30% of our hard earned compensation to highwayman baron, please consider joining us on a more fruitful platform to support us in our future endeavors."

  5. Bollocks? Honestly I think both that sentiment and yours both rings true. You're basically saying the same thing.

     

    The line "Fascism is the opposite of conservatism because it refuses to acknowledge reality as a limitation of the scope of human will." Does raise some eye brows.

     

    Fascism being the opposite of conservatism is for all intents and purposes a meaningless proposition. Set theoretically or otherwise. I think the intent though is to say fascism is notably different from conservatism in some particular way. That way being the claim that reality limits the scope of human will, and it refuses to acknowledge reality as such.

     

    We know that reality often doesn't always limit the scope of human will. In the way that it does limit us, we can do nothing about it. Well, then what about falsely reporting reality to justify drawing the conclusions we want based on the distributed morals and reasoning that everyone already holds. Feed the system with false parameters in essence. Which is actually acknowledging reality and bending an internal aspect of it. What Zorapter is getting at is that everybody does this including conservatives. Ultimately the real difference is not between Nazi's or Conservatives, but one of consequential vs deontological ideological imperatives. Fascism tends to be very consequentialist, justifying it's means for an ends. That ends is a consolation of power, and relies on high population homogeneity through which it can easily distribute it's will. Conservatism tends to be very deontological, kantian essentially, relying on people to be self-maintaining and self-supporting. One can freely associate with conservative institutions, but ultimate the institution might still warp reality to serves its interests at the expense of another equally conservative institution that competes for resources.

     

    It's a bit ironic that this guy invokes Hannah Ardent then basically draws the conclusion he wants to be making all along. It only sounds like it's an indictment of fascism, but instead its a vindication of conservatism in a way in which conservatism is undeserving.

     

    At the same time liberals can't ignore false facts being dispersed, they still have to be engaged for those who wish to seek, use truth will have to have reliable ways to maintain truth.

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...