213374U

Yeah, I sometimes went into exams like that. I knew the "essence" well enough, but was fuzzy on the details (i.e. I hadn't done my homework). In the rare event that I passed, it was due to dumb luck, and not because I deserved it. The thing is that Trump has people working for him full-time to do the homework, if he'll let them, and provided that he can keep his mouth shut for just long enough. There's this American saying... "the devil is in the detail". You're wrong about computers, btw.

Ah, thanks. Should have guessed something along those lines. Fun times.

Why "so-called"?

You know it. It's not exactly a coincidence that Red Russians are so much better than White Russians. (hint: it's because communism)

Needs more communism.

It's... not very good. It doesn't explain how the Reichswirtschaftsministerium actually coerced big businesses into "what and how to produce, at what prices and from whom to buy, at what prices and to whom to sell. It assigns every worker to his job and fixes his wages. It decrees to whom and on what terms the capitalists must entrust their funds". Göring had "absolute" power over the economy in a legal sense, but in practice, it's not explained how and to what extent this control was exercised. It offers no evidence of actually how the command economy was operated. Compare the results of Göring's Four Year Plan with the Soviet Five-Year Plans. I remember reading that this "mixed" system, not a true command economy but also not a truly laissez-faire arrangement led to inefficiencies and was a contributing factor to Germany's industrial output never being able to keep up with the Soviet Union's. From what we know, the German system was a hodgepodge of ad-hoc measures led by an economic illiterate (after they sacked Schacht) -- and the article even admits this. In addition, it also doesn't explain how government intervention in the private sector actually led to socialism, it just states that it inevitably did, despite admitting that businesses were kept in private hands, in keeping with ancap dogma. That's another important flaw in the article: no government is completely hands-off with regards to the economy. And if, as the article says, one interventionist measure must necessarily be followed by another and then another, and that will inevitably lead to "socialism", that means that all governments, everywhere, are in fact socialists. An absurd conclusion to be sure, but thankfully, it's not my logic. On the other hand, we know that the Nazis destroyed trade unionism in Germany and froze wages, as that was essential to stifle consumption at home and maintaining the margins needed for businesses to keep driving unemployment down. But they were really socialists... because reasons. http://www.academia.edu/9496976/How_was_Hitler_able_to_affect_such_an_economic_miracle_in_Germany_between_1933_and_1939

Sure does, except not at all. Socialism is about "social" (collective and democratic) ownership of the means of production. That's it. Do you see the state mentioned anywhere? And since every single President in the last 80 years has expanded the state, that means the Republicans among them were actually *gasp* socialists, according to the logic you're following. Huh, so, every ideal that isn't espoused by the American "Jeffersonian" democratic right is automatically leftist? Yeah, pretty much. The idea is to redefine what "right-wing" means, to exclude everything that isn't "free trade and small government", even if that means leaving out anything from traditional examples of right-wing ideology (cf. Kinder, Küche, Kirche) to the original right-wing, those who literally sat on the right side, and who supported authoritarianism as embodied by the French mother****ing king. Nevermind that "free trade and small government" already has a closer fitting denomination -- libertarianism. But if we use it, maybe we can't pin every calamity that has befallen humanity since the French Revolution on "socialists".

Ugh. Who writes this tripe? Seriously, no. Hitler was pro-big business, he privatised large chunks of the German economy, even more so than his surrounding economic liberal neighbors, and did his utmost to work closely -as opposed to nationalising or taking them over- with the large industrial conglomerates of the time (look up MEFO). Without the backing of wealthy patrons, he wouldn't have been able to finance his 1933 electoral campaigns to the extent he did. Read up on how the DNVP (and Alfred Hugenberg's media in particular) were basically Hitler's springboard into mainstream political success. But I guess that folks like Hjalmar Schacht, and groups like Stahlhelm and the whole DNVP were also actually leftists in disguise, because retarded contemporaneous American "pundits" need to rewrite history to accomodate their poorly crafted "no true rightist" sophisms. He was also pro-military big time, having a big boner about Prussian authoritarianism and military culture, and held extreme nationalist and ethnic views that bordered on the insane, what with the Thule theories about Hyperborea subtly permeating all the nonsense about "Aryans". Totally left-wing ideology, checking all the boxes here, right? But yes, he pushed for the Autobahnen and VW projects, so he was evidently a socialist. Nevermind that his goal behind that was to get the German economy back in fighting shape so he could undo the damage that jews and "cultural bolsheviks" had done to the Reich during WWI, as per Dolschstosslegende. And of course he called his party "socialist" so Half-Life 3 confirmed!!1 Now. Did his policies have an ostensibly different effect to those of Uncle Joe next door? To the average citizen, probably not, as within a decade, both countries were totalitarian hellholes. But that's because both sought to create an all-encompassing state that was inseparable from the national culture, and in that light, any policies they may have adopted or paid lip service to were simply a means to an end, absolute power. As Mussolini put it: "All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state."

So Cayne, a sci-fi adventure horror game set in the STASIS universe, is out on GOG for free. Nope, I haven't played either Cayne or STASIS. BUT:

POTUS doesn't have to undergo certification, does he? Which means he can't be decertified...

Right. So concrete rewards for doing your best (I guess the PASS bar is simply higher), and for which there are no shortcuts. On the other hand, a promise to put you to work digging ditches in the 'stan or some other hellhole for a few years if you slack off. I guess that's certainly motivational, especially if you compare it to the tools teachers have available in schools. Living in commie Yurop, good uni education was neither a reward for doing well in the military, nor particularly unaffordable as a civilian (back then at least -- tuition has increased 50 to 100% in about ten years), so the perspective is completely different. Thanks.

Did he just call the whole Mexican army pussies and casually threatened the Mexican President with war in consecutive sentences? Does he realize he's not at WrestleMania anymore? I hadn't been putting much stock on the warnings about this clown and the nucular option, but how long now before he starts ranting about glass parking lots. I mean, he hasn't even been at the helm for two full weeks.

How so? Honest question. I know, different countries and cultural differences and all, but overall I found my time in uniform *extremely* demotivating. And the most valuable lesson I learned is maybe... "I really ****ing hate long runs".

Perhaps. He also said he did well on tests. I would imagine that, much like children being sent to the center for kids who can't read good is a failing of schooling, there is a failing somewhere (though I wouldn't know exactly where), if someone finishes their studies without having acquired a good work ethic. The pitfall may well be precisely that someone can graduate at all without having acquired a tool that is much more important for life in general than the ability to solve for x or the knowledge of how many acres there are in a thingamajig. Yes, I'm fully aware that it's wholly unrealistic to expect a system that challenges each pupil's particular weak spots, but that doesn't mean people won't slip through the cracks with the current one. Also, I love how the emote is called "getlost".

Yeah, after posting that, I almost poked my eye out with the irony. But I'm a really laid back guy IRL, I'll have you know.

You ever met somebody that really made an effort to be miserable and angry at the world, regardless of their actual circumstances and what other people tried to do to help? The article kinda gave that vibe. Homeboy probably just isn't much fun at parties either. Assuming the original piece isn't plain old trolling -- the guy authored another one on how hard it is to be black and gay. "While it's true that professors have a lot to learn from their students, leftist students increasingly seem to hold the attitude that the purpose of higher education is to reinforce the ideas they already have and shut out all contrary voices." Whew. The obligatory "leftist" offhand remark was there after all. For a second there, I feared they might fail to meet the quota!

Hmm, not buying it. The gravitational constant expressed in Planck units (1) is "reality". The nuclear family is, perhaps, and at most, an evolutionarily stable strategy. Meaning, subject to change as (socioeconomic) conditions change, and it is no longer inherently disadvantageous to adopt other approaches. Society will be destroyed only when people are destroyed. We are gregarious beings. Change does not imply destruction in absolute terms, even if the process is sometimes destructive. Here's the thing: men and men have simply different interests at heart. Male nurses, ever heard of them? And the "winner takes all" explanation wrt human mating is... incredibly simplistic. You mean only the CEOs and MVPs are getting some? If it's so simple, why don't you just find uglier friends?

So, if being all about "saving women" makes one a White Knight, what does wanting to "save western civilization" make you? A Teutonic Knight? A Knight Templar? #importantquestions

*checks if Hillary is in jail yet* ...nope.

I guess she could use a remedial course in English.

Doesn't really matter. Populism is pandering to the lowest common denominator and using a rhetoric based on appeals to emotion and other assorted fallacies. Whether it's "muh handouts" or "muh nation", anyone can be a populist. All it takes is a soapbox and a hefty amount of dishonesty. edit: the original "populists" were demagogues back in ancient Greece. Predates left/right wing politics really.

Fixed that for you. I kid, I kid. Hitler actually privatized a lot of stuff. I'll look for the articles when I have time. http://www.ub.edu/graap/nazi.pdf But remember: they were actually doing this just to throw people off their commie scent.

Love the typo. Aside, what's with the bass fixation. They even recycled the reaper horn?

It had an early bird ($25), but it was just 900 units and it was gone within a few hours. The projected release date is kinda off-putting, as well. $900k for a 3-year dev cycle sounds... overly optimistic. Still, I'm bummed that it seems to have stalled before it even took off.

Yeah. Meanwhile the much more interesting Apocalypse Now RPG KS is at just about 80k. Bah. I backed PoE, but found it so underwhelming that didn't finish it and never came back. Gonna pass on this one. Best of luck to Obs, ofc.