Comments by "William Innes" (@williaminnes6635) on "Whatifalthist"
channel.
-
62
-
26
-
26
-
19
-
17
-
15
-
15
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I don't know that this will be as bad as you think.
Japan does the world's product development. Japan does not do immigration. More than one foreigner per village is one too many in their view. Japan has known it has had issues with its birth rate since well before pandemic. During the aftermath of the Baby Gammy fiasco, in which an Australian woman who has managed to remain anonymous abandoned a child she had paid a surrogate to bear in Thailand because the child, Baby Gammy, had been born with Down Syndrome, the Thai authorities cracked down on the surrogacy industry. One apparent customer was a Japanese businessman who was in a nursery with eleven or twelve children, forget which. He claimed he was their biological father, and that he just loved children. This was accepted as a sufficient explanation by the Thai authorities.
After that point, various developments in artificial reproduction began to be reported. A sheep embryo was grown to a healthy lamb in a plastic bag. A technique for turning stem cells into gametes was discovered. This stuff all made the press, and should all still be up on the internet. So, there is the motive - for Japan to survive as a country which does not do immigration and which has a low birth rate - and the means - Japan is the number one product developer in the world - and then a pattern of pure research innovations which suggest that artificial reproduction had been moving forward, all in the press, all prior to pandemic.
My suspicion is that the idea is to sandbag this technology, keeping it a strictly Japanese thing, for as long as possible, to prevent it from leaking to mainland China, in order to use demography as a strategic weapon against the Xiists. A bit of mass migration will provide a medium term patch for the rest of the traditional developed world. Whenever the Xiists collapse, the tech will be allowed out of Japan, which will allow for replacement to occur artificially, at the moment in which what I might term "the great deshitholeization" - a general advancement, powered by the spread of modern infrastructure, of most current actual Third World countries toward the level of upper middle income nations, and of enough upper middle income nations toward the level at which for instance Greece or Chile are today - the liminal First World - will be nuking the incentive for people to leave traditional sources of mass migration and those birth rates lower to the point that the population pressure comes off.
Most likely organizations similar to central banks, but carrying the mandate to maintain a steady expansion of the supply of population, rather than a steady expansion of the supply of money, will take on the role of ensuring that population is kept up at the gentlest of rates of increases, similar to the old argument that a one to two percent rate of inflation was preferable to truly sound money. This would also provide the opportunity for a bit of salutary eugenics, arresting the Idiocracy scenario by the simple expedient of making sure the genes of high IQ people were overrepresented in reproduction, and perhaps also compelling the reproduction above what would occur given birth control of the genes of more attractive people as well. The world would be too depressing were it full of fuggos alone. The establishment of such organizations would also allow for the more rapid peopling of anything we as a species are able to terraform between one and two centuries from now.
Not to get overly techno optimistic about it, but people aren't potatoes, they don't just sit there, especially during existential crises.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@MrWick-fi8vo Winnipeg I think is more affordable, at least if you can work remote, but the weather is even worse, I have heard they have mosquitos and blackflies, and IIRC the homicide is Thunder Bay like. The one guy I knew who doubled back to the 'peg used to say that everything was nicer in the fairly humble corner of the western Toronto suburbs where we lived - he'd make this comment while we were rolling down one of the chronically underdeveloped streets - and illustrate his point by the relatively more attractive appearance of our drug addicted prostitutes. Anyway upon arrival in Winnipeg I believe he was almost instantaneously imprisoned, which was my takeaway after he began posting a bunch of stuff about how the behaviour of the local FNs really got to him following a long hiatus. When I helped some people I knew move cross country, the other guy with whom I was driving who had done the drive before made a point to avoid Winnipeg. I also knew one guy who trained nurses on hospital equipment who said Winnipeg was the grimmest place he had ever visited, that it made the bad bits of western Toronto suburbs look nice. It might be it's fine so long as you stay out of town on the right side of town with the right overlap of police patrols, but it sort of makes the impression on people that it makes. Southeastern Manitoba did look sort of appealing, if you're a remote worker, especially in late summer when you basically get two climates in one by going east one hour uphill into Ontario.
2
-
2
-
2
-
@falcor200 A scenario where Canada stops existing is the optimistic one, because it's one where the successor states are able to stay in the First World with some shreds of democratic institutions remaining for them.
The problem is that it became a postnational state starting in the 1960s with secularization. Ontario went in the direction of extending the minimum standard of citizenship rights guaranteed to Catholics as second class citizens to every other minority, then gradually equalizing the citizenship rights of all minorities, becoming stuck in time with the equalization of Catholic school funding in the 1990s under Premier Harris at the high water mark of multiculturalism as an ideology in America, creating a set of soft expectations that American-style rights would predominate, which was not hurt by heavy spending by the Koch brothers on propaganda meant to push the idea of individual rights in the American sense anywhere that spoke English. The reason why there has been no Rivers of Blood scenario in Ontario is because of the 1990s suburban midwestern overculture evolved within a context of enclaves being a feature and not a bug. Whether this survives boomer opposition to housing development sufficient to accommodate the increasing numbers of people with decreasing average points system scores is up for debate. Quebec had the francophone secular tradition which guided its evolution. Outside of obscure online libertarian circles - so this is specifically men, generally post college aged, who choose a specific ideological group - libertarian girls aren't the ones who argue about theory, libertarian girls want to put on their Gadsden bikini and shoot a carbine at an unregistered range until it is time to homeschool their kids. It's exactly the way male sports fans memorize the statistics and female sports fans make sure the bunting is up in the house for the big game - the French and English traditions tend to be oil and water.
Secularism and multiculturalism are not compatible as they exist in these provinces, since there can be only one overarching ideology. The writing should have been on the wall about what that means for over eight years at this point, or when Harper introduced the niqab as a wedge issue and Mulcair's optimism that he could bridge the gap had the effect that it had. It is fair in my view to term this result "Canadian defeat in the War on Terror." The absence of an overarching ideology or close working substitute means that there is not common set of civic values, therefore that in the Benedict Anderson sense of an imagined community, Canada has been failing as a nation for six decades. The pre1960s ideology arguably went back to the 1840s but was codified into a set of formal minimum standards for minority rights by MacDonald. For being one guy with Victorian norms, MacDonald did an excellent job, given there were no Canadian equivalent to The Troubles in Northern Ireland, which had a similar demographic situation of a Protestant majority and Catholic minority.* We have to remember, whereas America was a project of several years of intense discussion, Canada was significantly the project of a lone colonial official deep in a Scotch-powered shamanic meditation who did a three year rush job getting the buy-in from officials in other British possessions. The worst thing Confederation did was give MacDonald's counterparts in Cape and Natal Colony similar ambitions.
The main effect of the "patriation of the constitution" was to sever ties with traditional restraints held by the elites against state overreach. In the absence of these restraints and with nothing in common at the level of civic values between the different provinces, this means that democratic norms will inevitably erode to nothing, unless centralized authority does first.
Bilingualism has been an utterly failed policy whose primary role has been to entrench an unaccountable managerial caste whose collective instincts will always be those of the Stalinist apparatchik. I say this as a bilingual.
A controlled and gradual phase-out of Confederation would be the most logical course of action from the perspective of anybody who might have family who might have to stay in these provinces. Other than the monarchy as a legal entity west of the Rideau - or in provinces which were recognized in 1763 as Indian Territory - and loose cooperation through the Bank of Canada which would be needed to stabilize the value of world CAD deposits and oversee their orderly and controlled redemption into provincial currencies which would, ideally, be allowed to float against one another as much as possible to ward off the Dutch disease, there ought not to be any other shared institutions.
A logical first place to begin would be by devolving the Criminal Code to the provinces. Montreal has anxieties about tools termed varmint guns in points west of Thunder Bay since Quebec people actually become mass shooters. Trying to hold up some kind of half-measure of property rights in Quebec will just result in the collapse of property rights in other provinces.
*I blame the way the Indian Affairs bureaucracy evolved for the damage done to First Nations as economies and cultures. MacDonald is on record as wanting to incorporate the FNs as ridings within the Parliamentary system. Even Egerton Ryerson had nothing to do with the abuses by pedophiles and other bad actors enabled by bureaucrats in the residential school system.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I think he had a bit on the Marathas where he argued they would have burned themselves out with constant warfare. The way to have India never get colonized by the British is you just have Plassey go the other way. Either it doesn't rain that day and the Nawab's weekend warriors are able to fire their muskets, or the Nawab's one general doesn't take Clive's money and actually leads his contingent to reinforce the Nawab, or Clive himself has a bad curry the night before and his judgement is off. Without a win at Plassey, the Seven Years War doesn't result in the East India Company expanding across the continent, with them remaining confined to a couple of coastal trading forts, and possibly getting kicked out of Bengal. The industrial revolution still happens, but the 2BE without India isn't the same thing. UK is not the industrial powerhouse it was in our timeline without the captive market of Company-controlled India. There's also no strategic imperative for the 2BE to be in the Mediterranean, for instance, without the most important colony on the other side of the Suez Canal. British involvement in Africa has much less motivation - the strategic aspect of Cape Colony was identical to that of Gibraltar or Egypt, hold open the sea lane to India - so the pressures which lead to the Scramble for Africa are reduced. Egypt possibly still carves out a swathe of territory uphill of the Nile rapids under that Albanian dynasty. Holland possibly continues to hold Cape Colony - with a dramatically different ethnic composition - Spain and Portugal still hold their enclaves, and indigenous empires like the Sokoto and the Zulus who had the aggression and warrior spirit to expand in our timeline up until they ran into the 2BE might just have kept going. There is no Great Game with Russia over Afghanistan, but, Afghan empires are never prevented from snowballing their way into the Indian princely states every couple of decades. Afghanistan could easily be a major world power today without the legacy left by the imposition of the frontier which divided Pathanstan. With nobody to conquer them besides the Afghans, the Punjabi Empire which started in the 17th century would have most likely continued to be a thing into present day, and most likely be in an ongoing state of intermittent war with Afghanistan. I could see it causing a lengthier period of tensions with America, since South American markets would become relatively more important to colonize with India taken out of the picture. In our timeline, Royal Navy reformer Thomas Cochrane lead South American revolutionary fleets while working as a mercenary in the waters surrounding that continent in the early 19th century. This might, if the British were still the guarantors of Belgian neutrality in 1914 and matters still came to a head then, mean America enters WWI sooner, on the side of the Ottomans, Austrians, and Germans, to get revenge on the British over chronic violations of the Monroe Doctrine. No colonization would also mean no decolonization. There would be no pressure for west Eurasian states to leave their coastal exclaves around the world.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@anthonysaunders345 You know what, for the sake of argument, I'm going to assume you're speaking in good faith.
There is an intrinsic incompatibility from first principles built in to the predominant evolved forms of regional civic sentiment in these provinces. Multiculturalism in the form in which it exists on the ground with its felt and understood but often unthought and unarticulated assumptions about individual rights can not be reconciled with secularism in the francophone tradition, due to the implicit assumptions multiculturalism makes about individual rights.
By Benedict Anderson definition, a nation represents an imagined community, held together in Anderson's view by specifically print media.
1830s-1840s through 1960s, the old nationalism worked on a system of guaranteed standards of second class citizenship for the nonProtestant minority groups.
I'd argue that this in and of itself was something specifically southern Ontario was able to do because of its heritage in having been originally settled - set aside the Neutral Nation who had been ethnically cleansed by the Iroquois - by Pennsylvania Loyalists who were themselves heir to the culture imported by the Religious Society of Friends along the Black Walnut Trail following the Revolution.
For having had, since the Potato Famine, an analogous ethnoconfessional dynamic to that Northern Ireland imported to it, this ought to be seen as stroke of good fortune that the basic ingredients necessary to build multiculturalism had all ready existed here for so long.
Just because this is going to get to be about five times as long as that, I'd just like to clarify with you that you are, in fact, about 75 years old and speak English as your first language; and would like to ask you in which part of which province or territory you live, and if you or your parents or grandparents moved there from somewhere else. I'm from around Toronto.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
He got it about right I'd say, but he's a bit too optimistic about mutual secession being the way it would go, rather than Ottawa simply becoming a truly authoritarian regime, and privileging the secret police within its power structure to maintain order. Given the death of Canada as a nation since the 1960s, thanks to the collapse of common civic values, and the absence of any dominant ethnic group since forever - the FNs were sixty separate ethnicities prior to colonization, then none of the genocides were full-scale, with the exception of ethnically cleansing the Acadians out of Nova Scotia, and the Beothuks dying of smallpox - which the Prime Minister acknowledged in 2015 as "the postnational state," nothing will stand against geographical determinism, and taken as a unit, Confederation is closest among other countries to Russia, being population centres dispersed along linear infrastructure in a bad temperate climate. All they'd have to do is set up an oprichniki and fiddle the elections just a little bit more each year. Canada lost the War on Terror the worst out of any member of the American alliance structure.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ShimobeSama Malaysia on the source material I know for a fact he used - the guilt shame fear cultural motivations website - is an interesting anomaly in being a majority Muslim country that is primarily guilt motivated. While there might be a "Coming of Age in Samoa" effect - the Samoans were joking in the interviews they gave to Margaret Meade, and Margaret Meade took them literally and then published their jokes as though they were a serious description of Samoan life, which the Samoans found embarrassing after the fact - the fact is that that is the way Malaysia shows up on that website. I feel like unless the explanation is that it was seen as a joke, then there must be something in Malay culture which means they are in fact guilt motivated.
Malaysia was coincidentally the only place the British ever decolonized properly, though they accidentally had the one-off resource of an army of veteran jungle fighters, thanks to the campaign in Burma twelve years earlier, which meant the problems a communist insurgency could have left the young country were completely avoided. It is also the inspiration for the pretend society of Naboo in Star Wars, in that it has an elected monarchy, selected from among the aristocratic families who settle the archipelago before colonziation, and was between about three and one year ago a darling of live and invest abroad social media.
(I remember Korea is another one of the guilt motivated societies in the Western Pacific, but Korea is a Protestant country. Hardly anybody is majority fear motivated, and the strongest shame motivation is in the belt of African countries immediately south of the Sahara. The only guilt motivated African countries showed up as Zimbabwe and South Africa. Latin America and eastern Europe are a blend of mild guilt motivation and mild shame motivation. Russia on that website came out with a mild shame motivation. Japan and most of the rest of the world showed up with a mild shame motivation, except for the rest of the traditional developed world, who were all either mildly or strongly guilt motivated. I'm not sure if the website itself is one hundred percent accurate, but it was for a while the most accessible illustration of the guilt shame split.)
1
-
@ShimobeSama yeah it seems intuitive that Christianity is the key element in guilt motivation.
I'd have to check SoKo's wiki entry my perception had been that the Proddies were the prominent set of denominations there.
Guilt motivation was a thing I remember came up in the one Freud I read where he argues that in child development terms - Freud had a lot of kids and has been allowed to be as wrong as he was about his theories because they were all based in watching his own kids develop - children at first show no reaction to doing anything bad except when they are caught, and then they begin to internalize it into a sense of guilt for doing something they have been taught is bad.
(I have a strong memory one time of having got in trouble because as a preteen my parents thought I punched my preteen brother in the gut, then he recovered and said that our developmentally disabled elementary school aged sister had used her Sesame Street toddler sized broom like a halberd to hit him in the face with full leverage as I distracted him, she was completely happy with everything up until she got confronted by an authority figure, when her mood shifted instantly. My brain always calls up that memory when I bring up that argument from Freud.)
The difference with Islam is that while Islam also makes requirements for conformity to objective moral standards based on the idea that man is made in the image of God, Christianity obsesses over repentance, and there is probably an element of reinforcing repentance in culturally Christian childrearing.
Guilt-motivation if it does provide a society-wide advantage would be that individual people are more prone to police themselves, and therefore a higher degree of trust between strangers is possible, with people who do not have a guilt reaction considered to have a personality disorder. Guilt motivation I would suspect acts like vaccination - in the old sense, infection with a weaker disease that provides immunity and intransmissibility against a worse disease, not this lIfE sAvInG vAcCiNeS crap - in that at a certain level of buy-in, people really do trust strangers.
(However, this doesn't account for ultra high trust mildly shame based societies such as Japan who have always been if anything even better at that stuff than anywhere with a guilt motivation - though Japan has extremely high emphasis on consultation and conscientiousness.)
(Further, when one gets into the spread of different motivations in shame based societies, the question of "shame in what?" poses itself. A society which says that the highest callings are craftsmanship for craftsmanship's sake and to put always the interests of ones actual community first is going to put a mountain of shame pressure on people for some behaviours, and none at all on other. A society which says that it is always permissible to lie about anything at all and that the object is always to be able to posture as though one has the highest stature will pressure people in quite different ways than the craftsman society.)
I find persuasive the argument that some of these movements were engineered language viruses designed specifically to weaken guilt-motivated cultures by paralyzing people into indecision.
Past a certain point, though, if one is in one of these guilt overloaded systems, the guilt motivation weakens as the sense of a person's impact on a culture vanishes to zero, and one becomes driven by guilt only insofar as one does things which affect people one actually knows, and by fear with respect to a crumbling ruin of a power structure no longer capable of producing anything of value.
Which is to say, in the sense that the nation is an imagined community, if this is the case, then pushing the guilt reflex to the point of breaking it is in fact an ingenious means of breaking any nation whose civic values include any appeal to the ability of the unpoliced individual to do the right thing at any point ever.
As far as "the West" goes, you know, I'm personally good with the old civilization having had its moment.
Something else will will take its place and mutate out of some of the cultural attributes it used to possess, in the same way as Buddhism ceased to be a civilizationally dominant force in the continent of India by the turn of the second millennium after Christ, but dispersed as an influence through China Proper and into the Western Pacific.
No doubt what societies in different chunks of it take forward with them will be as divergent as what the diadochic kingdoms took with them out of the slow collapse of Hellenistic civilization.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
naw this was damned to happen since the 1960s.
The old majoritarian Protestantism lost its self-confidence when decolonization kicked off outside of India and Ireland. Every bit of pull Canada ever had where it punched above its weight class comes from the point in history when it was, by default, the most important British possession in the British Empire. Had majoritarian Protestants had their self-confidence, it wouldn't have been known as the Quiet Revolution, it would have been known as the Quebec Emergency, and it would have gone as well for Jean Lesage and his faction as the Malayan Emergency went for the chicoms.
It was never going to be an ethnostate, because the Gascon-Breton-Norman admixies never got fully genocided by the British in 1763, and there was never enough admixture between the second and third waves of migration and the sixty or so FN groups.
For a while in the 18th century, there was a chance that enough of what is now Canada would have ended up like Mexico, everybody would be on a common continuum of Amerindian-settler admixture, but that never happened.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Ryan Dawson was my go-to guy for a while.
My takeaway out of trying actively to follow the Forever War in Syria though was that there is sort of no point in it, because at most you will see two months into the future of the narrative by listening to gonzo journalists and people at the edge of being a really intellectually honest conspiracy theorist and a rogue analyst, as a VERY active listener, prior to the late 2010s big tech crackdowns.
Made 35% on the runup in General Dynamics by buying in the second Trump's Hail Mary lawsuits failed, then selling because I didn't want to get greedy. Figured there were good odds the markets had priced in the increased chance of war, but that wasn't hard to see. Nobody removes a peace president if they don't have a war in mind. That might as well have been the shadow of Odin bringing back his spear.
I remember I was genuinely concerned and had a sense of it being the dawn of a new age when I heard Russia was invading The Ukraine. I thought to myself, holy crap, we're back to great powers and spheres of influence - we've gone back in time from the early 21st century to mid 19th century.
Then Johnson went to Kiev, at the exact moment that if it was a limited war being waged with the objective of maintaining The Ukraine as a buffer zone between NATO and Russia, the powers that be would have been downgrading it to negotiations - right after the Russian abandonment of the Dnieper offensive.
I looked at the news, looked at what else I had to do with myself, realized it was just another Forever War, realized that I had been had, realized that I had no chance against a professional propaganda campaign, realized I had no time to stay two months ahead of the narrative, and have resolutely tuned it out ever since, barring the occasional failure not to rise to the bait set by the subgenus of utter prat who supports The Ukraine on social media.
I suppose my other takeaway is this, next time I'm not selling my war stocks until the war starts.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@TheFoolish727 I mean...I agree with the literal meaning of the words he typed, since the video itself literally says that it won't engage with communist ideas themselves.
My head canon is that Marx was just trolling for fun, but he was a compulsive who couldn't stop himself. Because he was a fairly heavy reader, it seems plausible to me that Marx would have been aware that Jean-Baptiste Say had disproven the labour theory of value as articulated by Adam Smith in Wealth of Nations. Marx therefore initially for his own entertainment and later because as a compulsive he could not control himself wrote a series of long shitposts which begun with the pretense that the labour theory of value had not been disproven.
In fact, during Marx' life, he actually managed to get under the skin of the finance minister of the Austrian Empire, Eugene Bohm von Bawerk, to the point that the latter wrote a point by point refutation of Marx' ideas - the farmer with the six sacks of grain, the last of which he feeds to some parrots whose chattering amuses him, is the image from the summary of this refutation which has always stuck with me. (I still have yet to read the full text of Karl Marx and the Close of his System.)
The subjective theory of value, as articulated by Say and Bohm von Bawerk, is the origin of those econ graphs that show a consumer and producer surplus existing to either side of a price point, as well as the refutation of the central point of orthodox Marxism. Without the labour theory of value, there is no exploitation.
So this video is not really a debunking of Marxist ideas so much as it is an articulation of a theory of why it is that Marxist ideas continue to appeal despite their foundation on a 250 year old theory that was debunked about a decade or so after its publication. The video is an attempt at social history, in broad strokes, not intellectual history. It's more akin to "libertarianism is male astrology" than a blow-by-blow debunking.
After all, somebody could be drawn to a particular argument purely on emotional grounds or due to their own self-serving bias, and that argument could independently of why they support it actually be both valid and make true assumptions.
Tangentially, I disagree with the inclusion of Stalin. Stalin was the best thing that could have happened to the Soviet Union and the world at the time. He rejected worldwide revolution, held the bureaucracy to account during The Great Purge, was able to attract sufficient foreign capital and managerial expertise by embracing the mixed economy in order to make the Five Year Plans succeed and to industrialize the Soviet Union, and is rejected - I would say with some degree of intellectual honesty - as a communist by orthodox Marxists as well as enough Leninists and Trotkskyists. Stalinism to the extent that one approaches it through the lens of Marxism is a system which has come about in a fair bit of the former west, albeit in an iteration which lacks a Stalin. The Purge is seen as a bad thing mostly because it targeted the Soviet equivalent of the modern managerial elite, and this is the caste which controls the discourse.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@thinkpolhub Which could have lead to some weird stuff in the rest of the world. Brazil was the seat of the Portuguese royal family and IIRC Rio was technically the capital of Portugal for the duration of the wars with France, but that was the relocation of the seat of administration of a preindustrial power, say Belgium had been evacuated to Congo, that would have been the skilled labour to industrialize, and Congo would have been the only land Belgium had as an empire. That would have meant they would have had no option but to double down on industrializing it. Without War One, the strains on India would not have happened - the Army of India was well suited to colonial policing actions but not to trench warfare - which would have meant figures like Gandhi would not have become nationalists - Gandhi stalled the debate on Indian Home Rule for some time - and India could easily have become a Dominion in the 1930s or 1940s - probably the 1930s famine would have been avoided by Indian self-government, the way subsequent bad harvests in our timeline did not turn into famines under the Republic of India - and stayed a Dominion until the 1980s or 1990s. Africa would have looked a lot different, with an industrializing Congo at its heart, not having had for instance the effects of the scorched earth tactics employed by von Lettow-Vorbeck in our timeline. An industrial Congo would have caused heavier infrastructure investment in British possessions to make sense, and the notion that there was something intrinsic to Africa that made it poor as opposed to it being simply a very big place with very many engineering challenges to be overcome would probably be laughed at. Psychologically, the French, Germans, Russians, and Austrians might have got a bit bummed out about the meaning of life if things still bogged down into trench warfare, and the Ottomans would have the fatigue factor of dealing with the way their region would be in their absence, but...that wouldn't have affected the British, Belgians, Portuguese, Japanese or Americans. etc. Mental tangent.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I personally don't mind self-described communists as individual people, at least in my part of the world. One of them introduced me to Robert Nozick's arguments while trying to make an argument against anarchism prior to beginning to identify as the opposite gender following a number of police contacts after he - at the time - had given lip to a cop after calling the cops on his own library room event claiming the Proud Boys - before they had been listed as terrorists in this jurisdiction - had taken over his library room for a ritual fist fight, and when the cop asked him to leave as a person who had not registered his organization as an official student club, he had decided to try to argue his case - clearly enough he just wanted the attention - then he got a bit spicy about a year or two later at a counterdemonstration for an antiimmigraiton rally, and the police took that as his third strike. Not a bad guy, just a bit off. One of my good friends is a communist, though not that into it, which may be as a result of having a diagnosis for a mental illness for which he is medicated.
Self-described socialists, on the other hand, are bags of dog shit as human beings and the least intellectually honest and ethically inclined individuals I have ever met. I have bottomless contempt for the kind of person - at least from this part of the world - who openly claims to admire Sweden or similar Scandinavian systems. You'll never pin down a socialist on what exactly they believe, but they will always be the most useless parasitic incivil unpleasant selfish immoral shit stains you will ever encounter, at least in this part of the world. What's socialism? Who knows. What's a socialist? The worst asswipe you will ever meet in your life.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
That is what one gets out of a BA in the humanities with a GPA that falls just shy of that magical gray zone between a B+ and an A-.
At best, you're qualified to have an internet argument and know whichever set of obscure arguments necessary.
Not that I regret it, I love my old college major, but...the guy who runs this channel gets to work in the field for which I studied much more than I ever will.
The trick is, if you're actually in college or thinking of it, if you like a period and are obsessed with it to the point of wanting to give decades of your life to advancing the understanding of minor details of it, DON'T study it at the undergraduate level.
History departments spread their undergrads thin on a variety of different stuff. You'll have some background general knowledge, but, so does everybody else, and knowing what to do in a college library legit does not matter.
Instead, pick up languages, and try to bum time off researchers in the field to ask what software competencies they would want in an assistant, then go for classes which teach those.
1
-
Religious studies and classics departments are a bit more clear cut in terms of a direction for grad school. If you're in classics, you're learning Latin and ancient Greek, you're learning the tip of the canon, you get to grad school, you learn the rest of the canon, you learn the modern commentary on it, you're a classicist.
Religious studies varies, add Hebrew if you're doing Christianity, Buddhist studies, expect to be guided toward Sanskrit - though Sanskrit guys are going to be as good at or better than Buddhist studies guys at the nuts and bolts of Buddhist studies - as well as having to pick up a bit of Tibetan and Japanese.
It makes for a bit more of a culture with the TAs where the undergrads are thought of less as undergrads and more like grad students that have yet to hatch, because the material relates more to the fundamentals of the discipline. That bimodal thing in male humanities TAs, where half of them want to win a pedagogy award and the other half of them see their undergrads as a nuisance distracting them from research, it's still present, but its muted.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Liberals on average I believe to be a mixture of ideological Stalinists who actually believe in the crap that came out of the mouth of that genocidal bastard Pierre Trudeau - I'd term them Hitlerists since Pierre Trudeau was as close as these provinces ever came to a Hitler, despite the more frequent attachment of that comparison to his son, Justin has never committed a genocide by United Nations definition, whereas Pierre when he was Indian Affairs Minister oversaw the Sixties Scoop, which fits the fifth clause of that definition, and it isn't really fair to compare somebody who has not committed a genocide to the man who is considered the embodiment of evil in casual contexts due to the genocide to which he is linked - except that Confederation really fits the Stalinist model better, since private investors are free to repatriate their profits, and this was not a freedom enjoyed even by domestic investors in Nazi Germany in the 1930s and 1940s - and pragmatists who are just after pork.
Stalinism has mostly won, so I can appreciate the pragmatists' perspective, they just always seem to pick some new low to demand of their adherents.
However, there could be a thing where bilingual Quebeckers actually do have much more authoritarian values and a more totalitarian perspective on economics and personal freedom than either unilingual francophone Quebeckers further east or Ontario people from west of the Ottawa suburbs.
In other words, it may well be the case that it is just impossible to coexist with you people for cultural reasons underlying your weird Nazi ideas.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1