Reveal Your Uncool Conservative Beliefs Here

Marxism is dumb and bad.

Capitalist liberal democracy is the end point of Western civilization, it will never be superseded by a higher/better form of social organization, will only end through collapse.

Men should not have facial hair and people in general should not have messy hair.

xps i don't recall saying that you can hear a soulja boy's influence on chaucer

lol "a soulja boy." the soulja boy's tale

currently at peak hair and beard, this will probably only end by collapse too tbh

sremm beef = just watch their latest video, 'set the roof' and listen to the lyrics, they're just the worst people in earth, i fucking despise literally everything they're doing, it isn't even abrasive in an interesting way

lol crut, one for old-skool ilx that

hir wese y manne ful cranke, tellynge

Femmephobia is way less useful as a critical concept than misogyny

Self-care is necessary but not thereby radically oppositional

Couching leftist projects in terms of resistance to neoliberalism rather than to capitalism risks a lot of reformist implications

― one way street, Thursday, August 4, 2016 10:52 PM (1 week ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink]

looooool

women's sports are, in general, less exciting versions of men's sports

http://allproudamericans.com/paimages/does-duck-and-cover-really-work.jpg

I'll watch women's tennis from time to time but yeah

There are too many things that I massively disagree with posted here for it to be worth a fight on any one of them. I'm just wondering why the 'loool' at ows? Because those aren't really conservative standpoints? They kind of are in comparison to a lot of current radical discourse (I agree with all of them, though not entirely with the latter, but again, I kind of feel this thread is meant to be a dumping ground not a discussion ground).

women's sports are, in general, less exciting versions of men's sports

― have you ever even read The Drudge Report? Have you gone on Stormfron (k3vin k.), Wednesday, August 17, 2016 10:52 AM (14 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

sexual dimorphism of humans def means that a lot of sports are more exciting to watch when men are playing them but otoh a lot of women's sports are less commercialized and therefore less likely to suffer from rampant PED use endemic to men's sports and therefore likely to be more of a clean competition

also crowds at woman's sports tend to be less shitty

(emil.y i was laughing at the extreme relativity necessary to consider those "conservative opinions." i assumed they were posted tongue in cheek so thought i was laughing along with one way street, not at them, and wasn't critiquing the positions themselves)

Can't speak for sciatica but I lol'ed at ows' post bc it requires some, like, wicked fractal definition of conservatism within the queer anticapotalist left. but I get how all those opinions could be uncool rn

liberalism as many of my friends practice it is like a shitty religion that i want no part of.

they think of other people as needing to be saved, by them.
they make penance with speech acts, not real action.
they live their lives in constant guilt.
they live in cities that are only differentiated from other cities by being huge destinations for wealth, then they disavow that wealth while continuing to partake in the lifestyle it provides.
they blame rich people for all the evils of the world while ignoring that they are the 1%.
they prescribe how other people should be living their own lives.
they say things that have no meaning other than to reveal to others that they are members in this very sensitive club of good people.
it's nothing but performative.

Lol got xp'd

I must admit I like Republican President Dwight D. "Ike" Eisenhower. But chances are, you also like Ike. Maybe everybody likes Ike.

xps to sciatica and flopson - yeah, both of those reasons are basically fair enough. I think I inhabit so many circles where these are topics for fierce debate that I took it w/ a completely straight face!

watching grown adults discussing rae sremmurd like it was literature is to behold the end of art

― imago,

links?

I must admit I like Republican President Dwight D. "Ike" Eisenhower. But chances are, you also like Ike. Maybe everybody likes Ike.

― Philip Nunez,

best Cold War president if you look past his championing of covert ops

just watch their latest video, 'set the roof' and listen to the lyrics, they're just the worst people in earth, i fucking despise literally everything they're doing

Lj on rap always sounds like thinly veiled racist uncle 'i like blk ppl...who pull up their pants' lol

There was some self-directed irony in my post (like, as a queer trans woman and a marxist, I realize I occupy a different milieu than some of you), but I do actually hold the positions in it, and they're generally unpopular in radical circles; but as e.mily said, this thread seems "like a dumping ground not a discussion ground," so I'll stay out of the rae sremmurd discourse.

*emil.y, I mean

if hating on vicious misogyny, shit beats and two little soi-disant alpha male fuckers is racist then

never listened to rae sremmurd but i see his/her/their name everywhere

just read the lyrics to set the off and stopped here:

Now let's fill up her head and let's see if she chokes

it's fashionable to call anything (thinly veiled) racism these days (oh my conservative opinion i guess)

Bill O'Reilly also quotes lyrics as if they made sense removed from arrangements.

if hating on vicious misogyny, shit beats and two little soi-disant alpha male fuckers is racist then

― imago,

you just wrote hating "on."

if you are comparing me to bill o reilly you should say so instead of hinting at it

I think I did!

[Pre-Hook: Swae Lee]
Flash her with cash, had to spazz on the waiter
She fucked up my order three times in a row, woah
I'm good on gas, I just filled up my tank
Now let's fill up her head and let's see if she chokes

so the double entendre is not done on purpose i guess is what you're saying

i don't actually think ur racist lj you just an fyi you sound like coded white supremacist

I think I did!

― The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, August 17, 2016 7:46 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

and no, you didn't

yeah I quite like rap and rap culture so I appropriate its vernacular sometimes. doesn't mean I don't detest some of its practitioners though

and they're not as bad as anthony kiedis I guess

I see you flopson, I'm better about this shot these days but sremm are p much in the sweet spot of do not get

yeah idk they're like a fabulous marriage of Descendants and Kool Keith. They get away with their snottiness and for the moment they don't sound anomic or evil. But they can't keep it up forever and I can imagine hating them like The Weeknd and late Kanye.

doesn't mean I don't detest some of its practitioners though

― imago, Wednesday, August 17, 2016 7:50 PM (7 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

this is the thing

people take a band you don't like and make a lot of unwarranted generalizations about you

theres tonnes of good hip hop and rap that reads different than rae sremmurd

nah it's all good -- we're just zingin' late afternoon

zingin on hump day

ugh

s'all good

let's get back on topic

courses aimed at bright/curious state-schooled kids, such as those I help to run a few times a year, are not elitist

I think my uncool conservative belief is on a parallel with LJ's statement there -- I think drawing a line dividing quality work from mass market pulp and calling one side "literature" has its place

the line moves all the time, though, and things jump back and forth

spelling your band name backwards is straightup stupid

They get away with their snottiness and for the moment they don't sound anomic or evil. But they can't keep it up forever

This was basically my take on Odd Future when they first came out, but weren't they actually kids at the time whereas Rae Sremmurd are like proper adults? I like RS musically, but honestly I haven't really paid much attention to their lyrics, so... eh. I kind of don't want to go down that route but just imagine I wrote an incredibly long and interesting post about the conflicts and intertwinement of ingroup lexical production, culture, Cannibal Corpse and exclusion/alienation of marginalised groups. Seriously, this hypothetical post was the most brilliant and incisive thing you've ever read about lyrics and it's changed your worldview forever.

(sorry for continuing to turn this thread into 'Rae Sremmurd: Classic or Dud')

Fair enough. Cannibal Corpse have shit beats too though

rock has a rich and deep history of making garbage music (another uncool conservative opinion!)

the internet can't accommodate both privacy and anonymity, and given a choice between the two i pick privacy

it will never be ok with me when people use "unique" to mean "uncommon"

Marxism is dumb and bad.

Capitalist liberal democracy is the end point of Western civilization, it will never be superseded by a higher/better form of social organization, will only end through collapse.

Men should not have facial hair and people in general should not have messy hair.

― ælərdaɪs (jim in vancouver), Wednesday, August 17, 2016 12:37 PM (2 hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

You know the Marxist view *is* that Capitalism will collapse, right?

permitting female facial hair is a nice lacuna in jim's conservatism there, rebounds to his credit

xp. I am very familiar with Marxism. This is probably the problem! Grew up in a house filled with books on Marxist theory. Literally was at a table with friends of my parents and an uncle who are all Trotskyists a week ago.

just need to repost this

nah it's all good -- we're just zingin' late afternoon

― The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, August 17, 2016 7:00 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

wasn't the marxist view that capitalism collapses after we have 3D printers that really work, and don't just make smelly, knobby statues of webcomic characters?

nah that's gene roddenberry, easily confused

so many liminal exurbs would have to be razed to the ground to make a car ban work. Let’s do it!!!

you know, we could start with Manhattan, and extend to much of Brooklyn, Bronx and Queens

xp aaaaand we're back on track!
i think "there but for the grace of god", that could be me in 10 years. but so far i have only yelled scary shit at home

i mean the essence of the issue is that driving has been made way, way too easy! its attractiveness is propped up by its real costs being socialized and externalized, from the POV of the driver. so the solution kinda has to involve "make driving harder," or it's not a serious solution imho.

― not the one who's tryin' to dub your anime (Doctor Casino), Thursday, March 7, 2024 7:13 PM (four days ago) bookmarkflaglink

I fundamentally disagree with this. Making driving harder does not cause viable transit options to appear, and banning cars outright is significantly politically harder to achieve than building better transit options. Make transit attractive. Going back to Berlin again, not that I tried it with kids, but the transit and bike options were both so pleasant and enjoyable that just taking trams and trains around the city was a good experience for its own sake. The NYC subway by contrast is fucking unpleasant. Don't pretend that's just some kind of privilege thing, you know it is, everyone knows it is. I'm not saying it's the worst thing - I relied on it for many, many years. Cities all over the world have more pleasant and humane transit systems, even some US cities (the DC metro, e.g.).

Even in my suburb, virtually everyone who works in the city commutes by train (NB: I don't work in the city anymore, I work 20 minutes from my house in another suburb). The only reason to drive into the city is when you're going somewhere that takes way longer by train than it does by car (e.g. Brooklyn). Making driving from here harder is not going to rectify anything, it's just going to mean people making fewer discretionary trips into the city, which I don't really think is the goal, and is in fact bad for the city.

It really sounds like some of you just resent cars and car owners and want to punish them, and that is not really effective policy.

I guess to qualify that, yes, the solution may "involve" making driving harder, but that should be as a byproduct, not as the focus in itself. E.g. enact congestion pricing for the express purpose of funding a specific transit project and tell the public that.

otm

besides the thread being one of about four threads where it should be frowned upon for that kind of nonsense posing one-upmanship, its p obvious just a gang of ppl cranky because they cant drive

I don’t think “people drive too much” is as much of an issue in larger cities that have at least some level of public transport as it is in the sprawl in much of the country. Smog and pedestrian safety? Yeah, big issues! A complete inability to do anything at all without a car, though? Broad swaths of the country. These are places where the city might have some public transportation that has occasional branch routes into the suburb giving you a bus twice a day

But having visited the newer IMAX theater in a suburb near me (well, 10 miles away) I was struck by the fact this new construction area was 90% streets and parking lots and… nothing. I guess there might be some landscaping at some point but it’s a bank, a car wash, a strip mall, repeated on and on. You could duck over a couple blocks at some points and end up in a housing development or area of apartment buildings, but with those we’re talking at least one parking lot spot per unit. And all of the roads are sized for the time of day when they’ll be the most congested so they’re insanely wide

I hold up my hand up I absolutely resent cars and car owners and any scheme to push them out of where I live in gets my full blessing.

send them here! there’s all the driving you’d ever want!

man alive, who was pretending you were wrong about the NYC subway's issues? I agreed with you, and pointed out that they were all solvable.... with money that is currently being spent making driving artificially easy, to the detriment of the entire planet. we should stop doing that. this will, inevitably, make driving harder. it is way way easier than it can plausibly be in any sustainable version of the future. something's gotta give.

money is spent making everything artificially easy, to the detriment of the planet

fuckin hospitals man dont get me started

Sneaky Drivers Dodging Toll Cameras Cost Authorities Millions

It really sounds like some of you just resent cars and car owners and want to punish them, and that is not really effective policy.

― longtime caller, first time listener (man alive),

I do, anyway.

silby

you havent seen mine!

I think this has been posted here several times already, but I think there's almost certainly too much easy access to hardcore porn now, especially that kids can find, and I don't think saying this this makes me a SWERF.

Agreed. I saw an open tab for hard-core porn on a 10yo students ipad. No one wants that.

Opened tab? Closed tab? Unopened tab? You know what I mean, one at the top of the browser that wasn't currently clicked on

I think this has been posted here several times already, but I think there's almost certainly too much easy access to hardcore porn now, especially that kids can find, and I don't think saying this this makes me a SWERF.

― This is Dance Anthems, have some respect (Camaraderie at Arms Length)

Not inherently! I guess the question is how one puts that into practice. Because the ways it gets put into practice, like COPPA, _do_ disproportionately negatively affect SWs. And that's something that... I genuinely do believe it's well-intentioned. I don't think COPPA is "conservative" even! It's a liberal law promoted and passed by liberals. Supporting sex workers isn't really a liberal idea, I don't think. It's one of the places where the difference between liberalism and leftism becomes clearest. Liberals see people who make their living doing force fem ASMR and say "God, that's awful, we need to help that person get a decent productive job working for a national defense contractor."

For me, it's not a matter of _access_ to porn, it's a matter of porn _quality_. Frankly the financial incentives when it comes to pornography are perverse. I don't mean that as a pun. I'm literally just trying to talk about this from an economic perspective here. The problem here, to my mind, is that by and large when it comes to _what sorts_ of porn are out there, we've let the market decide. When you do that, you see the same thing that nearly always happens. The biases of the people who are _currently_ in power are perpetuated. The rich don't just grow richer - they shape the environment so as to self-select for people who _share_ their values.

I've seen the sorts of porn that get circulated on the Internet, and I do think that porn is a reflection of the values of the ruling elites. Now, I'm not saying that those values are bad in and of themselves. Lots of people _do_ find a lot of value in pornography that perpetuates "traditional" social values, such as porn featuring a dominant man and a submissive woman.

The challenge is for me is that pornography is often seen as being _qualitatively different_ from other forms of entertainment media by dint of the subject matter it portrays. I honestly don't see pornography that way at all. ContraPoints did this really fascinating video about the Twilight series that addresses really strongly the idea of Twilight as a sexual fantasy, the way in which it gave rise to 50 Shades of Gray. I haven't read 50 Shades of Gray. I've heard lots of people in the kink scene talk shit about it. All I know about it is that the author was really into Thomas Tallis's "Spem in Alium". To me, personally, this points to the positive social value of what I'm just going to generalize as "smut". Because I don't think there's value in making this hard and fast distinction. One can gain a great deal of _positive social value_ from work that appeals to the _prurient interest_.

So to me the question isn't one of "porn" itself, but _what sorts of material_ we are defining as "hardcore porn" that's accessible to children.

-

I guess I'm just gonna really get into this here, talk about my early experiences here.

-

When I was a kid - this was before the Internet - my best friend said hey, come on over to my place, I got this porn tape. So I did, out of idle curiosity more than anything else. His mom was off at work. Some conservatives would say that's the problem, that his mom should have been at home taking care of him instead of leaving him alone to watch hardcore porn. His parents got divorced because his dad was mentally ill and abusive. I am not sure that my best friend would have been better served by having been raised in a traditional two-parent abusive household. I can deep dive several more levels on this. One could draw all sorts of conclusions, make all sorts of speculations. I later learned that this friend sexually assaulted my youngest sibling, who was eight years younger than both of us. I don't personally think this had anything to do with his watching a porn video with me when we were 12 or so. From what I know, which isn't a lot but which is more than I'd like, sexual assault is a learned behavior. Minors who commit sexual assault often experienced sexual assault themselves, and from that experience got the idea that sexual assault was normal. I don't know whether or not my friend was sexually assaulted or not. I don't personally care if he was or not. I am angry at him and I hate him for what he did to my sibling. Whether it's because he was sexually assaulted or because of that porn movie we watched or any number of other reasons, that doesn't fucking matter to me. On a personal level, what matters is what he did.

And what matters is that I didn't know about this for 30 years, because when my youngest sibling tried to talk about this, nobody believed him. Oh, no, not _him_. He was a Good Boy. He wouldn't do Something Like That.

-

My dad was a _huge_ porn hound. He just had tremendous amounts of it. Never was able to use a computer, because every time he got one he'd fill it with malware from clicking every porn link on the Internet. He did better with adult bookstores. He worked hard to be discreet about it, though. We knew he watched porn, but we never saw him watching it. Never saw _what_ he was watching. He'd take us out to buy comic books and he'd go next door while we were looking at "Crisis on Infinite Earths" crossover stories and he'd come back with a package in a plain brown wrapper. He didn't pretend he didn't have a tremendous appetite for porn, but he was discreet about it.

Our mom was less discreet about it. After they got divorced, she would take out the catalogs he got in the mail and show them to us and make fun of the "sick shit" my dad was into.

I don't remember what was actually in those catalogs. I know they were from a place called Spartacus. Until I moved here to PDX, I didn't realize that Spartacus was local to here. It surprised me to learn that. We grew up on the East Coast. As far as I know, my dad has never even _been_ to Porland. Spartacus is still around. I'm not really entirely sure what kind of stuff they do. I think it's kink, generally? She Bop, the local female friendly sex boutique, has a lot of their stuff. I've seen local kink folks kind of look down on their stuff in the same way they do _50 Shades of Grey_. Honestly kinksters can be kind of snobby sometimes.

Like I said, I don't remember what exactly is in the catalog. When I last talked to my oldest brother, he said that he thought our mom showing him that catalogue was sexual abuse, that it fucked him up. Me? Shit, I don't know. It's not that simple.

A lot of the kink stuff is force fem. My understanding is that Spartacus does some of the kind of stuff. I guess probably some of that kind of stuff was in the catalog. I can't remember. I can't remember at all what was in that catalog. Do I personally think seeing that catalog _made_ me trans, that it _made_ me someone who liked kink? No, I don't. All of this stuff about, like, queer propaganda, about promoting these unhealthy lifestyles... you'll hear other queer people talk about it sometimes. We're fucking _surrounded_ by straight propaganda. Everywhere. In all forms. Like Garfield says, I'm not _immune_ to propaganda, but the straight media narratives, the straight porn, the complete and total insistence from all sides that the _only acceptable form_ of desire was cishet desire... none of it managed to turn me straight.

Did the stuff I saw fuck me up, though? Did it fuck me up when I tried to figure out stuff about my gender and all I found was people talking about their sissy fetishes? Yes. Yes, it did. Tranny porn is fucked up. It's completely fucked up. It's made for the benefit of people who want to objectify and fetishize trans people ... in a way that _affirms their own identity as cisgender, heterosexual men_. That's the thing that's fucked up about it. It's not the objectification or the fetishization. It's the _distortion_, it's the way there's this unwillingness to deal with the reality of attraction, the reality of desire. That, to me, that's the crux of it. It's not that it's explicit. It's not about "corrupting the minds of the youth". It's about...

I don't know how to explain this exactly, but to me, the essence of porn, the essence of what I find _evil_ about porn, is Bernini's sculpture "The Ecstasy of Saint Teresa". I know it's not normally seen as "pornographic", and this, I think, is kind of central to what I find evil about it. Bernini sculpts a woman in the throes of lust, and then claims it in the name of something which hates women, which hates lust. That disgusts me. That is odious to me. This, to me, is The Lie, the one Peter Hammill sings about in "The Lie (Bernini's St. Theresa)". I hate the lie, whether it's tranny porn or Sunday Mass. I hate both manifestations equally.

I don't know if that's conservative or what.

I guess to qualify that, yes, the solution may "involve" making driving harder, but that should be as a byproduct, not as the focus in itself. E.g. enact congestion pricing for the express purpose of funding a specific transit project and tell the public that.

― longtime caller, first time listener (man alive), Monday, March 11, 2024 4:35 PM (five days ago) bookmarkflaglink

because of the congestion externality (each additional driver adds to traffic making everyone else's commute slower) it's actually good to have congestion pricing even if you don't use the money to built public transit, even if you don't value spiting drivers. similar to how a carbon tax is good even if you rebate it rather than spend the money on green infrastructure