- The wealthy
- Space
- Planetary colonization (e.g. Mars)
These are all bad for the same reason; they’re all trying to kill you.
Politicians. Athletes. Celebrities.
I agree with the politicians and celebtrities, but why athletes?
+1
Nature as idyllic harmony, in the Rousseauvian sense. In reality, nature is metal as fuck. (As Werner Herzog put it, the birds aren’t singing, they’re screaming in pain and terror.)
I read that in his voice.
In the same vein “natural” products. Arsenic is a natural product. Just fucking tell me what’s in it and where it came from and stop trying to mislead me.
Asian giant hornet venom is natural too. So natural it literally melts your flesh on contact.
Beautiful. I was looking for a good animal venom!
It’s a good call.
There’s a picture I saw of a man who got swarmed by them. A survivor. (These are rare.) As a joke he stuck a cigarette in the hole left in his arm where one of the stings hit.
It melted a hole. In his skin and flesh. That you could stick a cigarette in and have it stand by itself.
Yep there’s a lot of things that can literally kill and maim you . It’s constantly trying to hurt you and is powerful AF
They’re not screaming in pain and terror. They’re shouting out “THIS LAND IS MY LAND AND ONLY MY LAND I’VE GOT A SHOTGUN AND YOU AIN’T GOT ONE” … or the equivalent in bird speak. They’re threatening to kill anybody who gets near their space, basically.
Religion.
To consider antireligion instead of atheism
The harm of religion is historically evident whereas the presence or absence of gods is not. Ultimately, the continued existence of religion is predicated on the indoctrination of children and suppression of rational thought. Therefore I am against religion but not necessarily against the idea of gods. For all we know gods are computer scientists and we are in their video game. —https://www.arscyni.cc/file/antireligion.htmlAtheist¹ here.
I disagree with you. First, not all religions are the Abrahamic variety that is the source of much of the negative rep of religion. For example you’d be very hard-pressed to find much objectionable from the Daoist camp. (You’ll find superstitious belief in the religious-Daoist camp, obviously, but far less so from the philosophical-Daoist camp.)
Second, being anti-religious doesn’t exactly have a great history itself. Communists, for example, have been anti-religious when at their most fervent and committed huge atrocities, both against religious people and against non-religious people. It seems that atheist (or, if you prefer, anti-religionist) camps haven’t exactly been clean-handed themselves. Indeed these anti-religion types (the Communists) are responsible for more death and horror than all religiously-motivated death and horror put together.²
Third, some of the most irrational people I’ve ever seen are the self-proclaimed “rationalists”. Take, for example, the entire LessWrong crowd. Though supposedly worshippers, practically, of pure reason, their output, if you dig a bit on their site, is ever-increasing gibberish with ludicrous conclusions, and the people who come out of that movement do crazy things (like the LessWrong alumni who formed that murder cult).
So I’m afraid I don’t see religion as especially deserving of ire, despite not being religious (and being atheist). Human beings are irrational at their core, and the veneer of rationality that supposed “rationalists” apply on top makes them, in the end, not that different from the religious people they sneer at.
¹ Small-a atheist, not Big-A Atheist: you know, the asshole variety like Dawkins and company.
² Now I’m not saying that anti-religionists have any kind of extra force behind things here. They just happened to be in power when the technology to do mass extinction of human life was possible. Any of the problematic religious groups would cheerfully have done the same had they had the organizational and communications technology to pull it off.
Before investing some time in a reply, have you read the essay that’s linked?
I read about one third of the way through before realizing it was Yet Another Pseudo-Intellectual (YAPI) argument that basically “carefully defines its terms” (by redefining them away from conventional meanings), then argues with a straw man. Oh, and that carefully overlooks its own counter-arguments as people who ostensibly share the writer’s stance are so carefully overlooked it practically calls attention to the absence.
You’ve introduced nothing new nor interesting to the debate about religion. You’re Hitchens without the style. You’ve got the hypocrisy of Harris, but without the personal charm. You bring nothing to the table but hollow platitudes and the typical intellectual dishonesty of the YAPI crowd.
Thanks for saving me the time of arguing a LLM.
Poverty. It’s fucking shit. You live in constant fear, fear of not being able to eat, losing your home, and one breakage wiping you out for months or years. You live day to day or week to week, your life revolves around money and you might have to take shitty treatment from employers cos you don’t have options. The poor really do pay more. There’s a reason that it’s called the poverty trap and not the poverty easily escapable zone.
Can you share some examples of poverty being romanticized? What comes to my mind is how there seems to be a lot of emphasis and appreciation for folks who are able to escape it, but that doesn’t seem too bad to me. Stories about poverty don’t make me romanticize poverty, they make me appreciate what I have. I don’t disagree with what you said. Just looking for the connection.
Lets start with Mother Theresa then, shall we?
Poverty is freedom. It is a freedom so that what I possess doesn’t own me, so that what I possess doesn’t hold me down, so that my possessions don’t keep me from sharing or giving of myself.
Yes. She really said that.
Didnt she also reuse needles for sick kids?
Warfare.
I routinely get into arguments with fellow metalheads over a specific band called “Sabaton”. Here’s a typical song from them. I just picked one at random because I really don’t know their full discography; I just hate their general vibe: the glory of war.
Almost every song by Sabaton is a perky up-beat pop metal sound that’s pretty competently executed, but invariably it’s about “history” (by which is meant, naturally, warfare because apparently it’s not history if you’re not destroying things and killing people). The song I linked to, for example, has a history page on their web site.
Album after album, song after song, Sabaton produces a perky pop metal piece about some aspect of warfare. (When they’re not doing a slightly less perky pop metal song about the Holocaust, I mean.) And while their fan base claims they don’t glorify warfare, I call bullshit. They’re always there to praise the bravery and gloss over the horror. Their sound is relentlessly upbeat and they’re always there with the praise. There’s no other word for this than “glorifying”.
Now is this me saying you shouldn’t do songs about warfare? No! Of course not! There is really no topic that isn’t suited to art. But at least try to represent the truth of the topic? 'Cause, thing is, we have examples even in the metal community of doing it right. Consider Iron Maiden’s Paschendale. The song opens like a funeral dirge. When the hard and heavy starts it’s in a minor chord, full of discordant power chords that jar the nerves. The lyrics begin with an individual before spreading to the horror around him. It’s unsettling. It’s raw. The guitar solo is like the scream of an overloaded banshee trying to announce tens of thousands of dead at once. The music alone threatens to yank the tears from your eyes before you even catch the lyrics. It states the facts of the battle like every Sabaton song, adding some philosophical musing about humanity in the process, and it does so with music that’s appropriate to the horror. The pain. The futility.
That is warfare done right in art. Further, brutal as this is, it’s the “lite” version of doing warfare right in music.
Because then there’s also this song from Black Kirin about the Nanjing Massacre.
This is going to sound like clickbait, but it is not intended as such. Do not follow that link if you are in any kind of a vulnerable place.
The music will shred your heart. The screaming vocals are the tormented souls of the dead screaming at the futility of humanity. This is warfare done right in art, but with all the dials turned to 11. The band holds nothing back and the raw anguish and dread and rage is laid bare, even though you’re very likely not going to understand the words at all (being in Chinese and all that). Then on top of it you have … that disturbing video. All very tasteful, but filled to the brim with a nightmare-like reality that will haunt your own nightmares.
Iron Maiden and Black Kirin did warfare right in art. It’s unvarnished truth. It’s horror. Death. Tragedy. It’s everything that war is in real life. Not fodder for upbeat pop metal riffs.
Stop glorifying warfare.
My granddads fought I’m ww2 so I can’t agree more. It’s horrendous, not glamorous or exciting, it’s devastating
People’s right to their opinions.
You’re allowed to believe complete horseshit.
You’re allowed to be an outright Nazi.
The fact the government won’t kick your teeth in does not vindicate such unforgiveable ignorance. You can be an asshole for holding certain opinions. You are entitled to believe things, and to say things, which mark you as dangerous, untrustworthy, intolerable, or dumb as a bag of hammers.
Never let ‘you can’ serve as an excuse. Some people are just wrong. Some people are complete assholes. Some people are fucking Nazis. You don’t have to respect one word that comes out of their mouths. All they’ve got is “it’s not illegal for me to be this dense.”
And hey, sometimes? Maybe it should be illegal. A lot of other countries do not in fact allow you to be an outright Nazi. We don’t have to entertain any slippery-slope nonsense, to acknowledge some assholes want genocidal bigotry, and letting them spread that desire is a direct threat to millions of innocent people. If “I am going to kill you with this knife” isn’t protected speech - “we are going to put you all in death camps” is not better.
When the response to “I would defend to the death your right to say that” is “I would make sure you die for doing so,” reconsider.
娑婆诃 (or 太好了 if you’re more Daoist-inclined).
Or if you absolutely must, Amen!
🤭
Being rich.
As long as there are people without a home or who live in a permanent state of anxiety, then being rich is unethical. Solving the problem of disproportionate hoarding—greed—should be humanity’s current prime directive because it’s the cause of nearly all our problems.
- -
✍︎ arscyni.cc: modernity ∝ nature.Vampires.
Werewolves are clearly superior.
^this comment paid for by the Big Bad Wolf^
Now that’s overkill
Wealth and the past
Regime whores and owners of the regime
Depression and suicide
Oh god yes. It’s horrible to live with depression, and suicide is brutal and of course permanent.
Promiscuity
What is wrong with promiscuity as long as you are not in a monogamous relationship?
Nothing wrong with it, but I don’t think we should idolize it. If some people choose that kind of life, they should be free to. I don’t think it should be encouraged though
I’m curious where you see people glorifying promiscuity. In most pop culture being “the slut” is a negative trait in a character, to the point that there’s an entire genre of entertainment (slasher flicks) in which being “the slut” is a death sentence.
Sure, for women, but having lots of sexual partners is idolized for men
Fair point.
Same for monogamy. We shouldnt put people in boxes
Vigilantism. People can barely deal with infestations without training/discipline, let alone justice.
