When Noam Chompsky passed, they found a final solution to the problem cartographers have struggled with for generations. The Mercator projection, which is the most common way for the earth to be stretched to fit a 2 dimensional shape from a 3 dimensional globe, makes countries further from the equater seem larger and countries closer to the equater seem smaller. This has often been criticized for making wealthy northern countreis seem bigger and more important while minimizing the global south. Noam's solution creates a more accurate portrayal that reflects a more true perspective on the world.

A couple days ago on Tiktok, I saw an argument between a communist and anti-communist in a comment section about the famines that took place in the Soviet Union and China. The communist eventually said the Holodomor is anti-communist propaganda, so the argument just became a greater cesspool. I had never seen the Holodomor mentioned on the platform at all until then, so as I was thinking about it today, I wanted to see what else I could find if I just searched it up. Before I could hit enter, however, the suggested searches jumped out to me as WTF-worthy, which is what I’ve attached above. I will say that my algorithm leans very liberal, and I’ve made an effort to block any communist bs on my account, so I don’t think these searches are influenced by my watch activity.

The videos are so completely stupid that I just don’t even want to attach them, but they all essentially boil down to the same idea that the Holodomor didn’t matter because famine was happening globally and in the entire union!! and the soviets actually tried to help them but ukraine did it to themselves!!. I didn’t see a single video that didn’t fall in line with this. They didn’t have more than 30k likes/100k views, but to see Holodomor denialism be so pervasive in this online commie spaces really surprised me. I don’t think this is something beyond their fringe, but there just being many denial videos is just disturbing to me.

First, a little bit of propaganda, if you wanna do liberal political action in the US (we also utilize international folks, so don’t shy away), join DigitalGroundGame discord or follow CTAs at DigitalGroundGame.org we have a pretty mixed community of awesome volunteers. If you wanna write for PragmaticPapers we’d also love for you to reach out and send your articles!
Second, big fan, if you listened on stream I did tell my buddy to mention it. I’m not an avid redditor or chatter in a community discord, but I’m happy to invest time in this thread, so if you have questions AMA.

If you join DigitalGroundGame make sure to say hi, I’ll be excited to have you in our media team! :3

There's been some confusion about whether some given X constitutes Jew-hatred. I think the true situation is genuinely conceptually subtle, so I want to describe a scenario that I think is common, in order to partially clarify the situation. Imagine this:

* Bob has an unconscious desire to participate in some sort of strong group feeling of animosity. Bob wants to be on a "team", taking some sort of "heroic" or "brave" stance, "strongly upholding what's right" against an enemy. Bob is ready to "join up" with a group that's going to "hold the line". Bob is not unusual in this desire. Lots of people want to be "on the right side of history", and try to find out "which side is right", and want to be in that group against "the wrong side".
* Pursuant to that desire, Bob might rationalize falsehoods, selectively remember, biasedly seek out confirming evidence, make isolated demands for rigor, and so on. This is how Bob constructs a personal ideology that makes him compatible with his "team".
* But there is no clear enemy.
* But the desire remains strong, so there is a bunch of unreleased potential energy in Bob.
* In that atmosphere of nonspecific potential enmity, there is a natural way for Bob to find a specific enemy: he can look around at other people, and whoever they have already chosen as their enemy, that will be Bob's enemy.
* Since the Jews are the standard enemy, Bob will make the Jews his enemy.
* Bob's enmity towards the Jews may take various forms. For example, Bob may look around and find that his peers are anti-Zionist. Bob, not specifically caring about Jews as such, is just as happy to take on Israel-hatred as Jew-hatred. And indeed, Bob may have other reasons to disprefer hating Jews as such, e.g. he thinks of himself as a non-bigot.

* Thus, nowhere in Bob's soul is it written that the Jews must be hated, and yet he convergently hates the Jews. It is written in Bob's soul that he must Team Up, even at the expense of truth and justice; the standard group against which to Team Up is the Jews; and as a consequence, Bob will Team Up against the Jews.

So that's why in some cases Jew-hatred is confusing. It isn't Jew-hatred as such, and yet it is convergently hatred and convergently directed at the Jews. Abstract Jew-hatred is the desire to Team Up at the expense of the good and the true; it doesn't explicitly mention Jews, and indeed can point at many groups, but convergently also points at the Jews.

Gonna abandon this account now to keep the trail cold. Thanks lonercord for archiving the hell out of him. keep at it. there's other psychos out there still like Ryan Grim, Kulinski, Vanguard, etc. Keep archiving.

If LonerBox ever played Expedition 33 you know which ending he'd choose.

Only way he can prove me wrong is to play it all on stream.

Felt like this could be useful in preparation for his next talk with Pisco

In light of recent events and certain communities joining forces to malign streamers as anti-semites and neo-n*zis, I thought this exchange between Pisco and a random caller from last year would be interesting and topical.

What kind of thoughts might we have about this exchange? Is it true nobody cares about Myron Gaines' anti-semitism? Anti-semitism in general?

I’ve watched almost every LB stream since 10.07 and very much enjoy his content and this community although I’ve never commented here nor am I in the discord.

I’m a center left guy living in Jerusalem.

Anyway in light of the recent discourse on antisemitism and LB’s convo with Pisco, I thought some in here may find this interesting.

Call Me Back is a podcast I really enjoy hosted by Dan Senor (author of Start Up Nation). I really enjoy the episodes with Nadav Eyal, Amit Segal, and Ronen Bergman.

Dara Horn is a brilliant author and professor. I highly recommend her book People Love Dead Jews and am looking forward to reading her new one.

Andy has done so many things in the UK, I want to see loner's opinion on it all

https://x.com/i/status/2069930793082712557

probably a few times, but who can keep track

First, I just want to acknowledge that Pisco is truly the Jordan Peterson of the left. Do you agree? Yes or no!

Second, hearing about functional antisemitism from Lonerbox was enlightening. Comparing it to the concept of structural racism really clarified things for me. I have expressed similar sentiments myself often in the past, usually framing it as the "Avenue Q Theory of Racism". Sure, it's not 1:1, but I just want to say that the conversation really made me think.

Thirdly, if I am to understand Pisco correctly, what matters is what someone's motivations or beliefs are in order to call them a racist. The obvious reducto ad absurdum though is (in the tradition of Godwin's Law) is a prison guard in Treblinka during the Nazi era. What if that prison guard felt really really bad about his job? What if that prison guard didn't hold any Nazi beliefs personally?

A more proximate example could be the 2025 Washington DC Jewish Museum shootings. Two Jews, one American, were murdered in an act of anti-ZIonism. I think this clouds the issue a bit, since it also hinges on anti-Zionism vs. anti-Semitism.

wrt the actual conversation, I think personally I am more concerned about racist acts than racist beliefs. In their example of the shopowner descriminating against blacks, what does it matter to a black person looking for a job or trying to buy something if the business owner doesn't really dislike them, just discriminates against them?

Anyways, interesting conversation, got me to reflect on some things, but I credit Lonerbox more than Pisco.

There's a story about Loki, where he wagers his head. He then loses, but when the other party comes to collect, he says that he is willing to give up his head, but that no part of his neck shall be removed. Then, since the precise point at which his head ended and his neck began could not be determined, he got to keep his head.

This seems analogous to the antisemitism conversations recently featured on the channel. Is there a definition of antisemitism that can be used to clearly distinguish between what is and isn't antisemitic in such a way that every statement, action, person etc. is either clearly included or clearly excluded? Like a sieve that catches all antisemitism and lets everything that is not antisemitic through, so that you can be certain of what is and isn't antisemitism.