iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 10/05/2026

Ich habe das Gefühl, hier gibt's was wichtiges zu verstehen, aber ich verstehe es nicht. Was meinst Du?

120

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 09/05/2026

Sure, I think we can agree that we're not here for the same reasons. This is getting tiresome. Goodbye.

110

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 09/05/2026

Islamic Revolution? It's pretty clear that you're proud you've read a book and that's what this discussion is about for you. Evident from your snide on my point being "so profound". Whether it's profound or not seems to be important to you. To me what matters is that it's real and being ignored.

100

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 09/05/2026

You read way too much into what I wrote. And you're being overconfident and needlessly abrasive. Tell me a Russian revolutionary who ended up in the Menshevik camp would have been happy about the result. Tell me the Cheka was what most Russian revolutionaries were fighting for.

000

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 09/05/2026

Just law, by the standards of the original revolutionaries?

210

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 09/05/2026

In some situations, you can't, I agree. But if you conclude that that's the case now, be aware that it's very hard to come back from lawlessness. It didn't work in the French, Russian, or Chinese revolution, in Cuba, in Cambodia, in Iran...

230

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 09/05/2026

Yes, and by political violence (civil war) which I don't deny can be necessary. But Nathan argued that no progress has been made without breaking unjust laws, to which I replied that the distinction is important. You can have progress without breaking just laws.

120

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 09/05/2026

I agree. Those laws aren't just. But the arguments I mean are for ignoring laws (and norms) that aren't bad in themselves - they're just limiting, as they should be. Like rejecting political violence, not suppressing the votes of your political opponent, not twisting the truth in your favor.

100

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 09/05/2026

They broke _unjust_ laws. I see a lot of people arguing for breaking _just_, democratic laws, because the other side does it. The difference: Black people can continue sitting in the front of the bus, illegal originally, but we can't continue ignoring court orders limiting partisan redistricting.

210

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 09/05/2026

How do they manage to be wrong on every. single. issue. You'd think antidepressants don't hurt anyone. It can't be in anyone's interest to restrict them. Same for sunscreen, public education, banning asbestos, an open and prosperous economy, equal rights... And yet: all of this!

010

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 09/05/2026

Damit müssten die bayerischen Absolventen aber weit reisen, um ihre Patenkraftwerke zu besuchen, wo doch in Bayern leider, leider nach ausgiebiger Prüfung keine Standorte gefunden werden werden, wo ein Kraftwerk die wunderschöne bayerische Landschaft nicht verschandeln würde.

000

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 09/05/2026

Warum sich spoilern lassen? Abwarten und überraschen lassen!

020

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 09/05/2026

In particular, it will be more difficult for them to convince voters that their next power grab is harmless if the last one lead to gross misrepresentation. That does not happen if the ones not in favor don't make themselves seen. So vote!

010

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 09/05/2026

Your vote doesn't just affect who gets an office. It also determines legitimacy. If the popular vote sorta agrees with the election outcome, office holders can say people voted for their policies. That's harder if the outcome is obviously skewed from what it should have been.

100

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 08/05/2026

Funny, in an un-funny way. THAT should be on lit up signs at every crossing in America: "The US military killed children and no one can say why."

010

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 08/05/2026

To make this more obvious: try to think of a scenario where _everyone_ realizes their full potential and earns a billion dollars. It's impossible because the only way to gain that much is through other people's labor.

000

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 08/05/2026

"Russia is a country of victors" (from a BBC article). More than that, it's a country of Vladimirs and Sergeis. 🤣

010

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 08/05/2026

"Ich denke, selbst eine:r wie ich kann ein bisschen vom Kuchen abhaben, wenn ich mithelfe, ihn anderen wegzunehmen."

030

Reposted by A Hooded Stranger

Bevin ✨ GOMS @roygbev.bsky.social · 08/05/2026

Deeply ironic they’re so obsessed with this anti-parasitic.

5861

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 08/05/2026

Steven Miller... "passionate intensity..." No. “I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.” John 3:15-16

000

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 08/05/2026

It will be a little like their political strategy: grab 150% in a way that you can't be held responsible personally, be forced to give back half of it, still keep 75% of what you should never have gotten.

010

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 07/05/2026

Fire and brimstone incoming on Mar a Lago!

130

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 07/05/2026

Actually... "peacekeeping mission"? How long until they claim the Vatican has nukes and resisted any diplomatic attempt to "make a deal" and stop "their program"?

161

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 07/05/2026

Going to Canossa... but that would have been the emperor and it would have worked out for him in the end.

020

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 07/05/2026

In Germany, we have Wodka Jelzin (Yeltsin, in German) and Wodka Gorbatschow...

000

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 07/05/2026

Ooh, yeah, citizens being paid with their own taxes - minus legal fees. I'd love that... if I were a lawyer! You ARE the United States of America - it's your employees who are ripping you off!

000

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 07/05/2026

Came to say that. Can't be too prickish about it. Complaining about the price at the gas pump when people have been murdered...

030

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 06/05/2026

I didn't say it was. Can you say for sure that it isn't? It does seem a little too good to be true, in terms of lighting, colors, and angle, considering the circumstances.

2210

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 06/05/2026

Politics should be boring, not a clown show. There are plenty of people to meet, books to read, things to build, if we want to live in Interesting Times™.

000

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 06/05/2026

"It's a dangerous business, Frodo, going out your door. You step onto the road, and if you don't keep your feet, there's no knowing where you might be swept off to."

010

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 06/05/2026

Another parallel to Russia and China.

000

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 06/05/2026

PS: Tailor your messages accordingly. Think: what would convince someone who's not on their side or mine? That means: * no technical lingo, * simple arguments, * easily verifiable facts, * no gatekeeping, * no open disdain for your audience, * no name calling (but call a spade a spade).

000

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 06/05/2026

Block to protect yourself. You don't have to fight every battle. But if you have some energy to spare, seek the Nazis out and mark their lies and hatred for what they are. Not for their sake or yours, but for those looking on. 10/10

100

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 06/05/2026

But should we just trust that everyone will see through them and know to do the right thing and ignore them? If people were that smart, educated, and well meaning, there wouldn't be any extremists, or if there were, they couldn't harm anyone. 9/10

100

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 06/05/2026

Should we pretend that they're just presenting their genuine arguments in the public square, that we believe that they could be convinced by well reasoned counter arguments (and that we could, too)? No. Their arguments are deceptive and their very values run counter to ours. 8/10

100

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 06/05/2026

In this case, doing what everybody should do - ignore the extremists - may leave one feeling great about oneself, but it leaves others behind, who may not be as solid in their thinking (yet), and it does nothing to reduce the demagogues' influence. 7/10

100

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 06/05/2026

A single person acting only according to that maxim that they will to become a universal law can actually do a lot of harm. They might feel very virtuous, but that virtuosity is bought by other people's suffering (treating them as mere objects, there to enact one's virtuosity on). 6/10

100

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 06/05/2026

Now, if everyone (or most people) blocked them, that would be different. But that's what I call the Kantian fallacy, which is a typically leftist fallacy: "Everybody just has to do X" is useless, unless you can argue why everybody WILL do X. 5/10

100

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 06/05/2026

This is different from demanding that they not get representation - which would be overrepresentation because they're a small minority - in talk shows and such. Excluding them from broadcast media actually does reduce their reach. Excluding them from your feed only reduces their reach to you. 4/10

100

A Hooded Stranger @ahoodedstranger.bsky.social · 06/05/2026

There's good research showing that naive observers of online discussions are swayed more easily by arguments that don't draw opposition. By refusing to engage with extremists, you let their false arguments stand, and others, who aren't as well-read, are left to fall into their traps. 3/10

100