Category Archives: Regressive Leftism

Math Added to Growing List of Racist Things

I honestly don’t know what to make of this. You see the title. You have a hyperlink to a news article. But it doesn’t make any sense.

What the heck? What the flipping heck?

We live in a world where scientists have been reduced to court magicians serving the purpose of validating the autarchs. We also live in a world which somehow justifies shutting down the most prosperous societies in all of human history to avoid a mild cough. Arbitrary third example? Okay, fine: the MLP fandom.

Now, the leftists are calling math racist. To the surprise of absolutely no one, this development came out of California.

So, the place where they want to dumb down math just to virtue signal is the place where Apple somehow designs the next iPhone. It’s also the place where Google somehow came up with the Android OS, and headquarters YouTube, which is somehow disseminated across a great distance, so you can watch videos of adorable bunnies.

Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

It’s because of crap like this that when I apply for a job, I have to work extra hard to make the case that when I was in college, I actually learned things. What’s especially infuriating about this development for me is that when I was in college, Calculus was my favorite subject. And I tried extra hard because I wanted to amount to something.

It was only days ago that colleges started doing something like this with language. What the left is trying to do with colleges, I still don’t know. I’d have imagined that they’d want the students that they are indoctrinating to have a competitive advantage, but it seems like they’re not doing that.

Perhaps it’s hard to stoke the flames of class warfare with graduates that actually succeed.

Yet another reason to opt instead for career training programs and two-year tech schools. Not that they are necessarily stepping forward, but because traditional four-year colleges are turning back.

By the way, leftists are pretty much done with their veneer of intellectualism. I haven’t fallen for it for a long time, but their veneer has been stretched thinner than luminiferous aether, so they have to be running low on anyone stupid enough to fall for it.

Educational Institutions Pass Students Bad At English, Fail a Generation

The education system has long been infiltrated by the left-wing establishment. That’s not a secret.

Their infiltration of society and monopoly on the major institutions is such that they can do just about anything they want, and there isn’t much that the general population could do about it, regardless of how many of us are aware of it. But when I see what they are doing with the education system that they have uncontested control over, one question comes up:

Just what is it that they’re trying to do?

This question is especially relevant now, now that some institutions are doing away with bad marks for poor English. You know, the ability to properly express one’s ideas in a way that an English-language people will understand.

This development doesn’t mean that one can have poor English and still pass an English course, as one might interpret this story (not that that’s stopped many a graduate). This has more to do with whether an understanding of the English language is central to the subject studied, as the Daily Mail story points out:

Academics at Worcester University have also been told that if spelling, grammar and punctuation are not ‘central to the assessment criteria’, it is fairer to judge students only on their ideas and knowledge of the subject.

Sound fair? One might think, except there’s one major problem: an understanding of the English language is central to one’s success in any course taught in the English language. Saying that understanding the language in which a subject is taught should not be required for success in that subject is actually worse than saying that understanding calculus should not be required for success in advanced Physics.

When a student is being passed in spite of their ineptitude, it might seem like they’re being done a favor, but they’re actually not, and neither is anyone else. The purpose of college or university or any career-training program is to prepare students for careers in their fields by teaching them the skills needed to succeed in their respective fields.

No one wants co-workers or employees that are too inept for their jobs.

Like many stupid ideas, this one has it’s requisite good intentions:

The move comes as universities come under increasing pressure to boost the progress of ethnic minority, disabled and disadvantaged students, as well as ‘decolonise’ courses.

The implication that minority students are inherently deficient with spelling, grammar, and sentence structure is, in itself, insensitive. Ethnic minorities are certainly capable of learning English. In fact, one of the most famous English-language websites was written by a man whose first language was Armenian, and he has a page where he makes fun of bad English in the emails he receives.

If you’re a dean or professor at an English-language university, and a student is in danger of underperforming by reason of poor English, here is a step-by-step guide on how to handle this problem:

  1. Overcome the disbelief that such a student was somehow admitted into your institution.
  2. Offer this student tutoring on their language, so they’ll be in a better position to succeed in their courses. Any respectable English-language college or university should provide English workshops, tutors, or office-hours with English professors. If not, your college or university is garbage.
  3. If for any reason the above doesn’t work out, the student gets a failing grade. This signifies that the student is not ready to succeed in a competitive career world where basic language skills are essential for success.

It’s so straightforward that it’s hard to see how anyone could screw it up. If helping minorities is what you want to do, then actually help them to succeed. If you give anyone a passing grade in spite of their inability, you’re setting up that student for a future where their honest assessment would come from their employer, from whom it would be many times more devastating.

I don’t know what it is that those colleges and/or universities are actually trying to do. But whatever it is, they can have fun doing it. This is because employers actually make lists of colleges and universities that they actively avoid hiring from. If a school has a bad enough reputation for turning out poor-performing employees (or worse, activists), employers simply dumpster resumes that list that particular school. And thanks to the connected nature of today’s world, it doesn’t take long for a school’s bad reputation to get around, and there’s more at stake for schools to graduate students that actually know what they’re doing.

As for me, I’m taking more interest in targeted career programs. These respect students’ time by focusing on material that would be relevant to their career path, while eschewing gen-ed courses that do little more than add expenses to a student’s education, adding bloat to an over-swollen education system.

Aside from that, there’s still some value in two-year trade schools that focus on real-world skills and turning out students that are actually employable. It’s my understanding that these are huge in Japan, which would be another case in point about how Asians value practical skill over superfluous bloat.

Eventually, employers will have to recognize the value of targeted career training, as the diploma mills that continually turn out activists will leave them with little choice. And the sooner, the better.

Satirizing Jordan Peterson as Red Skull Illustrates Yet More Reason to Avoid American Comics

Red Skull wants you to clean your room and get your life in order.

In another sign of the baffling bizarro-world we are living in, the supervillain Red Skull, as depicted by a new interpretation of the Captain America comics, was apparently based on Jordan Peterson.

Yes, the very same Jordan Peterson who wrote a book about 12 rules for life, and one of them had to do with petting cats.

Red Skull, as you may know, was originally conceptualized as a Nazi, and was depicted as fighting for Hitler himself.

On the other hand, Jordan Peterson is a clinical psychologist who, as a college professor, encouraged self-development and gave lectures about, among other things, how Hitler was a seriously evil dude.

So, what’s the thinking behind making Peterson out to be a Nazi supervillain? I don’t know, but I imagine that avoiding the cognitive dissonance involved would require an immensely skillful evasion of reality.

If there’s one takeaway to be had from Sonichu, it’s that if you can’t beat your enemies in real life, just make them out to be villains in your own comic book.

Watch out, Captain Marvel!

As he is now, Red Skull represents every boomer-aged snowflake’s greatest insecurity: that millennials and post-millennials could simply use the internet and find better ideas than what the establishment has been shitting out.

The American comic book industry’s plunge into intersectional lunacy comes at a time when Japanese manga is beating them mercilessly in their own market.

It’s to the point where, if you found out that Jordan Peterson was caricatured in Captain America, you probably discovered it outside of the comic itself.

American comic book writers should want people to actually read their comics. To this end, it would be expedient for their comics to be something that people wouldn’t avoid out of self-respect. People don’t make fun of me for reading manga, but if they found me reading Captain America, it would be hard to live down.

Assuming I actually read American comics, that is.

Thanks to humor website NotTheBee, we have an archive of a panel from Captain America from days-gone-by, from back before Cap was indoctrinated into the Cult of Woke. It’s quite moving, and an excellent example of what he has fallen from:

Twitter Infograph Warns Asian Art Communities

What you’re seeing above is an infographic uploaded to Twitter by an art-oriented account, intended for Japanese artists who may be seeing a sudden surge in western viewers who are intent on influencing Japanese art, particularly anything done in the manga or anime style.

This infographic comes at a time in which a nebulous affiliation of self-styled influencers are inserting themselves into art communities, intent on ensuring that anything that an artist expresses conforms to their sensibilities.

This can be jarring to Asian artists, who come from a career-oriented culture, who are now finding out that there are western subcultures that take entertainment media so seriously that they allow it to become a part of their identity while contributing little else to society.

The infographic comes in handy for Asians who may not be familiar with certain western subversive movements, and therefore may be less prepared to identify them when such bad actors appear. Whether we call them “intersectionalists” or simply “incels”, this group of people contribute nothing to society, but regardless are characterized by a legendary sense of entitlement, and it’s helpful to understand how to respond to them appropriately.

What I find particularly fascinating is the list of identifiers for the influencers, in that they are mostly accurate. Among them are preferred pronouns, imaginary gender identification, abuse of emojis, or identifying with certain activist groups (a dead giveaway). Also interesting is that they openly identify themselves with their mental illnesses. While one shouldn’t have anything against someone who has a legitimate condition, there are those among us who misuse these identifications for sympathy.

The infographic makes an important point: the way you deal with these people is by ignoring them, or by blocking them, if need be. It is important that one must never cave in to their demands, because they will interpret it as a sign of weakness to latch onto, as the tendency of predators often is.

In spite of their intimidation tactics, the influencers have no real authority, and are in no position to police anyone’s works of artistic expression. Thus, their threats carry no real weight.

One thing that the influencers seem to overlook is that in most of the western world, works of art are protected by freedom of expression, which is encompassing in its application. Even if a work of art is not considered socially acceptable, it is still protected under the freedom of expression. In fact, freedom of expression doesn’t have much value if it doesn’t protect art that isn’t socially acceptable.

Even understanding all this, the typical Japanese person may see the intersectional movement, and be distressed at the fact that so many young people in the west seem stunted and out-of-touch with reality, even years out of school. This highlights the difference in Asian culture, as compared to the west. The fact is, Asian society heavily emphasizes an education that prepares students for a career, reinforced by close-knit families that are highly supportive. It’s hard to imagine that in such an environment, a person would somehow become a cross-dressing ANTIFA windbag that blames all their problems on white-supremacists.

Westen families, generally speaking, could learn a lot from Asian families.

In the face of waves of leftist negativity, among the finest things we can do for Asian artists is let them know that they are appreciated.

There’s something to be said for the culture that brought us Chiyo-chan.

CBS News, Do You See What I See?

As much as I’ve made fun of legacy media, sometimes they publish something that catches my notice, by reason of the fact that it lets on that they really know what’s going on. And in this case, it signals a potential shift in the narrative.

If you were to read the story, you might see it, too. I encourage you to do so. It’s a piece where they acknowledge that there is a pending crisis due to declining birth rates.

Isn’t it interesting how it’s not until after leftists have taken control of nearly every aspect of elected government, in addition to all the institutions they’ve previously infiltrated, that they finally figure this out?

This development is an about-face for the “depopulation movement” (as we’ll colloquially refer to it in this discussion), who in decades past had the idea that there was getting to be too many human beings for this ball of molten rock’s ability to support.

They were so persuaded of this idea that some of them have produced what is referred to as the “Jaffe memo”, which I previously examined here (I found the Jaffe memo here). The memo was produced in 1969 and presented numerous underhanded ways the depopulation movement could surreptitiously reshape society in an effort to slow population growth.

See for yourself:

Obviously, there’s no ethical way to subvert the family plans of millions of people. But for a moment, let it sink in that they actually entertained the idea of “Fertility control agents in water supply”. The 60s had some truly evil people.

Extrapolating from the ideas behind this memo, it’s easy to see why there was as much strength as there has been behind the various movements that actively tampered with the gender dynamic. These very same evil people have infiltrated society on just about every level, and they’ve been hard at work.

Knowing this, consider what it means that legacy media, one of the many, many infiltrated institutions, are acknowledging that birth rates are getting to be way too low, to the point of nearing crisis levels.

Intersectional feminism was one of the many movements that have been propped up, due to the potential damage it could do to the gender dynamic. The same could be said of the LGBTBBQ-silent-f community, and if you don’t also see it, you might be among the many victimized by the narrative, in some way.

The thinking behind propping up gender-aberration was the potential for reducing the replacement rate. But now, there’s a different problem: the replacement rate is getting to be too low. Now that the controllers of the narrative are acknowledging as much, that’s bad news for the various iterations of the gender-aberration movement.

Here is why: Because birth rates have already fallen well below the point of the depopulation movement’s liking, they no longer have a use for the various gender-aberration movements. In fact, those behind the scenes are now taking an interest in reversing the damage that these movements have already caused.

That’s pretty bad news for the gender-aberration movements themselves, considering that they’re about to lose the backing of the various institutions that have previously propped them up. Because they’re now expressing an interest in restoring the population replacement rate, they’d likewise want to prop up what has long been proven to result in a healthy replacement rate: strong masculinity, supportive femininity, traditional family, classical virtues, and a values-based society that focuses on building up each individual, rather than sacrificing individuals to feed the collective.

Sound like wishful thinking? Considering that legacy media is now acknowledging what’s happening, it doesn’t seem terribly unrealistic. When you consider just how much it takes to get legacy media to acknowledge what’s obvious to the rest of us, you can appreciate that this development was a long time coming.

Now the question is, how will those who have been tampering with society pay us all back for the damage that they’ve been causing?

I’m sure that the various victims of cancel culture, as well as everyone who has had relationships wrecked by feminism’s ideas, can think of a long list of demands. But I doubt that Bill Gates and his empire of fake meat will have the means to satisfy them all.

The CBS article made the following observation, and it’s a fun one for the many millennials out there that have been putting up with boomer-bullshit all these years:

“The cost of housing, the cost of education, all these things have become more and more difficult,” Dowell said. “I think the boomers themselves don’t realize how much harder it is for millennials today. And they think, ‘Oh yeah, when we were young we had to live, you know, on very little money, and we made do, and you can do the same.’ That’s the story, right? Well no, it really is a lot harder for young people today. It’s amazing how much harder it is.”

Even though they fancy themselves such great problem-solvers, boomers made fun of millennials with problems for having problems. Now they are paying for their arrogance by not having enough millennials around to pay for their retirement.

“Anyone can make an error, Ensign. But that error doesn’t become a mistake until you refuse to correct it.”

Grand Admiral Thrawn

They’re Making Lola Bunny Less Attractive, and This Was Supposed to Benefit Women, Somehow.

Hold on, what is this? I heard that Lola Bunny is getting a redesign, but that’s just gross. Is that piccie above really of Lola Bunny? She looks like some kind of freaky space-alien-looking-thing.

But that’s not the main thing about her that I’m hearing about. But before this post continues, here’s a short disclaimer:

WARNING: If you’re disturbed by mild sexualization of a cartoon character, you should probably get over yourself.

Now that that’s out of the way, apparently, Lola Bunny was given a breast reduction in an effort to make her less sexually appealing.

In the special way that Slate sees matters, “conservatives want you to be mad that Lola Bunny’s not hot anymore”. This lulzy position overlooks the greater problem that this is what feminism has done to women throughout the western world.

As depicted above, Lola otherwise still has highly feminine characteristics, including diminutive upper-body strength, narrow shoulders, softer eyes, broader hips, and so on. Those hips are quite well-defined, by the way. Those would be what’s referred to as “birther hips”, which are considered strongly appealing by, you know, men. Lola’s otherwise over-the-top feminine appearance makes her breasts all-the-more conspicuous in their absence.

As I see it, the designers of Lola’s character could design her as they wish for what they perceive as the creative benefit of the work that features her. Put another way, if it’s your character, you can design her however you want.

However, if it was the designer’s intention to distract from her sexuality, they’ve likely figured out by now how difficult that can be. In many ways, it couldn’t really be helped by virtue of the fact that sexuality is something that occurs in the mind. An artist can’t really control whether anyone could perceive a work in a sexual manner.

If an artist wanted to make something that was impossible to perceive with an element of sexuality, that in itself would be pretty-much impossible. Humans can perceive a sexual element, even in things that wouldn’t seem intrinsically sexual. Like pizza, which is a food item. I don’t get it, but it’s something that some people find sexual.

What’s more, sexuality is an intrinsic element of humanity. It might even be that sexuality is the most human of traits. The moment that something is humanized (such as, for example, when anthromorphizing a cartoon rabbit), it gains a sexual identity. The only time when it’s acceptable to not consider a sexual identity is when it’s not known, such as when the sex of an unborn child is not yet identified. But once it’s sex is known, it’s not acceptable to call the child an “it” again.

When you draw a cartoon character of your own, and call it a “her”, you’re acknowledging the existence of her vagina, provided that the character is a human female that is anatomically consistent with other human females. It is then assumed that this characteristic plays a role, even if slight, among other characters that they interact with (except in some cases when it is established that the character plays a non-traditional societal role).

If you think I just stated a lot of highly obvious stuff, you’re well enough off to not have to be told as much. But not everyone out there is as well off. Particularly, the radical intersectional feminists who mistakenly view sexualization as a form of objectification. But the fact that they’re wrong isn’t stopping them from passionately trying to become authoritarian moral busybodies.

Intersectional feminists, being absolutely tone-deaf, misses the irony of the fact that, on International Women’s Day, the design change of a cartoon rabbit that isn’t real, and therefore cannot be an actual victim, makes the news by becoming less feminine. While this is occurring, women in the middle-east have almost no rights to speak of compared to men, and are legally kept in harems as sexual slaves.

Priorities, much?

As one might imagine, the furry community is furious about this news. They’ve become yet another western creative community that has become negatively impacted by intersectionalism’s obsession with making everything it touches less entertaining. They’re a sorta-dubious addition to the club, but they’re an addition to the club, non-the-less.

You know whose cartoon bunnies remain unaffected by western censorship? Anime.

Today has shown us yet more reason why more and more westerners are turning towards Japanese manga and anime. One can really hand it to the Japanese for making sure that entertainment is still entertaining.

If you’re siding with intersectional feminism and have managed to stick around this far, please stand by for a send-off from Akira Kogami:

When western entertainment fails hard, along comes anime to sweep up yet more viewers. How long will it take for Hollywood et al. to figure out the obvious? I don’t know, but there’s a continual flow of new anime to watch in the time it takes for it to happen.

Why I cancelled my subscription to Disney Plus

Image credit:

In light of the firing of Gina Carano from Disney, #CancelDisneyPlus started trending. Because I was subscribed to Disney Plus, this gave me reason to consider cancelling my subscription to the streaming platform. I thought about it, and went ahead and cancelled.

It wasn’t a difficult choice, though there’s more to the reason than is immediately apparent.

Gina played the role of a major character in The Mandalorian, named Cara Dune. She was a rebel turned New Republic officer, and was notable in that she was able to manhandle the titular Mandalorian, himself. Which is no mean feat, because in Star Wars lore, Mandalorians can give even Jedi a run for their money.

You’re still staring at the butt-whoopin’, aren’t you? That’s okay, take your time.

The Mandalorian is an important show to Disney Plus, as it played a significant role in the early adoption of the platform. If it weren’t for some new programming, the main reason to subscribe to Disney Plus would be to watch a bunch of things you already have. In the platform’s infancy, new content really mattered.

Now, Disney has let major talent in one of their most important shows go, and they’ve done this over her politics on Twitter. This is significant, not just to The Mandalorian, but for every other program in which Gina’s character is significant. Presumably, Gina’s character would have returned for a third season of The Mandalorian, and would also have been a central character to a new spin-off series, Rangers of the New Republic.

For Disney to drop an actor for a character for whom they had some ambitious plans, either out of politics or spite, goes to show that, in the sight of Disney, the politics matter more than the product that they’re producing. This indicates some dreadfully misplaced priorities in their corporate philosophy.

For a creative company to elevate politics above their creative works puts companies like Disney in a negative light. But what’s worse is the sheer lack of focus in their creative endeavors. Now that Disney has Lucasfilm, they seem intent on saturating the market with Star Wars products.

Among the avalanche of content so far includes television series like Rebels, Resistance, and The Mandalorian, as well as an entire trilogy of films. They need to focus on making fewer, better products, but it seems like they’re doing just the opposite. It’s easier to include the following photo packed with logos, rather than list them all:

My response to this is slow down! If they can make all of those programs great, that’s excellent on Disney’s part. But considering how poorly High Republic is doing, I have my doubts. It’s better to produce one great series than to dogpile the market with big mounds of rubbish. One who chases two chickens, catches neither.

Also, why does Obi-Wan need his own series? He was a major character in six Star Wars films, in four of which, he was a main character. He was also a central character in two different Clone Wars TV series, one running for three seasons, the other for seven. What about him could we have missed?

From what I’ve seen, the people who are currently managing Star Wars don’t seem to know what they’re doing, and Dave Filoni seems like the finest chance the IP has to see some quality future content. For me, that’s really sad, because my dad introduced me to Star Wars when I was a kid, and I’ve met people who also had an interest in the series. Yet, it really seems like Star Wars’ finest moments are behind it.

Having said that, I might return to Disney Plus at a future point. There is a possibility that Disney may get it together and realize what should be truly important to them as a creative company, though I’m not counting on it.

My approach with them might just be “stream service skipping”, wherein a person remains subscribed for just one month, binge-watches to get the most for their money, then drops the service until something comes up that would justify paying a few dollars for another month of access.

If Disney doesn’t like that, then they’d better learn to like prioritizing their products over their politics.

The baton has been passed to a new generation. Not because the previous generation handed it down, but because they dropped it.

Does this year-old story indicate Joe Biden will be unfair to video games?

There was an article from a year ago on that may be relevant now, now that Joe Biden is in the President‘s seat.

As you may remember, the controversy surrounding violent video games was another sensationalist story in the nineties concocted by the legacy media in an effort to prey on your parents, who likely didn’t know it wasn’t really a big deal. Since then, we’ve seen oodles and oodles of studies that showed that there was no link between violent behavior and violent video games.

The story quotes Biden as paraphrasing game industry executives with his own personal takeaways, rather than presenting us with what they actually said. How’s that for intellectual honesty?

By the way, the story is titled, Joe Biden Slams Game Developers as “Little Creeps” and “Arrogant”. Does a lot to cultivate the expectations, doesn’t it?

Here is what Biden told the NYT:

“And you may recall, the criticism I got for meeting with the leaders in Silicon Valley, when I was trying to work out an agreement dealing with them protecting intellectual property for artists in the United States of America,”

So, Biden wants to be friends with artists? Not so fast. Pay attention to what he says of these artists:

“And at one point, one of the little creeps sitting around that table, who was a multi- — close to a billionaire — told me he was an artist because he was able to come up with games to teach you how to kill people…”

If someone has already made up his mind that someone is a creep, there is no expectation that they’d be given a fair shot. But also notice the divisive use of a person’s supposed income level in a pejorative sense. Class warfare has long been an eager arrow in leftism’s quiver.

The article points out that Biden “proposed an additional tax on violent media, including violent games.” It’s interesting that Biden perceived that a form of expression was harmful to society, but felt no moral qualms with extracting the wealth it generates.

“And then one of these righteous people said to me that, you know, ‘We are the economic engine of America. We are the ones.’”

It’s apparent that the person that Biden sarcastically called “righteous” was speaking on behalf of workers all over America. Working Americans can be rightly described as the “economic engine of America”.

But notice how eager Biden was to divide him against other industries:

“And fortunately I had done a little homework before I went and I said, you know, I find it fascinating. As I added up the seven outfits, everyone’s there but Microsoft. I said, you have fewer people on your payroll than all the losses that General Motors just faced in the last quarter, of employees.”

That Joe Biden came specifically prepared to argue against that statement with data requires a generous suspension of disbelief. But putting that aside, notice his lack of respect for industries that are smaller in size than one of America’s largest companies?

And, for that matter, notice how he refers to wages as losses? I understand that a person can accidentally pick the wrong word, but it sounds as though it would pain him to admit that General Motors employees deserve their income!

“So don’t lecture me about how you’ve created all this employment.. The point is, there’s an arrogance about it, an overwhelming arrogance that we are, we are the ones. We can do what we want to do. I disagree.”

Joe Biden does not respect the people who create employment, nor does he respect those employed. He does not respect the game industry, nor does he respect those who create content.

If the Joe Biden sitting in the White House is the same Joe Biden from a year ago, if gaming were to thrive in the next few years, it would be in spite of Joe Biden, not because of him.

Gamers, Joe Biden is not your friend.

PETA wants to ban animal name insults

PETA is no stranger to taking offense on behalf of animals. Now, they’re taking offense to the use of certain animal names as slangs, and are suggesting alternatives.

Examples include exchanging the slang “chicken” for “coward”, “rat” for “snitch”, and “snake” for “jerk”. PETA’s objection is on the reasoning that they imply that humans are superior.

Humans are superior to animals, and I can make the case for it, easily.

Suppose a race of extraterrestrials wanted to wipe out life on earth because they want an oxygen-rich terran planet on which to build an immense parking lot. Who do you suppose stands the best chance of stopping them?

Cats? No, they’ll be too busy destroying yet another set of drapes, while being too stupid to know why this pisses you off.

Dogs? No, they can’t even perform simple calculus.

Whales? Of course not. What do they even do?

If you answered “humans”, you’d be right. We’d be the most likely ones to detect those invaders the moment they’d enter our solar system, then vaporize them with all the ridiculously awesome weapons that we’ve been developing in the eons we’ve spent fighting each other.

Animals are like those worthless coworkers who have no idea how to do their jobs without making everything worse, so the best they could do would be to just stay out of the way. Except animals can justify their existences by being edible, and if they can prevent a bunch of humans from going hungry, they’ll have done their part in the effort to eventually save life on earth.

As for PETA, if they think humans are so mean, they’re free to go graze in a field, somewhere, and discover just how enlightened animals really are. And if they were to be eaten by some carnivorous or parasitic animals, they’d at least bring up the average number of humans who understand how the world works.

You can now “fight against disinformation” on Twitter with an app that blocks New York Times

Remember when using the internet meant curating your own content, and not having it done for you by a tech monolith that’s so rich, they could afford to buy the rights to colors, and are making no effort to conceal their agenda?

If you do, I just found something that might get the comments buzzing on your Xanga or LiveJournal: an app developer has just produced an app that blocks New York Times on Twitter!

The app, called Block The New York Times, works by blocking 800 NYT contributors, and it’s activated with just one click.

As you are likely already aware, corporate information media like Twitter and Facebook have acted on concerns over “misinformation”, such as asking the wrong questions about the 2020 election, making the wrong observations about the coronavirus apocalypse, or otherwise engaging in wrongthink.

But for some reason, the media oligarchs are being lax about the greater concern over corporate misinformation. In light of this oversight, it’s great that an app developer has risen to the challenge of taking on corporate misinformation that social media outlets have actively promoted, perhaps accidentally.

Thanks to Block The New York Times, each of us can now do a bit more to bring the internet back to its golden age of individual self-curation.