Can't collaborate with the competition! 

Nah.

So I wrote it. Am currious to have your opinion before I publish. DM me if interested. 

Are you Dutch by any chance?

tbh, I think you just saw an attempt at art you don’t like and you’re unlikely to get a satisfactory response. The only fiction I have written which I suspect you won’t find disgusting is this: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/H4kadKrC2xLK24udn/the-maker-of-mind

lol

Thanks! I am writing every morning to build up my stamina for Inkhaven.

:chadgoose:

Before Allied victory, one might have guessed that the peoples of Japan and Germany would be difficult to pacify and would not integrate well with a liberal regime. For the populations of both showed every sign of virulent loyalty to their government. It's commonly pointed out that it is exactly this seemingly-virulent loyalty that implied their populations would be easily pacified once their governments fell, as indeed they were. To put it in crude terms: having been domesticated by one government, they were easily domesticated by another.

I have been thinking a bit about why I was so wrong about Trump. Though of course if I had a vote I would have voted for Kamala Harris and said as much at the time, I assumed things would be like his first term where (though a clown show) it seemed relatively normal given the circumstances. And I wasn't particularly worried. I figured norm violations would be difficult with hostile institutions, especially given the number of stupid people who would be involved in any attempt at norm violations.

Likely most of me being wrong here was my ignorance, as a non-citizen and someone generally not interested in politics, of American civics and how the situation differs from that of his first term.

But one thing I wonder about is my assumption that hostile institutions are always a bad sign for the dictatorially-minded. Suppose, for the sake of argument, that there is at least some kernel of truth to the narrative that American institutions were in some ways ideologically captured by an illiberal strand of progressivism. Is that actually a bad sign for the dictatorially-minded? Or is it a sign that having been domesticated by one form of illiberalism they can likely be domesticated by another?

I am still mystified that it's just generally accepted that appeals to the physical possibility of nanotechnology should be considered evidence someone is a wackjob. Like wut?