Been twice to burning man. It’s hard to describe the corruption of the soul that exists at burning man.
There’s a focus on the environment yet everything is disposable and people travel from all over the world to go.
There’s talk of safety but then they will literally kick you out of camp as soon as someone says you’re making them feel unsafe because of some normal thing you did. YES, it did literally happen to someone I know. It felt like a public lynching.
It’s supposed to be camping together but then there’s pages of rules, documents, charity companies, and letters written by lawyers (yes, still the above).
It’s a celebration in mediocrity. Most things that happen are very mediocre at best. They just do it because you’re supposed to give something, so they give something mediocre.
The people are all hyper liberal, and the types that cannot help but judge individuals based on whether they’re in their group on not. People you called your friends for years will turn against you once the group turns on you.
Obviously most of it is all about seeing and being seen, engaging in the pleasures of sensual experiences on offer.
I would describe it as literally sodom on earth. It’s shaped like a butthole, and takes a massive shit once a year.
The best thing about it imo is the cycling around where you can mostly just get away from the degeneracy that exists. The temple is quite nice too.
> the camp’s liberal mind virus spread like wildfire thereafter.
I guess I'm still just confused about this. Can you connect the dots between liberal values and how this situation played out?
in general: "liberal mind virus" is imho, a useless phrase at best, and an actively conversation-deteriorating one generally. Other people _do_ have legitimately held belief systems and assumptions that don't match yours, and arrive at them through a complex chain of events. It feels to me as if you are acting out the same derision you claim "hyper-liberals" show to their perceived outgroup by dismissing it as a "mind virus", removing them from the category of "normal person" so your assumption can hold
Eventually, because this guy felt unsafe multiple members of the rest of the camp put their hands up as feeling unsafe. I call it liberal mind virus because of the “safety” focus. A normal person would see small challenges and discomforts as part and parcel of daily life, and they certainly wouldn’t have safety concerns as grown up (mostly) men from a small girl. Everything was also taken out of context too - they all knew her and had camped together for 10+ years. It was basically a group-think public lynching based on some false sense of morality.
> they certainly wouldn’t have safety concerns as grown up (mostly) men from a small girl
Why? I can see the idea of “he can (probably) overpower her”, but is that the only valid metric for safety? I think a lot of reasonable people would say no. What you actually do about that is perhaps more up in the air - sometimes it is saying “you just gotta deal with it”, like you said, but that is a lot worse of an answer when it comes to personal dynamics and consent
> I call it liberal mind virus because of the “safety” focus
> … group-think public lynching based on some false sense of morality
I also promise you these are not exclusive or exceptional traits among liberals. It’s extremely easy for me to frame the (imho unreasonable) actions of some conservatives I know with that exact same language - do they have a “mind virus”? I think it’s important to take them seriously rather than dismiss them like that, as tempting as it might be
By all means I don’t know the situation and don’t want to interrogate you, but please reflect on: is it really the fault of hyper-liberal partisan groupthink, or was it a case of humans being messy and messily using the language they have to paper over it, or was it a case where “normal” people across the spectrum might agree upon a little reflection even if you still think it’s wrong?
I think you might receive less blowback and better conversation by avoiding vague, incendiary, hyper-partisan language
m101 · · focus · HN ↗
There’s a focus on the environment yet everything is disposable and people travel from all over the world to go.
There’s talk of safety but then they will literally kick you out of camp as soon as someone says you’re making them feel unsafe because of some normal thing you did. YES, it did literally happen to someone I know. It felt like a public lynching.
It’s supposed to be camping together but then there’s pages of rules, documents, charity companies, and letters written by lawyers (yes, still the above).
It’s a celebration in mediocrity. Most things that happen are very mediocre at best. They just do it because you’re supposed to give something, so they give something mediocre.
The people are all hyper liberal, and the types that cannot help but judge individuals based on whether they’re in their group on not. People you called your friends for years will turn against you once the group turns on you.
Obviously most of it is all about seeing and being seen, engaging in the pleasures of sensual experiences on offer.
I would describe it as literally sodom on earth. It’s shaped like a butthole, and takes a massive shit once a year.
The best thing about it imo is the cycling around where you can mostly just get away from the degeneracy that exists. The temple is quite nice too.
ceejayoz · · focus · HN ↗
> like a public lynching
> all hyper liberal... the types that cannot help but judge individuals based on whether they’re in their group on not
I'm starting to wonder what "some normal thing you did" entailed.
m101 · · focus · HN ↗
[dead]
e_outofme · · focus · HN ↗
I guess I'm still just confused about this. Can you connect the dots between liberal values and how this situation played out?
in general: "liberal mind virus" is imho, a useless phrase at best, and an actively conversation-deteriorating one generally. Other people _do_ have legitimately held belief systems and assumptions that don't match yours, and arrive at them through a complex chain of events. It feels to me as if you are acting out the same derision you claim "hyper-liberals" show to their perceived outgroup by dismissing it as a "mind virus", removing them from the category of "normal person" so your assumption can hold
m101 · · focus · HN ↗
ceejayoz · · focus · HN ↗
You’ve essentially described the ending of every Survivor episode.
> they certainly wouldn’t have safety concerns as grown up (mostly) men from a small girl
I take it you’ve never had to contain a raging toddler.
e_outofme · · focus · HN ↗
Why? I can see the idea of “he can (probably) overpower her”, but is that the only valid metric for safety? I think a lot of reasonable people would say no. What you actually do about that is perhaps more up in the air - sometimes it is saying “you just gotta deal with it”, like you said, but that is a lot worse of an answer when it comes to personal dynamics and consent
> I call it liberal mind virus because of the “safety” focus > … group-think public lynching based on some false sense of morality
I also promise you these are not exclusive or exceptional traits among liberals. It’s extremely easy for me to frame the (imho unreasonable) actions of some conservatives I know with that exact same language - do they have a “mind virus”? I think it’s important to take them seriously rather than dismiss them like that, as tempting as it might be
By all means I don’t know the situation and don’t want to interrogate you, but please reflect on: is it really the fault of hyper-liberal partisan groupthink, or was it a case of humans being messy and messily using the language they have to paper over it, or was it a case where “normal” people across the spectrum might agree upon a little reflection even if you still think it’s wrong?
I think you might receive less blowback and better conversation by avoiding vague, incendiary, hyper-partisan language
i80and · · focus · HN ↗