A small tool to view real-world ActivityPub objects as JSON! Enter a URL
or username from Mastodon or a similar service below, and we'll send a
request with
the right
Accept
header
to the server to view the underlying object.
{
"@context": "https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams",
"type": "OrderedCollectionPage",
"orderedItems": [
{
"type": "Create",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/entities/urn:activity:1500969418929213442",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307",
"content": "Shakespeare wouldn't be allowed to post on Twitter because his words \"GLORIFY VIOLENCE\" (OMG! The horror...)<br /><br />Twitter's theory seems to be their job is to protect the governments monopoly on legitimate violence by protecting their monopoly on the glorification, or legitimation, of violence.<br /><br />But the whole idea of America, as encoded in the US Constitution, is that the government is NOT to possess a monopoly on the means of employing legitimate violence (2nd Amendment) nor on the means of legitimating violence (1st Amendment.)<br /><br />Fuck Twitter. Someday they will be made to pay the ultimate price for their rank and reckless treason in the service of lawless tyranny and usurpation.<br /><br /><a href=\"https://youtu.be/A-yZNMWFqvM\" target=\"_blank\">https://youtu.be/A-yZNMWFqvM</a>",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1500969418929213442",
"published": "2023-05-04T21:16:35+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "Shakespeare wouldn't be allowed to post on Twitter because his words \"GLORIFY VIOLENCE\" (OMG! The horror...)\n\nTwitter's theory seems to be their job is to protect the governments monopoly on legitimate violence by protecting their monopoly on the glorification, or legitimation, of violence.\n\nBut the whole idea of America, as encoded in the US Constitution, is that the government is NOT to possess a monopoly on the means of employing legitimate violence (2nd Amendment) nor on the means of legitimating violence (1st Amendment.)\n\nFuck Twitter. Someday they will be made to pay the ultimate price for their rank and reckless treason in the service of lawless tyranny and usurpation.\n\nhttps://youtu.be/A-yZNMWFqvM",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/entities/urn:activity:1500969418929213442/activity"
},
{
"type": "Create",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/entities/urn:activity:1500902877554544654",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307",
"content": "Well, I got my Twitter back a couple of months ago after multiple appeals. But they've already suspended my account again, no warnings, no strikes, no deleted tweets, no temporary suspensions. They just said I was \"glorifying violence.\" To be fair, I sort of was. But what do you want me to do? I'm a masculine western male. That's my entire culture, history, heritage, religion, and everything else. Violence and glory are literally inseparable. That's like the primary way you can even win glory, by violence. Twitter and twitter's terms of service are inherently and intrinsically semitic and effeminate. They do nothing to prevent actual violence. They just mandate that, at least on their platform, it has to be skulking, two-faced and duplicitous, coming at you talking about \"peace\" and \"love\" and \"harmony\" and \"tolerance\" and \"inclusion\" before plunging the knife into your back. Twitter's claims and attempts to be the \"public square\" of Western civilization, while STILL, even after Musk's intervention, suppressing constitutionally protected, characteristically western speech surely ranks as treason or some other capital offense, for which the full measure of justice accrued shall someday be administered to all those responsible...",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1500902877554544654",
"published": "2023-05-04T16:52:10+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "Well, I got my Twitter back a couple of months ago after multiple appeals. But they've already suspended my account again, no warnings, no strikes, no deleted tweets, no temporary suspensions. They just said I was \"glorifying violence.\" To be fair, I sort of was. But what do you want me to do? I'm a masculine western male. That's my entire culture, history, heritage, religion, and everything else. Violence and glory are literally inseparable. That's like the primary way you can even win glory, by violence. Twitter and twitter's terms of service are inherently and intrinsically semitic and effeminate. They do nothing to prevent actual violence. They just mandate that, at least on their platform, it has to be skulking, two-faced and duplicitous, coming at you talking about \"peace\" and \"love\" and \"harmony\" and \"tolerance\" and \"inclusion\" before plunging the knife into your back. Twitter's claims and attempts to be the \"public square\" of Western civilization, while STILL, even after Musk's intervention, suppressing constitutionally protected, characteristically western speech surely ranks as treason or some other capital offense, for which the full measure of justice accrued shall someday be administered to all those responsible...",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/entities/urn:activity:1500902877554544654/activity"
},
{
"type": "Create",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/entities/urn:activity:1500902580618792969",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307",
"content": "<a href=\"https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1500902580618792969\" target=\"_blank\">https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1500902580618792969</a>",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1500902580618792969",
"published": "2023-05-04T16:50:59+00:00",
"attachment": [
{
"type": "Document",
"url": "https://cdn.minds.com/fs/v1/thumbnail/1500902563325677581/xlarge/",
"mediaType": "image/jpeg",
"height": 500,
"width": 567
}
],
"source": {
"content": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1500902580618792969",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/entities/urn:activity:1500902580618792969/activity"
},
{
"type": "Create",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/entities/urn:activity:1389423310646808586",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307",
"content": "Some people act like mass shootings, and specifically why they seem to have become a problem in recent decades, when they apparently weren't before, are some kind of mystery, or senseless and inexplicable phenomena.<br /><br />But imagine, if you will, a world where ugliness, perversion, and lies are exulted. Where art and architecture are deliberately demoralizing and alienating. Where truth, beauty, excellence, gods, country, nation, family, and everything else that gives life meaning are ruthless mocked, ridiculed, undermined, questioned, critiqued, denied, deconstructed, and disparaged by bitter, spiteful, nihilists, by self-serving parasites, or by many others with a variety of malicious agendas. Imagine a world where millions of people are drugged, either officially, by medical prescription, or unofficially, on their own initiative, just to get through their dull, dreary, pointless, dead-end lives. Imagine a world where so-called \"elites\" (those helming major institutions) are evidently almost all clueless, incompetent, out of touch, corrupt, dishonest, openly malevolent, self-obsessed, misanthropic, literally satanic, barely closeted pedophiles, or otherwise not faithfully serving, protecting, nor representing those they claim to. Imagine a world where many large, well-known, business enterprises offer to pay their female employees' travel expenses to go out of state to murder their babies where it's legal to do so, so they can get back to work and make their employers more money. Imagine a world where major institutions literally egg on disaffected underclasses to run amok, rampage through the streets, riot, loot, commit arson, destroy property, and even kill indiscriminately, and then put up money to let them back out on bail if and when they are caught by half hearted police enforcement, but will come down on YOU immediately like a ton of bricks, if you should happen to defend yourself too vigorously against it. Imagine a world where children are openly groomed into deviant sexual perversion, into barren and fruitless, evolutionarily unstable, degeneracy, in the public schools, by the mainstream media, in the streets at major public events, and in even more unsavory and unsuitable places, places where children ideally would not even be allowed, and certainly not enticed, or at places that should be safe and wholesome, but aren't. Imagine a world where all serious dissent and discussion about these and other dystopian aspects of said world is vigorously suppressed, either by top down, technocratic censorship, or by violence perpetrated by supposedly grassroots mobs of strung out, darkly attired, spiteful mutants, or just by shrieking herds of shrill, unpleasant, nagging, scolding, sanctimonious, meddlesome, harpies.<br /><br />It should be clear by now that we should all be tremendously grateful not to live in such a world. <br /><br />But if we did, IF WE DID, would it REALLY be any surprise, if in such a world, a few people snapped from time to time and just randomly, or not so randomly, went apeshit on others?<br /><br />The real mystery would not be why it happens. The real mystery would be why it doesn't happen more...",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1389423310646808586",
"published": "2022-07-01T01:52:10+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "Some people act like mass shootings, and specifically why they seem to have become a problem in recent decades, when they apparently weren't before, are some kind of mystery, or senseless and inexplicable phenomena.\n\nBut imagine, if you will, a world where ugliness, perversion, and lies are exulted. Where art and architecture are deliberately demoralizing and alienating. Where truth, beauty, excellence, gods, country, nation, family, and everything else that gives life meaning are ruthless mocked, ridiculed, undermined, questioned, critiqued, denied, deconstructed, and disparaged by bitter, spiteful, nihilists, by self-serving parasites, or by many others with a variety of malicious agendas. Imagine a world where millions of people are drugged, either officially, by medical prescription, or unofficially, on their own initiative, just to get through their dull, dreary, pointless, dead-end lives. Imagine a world where so-called \"elites\" (those helming major institutions) are evidently almost all clueless, incompetent, out of touch, corrupt, dishonest, openly malevolent, self-obsessed, misanthropic, literally satanic, barely closeted pedophiles, or otherwise not faithfully serving, protecting, nor representing those they claim to. Imagine a world where many large, well-known, business enterprises offer to pay their female employees' travel expenses to go out of state to murder their babies where it's legal to do so, so they can get back to work and make their employers more money. Imagine a world where major institutions literally egg on disaffected underclasses to run amok, rampage through the streets, riot, loot, commit arson, destroy property, and even kill indiscriminately, and then put up money to let them back out on bail if and when they are caught by half hearted police enforcement, but will come down on YOU immediately like a ton of bricks, if you should happen to defend yourself too vigorously against it. Imagine a world where children are openly groomed into deviant sexual perversion, into barren and fruitless, evolutionarily unstable, degeneracy, in the public schools, by the mainstream media, in the streets at major public events, and in even more unsavory and unsuitable places, places where children ideally would not even be allowed, and certainly not enticed, or at places that should be safe and wholesome, but aren't. Imagine a world where all serious dissent and discussion about these and other dystopian aspects of said world is vigorously suppressed, either by top down, technocratic censorship, or by violence perpetrated by supposedly grassroots mobs of strung out, darkly attired, spiteful mutants, or just by shrieking herds of shrill, unpleasant, nagging, scolding, sanctimonious, meddlesome, harpies.\n\nIt should be clear by now that we should all be tremendously grateful not to live in such a world. \n\nBut if we did, IF WE DID, would it REALLY be any surprise, if in such a world, a few people snapped from time to time and just randomly, or not so randomly, went apeshit on others?\n\nThe real mystery would not be why it happens. The real mystery would be why it doesn't happen more...",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/entities/urn:activity:1389423310646808586/activity"
},
{
"type": "Create",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/entities/urn:activity:1387232591928627209",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307",
"content": "<a href=\"https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1387232591928627209\" target=\"_blank\">https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1387232591928627209</a>",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1387232591928627209",
"published": "2022-06-25T00:47:02+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1387232591928627209",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/entities/urn:activity:1387232591928627209/activity"
},
{
"type": "Create",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/entities/urn:activity:1387232467143888902",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307",
"content": "<a href=\"https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1387232467143888902\" target=\"_blank\">https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1387232467143888902</a>",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1387232467143888902",
"published": "2022-06-25T00:46:33+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1387232467143888902",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/entities/urn:activity:1387232467143888902/activity"
},
{
"type": "Create",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/entities/urn:activity:1366960617847525378",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307",
"content": "One common interpretation of the recent film \"The Northman\" that I'm seeing over and over again in comments is that it's \"dark\" and \"gritty\" with \"no clear cut hero\" just a bunch of morally complex (ambiguous) characters inhabiting a savage world, making choices within it, and we get to follow along as the consequences unfold.<br /><br />But that interpretation only arises because the people making it are still stuck in THEIR context, the moral world of today, not fully immersed in the film's. They can see the logic of the characters' actions in the film, but they can't really relate to or sympathize with them (or won't admit that they do) because, by the way things are reckoned today, they're monstrous. <br /><br />By traditional standards, however, they are just normal people, doing normal things. <br /><br />(At least the subset of normal that was ever written down or recorded in epic poetry.)<br /><br />SPOILERS BELOW<br /><br />Only the Queen, Gudrun, is totally wicked. Even the principal antagonist, Fjölnir, is basically a wise and honorable man, doomed by one ambition-fueled betrayal to a fateful confrontation he can't ultimately survive. He's a tragic hero, just like the protagonist, Amleth. But while the one is ultimately redeemed, even in death, by the love of a good woman, the other is utterly destroyed by the machinations and incitements of a bad one.",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1366960617847525378",
"published": "2022-04-30T02:13:27+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "One common interpretation of the recent film \"The Northman\" that I'm seeing over and over again in comments is that it's \"dark\" and \"gritty\" with \"no clear cut hero\" just a bunch of morally complex (ambiguous) characters inhabiting a savage world, making choices within it, and we get to follow along as the consequences unfold.\n\nBut that interpretation only arises because the people making it are still stuck in THEIR context, the moral world of today, not fully immersed in the film's. They can see the logic of the characters' actions in the film, but they can't really relate to or sympathize with them (or won't admit that they do) because, by the way things are reckoned today, they're monstrous. \n\nBy traditional standards, however, they are just normal people, doing normal things. \n\n(At least the subset of normal that was ever written down or recorded in epic poetry.)\n\nSPOILERS BELOW\n\nOnly the Queen, Gudrun, is totally wicked. Even the principal antagonist, Fjölnir, is basically a wise and honorable man, doomed by one ambition-fueled betrayal to a fateful confrontation he can't ultimately survive. He's a tragic hero, just like the protagonist, Amleth. But while the one is ultimately redeemed, even in death, by the love of a good woman, the other is utterly destroyed by the machinations and incitements of a bad one.",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/entities/urn:activity:1366960617847525378/activity"
},
{
"type": "Create",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/entities/urn:activity:1359857179993051152",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307",
"content": "Retardarchs are obsessed with \"resources\" and \"overpopulation\"<br /><br />And they can only frame these things in terms of quantity, without respect to quality. So for example, they're always talking about the need to decrease the quantity of the population, without respect to quality, supposedly to \"free up\" greater quantities of resources for them. But that's simply not how these things work. The only resource that really works that way is space, which does have its benefits. But if they end up ruling over a smaller, lower quality population (even in vast open spaces) the quantities and qualities of most other resources that they can make use of will greatly decline.<br /><br />And it's not like this will even enable them to make use of those resources longer before they \"run out.\" (Although this is another perpetual preoccupation of theirs, reflecting only their limited perspective and understanding as parasites who consume without producing, and not how things actually work.)<br /><br />Haiti is less densely populated than the Netherlands. But it's an impoverished, unsightly, wasteland and an environmental catastrophe, while the Netherlands is a rich, bountiful, aestheticly manicured, garden in comparison. Why? Because the Dutch are higher IQ, higher trust, more productive, and produce fewer negative externalities for one another.<br /><br />They're higher quality people, and so you can stack more of them together where they can network and trade with one another, and produce positive externalities for one another, and the results are quite nice.<br /><br />One area where entropic retardarchs do seem to possess an intuitive understanding of the value of quality, however, is that they know that lower quality people's votes are cheaper to buy.<br /><br />So while trying to create population decline generally, they always want what population growth there is to occur in the worst subset of the population, either by prioritizing the importation of oftentimes literal drooling retards from the turd world, or by subsidizing the reproductive expansion of local dependent underclasses through dysgenic redistribution.<br /><br />When you've got your hands on the levers of power in an egalitarian, universal franchise, democracy, this is a sound strategy (until it causes everything to break down) because if all votes count the same, but some cost less then others, you can hang on to power by breeding or importing cheaper and cheaper voters while progressively plundering and looting more and more of the productive people above them, more and more severely, while providing fewer benefits in return...<br /><br />The hope seems to be that the inevitable disaster that must result from this dysgenic race to the bottom, and parasitic, unproductive, looting (all caused by these entropic retardarchs) can be averted by a timely robopocalypse. But this is unlikely.<br /><br />Robots cost money, because they cost real resources. The only way to pay for the development and implementation of a roboconomy, currently, is to have it create products to sell to the nonrobo economy so that it can purchase resources and labor from the non-robo economy to develop and create robots. But the more competitive pressure the robo economy puts on the non-robo economy, the less of a market it has for its products and the less of a market there is to supply it with its inputs. It's inherently limited by its own success. Meaning, the robo economy is more likely to establish an equilibrium with the non-robo economy than to wholly replace it, and to go up and down in conjunction with the rest of the economy (meaning mainly down if the retardarchs remain in charge...)<br /><br />All this means there are still plenty of opportunities to survive, and to persist, and to grow, and to supplant and replace clown world, if we can create exclusive ingroups with largely closed reproductive strategies (such as those demonstrated and proven by our enemies and by others, like the Amish) and if we can maintain eugenic reproduction in the face of clown world dysgenia (such as the Eugenic reproduction demonstrably achieved by the Mormons.) And if we can create parallel institutions to serve our needs where the hostile, retardarch, institutions do not.<br /><br />The future is not going to be the wilderness park world, sparsely populated by fabulously wealthy retardarchs in their soulless, unaesthetic, modernist mansions, waited on by robots. And it doesn't have to be teeming, fetid, open sewared, garbage strewn, global scale, favelas or backwards, primitive, low density, return to hunter gather, total collapse of civilization. It can be bustling, bountiful, and yet aesthetic, with plenty of green things, plenty of history, and plenty of tradition.<br /><br />Delete the retardarch elites.",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1359857179993051152",
"published": "2022-04-10T11:46:56+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "Retardarchs are obsessed with \"resources\" and \"overpopulation\"\n\nAnd they can only frame these things in terms of quantity, without respect to quality. So for example, they're always talking about the need to decrease the quantity of the population, without respect to quality, supposedly to \"free up\" greater quantities of resources for them. But that's simply not how these things work. The only resource that really works that way is space, which does have its benefits. But if they end up ruling over a smaller, lower quality population (even in vast open spaces) the quantities and qualities of most other resources that they can make use of will greatly decline.\n\nAnd it's not like this will even enable them to make use of those resources longer before they \"run out.\" (Although this is another perpetual preoccupation of theirs, reflecting only their limited perspective and understanding as parasites who consume without producing, and not how things actually work.)\n\nHaiti is less densely populated than the Netherlands. But it's an impoverished, unsightly, wasteland and an environmental catastrophe, while the Netherlands is a rich, bountiful, aestheticly manicured, garden in comparison. Why? Because the Dutch are higher IQ, higher trust, more productive, and produce fewer negative externalities for one another.\n\nThey're higher quality people, and so you can stack more of them together where they can network and trade with one another, and produce positive externalities for one another, and the results are quite nice.\n\nOne area where entropic retardarchs do seem to possess an intuitive understanding of the value of quality, however, is that they know that lower quality people's votes are cheaper to buy.\n\nSo while trying to create population decline generally, they always want what population growth there is to occur in the worst subset of the population, either by prioritizing the importation of oftentimes literal drooling retards from the turd world, or by subsidizing the reproductive expansion of local dependent underclasses through dysgenic redistribution.\n\nWhen you've got your hands on the levers of power in an egalitarian, universal franchise, democracy, this is a sound strategy (until it causes everything to break down) because if all votes count the same, but some cost less then others, you can hang on to power by breeding or importing cheaper and cheaper voters while progressively plundering and looting more and more of the productive people above them, more and more severely, while providing fewer benefits in return...\n\nThe hope seems to be that the inevitable disaster that must result from this dysgenic race to the bottom, and parasitic, unproductive, looting (all caused by these entropic retardarchs) can be averted by a timely robopocalypse. But this is unlikely.\n\nRobots cost money, because they cost real resources. The only way to pay for the development and implementation of a roboconomy, currently, is to have it create products to sell to the nonrobo economy so that it can purchase resources and labor from the non-robo economy to develop and create robots. But the more competitive pressure the robo economy puts on the non-robo economy, the less of a market it has for its products and the less of a market there is to supply it with its inputs. It's inherently limited by its own success. Meaning, the robo economy is more likely to establish an equilibrium with the non-robo economy than to wholly replace it, and to go up and down in conjunction with the rest of the economy (meaning mainly down if the retardarchs remain in charge...)\n\nAll this means there are still plenty of opportunities to survive, and to persist, and to grow, and to supplant and replace clown world, if we can create exclusive ingroups with largely closed reproductive strategies (such as those demonstrated and proven by our enemies and by others, like the Amish) and if we can maintain eugenic reproduction in the face of clown world dysgenia (such as the Eugenic reproduction demonstrably achieved by the Mormons.) And if we can create parallel institutions to serve our needs where the hostile, retardarch, institutions do not.\n\nThe future is not going to be the wilderness park world, sparsely populated by fabulously wealthy retardarchs in their soulless, unaesthetic, modernist mansions, waited on by robots. And it doesn't have to be teeming, fetid, open sewared, garbage strewn, global scale, favelas or backwards, primitive, low density, return to hunter gather, total collapse of civilization. It can be bustling, bountiful, and yet aesthetic, with plenty of green things, plenty of history, and plenty of tradition.\n\nDelete the retardarch elites.",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/entities/urn:activity:1359857179993051152/activity"
},
{
"type": "Create",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/entities/urn:activity:1347238189693145094",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307",
"content": "I'd rather be in the \"malthusian trap\" than suffer any of the plans I've ever heard to avoid it. Ecological models of human population growth and collapse, IMO, are silly. Humans are not rabbits. \"Malthusian limits\" don't denote some kind of fixed carrying capacity that human populations will crash into, or overshoot and collapse. They denote a realm or range of populations where there is a three way trade-off between birth rates, life expectancy, and standard of living. If any one of them rises, at least one other has to decline. There are many possible solutions or strategies for living in a stable equilibrium under malthusian conditions. Some of them are quite tolerable. <br /><br />Historically, European strategies tended to optimize more for standards of living and Asian ones for life expectancy. But many variations and combinations and gradients are possible. <br /><br />For most of human history, humans have lived under malthusian conditions. \"Malthusian limits\" were lifted by the industrial revolution and others to follow. But human populations have been rising to reach them again. When we do, it's not the end of the world, just a new equilibrium. <br /><br />There are new problems to solve to be sure, pollution, energy, and resources, foremost among them; social, cultural, and political upheaval as well. But they are not necessarily insoluble. Every waste product but heat can be reclaimed or reprocessed. The only inputs that don't have substitutes are energy, but energy comes in many forms. And on the social, cultural, and political fronts, many old forms that have been swept away by recent revolutions contained the solutions to problems we are currently facing, that formerly, they had kept at bay...<br /><br />The biggest problem I see to deal with are the assholes who want to kill us all or pervert our culture into abject and grotesque degeneracy, so that they and they alone, can live in this temporary and shortlived non malthusian interlude forever. <br /><br />Once we turn the tables on them, and repay villainy for villainy, with interest compounded liberally, and penalties generously added on, we can get back to the new normal, which will end up being a lot like the old normal that prevailed just about everywhere in Eurasia until maybe only 200 years ago.<br /><br />Come on based 88 billion strong Hyperborean and Hyperaustralian planetary, circumpolar, Kardeshev Type I giga civilization...",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1347238189693145094",
"published": "2022-03-06T16:03:34+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "I'd rather be in the \"malthusian trap\" than suffer any of the plans I've ever heard to avoid it. Ecological models of human population growth and collapse, IMO, are silly. Humans are not rabbits. \"Malthusian limits\" don't denote some kind of fixed carrying capacity that human populations will crash into, or overshoot and collapse. They denote a realm or range of populations where there is a three way trade-off between birth rates, life expectancy, and standard of living. If any one of them rises, at least one other has to decline. There are many possible solutions or strategies for living in a stable equilibrium under malthusian conditions. Some of them are quite tolerable. \n\nHistorically, European strategies tended to optimize more for standards of living and Asian ones for life expectancy. But many variations and combinations and gradients are possible. \n\nFor most of human history, humans have lived under malthusian conditions. \"Malthusian limits\" were lifted by the industrial revolution and others to follow. But human populations have been rising to reach them again. When we do, it's not the end of the world, just a new equilibrium. \n\nThere are new problems to solve to be sure, pollution, energy, and resources, foremost among them; social, cultural, and political upheaval as well. But they are not necessarily insoluble. Every waste product but heat can be reclaimed or reprocessed. The only inputs that don't have substitutes are energy, but energy comes in many forms. And on the social, cultural, and political fronts, many old forms that have been swept away by recent revolutions contained the solutions to problems we are currently facing, that formerly, they had kept at bay...\n\nThe biggest problem I see to deal with are the assholes who want to kill us all or pervert our culture into abject and grotesque degeneracy, so that they and they alone, can live in this temporary and shortlived non malthusian interlude forever. \n\nOnce we turn the tables on them, and repay villainy for villainy, with interest compounded liberally, and penalties generously added on, we can get back to the new normal, which will end up being a lot like the old normal that prevailed just about everywhere in Eurasia until maybe only 200 years ago.\n\nCome on based 88 billion strong Hyperborean and Hyperaustralian planetary, circumpolar, Kardeshev Type I giga civilization...",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/entities/urn:activity:1347238189693145094/activity"
},
{
"type": "Create",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/entities/urn:activity:1225984376681390080",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307",
"content": "I find that terms like “racist” or “racism” only serve to moralize and emotionally charge the issue, casting it as a matter of good against evil, with one side defined as irredeemably wicked from the outset, rather than providing any clarification, or explanation, or illumination, or argument, or anything like that. In fact, it’s quite the opposite. The purpose, and the effect, of such terms is to short circuit argument, to avoid the need to explain or illuminate, all to morally and emotionally bully and bludgeon people into acquiescing to agendas that are not compatible with their interests or preferences.<br /><br />But even if you do not wish to go as far as I go, to reject the very terms “racism” and “racist” out of hand as illegitimate and manipulative in themselves, even if you think they have some definite meaning which it is necessary or helpful to convey, that they have value as words/concepts; there IS one thing that no honest and thinking person can seriously deny...<br /><br />And that is that those words at least HAVE often been misued/overused in egregious and heavy-handed ways by manipulative people, just to get their way, or get something they want, and NOT out of any concern for truth, or fairness, or justice.<br /><br />That ought to give us pause, and urge great care, and precision, and clarity, and probably a good deal of further explanation, if we choose to employ such terms.",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1225984376681390080",
"published": "2021-04-06T01:44:13+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "I find that terms like “racist” or “racism” only serve to moralize and emotionally charge the issue, casting it as a matter of good against evil, with one side defined as irredeemably wicked from the outset, rather than providing any clarification, or explanation, or illumination, or argument, or anything like that. In fact, it’s quite the opposite. The purpose, and the effect, of such terms is to short circuit argument, to avoid the need to explain or illuminate, all to morally and emotionally bully and bludgeon people into acquiescing to agendas that are not compatible with their interests or preferences.\n\nBut even if you do not wish to go as far as I go, to reject the very terms “racism” and “racist” out of hand as illegitimate and manipulative in themselves, even if you think they have some definite meaning which it is necessary or helpful to convey, that they have value as words/concepts; there IS one thing that no honest and thinking person can seriously deny...\n\nAnd that is that those words at least HAVE often been misued/overused in egregious and heavy-handed ways by manipulative people, just to get their way, or get something they want, and NOT out of any concern for truth, or fairness, or justice.\n\nThat ought to give us pause, and urge great care, and precision, and clarity, and probably a good deal of further explanation, if we choose to employ such terms.",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/entities/urn:activity:1225984376681390080/activity"
},
{
"type": "Create",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/entities/urn:activity:1225906412944248832",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307",
"content": "I’m racist towards anti-racists, because all “anti-racists” are anti-white. <br /><br />For example, my biological father is “anti-racist” but the only “racism” he ever gets mad about is (alleged) white racism. He never gets mad at nonwhites for racism no matter how outrageously or flagrantly racist they are, towards one another, or towards whites. His “anti-racism” is directed exclusively against whites. It can only harm whites. It can never, for example, protect whites against antiwhite racism. That’s because he is just anti-white. He perhaps does not harbor an explicit hatred towards whites collectively and exclusively, in his own heart, but he is a clueless boomer who has allowed himself to be manipulated into the willing instrument of those who do, by adopting and using these loaded terms and the frames they’re supplied with, and using them in the manner prescribed and exclusively within the limits sanctioned by the official sources of narratives and all his stupid, virtue-signaling, boomer friends.<br /><br />I don’t recognize any anti-white as white, even if they are biologically of european descent and have light skin. White is an ethnic/racial category that describes the peoples of Europe and their descendants. But in America at least, it’s also an identity and an ingroup. If you don’t have any pride in your identity, only shame, if you don’t have any loyalty to your ingroup, you only relentlessly seek opportunities to stab us in the back for the benefit of outgroups that will never reward your treachery against us with more than momentary gratitude in return, you don’t deserve that ingroup membership. You don’t deserve a white card if you’re going to devalue whiteness and incessantly bash whites; you don’t deserve white privilege if you’re going to rail against it and try to destroy other whites’ privilege and redistribute it to hostile, parasitic, alien, out-groups. If you do any of that stuff, I don’t recognize you as ingroup, I don’t recognize you as white. You’re some other race - that I’m racist against...<br /><br />Noel Ignatiev said “treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity.” <br /><br />If you are a traitor to whiteness then “humanity” can be your race. See how humanity will reward you... But you don’t get to be a traitor to whiteness and white at the same time. Pick one.",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1225906412944248832",
"published": "2021-04-05T20:34:25+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "I’m racist towards anti-racists, because all “anti-racists” are anti-white. \n\nFor example, my biological father is “anti-racist” but the only “racism” he ever gets mad about is (alleged) white racism. He never gets mad at nonwhites for racism no matter how outrageously or flagrantly racist they are, towards one another, or towards whites. His “anti-racism” is directed exclusively against whites. It can only harm whites. It can never, for example, protect whites against antiwhite racism. That’s because he is just anti-white. He perhaps does not harbor an explicit hatred towards whites collectively and exclusively, in his own heart, but he is a clueless boomer who has allowed himself to be manipulated into the willing instrument of those who do, by adopting and using these loaded terms and the frames they’re supplied with, and using them in the manner prescribed and exclusively within the limits sanctioned by the official sources of narratives and all his stupid, virtue-signaling, boomer friends.\n\nI don’t recognize any anti-white as white, even if they are biologically of european descent and have light skin. White is an ethnic/racial category that describes the peoples of Europe and their descendants. But in America at least, it’s also an identity and an ingroup. If you don’t have any pride in your identity, only shame, if you don’t have any loyalty to your ingroup, you only relentlessly seek opportunities to stab us in the back for the benefit of outgroups that will never reward your treachery against us with more than momentary gratitude in return, you don’t deserve that ingroup membership. You don’t deserve a white card if you’re going to devalue whiteness and incessantly bash whites; you don’t deserve white privilege if you’re going to rail against it and try to destroy other whites’ privilege and redistribute it to hostile, parasitic, alien, out-groups. If you do any of that stuff, I don’t recognize you as ingroup, I don’t recognize you as white. You’re some other race - that I’m racist against...\n\nNoel Ignatiev said “treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity.” \n\nIf you are a traitor to whiteness then “humanity” can be your race. See how humanity will reward you... But you don’t get to be a traitor to whiteness and white at the same time. Pick one.",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/entities/urn:activity:1225906412944248832/activity"
},
{
"type": "Create",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/entities/urn:activity:1224900966930399232",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307",
"content": "Feminists call men “cavemen” all the time, but both in historical and prehistoric times (based on genetic evidence) more females succeeded in reproducing than males. Females are also more risk averse and live longer than males. <br /><br />Evolution proceeds by natural selection due to differential survival and reproduction. But most of the NOT surviving and NOT reproducing gets done by males. So it follows that men experience more selective pressure and are therefore more “evolved” (more adapted to changing circumstances...) than women. <br /><br />The reality is WOMEN are still CAVEwomen while men are relatively more “modern” (adapted to modern circumstances and challenges, by the relentless and deadly tolls that have been taken on men by the circumstances of every age since the stone age, which have not been equally shared by women.)<br /><br />The popular idea now is that sexism and gender roles are “backwards” and “outdated” and “progress” both requires and enables relative equality, and the empowerment, emancipation, and enfranchisement of women.<br /><br />Nothing could be further from the truth. The more things “progress” the more necessary and helpful sexist gender roles are because the greater the relative difference between the prevailing circumstances and the circumstances to which women are adapted. It’s necessary to confine women to roles and circumstances like unto the roles and circumstances to which they are adapted, to fixed and definite roles and relatively fixed circumstances.<br /><br />Men can adapt to changing circumstances and have more open-ended and flexible roles because males are specialized for risk-taking and that need to adapt to changing circumstances necessarily comes with huge risks, and huge costs. <br /><br />There is no reason at all to open the full suite of opportunities open to men also to women, and every reason to keep many of them closed off to women and the exclusive province of men...",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1224900966930399232",
"published": "2021-04-03T01:59:08+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "Feminists call men “cavemen” all the time, but both in historical and prehistoric times (based on genetic evidence) more females succeeded in reproducing than males. Females are also more risk averse and live longer than males. \n\nEvolution proceeds by natural selection due to differential survival and reproduction. But most of the NOT surviving and NOT reproducing gets done by males. So it follows that men experience more selective pressure and are therefore more “evolved” (more adapted to changing circumstances...) than women. \n\nThe reality is WOMEN are still CAVEwomen while men are relatively more “modern” (adapted to modern circumstances and challenges, by the relentless and deadly tolls that have been taken on men by the circumstances of every age since the stone age, which have not been equally shared by women.)\n\nThe popular idea now is that sexism and gender roles are “backwards” and “outdated” and “progress” both requires and enables relative equality, and the empowerment, emancipation, and enfranchisement of women.\n\nNothing could be further from the truth. The more things “progress” the more necessary and helpful sexist gender roles are because the greater the relative difference between the prevailing circumstances and the circumstances to which women are adapted. It’s necessary to confine women to roles and circumstances like unto the roles and circumstances to which they are adapted, to fixed and definite roles and relatively fixed circumstances.\n\nMen can adapt to changing circumstances and have more open-ended and flexible roles because males are specialized for risk-taking and that need to adapt to changing circumstances necessarily comes with huge risks, and huge costs. \n\nThere is no reason at all to open the full suite of opportunities open to men also to women, and every reason to keep many of them closed off to women and the exclusive province of men...",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/entities/urn:activity:1224900966930399232/activity"
},
{
"type": "Create",
"actor": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307",
"object": {
"type": "Note",
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/entities/urn:activity:1222925862949269504",
"attributedTo": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307",
"content": "The problem with even sending a woman to space at all is it jeopardizes the mission, not just because something is more likely to go wrong, even though it is, but because if something DOES go wrong, it’s more likely to threaten the whole program. <br /><br />People are MUCH less willing to risk women, so if they blow one up, for equality, they’re probably not going to go “well, we better just send men in the future.” More likely they’ll go “we can’t afford to blow up women like that, we just won’t send anyone in the future...” 90% of the emotion involved in the Challenger and Columbia disasters was on account of the few women that got blown up...<br /><br />When Magellan set off to circumnavigate the world, he had 5 ships and 270 men. Magellan died in the Philippines but one ship made it back to Spain with 18 surviving crew on board and 26 tons of spices. <br /><br />That’s an extreme example, but the age of exploration on Earth often involved similarly dismal odds. Yet we are all infinitely better off today that somebody took those odds and won, even though not everyone did.<br /><br />Making “equality” mission critical reduces the threshold of “acceptable risk” and limits the scope of opportunities we can explore and seize. <br /><br />A society committed to equality is a dying society and even if it steps falteringly into space for a bit, it will either be pulled back down by its own commitment to such a foolish and parasitic and backwards idea, or it will be surpassed and left behind by another society with no such self-imposed limitation.<br /><br />I can think of three in particular that would like to... (at least one of them very well may succeed.)",
"to": [
"https://www.w3.org/ns/activitystreams#Public"
],
"cc": [
"https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/followers"
],
"tag": [],
"url": "https://www.minds.com/newsfeed/1222925862949269504",
"published": "2021-03-28T15:10:46+00:00",
"source": {
"content": "The problem with even sending a woman to space at all is it jeopardizes the mission, not just because something is more likely to go wrong, even though it is, but because if something DOES go wrong, it’s more likely to threaten the whole program. \n\nPeople are MUCH less willing to risk women, so if they blow one up, for equality, they’re probably not going to go “well, we better just send men in the future.” More likely they’ll go “we can’t afford to blow up women like that, we just won’t send anyone in the future...” 90% of the emotion involved in the Challenger and Columbia disasters was on account of the few women that got blown up...\n\nWhen Magellan set off to circumnavigate the world, he had 5 ships and 270 men. Magellan died in the Philippines but one ship made it back to Spain with 18 surviving crew on board and 26 tons of spices. \n\nThat’s an extreme example, but the age of exploration on Earth often involved similarly dismal odds. Yet we are all infinitely better off today that somebody took those odds and won, even though not everyone did.\n\nMaking “equality” mission critical reduces the threshold of “acceptable risk” and limits the scope of opportunities we can explore and seize. \n\nA society committed to equality is a dying society and even if it steps falteringly into space for a bit, it will either be pulled back down by its own commitment to such a foolish and parasitic and backwards idea, or it will be surpassed and left behind by another society with no such self-imposed limitation.\n\nI can think of three in particular that would like to... (at least one of them very well may succeed.)",
"mediaType": "text/plain"
}
},
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/entities/urn:activity:1222925862949269504/activity"
}
],
"id": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/outbox",
"partOf": "https://www.minds.com/api/activitypub/users/1015287414840631307/outboxoutbox"
}