Liberal Forum

It’s not every day a neo-monarchist’s Substack helps shape disruptive federal policies. But Yarvin, 51, isn’t celebrating. In fact, in several recent interviews with The Washington Post, he offered a surprisingly harsh assessment of DOGE, comparing it to an orchestra of chimpanzees trying to perform Wagner. He also said the group’s attitude toward federal workers resembles that of a brash but insecure man who repels potential sexual partners. 


“In the worst aspects of DOGE, there’s this aspect of the incel who gets mad at the girl who won’t sleep with him,” Yarvin said, using the term for so-called involuntary celibates. “That’s not a powerful attitude.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... usk-thiel/

Before we begin I ask that all the slack jaws in the room (and you know who you are) google "neo-monarchist".

Then take a very deep breath as it slowly dawns on you that one of the most influential voices of your movement has concluded what Master Vegetable told you months ago.

This will hurt, once it works its way through your block heads.

On the bright side, you'll be able to tell your grandchildren of the Babadook who authored your scars...

 
 

Blackvegetable » 4 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

4 minutes ago

It’s not every day a neo-monarchist’s Substack helps shape disruptive federal policies. But Yarvin, 51, isn’t celebrating. In fact, in several recent interviews with The Washington Post, he offered a surprisingly harsh assessment of DOGE, comparing it to an orchestra of chimpanzees trying to perform Wagner. He also said the group’s attitude toward federal workers resembles that of a brash but insecure man who repels potential sexual partners. 

“In the worst aspects of DOGE, there’s this aspect of the incel who gets mad at the girl who won’t sleep with him,” Yarvin said, using the term for so-called involuntary celibates. “That’s not a powerful attitude.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... usk-thiel/

Before we begin I ask that all the slack jaws in the room (and you know who you are) google "neo-monarchist".

Then take a very deep breath as it slowly dawns on you that one of the most influential voices of your movement has concluded what Master Vegetable told you months ago.

This will hurt, once it works its way through your block heads.

On the bright side, you'll be able to tell your grandchildren of the Babadook who authored your scars...

It appears you're the one bleeding.......daily periods with no relief.

Blackvegetable » 9 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

9 minutes ago

Before we begin I ask that all the slack jaws in the room (and you know who you are) google "neo-monarchist".

Then take a very deep breath as it slowly dawns on you that one of the most influential voices of your movement has concluded what Master Vegetable told you months ago.

This will hurt, once it works its way through your block heads.

On the bright side, you'll be able to tell your grandchildren of the Babadook who authored your scars...

 
 

When you only recite what someone else said to incite everyone else into a social frenzy you only come off as a devil's advocate creating a diversion from honesty about living in real time and plain sight only being alive in a series parallel situation of adapting since conceived now all life is essentially kinetically eternally separate by the moment here.

Blackvegetable » Today, 6:48 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 6:48 am

It’s not every day a neo-monarchist’s Substack helps shape disruptive federal policies. But Yarvin, 51, isn’t celebrating. In fact, in several recent interviews with The Washington Post, he offered a surprisingly harsh assessment of DOGE, comparing it to an orchestra of chimpanzees trying to perform Wagner. He also said the group’s attitude toward federal workers resembles that of a brash but insecure man who repels potential sexual partners. 

“In the worst aspects of DOGE, there’s this aspect of the incel who gets mad at the girl who won’t sleep with him,” Yarvin said, using the term for so-called involuntary celibates. “That’s not a powerful attitude.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... usk-thiel/

Before we begin I ask that all the slack jaws in the room (and you know who you are) google "neo-monarchist".

Then take a very deep breath as it slowly dawns on you that one of the most influential voices of your movement has concluded what Master Vegetable told you months ago.

This will hurt, once it works its way through your block heads.

On the bright side, you'll be able to tell your grandchildren of the Babadook who authored your scars...

Ah, wonderful—another Grifticles thread where the headline does the heavy lifting, and the commentary is 90% smug gloating, 10% name-dropping, and 0% original thought.We get the formula by now:

• Step 1: Paste a link
• Step 2: Mock everyone else's intelligence
• Step 3: Pretend that quoting someone smarter is the same as being insightful yourself

You keep acting like posting articles is equivalent to winning arguments, but the only thing you're consistently proving is your impressive talent for outsourcing your opinions to strangers with Substacks. So here’s your question for today—feel free to ignore it and call it “Level 0.16” later:

If Yarvin’s critique is so damning, what do you believe the consequences of DOGE’s approach will be for federal governance, and how does that align (or clash) with your own political assumptions?

Or just post another video and call everyone a moron—we’ll be here logging Dodge #141.Your move, Grifticles. Try not to strain anything.
 

Vegas » Today, 9:00 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 9:00 am

Ah, wonderful—another Grifticles thread where the headline does the heavy lifting, and the commentary is 90% smug gloating, 10% name-dropping, and 0% original thought.We get the formula by now:

• Step 1: Paste a link
• Step 2: Mock everyone else's intelligence
• Step 3: Pretend that quoting someone smarter is the same as being insightful yourself

You keep acting like posting articles is equivalent to winning arguments, but the only thing you're consistently proving is your impressive talent for outsourcing your opinions to strangers with Substacks. So here’s your question for today—feel free to ignore it and call it “Level 0.16” later:

Or just post another video and call everyone a moron—we’ll be here logging Dodge #141.Your move, Grifticles. Try not to strain anything.

I think it more important that you demonstrate your understanding of the OP.


 

Blackvegetable » 1 minute ago » wrote: ↑

1 minute ago

I think it more important that you demonstrate your understanding of the OP.

YOU CAN'T EVEN DEFINE THE TERM WOMAN

FJB » 5 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

5 minutes ago

YOU CAN'T EVEN DEFINE THE TERM WOMAN

Already have many times

Blackvegetable » 4 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

4 minutes ago

Already have many times

YOU ARE A POS LIAR

Blackvegetable » 41 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

41 minutes ago

I think it more important that you demonstrate your understanding of the OP.

 There it is—Grifticles’ Golden Shield:
“Demonstrate your understanding of the OP.”

Translation: “I have no answer, so I’m going to quiz you on something I barely explained myself.”

Here’s the thing: we did read it. You posted someone else’s ideas, stapled on a paragraph of “everyone else is dumb,” and called it a day.
What’s missing—as usual—is you. Your actual take. Your own analysis. Something beyond YouTube links and rhetorical backhands.So here’s your gentle reminder:
The person who posts the thread is the one expected to actually defend it, not hide behind it like it’s a riot shield.

Now go ahead and dodge again—I know the script.


Dodge 142
 
 

Blackvegetable » 50 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

50 minutes ago

Already have many times

The article you provided  begins by saying that DOGE has "gutted" the Federal work force.
I didn't read any further than that since I don't read or pay any attention to what looks like  Yellow Journalism.

https://www.statesman.com/story/news/po ... 187967007/
The government grew to 3MM under Biden

Next I asked Google to simply tell me how many Federal employees  have been either fired or laid off and none of the search results gave a straight answer to that question.
The articles I clicked on were peppered with speculation about how many employees  COULD get terminated....but none of your usual sources were willing to provide a plain and simple answer as to how many people have been terminated so far.

Maybe you could provide us with the grand total so that we can decide for ourselves if the Federal Gov. has in fact "BEEN GUTTED" by DOGE.

Blackvegetable » Today, 6:48 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 6:48 am

It’s not every day a neo-monarchist’s Substack helps shape disruptive federal policies. But Yarvin, 51, isn’t celebrating. In fact, in several recent interviews with The Washington Post, he offered a surprisingly harsh assessment of DOGE, comparing it to an orchestra of chimpanzees trying to perform Wagner. He also said the group’s attitude toward federal workers resembles that of a brash but insecure man who repels potential sexual partners. 

“In the worst aspects of DOGE, there’s this aspect of the incel who gets mad at the girl who won’t sleep with him,” Yarvin said, using the term for so-called involuntary celibates. “That’s not a powerful attitude.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... usk-thiel/

Before we begin I ask that all the slack jaws in the room (and you know who you are) google "neo-monarchist".

Then take a very deep breath as it slowly dawns on you that one of the most influential voices of your movement has concluded what Master Vegetable told you months ago.

This will hurt, once it works its way through your block heads.

On the bright side, you'll be able to tell your grandchildren of the Babadook who authored your scars...

curtis yarvin? who the **** is he any WHY should anyone even remotely care? do tell, master moron...

*GHETTOBLASTER » 10 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

10 minutes ago

The article you provided  begins by saying that DOGE has "gutted" the Federal work force.
I didn't read any further than that since I don't read or pay any attention to what looks like  Yellow Journalism.

https://www.statesman.com/story/news/po ... 187967007/
The government grew to 3MM employees under Biden

Next I asked Google to simply tell me how many Federal employees  have been either fired or laid off and none of the search results gave a straight answer to that question.
The articles I clicked on were peppered with speculation about how many employees  COULD get terminated....but none of your usual sources were willing to provide a plain and simple answer as to how many people have been terminated so far.

Maybe you could provide us with the grand total so that we can decide for ourselves if the Federal Gov. has in fact "BEEN GUTTED" by DOGE.

brown'll run like simp he is...
 

ROG62 » 18 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

18 minutes ago

brown'll run like simp he is...

Unless we can see what the  ratio is  of  [[layoffs / firings]] TO  [[3MM total jobs]]  is....how can we tell if this thread is or is not another case of CHICKEN LITTLE screaming at the sky...?
Let's play with the 3M number and say that DOGE has eliminated 30.000 jobs

That works out to only 1% of the total Federal work force which is in my opinion an unrealistically low percentage of all the totally worthless, useless  and redundant Government positions we have been supporting for generations.
The Government will ALWAYS have the highest ratio of supervisors and administrators  to "hands on workers" when compared to the Private Sector

Vegas » 50 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

50 minutes ago

 There it is—Grifticles’ Golden Shield:
“Demonstrate your understanding of the OP.”

Translation: “I have no answer, so I’m going to quiz you on something I barely explained myself.”

Here’s the thing: we did read it. You posted someone else’s ideas, stapled on a paragraph of “everyone else is dumb,” and called it a day.
What’s missing—as usual—is you. Your actual take. Your own analysis. Something beyond YouTube links and rhetorical backhands.So here’s your gentle reminder:
The person who posts the thread is the one expected to actually defend it, not hide behind it like it’s a riot shield.

Now go ahead and dodge again—I know the script.

Dodge 142

Your "question" betrays no understanding of the OP..

 

Blackvegetable » 8 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

8 minutes ago

Your "question" betrays no understanding of the OP..

 

You better re-read your post again. Obviously he didn't betray what he understood about the OP.

Blackvegetable » 8 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

8 minutes ago

Your "question" betrays no understanding of the OP..

Ah, of course. Now we’re in the “Your question doesn’t count” phase of the dodge spiral.
It’s amazing how every time you get backed into a corner, you suddenly become the OP comprehension gatekeeper.

Let’s be honest—your post was a Yarvin quote, a snarky shrug, and another jab at "slack jaws."

If you're going to pretend it was some masterwork of political philosophy, you're going to have to try harder than that.

Here’s your reminder:
Questions don’t need your permission to be valid.
They just need you to have the spine to answer them.

Which, judging by Dodge #143, is still pending.



1. Continue to hind behind another copout.

*GHETTOBLASTER » 50 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

50 minutes ago

The article you provided  begins by saying that DOGE has "gutted" the Federal work force.
I didn't read any further than that since I don't read or pay any attention to what looks like  Yellow Journalism.

https://www.statesman.com/story/news/po ... 187967007/
The government grew to 3MM employees under Biden

Next I asked Google to simply tell me how many Federal employees  have been either fired or laid off and none of the search results gave a straight answer to that question.
The articles I clicked on were peppered with speculation about how many employees  COULD get terminated....but none of your usual sources were willing to provide a plain and simple answer as to how many people have been terminated so far.

Maybe you could provide us with the grand total so that we can decide for ourselves if the Federal Gov. has in fact "BEEN GUTTED" by DOGE.

From Feb 2017 to Feb. 2021


Private Industry Payrolls - (1,900,000)

Total Non-Farm  - (2,500,000)

Federal Employees - 560,000

 

Vegas » 15 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

15 minutes ago

Ah, of course. Now we’re in the “Your question doesn’t count” phase of the dodge spiral.
It’s amazing how every time you get backed into a corner, you suddenly become the OP comprehension gatekeeper.

Let’s be honest—your post was a Yarvin quote, a snarky shrug, and another jab at "slack jaws."

If you're going to pretend it was some masterwork of political philosophy, you're going to have to try harder than that.

Here’s your reminder:
Questions don’t need your permission to be valid.
They just need you to have the spine to answer them.

Which, judging by Dodge #143, is still pending.

1. Continue to hind behind another copout.

It doesn't. 


 

Blackvegetable » 5 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

5 minutes ago

From Feb 2017 to Feb. 2021

Private Industry Payrolls - (1,900,000)

Total Non-Farm  - (2,500,000)

Federal Employees - 560,000

More evidence that you don't know what "net" means.

**** idiot. And **** your upcoming questions/demands/copy/paste. Your OP, your job. Coward. 

ROG62 » 51 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

51 minutes ago

curtis yarvin? who the **** is he any WHY should anyone even remotely care? do tell, master moron...

He tells the people who tell you how high to jump what to think.

Nod.