User talk:Flandres

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
New logo large.png Welcome to RationalWiki, Flandres!

Check out our guide for newcomers and our community standards!

Tell us how you found RationalWiki here!

If you are interested in contributing:

--Yisfidri (talk) 08:23, 14 December 2019 (UTC)


Because of your edits to and time on the wiki, Autopatrolled has been added to your user rights. This lets you bypass most of the abuse filters, bypass the CAPTCHA, and edit more frequently. If you have questions, bleat ask away.

We hope you enjoy your newfound ᴘᴏᴡᴇʀ — and these external tools:

  • Rbutr shows user-submitted rebuttals to your current webpage.
  • Google Scholar Button (Chrome, Firefox) searches your highlighted text in Google Scholar. Easily check academic citations!
  • and can save permanent copies of webpages. Never lose a crank website or racist Tweet ever again!

Also, thanks a bunch for catching what was probably my mistake on WWI. 🎄Chef Moosolini’s Ristorante Italiano🎄Ask about our holiday specials! 23:00, 28 December 2019 (UTC)


You on Discord? Oxyaena Harass 19:10, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Afraid not. Why?-Flandres (talk) 19:12, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
Just curious. Oxyaena Harass 01:31, 5 January 2020 (UTC)


The IWW, antifa, and the SRA say hello. Oxyaena Harass 13:09, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

And how close are any of those organizations from achieving their stated goals?Flandres (talk) 13:22, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
They've made quite some progress. You can't achieve anything by sitting on your ass and moaning all day. Oxyaena Harass 13:35, 29 April 2020 (UTC) what? corporations are still fundamentally predatory. Fascists still speak without fear of reprisal(But clearly milkshaking is a amazing revolutionary act). The grand edifice of capitalism still exists and will continue to exist(Joe Biden says hello).Flandres (talk) 13:40, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
If you want to enact change, you have to build it from the bottom up. You're too blackpilled. Oxyaena Harass 13:44, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
Considering the leftist political project of equality has had oh, around 200 years to make change from the bottom up and ideologies like social democracy kick your ass on the front of doing things for working class people("socialism like in northern Europe", for fucks sake socialism is like social democracy's deadbeat cousin), if i'm too black pilled maybe its because people like you constantly let me down by promising a utopia and falling whenever it counts. You know, I left behind depression and socialism at about the same time(well, other things were involved but no longer holding the world to an unachievable dream might have helped).Flandres (talk) 13:50, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
It's a fact history has a tendency to move left, you don't think the French Revolution, Haitian Revolution, American Revolution, Mexican Revolution, and Russian Revolution didn't ultimately have any long term effects? Of course it's a struggle, it's always been, don't give up now. Oxyaena Harass 14:20, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
No, history moves randomly and you rationalize as left after the fact because you are desperate to believe a utopia is around the corner. Was the spread of Hellenic civilization in the the former achaemenid empire "leftward"? Was the the destruction of Mycenaean Greece "leftward? This is just something you make uop after the fact, you are no better than some preacher who always believes this is a sign the prophesies within the Book of Revelation will come true because of some thing he over heard on the news.Flandres (talk) 14:27, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
False equivalency noted, and do you deny what the trend of history has been since the Reformation and Enlightenment? It used to be okay to own people as property, now it's not. It used to be okay to rape your spouse, now it's not. Oxyaena Harass 14:32, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
Its not a false equivalency, first, its the same psychological triumphalist reflex. Second, the reformation was not a trend leftward and you are an idiot if you think that. Third, the enlightenment was just a social movement-if monarchy did not last forever, why should its successor? You are dealing in artificial constructs, not facts.Flandres (talk) 14:37, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
The Reformation was a response to the decadence and corruption of the late Medieval and Renaissance era Church, rebelling against authority and trying to reassert more egalitarian versions of Christianity seems like a leftist move to me. What was the successor to feudalism? Capitalism. By your very same argument why should capitalism last forever? I am aware that the Enlightenment was just a social movement, but social movements have effects that trickle down through history. Oxyaena Harass 14:42, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
The reformation also involved greedy noblemen in north Germany entrenching local privileges to defy the holy roman emperor and saw the implementation of horrifically theocratic laws and protestants lynching Jews. Is that anti-hierarchical? Also, if capitalism will not last forever why must socialism inevitably replace it? social democracy is doing better than you in every way.Flandres (talk) 14:45, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
We're all human. The Reformation also involved the DiggersWikipedia, an early religious communist sect, and one priest, John Ball, was a proto-socialist who helped lead the Great Peasant's Revolt. Of course it isn't inevitable that socialism will replace capitalism, but I believe that it's worth fighting for anyways, so that when capitalism inevitably dies what comes after won't be horrible shit. We're at a crossroads in history, why have you given up the fight? Oxyaena Harass 14:50, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
For every digger on john ball there were a lot more Henry the VIIIs and Gustavus Adolphuses. Also, socialism tends to fail. I have little as is, and I will not invest that in a sinking ship(Bernie 2020 demonstrated that excellently). I have my own plans for the future, or this "crossroads," as you call it.Flandres (talk) 14:59, 29 April 2020 (UTC)


Do you know what "nemesis" means? A righteous infliction of retribution manifested by an appropriate agent. Personified in this case by an 'orrible cunt... me.
—Brick Top, Snatch

Felt appropriate given your reasoning for your vote in the coop :p. Sirius (dog star / Pencil.png / Tux icon.png / Shield.png) 08:59, 27 June 2020 (UTC)


You've been nominated to the RationalMedia Foundation election. Please accept or decline; if you accept, you may wish to campaign. Gunther1987 (talk) 11:16, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

I honestly[edit]

appreciate your fair-handed approach towards things. Thank you. Oxyaena Harass 17:42, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Are you from Belgium[edit]

? Iwillprobablygetbanned (Reply) 10:08, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

Not personally, though most of my paternal relatives still live there.-Flandres (talk) 11:46, 4 November 2020 (UTC)


I've talked to you a few times before when I wrote on this website more often, and I've read a lot of conversations you've had. I can't help but notice that your both impressively well informed and depressingly pessimistic. You interest me because of this, and I'm wondering when you believe humanity peaked. Nebuchadnezzar7658 (talk) 02:23, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank You for your interest! As for your question, I don't quite think humanity ever peaked per se(no part of history, no matter how prosperous at first glance, is free of horror and doom), but if I had to chose one would probably be either the 90s or the 50s, with the caveat both of those times were hardly as good as the common man remembers. You could lie to yourself into believing humanity was on a "upward spiral" or whatever.-Flandres (talk) 02:35, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
Interesting. I've read authors who assert that humans were better off in the neolithic. Returning to your apparent pessimism, how do you imagine the near or far future? Nebuchadnezzar7658 (talk) 02:43, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
Biden will implement short term fixes, not long term solutions. Things will go much more immediately worse, however, in other regions-economic instability tends to help authoritarianism surge in already vulnerable places. The world will not fall apart all at once-that is not how history works-but we are not heading into a new era of prosperity post-Trump. Of course the death star here is climate change. Most countries by now have some climate plan drafted but few of them are actually adequate, especially when this problem requires immediate action. Already in terms of committed warming alone, we have passed the point where subsistence farmers in developing countries, especially around the equator, are fucked. If you think there is a "refugee crisis" now, you are in for a nasty shock around 2050 or so. The 21st century is going to get a lot more unstable. Note this is not exhaustive.-Flandres (talk) 02:59, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
Firstly, I'm interested in your confidence that Biden will win. While the voting results look good for him, the GOP could still use the Supreme Court that they happened to have effectively hijacked. Secondly, I've spoken to you before about climate change. I remember you specifically stating that 'it will more greatly effect the future than any one political entity', and I think that's a fair judgement. This may sound bleak, but I reassure myself about this issue with the accurate understanding that mass extinction events only create a temporary (few million years) recession in biodiversity before new life tends to re-evolve. I have no doubt that the Earth will still be teeming with life a billion years from now. However, another interesting thing that will undoubtedly impact the immediate future is the rapidly declining human fertility rate. (source: This century, we will see a global sub-replacement fertility rate for the first time in human history. Fun! Nebuchadnezzar7658 (talk) 03:22, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
The supreme court scenario is entirely possible, but that requires a lawsuit reaching them first. Besides, so long as the new democratic congressional majority is small enough to still be vulnerable to filibuster style sabotage tricks(so court packing and whatnot would be unlikely), Trump served his purpose-he appointed numerous judges that will stymie economic regulation, social progress, and climate action for quite some time. They can abandon him now. Chief Justice Roberts(who is very concerned with making the supreme court look "objective") can sacrifice him to look good knowing the long term damage to the right-wing political project is containable.-Flandres (talk) 03:39, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
What do you think about the two other things I mentioned? Nebuchadnezzar7658 (talk) 03:44, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
I agree the damage to the biosphere will be recovered from even if what emerges from this disaster will be very different from what entered it-in fact, I find that interesting rather than bleak. Sub replacement fertility rate...that is quite the variable. My projections can only account for so much, though you could argue that is a stabilizing influence depending on how it comes about despite my usual pessimism. Of course, lowering population would be much more problematic if it is not accompanied by serious economic redistribution measures I am not seeing happening right now. I don't think human extinction is on the horizon, if that is what you are getting at(though some of our favorite luxury crops are not so lucky).-Flandres (talk) 04:08, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
What kind of economic measures do you think would eventually need to be taken? Judging by the article I cited, China will be impacted most by population decline over the next few decades. The one-child policy they implemented a while ago had serious unintended consequences, mainly a gender skew, but their economy is currently fine. Nebuchadnezzar7658 (talk) 05:13, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
Well, actively encouraging immigration is at least a start. Of course, it would be nice if we did not lapse into nativist politics and treat these people like crap.-Flandres (talk) 05:41, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
Interesting. Well, I appreciate the discussion. While I'd very much like to keep bringing up other subjects to keep the dialogue going, I understand that this is sufficient. Despite your relentless pessimism, the existence of people like you makes me slightly less pessimistic. I appreciate your presence on this wiki and wish you well. 💚 Nebuchadnezzar7658 (talk) 06:10, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

This might be a weird question[edit]

You know when we were talking about Venezeula on the Ilhan Omar talk page and I admitted I was wrong. Yeah I noticed you reverted the part where I said I was wrong. Like did I break any of RW's rules there or?Evilatheistheathen (talk) 11:23, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Wait, what? I thought you reverted that yourself. That's what it says when I pull up the fossil record anyway...-Flandres (talk) 13:23, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
Yep looked over it again and it says I did. I can't even remember doing that either. Well, eh, sorry for the inconvenience lol.Evilatheistheathen (talk) 03:01, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

For not picking up on LT's obvious sockpuppetry[edit]

Rainbow trout transparent.png Whack!
You've been whacked with a wet trout.

Don't take this too seriously. Somebody just wants to let you know you did something silly.

If you had looked at their mindless generic wandalism, you would have seen that this user was not just worthy of a short-term block; it was LT. --Goatspeed. How's my editingCircularREmail2.gifasoningMy experiments 00:06, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Buckly and "right of reason"[edit]

OK, yeah, he wasn't that moderate, but, if you ignore the meaning of the actual words, he just sounded so authoritative and reasonable ... or is that patrician and condescending. 2601:285:8380:1AC8:D5A5:15FE:2810:8FBA (talk) 21:00, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Honestly, that describes far too many people usually held up as "sane" or "moderate" conservatives/right-wingers.-Flandres (talk) 21:06, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

My mistake[edit]

I pinged you on accident. Mea culpa. Oxyaena Harass 13:52, 15 December 2020 (UTC)