US Current Events November: D&D's Afghanistan

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > US Current Events November: D&D's Afghanistan

Alkydere: Jun 7, 2010; Capitol: A building or complex of buildings in which any legislature meets.
Capital: A city designated as a legislative seat by the government or some other authority, often the city in which the government is located; otherwise the most important city within a country or a subdivision of it.

CommieGIR posted:

Lmao, wonder how this will affect OPEC's temper tantrum.

I was wondering this too. I'm all for Biden continuing to not meet with their prince or whatever else it was that set them off.

# ? Nov 27, 2021 00:50

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 24, 2024 06:03

Majorian: Jul 1, 2009

KillHour posted:

I find it doubtful that a general strike would lead to a greater deficit in labor than the current labor shortage and that laws won't be put in place to ensure backup labor or logistic routes exist. I'm not claiming there's a strike, I'm claiming that this is roughly equivalent to a really bad general strike and all it's done is make electronics expensive and impossible to buy.

Well, but a general strike doesn't need to lead to a greater deficit in labor than we're seeing now to have a greater impact; it needs to be more strategically concentrated. Imagine if it wasn't just electronics that were impossible to buy, but something more vital. Given how dysfunctional the government currently is (and likely will be for the foreseeable future), I'm not convinced that they can enact laws to cover all their bases when it comes to preventing a crippling strike. I may be wrong on that, but that's part of why we plan and organize for an extended period of time: to account for these different contingencies.

quote:

What probably should happen is that the ports should be nationalized since they're obviously of extreme strategic importance. This would be good for workers, consumers and the economy but would also protect capitalism. It seems like a win-win but we're also really stupid so it probably won't happen.

I definitely agree with this, but the fact that it's such an unlikely thing to actually happen makes me feel more confident that the government won't have an adequate response.

# ? Nov 27, 2021 00:54

-Blackadder-: Jan 2, 2007; Game....Blouses.

The New Yorker did some solid journalism into Edward Durr, the New Jersey truck driver who beat the 20 year incumbent democrat, who was the state senate president. It's a good piece because it highlights some interesting key issues in the practice of modern politics.

quote:

In the November 2nd election for New Jersey�s Third Senate District, the Democrat, Steve Sweeney, had twenty years of incumbency on his side, including twelve years as State Senate president�the longest tenure in that position in state history. A self-described social moderate and fiscal conservative, he has been an ally of George Norcross, an insurance executive and the longtime political boss of South Jersey. Sweeney thrived working opposite governors of both parties, cutting deals with Chris Christie and acting as a check on some of the more progressive ambitions of the current Democratic governor, Phil Murphy. In 2017, when Sweeney was last up for re�lection, New Jersey�s largest teacher�s union, angered by his opposition to increased spending on public-employee pensions, spent more than five million dollars in an attempt to unseat him. The Third District�s voters re�lected Sweeney by eighteen points.

This year, Sweeney�s Republican challenger was Ed Durr, a fifty-eight-year-old truck driver for Raymour & Flanigan, the furniture chain. Durr, who ran unsuccessfully for the state assembly in 2017 and 2019, has said that he was originally motivated to seek office to loosen the state�s gun-control laws. Leading up to the election, he had spent only a few thousand dollars on the race. He shot a campaign video using a cell phone, and the state Republican Party never officially endorsed him. Durr beat Sweeney by three points, the equivalent of some two thousand votes, thanks to a late surge of Republican voter enthusiasm that brought down several Democratic candidates in the state and forced Murphy to sweat out a closer-than-expected victory.

Durr�s victory attracted instant media attention. The press camped outside his house, in Logan Township, and tweeted about him walking his three pit bulls. He appeared on Fox News, and turned down an interview request from the Times. The Atlantic worried what his victory meant for populism, while the Washington Post wondered what it said about the state of local news. �Saturday Night Live� made fun of his last name. (�Coincidentally, �Durr� is also the New Jersey state motto,� Michael Che said, grinning, during a �Weekend Update� segment.) Former President Donald Trump called to speak with him directly. (�Anything I can do, you let me know, O.K.?� Trump told him. �Thank you very much, sir,� Durr responded. �And you know you can call me at any time.�)

New Jersey�s political class was stunned. �I don�t know what happened,� Loretta Weinberg, the Democratic majority leader in the State Senate, who has served in the legislature since 1992, said. Of the Third District�s voters, she added, �I�m not sure that they know who they voted for.� Speaking to the Times, Norcross sounded defensive. �There was nothing that could have been anticipated or done,� he said. �It�s not like we didn�t have the money available to do it.�

One South Jersey Republican called Durr�s victory �the biggest thing that has ever happened in Jersey, and will ever happen in Jersey politically.� Durr himself seemed most stunned of all. �I joked with people and I said, �I�m going to shock the world. I�m going to beat this man,� � Durr told a reporter. �I was saying it but really kind of joking. Because what chance did a person like me really stand against this man?�

And then reporters began combing through Durr�s social-media posts. �Mohammed was a pedophile!� he tweeted, in September, 2019. �Islam is a false religion! Only fools follow muslim teachings! It is a cult of hate!� In other posts, he argued that there had been �thugs� on �both sides� of the 2017 white-supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia; compared covid-19-vaccine mandates to the Holocaust; referred to Chelsea Manning, the trans activist and government whistle-blower, as �shim�; and suggested that Kamala Harris had only reached the office of Vice-President because of her race and gender. The January 6th riot at the U.S. Capitol, he wrote on Facebook, earlier this year, was �not an insurrection� but �an unauthorized entry by undocumented federal employers!� His Twitter and Facebook accounts soon came down. Three days after the election, he issued an apology. �I�m a passionate guy and I sometimes say things in the heat of the moment,� he said. �If I said things in the past that hurt anybody�s feelings, I sincerely apologize.� That same day, he was back at work, driving his truck. He�d used up his vacation time during the election.

Last week, I visited the Raymour & Flanigan distribution center in Gibbstown, New Jersey, where Durr works. It was easy to find people who spoke of his election with a touch of awe in their voice. One young man, smoking a cigarette in the parking lot, asked if I was looking for Ed Durr the father or the son. (Durr�s son works at the same facility.) A few minutes� drive away, Durr�s small blue house sits at the end of a winding road. His mother lives next door. His father, whom Durr credited with inspiring him to run for office, died just a few weeks ago. Durr recently told the Washington Examiner that his parents were both Kennedy Democrats who became Reagan Republicans. A motorcycle, an aging Ford Mustang, and an S.U.V. bearing �Edward Durr 4 Senate� stickers on its front doors were parked in Durr�s driveway. A Gadsden flag flew just below the Stars and Stripes on a flagpole. The interstate was visible just beyond the back yard. When I knocked on the door, I heard dogs going crazy. Someone pulled a window open. �Ed�s not here,� a woman said, wearily. As she closed the window, I heard her implore the dogs to relax.

Later that day, Durr was scheduled to meet with with Muslim community leaders, including Selaedin Maksut, the executive director of the New Jersey chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, at the Al-Minhal Academy for Islamic Education, in Sewell, a few towns over. (Shortly after Durr�s tweets surfaced, Maksut had issued a statement saying, �Mr. Durr will soon be a state senator in New Jersey, and so, I believe it is in everyone�s best interest to engage him in conversation and not let the matter go unchecked.�) In the parking lot, the sky turned purple and yellow as the sun went down over the strip malls. Local-news cameramen and reporters busied themselves with equipment checks and small talk. Several were incredulous that Sweeney�s campaign hadn�t uncovered Durr�s tweets before the election. �A thirty-second spot on TV for a week before Election Day probably would have sunk him,� one said, shaking his head. Another replied, �And Sweeney would have won, and we wouldn�t be here.�

A few people working at nearby businesses got curious about the TV-news vans and drove over to investigate. �What�s going on here?� Jeanne Levonchuck, the manager of a nearby store, asked me, from the driver�s seat of a gray sedan. She wore glasses and an American-flag lanyard around her neck, and smiled when she heard Durr�s name. I asked if she�d voted for him. �Well, let�s just say I didn�t vote for Sweeney,� Levonchuck said. She�d lived all her life in Gloucester County, in the Third District. She was a Trump fan��I do miss Donald,� she said�and knew Sweeney from her time working for the Gloucester County Special Services School District. �He was the man who supposedly made the school,� she told me. She�d voted for him in the past, but not this year. �I don�t like the man,� she said. �He thought that he was a god. All terrible. Almighty.�

Oof, textbook Dems being incompetent/lazy at campaigning? Couldn't have guessed there was going to be a red wave? Literally everyone's been talking about the Dems getting drilled in the midterms for at least a year.

quote:

Around 6 p.m., Durr and Maksut walked out to the parking lot, trailed by a group of solemn-faced men and women. Maksut, in a blue sports coat, spoke first. �I just want to say thank you, Mr. Durr, for meeting us out here,� he said. �I think we had a very productive conversation.� Durr nodded. �I believe we made some progress,� Durr said. He seemed nervous, and spoke haltingly. In his hand, he held a Quran. �I just want to make the little statement to you guys, as far as this goes, as I reiterated to the group inside, that I stand against Islamophobia and all forms of hate,� he said. �And I do commit to that.� A reporter asked him what the discussion inside had been like. Durr said that it had been �open,� and that everyone in the room had been able to �get a sense of� one another. �It�s very easy to hate somebody that you don�t know,� Durr said. �But if you know them personally, and you talk to them�very hard to hate them. Don�t you think? That�s progress, right?� I asked Durr why he thought it was easy to hate people from a distance. �Because you just don�t know,� he said. �You�re in your own bubble.�

I approached Durr after the press conference. He said that he could give me two minutes�his wife was sick, and he�d been away from her for �a good five hours.� Then he asked me a question. �Do you like paying taxes?� he said. �Tell me you like paying taxes.� I told him that I appreciated what taxes paid for: subways, roads, schools, hospitals. Durr, who sports a well-kempt goatee, had removed his suit jacket and stood in suspenders. He furrowed his brow like I was the biggest chump he�d ever seen. �They don�t pay for all that,� he said, leaning toward me. �Your taxes go into people�s pockets.�

I mentioned police departments, trying to think of a government expenditure he might support. �There are things in the police department that need to be addressed, too, that are a waste,� Durr said. �I mean, there are wastes all over. You are not going to tell me that there isn�t waste.� I asked him what he thought his election meant. I�d been thinking of other notable political upsets, including Dave Brat�s Republican-primary victory over House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, of Virginia, in 2014, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez�s primary win over the House Democratic Caucus chair Joe Crowley, of New York, in 2018. Both had upended party power structures. Durr said he hadn�t been paying attention to politics back in Brat�s day, but that he would �equate� his election with Ocasio-Cortez�s, �even though she and I are politically different.�

On my drive home, I called Maksut, to hear more details about the meeting. �We explained to him our point of view,� he told me. �That this kind of hate speech can lead to violence.� Maksut said that he�d told Durr a story about his grandmother, who wears a hijab, being hit in the face with a purse at a shopping center in North Jersey. �My grandma�s been told to go home, back to her country, that she�s a terrorist, that she doesn�t speak English, even though she speaks seven different languages,� he said. The group had prayed while Durr was with them. �We prayed the evening prayer,� Maksut said. �He started asking questions about the religion. We started sharing stories about the Prophet Muhammad, who he called a pedophile.� I asked Maksut if he had a sense of where Durr had picked up this tired, hateful trope. �We can�t forget that Trump was President for four years,� he said. �The man who said, �I think Islam hates us.� �

Here we have the quintessential uninformed right-wing everyman getting his first taste of the real world and finding out that it's not a facebook meme. How incredibly easy it is for people who don't know poo poo about poo poo to be lead down the wrong path by the Tucker Carlsons.

quote:

On Thursday, I spoke with Sweeney on the phone. �It was a red tide,� he said. �That�s the only way to explain it.� He mentioned a recent NJ Advance Media analysis of his district, which showed that Republican registration went up some thirty per cent in the past four years, while Democratic registration rose only twelve per cent. Southwestern New Jersey is poorer, more rural, and whiter than other areas of the state�bad conditions lately for the Democratic Party. Sweeney had received about as many votes this year as he did when he won re�lection in 2017, but thousands of additional voters had come out. �My district has been a Republican district from the day I won it,� Sweeney said. �I would love to point at something like �I should have done this� or �I really screwed up here.� But it had nothing to do with it.�

One South Jersey Democrat told me that he thought Sweeney had been too focussed on helping other Democratic candidates, rather than focussing on his own race. Sweeney acknowledged that much of the money he had spent during the campaign had gone to help the two assembly members in his district��We run as a team,� he said�and he bemoaned the loss of local news coverage. �We used to have local papers,� he said. �And people used to be able to read about all of these wonderful things that were going on.� Progressives in the state were looking at Sweeney�s defeat as evidence of the political dangers of centrism. Sweeney saw it the other way around. He talked about the minimum wage, paid family leave, and green-energy initiatives. �Listen, I�m not a progressive,� he said. �But Phil Murphy�not one piece of legislation that he championed didn�t get passed by me to get to him.�

On the subject of Durr, Sweeney felt strongly that voters in the Third District were simply voting for the Republican and against the Democrat. �It wasn�t a vote for someone,� he said. �It was a vote against someone.� Sweeney talked about his daughter, who has Down syndrome, and said that he�d got into politics in the first place to champion the rights of the disabled. I asked him how many people in his district he thought knew that. �In my mind, it wasn�t people saying, like, �I don�t like Steve Sweeney,� � he said. �I really don�t believe that. It was, �You guys aren�t listening to us.� �

I mentioned that one of his constituents had told me that she thought Sweeney had become too much of a big shot, and had lost touch with his district. �The woman you talked to,� Sweeney said, �she voted for me before but she really doesn�t know why she voted for Durr. I got too big for my britches? Really? In what way? They wouldn�t be able to describe it to you.�

What's funny is that he thinks he's proving his own point, when he's actually doing the opposite. This is the political world we live in. If you want to succeed electorally in that world you have to do it under those given constraints. Whining that the voters are too stupid and uninformed to know what good things you've done for them, or that they make decisions based on vague, hand wavey snap perceptions of candidates rather than logic and rationality is completely pointless. It doesn't matter if voters' decision calculus is at the kindergarten level. If the metric voters use to decide which candidate to vote for is who can hold their breath the longest then you better have a stopwatch, Olympic swim coach advisor, and already be practicing. Otherwise you get truck drivers and reality tv stars leading the country into the climate apocalypse, while you sit at home on your couch pointing out the incredibly useful tidbit that the upcoming collapse of civilization is actually the voters fault for not being smart enough to realize how great a candidate you were.

-Blackadder- fucked around with this message at 04:05 on Nov 27, 2021

# ? Nov 27, 2021 01:01

F_Shit_Fitzgerald: Feb 2, 2017

KillHour posted:

Systems don't reform themselves. The things you said are how you reform the system. You're not "smashing capitalism" by donating time and money to the DSA, you're slowly and steadily reforming it and pushing for incremental change. In the same way that we're not all huddled around our guns waiting for the polls to strike 51% so we can march to the Whitehouse and depose Biden, we're not filling up some arbitrary "defeat capitalism" progress bar where the DSA getting enough funding causes Mecha-Marx to rise up out of the ocean and institute communism. Forcing the system to listen to your demands is reforming it. That's the definition of reform. You're just upset at the pace of progress and my sincere advice is to find some things that bring you peace outside of this thread to occupy your brain because you're not going to be helping anybody if you burn out in a few years. Do what you can, but don't let it drive you to the point of despair.

I come to bury Caesar; not praise him. I have no interest in �reforming� a system that leaves people hungry, homeless, medically bankrupt, and disenfranchised from voting. But if I can do what I can to help these problems on the local scale while agitating for socialism, I hope I�m doing better than any of the useless elites we call �representatives�.

F_Shit_Fitzgerald fucked around with this message at 01:19 on Nov 27, 2021

# ? Nov 27, 2021 01:07

Gucci Loafers: May 20, 2006; Ask yourself, do you really want to talk to pair of really nice gaudy shoes?

A big flaming stink posted:

This is functionally identical to climate denialism

Let's look at this further, he's a better summarization of our progress.

https://twitter.com/benyeohben/status/1463127810952806405?s=20

quote:

Then the other area which you sort of teed up earlier is around where we're headed in terms of emissions. About a decade ago, which is when the previous IPCC report came and a little before that in particular when the previous generation of emission scenarios were being created by researchers, it seemed we're in for a pretty dark climate future. Global emissions have increased by 30 percent over the 2000s and were increasing by three percent a year. Global coal use had almost doubled. China was building a new coal plant every three days and the idea that the 21st century would be dominated by coal and we could end up with doubling or even tripling emissions by the end of the century didn't seem that far-fetched and so those were scenarios where scientists thought we could end up at four or five C warming.

Flash forward about a decade and we're in a very different world right now. Global coal use peaked back in 2013 and the IAA has recently estimated that it's in structural decline going forward. Clean energy like wind and solar is the cheapest new form of energy of the margin in many places around the world and global emissions have been relatively flat for the last decade. Fossil fuel emissions have been increasing by only about one percent compared to three percent for the prior decade and emissions from land use, according to our most recent estimates, have actually been slightly decreasing. Mostly balancing out the increase in fossil fuel use. So, it seems like the world is now entering a long plateau in emissions rather than continuing increasing emissions driven by a combination of falling clean energy prices and governments enacting stronger policies to actually start dealing with climate change in a much more meaningful way than they were a decade ago.

# ? Nov 27, 2021 01:08

Craig K: Nov 10, 2016; puck

aas Bandit posted:

Are you a mod?

oh good christ no, i actually prefer to solve problems

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

# ? Nov 27, 2021 01:08

Fister Roboto: Feb 21, 2008

How are u posted:

How's that? There are no people to subjugate out there in our little slice of space.

What makes you so certain? There could be other forms of life that we're not even aware of, that we might destroy or drastically alter by colonizing other planets, even if by accident. And even if their aren't, what gives us the "birthright", as you say, to go to other planets and gently caress them up? Others pointed it out - this is the rhetoric of manifest destiny.

Your attitude is not exactly the same as that of the European colonizers, but it is shockingly similar. They justified their atrocities by dehumanizing the native peoples, and you're justifying it by claiming as a matter of fact that there is no other life out there. The idea that we have some "right" to conquer whatever world we please is an inherently destructive belief, and if that's what we take with us to the stars, then it absolutely will evolve into conquering other life forms if we find them.

But more than that, your beliefs show a complete lack of understanding of the problems that we face today. As if all we have to do is clean up our own planet a little bit and then we can be on our merry way to tarnish and despoil countless others.

Tell me, do you think that we should abolish capitalism before we spread to the stars? Or do you think that we should bring it with us - an ideology that exists solely to chew up lives and resources and convert them into immense profits for a small handful of people?

# ? Nov 27, 2021 01:53

Gumball Gumption: Jan 7, 2012

-Blackadder- posted:

The New Yorker did some solid journalism into Edward Durr, the New Jersey truck driver who beat the 20 year incumbent democrat, who was the state senate president. It's a good piece because it highlights some interesting key issues in the practice of modern politics.

Oof, textbook Dems being incompetent/lazy at campaigning? Couldn't have guessed there was going to be a red wave? Literally everyone's been talking about the Dems getting drilled in the midterms for at least a year.

Here we have the quintessential uninformed right-wing everyman getting his first taste of the real world and finding out that it's not a facebook meme. How incredibly easy it is for people who don't know poo poo about poo poo to be lead down the wrong path by the Tucker Carlsons.

What's funny is that he thinks he's proving his own point, when he's actually doing the opposite. This is the political world we live in. If you want to succeed electorally in that world you have to do it under those given constraints. Whining that the voters are too stupid and uninformed to know what good things you've done for them, or that they make decisions based on vague, hand wavey snap perceptions of candidates rather than logic and rationality is completely pointless. It doesn't matter if voters' decision calculus is at the kindergarten level. If the metric voters use to decide which candidate to vote for is who can hold their breath the longest then you better have a stopwatch, Olympic swim coach advisor, and already be practicing. Otherwise you get truck drivers and reality tv stars leading the country into the climate apocalypse, while you sit at home on your couch pointing out the incredibly useful tidbit that the upcoming collapse of civilization is actually the voters fault for not being smart enough to realize how great a candidate you were.

Honestly wild that he could lose like this and still have no introspection into why.

# ? Nov 27, 2021 01:55

Angry_Ed: Mar 30, 2010; Grimey Drawer

-Blackadder- posted:

The New Yorker did some solid journalism into Edward Durr, the New Jersey truck driver who beat the 20 year incumbent democrat, who was the state senate president. It's a good piece because it highlights some interesting key issues in the practice of modern politics.

Oof, textbook Dems being incompetent/lazy at campaigning? Couldn't have guessed there was going to be a red wave? Literally everyone's been talking about the Dems getting drilled in the midterms for at least a year.

Here we have the quintessential uninformed right-wing everyman getting his first taste of the real world and finding out that it's not a facebook meme. How incredibly easy it is for people who don't know poo poo about poo poo to be lead down the wrong path by the Tucker Carlsons.

What's funny is that he thinks he's proving his own point, when he's actually doing the opposite. This is the political world we live in. If you want to succeed electorally in that world you have to do it under those given constraints. Whining that the voters are too stupid and uninformed to know what good things you've done for them, or that they make decisions based on vague, hand wavey snap perceptions of candidates rather than logic and rationality is completely pointless. It doesn't matter if voters' decision calculus is at the kindergarten level. If the metric voters use to decide which candidate to vote for is who can hold their breath the longest then you better have a stopwatch, Olympic swim coach advisor, and already be practicing. Otherwise you get truck drivers and reality tv stars leading the country into the climate apocalypse, while you sit at home on your couch pointing out the incredibly useful tidbit that the upcoming collapse of civilization is actually the voters fault for not being smart enough to realize how great a candidate you were.

And the "best" part is Sweeney was unopposed in his primary so in theory a progressive could've unseated him. There's probably hundreds of long-term incumbent dems who their constituents view as out of touch and could, possibly, be replaced by someone more left/more progressive. We just* need people to run for things.

EDIT*: There is obviously more to it than that but that is the most important step.

Angry_Ed fucked around with this message at 02:10 on Nov 27, 2021

# ? Nov 27, 2021 01:59

A big flaming stink: Apr 26, 2010

Lmao, almost literally "No, it's the voters who are wrong."

# ? Nov 27, 2021 02:01

How are u: May 19, 2005; by Azathoth

Fister Roboto posted:

What makes you so certain? There could be other forms of life that we're not even aware of, that we might destroy or drastically alter by colonizing other planets, even if by accident. And even if their aren't, what gives us the "birthright", as you say, to go to other planets and gently caress them up? Others pointed it out - this is the rhetoric of manifest destiny.

Your attitude is not exactly the same as that of the European colonizers, but it is shockingly similar. They justified their atrocities by dehumanizing the native peoples, and you're justifying it by claiming as a matter of fact that there is no other life out there. The idea that we have some "right" to conquer whatever world we please is an inherently destructive belief, and if that's what we take with us to the stars, then it absolutely will evolve into conquering other life forms if we find them.

But more than that, your beliefs show a complete lack of understanding of the problems that we face today. As if all we have to do is clean up our own planet a little bit and then we can be on our merry way to tarnish and despoil countless others.

Tell me, do you think that we should abolish capitalism before we spread to the stars? Or do you think that we should bring it with us - an ideology that exists solely to chew up lives and resources and convert them into immense profits for a small handful of people?

I dunno, friend, I think this is pretty small minded, myopic thinking to be honest. Of course we shouldn't gently caress with life if we find it, that's an absolute given, a bedrock assumption. If we don't find life, though, then who the hell cares if we colonize rocks here and there? It's just empty land, there's absolutely no reason to hold it up as some kind of pristine Eden unsullied by rotten human hands.

We absolutely do have the right to go out and spread ourselves out amongst our solar system. Nobody else contests it. Nobody else, as far as we know right now, exists at all. I don't think humanity is some kind of poison or plague that needs to be bottled up at home. No, I reject that outright. I don't know what type of global social-economic paradigm will exist at the time that we start going out there to live, but I doubt it'll be Marxism or some truly classless idealized society free of pain and want. That just doesn't seem likely to me, though I'd certainly be in favor of it!

We are explorers, we are expanders. We'll be going out there, because there are people who want to do it. People who don't have such a narrow, small-minded, and self loathing view of humanity.

# ? Nov 27, 2021 02:21

Ghost Leviathan: Mar 2, 2017; Exploration is ill-advised.

How are u posted:

I dunno, friend, I think this is pretty small minded, myopic thinking to be honest. Of course we shouldn't gently caress with life if we find it, that's an absolute given, a bedrock assumption. If we don't find life, though, then who the hell cares if we colonize rocks here and there? It's just empty land, there's absolutely no reason to hold it up as some kind of pristine Eden unsullied by rotten human hands.

We absolutely do have the right to go out and spread ourselves out amongst our solar system. Nobody else contests it. Nobody else, as far as we know right now, exists at all. I don't think humanity is some kind of poison or plague that needs to be bottled up at home. No, I reject that outright. I don't know what type of global social-economic paradigm will exist at the time that we start going out there to live, but I doubt it'll be Marxism or some truly classless idealized society free of pain and want. That just doesn't seem likely to me, though I'd certainly be in favor of it!

We are explorers, we are expanders. We'll be going out there, because there are people who want to do it. People who don't have such a narrow, small-minded, and self loathing view of humanity.

We do not have a society that can support any of these things. Capitalism will, and is, destroying everything that can support it as we speak.

# ? Nov 27, 2021 02:30

Gumball Gumption: Jan 7, 2012

You do not want to live in space. You will not like living in a space ship, you will not like living on a planet that can't naturally support life, you will not like what space will do to your body. If you think "technology" will solve these problems you have such a thorough lack of understanding of the physics of space and what space travel requires no one should take you seriously.

# ? Nov 27, 2021 02:43

the_steve: Nov 9, 2005; We're always hiring!

A big flaming stink posted:

Lmao, almost literally "No, it's the voters who are wrong."

It's the same bafflement as when Hillary lost. In their mind, they can not fail, they can only be failed.

# ? Nov 27, 2021 03:00

Herstory Begins Now: Aug 5, 2003; SOME REALLY TEDIOUS DUMB SHIT THAT SUCKS ASS TO READ ->>

Craig K posted:

oh good christ no, i actually prefer to solve problems

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

this owns

rip craigk lmao

# ? Nov 27, 2021 03:06

How are u: May 19, 2005; by Azathoth

Ghost Leviathan posted:

We do not have a society that can support any of these things. Capitalism will, and is, destroying everything that can support it as we speak.

I'm not so sure about that. Maybe? Maybe not. I suppose we'll find out over the course of our lifetimes.

# ? Nov 27, 2021 03:13

DeadlyMuffin: Jul 3, 2007

Willa Rogers posted:

No one's "forcing me to vote a certain way"; only preventing any option for president other than a senile, racist rapist.

And yes, I do believe that the systemic rot that locks us into the perpetual "choice" of voting for a senile, racist rapist as president is worse than a one-day protest. I'm not dying on a hill, only pointing out how ludicrous it is to whinge about 1/6 as the end of the world--or as the end of democracy--given our current system.

The two party system isn't new. It's a consequence of the first past the post system. The two major part candidates are always lovely compromises because the two major parties are essentially coalitions formed before the election. That's why primaries are important.

This past electorial cycle came quite close to being brazenly stolen, culminating in the capitol building getting overrun during certification of the votes.

That is new, and is a huge step in the wrong direction that, rightfully concerns a lot of people.

I get that the libs being upset by it means that you need to be for it, or it needs to not be a big deal, but downplaying the biggest threat to the peaceful transfer of power in my lifetime (and I'm betting yours) to own the libs is pathetic.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

# ? Nov 27, 2021 03:16

Willa Rogers: Mar 11, 2005

lmao, Bush/Gore was a far greater threat to a peaceful transfer of power (and to the myth of a functional democracy) than a hundred chuds storming the Capitol.

# ? Nov 27, 2021 03:20

Gatts: Jan 2, 2001; Goodnight Moon; Nap Ghost

Gumball Gumption posted:

You do not want to live in space. You will not like living in a space ship, you will not like living on a planet that can't naturally support life, you will not like what space will do to your body. If you think "technology" will solve these problems you have such a thorough lack of understanding of the physics of space and what space travel requires no one should take you seriously.

Thus far!

Throw a few hundred trillion into it over 50 years for grift, tell them there are green skinned slave girls out there (and oil), and we'll get to artificial gravity and replicators in no time!

For all the talk about finding a planet that supports life, the universe gave dead worlds to seed life and develop in abundance so we could create. Too bad about human nature though.

Gatts fucked around with this message at 03:23 on Nov 27, 2021

# ? Nov 27, 2021 03:21

Gumball Gumption: Jan 7, 2012

DeadlyMuffin posted:

The two party system isn't new. It's a consequence of the first past the post system. The two major part candidates are always lovely compromises because the two major parties are essentially coalitions formed before the election. That's why primaries are important.

This past electorial cycle came quite close to being brazenly stolen, culminating in the capitol building getting overrun during certification of the votes.

That is new, and is a huge step in the wrong direction that, rightfully concerns a lot of people.

I get that the libs being upset by it means that you need to be for it, or it needs to not be a big deal, but downplaying the biggest threat to the peaceful transfer of power in my lifetime (and I'm betting yours) to own the libs is pathetic.

People can just believe things that are different from you. Not every differing opinion is an attempt to own you.

# ? Nov 27, 2021 03:21

Fister Roboto: Feb 21, 2008

How are u posted:

I dunno, friend, I think this is pretty small minded, myopic thinking to be honest. Of course we shouldn't gently caress with life if we find it, that's an absolute given, a bedrock assumption. If we don't find life, though, then who the hell cares if we colonize rocks here and there? It's just empty land, there's absolutely no reason to hold it up as some kind of pristine Eden unsullied by rotten human hands.

We absolutely do have the right to go out and spread ourselves out amongst our solar system. Nobody else contests it. Nobody else, as far as we know right now, exists at all. I don't think humanity is some kind of poison or plague that needs to be bottled up at home. No, I reject that outright. I don't know what type of global social-economic paradigm will exist at the time that we start going out there to live, but I doubt it'll be Marxism or some truly classless idealized society free of pain and want. That just doesn't seem likely to me, though I'd certainly be in favor of it!

We are explorers, we are expanders. We'll be going out there, because there are people who want to do it. People who don't have such a narrow, small-minded, and self loathing view of humanity.

The problem is that you're assuming that there is no life out there. By the time we discover truly alien life on other worlds, it could be too late, we could have already destroyed them with our presence. Kind of like how Europeans wiped out millions of indigenous people with smallpox without even being aware of it.

I don't think that humanity is a plague, but we don't exactly have a great track record of not destroying every place we expand to, especially in the last 500 years. We're not the benevolent Star Trek explorers that you seem to think we are, either. We have brought death and destruction to the entire globe and countless lives, and extinguished millions of species, and unless we change some really fundamental changes to our society and culture, we're just going to do the same thing in space.

And you're dodging the question about capitalism. Do you think that it would be acceptable if we settled other worlds under a capitalist system? Yes or no.

I'd also really like you to explain exactly why you think that we have a "right" to conquer other worlds, because you keep repeating it as some kind of fundamental truth. Where does this right come from? Did God give it to us?

# ? Nov 27, 2021 03:24

socialsecurity: Aug 30, 2003

Willa Rogers posted:

lmao, Bush/Gore was a far greater threat to a peaceful transfer of power (and to the myth of a functional democracy) than a hundred chuds storming the Capitol.

Yeah? That was also 20 years ago so it doesn't get brought up much in this here current events thread, what is your point exactly?

# ? Nov 27, 2021 03:26

Epic High Five: Jun 5, 2004

We probably wouldnt even recognize alien life. We definitely wouldn't be able to communicate with it

*in Read Settlers guy voice* Read Solaris

# ? Nov 27, 2021 03:29

Sedisp: Jun 20, 2012

How are u posted:

I dunno, friend, I think this is pretty small minded, myopic thinking to be honest. Of course we shouldn't gently caress with life if we find it, that's an absolute given, a bedrock assumption. If we don't find life, though, then who the hell cares if we colonize rocks here and there? It's just empty land, there's absolutely no reason to hold it up as some kind of pristine Eden unsullied by rotten human hands.

We absolutely do have the right to go out and spread ourselves out amongst our solar system. Nobody else contests it. Nobody else, as far as we know right now, exists at all. I don't think humanity is some kind of poison or plague that needs to be bottled up at home. No, I reject that outright. I don't know what type of global social-economic paradigm will exist at the time that we start going out there to live, but I doubt it'll be Marxism or some truly classless idealized society free of pain and want. That just doesn't seem likely to me, though I'd certainly be in favor of it!

We are explorers, we are expanders. We'll be going out there, because there are people who want to do it. People who don't have such a narrow, small-minded, and self loathing view of humanity.

You're speaking in a timescale that is probably in the centuries not in a century or two. Like until you figure out space magic like the Expanse or whatever hand wave science fiction sets up to explain why we can now get to mars in a time span that doesn't include the word year for a round trip you're colonizing nothing.

# ? Nov 27, 2021 03:33

Willa Rogers: Mar 11, 2005

socialsecurity posted:

Yeah? That was also 20 years ago so it doesn't get brought up much in this here current events thread, what is your point exactly?

I was responding directly to:

quote:

I get that the libs being upset by it means that you need to be for it, or it needs to not be a big deal, but downplaying the biggest threat to the peaceful transfer of power in my lifetime (and I'm betting yours) to own the libs is pathetic.

which is what I addressed. Your anger-spittle is clouding your monitor.

eta: also, what GG pointed out about expressing one's views because, well, those are my beliefs, not because I'm trying to own anyone.

# ? Nov 27, 2021 03:35

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Epic High Five posted:

We probably wouldnt even recognize alien life. We definitely wouldn't be able to communicate with it

*in Read Settlers guy voice* Read Solaris

Eh, not necessarily true. For the most part there's universal truths when it comes to communications especially with math and science. We'd likely find some sort of way to communicate with intelligent life.

Willa Rogers posted:

lmao, Bush/Gore was a far greater threat to a peaceful transfer of power (and to the myth of a functional democracy) than a hundred chuds storming the Capitol.

Okay that's a loving bold take given what we know about the Trump Admins attempts to overthrow the election, not even remotely comparable to Bush v Gore.

CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 04:00 on Nov 27, 2021

# ? Nov 27, 2021 03:57

DeadlyMuffin: Jul 3, 2007

Willa Rogers posted:

lmao, Bush/Gore was a far greater threat to a peaceful transfer of power (and to the myth of a functional democracy) than a hundred chuds storming the Capitol.

What makes you say that? It's hard to argue it wasn't peaceful... Al Gore's concession speech sums it up really well.

Willa Rogers posted:

eta: also, what GG pointed out about expressing one's views because, well, those are my beliefs, not because I'm trying to own anyone.

I'm certainly not saying you aren't entitled to express your beliefs. I'm saying I think they're silly.

On one hand you have a losing president whipping up a crowd to storm the capitol and interrupt certification, calling state governments to try and get their votes flipped, etc.

On the other you have a disputed election that dragged on for weeks, made it to the supreme court, the courts made the wrong call, but the person on the losing side said this:

Al Gore posted:

Now the U.S. Supreme Court has spoken. Let there be no doubt, while I strongly disagree with the court's decision, I accept it. I accept the finality of this outcome, which will be ratified next Monday in the Electoral College. And tonight, for the sake of our unity as a people and the strength of our democracy, I offer my concession.

CommieGIR posted:

Okay that's a loving bold take given what we know about the Trump Admins attempts to overthrow the election, not even remotely comparable to Bush v Gore.

Pfff, that's just like, your opinion man.

DeadlyMuffin fucked around with this message at 04:11 on Nov 27, 2021

# ? Nov 27, 2021 03:58

camoseven: Dec 30, 2005; RODOLPHONE RINGIN'

CommieGIR posted:

Eh, not necessarily true. For the most part there's universal truths when it comes to communications especially with math and science. We'd likely find some sort of way to communicate with intelligent life.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

# ? Nov 27, 2021 04:00

Top Gun Reference: Oct 9, 2012; Pillbug

KillHour posted:

I find it doubtful that a general strike would lead to a greater deficit in labor than the current labor shortage and that laws won't be put in place to ensure backup labor or logistic routes exist. I'm not claiming there's a strike, I'm claiming that this is roughly equivalent to a really bad general strike and all it's done is make electronics expensive and impossible to buy.

Can you elaborate on what laws the US Government would enact in the event of a general strike to �ensure backup labor"?

# ? Nov 27, 2021 04:17

Gumball Gumption: Jan 7, 2012

It's not that laughable of an argument. Bush successfully stole that election, poo poo like the brooks brothers riot were successful and influenced future tactics. There's no Trump and Jan 6th without the damage that was done by Bush and his administration. Jan 6th was bigger and scarier looking and that's why people are laughing but there is a real argument that it was a wet squib compared to quieter things that did more damage.

# ? Nov 27, 2021 04:18

Willa Rogers: Mar 11, 2005

DeadlyMuffin posted:

I'm certainly not saying you aren't entitled to express your beliefs. I'm saying I think they're silly.

That's fine; I read dozens of opinions in this thread each day that I think are silly, misguided and/or outright ludicrous. It's not "trolling" nor "bad faith" to have various opinions, nor to disagree with others' opinions.

As I've said, I'm glad that dnd has been returning to its roots of vigorous debates in lieu of circle jerks + echo chambers; there are plenty of other online spaces that have carved out this space.

# ? Nov 27, 2021 04:19

Epic High Five: Jun 5, 2004

Bush v Gore seems like less of a deal exactly because it was enormously successful. Had it failed and we had gotten a truth and reconciliation commission or similar out of it to shine a light on the rot that instead got established as the pinnacle of patriotic virtue, it would've been a very different thing on account of us being in the timeline where Democrats do not exist

# ? Nov 27, 2021 04:23

Ershalim: Sep 22, 2008; Clever Betty

Epic High Five posted:

Bush v Gore seems like less of a deal exactly because it was enormously successful. Had it failed and we had gotten a truth and reconciliation commission or similar out of it to shine a light on the rot that instead got established as the pinnacle of patriotic virtue, it would've been a very different thing on account of us being in the timeline where Democrats do not exist

I don't think that'd happen. In the event of a concerted effort to commit a crime that fails, we typically punish 1, maybe 2 of the people involved, and then basically all of the whistleblowers. Most of the people from Watergate (which is the closest thing I can think of to 2000's fuckery) were also involved in Iran-Contra, which, y'know, neither of which most of them were ever punished for. So...

Ershalim fucked around with this message at 04:27 on Nov 27, 2021

# ? Nov 27, 2021 04:23

Angry_Ed: Mar 30, 2010; Grimey Drawer

Ershalim posted:

I don't think they're laws, as such, but the corporations would do all kinds of shady poo poo like offering huge application bonuses and then using the name you gave them to ensure that either you took the job they offered or you'd be reported to unemployment for not taking a job (which McDonald's took to doing during the pandemic).

Any deeper info on this? I'm curious, sounds really hosed up and definitely want to know if companies are doing that to people

Ershalim posted:

Or they'd go old school and call in the Pinkertons (or some other PMC) and have them beat the poo poo/kill the poo poo out of the strikers.

So they'll just call Securitas then (who bought the Pinkertons) :v:

# ? Nov 27, 2021 04:31

KillHour: Oct 28, 2007

Epic High Five posted:

Bush v Gore seems like less of a deal exactly because it was enormously successful. Had it failed and we had gotten a truth and reconciliation commission or similar out of it to shine a light on the rot that instead got established as the pinnacle of patriotic virtue, it would've been a very different thing on account of us being in the timeline where Democrats do not exist

Yeah, Bush v Gore in comparison to Jan 6th feels really similar to the Bush admin in comparison to the Trump one. Sure, Trump was bad and scary. But the playbook they followed was written under Bush and Bush's administration were the ones who established a lot of the executive privileges Trump used. We're currently watching the big huge dominos fall and we're terrified of them but the small domino that started it is arguably more impactful and was the worse thing.

# ? Nov 27, 2021 04:33

Top Gun Reference: Oct 9, 2012; Pillbug

KillHour posted:

It's illegal for federal workers to go on strike, so the federal government could require that federal workers be employed for critical logistics roles. Or they could require that companies staff at a certain ratio where even in a general strike, enough people wouldn't be striking to limp everything along. Or they could make the national guard go in and replace the striking workers. Or they could just make it illegal to go on strike if you have a job that requires TWIC (or make it so if you've ever been on strike, you are ineligible for TWIC, which would permanently gently caress your livelihood and accomplish the same thing). My money is on the last one because it's cheap, easy and favors capital the most.

The government can just declare the functioning of major ports to be a national security matter and do whatever the gently caress it wants, really. And if the goal is to prevent the kind of societal collapse y'all apparently want, they honestly probably should.

cool, thanks

# ? Nov 27, 2021 04:40

Majorian: Jul 1, 2009

KillHour posted:

It's illegal for federal workers to go on strike, so the federal government could require that federal workers be employed for critical logistics roles. Or they could require that companies staff at a certain ratio where even in a general strike, enough people wouldn't be striking to limp everything along. Or they could make the national guard go in and replace the striking workers. Or they could just make it illegal to go on strike if you have a job that requires TWIC (or make it so if you've ever been on strike, you are ineligible for TWIC, which would permanently gently caress your livelihood and accomplish the same thing). My money is on the last one because it's cheap, easy and favors capital the most.

The government can just declare the functioning of major ports to be a national security matter and do whatever the gently caress it wants, really. And if the goal is to prevent the kind of societal collapse y'all apparently want, they honestly probably should.

Making general strikes illegal doesn't always prevent them from happening. Indeed, I'd go so far as to say it has often failed to prevent them from happening.

quote:

Edit: Even if they sat on their hands and did none of this because they have zero foresight or ability to plan and a general strike somehow caused the kinds of disruption it would take to literally bring down capitalism, the government would bring back the draft and draft you into the military so they could force you at gunpoint to drive trucks to the ports and pick up Walmart's poo poo.

if history is any indication, that's the type of overreaction that tends to make revolutions happen more quickly, not more slowly. Heightening the contradictions, and all that.

Majorian fucked around with this message at 04:47 on Nov 27, 2021

# ? Nov 27, 2021 04:43

KillHour: Oct 28, 2007

Majorian posted:

Making general strikes illegal doesn't always prevent them from happening. Indeed, I'd go so far as to say it has often failed to prevent them from happening.

You're really expecting a substantial percentage of the workforce to be willing to lose their livelihoods AND go to jail to end capitalism? Because I uh... doubt it. I'll be shocked if the Starbucks here manages to unionize.

But of course, we don't have to guess what would happen. We have precedent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_Air_Traffic_Controllers_Organization_(1968)

Man, that worked out really well for the strikers, didn't it?

# ? Nov 27, 2021 04:48

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 24, 2024 06:03

Bar Ran Dun: Jan 22, 2006

KillHour posted:

You're really expecting a substantial percentage of the workforce to be willing to lose their livelihoods AND go to jail to end capitalism? Because I uh... doubt it. I'll be shocked if the Starbucks here manages to unionize.

But of course, we don't have to guess what would happen. We have precedent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_Air_Traffic_Controllers_Organization_(1968)

Man, that worked out really well for the strikers, didn't it?

Russian railroad workers strike would be the counter possibility.

# ? Nov 27, 2021 05:01

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > US Current Events November: D&D's Afghanistan

«‹›188 »