|
Somebody in a previous incarnation of this thread did a little write up that concluded (if I remember correctly) that the costs of those rewards programs filter to the merchant and then to the customer... so if you're not utilizing credit card rewards you're "paying for them" in a sense. Since I don't care to spend money I don't have, keep track of debt and payments, or hell spend money at all full stop, I will be glad if credit cards die. They seem to thematically and materially prop up our consumerism and our tendencies to establish portfolios of debt anyway.
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2022 12:31
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 09:26 |
|
|
Don't think it would be unhinged to say our nations and systems just don't do "the right thing". The "right thing" may be achieved as a by-product of the real goal, or the intent to do "the right thing" may exist (in a cynical political / electoral way), but there's no reason to think we're capable of global altruism for the sake of global altruism, or even justice. We can't even provide proper equitable sustainable acts domestically, only short sighted preservation of the status quo. Stability peace and order are important to a predictable acquisition of profit. Not sure if I believe proper altruism exists (I'm sure that's a whole can of worms) but I'd bet individuals and small groups are far more capable of it than something like a large wealthy nation. Edit* basically "doing the right thing", "helping people", "protecting the future" is very much not the point of any major power on this planet. BRJurgis fucked around with this message at 00:31 on Oct 18, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Oct 18, 2022 00:26
|
|
|
I was never able to make a dating app profile even when I was (rather desperately) single... the idea of trying to present myself on paper, having to take a good photo of myself (none exist), plus I have no social media presence which everybody assured me would be seen as suspicious and weird. Honestly the idea of subjecting myself to the judgment of a world of strangers and a culture I openly reject put me in a bad place. A life of being an outsider taught me trying to get people to like you only ends in heartache, as much as that may be a "me" problem online dating still seems like they took the difficulties of dating and added the problems of social media. Anyway, I live with my gf now but I don't know where or how I'd meet people if I were single. You could meet girls at college, and at parties, and sometimes at work, but as we get older parties are few and far between and messing around with coworkers is not the best idea for obvious reasons. I find the internet incel thing as distasteful as anyone else (especially the misogyny and alt-right type stuff), but then I'm lucky I didn't end up in that world and I feel bad for the One more time, not that it's an excuse to be a nazi, goddamn. Its scary to watch people's misfortune in love turn to misogyny, especially when they know better. I think we've all seen it happen.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2022 14:02
|
|
|
Heard some of the zeldin hochel debate on the drive home from work (I don't live in NY or I'd be able to spell their names) and hoo boy as enraging as one would imagine. Zeldin straight up advocating for dropping the hammer on 'those people', because we all know democrats want to treat people with too much compassion which drives them to doing crimes. Fear is your only god on the radio. Yes, it was enraging because it made a Democrat seem like an obviously good choice stop asking.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2022 00:55
|
|
|
When people who aren't already aligned with the left or right react to stories like this, the tendency to be the "reasonable/moderate adult in the room" reigns supreme. A ton of folks feel the need to constantly triangulate between what they perceive as the two extremes. Our culture and media (including purposeful propaganda) dictates those parameters, thus the positions of the masses are produced and controlled simply by tweaking the narrative and discourse. And what a surprise, the insanity of the right is downplayed, and the part of "the left" will be played by a caricature drawn up by the right. Being pragmatic to build a working movement is one thing, but what I'm describing is the self as a brand. It's in the interest not of building a coalition, but painting a personal portrait that lets one feel more reasonable and realistic than those around them. South park-ism. "OH both sides are bad I'm in the middle" with no effort or interest in actually understanding the situation or participating in change. We'll be a world of shallow Twitter accounts and hot takes.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2022 15:32
|
|
|
Even knowing both the antisemitic bent of online conspiracy theorists / alt-right folks, and Kanyes obvious instability, I still would have assumed this was just a detached celebrity pulling the "no bad publicity" thing trump and musk have so much... "success" with. A cynical move to get attention and tap a demographic. Apparently I'd be wrong and dudes full on anti-semite shitheel bought in on a global jewspiracy. I've met people who should know better defending Kanye (supposedly based on appreciating him as a musician), I wonder what they'll make of this. Also I sure hope such a prominent celebrity going all in on this poo poo isn't used to clamp down on the web in some way, much as I worry about jan 6 and the Pelosi assault helping ramp up a police state that the right already screams for. Imagine both sides of the aisle in a race to "defend freedom" by increasing a police and surveillance state. It... shouldn't be hard, actually.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2022 21:45
|
|
|
Youth Decay posted:The opposite seems to be happening, with Musk taking Kanye's side and people like Kyrie Irving broadcasting their own anti-semitism to legions of fans who are now loving everywhere on tiktok and twitter going unchecked. Failed Imagineer posted:Ye has been best buds with Candace Owens for years now, can't say I find the anti-Semitic stuff too surprising in that context I try not to pay attention to celebrities honestly (hell without social media or cable TV it's not much effort). I like to say I "don't believe in them".* I'm not sure who Kylie Irving is for example. This just seems particularily egregious and political, much like musk in a certain way. And as much as I understand the democrats making political hay from jan 6th and the Pelosi attack, "voting for democrats" obviously isn't a solution in itself to violent radicalization (or mentsl illness and antisemitism), so I just wonder what actual action or legislation this would bolster or provoke. Especially since everywhere from republican campaign ads to npr station shows I'm hearing how much democrats love criminals and hate police. *this purposefully ambiguous statement usually elicits some humorous responses especially from younger people. Think somebody immediately and enthusiastically signing onto the idea that celebrities in fact don't even exist.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2022 22:24
|
|
|
Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:congress is going to go from being incapable of passing laws for fear it might offend the republican base to being incapable of passing laws for fear it might offend the republican base. I assume you're referring both to the number of democrats that aren't fully pro choice (without compromise) and having abortion to fundraiser and campaign on. But before anybody else freaks about that last bit, would it be fair to say a significant amount may want to but can't because our systems and electorate are crazy town bananas hosed.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2022 15:59
|
|
|
I consider our leaders desire/need to cater to* an electorate that's woefully uninformed, misinformed, apathetic (and willing or forced to vote against their own interests) a step worse than what I think you're implying. I guess I'm saying the whole setup is so hosed, populace leaders and common understanding, that I can't imagine a path forward even for a group of people who wanted to represent my interests (not that I think the democrats completely do). Maybe I was preemptively playing peacekeeper on the phrasing of YMBs (warranted) attack on the dems, apologies. *for this exercise, pretend they actually want to do the "good" things
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2022 23:03
|
|
|
People will bitch and moan about our systems and leaders for sure, but in my experience at the end of they day they usually still want to pin the blame on someone. Some other, some enemy, without whom things would be running as intended. The problem is the dems, or the problem is the Republicans. Or our treacherous and cowardly leaders are advancing the cause of some group to displace or usurp people like us. Its the old people, or the young. It's the "elite" (big business or the jews depending on your brain worm level). I think people like to identify and solve problems. I think they need them to fit within their sometimes limited scope of understanding... we don't exactly have stellar civic/political understanding and engagement, but everybody has a hot take. Finally, "nobody is really at the wheel and we are likely hosed without significantly changing our way of life" isn't an enticing epiphany. That is how I believe we can be so faithless while still clinging to the supposed "rightness" of our world. From "good/smart people are working hard to fix this" empty hope, to "my God will save us/me and/or purge 'them'" bullshit.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2022 13:33
|
|
|
Morrow posted:Laptop stuff isn't true. Don't accept the narrative that there is something to it: at most, dude hacked Hunter's cloud to get a sex tape. I mean, I think gumball and bigger boat had a good synopsis... proof of a conspiracy and corruption on behalf of bidens administration, laughably unlikely. Hunter biden being a spectacle and everything surrounding that seems pretty likely though, and as unimportant as it ultimately is would anybody be surprised if a strung out wreck attempted to/ succeeded at cashing in on his family name?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2022 17:01
|
|
|
Automata 10 Pack posted:Can people provide sources of what is real and isn’t real about the whole Hunter laptop affair? This sounds like a situation where lefties can end up buying into some dumb conspiratorial disinformation because “Of course! America bad!” Your concern is noted. Is anybody here doing that though? If right wing media told me the sky was blue I'd immediately look up, but given what we know about hunter it seems there is a story there. It just doesn't matter materially beyond electoral optics (because of his last name and RWM attempts). I'm also confident the the reason the media largely got cold feet was the dubious origins and chain of custody. Hunter may arguably be a victim in some ways, but he's hardly on my list of sympathetic characters. selec posted:I think the argument “a crackhead only got high powered corporate fake jobs because of his last name” is pretty impervious to being cast as a right wing argument. Yeah!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2022 18:47
|
|
|
These are horrifying tragedies, but they're expected at this point. Fwiw, I don't own a gun and completely support national gun control laws and enforcement. And I understand people need to vent about our idiotic relationship with firearms in this country. That said, in the US "no more guns!" is as realistic a solution as "no more murders!" and its frustrating to see the argument suggested as a legislative solution. In a democratic sense it's not what Americans want, our enforcement agencies would never be willing to play ball (except against marginalized / leftist groups), our leaders won't run afoul of the gun manufacturers IE capital, and finally there are so many guns out there as to diminish the effectiveness of such an act even if it was enacted with sincere commitment. Compounding that, the very environment and movements spurring on these tragedies and further illuminating our gun issues mean any serious move against gun ownership would radicalize more people towards the anti government right, even if they aren't rabid bigots. All the while creating an atmosphere where minorities and marginalized groups see more need to own a weapon to defend themselves because they are being openly and publicly targeted (yes I know it doesn't help statistically to own a gun, but humans don't make decisions based on graphs and excel sheets). The way I see it, this is just another issue that's very difficult for the government to legislate (if they even wanted to), would take a lifetime to start to meaningfully change things for the better, and would surely make things worse in the short term. Thus it exists most accurately as a political wedge issue to divide us (regardless of how much more correct one side may be). I'm sure this is some kind of thought terminating cliche, but given the myriad difficulties and realities of the situation, along with the timetable, I start to just wish people were talking about climate change instead. Equally difficult and unlikely, but far more important and consequential. One depressingly impossible crisis at a time. I mean, surely we can view energy and attention as finite resources, thus making prioritizing of issues reasonable (non terminator cliche baby). Gun control is a fine enough thing to debate on these here forums, but out there it's just another doomed hill where we're supposed to battle without any real victory.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2022 15:58
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:A variety of specific gun control measures such as universal background checks poll extremely well. First, I certainly intended to draw a distinction between "actual national gun control being implemented and enforced" (which has its own hurdles but should be pursued) and "get rid of the guns". If that didn't come across in my OP, well, now you know. I was rabidly anti gun for longer than I've been at my current understanding. It was easy before as somebody who boosted the dems and saw them as the only way forward to write off "gun people" as republican white supremacists and crazy toxic masculinity mad max fantasizers. I've since met reasonable rural nonpartisan people for whom "taking all the guns" is an absolute non-starter (some of whom don't even own guns, but correctly identify they are not represented by our systems). I've also started seeing that we will not achieve what I consider a bare minimum of real progress under present conditions and trajectory. So with this distinction in mind, "no more guns" is absolutely a useless wedge issue, not only because of the obvious implausibility but because it freaks people out to hear (which is why Republicans claim it is the democratic platform). It's not just a few posters here, it's out there too and sure enough any pushback paints you as "the other team" and leads to accusations of bad faith and loving the NRA (which is why you have to preface such arguments with declarations of not owning or liking firearms). How is that not a wedge issue? Perhaps I didn't draw that line clearly enough in my OP, but having now clarified that: surely you don't think arguing for federally enforced disarmament in America is reasonable or constructive... right? If so I would ask how you came to those beliefs, as they're based on the idea we have a healthy enough society and government that such a thing is possible or even wise. As I'm sure you're aware, the idea that preserving the status quo is of the highest priority (and the only way to progress) has no shortage of boosting from media and culture at large, it's bolstered both by human nature and money reflexively protecting itself. If you want to know my thought terminating cliche, here it is. None of the progress I and many of you know is necessary will be achieved without wresting control of our country away from money, and that isn't possible if we keep falling into endless fights that divide us (not as political parties, but as people.) We need mass consent for real change, and if that is truly impossible than I'd prefer we give everybody a gun than anybody entertain the idea that we can or should actually take them away. I don't see how running afoul of some media criticism ideal makes the world I'm looking at any less real. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST) BRJurgis fucked around with this message at 17:44 on Nov 24, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2022 17:41
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Who, other than you, is starting from a position of "get rid of all guns". By wedge issue I meant "predictably and convienantly divides people into uncompromising positions that pledge them to one of our two parties". If that's not what it means, fine. But that is what gun control debates do when they focus entirely on the existence of guns and ignore the many other problems we face that cause or worsen this situation. quote:No. "money" doesn't reflexively protect itself, and the immensely overbroad claim you're making here can, again, be leveraged against any policy change, anywhere. It's useless. quote:You are working backward, again, from the demand that anything other than the impossible is meaningless. Meaningful social, legal and cultural change do in fact occur without the nebulously defined "wresting control of the country away from money", and we do not need The Revolution to occur first in order to produce change on gun control policy-or on any other topic. This isn't a matter of "media criticism ideals", it's the opposite- grounding discussion in literally any specifics of how laws and politics work. You are working backwards from the idea that working within law and politics is a necessity or even preferable. It constrains your positions to see any suggestion of focusing beyond those methods as nonsensical, or in violation of a set of rules you've internalized that nobody else is necessarily compelled to recognize or follow. Hardly seems a position of strength. Do you suppose it's even possible giving people a false relationship with power (our two party system) could in fact be a prison to placate, distract, and otherwise burn out efforts for real change?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2022 21:15
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:I see two people out of the whole threadadvocating for the eventual removal of guns from American society over the course of generations by a series of intermediate steps. You're presenting this, and have repeatedly, as if none of those intermediate steps exist, and as if it's an immediate demand. It sounds like the systems and methods that you govern your arguments by, along with the terminology you shackle yourself with, are representative of the very problems I'm decrying. Little wonder we disagree, I want to see your world go away. Only natural you'd work to preserve it, as I argued earlier. Happy Thanksgiving I guess! (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
¿
Nov 24, 2022 21:46
|
|
|
It seems pretty obvious that a service is made up of the people providing it. If them not doing what they do is untenable, they have leverage. So who has this leverage? The people who do the work that makes that service happen, or the money that controls and profits from that service? Who will be served by our representative government? Another instance of "one weird trick to blind you to the truth that's right in front of your own goddamn eyes".
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2022 01:38
|
|
|
This is one of those "this is technically true so I can say it" things. Like when I raged about whatever daily execution of a young unarmed black man by police, my father several times brought up the "lack of fathers" in "those communities". My understanding is that is true enough on paper to the point where it's an issue those communities actively address themselves. But to use it as an excuse from his (my old white father who is a "real republican unlike the republican party") perspective against blatant brutality and injustice doesnt land. You're not lying, but focusing on that 40% is effectively anti union because it undermines the whole point of unions and what we're witnessing. You shouldn't be silenced, no, but you should get pushback.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2022 00:59
|
|
|
Kalit posted:I’m confused, why do you wish that a strike would happen? Especially since those who are already suffering will be hit the hardest? I'm sure the OP and everybody else agrees that would be better. Don't imagine we need a poll. Barring that, I hope they strike. I've been loving the show Andor, Luthen has a quote something like "they've been choking us so slowly for so long we don't realize we can't breath." For large amounts of people to accept change, to demand change, things have to get uncomfortable.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2022 00:59
|
|
|
Judging potential "good" presidential candidates on a -10 - 0 scale. I had to Google whether aoc and Omar really voted to bar the strike. Changing the system from within! Guess I wasn't being realistic enough. I believe representation is important to a point. Representation without results is just empty placation and neatly fits with our trajectory. Imagine our first leftist atheist president (if you can). In a hurry to compromise I'd bet. But the data shows that reasonable logical
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2022 02:20
|
|
|
Automata 10 Pack posted:Hey, stupid loving question here. If they gave the Union workers a 25% raise instead of sick pay, wouldn’t someone who works four days and call in sick on the 5th make the same amount of money as someone who worked five days before the raise? Many people want to feel they did a good job every day, are in good standing with their business/industry, and rely on job security for the Healthcare and well being of themselves and their families. There is a right wing media framing of "people are too lazy to work!". It's also possible people respond reasonably to their energy efforts and life being spent in service of profits to a company that consumes their existence. Hey, though, they can always quit and get a different job gotta love freedom.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2022 02:44
|
|
|
Yeah I've already encountered "but you ses, biden's a union guy!" when I bring this up. When you get to the crux of why act against the workers rather than the company, it's "because of money" but in a sympathetic way. Like that is some justifying motivation I'm too dumb to see. It's pretty crushing to hear people adopt that attitude It's less a realist "your condemnation doesn't matter" and more a defensive "you can't condemn the inherent way". Beyond frustrating especially with beer involved.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2022 21:33
|
|
|
I work for and talk with wealthy liberal folks who are perennially expectant of Trump facing justice, down to any "lets see him wiggle his way out of this one" take we could manage. It's really out there, and the difference between older/middle aged people who "did everything right" is whether they're wealthy and comfortable or struggling.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2022 01:43
|
|
|
I think people who actually create art can get a pass even if it's not a practical physical product necessary for living. I read once that evidence shows early humans created instruments before creating weapons of war*, and that brings me dangerously close to wielding the word "hope". Art and music brings people together and shares knowledge in a different way than straight up science and academia. I will never stop making fun of actors and the people who cling to them though. "As somebody who pretends to be other people for a living, the world waits with bated breath for my next profound utterance". Cmon. As much as athletes are often rich people having gym class, I also think celebrating strength teamwork and physical mastery is important. People should want to take pride in their bodies, and physicality is akin to language in the way it lets us interact with the world around us. It's objectively better to be strong and healthy, we should celebrate that. Seems the real problems are the systems we create and monetize these efforts with, and the culture of fame and fortune lending more weight to these larger than life winners of our system. If the quarterback is talking about anything unrelated to their team and how they discipline themselves to throw a ball through an exhaust vent 13 miles away, we shouldn't really give a gently caress... but they're rich and famous so people will. How people are compensated for what they do isn't necessarily their fault. That woman rotting in a Russian prison is obviously unjust and I'm glad it was stopped. In general though, I do not relate to wealthy people. It's not necessarily how much you have, more how you live your life, what means and struggles you have. I work for rich folks and the things they get all twisted up about is often the dumbest poo poo, it really highlights class differences. Frothing mad about geese in their yard, pained despair over the rabbits eating their flowers. Having somebody with several enormous houses and no need to work wring their hands in desperation, pleading for a solution to this untenable problem... it's comical on its face but as somebody who works long hard dirty hours it's pretty gross. I guess I should just be thankful they talk to me like I'm people. I have a friendly repor with many of them, but there is no mistaking that the life they live renders them incapable of relating to any significant progressive economic change. You don't tolerate threats to the game when you're currently winning. *think this was in a coffee table book, not exactly rigid academia so feel free to correct me if that's warranted
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2022 16:39
|
|
|
Honestly I hope this story doesn't get pushed. Not at all looking forward to encountering "actually we got closer to this thing we might someday be able to do, thus our way of life is saved full steam ahead!" To be clear, I'd be stoked if we developed sustainable energy technology. Until then though, anything that allows us to feel better about the damage we cause to this world just upsets me.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2022 13:20
|
|
|
There's a few coworkers and others.i know who are laughing at Elon musk (appropriately), and the detractors are shaken. As much as this is big dumb spectacle, hope it helps shatter meritocracy thinking.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2022 03:16
|
|
|
Gyges posted:All known history of fail sons, rich man hubris, and economy imploding gently caress ups suggest you shouldn't hold your breath. I mean, we hosed up a whole nation's economy via flowers and still can't get enough of dumb gently caress financial instruments. Its frustrating how close so many people are to a straight up pro labor class consciousness, but yes the forces against us seem insurmountable. Guess the politics from somebody who hates "global elites". "Pencil pushers who make money with their money instead of their back and hands like us". "Forces that subject us to rules they needn't abide by." It exists independently of political affiliation, it's just that the truth of our situation is so uncomfortable,, and there's so much garbage out there, some people are fine stopping at "its the jews/democrats/government at large". DarkCrawler posted:All the Musk fans around me are shut down or mocked. Shame works. Wink wink. The key isn't shame/hate (If that's still your thing), it's strength. Its pretty clear people live in different realities, and being right or wrong ain't worth much because everybody thinks they're right. Musk and trump, for example, are frequently shsmefully hilariously obviously wrong and it never slowed them down. What hurt them was looking weak, publicly being big losers. People respond to strength and power, and strength and power are what we need. Hate isn't necessary for strength. Being willing to talk to or yes even confront the people in your community is the kind of strength that wins more allies and respect.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2022 16:55
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:Nah, the key to shutting them the gently caress up is pretty clearly shame and hate, for following a shameful and hateable person. How many allies and respect, if that is your goal, has your approach gained for you or people with your approach in America? My approach is pretty great in achieving the goal of shutting Elon Musk fans the gently caress up. But how are the hate-shamers doing with allies? Strength? More or less than yours? Yes, I remember the choreography of this number. You're not making Elon musk fans shut up, his obvious public failure is doing the work there. And then I explain to you that I have brought people around by doing the opposite of your strategy (talking to anybody who will listen, with a collaborative attitude). You say I haven't / cant. It seems nothing's changed between us regarding this argument.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2022 17:24
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:I don't see how this is strawmanning. MPF is literally saying that Hieronymous's boss got away with it because they didn't report him. That's victim blaming. Victim blaming in service of defending or dismissing the perpetrator of wrongdoing is obviously hosed, but all things not being black and white, it would be objectively better if mistreatment (of employees or women or both) was always reported and pushed back against. quote:"Harvey was breaking sexual assault laws the entire time, and got away with it only because neither you nor anyone else in the production house reported it" Is that factually inaccurate? Wouldn't say it to a victim of abuse, but it reads like a true statement. Bear Enthusiast posted:If they had reported it other things would happen besides the authorities finding out, for example being fired. It's not as simple as tell the government and get your $20 back. Fister Roboto posted:Well yeah, and I assume Hieronymous was aware of that as well. Everyone knows that unreported crimes don't get prosecuted. Why did that need to be pointed out? Like fizzy said, it reveals a lack of understanding for why those crimes go unreported - because of the power imbalance and fear of reprisal. The comparison to sexual assault may not be very charitable, but the exact same power dynamic is at work. Yeah, it's all about the relationship to power. If a dude smacks some strangers rear end I'd love to see her smack his dumb face, but I understand the myriad reasons why somebody wouldn't take that action. A world where everybody stood up to bullies and abusers without thought to their personal well being would be a world with far fewer assholes, but obviously systems and culture that foster and enable that abuse are the problem.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2022 16:43
|
|
|
Given the misinformation and ever raging culture war surrounding us, I think even if we had a perfect pure democracy and some sort of mythological just and wise leader, we'd still be hosed. The order we've established could only be threatened by a radical change in both our leadership and our populace, and that's just the US.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2022 15:45
|
|
|
Somewhat conspiratorial, but I've been thinking this increasingly often. I feel somehow the national right or RWM manages to pre-empt and drown legitimate criticism about the democrats or society at large in their sea of bigoted insanity. It seems so convienant, top-down enforced horseshoe theory. Its global bankers VS "global bankers". Anybody angry or dissatisfied can be written off as some opposing partisan group, "one of those crazies". Starting from there, everything about "substation sabotage is the right lashing out at drag shows" seems very suspect to me for reasons beyond the already confusing premise. This is not to say I think sporadically cutting off power to large groups of people serves any leftist goal at this juncture. *to bring more relevance, try to entertain my weird concern next time somebody itt asks "why are you buying into right wing talking points?" We're all in a hurry to put people into neat little groups, and it's hard for us not to get swept up into a framing that's convienant for the status quo. BRJurgis fucked around with this message at 19:58 on Dec 26, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2022 19:56
|
|
|
Archonex posted:For anyone taking this guy seriously, I encourage you to look at the text below his name. Not really much I need to say aside from that. Big lols indeed, pointing out the custom title somebody bought me is a powerful debate tactic. And then you attacked RWM and the right as your response? I'm not defending those things at all in my post. If you're gonna be a jerk at least make some sense or have a point maybe? Main Paineframe posted:Who do you think is a more likely suspect than the far-right movements that have long desired to cause disruptions to critical infrastructure in hopes that it would cause a societal breakdown? I don't think anyone else really has the motive to attack remote rural infrastructure. Well, to keep it simple and a direct response, we don't know what they hoped to achieve beyond the most direct results of disrupting that station. It may not be effective or a good idea, but what if somebody was disrupting for economic or industrial sabotage? Hell, even societal breakdown doesn't get to be exclusively an action by "the right". We saw with January 6th how precious we all suddenly found Congress, or with reactions to Supreme Court leaks and threats. Whether it would be effective or smart for "the left" or anybody to storm the capitol isn't the point, and honestly if most Americans were willing to storm the capitol for actual better things we'd probably have a better democracy.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2022 22:35
|
|
|
On a similar note, heard a brief on npr this morning about a ceo (who made some pile of millions last year) giving up their pay because it wasn't right when the shareholders were suffering. I posed it as a riddle to my coworkers all day too.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2022 03:29
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 09:26 |
|
|
cat botherer posted:It's a good skill! Impressive in a hosed-up way how long he could keep up these blatant and insane lies. Do the Dems not do any kind of oppo research or anything? It would not have been hard at all to dismantle these lies. Leave Dalton alone! (Ok, Johnny got his gun wasn't exactly an enjoyable read). Since I learned about this Tate guy (yesterday) I've been asking around and nobody seems to know who the gently caress he is. Of course the large majority of people I interact with daily do not have social media, which seems increasingly to be an objectively good decision for individuals and society at large.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2022 17:42
|
|