Cataphract @ Cataphract @lemmy.ml

Posts

27

Comments

562

Joined

2 yr. ago

oh I like that, it's not in my usual rolodex but covers the feelings of all of them. A little new-age for me, but it checks out as a good alternative.

Just an OG fantasy accelerationist eh? I can dig it, but I think they would dismiss it as not being fit for the definition. Judges can and are allowed to be fickle like that.

This was such a weird time-line switch. Trump president again and progressives on Lemmy sound like r/conservative with law interpretation. So there's no better response, no room for the very real needed evaluation of each situation, just a blanket "shoot em" now. Idk how people are so subjective to propaganda and influence when we have such a hard grasp on reality.

Holy shit, a true clown-troll account made specifically because of the results of a political election. Get a fucking life or even just a singular hobby to better waste your time with.

The working class didn't come out in droves, it was the same fucking numbers. Republicans are taught at a very young age it was their duty to vote, it's ingrained in a lot of the family structure while the left/progressive stems more from active engagement and a distrust in the political system.

If you think Biden stepped down just because he was "too old", you slept through the past year. It was a valid concern and still is as the sitting administration, it's even more concerning we're about to have the oldest elected person in history in fucking 2024.

Economics hardship was already here, that's probably what pissed me off the greatest about this last election cycle. "They're going to come after us if you don't vote!" removed, hey've been coming for us, everyone is just pretending it's important now.

ok, I was gonna be facetious and post the video mockingly but it's actually kinda funny. It seems from the clips it actually tries to follow the ball but keeps getting distracted by the referees big beautiful bald head. Future AI-AR(artificial resources instead of HR) discussions probably like, "wtf guys? You told me to track these things!?!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eMx-2s7mZ24

Is there something I said that's confusing to you? Do I need to repeat it in different words for you to be able to carry on a conversation? Are you legitimately confused and can't follow along or just trolling? You definitely have a different conversation style (I'm guessing young and haven't engaged in long-form discussion before, maybe even strictly on mobile so it's hard for you to type at length).

If you really don't understand and you aren't just being a dick I'll actually reply but you just seem hostile as fuck.

Idk if any of this will help, but you're very actively involved in the discussions and I encourage that. So, as a friendly commenter who sides with your disgruntlement of the situation, I thought I would at least point out the things that I understand but don't 100% agree with.

When it comes to degrees, I agree that it is a "machine" (education as a whole) that produces desired individuals to fulfill the roles it has established as "important/valuable". Everyone can disagree on the opinion of what a "valuable" society is, but I digress. You have to understand that knowledge comes from experience and research though (just like you've probably done, just as an individual and not mandated by a course). The most succulent of critiques can come from someone deeply established in a field, kinda like how Bernie Sanders made comments about the DNC after the election and it forced the media and all of us to discuss it and the message.

The truly dangerous ones are those who can fully understand how flawed a system is, but realize they must play it to their advantage to get what they "want" out of life. I just can't demonize the whole entire system when the people I've learned and read from were birthed from that experience. A lot of people realize after or during pursuing a degree, just how bad it is so it's some kind of awareness for a certain %. Now if they've fully embraced the system, you just have to find the examples they choose to ignore in their flawed beliefs.

I also don't know how effective the "per quote response" is. I've been guilty of it in the past, but honestly I think people just dont really read the "tit-for-tat" style comment replies (I find myself scrolling past if it's too long). If they see one thing they disagree with then they downvote the entire comment. I try to hit the points I want but change the length and style of response in regards to how effective I can actually communicate to the person.

I'm just happy that a little bit of sanity has returned to Lemmy (obvious from the changes in what got downvoted/upvoted or discussed heavily). It felt like everyone just completely drank the kool-aid so we could "save Democracy^tm!!" Unfortunately, I think people sold all the common-sense realty in their head for the Blue Superhero fallacy that could save us all from all the boogeymen. It will take time for some to let their head critique things effectively, some will never come back to reality. It's one of the reasons I just asked a simple question instead of critiquing their entire argument (I think his entire premise is flawed, and happily skewed so Biden is still a hero in their eyes). It's mostly there so other readers can see it and makes them pause for a second instead of just "believing" it's true. If the OP comes back with a sane comment I'll engage in a discussion, but we see from the response to me they don't want to discuss facts so I'm not engaging further.

I'm ootl, what monopolies got broken up? I tried looking it up but it's not returning results.

This is like gameplay analysis mode atm, the lessons need to be learned and strategies need to be changed.

I'm actually thinking we might need to be throwing dignity out the window. It's just being used as traditionalism to keep the status quo much like we've seen with feudalism. A progressive movement should've been continued after the DNC chicanery in 2016, dignity be damned. I've watched Bernie bend the knee to a left-wing party that's been completely overtaken by big interests, if they didn't play fair he shouldn't have endorsed and went back independent immediately (it's all speculative though).

I do fear that jumping through too many hoops will land the democrats back to square one and they'll just continue the same path (Desi Lydic did a good bit on the daily show about the media's many conflicting critiques).

who's y'all and what are they trying to convert you too? Are 'they' in the room with you right now?

Glad you aren't addressing any of the critiques and just gonna continue living the meme. Also, you should learn that there's a neat little feature called sorting, there's a controversial selection that's really handy for shit takes to pop up in the first few comments!

I'm most definitely looking at the complainers right now to see if they're actually listening or have just been harping the same shit for a year and now trying to blame everyone else for the problem. We need to flush out this "woe is me" crap, as if people haven't been wondering for decades how they're going to be protected or how could democracy possibly survive in such a capitalistic and corrupt system.

D's lost, I wanna get back on the field and train with new strategies and directions. There's just a bunch of butt hurt locker boys who wanna complain about members of the team instead of learning to work together in a different way.

I would expect that to actually make you smell worse. Like the scent of a gamer who hasn't showered all weekend so you can blend in with the rest of your friend group but you're actually an avid gardener.

username checks out :P

Oh no, mean spirited comments that don't actually add anything useful!!

This you?

BuT BiDeN nEeDs To EaRn My VoTe!

If we manage to avoid a fascist takeover, it will be in spite of the naive progressive idealogues who think they have the privilege to vote their conscience.

It's.... almost as if you do need to earn people's votes after all. Everyone already spelled everything out to you almost a year ago on changes the Dems could make but still you're wondering what Step 2 is?!?

Dems: We've tried nothing and are all out of ideas!, Third party, absolutely not!

I don't know what's going to happen, but focusing on what you're saying this early is only going to cause you panic when we need to be gathering our strength. We've seen from the MAGA movement that our democracy is fragile. The safeguards and protections that make everything "so difficult"^tm to change these past decades aren't necessarily that difficult after all.

I can see a few well established Dem's like Bernie and AOC jumping aboard a progressive party movement disguised as a blue wave much like was overtaken on the right. We see that there is room to capture voters that didn't turn out and from both parties, a small band CAN take over a movement if their dedicated enough.

It's just unfortunate that it was someone on the right who first abandoned party-lined politics and showed you can tame a party while speaking to the base (again, it was only like 20% of the population). It really makes me think that Bernie should've handled the fiasco in Nevada and South Carolina differently during the 2016 primaries. No blame to him, and I'm not sure what lesson there is to be learned besides authoritarianism and narcissistic tendencies are a way to brute force yourself into politics. But, I would've loved to see Bernie politely take the gloves off and took it to the people to back him up as well like Trump did with his group (just not, you know, all murdery and dark).

I don't know, I try to be a little more optimistic. over 250million eligible voters, only 70million voted for Trump. That's less than a 1/3 and could be lower if you included the entire population. People will spend extra time to pursue things that will benefit them directly, there just needs to be better communication about the good things that will benefit them for their time, not the things to be fearful of because people will tune that out (as shown by the voter turnout).

I really don't think that's true anymore. Maybe looking at decades of political party data but I think the games kinda changed with MAGA taking repubs extreme and Dem's going center-right. There are a lot of republicans who could find a home in the democratic party since we know 2028 will see a cult leader retiring and you know the Dem's are gonna run an old white guy out of fear. I'm hoping another party can cause a splash that election cycle but I see it going blue and hopefully the infrastructure for this third-party progressive moment can become solid in local with sites on national.

I'm no longer holding out for election change. Oregon just voted against RCV, the push-back from changing the voting system is just too much for our set-in-stone political machine we have running now. I'm definitely gonna look into the data about why that went down though, a lot of opposition from Dems and Repubs in Alaska and Maine so would be interesting to see what coalesced.

geez you weren't kidding

Several other Democrats who voted to censure Tlaib were among the top recipients of AIPAC funds in November, including Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz ($141,058) (link)

and that was in January. If it's any consolation, the evil is slowly draining her life away it seems.

2016 :

What is with this "They" pansy-ass scapegoat bullshit I keep seeing from all these political extremism comments?

Jesus, been scrolling for hours and finally someone has said it. It's why someone like Bernie trended so well and actually had a chance if the DNC would've ran him in 2016. He wanted to raise EVERYONE up, regardless of any identity or ideology. He came with receipts and actual plans that he non-stopped harped on every second he had a mic in front of him. This election cycle I didn't hear a single actual legislative plan fleshed out like they did with the healthcare for all in 2016 debates. You're not gonna win a mud-slinging contest of "he said, she said" when people just don't care.

A lot of people (white and/or rich mostly) also know that they have benefited from racial discrimination and opportunities stolen from other people. They saw their parents buying homes, getting loans and jobs. They vaguely heard how difficult it was for POC or displaced individuals, they don't want the system turning on them. In their bleak futurism that the right-wing paints, we will all be treated equally so everyone is a target. Instead of targeting voters concerns in an economical way, they went with a polisci approach like Harris's horrible housing innovative.

Harris proposes to provide $25,000 down-payment assistance to first-time homebuyers who have paid rent on time for two years, with more generous support for qualifying first-generation homeowners. .... The proposal stems from an idea the Biden-Harris administration presented earlier this year, which called on Congress to implement $25,000 in down-payment assistance exclusively for 400,000 first-generation buyers, or first-time buyers whose parents weren’t homeowners, and a $10,000 tax credit for first-time buyers.

You're parents had a shack? sorry. Get no economical support from parents but they effect your government support? sorry. Congress didn't pass it? sorry. We've decided to change the definition of a "starter-home". Sorry.

The piece of the pie was a perfect way to put it, I've seen so many shit takes from everyone on here I'm flabbergasted. From people "getting popcorn to watch everyone get their just desserts" to "maybe we shouldn't of ran a woman-POC this election cycle".

I have loved ones that I very much care for that I have to do these mental dances with. Certain groups or cultures of people may have a bias towards only looking at scientific evidence that promotes their hypothesis, well established institutions can sometimes be "stuck in a rut" but I would include people like graham hancock in that group. Science is a beautiful thing though, new data and experiments doesn't care what your belief structure is. Your germ theory is a beautiful example where thought was put into a hypothesis and was slowly formed over time with new evidence. Religious and spiritual aspects do not require this with belief. What was the last study done by a religious scholar that a deity exists? What was the last religious text that was changed due to discoveries or experiments that were done?

It's important to realize that scientific study is a rigorous system and not everyone follows it to the best of their ability. Slamming a label on like "whether you accept and believe scientific discoveries remains a subjective choice" is not a valid statement.

The basic difference between objective and subjective information is that objective information is based on facts, while subjective information, or a subjective perspective, is based on opinion, emotion, or feelings.

The very fact that you're using subjective choice to look at scientific data means you're not actually following the scientific method (explains how something goes from hypothesis-theory-law). It's ok to have a hypothesis that's different from mainstream, it's not ok to declare being subjugated because you aren't following the method to show your data and claiming it must be a law.

If you're going to dance around the science/spiritual circles you need to have proper respect for both parties when communicating directly (if you want everyone to understand what you're talking about). One example is "Energy", means two very different things when talking to an electrical engineer or a new age "star child". The distinction needs to be made for sound scientific communication that doesn't impede someones belief.

I highly suggest checking out "The Hidden Story That Defines Our Modern Era" from Like Stories of Old. This is a prime example of how you can bind modern communication and stepping into the religious/belief structures of our history while maintaining respect for everyone.