JubilantJaguar @ JubilantJaguar @lemmy.world

European. Contrarian liberal. Insufferable green. History graduate. **I nev

---

Read more

Posts

12

Comments

1,484

Joined

2 yr. ago

Indeed, and I get the feeling that the point of your comment is not to ask any question but rather to propagate that smear even though you probably haven't even looked into whether or not it was justified.

Or perhaps you have, and you can tell me (us) why it was?

Agreed. What's your pet solution?

The first oil crisis was in 1973, which is roughly what the graph suggests.

In 1971 the oil-fuelled postwar party was still in full swing.

This is entirely contingent on how much you wear them, of course.

I get between 6 and 12 months out of a pair when used exclusively (yep, literally exclusively). Wide variety of models tried. The main thing to avoid is a fabric upper too close to the toe.

Cut to the shape of an actual foot [...] I don’t understand why you would want your toes/foot contorted

So much this! This is literally my criteria 1, 2 and 3 when choosing a sneaker, too.

And there is now so little choice! Bullet-shaped sneakers have basically won the war against foot-shaped sneakers. I get the idea of design memes (think: fins on 1950s cars) but personally this one is completely mystifying to me. After all, sneakers code as "masculine", but what is less masculine than something that looks like a ballet shoe?? I don't get it!

Come to think of it, maybe that's the explanation - maybe it's a corporate plot to make sports shoes unisex?

BTW my two go-to vintage solutions are the New Balance 574 and the Onitsuka Ultimate 81. Coz it seems sneakers weren't shaped like medieval court shoes back in the early 80s! But get this: as far as I can tell, the Ultimate 81s are no longer produced and Asics has replaced them with a carbon-copy "new look" model which seem identical in every way except one - yes, they are now bullet-shaped! It's crazymaking!

For the sake of sanity (and budget) I've decided to give up and go with the flow. Currently rocking a pair of Under Armour which are un-foot-shaped and ugly as hell but comfortable enough.

Sounds great! As a moderate I would fit right in! Oh - except I'm not allowed to.

PS: to be clear, I mean I can't do it with this account because it's not federated AFAICT.

Just had a look around. On the recent article about immigration, the second highest comment is a progressive questioning the education level of conservatives. So the block is not completely effective.

Personally I think it's a terrible idea for people to be siloing themselves into bubbles where everyone agrees with them. In a democratic political system this cannot end well.

This. Or even just tone theory. Don't wear a black top with white shoes, or vice versa.

Personally I don't care a bit for fashion, but I'm often surprised by how many guys seem to have no conception of basic esthetics.

Great! Thanks for the clarification.

So much talk of Beehaw but still no sign of a link!

PS: or Blahaj, assuming it's not the same thing

This was a fun read! Thanx.

There must be a way of compressing this so that the...

...punchline fits

Diet is literally the most frequent choice we all make, i.e. every single day. All your response reveals is your insecurity about your own.

Personally I find the meta-question more interesting than the question here. Your take is pretty much the majority one in any Western society today (albeit particularly thoughtfully expressed here). Personally I share your analysis right down the line. But you're asking to be talked out of it. Is it because you feel that it's not presentable here? Or maybe among your friends? Who perhaps might belong to the small minority (7%) of the US population that pollsters categorize as "progressive activists"? Just a thought.

In any case, steelmanning is a great technique to practice. Well done for having a go.

Go vegan. Or at least vegetarian or flexitarian. Not even joking. Life becomes so much simpler.

Since I'm not a psychologist or even (alas) particularly empathetic, I will leave aside the fact that this post appears to be a veiled cry for help, and answer the actual question.

Prison exists to protect society from dangerous individuals, but also because it's the simplest form of non-corporal punishment. Flogging and flaying and chopping and mutilating and so on are all well and good but at some point in humanity's march to civilization such things will start making the rulers queasy and it becomes more palatable to just lock the problem up for a while.

Personally I have a radically liberal take on this. I think that the purpose of punishment (other than protection, as mentioned) should be not retribution but rather restoration. In my ideal world, prison sentences would mostly be swapped for various forms of community service.

Come to think of it, there are one or two podcasts I stick with partly because I like the sound of the host's voice. So perhaps you're on to something after all.

Big, if true. Not even being snarky. I wish I were so open-minded. There are just some things (indeed, lots of them) that I will never be interested in.

Well said. And I think there's more. In the Anglosphere and the USA in particular, government and state are often conflated, but they really are two different things. The former is the cockpit, the latter is the airplane.

Things are different in European cultures. In Latin languages, for example, the government is understood to be the body of politicians in control right now, whereas the state is a sort of expression of the people's will and therefore has much wider legitimacy. Two very different things. I believe it's similar in German.

I sometimes wonder if this semantic quirk has exacerbated the general skepticism of English-speakers towards collective action.

This is like asking, "What are some good books?" Are people here really so guileless that they're listening to podcasts simply because they have no ads? I don't get it. You could give me 100 ad-free football podcasts and I'm not listening to any of them because I'm not interested in football.