LovingHippieCat @ LovingHippieCat @lemmy.world

Here's my substack, I write about videogames and have good and bad takes ab

---

Read more

Posts

0

Comments

361

Joined

2 yr. ago

Yes, the democrats and republicans supported the war on drugs for decades, but just because those things happened doesn't mean they'll continue to happen. Democrats have been leading the way most of the time when it comes to legalization and other weed related issues like banking or drug testing, even in congress with multiple legalization measures introduced and even passed by the democratic house despite the senate not picking it up. The party wasn't for legalization back when they had a super majority, that sucks, and it's okay to be angry that that didn't happen. But it's being worked on now, and the present is just as important as the past. Rescheduling would be a first step that can really help the industry and consumers and patients. It's not the last step, there has to be more done to help undo the disastrous effects of the drug war, but it is a first step. We have to remember that the democrat party is not the party from back in the day, even from 2009 when they last had a super majority, it's changed a lot. For instance, changing their stance on gay marriage and other lgbt issues, that was fantastic and while it should have happened sooner, it still happened and that's important. Also I think it's important to remember that despite there being a level of bipartisanship when it comes to legalization outside of congress, the republican party has devolved into the "stop everything democrats want to do" party, so full legalization could take a while since they're so fucking hell bent on breaking congress and the federal government. Unless democrats get another super majority in the senate, something that isn't likely, legalization through congress is next to impossible.

Nope, the process to reschedule has been started, it'd be changed to schedule 3, which, unless you think tylenol with codeine is illegal, it wouldn't be illegal anymore.

Just so everyone knows, the DEA is actively reviewing a report from the Department of Health and Human services where they recommended to reschedule weed to a schedule 3. Biden had directed HHS to research to see if it should be rescheduled, so while biden hasn't unilaterally legalized weed (something that would quickly be challenged in court since presidents don't usually have unilateral power for most things), he has definitely been pushing it not be schedule 1. Which, while not legalization, would be a huge step for not just the industry but for all the medical patients out there who have had their doctors refuse to treat them because they use weed for pain.

Multiple democratic supermajorities? There hasn't been a democratic super majority since Ted Kennedy died in August of 2009. Which was before anyone had even legalized for recreational use. I'm not saying the DNC hasn't been dragging its feet, but they have not had a super majority to just do it themselves unilaterally.

A few people in these comments are essentially saying there are no real differences in the parties. Don't get me wrong, there are 100% things that the parties agree on, like capitalism, supporting Israel, and continuing to fuck with countries that we really shouldn't be messing with. But here's the thing, if you think the parties are the exact same then you most likely aren't having your rights to exist threatened by this election. Republicans want to ban books, want to have lgbt people put in prison for just existing, want to keep people of color from voting, want to have women getting illegal abortions so more of them die, want to force Christianity on the entire country because they think they're the religion that's "right", want to make trans people illegal and force all of us to detransition or be put in prison, want to block all immigrants and deport the ones that currently exist in the country, want democratic lawmakers to be killed in a mob, want to go on a murderous rampage killing all they deem to be scum of the earth, want to literally bring on the rapture, want to establish death and work camps like what was done in nazi germany, want to have putin take over all of europe because he has dirt on them, want to remove all governmental assistance so that poor people die more often, want to eliminate all public education, want to take away voting power from women, want to make the internet as uniform and unsafe a place as possible, want to have disabled people be unable to afford to live so that they die, want to strip all workers rights and go back to before we had unions, want to criminalize homelessness to the point that they are literally dying because that's easier, want to increase fossil fuel consumption because they don't think that global warming is real, want to make life on earth as shitty as possible because they think they're gonna be raptured up and won't have to deal with the ramifications of their actions. I could go on but this is already a really long comment. There are important differences to the parties, even if you personally won't be significantly impacted by those differences.

The article uses a single black college student who says he might vote for trump, and a single "liberal climate group" poll from a recent New York Times article. So a single student and poll mean that America is not realizing how bad things would be? If that was true there would be far more republicans winning special elections and the house would have swung to a much larger majority for the republicans. The problem lies in the polling and assuming polls are at all accurate. Polls haven't been super accurate for a while. Polls said Biden would be in a dead heat in 2020 but he won a decent victory, far more than the polls expected. The polls said 2018 was gonna be a good year for democrats, which was right, but the polls far underestimated the turn out. In 2016 the polls had Clinton winning over trump but that didn't happen in the states it needed to happen in, despite most of the polls saying it would. In 2022, the polls expected republicans to get over 20 or 30 seats. That didn't happen. Using barely any evidence to show how America isn't understanding whats going on just ignores that the majority definitely understand. Its just that 43-46 percent of voters, who are the most likely ones to respond to polls, will always support trump. We can't base our view on the election just because of polls. Look at the actual elections that democrats usually have been winning where they need to be winning.

Also, it's not that I don't think there are people who don't understand how bad a second Trump term would be, it's just that those are a minority and will get smaller as the election gets closer.

Of course at the end of the day, we just have to vote. Ignore the polls, they're all bullshit, you just gotta vote.

The writers of this terrible terrible article are Matt Cole and Chris Nicholson. I have looked up both of them.

Matt Cole is Ceo of Strive. A company specifically created to work against diversity in the tech industry. Here's Strives site where it talks about the history. It was created with Vivek Ramaswamy (Vivek rhymes with cake for pronunciation). Which if you know him, then you know how crazy this article really is.

Chris Nicholson has a lot of people sharing his name. One is, as of 2018 at least, the ceo of skymind, an ai company that doesn't even have offices in the US. Another is the ceo of mpulse mobile, a sub company of mpulse. It's a Healthcare company that seems to do a lot of software development for that industry. Another is a partner at Russel Reynolds Associates, a pretty standard looking UK lawfirm. Yet another is an Australian Sailor who's competed in multiple summer Olympics. I'm unsure which this Chris Nicholson is. Probably not the Olympian.

I know this was an opinion piece but I'm rather surprised to see this from the hill. I don't really care for them but this seems to be a step in a much worse direction. It's possible it's been heading that direction for a while and I just haven't noticed it since I don't really pay attention to their clickbait.

The press release even has a "quote" from chat-GPT even though it is not an AI so is not capable of making the quote without prompting. This is so so stupid.

In case anyone wants to watch the video, like I do on Monday mornings, turns out HBO is now posting them on youtube on Thursdays so as to "drive up viewership" on Max.

While the incel movement may have seemed to be just some men who found community in others who haven't been in a relationship, something rather innocuous. It very quickly got hijacked into what it is today. It went from "I haven't been with a woman yet but I'm still looking and in the mean time i have my friends" to "It's women's fault that I haven't been with one and they use sex for power and are horrible people" and it devolved into worse things from there. The incel community was preyed upon by misogynist far right fascist and nazis. They were assaulted with propaganda in their communities, a place they had finally found that they were comfortable in. And when you are around those you care about, and they start espousing bigoted beliefs, some start to agree with it, and then most of them fall for it. It's not unreasonable to want community. Everyone wants that. But the incel community quickly became a community of people who hated that they were virgins and were willing to take their anger out on others. Particularly women identifying individuals.

You say they are lacking in a way they can't get women, I don't think is wrong. They really haven't been taught well by our society how to interact with women. They're trying to get into a relationship using what they've been taught, but they're floundering, reasonably, because society has taught them to view women as sex objects. Incels as a movement are a failure of our society, a failure of us teaching our kids how to act around others, including the gender they're attracted to.

I'm not nearly read up enough to give you much more information, but if you want, there's a book called Escape from Incel Island by Margaret Killjoy. It's really good and helps explain things far more eloquently and fully than me, a random lemmy user can.

Also, never having been in a relationship doesn't make you an incel, it just makes you someone who hasn't experienced that yet. And that's okay, we all grow at different speeds, it's okay to not having been with someone. We attach way too much to the idea of being with your first person. It's important to be able to respect and care about yourself somewhat before getting in a relationship, and it's okay if that takes a while. I didn't have that experience until my mid 20s, but it didn't make me any less of a person. Just remember to respect yourself, and to respect the others around you. And also don't treat women like sex objects, we are just humans, like any other. And there are 100% multiple people out there who will be interested in you, even if it takes a while to find one. I know you'll find someone, especially considering you're asking this question. You're willing to ask about tough topics and that is something a lot of people can't do. So good on you.

Highly unlikely this is what the civil war would be like. It's not a state v state thing necessarily although that might be a small part of it. In the first civil war, the south unified and its people largely supported the war, except their slaves. It's unlikely something like that will happen again. It's not impossible but unlikely.

What is much more likely is rural v city. Even in red states, cities are blue and will often vote for blue policies. Rural areas are where things get dicey. They've been largely left behind by the surge in industry and general expansion of the capitalist economy we currently have (they've had a lot of businesses (including grocery stores) close because more people are leaving, and their rural towns are frequently having their hospitals close leaving large swaths of areas where the nearest hospital is an hour away). As such, they've got a grudge against the cities. What's likely to happen is rural counties and their local governments trying to cut off their food supply, starving the cities to win the battle. There's tons more possibilities, but this one I think is the one that's got the highest likelihood.

Another possibility that is scary, but is highly dependent on the party of the people in power, is the government using their power to actually strike the cities, like in Syria where Assad bombed and used chemical weapons on his own people. Syria is actually a pretty good example of what more modern civil wars are like, or can be like. Governments v rebels and militias, and cities v rural (although there's much less rural land in Syria).

If you're interested, the podcast It Could Happen Here has a great first season where they go over possible disasters including a civil war and a pandemic (it was actually made in 2019 so before covid). It's really helpful and can teach a lot, especially for an outsider from across the pond. It also does a lot better job giving an explanation and actual sources.

Hope this helps since it didn't seem like you were getting a real answer.

Someone at Machine Games watches Ancient Aliens.

State department with its eyes closed: "We have seen nothing"

As a survivor of the titanic once said in a review, Fuck you Rick Berman.

This is fantastic and should never have been close. People who don't think this has worked before for murderers obviously haven't been to a tdor (trans day of remembrance) in November where we list all the trans people that are murdered every year because of them being trans and men freaking out about it and murdering them. Plenty have gotten away with murder using this defense so banning it is amazing.

He's a fucking christofascist. He doesn't think gay sex should just be illegal, he thinks anyone who is queer should be killed because they are sinning against God. Even if he hasn't openly called for that, a key tenant of his faith is that. He's a terrible person who has just gone a bit under the radar so the Republicans could shove him through quickly.

They're still gonna own guns, will just do so illegally. I've known a couple felons who have guns illegally. They're not gonna let a ban get in their way of owning tons of guns.

Thankfully, here in Ohio, we are almost definitely gonna pass issue 1. Abortion is not a winning issue for Republicans right now, which is obviously why they're lying. This November, we are also likely to pass weed legalization, possibly because of the increase in turnout with the abortion measure. Ohio is pretty red don't get me wrong, but both issues should still pass with an okay margin.

She was attacked and defended herself so she got arrested and her attackers got off completely free. That's some peak school zero tolerance policy bullshit. It's also completely insane she has a 500k bail but Trump, who tried to overturn and destroy our democracy so that he could establish a dictatorship only has 200k. This singular case should be provided when people disagree that Trans people are being attacked and persecuted all across the country.

There's tons of dispensaries in Ohio, over 100 at least. And new ones are opening every month. They just moved the medical program to the department of commerce now so it's more likely to have even more dispensaries in the future. The prices are also slowly becoming more reasonable. Rec is coming whether the legislature wants it or not. They might do the same thing they did with medical sometime soon. There's supposed to be a ballot measure for rec here in November alongside the abortion amendment. Hopefully it passes.