PhilipTheBucket @ PhilipTheBucket @ponder.cat

Posts

595

Comments

1,799

Joined

1 yr. ago

Moderating

---

The point was, just like in the general election, some people were attacking the least genocide friendly of the options, and saying they were doing it because they hated genocide. Which is a weird thing to do (especially since in both cases it seemed to result in the more genocide-friendly option winning).

I don’t want to bother the mods for this, but consider this a report for “bunch of shit.”

"Oh god! Are you trying to get me demonetized? Your flag has nudity, murder, and an explicit call to violence. But you know what, Virginia? That’s kind of badass." -CGP Gray

Yeah. This is why we have judges. A really surprisingly large amount of a judge's job is looking at the situation and saying, more or less, "You know what? That's a bunch of bullshit. Here's what we're going to do."

That's the whole reason there is "precedent" and then sometimes precedent gets overturned. They're just using their, you know... judgement. There's a whole interplay of written laws vs. what happened before vs. what should happen now, it's not just like the judge is the CPU and then they execute the law like a program and then output a judgement.

The Wall Street Journal reported as part of a story detailing the billionaire's mega plans to have a "legion" of children to address the issue of declining human population

I absolutely could not believe that this is true. This has to be someone misunderstanding or exaggerating something. Even Elon Musk is not this psychotic.

From https://www.huffpost.com/entry/elon-musk-ashley-st-clair-legion-babies_n_67ffef3ee4b0485a7732a835 is this:

Elon Musk is directly messaging women on his social media platform, X, to solicit them to have his babies in order to grow a “legion” of kids with high intelligence as part of his mission to save “civilization,” The Wall Street Journal reports.

Sources told WSJ that Musk, who currently has at least 14 children with four women, wants to build a “legion” of children because he believes “civilization is going to crumble” due to declining birthrates.

I still can't believe that it's real.

Jesus Christ man. I didn't read that far in.

Imagine if she could get kicked out of the country, or deported to a mega-prison, for doing the right thing. That would, presumably, also be a risk, and one that some people in the face of would still do the right thing.

“let’s see if his actions match his words”

Would have been a perfectly reasonable thing to say. On the other hand, you said:

His adoption by a lot of centrist Dems, and his absorption and placement as DNC Vice Chair makes me wonder if he’s just the Centrist Dems’ vehicle to remain the top influence in the party by replacing old Centrists with young Centrists.

... which is a load of puckey. He was elected by the full membership of the Democratic Party. He's trying to primary old and centrist leaders. Could it all be a smokescreen? Sure. Why are you comitted to shitting on him preemptively and immediately reacting to a story about him refusing to go along with the DNC's attempts at "party unity" with some of their centrist leaders, and trying to specifically make efforts to primary them, by saying he obviously has the support of centrist leaders so maybe we can't trust him?

Now, I am very interested in why you seem dead-set on immediately and unwaveringly and unquestioningly trusting him

Pretty sure I did nothing of the sort. When did I do that? Quote me.

Because at this point you’re starting to look like you’re pushing an agenda.

Honestly, I'm just irritated at pointless fact free purity-testing of anyone who is left who is trying to accomplish anything at all. It had partly nothing to do with anything you said, it's just I've lost patience with this kind of harassment and questioning of anybody at all who has a realistic chance of doing something good. Let the fucking guy make some progress without immediately starting to bite your nails about what flaws he might have. Maybe he's a horrible centrist in disguise. Sure, could be. On the other hand, he could be somebody who is trying to do what you say you want to see happen. Let's see without starting to throw "centrist dems" "old centrists" "young centrists" at him for more or less no reason at all.

If anyone is splintering or diffusing progress, it would be someone other than them popping up and trying to do their own thing.

So no one is allowed to "pop up" and start to try to make progress. Otherwise, they're "splintering." Got it.

And like I said, if he does push for progressives, that would be good.

Quick question: What is he doing, as the main topic of the article you're posting under?

I mean it’s just weird. I won’t say you’re in any way wrong to be suspicious of anything DNC-related. But it just seems weirdly and pointlessly extra in this case. And this precise suspicious hyper-criticism of anything in the left that seems to be helping but doesn’t pass some weird purity test (or even, as in this case, maybe doesn’t pass some weird purity test, just based on no knowledge at all) does a lot of damage. It’s a good way to splinter and diffuse progress and put up obstacles to people who are trying to accomplish something.

Put it this way: If one mid-level priest said he wanted to do something about pedophilia in the Catholic Church, that would be good. It wouldn’t really make me decide to be Catholic, but it seems like a good indication about them. If someone said “Yeah but he’s CATHOLIC CHURCH so how do we know he’s not a pedophile himself!” then that’s weird. Even if maybe the person has a point to be cautious, it’s just a weird point to decide to make.

Centrist Dems are half the reason we have Trump.

More than half, I'd say. That's precisely one reason I think it's weird that you're coming out against someone who wants to get rid of them.

Don’t try to frame this as some anti-Left thing

I mean, this guy's left, and you're anti- him. Sounds like it is an anti-left thing. Again, that's actually what irritated me about your message.

this is about milquetoast, feckless neolibs who have and still do spend enormous effort preventing the party from actually aligning with its voting base.

Absolutely.

If he’s not that, I support him fully!

Yeah. If he's not a child molester, then I support him fully too! Isn't that a weird way to frame things?

Makes perfect sense. After all:

• We can't support the Democrats until they get better on Gaza
• We can't support the people who want to improve the Democrats until they don't have the support of "centrist" Democrats and thus demonstrate their cred <- You are here
• We can't support the independents like Bernie Sanders until they stop being "sheepdogs" or whatever
• We can't support the et cetera you get the idea

Bottom line, we can't support anything on the left. It's better to just let the right wing (or the conservative/corporate wing of the Democrats or et cetera) win whatever contests, until we all go to El Salvador.

Got it. I completely agree with you. This is totally sensible.

/s

I think he thinks women are icky and scary. Vaginas, he likes.

The beauty of it is that it is stochastic. It doesn’t need to be an organized effort that would be detectable systematically and could be punished accordingly, it just needs thousands of random people to make thousands of random decisions and all add up.

I’ve seen people display coffee sacks or other industrial folderol in pretty much exactly this way. I think it’s probably just random decoration.

Yeah bo

Just send a DM to @bot@rss.ponder.cat with something like:

/add {rss_feed} bitofarambler@crazypeople.online

(You have to be a moderator for the community in question)

Seriously. It's more like the citizens are wondering if it's safe to stay or how we should be getting visas somewhere else, or if it's better to stay and fight. Coming in a on visa right now is not smart.

Yes, Bernie Sanders was getting arrested at civil rights protests in the early 60s, and then writing op-eds about how socialism was the answer and a better world is possible in the 80s, because he was all being built up as a fake candidate for the present day and all leading up to where CNN wanted people going on and talking about wealth inequality and problems in the health care system.

Clearly. It all makes perfect sense. You're actually 100% correct as far as the whole operation being pretty much fake, but then someone comes on who's trying to poke a hole in the fakeness and you're getting real emotional and insulting about how that, we have to not pay attention to.

Also, you participated a little bit with the voter-fraud user down below.

Fascinating.

I'm reporting you for voter fraud lol. There are four upvotes on your comment that are pretty suspect, including at least one that comes from an account that has a history of obvious clumsy voter fraud. I'll put details in the report.

Anderson early in the exchange sadly looking down at his notes, as he begins to understand that things aren't going to proceed along the rails that he wanted, is absolutely perfect to behold.

IDK. I asked one of the Cornel West boosters for why they supported him, and they linked me to a speech that was a mixture of incoherence, empty self-boosterism, and random things that pretty much everyone agrees with ("it's a problem that there's no much money in politics, the whole thing is corrupt" like yes dude I think we figured that out at this point).

Out of curiosity, I read some of "Race Matters" which I guess was part of what put him on the map originally, and I thought it was genius. The parts of it I happened to read just sampling it were honestly some of the best stuff on the issue I've ever read. One random example, he talked about the spread of cynicism and nihilism in the black community as a huge impact of these systemic problems, and then how it can compound a lot of the problems that they face and make it difficult to ever navigate their way out of it on an individual level. I have never heard anyone with a public voice talk about it the way he did, without then turning it around as a reason to blame the black community for their own problems (by pretending that it arose from nowhere, or because of racial reasons, as opposed to being an incredibly logical and natural reaction to the way they're being treated by social and governmental systems). And, he basically said that it's the black community's problem to overcome that challenge, since it's there and present, and there's no one else who can come in from outside and solve it for them. Even though it's not their fault.

So I do respect him intellectually (at least as of the point when he wrote that book). I don't feel like the people who were boosting him as a spoiler candidate are even aware of any of that, though, and I think the reason they were promoting him are potentially pretty much the exact same reasons why some people might start promoting Smith.