fine_sandy_bottom @ fine_sandy_bottom @lemmy.dbzer0.com

Posts

0

Comments

42

Joined

2 yr. ago

Exactly. Reporting on what Trump does rather than what he says does not require you to ignore nazi rhetoric.

You can report on the behaviour without breathlessly trotting out every sentence.

The actual story is that Trump is using nazi phrases to stoke furore, generate headlines, and galvanise his base. It's so tiresome that it's working so well.

That's not what I said.

You can acknowledge the behaviour without reporting on every utterance (which is what he wants).

I think that's exactly what's happened with Trump, is that deviance has been defined down in the sense that there's so much focus on, it's almost like an overload of sorts. The result is, you just don't see it — it's almost like he's kind of normalizing this on some level. Even as outrageous as he can be, it's been very difficult, I think, for people to maintain a consistent vigilance and see the threat that he represents because it's kind of overwhelming, really, in many respects.

Precisely why this article shouldn't exist. This article is normalising the behaviour. Reporton what he does, not what he says.

If they could dump it overboard they absolutely would not care whether it continues to burn.

An expert hired by the Taipei, Taiwan-based Wisdom Marine Group “is working diligently to create contingency plans, arrange for a firefighting team, and ensure the necessary equipment is in place,’ the group said in a statement.

Yeah right. They're frantically trying to figure out how to dump the container overboard and whether the penalties would cost less than losing the boats cargo.

Thankfully I'm not in her situation, so i can't judge her actions, but I do wonder whether it would be better not to give the perp the satisfaction of publication.

I can imagine someone jizzing their pants over this article and their little stunt.

The whole point of a representative democracy is to acknowledge that in some cases the populace lack the proper understanding to make an informed choice.

Let me guess...

• not very accurate
• needs to be trained on an individuals brain.

Sure mate, I guess the question of whether it's authoritarian is subjective. Suffice to say rationing would be daft. What about roof top solar?

A very obvious example of post hoc ergo propter hoc. I've never heard anyone believe that, certainly not a majority.

What a silly thing to say.

I think you'd be hard pressed to find someone who doesn't want to use less power.

I suspect what you really mean is that you want to reduce power requirements by some authoritarian policy.

Well how else would they get chopped up by a wind turbine?

Sure ok. This guy drives Australian road trains. Typically 15 axles, 58 tyres.

Chop chop chop.

Last night someone was telling me that the resin they use to make the blades deteriorates over time and covers the area in microplastics. Oh and each turbine needs 40 tonnes of cement which is not carbon neutral.

Bridget, you deserve to be fired from your job because you are terrible at your job, not because you had sex with a woman,

I love this so hard. Epic burn.

You could take photos of the dog humping your dog and make posters & flyers warning everyone.

Better yet, you could post to your local "mother's chat" Facebook group and let them resolve it

My goodness me.

"Talk to all the other people at the park and turn them against one other person in order to avoid an awkward conversation with said person".

If someone at the park told me to avoid some other person because their dog is a humper I world tell them to grow up.