lemonaz @ gabbath @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

188

Joined

5 mo. ago

Envy.

Spite. The dirty bomb of emotions.

That is absolutely golden. Thanks!

I'm curious: was there a specific episode about this that got you thinking, or was it more the exposure to the whole of the show which kept joking in that particular direction?

They care to a point. Most people want a populist anti-elite approach to politics and messaging but that's off limits. In reality, what you see is the following dynamic:

• Republicans get their cues by testing various talking points on their base to see what sticks. They respond to the response of their base and double and triple down on the most popular. So in a sense get their policy cues from their base, but I left out one crucial thing: they're extremely disingenuous about it because the talking points are mostly just culture war tabloid style outrage bait — moral panics filled with lies and half-truths. Still, to the common Republican voter, this seems like a dialogue.
• Democrats could do the same thing but with real stuff. Even appeals to emotion are fine as long as you're being truthful, because a lot of the time you need to meet people where they are. But Democrats do not talk to their voters at all, they despise them and feel entitled to their vote because hey, look how bad the Republicans are. But then where do they get the policy if they don't talk to voters? Oh, why, the Republicans of course! They triangulate a "common sense" position between their ivory tower ideas (mostly just "civility"), the Republicans and the (pre-programmed) Republican base. Except for the populism, you see, because that's "going low" and they're going to be the adults in the room who "go high".

I hate this worthless octogenarian club of a party, sometimes more than the Republicans.

(I apologize that this turned into a rant. I do want Dems to win, I just want them to stop being, you know, them.)

Yeah for sure. I'm afraid of the "just one more" thing too, that's why I don't think of it as casual. It's more like I expressly forbid it in association with things I do every day or places I am every day, then if it happens in the corner cases once in a blue moon, I'm fine. So for instance, one rule I have is not to buy any packs ever and I don't keep any around the house — you don't move in with your FWB lol. But if there's a crowd of friends or something, we can partake, but it's like a ritual, it has a clear start and end and you don't take it home with you. I specifically modeled it after weed, since I'm not addicted to that at all, and if it's around me I sometimes partake and sometimes don't. That's how I'm currently with cigarettes. Plus, I don't go out much these days, so I barely even see anyone else do it.

That said, you're right: both that it's a different experience for everyone, and that it's better to just never touch it again, but personally I can't live with the thought of being banned from something for the rest of my life, because that implies I've already experienced it for the last time in my life, and that just brings in the existential dread.

As someone who has a relationship with smoking, I feel like I have to say a few words:

Apart from abusing my body in ways similar to what you described, I also smoked for almost 15 years. I started out of stupidity in my twenties. I was not even in high-school, I totally averted that danger... only to step in it years later voluntarily and for stupid reasons (I coughed when trying to smoke pot so I thought I should practice, then found out the high was pretty nice and reasoned it was cheaper to smoke this than pot). Anyway, I gave up 2 years ago, but I tried many times before that. I tried cold turkey, I tried gradually, I tried lighter cigarettes, but nothing worked. The idea of never ever smoking another cigarette for as long as I lived was paralyzing. I also hated how it controlled me, and it felt like avoiding any contact with any cigarette ever was also a form of it controlling me from the other direction. So I worked something out that works for me, and maybe it will for you:

My goal was to solve the control problem more than anything. So I said I don't want a love or hate relationship with cigarettes: I want indifference. It means I don't buy cigarettes anymore, for one. This is probably the most important part, just don't smoke at home or during normal activities. The physical dependence is present in the first 3 days, after that it's just psychological, or so they say, so I took advantage of when I was down with a cold and couldn't smoke, and I kept it up after. I still had some cigarettes left and I smoked them with some friends when I was out for beers, about 2 weeks later. Whenever I felt stressed at work or whatever, I tried to just take my hand and put it on my mouth with like 2 fingers as if I was holding a cigarette and just suck thin air like it was a cigarette then blow the fictional smoke, I'd do it multiple times if needed — this gesture was calming, even if it didn't last as long as it did with the real thing, it was like halfway there. Even though this sounds like quitting, the goal was still indifference, but I was way too much in the "I need to smoke" control zone so I focused on pulling out. Throughout I didn't think of myself as anything related to smoking: I wasn't a smoker because it felt defeatist, I wasn't a non-smoker because it felt unearned, I wasn't an occasional smoker because it felt lazy — I was just trying to take the control out of my relationship with smoking and turn it into something more like "friends with benefits". I had a quit-smoking-timer app on my phone which in previous attempts I kept resetting with each cigarette I wasn't able to resist, but this time I said I'm not going to punish myself anymore: this is a new mindset and it allows for casual smoking just like you casually try some weed at a party if someone is offering and it doesn't make you addicted to weed or a weed smoker or anything like that — you're just having fun — so the app measures the time since I adopted this new mindset and new (non)relationship with smoking.

The first month was probably the only time I kept needing to repeat all of the above to myself. After that it became second nature. It was both easier and harder to do than I initially thought, but I'm confident in myself now because it's more of a fundamental identity change than a change in habits or actions: it's internal, how I see myself vis a vis smoking.

Maybe a mindset like this can help you conquer your addiction, if you're interested. I say "if you're interested" because you probably know already: you have to want it first. It can't be forced on you, it really has to come from you. If it helps, for me it came when I got mad that, after forcing myself to smoke lighter and lighter cigarettes, I learned that they're just as harmful in the long run, so I got even more mad at big tobacco for lying to me like that (apart from all the other horrible shit they've done) and that betrayal was the fuel I used as motivation. It's always the petty stuff that gets us the most, lol. Also, I really don't want to check out that soon. Non-existence is terrifying, and life is finally getting better for me. But I'm also older and need to watch my health, so I'm more open now to actively changing stuff for said health.

I may be using both unwittingly. Many programs on desktop autocomplete two dashes with a long dash (not sure which one) and on my mobile keyboard I use it reflexively and I think the easiest is the Em dash because I don't have to move my finger after the long press. It's such a small visual difference that I always forget which is which.

Interesting. I use them like this — looks cleaner with spaces.

I'm with you. Too much baggage with these terms. I'd rather extract the actual policies from them and run with those directly. Call it "supercapitalism" for all I care (although realistically I think "demsoc" would sound like an intuitive next step after "socdem").

I also agree with the previous person that it's a time for revolutionary change. It's clear the current system needs to fundamentally transform to be stable, either by doubling down on capitalism at the expense of democracy, or by doubling down on democracy at the expense of capitalism. It's clear now that the two cannot coexist.

Nice try, FBI!

I think your comment could be more productive if you drop the "solar shill" crap. Speaking as someone who's never taken sides in this (except against fossil fuels): we're all looking for solutions. And yes, nuclear is good and should grow, as should solar and others. We need to rely as little as possible on energy that harms the environment. Keep it positive because it's a shame for good points to go to waste because they're surrounded by cheap accusations.

Could be. It was definitely a passive-aggressive move against Israel intended to put them in an uncomfortable position and make people think harder about their demonic acts, as well as get media to report on them.

AKA all of them

You're right. But they also need hope alongside what you said. Specifically, hope that there's a future to fight for and that they're not alone.

Pathetic

We told you...

Then there must be pushback from the people who know better. Raising the alarm is not brainwashing — the brainwashing is when MAGA types tell people there's no threat.

Also, Europe needs to get its shit together and stop pulling punches with regard to helping Ukraine.

Yeah, to them it's not a threat — it's empowerment.

He's said some things...

I guess it's a start, though I hope he calls them out more directly. He was pretty close to Francis after all, and Francis even donated his popemobile to be turned into a mobile clinic for Gaza (no doubt to draw media attention to what Israel is doing).