sensiblepuffin @ sensiblepuffin @lemmy.world

Posts

1

Comments

312

Joined

2 yr. ago

I don't know about extremely targeted, but... Tallahasee? They're probably safe there.

Re: coherent answer, that's okay. I'm rarely coherent.

Cancel culture is most certainly a thing. It has the effect of saying to people "hey, if you don't change your views, then your life is going to be a little more unpleasant." You'll get dirty looks when you order coffee with your MAGA hat on, or get laughed at when you drive your Cybertruck down the street. No one is entitled to not have these things happen to them, so in my mind they're fair game.

The reason cancel culture has largely failed is because instead of hearing numerous people say "hey, your opinions and actions make me a little uncomfortable to engage with you as I normally would another person, and so I'm going to not engage with you", conservatives have instead retreated to their own corner (think treehouse that says No Girls Allowed) to all gather and complain that no one else will play with them. In short, they've taken the wrong lesson from it.

The way that podcasts and other methods of engagement have changed the way shame works is an example of this, not evidence that it doesn't work. I would argue that if your identity is built largely on being disrespectful of certain groups of people and looking down upon them, your identity doesn't really deserve to exist. I disagree that Trump "understands" just about anything he says. He has ridden a wave of podcast bros, crypto fanatics, undercover racists, gun nuts, and other people who have taken the wrong lesson from the admittedly annoying moralizing that people have sent their way.

Fascists have most certainly taken advantage of the landscape to boost recruitment and foment dissatisfaction and anger, but I think once again, we're learning the wrong lesson. We need to stop being so tolerant of those who do not in turn show tolerance.

I appreciate the anecdote, because I think it's happened to all of us. I had a similar interaction with someone who balked at my usage of the word "homeless" (I live in a city, so it's come up once or twice), insisting that I should instead call them "unhoused".

I think the important point in your anecdote is saying "it's unsettling and angering to be called out for doing/saying something racist when you in fact are not racist". My stance on this issue is that everyone's a little bit *-ist. Instead of concluding "people can do and say racist things while not being racist", I think a more helpful conclusion would be "people do and say racist shit all the time without meaning it because we have a lot of racism built into our brains".

I agree with you on the othering, however. I dislike when people try and put racists, sexists, etc. in a timeout corner, mostly because it seems to be with the aim of declaring themselves A Good Person rather than actually affecting any social change. I think it's more helpful to say "hey, look, we're all born with a lot of baggage from our environments and parents, and we don't get to choose how our brains are molded".

Okay, let's go down this road. I think you've touched on something important, so I genuinely want to get this.

How have the left played a "huge emotional role" in the polarization? I suppose you could argue that "the libs" or progressives have essentially started to shun those who they find don't agree with them on certain key issues (abortion/birth control, immigration, etc.).

But how does this differ from how political discourse has been for the last few decades? People want to act like cancel culture is this new thing that Millenials invented, but societies have utilized shame in order to shun unwanted or undesirable opinions forever. Really, the only thing that's changed from my perspective is that people have started drawing lines in the sand, and conservative reactionaries stamp all over the lines, then go Pikachu-face when they're boycotted.

If 2A maniacs seriously thought that its purpose was to establish a militia for local defense, they would a) shut the fuck up and b) go enlist in the National Guard.

So your argument is that stupid people are falling for really transparently disingenuous PR stunts and that neither those perpetuating those stunts nor the ones falling for it have played a huge role in it.

Moving away from FPTP is, for democracy, the crucial first step that very few seem to have taken.

Hard disagree. It's really easy for candidates to talk the talk on the campaign trail, and then do a 180 once they're in office.

That being said, this doesn't work if you let them use flowery speech and vague promises. If you had parties submit a platform of actually actionable decisions they would make (e.g. "decrease the federal minimum wage"), you'd be able to suss out what they actually want to do. It would also provide a rubric for re-election - how many of the things you wanted to do did you accomplish? Are there good reasons why you weren't able to?

It's extremely disappointing to me (admittedly in the US) that Covid seems to have obliterated any chance for a large-scale investigation on payment processors' stranglehold on our financial systems. The fees that Visa/Mastercard/etc. charge, especially for tiny merchants with insanely low transaction numbers, are criminal.

Turns out you don't become one of the world's richest men by not being a fucking selfish coward.

Reserving judgment, but "unfiltered" places on the internet usually tend to veer one way.

Think he'd rather do that then not kowtow to Trump out of fear.

Usually RCV is an initiative or referendum depending on how your state does it. In mine, it's just a separate issue on the back that we have to vote for, alongside things like "should we institute a tax for schools" or "should we approve building a new park". Entirely separate from voting for candidates for any position.

Don't forget a little note saying "Think this is stupid? Vote for Ranked-Choice Voting!'

That makes a lot of sense, and very much tracks with what I've experienced of DHS. Scumbags.

I think they're funded just fine, but recent events have created some unusual expenditures for the SS.

It's a fair argument, especially given how much... entertainment he seems to derive from owning it.

Hey, everyone deserves two or three back and forths before I write them off as not really wanting to have a debate on a thing

A cable subscription isn't a depreciating asset, though.

The cultural victory, if you will.