I mean, the article linked is an AOC apologist quite literally bending “definitions and rules to make exceptions” for her after another columnist said she was "just a regular old Democrat now."
Branding the progressive left the “AOC Left” is also problematic and indicative of some hero worship on the author’s part.
This is when you put a small pebble under each of the tire valve caps and screw them down tight enough to depress the spring, open the valve, and let the air out all of the tires
There’s a lot educational material as opposed to trash, and, like in school (but not like on Reddit), I haven’t felt condemned for expressing thoughts that might piss off one dominant political ideology or another.
You probably already have, but if you’ve not yet check out Wine and Proton, I’ve seen numerous guides on setting up a Linux gaming rig that runs Windows games.
Yup. It’s too easy to be “Christian” these days, which breeds complacency and corruption in a hierarchical religious system (which, by dint of its hierarchical structure and opportunity for abuse of religious ideals, already breeds complacency and corruption).
When you legislate (bastardizations of) your religious precepts into law, at no point do you have to consciously “choose” to be Christian, at no point do you have to make the hard choice between, say, holding to your faith or having an abortion because you’re really, really not ready for a kid. It’s just not an option, and you’re forced to do what your Church says, which seems…un-Christian.
Idk. I’ve been trying to workshop this thought—that living in a religious society results in half-baked, hypocritically-“religious” abominations that end up in office—rather than thoughtful, intentional participants in a diverse and thriving society that understand why they choose to live in one way and listen to their neighbors explain why they choose to live in another.
The goal would be to use that approach to get Christians voting for legitimate freedom of choice, but idk if it’s even worth it at this point, it seems pretty impossible to sway them at times.
Looking back at the early days of persecuted Christianity (Roman times) it seems like people were legitimately drawn to these communities because they looked out for each other in a way that others didn’t. Christians have come a long way from that, in a bad sense, and I wonder if the lack of (actual) persecution plays a part in that.
Exxon figured that they’re already good with molecular logistics, so rather than (only) ramp up renewables (which requires new infrastructure for electrical energy management), they’re trying to become the leader in the carbon-capture market.
They’re predicting the carbon-capture market to hit $50 billion by 2030 and as much as $4 trillion by 2050 as industry standards change to require more stringent carbon-footprint management.
Honestly not the worst idea, although it’s def more of a bandaid than a solution. Only issue is that it’s big, bad Exxon, who’s capitalist-style fossil-fuel production is part of what got us into this mess, but, again, this is kinda right in their wheelhouse.
Idk, I counter the “God created Earth” argument with the Biblical injunction to Noah and his descendants to be good “stewards of creation” after the Great Flood, which usually works to end that line of flawed reasoning, at least.
E.g., “God created the world, yes, but he gave humanity dominion over the Earth and trusted us to govern it well. We’ve been given 10 talents (aka gold coins), and when the Master returns we better have used the first to earn 10 more rather than bury them like the frightened servant or waste them like the prodigal son.”
Maybe I’m too participatory, but you can sway religious peeps by arguing using the same framework they do. Worked pretty well on my Catholic parents, although they still question the “degree to which humanity is responsible for global warming,” meh.
The efficacy also be dependent on which denomination of Christianity you’re arguing with, though, since the argument kinda relies on exercising free will and choosing to be responsible as part of the effort to go to heaven, which might not play super well with crazy predestination theology…
As for the echo chambers, yeah, idk what to do about that.
Well, an EU study a few years back found that online piracy has little affect on actual legal sales, except for newly released movies which took like a 4.4% knock on their box-office sales.
Games apparently see an increase in sales, with 100 illegal downloads spurring 24 additional legal transactions than would have otherwise occurred.
That said, I support studios/musicians/devs that I care about by buying their stuff.
I refuse to subscribe to the 10+ mainstream streaming services, though. I’m voting with my money, and the current streaming landscape is just as anti-consumer as cable TV was before it.
Idk that anyone in their right minds would ever call Big Mouth’s Elliot Birch “well-adjusted,” but he’s certainly different from classically idiotic Homer Simpson or unhinged Randy Marsh.
You’ve absolutely been self-righteous about it. I think this comment is a good example, as is spam posting the same links without really saying anything other than “or…you could go vegan :) tee hee!”
It’s not productive, and actively turns people off in a time when many of those same people are, for the first time, reconsidering their dietary balance.
It’s like criticizing an out-of-shape person at the gym. Maybe they’re not doing it the way you think it should be ideally done, but they’re at least trying and doing something rather than giving up entirely.
I mean, the article linked is an AOC apologist quite literally bending “definitions and rules to make exceptions” for her after another columnist said she was "just a regular old Democrat now."
Branding the progressive left the “AOC Left” is also problematic and indicative of some hero worship on the author’s part.