Okay, we need to have a talk with all the “the system is working exactly as intended” people.
Look, I understand that obviously it was built to benefit the 1%. But you need to understand when people say the system doesn’t work, they mean the system isn’t working for them. You’re saying the same thing, not adding to the conversation and it kind of makes you sound asinine.
Yep, really stretching the bounds of how far name recognition will get them. All of Christie, Mondelez and Nestle products are barely even edible anymore. Forget the shrinkage, it’d be slop if they doubled the size.
Mondelez used to be a champion of quality but quarterly earrings erode all scruples.
Yep in China is more than willing to assist Russia
If my degree is not relevant to what I’m applying to I will either selectively reveal it or leave it out entirely for this reason.
They say suspiciously green banana in the same way they say Barack Hussein Obama.
I really hope there is a limit to how much Fox New’s daily message of “suspect and hate anything that looks like progress”
Hopefully the concrete benefits of cheaper groceries will sway people.
Let’s set up a very public network to crack down on Canadian universities that try this shit.
Tim Cook for all his faults is always been great at politics and this is an extension of that.
I mean I do think we need to be less puritanical as a society, sexuality is a normal part of the human experience and shouldn’t be viewed as harshly as violence.
I know the main thing is that YouTube is being hypocritical here.
Look at the data. Under Trump, Gaza got an embassy move, funding cuts to UNRWA, and open talk of annexation. Under Biden, it got bombs,but also pauses, pushback, and at least some rhetorical distance. That’s not enough. It’s nowhere near enough. But it’s less. Same with Iran, Trump tore up the JCPOA and maxed sanctions; Biden at least kept diplomacy open. Same with SNAP, Trump gutted it; Biden restored some of it.
I’m not asking you to recognize this scale as legitimate. I’m saying it’s the scale that actually exists and the difference is real.
The absence of your vote doesn’t punish them, it hands the keys to the people who will do worse, faster, to the communities you’re trying to protect. You want to build mutual aid and unions? So do I. But those need time and cover to grow. One administration gives you more of both than the other.
Being morally pure does absolutely nothing for the people lives that get actively worse.
While we do that we need to also work in primaries to get people into Congress that will apply pressure for change because if you look at any actual societal progress we’ve had it’s been civil action in tandem with political pressure.
Withholding your vote only puts gasoline on the fire. Voting for something is not support, it is selecting from available paths and they are not of equal harm. The most important elections to vote in are primaries where you get to choose who you’ll be choosing.
Please note that voting should always be done in conjunction with civil protest and mutual support networks.
I actually got rid of windows instance entirely, I just realized one day that I hadn’t booted it up in 6 months, thanks Linux.
Is it like how a non plug-in hybrid uses the battery to improve efficiency?
I can see the point when more than 1% of the population votes in primaries
We need to show the Democrats that being conservative light is not good enough by making it have consequences in primaries.
The lesser of two evils trap demoralizes people and makes them think that this is the best we can hope for from a politician but it’s not, We’ve seen a rise of left-wing politicians lately and we can do better.
We must participate whenever possible and the choices aren’t always great but they do still matter.
So yes, Democrats actively doing less damage than the Republican counterpart, and no it isn’t good enough.
People deserve a world where hope can be a part of it.
Neat, now imprison the people responsible for grievous negligence
You’re telling on yourself in real time you’re accusing me of not seeing outside my position while demonstrating exactly that.
You’re diagnosing my motives by something you literally cannot know because you have not engaged with a single word on the screen.
You’re making unfalsifiable claims for the sake of, what I can only assume at this point is to insensing me based off of the amount of times you’ve doubled down and never actually responded to the points I’ve made
You’re projecting your own behavior on me without evidence.
You’re claiming that third party is in an online discussion don’t exist while writing a public comment. It may be true that no one’s reading this because we’re so far down the rabbit hole it’s very easy to disprove in general, just think about the last time you read a conversation you didn’t comment in.
“I respond because I want to respond, not hypothetical higher ground.” That’s exactly my point I never said I had any moral higher ground just that there are holes in the argument worth exploring, I’m not trying to win or prove you wrong build a scaffold for respectful online debate. This is an example of you anchoring your own trauma to me.
At this point I would like to respectfully disengage I will still read what you say if you have something to say but I won’t take it any further because at this point it’s cyclical.
You’re proving my point for me: you’re boxing with your own ghosts rather than engaging what I actually said.
You try to use hyperbolic exaggeration to pin a list of positions I have never claimed to hold. This is almost certainly from past arguments.
With this exchange as an example, If I was an onlooker I would see someone who told me that there is a purpose in respectful debate and working to add clarity and consciousness instead of trying to win for onlookers and then another who has had no point engaged it and instead lashed out, that would both effectively communicate the point and teach me how to engage with someone who is talking past me.
You’ve tried to pin a bunch of positions I don’t actually hold on me, I never said that police other people I said to approach ideas and jokes with skepticism.
What you hit me back with is both hyperbolic and not what I’ve actually said. I’m sorry for what happened to you but I don’t see how what I’ve said has any connection to it.
Is your argument that you don’t think anyone else reads what people post on social media, and that it has no effect if they do? Respectfully are you insane?
While this certainly could be true, I would say it’s only that way because state and federal government refuse to invest in our aging energy grid.
with proper taxation and directing that towards upgrading the infrastructure, supporting it is absolutely possible.