The material results that I care about, that reasonable adults care about, revolve around stopping the Federalists, Fascists, and Fundamentalists. Or are you on their side?
So the answer to that question is “Yes”. Got it. I’m not surprised.
The material results that I care about, that reasonable adults care about, revolve around stopping the Federalists, Fascists, and Fundamentalists. Or are you on their side?
So the answer to that question is “Yes”. Got it. I’m not surprised.
He’s actually been surprisingly effective. Your distaste doesn’t negate his numerous policy accomplishments with tangible benefits.
Even disregarding that, even if he was ineffective, he’s not trying to concentrate power into the hands of Federalists, Fascists, and Fundamentalists, so he is by default the superior choice to those who are. The material results that I care about, that reasonable adults care about, revolve around stopping the Federalists, Fascists, and Fundamentalists. Or are you on their side?
IDGAF who does or doesn’t accept blame for whatever. I care about material results; my future, my family’s future, my neighbors’ futures, the future of the people who live in this country, and this world. IDGAF how ideologically pure a politician is, or who’s wrong or right, or who gets away with whatever. I care about the people who are going to suffer if the Federalists, Fascists, and Fundamentalists keep establishing their foothold judge by judge, bill by bill, ruling by ruling.
This isn’t grade school, this isn’t a game, this isn’t about fair. There are real stakes here. People will die. I’m not heartless enough to play the blame game with lives on the line. I’m voting harm reduction because I’m an adult and I play the hand I’m dealt. Righteously losing doesn’t help anything but ego-centric deontology.
Uh huh, and historically violent authoritarian transitional regimes are always so willing to step aside after the transition.
There’s a difference between someone-needs-to-coordinate-and-manage-complex-undertakings “authoritarian” and line-the-dissidents-up-against-the-wall “authoritarian”. Tankies are the latter.
Lots of people say lots of silly things, nonetheless Trump is worse for the proletariat than Biden, and turning your nose up at the lesser evil endangers real people when the greater evil wins. You don’t have to vote for the greater evil to help tip the scales in their favor. Accelerationism is authoritarianism with extra steps and no one in the driver’s seat.
A tankie is, broadly, someone who wants to effect left-wing ideology using authoritarian methods. It originally referred to those who defended the USSR using tanks to suppress the Hungarian Revolution, but it could be aptly used to describe those who defend China’s actions in Tiananmen Square. It’s rightfully used as a perjorative, since authoritarian enforcement is antithetical to leftism, particularly communism.
Tankies are hypocrites who didn’t understand their self-proclaimed ideologies. If someone’s idea of communist praxis is lining up dissenters for the firing squad, you’re dealing with a tankie.
Do you? “Thousands” is the word in question here
Keurigs are actually pretty convenient when you’re only making one cup. The trick is to get one of the reusable filters and just use whatever coffee you like.
That’s another big reason to practice for sure, but I think it’s a stretch to call that belief.
This is a pretty broad question, it really depends on what you mean by “believe in religion”:
Believe that a particular holy book is literal, historical truth.
Believe in the moral teachings of a particular holy book and follow its practices.
Believe in the existence of a universal higher consciousness (God)
1 is a vocal minority, and the reasons have been sufficiently explained elsewhere in this thread.
2 is much more common, and can derive from a number of reasons. Cultural identity generally determines which holy book (and interpretation thereof) you follow, but the attraction to moral framework is deeper than cultural identity. Having a set of guidelines to inform moral behavior, and a method of alignment and focus (prayer) is very valuable.
3 is a metaphysical consideration, and pops up even in 2024 because consciousness is still a mysterious phenomenon. Every explanation leads to roughly the same conclusion: if consciousness is an emergent property of complex interconnected systems, then it stands to reason that the most complex interconnected system (the universe) is more likely than not to be conscious; if consciousness is some external force that complex systems can “tune into” like a radio, then it stands to reason that “consciousness” permeates the universe; if consciousness is something else which defies scientific description, then it stands to reason that there exists some agency to dictate the rules.
Those are, broadly, the rational explanations of consciousness of which I’m aware, and they all imply a universal consciousness of one variety or another. If you can think of another I’d love to consider it.
If you meant something else by “believe in religion”, let me know.
They’re good when they’re crumbled as an ingredient or topping. As-is they’re gross.
Frankly I’ve accepted it, minimized my interactions with the database(s), and don’t worry about it. “They” don’t have anywhere near the capacity to meaningfully process all that raw data for every person. Sure if you’re popping up red flags left and right you’ll get assigned to someone who will scrutinize you more thoroughly, but as long as you’re boring (in a traceable capacity) no one has the resources to go over all your messages with a fine-toothed comb.
If you don’t like being in a database, don’t interact with systems that lit you in a database. Drop social media, get rid of your phone, stay off the Internet. There are steps you can take to avoid extensive records in “the system”, but people generally don’t like taking them because “the system” has fun content they don’t want to miss. If you want to have your name and eat it too, just be boring.
Breakfast in America is always a fun album to play for people, because you get “Wait, this song is Supertramp too? And it’s the same album??”
I disagree here because I don’t think they’re really underrated at all. They’re fantastic, and generally rated as fantastic by most people who’ve listened to them. Maybe they’re not as popular as they could be, but they’re still pretty darn popular.
You said you’d never heard it that way, I just wanted to clarify that I communicated the right pronunciation since “sewer” is a bit more drawn out than I meant to imply. All good
Closer to sewer, or “doer” or “fewer”. Compress it to one syllable. Think “ooh” not “ohh”.
Optimists are aspirational. The placebo effect is real, and pessimists use it counterproductively.