The phrase is about hierarchy. Any metaphysical claim can be used to create a “power over” relationship. If a metaphysical belief causes an individual to behave differently a “power over” relationship has been established.

I sense Noble Savage and Orientalism in drags arguments. Why are “power over” relationships stemming from religion only a “white” person problem? Is drag familiar with the Rohingya and their oppressors?

Sometimes the units are given cute names like “wiggly waggly units” to make physicists cringe. Acknowledging a unit with cute names when the unit is not important is entertaining.

Banning ownership becomes a game of catch. Use whatever you have: 7.62x51mm, arrows, rocks, ect.

Roast pumpkin puree can be added as filler to sauces. Bottom right option seems fine too. Why kink shame?

Wanting an end to needless slaughter, healthcare and working equipment sounds reasonable. I am glad there are reasonable voices on Lemmy.

I am probably missing a lot of information on Israel, but continued learning is important. I recently learned about the USS Liberty incident in 1967. I am not sure how Israeli’s could mess up that bad. There are still individuals maintaining the incident was deliberate. Who knows? Troubling history abounds.

People have different reasons for being on Lemmy. Examples are looking to feel validated or to pick a fight. I think these folk also existed in ye olde times. Maybe the attention economy is amplifying specific behaviors that would not have been amplified in the olde times.

Being fair, I usually come to Lemmy to argue. I am probably part of the problem.

The vote is worthless outside of swing states. May as well vote your conscience when fptp and Electoral College enshrine disenfranchisement.

Informative. Well written. Seems like the short version of my Intro to American Politics class at Uni. I classified myself as a social democrat back then. I was told I would get more conservative when I was older. Now I classify myself as an anarchist. Not sure what went wrong.

I am grateful local debates are posted online. Instead of listening to music at work I listened to the debates. Living in a one party state is unfortunate. The opposition tends to have similar political convictions to the incumbent.

Agreed. Voting shouldn’t be the only activism we are involved in. My comment was about solidarity against the oligarchs that can decide to make life harder for people they deem icky.

Republicans and Democrats were unable to stop legislation from the Judiciary with Roe v. Wade and later Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. Super PAC’s donate multiple lifetimes of dollars to Presidential candidates in a quid pro quo system protected by the first amendment under Citizens United v. FEC. Americans outside the oligarchy will never exhibit their influence.

If oligarchs find your existence icky, they have the power to remove your “right” to exist. You lack the power to prevent it. Instead of thanking anyone, I suggest we take the power back. Punch up.

Bees and other insects are pollinators allowing food to grow. Say humans succeed at sealing themselves off in such a way that we can grow the food we need without impacting outside ecosystems.

Would humans still need pollinators? Would human pollinator populations be separated from outside populations?

The idea could inspire some entertaining science fiction. The best writer would probably have a background in Entomology and Horticulture.

Naturally fallen fruit has ground bugs enjoying them like slugs. If a slug is already enjoying the fruit, that would violate Jainism?

I respect this argument. I would like to know how Humans fit into the ecosystem.

Humans tend to remove predators from population centers to prevent Humans from becoming prey. The culling of predators allow more prey animals to survive. Humans find themselves competing with prey animals for fruits and vegetables. Humans hunt prey animals to increase yields of fruits and vegetables.

How do we reconcile that our population centers are built on the culling of predator and prey species?

How do Humans balance protection and food production with the morality of minimizing animal and plant death?

What should Humans do with the bodies of culled predators and prey?

I find it eloquently said that oppressors can be public and private. People seem keen to trade public for private oppression. Humanity deserves less oppression of all forms.

Woody Gutherie, Utah Phillips… I guess I am asking what divides county from folk.

I have a lot to learn. I appreciate the insight. I listen to Aesop Rock. I remember his work being with Rhymesayers.

I agree with the music industry problems. Luckily I have found some great hip hop and country recently.

As an anarchist, voting is fine. In addition, build community and help others.

Becoming familiar with other ideas is beneficial. There is nothing wrong with being a Democrat, Social Democrat or Libertarian. Real people hold these political ideas. My transition over years was Democrat since I opposed hawkish Republican imperialism, but I rejected corporate power, so Social Democrat, but I rejected hierarchical power, so Anarchist. Through reading I know Pacifism meshes with any of these ideas. I have never been a Pacifist, but I applaud anyone that takes the time to explore politics even if we do not agree.

Being able to have conversations with people around you is important. Reading theory from other politics helps. Most people around me consider themselves conservative. They say talking points like “I’m for small government”. Having read Libertarian texts like Nozick’s “Anarchy, State and Utopia”, I can discuss the minimal state as a Libertarian idea. I can then transition to “Nozick’s minimal state is not small enough”. In my area this approach opens conversation more than banging a drum about being a Democrat, Leftist, Communist or Anarchist.

Learning to explain math to a computer has been a major blessing.

I referenced a news story in which the parachute on an air dropped aid package failed to deploy crushing people underneath.

Genocide is not ethical. Voting for genocide, but less, does not change the ethics of genocide. Part of the coalition that elected Biden in 2020 will not vote for him again due to his support of genocide.

The options for such voters are:

1. Being complicite in genocide
2. Voting third party or not at all

I understand the two party system created by first-past-the-post. I understand third party candidates are unlikely to win. I understand Democrats are rightfully nervous. If Democrats are nervous enough, they should do something to change the minds of voters that will not vote for genocide.