I disagree that the premise is about “discouraging debate”… But I have no personal desire to debate the issue, so I’m walking away. Others are free to, I’m not discouraging it just because I don’t personally feel the need to debate the topic/perspective.

Imagine a society where those setting the regulations are wealthy in such a way that they face no money related consequences. If they stuff up, or get into a tight spot with money, they’ll be a subsidy, or bailout, or sweet deal with a bank loan, or a wealthy relative, or they sell a property or a stock holding, or a mega yatch, or they’ll just declare that shell company bankrupt. They’ll never have a monetary problem that can’t be immediately resolved.

…this class of people - those with essentially no financial consequences in life, are expected to make empathetic and caring laws, systems, and regulations for the rest of us, for whom money is behind literally everything consequential. For whom a small or temporary lack of money drastically changes us and our quality of life immediately and often with no real resolution.

We have all the consequences they do not, they have all the power we do not. Nothing about this system makes sense, and it’s enough to say we live in a kind of Capitalist Monarchy, posing as a democracy of, by, and for the people.

Seems this guy actually needed a mental health professional.

I wonder how long until Xitter does this sort of thing to the EU Disease Information account:

Community Note:

Covid 19 is not real.

I feel like that level of misinformation is now possible there.

I don’t think the people still on X are going to be listening to the EU disease agency account.

They should (as you say) go where the people are… Which is threads and BlueSky. Follow the crowd.

Probably economic and sociological issues.

Low mental health access, lack of cultural concern/respect for alienated groups, lack of welfare and social safety nets.

The usual stuff that makes people feel like they have no future, and resentful of others.

I’m fine with it.

Which perhaps might also speak to another division, reformists vs revolutionaries. Eg those who want to bargin to make gradual improvements in conduct/practices or believe such is possible vs those who think something more drastic or conclusive is necessary as far as changing everything.

Hace we considered that perhaps certain socially normative messages such as these also reinforce a Capitalist agenda: eg. Keeping leftists from becoming interesting in, and owning/running their own businesses?

I feel plenty of leftists have probably stayed out of business in order to avoid being exploiters… But I’m not entirely sure that’s how things work, or the best outcome possible.

What I’m saying is; culture under Capitalism gets us to recreate messages that reinforce the status quo of base superstructure relations… We do so without knowing, and often without questioning it.

So not to be that guy (but in this case I’m totally being that guy); I’m just asking questions bro!

…and now just actually reality as in radicalized domestic actors, but also The Onion is like a test case, if you can fall for it, then you might have fallen for some amount of Russian bot account activity too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZ5XN_mJE8Y

It happens!

deleted by creator

70,000 BC Soyjacks.

I’ve never had a positive interaction with Lemmy.ml. For me it serves as a quarantine space, and a set of pre-tagged users I don’t personally enjoy dealing with.

…and I’m not particularly averse to Marxists sentiments either, but they’re certainly not good sales people, diplomats, or representative of their cause.

Which is just part of their reputation now. Having a bad experience with a .ml user seems to be part of the lemmy experience. It’s kind of comical how consistent it seems.

That said, I’m sure there’s good people on .ml.

The idea that you’re a credible advisor when you can’t even keep track of whose arguing what is ridiculous.

If you don’t have a response and want to take a break, you don’t have project that onto me. You can just stop responding and walk away.

Oh, just like that thing, from that thing

…you know.

I’m the one saying Libertarianism has been sold to Americans under the brand of Conservatism.

… and it’s important to point out (particularly to young people) that these two philosophies don’t mesh.

You’re free to say “No! All you conservative voters are actually fascists and you’re evil and stupid and need to stay away from everyone!” - and continue to see whether that shaming moralism of young men starts winning them over. You’re free to persist with declaring everything right wing fascist.

After the last election some might suggest it’s not winning any votes.

Wait is Dobbi the real hero of Harry Potter?

El void.

I didn’t say anything about fascism, that’s a whole different topic entirely. So weird that’s you’ve brought a third term in whilst claiming I was playing on the no true scottsman fallacy (which I don’t believe is the case).

Conservativism is about the family unit, the church/traditional culture, and serving your community and nation. Conserving tradition in the name and style of your ancestors (so Confusionism is fairly conservative for instance, as it focuses on ancestors worship and supporting your parents).

Libertarianism is about reducing government, avoiding taxes, and maximizing individual “freedoms”.

They’re simply two different ideologies. Has nothing to do with a not true scottsman fallacy. Has to do with the fact they’re obviously not overlapping sets of values, and in fact oppose each other greatly and often.

However American have been tricked into thinking they’re compatible.

Your comments and those supporting it are proof of this. You’ve been had by billionaire think tanks and mega churches. Brainwashed into seeing them as the same ideology when they’re actually in opposition.

Foolish American. Brainwashed people are bound to vote against their own interests. Lambs to the slaughter.