Skip Navigation

Posts
1
Comments
2723
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • Whatever you're planning on doing about ICE agents, redirect toward anyone with 9+ figures of net worth.

  • Uh, my argument was the reverse: That it is celebrity worship, and that celebrities have proven substantially more effective presidents. Reagan and Trump have easily been the most influential presidents since Truman, and only because Truman used the bomb.

    My point was that the problem with celebrities in the White House has been their right-wing agendas, not their celebrity status. Their celebrity status enabled them to achieve their agendas in a way that the other, mediocre presidents couldn't.

    Why should we select yet another boring, ignoreable, mainstream, career politician instead?

  • Exactly. The role of the president is defined by the president. They have a cabinet for a reason; they don't need to be experts in everything.

    Presidents entering office with celebrity status have proven extraordinarily capable of pushing their agendas. The problem isn't "celebrity". The problem is that their agendas have sucked. Stewart's agenda doesn't suck.

  • Reagan and Trump have proven that actors and media personalities are extraordinarily good at pushing their agendas. The problem isn't that they were/are celebrities. The problem is that their agendas suck.

    Stewart has consistently demonstrated his agenda, on the air and as a lobbyist. His agenda doesn't suck. His agenda is what this country has been looking for my entire lifetime.

    Don't cockblock my candidate.

  • I don't think you understand my point: what part of your argument justifies ICE bringing harm to this woman? Do you support ICE actions? Do you support something these Nazis want to do?

  • I will allow you only those tools you give to the Nazis currently in charge. What are you going to let them use against us?

  • Do you truly believe that those calling for oppression

    Whatever tool of oppression you are going to use is the exact same tool that will be used against you.

    Paine's message is "destroy those tools so nobody can use them".

    Popper's message is "use these tools until you face no oppression".

    Popper was a fascist.

  • “Becoming her,” would be attacking her because of where she was born, or skin color, or religion, or sexuality. We should attack her intolerance.

    Parent comment wasn't attacking her intolerance. Parent comment was wishing her harm.

    Furthermore: "Religion" should not be a protected class.

    They deserve the ICE treatment.

    As are you: You are wishing harm on her, not on her intolerance. This is the exact distinction I was trying to highlight.

  • Thomas Paine understood the problem.

    He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.

    Karl Popper's philosophy calls for directly and actively suppressing the people you and I deem "intolerant". The fundamental problem with his philosophy is that the Nazis are already in charge. Any method you use to suppress "the intolerant", you give to the Nazis. It goes straight into their hands for them to use against the people they deem "intolerant". Popper asks you to forge the tools of your own demise.

    Thomas Paine's philosophy breaks the cycle. He opposes fascism in general. When you instill Thomas Paine's values in the general populace, you discredit yourself in their eyes as soon as you call for suppressing anyone.

    Fascism that you happen to agree with is still fascism. Popper's actual paradox is that he was a fascist.

  • Oh, it absolutely would. "Reasonable articulable suspicion of a crime" is all that is needed to stop someone. Criminalizing e-bike usage gives yet another "crime" for cops to justify an "investigation" of "suspicious" activities.

    Sure, their "investigation" will ultimately disprove their initial suspicion. But that doesn't make their initial suspicion invalid.

    That initial suspicion gets them the stop, the detention. That initial stop gets your ID in their hands, their questions in your ears. While stopped on that initial suspicion, they get to evaluate your actions and behavior for nebulous "crimes" like "disorderly conduct" and "disturbing the peace" and "resisting arrest". They get to issue contradictory orders, then arrest you for the one you didn't follow.

    The solution to "ACAB" is to strip them of the justifications they have to act, not to expand their scope.

  • Too much protein can damage the kidneys. Certainly don't avoid protein, but don't go overboard.

    If you're trying to up your weight, push carbs. Preferably starches and whole grains, but if you actually need to double your caloric intake, don't shy away from simple sugar. Add a spoonful to everything.

  • Or anyone they "suspect" of being an e-cyclist.

    To a cop, any black man on any two-wheeled vehicle is presumptively an e-cyclist until proven otherwise. They are also "armed" and "fit the description".

    We need to be stripping the old toys away from the cops. The authoritarians don't get new toys until they prove they can be responsible with the ones they have.

  • Those who want to hurt others ... deserve to be hurt themselves.

    ...

    May she get [hurt].

    ...

    Yes, I stripped out some very important words, but those words don't actually change the underlying problem: we are each wishing harm befall other people.

    She wants people hurt; we want people hurt. We're all getting exactly what we say we want.

    By all means, marvel at her stupidity and bigotry, but please stop short of becoming her.

  • Bigots getting what they deserve. Cry me a river.

    Everyone is getting what this bigot deserves. Don't gloat. Their misfortune is ours as well.

  • It's not a survey. It's an ad. It's an ad for noai.duckduckgo.com. The fact that we're thinking it and talking about it means it was a good ad. But it's just an ad. The numbers are entirely meaningless.

    Nothing about this ad says that they are scrapping AI. They aren't. They still provide AI by default. This is a way for the end user to opt out of that default.

  • You can seem reasonable and rational when you distinguish between your opponent's truths and your opponent's lies. John McCain earned a lot of respect when he rejected an attack on Obama and pointed out that Obama was a decent person and family man who merely disagreed with McCain on some political issues.

    If you don't want your opponent to appear reasonable and rational, don't give them opportunity. Lie about everything, all the time. Lie when the truth sounds better. Lie so much that they never have the opportunity to do anything except call you a liar. Lie so much that your opponent loses credibility every time they rebut one of your lies.

    Related: Gish Gallop

  • I shut it off the first time I tried to watch it. Seems like the first half of the premier could have been a flashback in season 2.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • The screws don't even reach through the drywall?

  • There are a wide variety of exotic materials with exceptional strength and/or toughness. I think Graphene would have similar characteristics, if it could be formed into the weapons we see on screen.