Lemmy is getting infiltrated by US supremacist trying to drown out any criticism
Well, given we don’t know who is and who isn’t being genuine, we’re just gonna have to falling back on analysis of what people are saying to determine whether it makes sense or not.
Now what the hell? How was the sword put into the rock 100 feet up 1300 years ago?
Are you gay, or a woman? I’m pretty good at relaxing, and wouldn’t mind having an industrious partner.
I just want to add that a substantial social safety net doesn’t have to be a loss of freedom. You can keep it broad and level and market activity can happen above it while still processing information.
As a libertarians, I often argue with other libertarians about this. To me, being a libertarian is about making liberty the highest value to be sought by governmental design. A reduction of risk for everyone across the board increases liberty. It leaves people free to engage with others as they see fit and to seek profit wherever they will.
That calm thing you’re talking about is huge. One of the prerequisites of anything that can be called freedom is the ability to think clearly, and science has shown that the more stress and uncertainty a person is under chronically, they less clearly they can think. Freedom means being able to do what you choose, and people can’t really choose if they’re sleep deprived, full of adrenalin and cortisol. Like, the psychological literature calls that “ego depletion”, and with good reason. A person whose willpower budget is always drained, and therefore can’t control themselves, is not a free person.
Never underestimate the ability of a few good policies to increase individual liberty. Indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.
Hit me up when you come back. We can get a full bag of double cheeses, and we can roll all day.
If I were President, and I were meeting with an enemy face to face, and they saluted me, I’d salute them back.
I have not served in any military and am not aware of the official meaning of a salute.
But I have had enemies and if I were meeting with one of my enemies and they saluted me, I would salute them.
This is just based on my gut feel of the gesture’s meaning from watching movies. My gut feel is it’s a combination of:
I could be wrong, and I’m asking for correction if I am, but based on that I’d salute an enemy soldier if he was standing there ready to meet with me.
Thing is though, with a politician it’s different. I don’t know if Trump’s ever been shot at. Probably not. So the “hello, spiritual brother” thing that can apply to any other soldier even enemy is less there with a politician.
I don’t know. Just saying it seems natural to me to salute an enemy. Like “this sucks, maybe we can end it today” feeling to it for me. Framing the war as a problem they’re facing together.
I simply cannot see Shrek without seeing Joe Rogan
Yeah I’ve run into this a bit. People say it “doesn’t understand” things, but when I ask for a definition of “understand” I usually just get downvotes.
I’m this way with sex. I haven’t had sex in six years, and I haven’t had decent sex in like fifteen.
I used to be so sexually confident. Now I avoid it because I’m scared of being shamed for sucking at it.
I do all my web development on a $4000 Mac!
Just look at all my lovely color choices!
It’s a good question. I suppose it might open the door for more of it, but I don’t really see this as “the moment it became true the POTUS could get away with murder”.
Like, a year or so ago there was a story about finding cocaine in the white house. People were like “Aren’t you shocked?” and my response was “not in the least”.
Yeah “naive” lol. How many Republicans do you discuss these things with, to find out what Republicans believe.
Primarily because when other people are given authority over me, they tend to find ways to shut me down.
Generally speaking I’m ridiculously good at things when I do them my own way, but I’ve often not been permitted to, instead offered “this great option the government has authorized for people”.
It’s just like I need the leeway to innovate and prove my worth based on outcomes, in order to survive in this world. I am autistic, and I draw a lot of hostility from people. The problem is, people won’t acknowledge (hence own and then turn off) this hostility. Everyone believes they’re a great person and so the mechanism by which they can actually improve is missing.
What am I trying to say here?
I guess I’m saying I don’t trust people to be consistent with their compassion. I trust people’s self interest more than I trust their compassion, and in my experience the compassion comes with rules abojt what you can’t do, and when I stay inside the same lanes as everyone else I fail hard and I generally get kicked out of things despite following every rule and performing every duty.
So because all of humanity treats me essentially as a frenemy, and doesn’t even seem to be aware of it or interested in cultivating that awareness, I try to avoid being under the power of others as much as I can, even (especially?) people who think they’re helping me.
Free markets allow the marginalized to succeed without having to cut off 80% of themselves to play the role of a correctly-shaped cookie.
Now, can you articulate some kind of “you’re abused” model of me defending capitalism that goes deeper than “you’re defending X and sometimes abuse victims defend their abusers, therefore your X is abusive”? Or is that as far as the analogy goes?
I have been abused, incidentally. Twice. Both times by people who said and believed that they loved me.
I simply do not trust people’s good intentions for me to produce good outcomes. This is why I think free market mechanisms, where everyone is only entering into deals that both parties want, aside from being morally correct at a fundamental level, is also a great mechanism for cutting through people’s self delusion.
If you aren’t buying what I’m selling, then under a free market that forces me to adapt. Requiring your consent keeps me in line and vice versa.
Non-consensual economic systems, ie the ones not based on free markets, aren’t just morally wrong. They’re also consistent in producing bad outcomes.
If you’ve got more on this “you sound like an abuse victim” angle I’m all ears but so far all I’ve seen is this “people defend abusers therefore defended things are abusive” component to the theory and that’s weak.
I could easily say that people who want someone else to take away their economic consent, for their own good of course, has been addled by abuse. I just don’t, because it’s cheap and uninformative.
The double cheeseburgers differ from the McDouble only in that the McDouble has one more slice of cheese.
The double cheeseburgers are also buy one, get one for $1. Here in denver that means $4.50 for two of them.
Probably the most bang for your buck if they’ve got the same deal going there.
In the circles I follow, it’s called The Ten Demandments
I learned this the hard way for myself.
I’ve lived on the street defending myself against violence, and growing gnawingly more hungry every day, and dealing with sleep deprivation from always being moved along.
I’ve also been a senior software developer at a company that broke promises to me, and I smiled and ate that shit for the money and also to “grow up” and be less naive and idealistic. Also, I started breaking promises to them too.
When I lived on the street I was happy and whole, despite the discomfort. When I was working that dev job I went to the hospital twice with stress-related issues I thought were going to kill me, and separately, shelled out over $7k on neurofeedback training to reduce my beta wave amplitude and cut down on my panic attacks.
That learned me good. I am done sacrificing my integrity for any material comfort. It simply does not work. My body was suffering despite the cushy conditions around me. I was uncomfortable in my own skin, and not in a trivial way. I was fucking ill from that.
Long story short, I realized the reason to stand up and face the cavalry is that it hurts less to die fighting than it does to die running away.
Concealed carry