volkris @volkris@qoto.org
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)
Joined Dec 2022
@B2Spirit_TT@mastodon.social
Huh. Frankly, you seem a little obsessed with Trump there
What in the world does the Constitution have to do with it?
@LALegault @woo asked where to serve the court order and I simply said it depends on the order.
Well, just to illustrate that it seems more complicated that you are giving credit for, I AM one of those bleeding heart liberals, and I'm constantly sad that progressives have seemed to break from that, to go in a direction that strikes me as far more related to the right than my own stance.
So I guess great? Go be loud? Prove whatever you need to prove? But that's part of what to me separates progressives from my identification as a liberal, part of why I don't find myself to be an ally with the progressive cause.
I'm busy looking for solutions due to my bleeding heart. Y'all do y'all, but this is why there seems to be a serious rift between liberals and progressives.
I think it's more complicated than you are realizing.
For example, I don't think liberal is a dirty word and I don't really give a shit what Rush Limbaugh said, but I differ from progressive people because I disagree with them and how authoritarian they tend to be.
Progressive isn't the new word for liberal. Progressive is different, in my estimation, and as a strong liberal I sure wish progressive people WERE liberal.
I feel like the progressive movement left liberals like me behind.
Wow, imperial Supreme Court?
The author does realize that the Supreme Court is not part of the executive branch of government, right?
That's quite the sensational way to describe a deliberative body with no actual authority to execute any of its opinions.
@argv_minus_one@mstdn.party
Never forget that so much comes down to the gamesmanship imposed by the US adoption of first pass the poll voting instead of something like instant runoff or another ranked choice voting system, where every voter, even in primaries, has to adjust their vote based on their prediction about how their neighbor is going to vote.
Unfortunately, so long as the US keeps this system of voting there will always be strategic voting that skews people's votes as they play that game.
But in the end, if we do take your conclusion that Americans are right-wing, well I guess democratic principles would say we deserve to have right wing politicians representing the country. If you really want to go that direction.
If Biden is running such a bad administration and such a bad campaign that he can't manage to run rings around the idiots on the Republican side, that's not criticizing everything Dems do. That's criticizing serious issues with their ability to connect with the American public.
This should not have been a hard contest. Somehow Biden is failing anyway.
And if he is threatening to allow someone like Trump to regain the presidency, seriously, that is worth criticizing.
Yeah, but, here we are.
No matter how good you might personally think Biden is, no matter how much you might agree with all of his policies and all of his accomplishments and whatever else you might like him about, the guy is turning out to be awfully unsuccessful running against a couple of very very flawed alternatives.
I don't care what you think he needs to do. You think racking up some felonies would help? Well I guess he should! Whatever. But the simple fact here is that the Republicans are running really really terrible candidates and Biden is himself somehow managing to lower his campaign to the point where they have a chance.
If you think lack of felonies is the reason, fine. Personally, I think he needs to connect with more voters and stop being so divisive but that's just me.
Oh what a welcoming place Mastodon is.
And that's a great example of exactly what I'm saying:
IF this Politico article is accurately capturing the position (and I'm not saying it is) then the arguments being refuted above aren't part of the position being taken.
Without a specific citation for what's or who's being argued against, the critique is open to being waived off as misunderstanding, at best, the idea it's trying to counter.
If DeSantis said slavery was good because it Christianized those in chains, yeah, that would be a pretty awful stance to take, but that's not among the arguments that have been hitting the headlines, as the Politico article indicated.
Keep in mind that with the way the ActivityPub protocol was designed, more small instances end up taking up more resources and are more costly to run overall than larger ones.
Resource requirements scale with number of instances, not number of users.
I mean, it mainly says something about Biden and the Democratic Party.
A decent incumbent would be running circles around that mess. And yet, Biden is right there down in it.
#USPolitics #Biden #2024
Maybe it would be helpful for citation of specific cases where those arguments are made, so they can be addressed directly, instead of vaguely.
Again, the problem is that maybe those arguments are made or were made, but in the present case they're not the ones I've seen, hence it ends up sounding like a strawman attack.
I'd say specific citation would help set the criticism on a firmer foundation.
People calling for action to be taken against a judge for his highlighting the importance of judicial independence and the rule of law are at least consistent, if not self-aware.
An issue I see in your posts here is that it comes across as setting up a series of strawmen, your putting words in others' mouths about what they're claiming in order to shoot down the things that they're not necessarily saying.
The arguments that you're attacking aren't the ones I've been hearing from the other side, so the stance doesn't come across as actually addressing the issue.
Well because when judicial independence is so under attack, that ends up being kind of a big deal.
We need to be definitive about this: NO, politicians are not to be permitted to interfere in the judicial branch that's there to, in part, act as a check on their activities in office.
@realTuckFrumper
Well such ownership tends to be based on communal recognition anyway. The community sort of chooses its own owner through members of the community agreeing that so and so is the owner.
If the creator or current owner disappears, it would be up to the community to first recognize that and secondly react to it, probably by coming to a general agreement that someone or someones else will be the new owner.
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)
Joined Dec 2022
volkris's choices:
