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
@amszmidt I'm not trying to scp is a panacea, but it is pretty neat in what it can do, and it can copy entire directories.
What in the world?
Focusing on facts is how you're manipulated?
Well, I think we're done here.
@jackhutton but that's how the US government was intentionally designed, with subordinates answerable to the executive who was himself subject to impeachment.
It's the key part of the design of the US government that keeps it accountable to the US people.
@davenicolette@mastodon.social I mean, there is a ton of misinformation here...
@dnc those look like grease catchers on a commercial vent hood.
If that's what's happening, you only need to mess with them occasionally to clean them.
But that's not factually what's happening.
That small minority has been thoroughly rebuked by the rest of the Republican party. Huge voting proportions have told them to go away.
Except that Democrats voted to back them, to set up the math such that they had an amplified voice.
If Democrats stopped actively voting in their favor, then the small MAGA minority would be laughed out of the room, mathematically irrelevant.
It's only with Democrat backing that they have any say at all in the chamber.
Yes, Democrats are mathematically to blame for that.
@USelaine I'd say keep it cool
Seeing as my logic is based around the Democrats' votes for shut down, the fact that I don't have a vote myself does not mean that by my logic. I'm allied with them.
It's like you're missing the thing that I am really stressing here, the core element that this is how these Democratic representatives actually voted.
If you focus on anything other than actual votes then you are missing the point.
The thing is, I don't have a vote in the House.
The Democratic caucus of representatives in the House do have votes, though, and they voted to shut it down.
Again, if you think that's a good thing, great! Either way your representatives need to be held accountable for how they voted.
It's obviously not the same rhetoric and spin because it's an entirely different legislative process.
It's like you're saying folks don't see that these apples are actually oranges.
No, we don't see that this is the same, because factually it's not, and you are excusing politicians from accountability if you try to make those apples into oranges.
@freemo Yeah, as always, it's all about incentives.
Give people personal incentives to protect things like environmental status and they will tend to do so.
Socialism undermines those incentives, so it's not surprising when things like environmentalism get set aside for the things that are incentivized.
Maybe this would be more productive if you laid out what you are saying the stances are, what the course is and what you would have them reverse to.
That's a lot of words but doesn't really make any particular case.
Extremist Republicans voted to shut down the House, and they would have been laughed out of the room except that Democrats actively supported their effort, empowering them to shut it down.
That's simply how the voting for this particular issue is set up and it is how it went down.
So yes, plenty of times you see voting results being spun, but this is a simple example, and in this example the Democrats voted with the Republican extremists, for better or worse.
The difference is that in this occasion the Democrats voted yes to the shutdown.
And it wasn't a poison pill sort of thing, it wasn't a complicated question on many different subjects with nuances or anything like that.
It was a simple question, do you want to declare the House to be without a speaker which shuts it down, and Republicans overwhelmingly voted no while Democrats unanimously voted yes, alongside the extremists.
There are absolutely cases where the voting record can be spun for rhetorical purposes, but this is not one of those cases.
Democratic representatives need to be held responsible for voting to shut down the House, whether that's giving them positive or negative regard.
Again, if your representative voted to shut down the legislature and you think that was a good thing, great! You think it's a bad thing, they should probably not be re-elected.
And yet none of that changes what I pointed out, that Democrats voted unanimously with the Republican extremists to shut down the House
You might think that's good! In which case, excellent!
But we need to recognize this fact when we go decide whether to re-elect our representatives are not.
If you are happy with your representative voting with the Republican extremists to shut down the House, great!
Or maybe your representative was one of the overwhelming majority of Republicans who said no, the House needs to continue legislating.
Either way, judge your own representative for the way they voted and keep that in mind when you decide whether to send them back into power.
Whether your representative backed the Republican extremists or not should be a pretty big factor when you decide whether to re-elect that representative.
@lauren I mean you're not saying anything different from what I said.
Yeah, it's possible that somebody would care about what the position came up with. But as made operational, plenty of organizations would just ignore it.
Like you said, the key is how the role is defined and made operational, and so often the role will be defined and made operational in an immediately nullified way.
You're absolutely right in saying this goes both ways, that either party membership could vote for the other party.
But.
I would say there is a little bit of a difference in that the Democrats voted unanimously for this moment, as they allied with the Republican extremists to shut down the House.
That's significant to me, and it sort of breaks the symmetry between the two parties.
It's one thing to say that both parties should work with the other to get things going, but it's another to point out that only one party voted overwhelmingly to shut down while the other voted overwhelmingly to keep going.
Yes, space junk is something to be worried about, but it's like landfill space down here on the ground: we have SO MUCH space here in terms of square miles that even though we should avoid turning the whole continent into a landfill, we are nowhere nowhere near seeing that happen.
But at the same time reporters are able to put out sensationalize clickbait misrepresenting the orbital space as a present danger.
Such reporters are misleading their readers. It's really a shame.
@MaRY1Fem I think the real lesson to learn from all of what you said is that Trump really doesn't matter.
So many people are so obsessed with bashing the guy, when he really doesn't have anywhere near the impact they see. He's a boogie man, somebody that makes for a whole lot of clickbait, a whole lot of reporting and storytelling and angst, but it really puts the cart before the horse to build him up by saying he is so important.
Basically, none of this has anything to do with Trump at all unless we say it does in which case we are playing into Trump's hands.
We should knock that off.
Trump is a moron that would fade into the distance if we would just stop building him up as a pivotal figure.
He basically exists because we keep asserting that he does.
This has nothing to do with Trump. Let's not fluff. Trump's ego by saying it does.
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:
