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
@jackcole that gets a bit complicated in the US system since federal supremacy over states tends to prevent states from taking actions that would interfere with federal functions.
The arrest and trial of a Supreme Court justice might run into that. It would be a thorny issue.
So the best approach would be to impeach first and avoid the whole issue at all.
All of these claims that the Supreme Court is delaying rulings on #Trump matters for political reasons don't even make sense strategically.
Firstly, they're based on misunderstandings about how the US government actually functions, but setting that aside:
If #SCOTUS really wanted to delay trials as claimed they could simply issue rulings that would result in drawn out procedures. There's NO reason they'd hold the ball and take all of this heat when they could pass it along to lower courts.
It's unfortunate that so many people in the US, and on this social media platform, keep promoting those conspiracy theories.
If nothing else, they shield from accountability those who are actually responsible for the things we're critical of.
@TheLastofHisName what? No. The corporations are happy to just have the protesters arrested and off their plates.
These people need to be going out into their communities and having sane, rational engagements with their fellow voters to change minds that will be reflected in their representative governments.
Otherwise, yes, the corps will laugh at them. Sit-ins and direct action are part of the corporations' playbooks. They know how to win that game.
So long as folks are doing that nonsense it keeps them from working to change voters' minds, which is what the corporations actually fear.
And that's the whole point.
@Nonilex I wouldn't say it's so much anti-regulation as much as pro-process.
After all, a regulation on sound legal footing--including Congressional authorization--is going to be more effective regulation in the end.
The arguments over things like Chevron deference aren't saying we shouldn't have regulation. They're saying we should do regulation correctly.
@PeterSoukup I don't think those beliefs are as genuine as you make it sound.
When, in the course of running on women's rights and protection of democracy, the politician is citing falsehoods that they HAVE to know are false--from misstating laws through misstating history that they themselves were there to see--you can see that there's a level of dishonesty there as well.
I don't actually think Trump believes much of anything. He just stands in front of the crow and vomits out whatever is getting more applause moment by moment.
But I don't know if its better or worse to know nothing or to know but still mislead.
@si_irini I think we really do have to treat them like children.
When a child does something bad and stupid, maybe don't get angry, just do your best to teach them why what they did was wrong while sending them to time out when appropriate.
Sometimes anger is unavoidable, of course, but maybe framing it that way would be easier on your blood pressure :)
@ERBeckman the thing to keep in mind is that a substantial number of backers of this are effectively trolling you, and should be treated as such:
You ignore them other than filing the appropriate lawsuits to have a court slap it down.
Don't despair. Shake your head and move on.
Otherwise, you give them what they want and end up encouraging them.
@nathans you were on to something until the end with the example:
No, Trump didn't ignore dozens of court rulings saying he'd lost the election, since that's not how the courts work, nor is it how presidential elections work.
On top of that, he didn't take any substantial actions wrt to the election that were authoritarian.
Both Trump and Biden are guilty of impeachable authoritarian actions, working outside of the law. The thesis is well-served by a huge number of examples.
It's just, that's not one.
@Codeschubse save it by destroying it, huh?
@PeterSoukup perhaps Dems are doing the same, though, following some PR strategist advice to get a few more votes.
Two groups who aren't leaders but rather loudmouths following the way they think the wind is blowing in the broader public.
Well, at least that highlights that they're following us, if only us could get our stuff together.
I don't know how to conceptualize the story, though.
It sounds to me like (bear with me) the proposal is to recenter microblogging around long-form content, by which they mean linking out to longform content elsewhere
That is full of contradictions, though, both in the conflict between micro- and long- and in longform being on the outside, not the center.
I WISH there would be a recentering around long-form content, but this doesn't sound like that.
@si_irini so often we see cases of activists being so out of touch, or so nearsighted, that they don't see that their tactics harm their own causes.
Those falling into that trap are foolish children.
So why do they do that? Because they're foolish children who don't understand the harm they're doing, including to themselves.
@freeschool those notices will do nothing to stop a company from vacuuming up your postings to help build their marketing profiles of you or train AI or whatever.
They will be more content to put in their databases, though.
You're comparing apples and oranges while talking about machine parts.
I'm pointing out that this is a unique case and time doesn't matter in the context of the court, and yet you're continuing to talk about time, which doesn't matter, in comparison against other cases, which are uncomparible.
AND the claim doesn't make sense in the first place. A delay gets the supposed conspiracy nothing at this point, given the timing of lower courts.
@Guinnessy but that's why you don't go to the SCOTUS in the first place if you need speed. Go to the two other branches.
If the house needs to be built in a specific timeframe, don't hire a baker since he's not even the right one to build a house in the first place!
I'm also reminded of people upset that the Court didn't talk about Trump enough when hearing this case. Except... the Supreme Court's role sitting as a court of appeals here has pretty much nothing to do with Trump. Those people who were upset don't understand the Court's role in the US government.
It's just not what the Court is for, and people are seeing malice due to their misunderstandings of this stuff.
@dougiec3 So you look for historical tradition that's in the context of whatever law is on the table.
Since there is no question of law about whether women have a right to vote, one wouldn't go looking to the tradition of whether women have a right to vote.
@bespacific you're comparing apples and oranges, though. This case was particularly nuanced as they sought to answer that rather deep question of federal construction.
It's pretty rare that such a case even gets to the Court, and since judicial independence means they can take their time and get it right, there's nothing strange about it taking them a while to resolve their stance.
Folks trying to make something of timing here don't understand that time doesn't matter to the Court by its nature.
If you wanted something done fast, there were two other branches better situated to respond to situations today.
@dcdeejay that's not what happened here, though.
Both sides in the dispute were engaging in originalist analysis. They simply weighed different factors differently in light of an incomplete picture.
Barrett wanted to go farther and make a broader ruling, while the ruling that carried the day was narrower given the case before them.
@Guinnessy you're just looking for meaning in a metric that has no meaning in their context, though.
It doesn't matter what the meaningless issue of timing was previously compared to this meaningless case of timing, timing just doesn't enter into it.
It's like complaining that this wrench is really slow a driving a nail, because you had a different wrench that was faster at driving a nail, when in reality wrenches aren't the right tool to drive nails in the first place, so it's not relevant.
As for bizarre decisions, I thought the bump stock decision was very straightforward...
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-976_e29g.pdf
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:
