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
@GatekeepKen Right, but Republicans are supporting abortion rights.
@old_hippie I see that kind of sentiment a lot, but the reason it doesn't work is because it appeals to democracy to say that democracy can't survive.
It just doesn't make sense.
If the GOP gets those votes, well that's democracy. That is democracy surviving.
@_dm Well I think you should.
It is what it is.
Is Trump president right now? No. Why not? He seemed to really want to be. It seems like all of his supporters wanted him to be. It seems like they would all move heaven and Earth to have him be president right now.
And yet he's not, and it's all because the system is robust.
We keep having people claiming that the sky is falling, but we can look around and see that it's not. Those sensationalized stories promoted by people with special interests, reasons to promote those sensationalized stories, people who profit off of those sensationalized stories, often conspiracy theories, they're just wrong.
Often they are powerful people trying to get you bought into their myths because it benefits them.
But at the end of the day, we can look around and see that the story they are selling is just false.
Yeah, the system is robust. If it wasn't robust Trump would be president at this very moment. He's not.
And that really proves the system.
@_dm But the thing is, it doesn't matter what people say because we have a system that makes sure that presidents don't have unilateral power.
Both Trump and Harris promise openly to do illegal things. Both of them promise unconstitutional things. Fortunately, we have a system that prevents presidents from doing things that they don't have authority to do.
And so, let's send a message to the party bosses that they need to nominate people worth voting for.
Both of these will have failed presidencies. That's just the reality. It sucks. But hopefully in 4 years parties might get the message that they should nominate better people.
In the meantime, the system will not let either of these morons do the awful things they promise.
#Harris is a cop that the #DemocraticParty nominated without the input of all of us in an era that is marked by the public being skeptical of cops.
Why is it a surprise that she's struggling? The people in power screwed up here, and they need to be held accountable for their screw up.
We need to be very clear about that even if you want to vote for her for some reason, the party elites have disrespected us.
Hopefully things will be better in 4 years, but for now we're just screwed.
@moira Well, how about making your case?
Instead of shaking with rage, lay out the case that she is particularly better.
We don't need rage. We need honest discussion and reasonable arguments, reasonable evidence.
Shaking with rage just gives up the game.
@joeinwynnewood That's the opposite of what's happening.
We've seen event after event where Trump, the moron that he is, did his best to mumble out some response to critics of his, while Harris refused to engage in events that weren't prescripted, and dodged questions put to her from non-friendly outfits.
It was really notable that Harris went to town halls that didn't allow pre-screened questions.
Both of these candidates are garbage, and we shouldn't pretend otherwise, we need to hold the parties accountable for nominating garbage candidates.
@benroyce exactly.
@EricChrSmit The guy is being roundly criticized for things like transferring Federal powers to the states, talking about closing departments, and all of these other things that would diminish the president's power.
So it's ridiculous to call him fascist. And at the same time criticize him for giving up power. That's not what fascist people do.
A whole lot of us notice that contradiction and ignore people trying to sell this line. It doesn't make sense.
@_dm The problem is, no vote can help the civilians in Gaza.
That's just the unfortunate reality.
However, a vote for Jill Stein can sent a message that the Democratic Party might want to nominate someone who actually could help next time.
But for now, Harris is awful and will not help civilians in Gaza. So that's not even an option.
@fraying Well more importantly, Harris is awful.
It has nothing to do with her color, she's just a rotten candidate, and it was obvious since before the Democratic Party powerful decided to nominate her for some reason.
Sometimes people don't support people who are simply not worth supporting. It doesn't have to be any more complicated than that.
Harris has been unable to show that she has any idea how to be an effective president, she has botched interview after interview, she did poorly in the debate, and she has just generally been an awful person.
Has nothing to do with her color, she's just an awful person not worth standing behind.
We need to hold the Democratic Party responsible for their bad choice.
.... What?
I've absolutely seen feddiverse admins asking for help paying back the debt they took on.
@benroyce No I don't think you're that interested in knowing how the world works. You seem pretty comfortable in your ignorance.
But it does amuse me that I'm inviting you to well actually me, but you're too busy being disconnected from the world to notice.
It just really captures what I'm saying, so your responses are giving me a nice warm glow of approval.
The affirmation is nice.
Oh I'll be okay. No it's up to you whether you actually want to be informed about the world, but I'll be okay either way.
Check out the ruling if you care about the world.
Again, I'm inviting you to quote from the ruling to prove me wrong. But if you don't care, hey that's your call.
No skin off my back, but hey here's an invitation to prove some random person on the internet wrong.
@benroyce exactly.
You're uninterested, you don't care what the truth is.
You're just believing what you've been told and not interested in reading about it to see that what you've been told is wrong.
You're just going with it.
Quite unread.
@benroyce exactly.
You're uninterested, you don't care what the truth is.
You're just believing what you've been told and not interested in reading about it to see that what you've been told is wrong.
You're just going with it.
Quite unread.
@smach The problem is that there is no candidate who isn't promising authoritarianism.
Both Harris and Trump promise to ignore Congress and implement their wants on the country, whether they actually can fulfill those promises or not.
I'm sorry the Democratic Party elites chose Harris. Almost any other candidate would run circles around Trump, but that's the direction they went.
By choosing not to endorse a candidate those editorial boards are highlighting just what a mess the two parties have made here. They will not bow to supporting either authoritarian candidate.
@benroyce One thing to keep in mind is that the Supreme Court doesn't have the authority to stop such account. It is sitting as a court of appeals, and it would take not only a different branch of government but even a different government to stop the count.
So no, read the ruling, the Supreme Court did not stop the count, but furthermore, it could not have stopped the count even if it wanted to.
That's just not how the Supreme Court works in the US system of government.
Again, I don't know who's telling you these things, but they are lying to you.
Want to prove me wrong? Quote from the ruling where the Supreme Court stopped the count.
@benroyce Read the SCOTUS ruling.
It says the opposite.
If I wasn't on my phone I would give you a link directly to it, but it's public, so you should have no problem finding the ruling.
And after you read the ruling I want you to realize how many folks have lied about what it said over the years, and don't believe them anymore.
@theguardian_us_opinion I saw a post saying that the story has already been debunked based on government records showing that the timing didn't work right.
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:
