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
@benroyce it seems like you're getting distracted by distinctions without differences, like you're so busy trying to categorize different forms of questionable behavior that you're not noticing the similarities.
Yes, the issues with moderation are related because they are similar. That makes them related. Because of the similarities.
@manton The way I always put it is that Mastodon is centralized around instances.
@Brandon Well that sounds like pretty good reason to think it's actually not that great and not that interesting 🙂
Good content appeals to both.
@knittingknots2 keep in mind that many on the GOP side have seriously lost faith in the FBI in the last couple of years, so if you're coming from that perspective, why would you care what the FBI had to say?
Anybody stunned by this hasn't been paying attention to the political environment.
@Nerde there are serious legal questions about whether a president can pardon somebody for unspecified crimes.
It's not actually clear that's legal.
To give somebody such a blank check is pretty questionable, really putting them above the law.
The very important answer is no, because what the Supreme Court actually said was that presidents can't prosecute for things like that.
The Supreme Court did not say presidents had free reign to violate the law. What it said was that presidents were restricted from inappropriate prosecution.
A whole lot of people get that backwards.
The Supreme Court ruling does much more to protect Biden from Trump than it gives to Trump.
Except, no that's not quite right. These infractions were judged to be so substantial that they needed to be prosecuted at a very high level. The administration already determined that significant resources needed to be poured into prosecuting these infractions.
Biden's administration already concluded that these were not minor infractions.
AND MORE IMPORTANTLY (yeah, my voice goes up because, wow) Biden pardoned Hunter for anything else as well, not just these things that you call minor infractions, but also anything else at all that he did.
That's incredible!
In my opinion, Biden's explanation made it exponentially worse, but alternatively, it would have made it slightly better if he had resigned in the process.
I could at least appreciate an official saying, I am doing this but I recognize that it is not really fitting for the office. I cannot act neutrally here. And so as I do this, I hereby resign.
#Biden's pardon of his son crosses the line when it gives a blanket get out of jail free card to any laws his son might have violated, not just the ones we know about.
He put his son above the law. That's striking.
It's only the icing on top that he attempts to justify it by claiming persecution... by the administration that he himself was leading.
We need to be clear that this is disgraceful, as really that's the only way to hold such a person of power accountable.
Biden should be forever remembered for crap like this.
@MusiqueNow the problem is, the accusations listed, even if true, don't rise to the level of high crimes or misdemeanor.
But really, the SCOTUS records are public, and we can read for ourselves that these justices haven't misbehaved in office.
This is just a witchhunt.
@brianvastag as Hunter was afforded the full range of due process it's pretty hard to say he was overcharged.
But more importantly, keep in mind that JB has been the head of the administration putting these people away.
Pardon them? He's the one who locked them up!
@fixatedpersonsunit The important thing to keep in mind is that Democrats and Republicans are both put in place by voters.
We keep voting for this.
So it's not so much a horrible system of government, it's a system of government reflecting a population that, well, might be horrible.
It's just where we are as a society, so why would we expect a representative government to be different?
@LovesTha administrations don't have that authority.
@DrALJONES that doesn't make any sense, though, neither in terms of the connection between the encampment and intellectual argument nor in terms of elite intellectual argument versus military deployment.
Anyway, trespassing is not peaceful, and minimally disruptive is still disruptive.
This sounds like a person trying really hard to jump through logical hoops to justify just doing what they want to do and getting mad when finding that they don't actually have the level of privilege they think they do.
Don't forget, it was his dad that was prosecuting him.
Viewed through that lens, it's really hard to stomach all talk about political persecution or political prison.
No, if anything Hunter was getting levels of privilege that would not have been afforded to most people in his position, from judicial discretion through those really great lawyers through prosecutorial cooperation.
So no, it is not probable that he was a political prisoner. His dad tried to tilt the scales in his favor, and even then his behavior could not overcome his privilege, and his dad had to recognize his guilt and hold him accountable for it.
Right up until he didn't.
Oh no, I would emphasize that it is fundamental to our system of checks and balances that we absolutely do blame public officials for their behavior in office.
Whether one thinks it is excusable or even appropriate is a different question, but we absolutely can and should blame him for it.
@veedems It's important to keep in mind that Biden was in charge of the branch of government that prosecuted and then gained the conviction for his own son.
And then he said he would absolutely not pardon his son.
We can't excuse what a mess, what an utter mess, Biden was. If he had done a better job as president there's no way Trump would have been reelected.
You say it makes sense. No. No it doesn't. And if the Biden administration had made more sense we wouldn't be in this mess.
Let's call that out. Let's remember this guy as a disaster that he was.
@louis anyone who thinks it will piss off Republicans doesn't understand them. They are going to be absolutely delighted tomorrow because it will have proven them correct, and they will get to jump with glee feeling like Biden corruption is absolutely proven.
They're going to be very happy about this.
I was so hoping Biden wasn't going to prove them right.
@freeschool You're still thinking in terms of structures that are not sustainable in terms of equilibriums.
A slightly different way of putting that is, you might be thinking in terms of conspiracy theories that are kind of out there.
You mention the state and its roots, but really that's just what people are putting up with, and they're not putting their shoulders behind supporting such a mechanism, supporting such an effort to organize society, because it doesn't work and they see it.
It takes effort on the part of society to organize such a thing, and there just isn't the motivation to incentivize all of these people to put their lives aside and get behind that effort. This is the real world with people who want to see their kids, go to bars, look at art, go bowling, whatever else people want to do. They aren't going to put their effort into propping up that kind of system.
So it doesn't work.
All the talk about finance misses that concrete reality.
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:
