What do you believe that most people of your political creed don't?
-
No proof is absolutely undeniable. Especially not in an age when generative AI will soon be able to fabricate evidence easily.
DNA based proofs are pretty undeniable unless you have a twin.
-
Consider the scenario where you meet a man. You know his name is Bradley (either through mutual friends or whatever), but he introduces himself as Alex. You can call him Bradley, and it would be technically correct, but it would be slightly rude when he has explicitly given his preferred name as Alex.
I don't think that's quite right. It's more like referring to him by another title such as "a friend of mine" or "a person I met" etc.
-
Immigration is universally a roaring net positive in all of history ; economically, socially, everything. It's more than disinformation when they spew talking points. It's hate. And most people complicit are just fully ignorant. USA lost their empire due to lack of education. Every other first world nations have their success in lockstep with the level of education they give their kids. A heist of all wealth has been conducted and you are viewing the aftermath. Elon will find your coffers empty. The real treasure, turns out, was the people.
Is it your political creed commonly against immigration?
-
I would argue calling all they/them is the opposite of misgendering. "They" has no gender. It is neuter.
"Intentional non-gendering" seems sensible and inoffensive. No chance of misgendering anyone.
I have met one person (in real life) who uses she/he pronouns. I asked if I can call her they and she said no. I don't know what to make of this, personally, as I'm unable to understand it, but I do try to abide by her request. I suspect she is an outlier though.
-
DNA based proofs are pretty undeniable unless you have a twin.
It's not necessarily true. I mean you could be framed with your DNA. I'm not arguing that it's plausible, just not absolutely undeniable. For instance, I would bet dollars to donuts that somebody has tried to frame someone else using their DNA.
-
Well, I posted about this in this topic because I think it's not a perspective that's gained traction. Please help spread the good word..!
I've been thinking of starting some sort of group to help with that goal-- would you be interested? I'm not sure what we could do, but I want to do something, you know? I figure the best impact I can have is to convince other people that I mostly agree with to adopt this approach, which is what I envision the group could help with.
-
The answer is no in both instances, hence why labor vouchers are only sensible in a centralized and publicly owned and planned economy that has gotten rid of the necessity for small commodity producers.
Interesting. That could work. Feels a little draconian though.
-
Leftism is unpopular by definition, especially to the privileged classes. Leftism seeks to upend the status quo, and loss aversion is a problem.
Not that efforts can't be made.
How it's possible that the political movement that aim for the benefits of the 99% is unpopular by definition?
Identity politics may be unpopular by definition.
But the leftist movement is by definition a popular movement, and tons of alienation are needed to make people stop supporting themselves and support the 1%
-
Just wanted to prove that political diversity ain't dead. Remember, don't downvote for disagreements.
I don't like racism against white people or sexism against men. Do I think they're less urgent or worrying than bigotry directed at other groups? Sure. There's less hate against men and whites compared to other demographic groups, and bigotry against them simply doesn't have the same social or political impact due to current systemic racism and sexism being directed at other groups. But bigotry is still bigotry, and I don't like bigotry against anyone.
-
Is it your political creed commonly against immigration?
China and DPRK strongly restrict immigration, whereas there are lots of neoliberals advocating immigration for free market reasons
-
Just wanted to prove that political diversity ain't dead. Remember, don't downvote for disagreements.
I'm a lefty artist (video) and pro-A.I. That is to say, I don't believe training generative models on any information constitutes copyright infringement when the model is sold. The abstraction to latent space is sufficiently transformative.
-
I don't really know what constitutes a "political creed," really, so I don't know how to answer.
He means who do you circlejerk with on tinternet
-
They do not, as evidence by the last two decades of "progressive" politics here in the US.
you can't learn much about leftism from the USA
-
Well yah. The alternative is barter and farmers only need so many cell phones and software developers.
The alternative is barter
No. Never has been.
-
It's all well and good for leftist individuals to achieve that understanding, but how can we effect change without more of the population being swayed to this ideology?
You still haven’t achieved that understanding. Ideology does not come about from ‘convincing’ or ‘swaying’ anyone. I once again suggest you to read Settlers to see why this thought process is flawed. I understand where you are coming from but the material precedes the immaterial
-
You still haven’t achieved that understanding. Ideology does not come about from ‘convincing’ or ‘swaying’ anyone. I once again suggest you to read Settlers to see why this thought process is flawed. I understand where you are coming from but the material precedes the immaterial
Very well, I'll look at it.
-
Just wanted to prove that political diversity ain't dead. Remember, don't downvote for disagreements.
I don't like extreme leftists (they live in a bubble) but they've been right about everything and they are our best chance at resolving economic disparity
-
those are just vague values
Found the millennial or Gen Z
'my truth' doesn't exist: there is fact and not fact.
-
Perhaps "not a person" isn't the right way to put it. More like "already passed away." I was being a bit provocative, sorry.
Regarding stimuli -- fair enough, that is a good argument actually. But to me that indicates a "kink" in the graph of their moral worth; it ought to resemble a point where they start gaining moral worth, but not a point where they immediately have it.
Of course, this is all very speculative, vibes-based and handwavey. I don't know how to define someone's moral worth -- which is precisely why I don't see why birth is special to one's moral worth.
Fair enough. I think you're right to question these things; people have very strong opinions with hard lines here, but I don't think there's always solid reasoning for why some things that may seem like an obvious hard line are considered one.
-
Lessee... I suppose my hottest take is that no lives are sacred. I believe that human expansion into more 'wild' domains is a mistake and that national and state parks' availability should be limited (geographically - you may not venture into the Deep Parks). This probably borders on some vaguely eco-fascy beliefs, and I recognize human's inexorable curiousity and desire to explore, but you will never find me mourning a human victim of a wild animal.
Does that also apply to hypothetical martian settlements?
If people ever technically managed to live on mars.There's definitely no higher life on mars (or we would have already found it), and it's also unlikely that there's any life at all - not even microbial life (due to an absence of liquid water on the surface).
