Little bit of everything!

Avid Swiftie (come join us at !taylorswift@poptalk.scrubbles.tech )

Gaming (Mass Effect, Witcher, and too much Satisfactory)

Sci-fi

I live for 90s TV sitcoms

  • 624 Posts
  • 10K Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 2nd, 2023

help-circle

  • As others mentioned, ICE are not police.

    On top of that again it’s idealism vs realism. Yes idealism is what it could be, but the system isn’t changing anytime soon. I’m sorry, but it’s not. Unless the majority of people suddenly mobilize, but I’ve been waiting now 30 years and at multiple points thought maybe they finally would, but it’s not happening. Once you realize that it’s idealism, then you can move into realistic options.



  • “No more police” is an idealistic concept that would never make it out of committee and is routinely used by the right to “prove” to themselves that we can’t be taken seriously. “Demilitarized police” instead is a concept that could be actually implemented, and could get support from both the people and politicians and could actually be implemented.

    If you seriously believe that we could pivot next year to “no more police” then you’re deluding yourself, there’s no politician in this entire country who would stake their career on that. Nice to dream, but no way in reality it would ever happen, and using it only fuels the right.


  • Who says I’m settling for it? It for sure could be faster, I’d love HSR but that’s not going to happen tomorrow, that’s going to be a generational task. In the meantime, yes I’ll advocate for what transit we do have, because the more people who ride will convince more to take it. There’s a reason that 10 years ago we had 2 daily roundtrips to Portland and now we have 6, with new traincars coming end of month. It’s because people started riding so they invested in it. You don’t get investment by ignoring it.

    Being able to read, drink, or sleep during the ride doesn’t counteract the fact that it’s slow as that’s still a couple hours more that you’ll be spending on the transportation portion of the trip rather than at your desired destination.

    That is an opinion. My opinion is that I would much rather have 3 hours to read or sleep than to have 2.5 hours in a stressful drive. Driving is not fun, I find it stressful and annoying. My opinion is that my time is better spent relaxing on a train reading or playing video games, I get nothing out of a drive.

    The benefit of reduced stress that you listed could be accomplished by having someone else drive you there too

    That is quite literally what the train is, I’m having someone else drive me there.




  • I agree with this, and it’s why movements like OWS and BLM have more or less done nothing. Those are complex concepts with lists of things that need to be done. The right has “Lower taxes” and “Let us be racist”. The left though has nuanced concepts and new things that people have never heard of. People hear “Lower taxes” and know what that means. Universal healthcare is new and complex, and so the right reduces it to something they understand, “higher taxes” and other fearmongering. Meanwhile we’re trying to show amortization rates of providing care to everyone and the right has simple phrases.

    Rinse and repeat for everything. We tried “Defund police” but the right only heard “No more police” because there is a lot of nuance to “defund police”, like demilitarizing and focusing on sending in people who can actually help. “Climate change” is a complex nuanced subject that takes a long time to understand, but the right reduces it to “They want to take away your truck”.

    Gay marriage I think worked because it was a very simple message, allow gays to marry. They tried to reduce it however they could but in that case their arguments were the harder ones to follow. I think we need to think about how we describe things, and try to avoid from the beginning needing to explain concept subjects to (I’m sorry but) simple people. Universal healthcare should simply mean “We run a government level insurance program, like all of the other countries, so no one gets denied coverage”. Or something like that.



  • That sort of nuance is never going to be noticed on the internet I’ve learned. It was obvious to me as well that by putting the thin blue line there right in the background that this was going to be “testing” his view of the thin blue line. Isn’t that obvious, from the image it’s something the character holds to be very important, so important that it brands him, and the whole movie is going to be chipping away at that.

    But internet people don’t see that level of nuance, and immediate downvote.