Nobody answer, this guy might be a fed

I’d just like to step in here and remind the people at home that appeals to hypocrisy are a logical fallacy. Just because someone isn’t doing what they say should be done doesn’t mean they’re wrong.

Thanks, I’ll hang up and listen.

Edit: Forgot to add one thing. This conversation is about collective action, a particularly silly place to judge the actions of a single individual

Not a lawyer but I wonder how much teeth that law has. The GOP/Trump has put on a clinic on how to legally gum up the wheels of justice, it seems like unions could try the same. Delay, argue technicalities, appeal, rise, repeat…

For example: if you spend 2 months in court arguing about who organized what and what they’re technically striking for, damage could still be done even with the strike broken up. Multiply that by a few major unions and it adds up.

You can already see a similar plan coming together with UAWs 2028 contact expiration plan. Its not a general strike, there’s just coincidentally a lot of strikes at once.

Of course there’s a stricter set of laws and leeway when you’re not a corrupt oligarch so it wouldn’t work. But it’s fun to think about…

Don’t disagree that civilization is a parasite, but a lot of parasites evolve to not kill their host 🙂

Well, the alternative is very foreseeable consequences for aquatic life. I’m sure they’d be on board

Oh huh, interesting… 📃✍️

Yes, all the things they’re doing are indeed part of a plan and all of that plan is bad. It’s more that some of what they’re doing (right now, actively) is hurting people and setting up for even worse things. Erasure is bad but you’ve gotta pick your battles, its much harder to stop any of this when they take away your ability to vote.

Wouldn’t composting just release more greenhouse gasses? We need a more effective means of carbon capture, or maybe directly repurpose them as some sort of nutritional paste

I won’t lie, I don’t think we’ll ever totally agree. I’m getting the gist that we fundamentally have a different understanding of the human race.

You’re holding people to your own standards, which is admirable because you clearly have your head on straight. I just view people as generally more base and malleable. Animals that react to the stimulus they’re given and environment they’re put in.

It’s why propaganda can work with simple repetition; it’s why ancient cultures and atrocities feel so alien; it’s why there’s a natural evolutionary drift toward tribalism.

From that: this is a generation being left behind educationally, economically, and socially. They know their quality of life is regressing but don’t know why. They’re an audience searching for clear answers.

They’re also the only humans in history to spend more of their formative adolescence on screen time than on other traditional activities.

So they’re starting on the back foot and getting unprecedented exposure to privately operated, centralized media sources. It follows that whoever owns those platforms (or pays enough) can selectively amplify any narrative they want to great effect.

It would have been just as feasible to push their politics to the left as right. If you look at who operates these platforms you’ll find, unsurprisingly, its right wing media moguls. The capitalists with the capital and mechanisms to spread their gospel have done so.

So at the end of the day I think it is reasonable to scold a person who you know should have better media literacy. I just don’t think it makes any sense to extend that to an entire voting block. Its more productive to direct that effort toward the root of the problem, the people pushing the content.

No, they’re making a conscious choice to use the platform. The content itself is whatever pops up and looks entertaining.

If the algorthim shows you 2 center-right videos, 3 hard-right videos, and one nazi rant then are you choosing to be a nazi by watching the center right ones?

Its never actually 3 hours of nazi things. Its an otherwise entertaining video making some off color jokes. It’s a streamer going on one politically dubious rant in a 6 hour stream. It’s a weekly podcast talking to “interesting” people; some benign, some funny, some actual problems… It’s about normalizing the conversation and the ideas. Nobody is getting handed a knife.

Yeah, there are some people take the red pill and actively go down the conspiracy rabbit hole and watch nazi shit. But I’m not gonna go out of my way to crucify people who have shitty ideas in their head at some point, there are lots of people that have stories of escaping the funnel.

Because at the end of the day a vote is just voicing an opinion to most people.

“I was told tariffs aren’t a bad idea”… “Musk has points that there might be wasteful spending”… “Well Rogan endorsed him haha”…

If they were told they’re getting drafted to invade Greenland before they voted, they look at you the same way as the knife guy.

If anything the current political context makes what needs to be done pretty clear. There’s a difference between downplaying the problem and realizing that if laying down and dieing isn’t an option.

God forbid someone tries to think past the next quarter.

If the future can’t be livable and people just wants a quiet suicide for the human race I’ve got good news. There’s a very easy solution for avoiding that discomfort that also happens to be the #1 way to reduce your carbon footprint.

But if you want to keep living and not just surviving, suck it up…

Personal consumption accounted for 68.8% of US GDP in at the end of 2024, an all time high. Granted, ~45% of that is very hard to cut back on (healthcare, insurance, housing).

But even still, a drop of 10-15% would be devastating. If you could organize it, you could even skip payments on the big ticket services. Everyone skipping a month of bills at the same time would do serious, recession-level damage.

It’s not a direct fix for our problems, but you can play serious economic chicken when most of the economy flows through your wallets.

It’s literally illegal for these publicly traded companies to do anything that would be detrimental to their shareholders. The guy in oval office is telling them there will be consequences for not following his EOs (ie: lowering shareholder value). There’s not any decision to be made here (not that they aren’t laughing to the bank either way)

You proved it’s impossible to be a completely ethical consumer, but did you prove that it’s necessary to be a consumer at all? Or that all volumes of consumption are equally culpable?

People view boycotting as if enough homework will find them the fabled Free Market Unicorn©️, with sparkling udders they can ethically consume from to their hearts content.

Guess what: your coffee and chocolate are slave labor all the way down. Nestle owns all your water and 6 media conglomerates get your entertainment money no matter where you swipe your credit card.

But do you actually need to make those purchases in the first place? There’s nothing other than habit, comfort, and convenience keeping you from cutting most of it out of your life. It makes the ethical calculus so much easier.

Of course, how much austerity you can stomach in your modern life is a personal threshold. But every dollar you don’t spend is a dollar less to our corporate overlords. You could even donate it to a worthy cause for double the satisfaction (if you care to do that homework…)

Nothing positive is happening until it happens, we have yet to see Trump comply with a judicial ruling (let alone an emergency injunction). And it’ll get argued up to the SCOTUS before he’d even theoretically stop.

Don’t fall for Lucy pulling the football for the 9th year in a row. Plan and act as if he’s not facing any consequences within the limits of our government, because his record shows he won’t.

These people have the memory of a goldfish. Resignations were the main way he got the vacancies to fill with collaborators in his first term

Why not go out doing something exciting at least?

It’s easy to make statements like that before desperation sets in. Starving is an awful way to die, death after nuclear fallout is excruciating and slow, you won’t enjoy any sunsets when the smoke from burning cities fills up the sky.

50 years from now when you’re freezing in a cold muddy ditch, you’ll be wishing you died a martyr taking the 1/1e10000 chance to fix it.

Edit: I’m legally required to clarify that martyrdom can result from non-violent acts 🙂