Well, on the bright side, the housing market will collapse in the next few decades as boomers die off/move to retirement homes, leaving a massive glut of housing (unless it all gets bought up by corporations). That’ll cause its own set of issues, but ample housing would certainly go a long way.
Perhaps. In theory, you’re definitely right. I just feel that this is something where building the momentum during a single election cycle isn’t feasible. The most likely result of voting for a third party without laying this groundwork would be splitting the vote and giving a landslide victory to the greater of the two evils.
Formally organising online would make it possible to demonstrate how much support each candidate actually has without giving an official vote to a candidate that the general public isn’t confident enough to vote for. Watching participation grow and third parties receive substantial semi-official support could build excitement and lead to a third party being trusted to have the sway to win.
I’d love to be proven wrong though. If we can organize enough support for a third party within a single election cycle that it’s reasonable to risk voting for that candidate, I’m open to it. I already have too much on my plate, but if no one has built this service by the time I have energy for it, I’ll definitely be thinking about it
I suppose it’ll continue until enough people believe that it’s possible for a third party to win.
I think ranked choice voting would make it much simpler to foment that change. People need to be able to trust that breaking from the party line has a real chance of success, but that can’t happen without demonstrating support.
If we can’t have real ranked choice voting, a third party could build a website to let people coordinate votes according to ranked choice, and hopefully carry the result as a unified bloc to the polls. Have an agreement that if a certain threshold of participation is met, vote for the ranked choice result. Otherwise, lesser of 2 evils.
I didn’t learn of any rhyme or reason to it in German when I took classes on it. In fact, in a few cases, the gender changes the meaning of the word. Der See und die See, for example. One means lake and the other means sea/ocean.
All those negative effects would happen with or without religion. I think the real issue is blind trust of hierarchies. Many of those who ascribe to organized religion have a tendency towards that (the loud ones do at least), but religion isn’t the only pathway by which conniving subhuman trash controls the masses. Anything that can enforce an in-group/out-group think is a pathway to this form of control that leaves people more vulnerable to allowing despicable acts in the name of God, the public good, safety, liberty, freedom, democracy, progress, etc. Pick your symbol of idealism, and you’ll find someone who committed untold atrocities in its name.
If you’d prefer to succumb to hate, that’s your prerogative. And I wouldn’t necessarily consider it naive to prefer hope anyway, although having lived in hate in the past, I can understand why you might feel that way.
Any “helmet” you could wear is something that others would call delusion. It’s always a lens by which you choose to warp reality. Hardened pessimism is no more realistic than blind optimism. It all depends on what you want to protect. Your own corporeal form and possessions (in which case, please keep your armor of selfishness and cynicism), or something less tangible, like emotional resilience and a belief that there might be a dream that’s achievable.
Regardless of all that, and in spite of your attempts to shame me for grammatical mistakes, I’d like to thank you for inspiring some thought-provoking questions.
Is living while rejecting hope actually living? Personally, even if there won’t ever be change. Even if the future is truly a lost cause. I would rather delusionally hope for a better future than succumb to a form of realism that demands an expectation of progressively worse suffering. So, I choose to believe that improvement is possible, regardless of whether there is evidence for it, but also becuse there is evidence that it can happen.
We honestly should just replace every single fixed dollar amount in every law with an algebraic formula. It’s ridiculous that we design laws to become dated and require replacement.
Minimum wage should be tied to worker productivity, and wealth tax should be tied to the median personal income, including that of non-working adults. Welfare programs should be tied to regional cost of living. Limits on rent should be tied to changes in regional median income.
We’re already tracking most or all of that data anyway, might as well put it to maximum use.
Never been part of that community personally, but thanks for helping to support the platform. Even if you’re not seeing much traction, it’s appreciated. What would you think of picking the most engaging Reddit content and migrate it here to help boost community size? Or maybe posting to Reddit with a watermark/credit leading to your Lemmy community?
I think Lemmy would either need to find a way to wean Redditors off of their dopamine machine or replace that dopamine machine long-term to sustain an exodus from Reddit. Either that, or Reddit will need to break their dopamine feedback loop. There are some cracks showing, and that might have already killed the platform in the long term, but it’ll keep going from pure momentum for a while. Maybe as long as months or years.
Seems like there’s more sexists and racists than I used to see over there, which is definitely offputting. I’ve found communities that are supportive of thoughtful discussion are more appealing, and Reddit definitely lacks that lately, outside of some small, relatively niche communities.
I’d also like to hear what your idea is. I don’t know of a platform to solicit someone building your device at a price you’ll be wanting to pay, but there are forums to help you learn how to do it yourself if you’re motivated enough.
If it’s cool enough to pique interest, you could try posting the concept in an electronics community and seeing if anyone’s interested in the challenge, or an ideas community and just floating it for people to choose to run with.
It’s also possible the device already exists and someone can suggest an easy option for you
Well, I’ll admit it might be poorly suited, but I know it supports comments, posts, and user signups. Users would sign up with a sbscriber role, you’d verify them somehow, and then you’d update their role. It would be a little janky but should work with little adjustment
Easiest? I’d say WordPress on a Digital Ocean droplet if you’re going super small. Allow people to sign up and vet them, and you have a functional standalone platform pretty much as soon as you can get users. I don’t know that it would take off or have a sustainable userbase though
Would you be willing to share how you make that work? I can’t imagine living on my own for that much, let alone raising 3 kids. What does a weekly meal plan look like? Do you drive? What are rent and property values like in your area?
Edit: Just ran some numbers, and I can see how that could be possible, but it’s dangerously lean. We shouldn’t need to live like that. I commend you for making it work, but would like to say that you’re definitely worth more than $20k/yr (especially with all those home improvement skills, but regardless)
Nor did I elect you king of what I’m allowed to enjoy. Go ahead and police people’s thoughts if you insist, but don’t expect to be included by people you willfully offend.
You’re welcome to dislike something, but that doesn’t mean you need to discourage someone else from liking that thing. You can share an opinion without making it sound like it’s a sin against nature to disagree with that opinion.
It’s a problem, but I don’t think it’s as unsolvable as that. Figuring out how to overcome the strategies being used to divide us could rapidly repair the damage. Education, both in and out of school, is a crucial element of that. The ones frothing over “liberal tears” clearly don’t want to find common ground, so we would need to learn how they communicate and why they won’t listen, then find a strategy to break through that barrier and help them on their way to broader skepticism. In essence, once we cure the disease, we need to vaccinate them to mitigate the next outbreak.
There’s been some focus on this area of research. We have evidence that “strong men” rise to power by capitalizing on fear and anxiety. They set themselves up as a savior who will get rid of the scary problem by blaming someone/some group that is innocent but unknown (and therefore a suspicious stranger) to their base. They start with (comparatively) small lies and build trust among their following. Once the more suseptible slip into this form of groupthink, they’ll fall for bigger and bigger lies, and are very difficult to recover. The question is, how do we wake up they who scream of “sheeple” without an event so tragic it traumatizes an entire generation? The last few times involved massive wars or similarly harrowing events. Events so massive they dissillusioned the followers and forced them to confront the fact that they got played by a charismatic (to them) narcissist with a superiority complex.
Unless we can figure out how to snap these people put of it relatively peacefully, we’re most likely going to be in for a really, really bad time before it gets better. With any luck, at least in the US, maybe Trump will get thrown in prison and the Republican party’s leadership will turn on Trumpism or collapse before they can take control. Maybe if their chosen authority figure is imprisoned and disowned by their team they’ll be able to see clearly again.
I’ll have you know it’s perfectly unnatural when I invert my corporeal form to assimilate my terrified victims into the eldritch void where my soul used to be.
But in all seriousness, agreed. It’s not possible for something that’s part of nature to be unnatural. All behaviors are natural. Some behaviors pose a threat to the individual or society at large, and that’s the only case where any action should be considered, but only as a harm reduction strategy rather than punitive. An individual’s sexuality, gender identity, etc., definitely don’t qualify as dangerous.
Yeah, that would be crucial too. Antibioitics and the risks of antibiotic resistance need to be included. But to create and purify effective antibiotics, you also need to start with the scientific method, then branch into chemistry, biology, etc. Glassware and procedures to minimize contamination would be important to effectively extract helpful ingredients from potentially harmful molds/other sources.
Depending on the starting scenario, it might be possible to skip much of that at first if we had leftover supplies from a prior civilization. If this site is to be believed, it sounds like making penicillin at home is quite a process, but doable if you’re able to get the right supplies. I don’t see any efficient pathway from here to there if we had to start from zero though.
I can’t say you’re wrong, but is there a person who more than 50% of citizens would actually be happy to vote for? The options we’re presented aren’t great, and I’m certain a better one could be chosen. But reaching a full 50%+ seems like a tall order in the current political environment.