if you’re planning to kill the guy, what would you do with our cat?”
So…this makes no sense. If I had to guess, I’d imagine your girlfriend exhibits this kind of strange obsessive behavior inconsistently, has occasional bouts of depression, and is no older than 30. Regardless of whether I’m right (but especially if I am), you should consider whether your girlfriend is suffering from something that requires a psych evaluation and get her one.
The consequences was losing the election in 2020, no? I mean Democrats are really, really, really bad at fighting back. Like bringing pool noodles to a gun fight bad. But saying they do nothing is a bit much.
I’ll guess it that people who like third parties fall into 2 categories: people who are really focused on one issue in particular (green party, free soil party, pirate party), and people who are really individualistic (Angus King, Bernie Sanders, Jesse Ventura, etc.). The former aren’t really there to win, but rather to draw attention to the issue. And the latter don’t wanna join someone else’s party.
To be fair, I’m not sure this is an unrealistic scenario of your average instagram influencer going out camping.
Ok yeah, but that doesn’t mean we need to choose Alfred to do the actual fighting against the Joker. Instead, it’s perfectly OK to say “Hey Alfred, let Batman handle the Joker, you watch and provide advice if you’re needed.”
You are the one pulling an ad hominem, not me. You ignore my answer to your “argument” and go on to attack my person.
No I didn’t, everything was specific to your argument. I said nothing about you. As for your argument, well I guess I’m glad that I’m promoted to teenager now.
Your entire argument is “without the context of the site we’re on, no-one could know what this is referring to”, as if this was some sort of “both sides” bullshit, which you claim to despise.
But the argument I’m making is that both sides are guilty of claiming the other side is defending genocide not that both sides are guilty of committing genocide right now. The argument that one side is defending genocide is bad faith, as other than a few extremists nobody on either side is actually defending genocide.
Ad hominem = attacking the person rather than the argument. Like “you’re a little kid…” The fact that you feel the need to accuse someone you’ve never seen of being a kid instead of pointing out what’s actually wrong with what I’m saying should be seen as evidence that you are desperately flailing, pathetically grasping for straws to build an argument from when you clearly have nothing. Instead, it’s getting upvoted, for some reason.
Everything else you say is completely and absolutely non-responsive, internet tropes in place of argument. You completely ignore the whole point of my argument, which is that you replaced my argument with another argument and argued against that instead, and proceeded to argue against an argument that was never made in the exact way I described.
Forget Israel and Palestine, the fact that this illogical Trumpian debate tactic shit is getting upvoted is the new thing that disturbs me. We’re truly fucked as a species.
“What the fuck are you smoking” is an ad hominem designed to distract from my undeniably true point, specifically: that both sides are similar in using unfair allegations of defending genocide to dismiss more nuanced beliefs of the other side.
Outside of shitty Israeli propaganda, no-one thinks Israel is under the threat of genocide.
This is called a motte-and-bailey fallacy. You’re taking my point implying that both sides accuse the other of defending genocide and then wanna say I’m suggesting Israel is under threat of genocide. These are different things. You use a different thing because if you were to address the actual point, which again is undeniably true, you would have a very hard time.
To be clear, the “genocide” Israel supporters (unfairly) accuse others of defending is the Hamas attack on Israel, where Hamas killed unarmed civilians at close range, proudly recording it on video. I don’t mean to imply you can’t figure that out on your own, but you kinda forced me to point it out.
And if you say “but people who are protesting Israel aren’t defending Hamas attacking Israeli civilians, but are defending the right of the Palestinian civilians to remain alive”, then you understand completely. Now try swapping the relevant ethno-religious tribes.
If you took this out of the context of being on lemmy, it would be impossible to tell which side this came from.
Why the hell would anti-genocide protesters be protesting Bernie Sanders, the rare jewish voice that has condemned Israel’s war? It goes to show how the biggest unwitting enablers of Israel getting continued support from the US are these edgelord protesters. All they did was piss people off.
It’s time for everyone on the left to be clear-eyed. Just try to be convincing. That’s the only thing we gotta do differently if we wanna end poverty, war, and live in a literal utopia. Just try being convincing and picking the right hills to die on and not being willfully blind of weak spots, just once.
If you’re sick of this, in the DC area, and need a saturday activity, reminder that there’s a “Mass Poor People’s and Low-Wage Workers’ Assembly and Moral March on Washington, D.C. and to the Polls” in Washington DC tomorrow morning 10 AM. Make it if you can. Yeah I know the title’s absurdly long and marching doesn’t do shit but what else are we gonna do.
The crazy thing is everything up to this point was so much better. They’d show biden waiving at “nobody” and then they’d zoom out and there’s someone standing there. Or he’d say “president of Mexico” when he meant to say “president of Egypt”. But then last night was like nonstop fail. It’s the perfect nightmare scenario because now everyone can say “You shoulda seen it sooner!” but really, we couldn’t.
I think you can do a lot better than he did, any of us could. Just look at the transcript here. ctrl+f for “golf”. You’re gonna tell me you don’t have a better response than Biden here?
I’m just gonna come up with 5 things right now Biden could’ve said:
Instead Biden talked about his height (which he didn’t mention) and challenged him to a driving contest. WTF. I recognize how bad this would’ve sounded before yesterday, but literally any random person we pick from this thread has better odds than Biden at this point.
Trump did absolutely horribly. His answers can be fairly described as completely and transparently delusional. But Biden managed to make him look good.
We would be, if not for Devo
Going the whole distance in QWOP
I don’t know if the type of matter matters, rather I’m basing in on the idea that measurement collapses the wave function, and consciousness does measure things
There’s a lot of possibilities.
My top contender would be a desire to explore, which probably requires consciousness. Given that we have pretty much no idea what leads to consciousness, it can be guessed (dubiously) that if it arose more easily then we’d have an explanation by now. It could be that it’s an extremely rare phenomenon, and there may even be other planets with “intelligent” but mechanistic beings that act entirely for their own survival and don’t build civilizations or explore much.
Second would be intergalactic and to a lesser degree interstellar travel. If we assume both 1) intelligent civilizations are extremely rare and 2) faster-than-light transportation is impossible, it could be that everyone is just too spread out to make contact.
Third, and the one I most feel is right but it requires pretending I understand quantum physics (which I don’t) and probably offending many that do, is the notion that the concrete universe is not large but small and has no objective existence independent of our respective perceptions, and any part of the universe that’s invisible is a mere wave function that will only have concrete reality upon our perceiving it. I make the further dubious assumption that conscious beings can’t be part of the wave function. So there.
I think what it all comes down to is most people don’t really want rational debate, and don’t participate in debates in the hope of learning or even to help others learn. Most people participate in debates to feel superior/“own” the other side. The result is debates that are typically lazy, uninformative, and downright mean.
I think all of us have a little bit of this desire for superiority in us and we need to consciously make an effort to suppress it.