Kindness is Punk

Tim Cook for all his faults is always been great at politics and this is an extension of that.

Look at the data. Under Trump, Gaza got an embassy move, funding cuts to UNRWA, and open talk of annexation. Under Biden, it got bombs,but also pauses, pushback, and at least some rhetorical distance. That’s not enough. It’s nowhere near enough. But it’s less. Same with Iran, Trump tore up the JCPOA and maxed sanctions; Biden at least kept diplomacy open. Same with SNAP, Trump gutted it; Biden restored some of it.

I’m not asking you to recognize this scale as legitimate. I’m saying it’s the scale that actually exists and the difference is real.

The absence of your vote doesn’t punish them, it hands the keys to the people who will do worse, faster, to the communities you’re trying to protect. You want to build mutual aid and unions? So do I. But those need time and cover to grow. One administration gives you more of both than the other.

Being morally pure does absolutely nothing for the people lives that get actively worse.

While we do that we need to also work in primaries to get people into Congress that will apply pressure for change because if you look at any actual societal progress we’ve had it’s been civil action in tandem with political pressure.

Withholding your vote only puts gasoline on the fire. Voting for something is not support, it is selecting from available paths and they are not of equal harm. The most important elections to vote in are primaries where you get to choose who you’ll be choosing.

Please note that voting should always be done in conjunction with civil protest and mutual support networks.

I actually got rid of windows instance entirely, I just realized one day that I hadn’t booted it up in 6 months, thanks Linux.

I can see the point when more than 1% of the population votes in primaries

We need to show the Democrats that being conservative light is not good enough by making it have consequences in primaries.

The lesser of two evils trap demoralizes people and makes them think that this is the best we can hope for from a politician but it’s not, We’ve seen a rise of left-wing politicians lately and we can do better.

We must participate whenever possible and the choices aren’t always great but they do still matter.

So yes, Democrats actively doing less damage than the Republican counterpart, and no it isn’t good enough.

People deserve a world where hope can be a part of it.

Neat, now imprison the people responsible for grievous negligence

Well the reality is that sometimes the US does do a lot of good outside of its borders almost never because of Republicans but when it’s cut down or left limping you bet your ass is always because of Republicans

The most pressing example I can think of from recent history is the controlled release of sterile flies to stop the spread of screw worm and as it has been defunded under the Trump admin it has begun spreading again

You’re telling on yourself in real time you’re accusing me of not seeing outside my position while demonstrating exactly that.

You’re diagnosing my motives by something you literally cannot know because you have not engaged with a single word on the screen.

You’re making unfalsifiable claims for the sake of, what I can only assume at this point is to insensing me based off of the amount of times you’ve doubled down and never actually responded to the points I’ve made

You’re projecting your own behavior on me without evidence.

You’re claiming that third party is in an online discussion don’t exist while writing a public comment. It may be true that no one’s reading this because we’re so far down the rabbit hole it’s very easy to disprove in general, just think about the last time you read a conversation you didn’t comment in.

“I respond because I want to respond, not hypothetical higher ground.” That’s exactly my point I never said I had any moral higher ground just that there are holes in the argument worth exploring, I’m not trying to win or prove you wrong build a scaffold for respectful online debate. This is an example of you anchoring your own trauma to me.

At this point I would like to respectfully disengage I will still read what you say if you have something to say but I won’t take it any further because at this point it’s cyclical.

You’re proving my point for me: you’re boxing with your own ghosts rather than engaging what I actually said.

You try to use hyperbolic exaggeration to pin a list of positions I have never claimed to hold. This is almost certainly from past arguments.

With this exchange as an example, If I was an onlooker I would see someone who told me that there is a purpose in respectful debate and working to add clarity and consciousness instead of trying to win for onlookers and then another who has had no point engaged it and instead lashed out, that would both effectively communicate the point and teach me how to engage with someone who is talking past me.

You’ve tried to pin a bunch of positions I don’t actually hold on me, I never said that police other people I said to approach ideas and jokes with skepticism.

What you hit me back with is both hyperbolic and not what I’ve actually said. I’m sorry for what happened to you but I don’t see how what I’ve said has any connection to it.

Is your argument that you don’t think anyone else reads what people post on social media, and that it has no effect if they do? Respectfully are you insane?

I don’t think it’s delusional to want to teach people things. When you respectfully deconstruct someone’s half truths it can help people understand.

This is not to say that you should take everything seriously or that every person is worth engaging with of course you still have to be selective.

This is incredibly aggressive and has no connection to what I originally said.

I think you may want to reread what I wrote because this is barely related. Feels more like something happened and you’re just looking for a vent.

It’s not about them it’s about the other people that might be influenced by their post.

Online is never an A&B conversation, which is why I usually avoid direct confrontation and just provide well structured, clear information, because I don’t really care whether I can convince someone who has made up their mind.

It’s about deconstructing the argument with clear digestible information for the dozens of lurkers.

Something can be incorrect or harmful and funny.

Moreover if you reread my comment I think we very much agree.

While I agree that we could all stand to take things a little less seriously, I also think that it’s important to realize that humor is an important tool for normalizing ideas and opinions so sometimes it warrants scrutiny.

Yep this is why non plug-in hybrids work, by using the battery for regenerative recharge and then using that to reduce engine load you increase the efficiency to about 30% - 35%

Still coming out way ahead for how much fossil fuel you’re using to do the same job