I’ll give the author a modicum of credit, I didn’t know wood banks were a thing, so at least I learned something. But gotta lambast them everywhere else.
Rural America knows the truth long before the rest of the country feels it.
Rural America wouldn’t know the truth if it bit them in the ass. This is what they voted for, a silver spoon city slicker who calls functioning institutions “the deep state” before totally destroying them, to their delight.
The article is full of this coddling “woe is they” language.
Rural families don’t get to pretend. … They also know what it means when everything gets privatized except the consequences.
What a load of baloney. Rural voters have been playing pretend my entire life, to the tune of 64% support for Trump in 2024. They’ve been pretending that piss-down economics works since the 80’s. Maybe you mean they can’t afford to pretend, but they’ve been happily running a deficit on that front and won’t stop even if they freeze in the winter.
So I say let them freeze. They can beg for scrap wood and call it charity, because that’s exactly what they wanted.
Hey, asshole, not everyone who lives in a rural area and is poor is a Trump supporter. Nor, would being a Trump supporter mean that it’s okay to let them freeze or cheer at other people suffering. You’re engaging in exactly the same toxic dehumanization as the MAGA crowd.
If you think rural voters are your enemy or the source of our problems, then you’re woefully ignorant about the current political situation or how political influence works.
You’re very much right to be angry, but make sure you know where that anger should be directed before making outrage bait posts like this.
They have never in my lifetime acted as friends. They have never offered so much as a kind word for anyone not in their group.
At some point, you have believe people when they show you who they are.
Yes, there is intense propaganda. Yes they are uneducated. This changes nothing of the material reality of the situation they FOUGHT FOR.
If they want to come over to my side, I would welcome them. They have to make they effort, not just whinge that their own policies are hurting them. The more they suffer from their own stupidity, the more likely they will see the light.
We should not ever be tolerant of intolerance. Similarly, it’s fine for those who want others to suffer, to suffer themselves.
Karl Popper’s paradox of intolerance is about how we can’t tolerate intolerance in society.
It isn’t a cloak for you to wear when you want to be intolerant and feel justified. Nor is it a proscription to dehumanize and celebrate suffering.
Those are the actions of the intolerant, which we will not tolerate here.
The irony.
So you mean people like OP? You?
Don’t confuse feeling outraged or righteous for an actual moral high ground.
That was some excellent sea lioning there buddy.
I feel fully morally justified in having people experience what they want others to experience. I’m also fine with that applying to me.
And since you’re substituting outrage for intelligence, I’ll provide an example.
Person A thinks that social safety nets should be removed for the express purpose of making Person B to suffer. Taking this action causes person A to suffer the effect of their own action.
Person C thinks that if you want others to suffer, you should suffer. Taking this action causes… Nothing because it is a purely reactive stance that doesn’t do anything unless triggered by a second party.
Similarly, I think that if you take someone’s money that you should be punished, for example by someone taking your money.
The fact that you don’t understand this is honestly rather baffling. Or you’re just enjoying sealioning to make everyone who isn’t on your side of the argument look bad.
Tolerance is a social contract. Intolerance voids the contract, so no paradox.