data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ab5a8/ab5a83c36a5f51cb29552b46a1b9f84d2cc76c74" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/1df69/1df69f53f5559e83c288e08b403109544e78dc05" alt=""
People are saying it. Many great people.
People are saying it. Many great people.
I mean, what else are you gonna wind a piece of string around?
I think 75% is far too generous an estimate, tbh. Every policy I’ve acquired through the ACA-mandated marketplace has been garbage, right from the start. For-profit health care is evil, and the ACA just served to further entrench this evil in our lives. It did some marginal good, and I’m certainly not advocating for its repeal in favor of ‘concepts of a plan’. But 75%? I can’t get on board with that.
This is something I do, so I’ll take a crack at it—though, bear in mind, it might be total bullshit.
It’s a defense mechanism. Many popular things are—in my estimation—objectively terrible. Every time something utterly devoid of merit (and often actively detrimental to the public good) is generally agreed to be a popular sensation, the connection I feel to my fellow human beings takes a hit.
I want to believe in people—in society. But I’m clearly a judgmental sob. So maybe by avoiding the popular things, I’m trying not to further my own alienation.
I can see how it’s easier to fuck someone than to actively listen and (at least pretend to) empathize with them. It’s easier to go without the former than the latter, as well.
I generally agree with your point, but the MIC is a bad example; both parties are equally happy selling bombs to murderers.
Like every single person who has ever claimed that downvotes proved their point, you are making an insupportable claim. There are at least two things I can point to in your comment that could provoke someone to downvote it, even if they agree with your other points.
You had 4 years to make a change, but you guys would rather just blame people that wants actual improvements and still doing so after you lost the election despite getting the candidate that you supported.
I think many commenters here would argue that at least some of the people who campaigned against Harris in the run-up to the election were not acting in good faith; certainly the comment you replied to implies this. It would therefore be inaccurate, in their view, to say that they’re blaming “people that wants actual improvements”.
It’s really funny to watch.
This kinda makes you sound like an asshole.
For the record, I agree that she was a bad candidate, and that the Democrats would have won the election if they offered real change, instead of rallying round the status quo as they so often have in my lifetime.
I have blocked at least one “videos” community, since I have no interest in watching anything masquerading as informative. I’ve been on Lemmy a bunch lately, so I can only assume that I’ve preemptively blocked the instance or community where it’s being posted.
I’ve been blissfully unaware of this trend, because I’m not on any other social media! I get that posting this is a bit of smug self-satisfaction, which nobody likes, but I feel strongly that corporate social media is a scourge, and that far too many people farm out their critical thinking to random “content creators.” Black-box content algorithms are not doing you any favors, and they will affect your thinking if you subject yourself to them.
Can’t help but agree with both of you ‘(I am large, I contain multitudes.)’
To say nothing of all our other problems, anyone should be able to grasp the idea that the US health insurance industry is inherently evil. They provide and create nothing. It’s a whole sector of the economy that exists solely to extract profit by amplifying human suffering and death. It should and must be abolished.
Thanks for the perspective!
Trust you to bring such a granularly appropriate reaction gif. 'Preciate ya, ummthatguy.
What the actual fuck? Now I feel like I had this identical experience like a decade ago, and totally blocked it out. Gross.
Oh, for sure. It’s just that there’s no actual cleavage in the picture. And the meme is about cleavage. It’s not as if there aren’t millions of images that would’ve suited the meme better. I can’t fathom the thinking behind selecting this image, unless the person making it either didn’t know what cleavage was, or maybe thought a picture with cleavage was too ribald for a meme about cleavage.
Sure there were Russian bots. Of course there was billionaire fuckery. That’s been the case every cycle for decades. Do you honestly believe that Democrats lost exclusively because of these things? And furthermore, that nobody should critique their performance or policies, because that constitutes sowing apathy? Weeks after the fucking election? That’s the dumbest fucking thing I ever heard.
The election is over. Democrats failed spectacularly. Now is the time for criticism and accountability. If not now, when? We’re all just supposed to pretend that Harris ran a great campaign? Are you familiar with the concept of learning from failure? I was beating this drum myself before the election—you know, when it actually made sense. Now it just smacks of sticking your fingers in your ears.
I feel like whoever made this didn’t really know what cleavage was.
Nothing to do with cryptocurrency. Great podcast, though.
This is from Waterworld, right? Troublingly relatable.