Thank you🙏

Reminds me of two Mensheviks giggling about the Bolsheviks platform just before they were sent to the Gulag.

@gregallen485

3 күн бұрын

That sounds profound but I don't understand how your comparison applies to this discussion.

@italukr

2 күн бұрын

I got the sense that you are underestimating the amount of damage that the Progressives can do.

Love this woman

She gives the woke too much credit -- they weren't that smart. Perfecting bullying is what allowed them to capture so many institutions. During a discussion, if challenged by facts that they can't refute they, just shut the other person down by calling them a racist, or transphobe, or bigot. When you can do that, you never lose an argument.

Given everything she’s just said, why in the world should we trust reporters now?

@gregallen485

3 күн бұрын

I think her point was saying this kind of wishful thinking and group think did real damage to our trust in reporters and there needs to be a reality check and an understanding of what went wrong. Unfortunately that erosion of trust is being exploited but Trump and his collaborators who are living in their own even more dangerous bubble that is detached from reality. Kinda like standing on a barrier island being eroded from both sides. I fear it will end badly before it stops.

Did the Oregon drug legalization fail because it was bad policy or because drug warriors refused to fund adequate treatment?

@gregallen485

3 күн бұрын

That's always the question. You'll have to dig deeper. Sometimes it's a lack of resources devoted to the problem but often that's a very easy excuse to explain a misguided policy. I really don't know which in this case.

The arrow of time moves forward - this won't look good in 10 years - 2nd law of Thermodynamics

@gregallen485

3 күн бұрын

*sigh* What she is describing is what happens when wishful thinking comes unmoored from reality. It's fine to have a vision of the future like, "I will wade across this river to the paradise on the other side!" but refusing to fall back and work on a better plan when you find the water is too deep and the current is dangerously fast but instead let yourself get swept away and drown with your followers is foolish, not principled. Being blind to reality when we're convinced otherwise is a human frailty and it doesn't just happen to those on the right, even if your vision is far nobler. It won't be her position that looks bad in 10 years. BTW, the 2nd law of thermodynamics says temperatures will move away from the extreme hot and the extreme cold and approach the average between the two. It's not proof of constant improvement. Entropy doesn't work that way. It kinda sucks, actually. It takes careful thought to get useful work out of a system, not wishful thinking.

@user-xu6bv7yh2j

2 күн бұрын

@@gregallen485 You projected quite a lot onto my comment - lol - "far nobler"? - Your values are yours - that's it - where did I write that it wouldn't take work? It will happen because it is happening - slowly, our ethics improve - doesn't mean there aren't set backs - but over time, humanity moves forward - things do get better ethically - as a queer, I can attest to this

@gregallen485

2 күн бұрын

@@user-xu6bv7yh2j I suppose I did combine a lot of what I've been studying lately into what you wrote but it had a strong "end of history" tone which I believe will go down in history with lines like "peace in our time". Wishful thinking that greater freedoms. growing prosperity, and democracy is the natural order of things. Unfortunately, that feeling just made us complacent. As Joh Stewart said, "democracy is hard". We grew complacent and now we're scrambling to save it from a Trump lead authoritarian movement fed by populism. I understand how that hope sprang up. In my 66 years, I've seen the end of the Cold War, the amazing progress gay rights have made from the 70's to gay marriage becoming the law of the land and the broad acceptance that came with it. The economic, technical, medical progress we've made in that time is amazing as well. All heady stuff. We forgot all the hard work it took to get there. the dead ends that needed to be reversed, the pitfalls avoided. Marxism was a "far nobler" economic/social system then capitalism but Marxism failed, each and every time. -"One more tweak!", "This time it will work!" was announce/promised over and over again but it is a fatally flawed concept. Some parts worked. Monopolies were broken up. Social safety nets were installed and continue to be tuned but as a whole it was a failed model/concept and now it's been dressed up and rebranded as the social justice/occupy movements and identity politics where identity replaced class. It's an overly simplified dream that has become unmoored from reality and those will be the ideas which seen as fatally flawed in the future, no matter how noble the sentiment, not those who are attempting to tug us back to reality like Nellie Bowles. And whatever the better future is, it will not just happen. It will be hard work and there will be many missteps. Hopefully we'll make it but it won't be easy or natural. As an aside, I'm honestly curious what your definition of queer is these days. I have writer friends and friends heavily involved in the LGBTQ+ community who pay very close attention to their words and labels and they couldn't even agree on the meaning even if they sometimes applied it to themselves. The best I could figure out is that it means a mix of all and other. Is that correct or can you provide something more accurate?

@user-xu6bv7yh2j

2 күн бұрын

@@gregallen485 Hmm - maybe the best definition is NOT STRAIGHT - not heterosexual and not honoring binary thinking/hierarchies -

@gregallen485

2 күн бұрын

@@user-xu6bv7yh2j So anything EXCEPT traditional? It seems like Russel wrestled with this in set theory ;) More seriously it seems like a label saying "I don't want to be in any box/category you or society wants to put me in. I refuse to be labeled!" Ironically, I think the drive to label/classify everyone is the fundamental flaw with identity politics. That and the grossly oversimplified system of determining who is right and who is wrong by simply figuring out who is oppressed and who is the oppressor. Nothing worth thinking about is ever that simple. Anyway, thanks for the thoughts on the definition. That makes some sense (if I get your meaning). Am I correct in thinking that not heterosexual means that, while not opposed to a heterosexual pairing, it's based on the compatibility/desirability of the partner(s) independent of how that bonding would stereotypically be classified? *sigh* sorry for the word salad. I must have eaten a dictionary for dinner.

Wealthy Airhead Alert ! 🤔

@gregallen485

3 күн бұрын

@geoffreynhill2833 You do realize that your ad hominem attack of the author is an excellent demonstration of the point she's making, right?

@geoffreynhill2833

2 күн бұрын

@@gregallen485 Apologies! 🥴