I think there’s a place for both. So long as none of it becomes mandatory, and online communities can freely choose to offer anonymous or verified identities, it’s an idea worth trying.
I played this so long ago, and every game has flaws, but I don’t recall any big issues. What are the flaws you remember these eleven years later?
Resistance requires hope. I appreciate people being willing to imagine how things could get better from this point. If you aren’t willing to allow yourself to even imagine victory, you’ve already lost.
I wasn’t thinking so specifically about Biden voters who stayed home in 24. I see that’s what you were talking about initially.
If you simply ask everyone who voted for Trump, the economy was the top issue. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/11/13/what-trump-supporters-believe-and-expect/
That’s all I was saying. But there are, I think, three groups which it would be interesting to have this answer for. The first is the one you mentioned. The other two are people who voted for Biden and switched to Trump, and people who chose not to vote in 2020 and voted for Trump in '24. I couldn’t find those answers readily.
Big? Sure. Biggest? No. Biggest was “the economy”. It’s practically a law of nature that inflation ends governments.
Imagine responding to someone’s concern without flipping your shit at them.
The article doesn’t go into much detail about the breakdown of those punishments. That second category, “denial of opportunities to reduce their sentence,” doesn’t sound like punishment. The opportunity to reduce their sentence is doing the work. I’m worried that’s being used to pad the 76% stat.
Perhaps he’s objecting to having the alleged hand gesture referred to as feminist. A bit of a quibble, but not completely baseless.
Then again it may not be fair to claim that whenever feminists do hurtful things in the name of feminism, that it’s not real feminism. Feminism can do bad things too. Any philosophy can.
I know some areas have laws mandating certain minimal coverages. I wonder if the insurers would even be allowed to issue policies that didn’t cover wildfires.
I think it’s more about being able to play as the oppressed, and whip up their base. There have been many platforms where they could post their hate. Censoring speech just fuels outrage and invites the Streisand effect.
But in this case I don’t think Zuck really cares about enabling these right-wing messages. It’s about saving money by cutting a bunch of expensive fact checkers, and displaying friendliness toward the new president; either because they don’t want to be singled out for punishment, or they hope to be rewarded with some largess.
I really don’t think so. If the process was so simple as writing false or hurtful things, and then your political opponents are blocked from power, then why doesn’t the left just become a bunch of shitposters and kick all the fascists out?
I think a more plausible explanation for why the left has been excluded from power is simply that American politics runs on donor money, capitalists have lots of money, and they have a class interest in excluding the left. You can certainly get deeper than that, but that’s sort of the heart of the issue.
Note here that Zuck and Meta are capitalists, and were never going censor the narrative contrary to their interests.
I still think this whole idea that we were going to get big tech (or anyone really), as owners of the modern mediums of communication, to act as the arbiters of truth and harmful messages was always a ridiculous notion. It’s both not in their interests and not in their power.
The mainstream of the liberals and the left seem to have become so obsessed with policing speech that they’ve nearly completely given up on meaningfully improving the material conditions of people’s lives. You win the narrative by delivering real results that people can see and feel, not by trying to ban charlatans from spinning bullshit.
Change the world, and the narrative will follow. Not the other way around.
Utter nonsense
Maybe you’re not wrong, but at this point, that battle is long lost.
There’s a profit angle in terms of keeping wages down, but there’s also a competitive angle. Having a bigger talent pool to draw on means you get better talent, particularly when you’re in the top spot in terms of pay, quality of life, professional achievement, etc.
We should have culled all these cows, and kept culling them until nobody and nothing tested positive. And done it all a year ago. But apparently that was too hard, and now it’s really just luck whether this becomes the next global catastrophe.
Not that I’m any kind of authority on the biases of publications, but I tend to think of ProPublica as more about investigative journalism than any political theory.
Just off the top of my head
The media keeps talking about how they’ve learned their lesson about how to report on Trump; that they’re not going to get spun up about all the noise he makes; that they’re not going to let him switch the story every week; that they’re going to focus on the real, material things that are going on.
Well here we are again, writing deeply concerned pieces about a handful of tweets (or whatever they’re called in Trump land). And here Lemmy is upvoting them.
Trump is a troll. Don’t feed the trolls.
That’s roughly the total COVID death toll for that period. The term “excess deaths” is used to refer to the deaths which occurred above the typical yearly mortality rate. In other words, the deaths which are roughly attributable to COVID.
I don’t know if that’s what you meant, but it would be easy to read your comment, given the context, as saying that Trump caused 522,368 deaths in 2020.
If you want to quantify the deaths caused by Trump’s mismanagement, you’d need to compare COVID deaths relative to population. I actually managed to find that (to my surprise)
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1104709/coronavirus-deaths-worldwide-per-million-inhabitants/
If you sort by deaths per million (total), the US is 16th from the bottom right above Brazil, Slovenia, and Lithuania. And right below Latvia, Chile, and Poland.
You could also download that data set there, find the global average, sum up the difference between that and the US, and roughly say that number is the death toll for Trump’s mismanagement.