Curse you for being in an earlier time zone! I wanted to be the first one to post it this year.
Curse you for being in an earlier time zone! I wanted to be the first one to post it this year.
Curse you for being in an earlier time zone! I wanted to be the first one to post it this year.
So clever my first suspicion was that the source had been photoshopped.
You’re not wrong, but winning the election isn’t the bridge the article is talking about. There’s room for both conversations in the world, and talking about the potential shift taking place in The Democratic Party may help them to win more elections.
There are certainly problems with the state of journalism, but anyone who tries to “view the news as a person” will be as woefully uninformed as those who try to “run government like a business.”
Yeah,I’m not gonna lie, I’ll enjoy the chance to march with the Northside Coalition again.
What a terrible thing to say about someone’s father on the basis of one offhand remark.
Hmm… Sounds a bit like Humankind’s system.
Coincidentally my problem is, in fact, that no one is paying me.
Cheap rent with a friend and the ability to move right back out again. I was laid off recently just as I was about to move for work and the choices were be homeless in LA, be homeless in Dallas, or move back into my old room in Jacksonville.
I enjoyed living in Florida, and I’m moving back, but I can confirm that they are both visually,and societaly, North America’s dong.
So you’re saying my father was wrong; crying will solve something?
You raise a good point. The bias towards action, real or perceived, and the catharsis of self-righteous anger are both strong motivators at work in the political realm. We’d all do well to guard ourselves against those wishing to exploit them.
You’d think so,but education and experience doesn’t really get rid of the underlying tendency so much as it inoculates you to it in specific areas of experience/expertise. Plenty of experts in their own field will look at a screw-up in another field they’re not familiar with and exclaim “just do/don’t do x, y,or z.” That’s why it’s such an insidious tendency, insight really only let’s you see how complicated certain things are while leaving the shroud of your own ignorance around everything else.
Think of a clerk having trouble with the register when you’re in a hurry to get home. You’re likely to think to yourself "come on! It’s your one job and it’s not that hard. But if you’re made to stop and think about it you realize there’s a whole litany of functions to remember for the different scenarios that come up, an encyclopedia of produce numbers to remember, company policies to be observed,and all sorts of smaller jobs to be done.
This isn’t to say that people willing to hurt others for an easy solution to their problems have an excuse. This is just to say that we would do well to remember that everyone is susceptible to the urge to oversimplify.
Edit: spelling
His appeal is the same appeal that takes each of us in at some point; he offers easy answers to complicated problems. It’s tempting to believe that only the profoundly stupid will fall for this, but when a problem is outside your knowledge or experience and someone confidently announces they have a solution its pretty easy to let yourself stop thinking any further.
Also, there are a ton of racists and xenophobes out there who already believe they have the easy answers and like the confirmation of having them parroted back at them.
Side note: port isn’t the only terminology aviation has stolen from seafaring. For example: airspeed is measured in knots. Captain, pilot, and first officer were all used aboard ships first as well.
Here I am calling them air fields.
Of course it’s the folks taking it back to the ancient Greek and calling them aerodromes that are on the real next level.
That may be so, but it doesn’t stop it from being a complicated situation. What happens to US international relations when the rest of their allies come to the conclusion that they’ll be met with bombs and threats when they don’t respond to requests the way the US wants? If the US does far, far less, how much less is enough and how much is too much? What happens when Iran, its proxies, and other adversaries of Israel realize that its biggest ally no longer has its back?
I’m not telling you that calling for an end to the bloodshed is wrong, it’s not. I’m not telling you that the United States and the international community are doing enough to pressure Israel to respect human rights. I don’t think anyone knows enough of what’s going on behind the scenes to say for certain that enough is being done and what’s going on in front of our eyes says that more is required. What I am saying is that complex, world issues are complex and we cannot have a full understanding of them, nor a productive discussion about them unless we acknowledge their complexities.
Edit: I do appreciate the breakdown of how a threat works though.
You mean in an electoral democracy prospective leaders have to go out and sell the populace on their vision for the country’s path forward? Color me shocked. Who knew leaders would have to communicate with the people?
I swear, every James Woods post I’ve ever read is the text equivalent of watching a seasoned philosopher very carefully, and methodically shit their pants.