LainTrain

You're absolutely right.

That said at least I'll take this as my cue to peace out of the mainstream web and only use Links2.

Just wait till they do this again with vision pro 2. Oh wait it hasn't sold well enough. Lol!

When I'm in a "don't comprehend nuance" competition and my opponent is the average Trekkie. Bet you like discovery!

We're done here.

Woah there we got a tough guy on the internet.

I don't want to talk to someone who thinks leaving people to die needlessly in ambulances is a good thing.

And is this someone in the here with us right now?

Because you made up a strawman in your head. I never said it is a good thing to leave people to die in ambulances needlessly.

But all the most effective protests and riots in history have had their casualties, and yet brought us the quality of life we enjoy today. That's not fee-fees, that's historical fact.

There's no need to get so worked up and upset that you must twist my words to make them easier to attack.

People being charged for crimes they've committed isn't fascism.

Yeah if you strip away all context from an action nothing can be anything. The anti-protest law isn't fascistic either, it's just a bill to keep the peace.

The mother of the person who was jailed said it was wrong as it meant her son wouldn't be able to attend a wedding in America, which was retweeted by JSO.

Yeah I'll agree with you there. I don't defend those cringelords as individuals, most anprims and other climatoids are absolute morons beyond all help.

Okay, now we're actually done :)

Does java even run on linux

You too.

That's not how courts work, and it's not how laws work. It shouldn't be done based on feels.

Fee-fees != Morality, context, nuance

They explicitly said they would rather people in ambulances die than let them through. Do you agree with that?

It's a shitty situation. They are not being listened to, what are they supposed to do? Idk I'm not them I can't unpack all that, but somehow I doubt they have genuine contempt for random people in ambulances.

Killing people is fine?

Depends. In self-defense? Yeah, absolutely. Are they Nazis? Yeah go for it man. Landlords? Geez wait for me! Oil execs? Wait wait, slow down, let me grab my S&W.

You can't just say "no the law shouldn't apply to you because I like you". That sounds like the way some fascist shithole would be run.

Well we are in a fascist shithole and it's not run like that so checkmate redditor.

The problem is that when you let only bad guys use hypocrisy, they win.

True, i mean we're both trans so I feel like even if I was transphobic I wouldn't think I'd be typical

Ehh, in anarchism there's a concept of nominated authority Vs compelled authority (not sure of the exact phrasing of either but you get the point). If a group of people voluntarily elect authority there isn't really a problem with it.

"Down with all authority, except on a both figurative and literal anarchist plane/boat where the passengers all make the conscious informed and democratic* decision under no duress and a freedom of association that it's in their best interests as a community to delegate decision making power for their community to the captain of said boat/plane as he has the knowledge and experience to navigate it." doesn't exactly roll off the tongue does it? Nor does it fit on a poster.

But the same is true in communities. Humans are in their initial state very atomized and individual we are not like ant colonies or bee colonies where by default the welfare of others is even a known subject to us, but as we seek to accomplish tasks, we voluntarily commit to some degree of communal benefit and to ensure this community lasts long enough to yield said benefit we learn to keep the peace and abide by some social norms within this community.

It sounds like conservative hell, but the nuanced position between that and hyper-individualistic self-expression is that as long as said communities aren't coercive and association is voluntary, it's kind of okay.

However one flaw in this take is something like the Amish. Is it ethical for say, Amish or some other community that willingly foregoes the benefits of modern technology to have children, who may find that growing up not surrounded by tech has reduced their development in some ways?

Pure /r/natureisfuckingmetal material amirite

I thought it said Poland I was like dayum

Unfortunately the "you" in this case is generic, and plural. And most people, in the UK, even the progressive folks, as evidenced by ITT, are definitely so inclined.

I don't really give a shit what Rossman thinks and I don't owe anyone "good activism" and especially not according to his opinion. Don't get me wrong, he's a good dude and all, I have nothing against him.

But imo, the time for "activism" has long passed, if people weren't onboard with it after the past 10 years of "activism" and things have only gotten worse I don't see much point in it. I'd rather scream into the void, harmonizing with the faint echo chorus of downvotes.