|
Post by kds on Apr 28, 2021 14:47:31 GMT
What a sad state of affairs.
|
|
|
Post by Kapitan on Apr 28, 2021 15:35:34 GMT
Yeah ... it's a load of crap.
But his underlying point isn't fully wrong: outdoor mask-wearing (when not in a crowd) is indeed silly and almost certainly not important in protecting one another from the virus. There is indeed a HUGE political signaling aspect to it. Unfortunately.
Because we're morons in this country, always looking for new ways to "own the [libs/conservatives]" and show we're on the right side.
I fully believe there is no reason to wear a mask in open space outdoors. I fully believe it's idiotic (not to mention potentially threatening) to confront someone who chooses to do so. I also think it's stupid to wear that "athletic tape" in weird patterns as many athletes do believing it has something to do with helping muscles recover or something. It's nonsense. I don't confront them about it. For that matter, I think going to church doesn't make much sense beyond growing a sense of community: the underlying beliefs, I think are untrue. Would I confront church-goers, ranting about how the eucharist or baptism are pseudoscience? Absolutely not.
Media stars like this, parading as journalists and demonizing a third-to-half of the country, are terrible.
And we are worse for buying into it.
|
|
|
Post by kds on Apr 28, 2021 15:51:09 GMT
I absolutely agree that wearing masks outdoors is silly. Unless I've been at an outdoor place of business that requires it, I've not worn one. And I really don't want to go back to sporting events until I can do so without the mask.
You also have nut jobs like Maxine Waters encouraging violence against people who wear MAGA merch.
I guess this all shouldn't be overly surprising considering I've witnessed grown men at football games fight each other because they root for different teams.
|
|
|
Post by Kapitan on Apr 28, 2021 16:17:52 GMT
You also have nut jobs like Maxine Waters encouraging violence against people who wear MAGA merch. Exactly. In the past couple of years, we've seen an increase in "leaders" (political and media) encouraging citizens to confront one another for what amount to displays of annoying speech (from their perspective). Whether in reaction to kneeling at games, MAGA merch, BLM merch, or politicians' perspectives or votes, they call for direct confrontation, shouting-down, protests at their homes ... it's not just nasty and ineffective in the big picture (of bringing about consensus on any opinion or compromise), but it's dangerous.
People need to cool off. Do what you want (as long as it's legal and doesn't hurt anyone). And let others do the same.
|
|
|
Post by kds on Apr 28, 2021 16:25:04 GMT
You also have nut jobs like Maxine Waters encouraging violence against people who wear MAGA merch. Exactly. In the past couple of years, we've seen an increase in "leaders" (political and media) encouraging citizens to confront one another for what amount to displays of annoying speech (from their perspective). Whether in reaction to kneeling at games, MAGA merch, BLM merch, or politicians' perspectives or votes, they call for direct confrontation, shouting-down, protests at their homes ... it's not just nasty and ineffective in the big picture (of bringing about consensus on any opinion or compromise), but it's dangerous.
People need to cool off. Do what you want (as long as it's legal and doesn't hurt anyone). And let others do the same.
People seem to have lost the ability to do this for whatever reason.
|
|
|
Post by B.E. on May 1, 2021 23:57:22 GMT
The mention of MAGA merch, BLM merch, sports, and an inability to live and let live, has me thinking about the correlation that must exist between them. Why is it that people are wearing political/virtue-signaling baseball caps, anyway? Rooting for their team and against the other. Seems rather perverse to me. (I honestly hadn't really bothered to think about this before - I just accepted it.) Granted, this is coming from someone who won't put up a sign or a sticker on my car, so it's hardly surprising I'm not game for T-shirts and baseball caps. Maybe if independent thinking was valued and encouraged in all areas of life, the political arena would become...well...less of an arena.
|
|
|
Post by Kapitan on May 2, 2021 11:52:40 GMT
I became obsessed with (or against, really) political yard signs this season. The more I thought about them, the more I came to believe they weren't what I'd always naturally thought they were.
By default, I just thought political signs were intended to convince other people to vote the same way. To promote your side of an issue. But now I don't think that at all. It's the "In this house, we believe..." signs that really got me. They are snarky and obnoxious. The implication, obviously, is that their political opponents don't believe in science, or that love is love, or that no humans are illegal, and so on. But that's obvious. The signs basically position themselves against implied, unflattering strawman versions of their opponents.
Maybe worse, I think a lot of people who put those signs up think they are brave positions to take. That Republicans would oppose the substance of the signs. But by phrasing things in partisan ways and using partisan talking points, it makes it harder to bring people to their side. Plenty of conservatives who would agree to the substance of those points would just want to argue nuance, or policy stemming from these values...but by phrasing them as they did, it's more likely to just turn off the conservative entirely. Hell, they turn ME off, and I'm far from conservative.
Now I just see signs as, at best, the equivalent of sports team banners; and at worst, they're "Packers Suck!" banners.
|
|
|
Post by Kapitan on May 5, 2021 12:23:35 GMT
An interesting but typically maddening political disconnect is occurring in Minnesota that I thought might be of interest.
The Democratic governor's administration has been pushing through the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency a new rule that would mimic one from California already copied by over a dozen other states by requiring carmakers to deliver and auto dealers to stock an increasing number of low- and zero-emission cars, as well as formalizing a standard for low emissions that the state actually has already adopted. (The idea on that is to ensure the standard would be harder to change later.)
Republicans, who control the state senate, complain that such a change should not happen without legislative action. Basically, the complaint is executive overreach. Their power is limited, however, considering Democrats hold the governorship and the state house.
The Republicans' leverage, then, is about threatening to block other legislation. Specifically, they have said they will not pass any omnibus environmental bill unless the new rule is dropped. Failure to pass the omnibus environmental spending bill would close Minnesota's (wildly popular) state parks, stop "forever chemical" cleanup, stop fighting chronic wasting disease in the deer population, among other painful cuts.
To me, this seems to be a losing strategy for Republicans--even though I sympathize with their point. Closing Minnesota's state parks would be a very public disaster for them politically, to say nothing of the other programs that would end. But their point--that governors are not kings, and that major changes should be legislated, not administratively declared--is one I largely agree with. A governor can claim the mandate of the people, sure; but so can each elected legislator.
But won't a compromise water down a governor's (and a legislature's) agenda?
Yes. Winning an election doesn't promise you your agenda.
Isn't the environment an important cause?
Yes. Perhaps this is why solutions should be legislated, to help guarantee a lasting solution rather than an administrative reversal as soon as the other party gains the governorship.
Political gamesmanship is just so frustrating to me.
|
|
|
Post by B.E. on May 6, 2021 2:29:17 GMT
I see Rep. Cheney is about to be ousted from her leadership position for being critical of Trump - who last I checked doesn't even hold office. It's understandable insofar as a party will want leadership who shares their views, but that's where my understanding ends. Relatedly, but by no means consequently, I just signed my political party affiliation form. A change has been in order for a long time now. Unless a 3rd party becomes relevant at some point in the future, I'm independent (or, officially, "unaffiliated") from here on out.
|
|
|
Post by wannabeyachtrocker on May 12, 2021 23:43:07 GMT
Anybody read james lindsay's twitter account?
|
|
|
Post by Kapitan on May 13, 2021 12:51:58 GMT
I'm familiar.
|
|
|
Post by Kapitan on May 14, 2021 12:06:59 GMT
Minnesota's House voted yesterday to legalize recreational marijuana. (Medicinal marijuana has been legal for maybe 6-10 years, although in highly restricted formats and very limited situations.) However, while it passed the house 72-61 in a mostly party line vote with the support of Democrats (and six Republicans), it is seen as having no chance whatsoever in the GOP-controlled Senate. What's more, because the legislature has yet to pass any substantive budget bills, many see the effort in the House as a waste of time and misplaced priorities.
|
|
|
Post by wannabeyachtrocker on May 16, 2021 7:01:34 GMT
I thought maybe I'd be presumptiouous and turn ya'll on to him. I thought he's a dude people in good faith could all get onboard with. Im lookin at you nowkds. James lindsay's new discourses podcasts are pretty challenging,if you like him from twitter--or not . His interview with glenn loury is good , too.
|
|
|
Post by wannabeyachtrocker on May 16, 2021 8:06:12 GMT
I stumble upon ""the intellectual dark web"of bret weinstein a few weeks ago.gaslighgting myself.
retroactively my perceptions of 2020 and 2021 all seemed distant. Was this reall?
I still care not, not at all,
hadnt cared, not deeply bout things .Other than my sanity.Not at all.
I gotta cancel my damn wapo and wsj. As i no longer want to read george will. And i find matt gaetz very uninteresting.... Anyone habitually forget these damn free trials after initial trial period? Goddamn whatashame i thought the last ten mins. Of an interview with russell brand was worth risking my spotty memory on. Shit costs me 4p$ and its all new age people i never heard of. I love rb. All good content's on youtube, tho.
|
|
|
Post by Kapitan on May 16, 2021 11:26:22 GMT
I thought maybe I'd be presumptiouous and turn ya'll on to him. I thought he's a dude people in good faith could all get onboard with. Im lookin at you nowkds. James lindsay's new discourses podcasts are pretty challenging,if you like him from twitter--or not . His interview with glenn loury is good , too. I really respected his work with Helen Pluckrose and Peter Boghossian a few years ago when they released the "grievance studies" hoax papers. Those were brilliant, but unfortunately entirely impotent: nothing changed. And I really respect the work he's done with the ND project.
However, I don't at all like the turn towards sarcasm, personal attack, "own the lib" style work on twitter. It makes him fit right in that divisive cesspool of a platform. He comes across much better in interviews. But playing the character of a troll isn't a lot different from being one, in my opinion.
Loury, conversely, is a great model for people on how to conduct themselves as well as how to think, in my opinion. His podcast might be my favorite.
|
|