MonkRome

joined 1 year ago
[–] MonkRome@lemmy.world 11 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (4 children)

If that is real, it is in pain. Overfed chickens typically spend the last ~month of their life in pain. I love chicken, but what we have done to get bigger yields is pretty gross.

[–] MonkRome@lemmy.world 12 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Obvious sarcasm getting down votes ...

[–] MonkRome@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago

I'd rather pay for security updates than invite more AI and Microsoft sponsored spyware onto my computer...

[–] MonkRome@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

More like the third lever is a lever that does absolutely nothing but comfort the person pulling with a dumb sign that says, "your moral purity is still intact", 5 people still die. Spoiler, your moral purity is not intact, you just lie to yourself that it is.

[–] MonkRome@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (3 children)

That's more complicated than a simple meme. If you have a party with 1/4 far left, 1/2 moderately left, and 1/4 basically moderate conservatives, it doesn't matter that you have a majority, those moderate conservatives will still hold up any progress, but that's not the fault of the other 3/4 of the party.

[–] MonkRome@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I think you're mis-characterizing what I'm saying. That isn't the only two options, the far left could be a little more honest about how one gets to a majority and start working with the only party with power that somewhat aligns. It's what I've done much of my adult life, I've swam in party politics, there is a lot more room for socialists, democratic socialists, progressives, etc in the party than people seem to realize. You just have to be willing to compromise for incremental progress instead of letting perfect be the enemy of good. Policy shifts move slowly, but they do move.

The left has a clear path forward to move the Overton window back, but it needs the far left to be willing to do something other than constantly masturbate our/their moral self righteousness. But parties don't really shift the Overton window that much alone, society does, activism does, education does. Parties don't give a great speech and everyone changes their mind. That kind of of leadership is a simplistic fantasy we sell ourselves, but really parties and leaders meet the moment, they don't make the moment. Citizens need to get involved, the far left needs to stop standing on the outside looking in. They need to be committed long term to joining, and then shifting, the party for real.

[–] MonkRome@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

It's not a "strategy", it's literally how democracy works. You need 50% + 1 or all the moral purity in the universe means nothing. If the far left continues to never work as a coalition then the left is forced to move to the middle. Don't get me wrong, most of my views are pretty far left, I just understand how democracy works...

[–] MonkRome@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

Morally pure ideologues that refuse to work with others enjoy all the benefits of knowing they are right while making none of the decisions. Democracies involve consensus and coalition building.

[–] MonkRome@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah I generally agree, but I suspect that every politician that attends national security meetings is constantly being told that Israel is a necessary partner. Combine that with a strong Christian and Jewish Israel lobby and even a good person may recognize that they can't gain power to do all the things they want and also oppose funding Israel at the same time.

It's the paradox of political power, it's why if I went back into politics I would do activism instead of elected office, with activism you have the freedom to put your energy where you want without compromise. In politics compromise is fundamental, even necessary, even when dealing with unquestionably immoral things. Personally I think being afraid to spend your political capital means you have failed, but id also probably lose if I ran for office.

[–] MonkRome@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

My family always played a variation of "oh hell" that we named "oh blueberry" because no one ever saw grandma say a negative word. Basically same rules but instead of going 1 up to 7, back down to 1, we went 1 up until we ran out of cards, which varied depending on players. If the table was large we would add a deck which altered the rules, I think first played was higher for ties.

[–] MonkRome@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Have you met voters? Pretending like voters are any better would be pretty hilarious if it wasn't so sad.

[–] MonkRome@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

How they gonna nominate someone that has only ever said they will never run for president. Dumbest take I have ever seen on lemmy. Michelle would never be president, she doesn't want it.

view more: next ›