CapuccinoCoretto, capuccinocoretto@lemmy.world

I disagree and I don’t think you got it, but I updoot for good faith, some fair points, wit and humour. I’ll always drink to that. ;)

Heresy! Where are the turtles? It’s turtles all the way down.

It’s not fundamentaly different than the Heritage Foundation trying to find ways to bring back lynchings. People pick a position that suits their narrative and groups eventually evolve extremists. It exists everywhere. This only appears absurd because you’re getting a rare glimpse of LGBTQ+ and neurodivergents trying to self govern.

It’s not absurd. It’s inevitable. These groups have never had a voice before, let alone the freedom to try and self-assemble power.

You judge a nascent phenomena in human civilization with a lense that was forged, refined and normalized watching the dominant power groups who have had fewer of the particularities of these minorities and a lot longer to work out the kinks of governance.

The real kicker here - tell me this well intentioned but unproductive spectacle here is “nuts” while I look at the dominant form of conventional politics in the news daily. It makes me want to pull out a lawnchair, sit naked on the frontlawn, crack a cold one and wait for the nuclear blastwave to free me.

This article is sanewashing the situation.

There are no talks. There are no negotiations. There are no deals. Americans are bad-faith absolutists with no checks and balances in congress or rule of law with courts. Nothing will be honoured.

This is worth less than two dogs barking.

c/wholesome

Hmmm. Upvote or downvote? You make solid points. You are defending a position in good faith. Yet “mental disorder”?

Your mentality and eagerness to stake a position and defend the bastion hurts as much as helps.

catholic sins were only defined later

You are making an artificial distinction. Catholicism can be, but shouldn’t be viewed as a thing with a start. It’s part of a continuum. Judaism>Christianity>Islam. Catholic sins weren’t defined later. Like all culture, they evolved from earlier sins. Even calling them Abrahamic Religions as we do is making the same error. The tradition didn’t just emerge, it evolved from predecessors and it has descendants.

natural law is the law of nature, that exists and has nothing to do with religious nonsense but instinct, which originated from evolution.

Aside from the above linking culture, specifically religion to evolution in a real tangible way, please consider that natural selection over time takes random mutations and selects for reproductive fitness. It doesn’t care about what is “good” it only cares about what is most advantageous until new offspring can extend the continuity. We tend to think of this in terms of physiological of biochemical traits, but that’s a narrow view too. Our minds are a product of evolution. Our thinking is a product of our minds.

“Sin” is just part of a evolutionary cultural continuum that started somewhere in the roots of cognition where “actions>consequences” evolved and branched into “sin” and “karma”.

Creatures with evolved complex cognition need their complex social constructs to evolve to survive as well. They become condensed, efficient, easily axiomized artifacts like “the golden rule”, “religion”, philosophy, ethics, morality. All part of a continuum where divergence, convergence and speciation occur.

Religious and atheists are seperate cognitive sub-species who can choose to compete, fall into a predator-prey relationship (e.g. inquisition or communist religious purge) or we can coexist in our respective niches or, like all the best stuff in nature, become symbiotic and make the system better for all.

In short, not Religion vs Evolution. Religion as evolution. 😉👉

It’s not nuts. It is uncalibrated and counterproductive. It’s also what I’ve called the “curse of the intellectual”, and why they rarely become polliticians, let alone successful ones. It’s what happens when ideas are carried further than their utility justifies.

Good point. It has utility as a shibboleth. Careful though, a weapon like this can burn friend and foe alike.

Remember when the neo-pronoun thing landed on:

co/cos
e/em/eir
e/em/es
hu/hum
ne/nem
ne/nir
per/per
s/he/hir
thon/thons
ve/ver
vi/vir
vi/vim
zhe/zher

I’m all for being inclusive and a completionist. But the community had to learn the difference between what belongs in academic and reference litterature, and what belongs in casual conversation. A well intentioned idea was badly introduced to the public causing blowback and faned the flames of the culture wars and energized the maga chuds. It’s weakness was not its specificity. It was trying to start at the end and forcing the language everybody’s been learning since birth to be rewritten. It’s unweildy.

To your exact point. Naming each group IS important. Specificity and identity has a power of its own. Let the acronym grow! But know where it belongs. This is already past the point of needing a shorter simpler umbrella term for conversation and is going into reference material.

When even your allies are getting tripped up, it’s time to rethink and pivot.

Capitalists say the system is working as it should. The poor are civilization’s crumple zone and air bags. They get destroyed in the event of a crash to protect the (rich) drivers.

Be grateful they are incompetent.

This is called Leadership.

Threaten me with a good time will you?

I am usually skeptical about you tubers, but this one was good. Clear thinking right on the spot.

One observation that surfaces from this video and has merit for Canadians to watch as policymakers decide what to do about the obvious unsustainable nature of the Canadian housing market:

Problem: the housing ladder has been pulled up and Canada’s youth effectively can’t access it. How can aging Canadians’ housing assets maintain that value if future generations can’t support its value?

Solution 1: Restoration - Policy supports gently rebalance to where housing declines eventually catch up to a reinvigored youth workforce and the population has a continuum of property succession. I.e. we lower the property ladder back to within reach.

Solution 2: Acceleration - We continue the disastrous path of the last 25 years and continue down the path of financialization of housing. Pension Funds, REITs, Hedge Funds end everyone between large corporate players to wealthy mom and pop investors will consolidate housing forever. I.e. The property ladder is burned forever.

Where things get interesting, is considering the global demographic decline of aging populations, both options aren’t far away from a major reckoning in absolute terms. #2, in my personal opinion is the more vulnerable. Holding onto declining housing asset and rental prices inside a demographic collapse is going to hot-potato hard. We would see a period of crushing rentierism, tearing the social fabric of the country resulting in severe withdrawl symptoms when such egregious malinvestments reveal their consequences.

Edit: spelling and clarity.

Hard disagree. That was a delightful accurate, sober, honest and concise assessment of where we are.

Your bias, however warranted against AI, is throwing the baby out with the bath water.

Good. Surefire proof it’s the right thing. Double down hard.

Some people just suck the joy out of everything. ;)

We’ll always have each other.

They say misery Loves company We can build a company That makes misery

Frustrated Incorporated.

Por qué no los dos.

Or join the draft (selective service). Honour the oath and defend the constitution against ALL ENEMIES foreign AND DOMESTIC.