So you’re just gonna sit there and act like propaganda influence on voters is not a thing
You chose to speak to me, someone who is talking about the word tankie and it's application here. If you'd like to talk about "propaganda influence" outside of the word tankie, I invite you to make your own top-level comment.
If you're implying tankies themselves have amazing propaganda brainwash powers that caused Harris to lose the election, I invite you to touch grass.
There are definitely tactics being used to divide the left and the word tankie is not one of them. Purity politics is the death of left wing politics.
Why, then, are we running around calling people tankies when that is an ill-defined word that tends to change from person to person? I've seen it applied to everyone from left anarchists to starry-eyed idealists who call themselves communists, to actual Stalin-Did-Nothing-Wrong types (this last group deserves criticism, all twelve of them).
The fact that people moved out of the way of blocking a legitimate facist government because Harris wasn’t quiiite right is utter insanity
Focusing on an incredibly online, vocal minority is insanity, especially when your previous statement is about purity politics.
Shouldn't you question why Harris and the democratic establishment couldn't beat actual fascism? Could it be that Trump used real issues in our political environment for his messaging? He lies constantly about why the cost of living is going up, why good jobs aren't here anymore, etc, but Harris ran on a platform of "Vote for me, nothing will fundamentally change" and voters didn't find that attractive for some reason.
Even when voices within the party point out problems they are shouted down. Sure, Bernie is an independant, but he's been voting with the Dems the entire time, and they even pretended to let him run for nomination for president.
The democratic party has been shifting right for decades, and the only messaging they have to offer is that approved by their donors. It's bullshit and it repels people.
"Tankies" made no measurable difference in the 2024 election. There's next to none of them in the USA. Go ahead: ask real people in your offline life what a tankie is, and see if even one single person has even heard that word.
Unless, of course, you're just applying that word to anyone whos not a Republican that's criticizing the dems. Then I suppose you'll find "tankies" everywhere.
It feels like a word that's just being used to divide the left.
I do believe that in order to achieve welfare/prosperity, not all the people have to work. And I do believe that there are more important things in life than working. I’d love to be a stay at home dad, but I can’t.
Being a stay at home dad is work. Raising children is necessary work that capitalism requires, because it requires laborers. We have engineered a system in which this work is uncompensated, and if you gender this work, it causes gendered oppression.
I will also point out that in America we have decided that unless you have a "job", society has decided that you pretty much don't deserve health care. Anyone who chooses a life of domestic labor in America puts themselves in a position where they are financially dependent on their spouse and their spouse's employment status. It doesn't have to be this way. We have forged these chains.
Whether doubling the workforce is a good thing - that I’d keep up for a debate.
If we had more workers, it could be that we wouldn't need those workers to work as long. Earlier retirement, shorter work weeks, whatever. The issue is not the size of the work force, the issue is what is chosen to be done with it.
Are you trying to imply doubling the available workforce is not good? Its usually a good thing. While their motivations are cynical, those leaders are doing good.
...or are you trying to imply that keeping women out of the traditional work force (by only allowing them to work unpaid in the home in domestic servitude, labor that capital does not value) increases the value of male labor through scarcity, which would be preferred?
Sorry that second question kind of reads as an attack. A shitty coworker of mine said that to me unironically and tried to play it off as a joke when I pushed back.
Ok... but is the picture art??? I don't think anyone would try to argue it is. Miyazaki was specifically talking about how no algorithm can produce art, and I agree.
What makes this screenshot funny is the human element, the performance! It's all ridiculous.
Glorified Matrix Algebra: [Presents an image of a caked-up gnome]
Internet goblin: "Make it's butt even bigger."
Glorified Matrix Algebra: "Sorry, that's a bridge too far for me."
I know right? Have any of these posters met a baby? They're too short for this.
Yeah, this shit is on purpose. These people have no respect for national security (and no respect for our allies), so it makes sense to me that at least one of them is playing dumb games. Pete should have never risen to this position in government.
As it stands, people who like the trump admin will see nothing wrong with these messages (if they even read them). Maybe they'll even think those goobers are doing a good job.
The people who hate the trump admin will not change their opinions of them after this (it can't possibly be lower for most people who hate these fascists). Critiques of the signal meeting will be met with comments like "so the journalist should be in jail for leaking!" or "Does it matter? Look at trumps men going after the terrorists! Do you love terrorists or something?"
Facilitating the of leaking this stuff is win/win if you don't value the lives of military personnel, records acts, security clearances, international opinion, etc.
Sorry, I thought this was in another thread that was actually talking about IQ. I've clicked through too many articles.
This article doesn't mention IQ at all, even though your response does. IQ isn't an absolute quantitative measure for intelligence even though many people conflate them - this is probably why the article doesn't mention it.
I'd dig into the Financial Times article that this Neoscope article is about but it's pay-walled. The neoscope article makes some case for intelligence declining (I don't have time to read those citations right now), but I'd point out this doesn't necessarily have anything to do with less intelligent parents having children. It could be evidence that the material conditions for us ordinary citizens is declining as a whole (I think we would both agree on that point). Cost of living is up, people are working longer. Long COVID probably has something to do with it, and stress.
Im not going to write some big long podt, just two things:
people, on average, are not getting dumber. Anything you noticed observationally about dumb people having more children does not seem to have any effect on the world. Human nutrition has improved vastly over the past 100 years, as has education, etc.
IQ increases every year. I don't think this is evidence people are getting smarter because I think IQ is a poor measure of intelligence. I'm pointing this out to you because your statement about "IQ drifting toward the bottom'" is factually untrue.
duck duck go has been giving me AI summaries / suggestions
You can turn it off but if your cookies are cleared you have to do it again.