Please go back to the start of this conversation. I did not say we should be learning to understand nazis. Fuck nazis. But your average person who stayed at home is not a racist, secret neo-nazi. A large portion of voters who chose Trump over Kamala are also not voting to hurt others. By and large, voters are uneducated by design, and feeding into that design by calling them all nazi's is deepening the problem.

I feel for you, because I also know how you get to feelings like yours, but this attitude is one of many problems, and I am approaching it exactly the way I am suggesting we need to: with understanding and discussion. I'm not blaming you. I get it. And that's exactly my point.

Smug self-satisfaction it is, I see. Good luck.

This is a gross misunderstanding of why it worked for the Republicans. But okay.

I'm not suggesting more compromise and more moderate politics. I am suggesting we stop building strawmen.

The attitude that led to Trumps victory is born of the very belief that the ship sailed long ago. It turns out that when you paint your common man as a villain, their ego is all too happy to oblige. Or just burn out and stay home, calling it someone else's problem.

I'm not sure why you are so eager to blame your common man when you yourself are quick to point out that billionaires are the problem.

They'll choose not to vote again.

Is the goal change or smug self-satisfaction?

Right, and that is awful, but it's ignorant and self-defeating of us to make enemies and play the blame game instead of seeking conversations and understanding.

If you tell people this is their fault and make them into the enemy, they will gladly act as the enemy. And they'll blame everyone but themselves, a fact Trump has been far too happy to exploit.

Conversation. Understanding. Not creating enemies out of moderates.

Trump won because he appeals to people that we choose to neglect as simply ignorant, uneducated, stupid, etc. We have to accept that these people get a say, and show them that their decisions with Trump were not in their best interest, instead of continuing to insult them while their ego leads them to shoot themselves in the foot to spite us.

technocratic fascist dystopia

Technocratic is such a high hope. I like to think of it as capitalcratic fascism, or just capital-fascist. Rule by power of wealth.

Ah, yes, that's the solution, sow more division.

I get why you'd remove the names for posting here, but I hope you've forwarded the unredacted versions to the police. Even when this laws are in place, visible evidence of abusing these laws to justify sexually abusing minors will remain a crime. In fact, these statements remove the "in good faith" part from the equation, and turn it back into illegal abuse.

It's fucked that we even have to toe this line, but action should still be taken.

We need a term for a Freudian slip caused by mobile autocorrect. Because "wallet garden" is extremely accurate, even if it's not the intended word choice.

The game can collect data, if that's what they're after.

My theory is that it's all about advertising. It's another point of contact with the consumer, and another opportunity to make sure every new release is presented to every potential buyer.

I don't see how that statement refutes the problem being something to do with kernal level access. It's entirely possible that the 24H2 update changed something that is playing poorly with the DRM in these titles.

Jesus christ, that's so many words for boring, circular logic.

Your argument is self-defeating. "We shouldn't do anything, because people are animals that can't understand and react to objective reality rationally" is borderline fatalism, and at the very least suggests that everything you are saying is a waste of breath. If you're right, no one here will accept objective reality, will do whatever they want and you are therefore wasting your time and energy. If you're wrong, well you're digging in on an invalid argument, and also wasting your time and energy.

So, my rebuttal is this: fuck off. Rude, but no less so than a childish laughing fit. Your entire deconstruction of my argument is riddled with fallacies and built from the bias that you are correct to begin with. Taking the time to address it beyond this is to give it more credit than it is worth, and I have better things to do with my night than engage with terminally-online pseudo-intellectualism. Either people are better than you give them credit for, or they're not, and I'd still rather waste my time trying to do the right thing than engage with pointless cynicism and smuggly jerk myself off about how superior I am for being smart while the world falls apart around me.

You are talking about taking a giant shit on everybody who's been saying that 2020 was a free and fair election when you immediately fling the same accusations the very first time an election doesn't go your way.

This is not what is happening, though. I address this in another post, but this is a false equivilency. Screaming fraud because of heresay from a demonstable liar, and then refusing to accept the results even after the audit without just cause is not the same as seeing these questionable and verifiable facts and performing an audit in response, particularly if the result is met with acceptance. To suggest that this response is occurring "the very first time an election doesn't go your way" is dishonest, as there were no widespread claims of voter fraud nor calls for recounts and audits in the 2016 election. By and large, people accepted the results.

Your 2028 hypothesis is predicated on the idea that Democrat voters will deny objective reality the way Trump voters have been. I suspect that would not be the case.

But we're not talking about verifying the results and then refusing to accept them anyway. That, would be chasing conspiracy theories. We're not talking about denial and a refusal to believe in objective reality. We're talking about easily (though slowly and expensively) verifiable facts. The false equivilency you're drawing between the two is delusional.

And that's really the issue here: false equivilency. The last election was challenged, and recounted, based on hot gas and whataboutisms. And we found that it was fair, so we should accept it. This time there is really strange data and openly accepted knowledge that the voting machines were compromised. We have more genuine reason to worry, so perhaps we should check instead of having completely irrational, and I'm starting to think maybe bad faith, arguments about it.

The argument of "oh, but if they DID cheat, it'll damage trust in the whole thing" just doesn't hold water. So what? If the system is broken we shouldn't trust it until visible measures have been made to fix it. And that's a good thing, civil war or no. We do not bend over to bullies when they threaten violence, because it just empowers them to take more and more. And look where it has gotten us.

So, stick your head in the sand? "People are going to lie, cheat and threaten violence, and questioning when it is happening is just going to stop us from ever trusting anyone in the future. We should just let them do whatever they want." Insane take tbh. I get how you reach the outcomes you're suggesting are possible, but I don't think it's as bleak as you've portrayed it, and simply rolling over as literal fascists rig the electoral process of the most powerful country in the world is straight up not a good idea.

Turns out the right was unified in their belief that they should be the ones with the power, but very divided on what they are going to do with it.

It's going to be an exhausting four years.

Why is it not bigger news that MTG is openly stating that the only reason any of these people are in power is because they have paid off all their victims and buried all the bodies. This is a verbal admission that she knows the entire GOP is filled with sex offenders, and the only reason they aren't in jail is that they all cover for each other.

Fucking do it. Release it all. Don't just threaten me with a good time. The people deserve to know exactly how morally bankrupt their representatives are. Not that you even need to see the evidence to know, with these blatant admissions, that they are morally bankrupt.

Weirdly glad to see your experiences mirror mine, even if they make a sad reality.

Idk. Doesn’t bode well for Lemmy long term, they make the entire software stink

This is my concern, too. I do respect what they've created - getting social networking out of the hands of corporations and functioning as a decentralized collective is a good idea - but as I said somewhere else, the ideology that led to this shared goal looks to be problematic. I have no interest in trading capital-fascism for good ol' fashioned fascism.