Conversation
Notices
-
lain (lain@lain.com)'s status on Thursday, 24-Feb-2022 03:47:36 JST
lain
one option for president: noooooo my decromacyrinoootwo options for president: :soy: -
バツ子(痛いの痛いの飛んでけ;; (shmibs@tomo.airen-no-jikken.icu)'s status on Thursday, 24-Feb-2022 03:47:35 JST
バツ子(痛いの痛いの飛んでけ;;
@lain weren't these guys mr-yang adjacent, which in turn is entirely "more options please" currently? -
バツ子(痛いの痛いの飛んでけ;; (shmibs@tomo.airen-no-jikken.icu)'s status on Thursday, 24-Feb-2022 12:44:21 JST
バツ子(痛いの痛いの飛んでけ;;
@lain @insurgentem @SleepyAdam wolves don't become sheep when you change government around -
lain (lain@lain.com)'s status on Thursday, 24-Feb-2022 12:44:23 JST
lain
@SleepyAdam @insurgentem I think its creepy to let two wolfs and one sheep vote on what's for dinner -
SleepyAdam (sleepyadam@mas.to)'s status on Thursday, 24-Feb-2022 12:44:35 JST
SleepyAdam
@insurgentem If we regulated the abusive chokehold the DNC and RNC have on the media and the system I can guarantee you those two choices wouldn't come down to them as often. Britain has the right idea with banning political adverts. They need to be forced to play fair.
@lain also implying democracy is a bad thing is creepy as fuck.
-
insurgens ad opus (insurgentem@80percent.social)'s status on Thursday, 24-Feb-2022 12:44:38 JST
insurgens ad opus
@lain This is the kind of adolescent thinking that says "the two party system is oppression forced on us by murky scapegoats!" The human brain is a difference engine. It wants to have a clear choice between two options. When more than two options exist, people naturally whittle the field down to two. When there are no clear differences, our minds start to pick things apart or look for ANY differences by which our choice will seem like it was clear from the start. That is natural and normal, and no matter how one might choose to artificially create a different situation, masses of people will behave in a way where it boils down to a choice between two options. More to the point of the stupid statement, human minds focus on the negative by default. This is a function of your survival instinct. Again, it is natural that you would focus on what you don't like about two options over what you like. Anything else is childish fantasy. -
バツ子(痛いの痛いの飛んでけ;; (shmibs@tomo.airen-no-jikken.icu)'s status on Thursday, 24-Feb-2022 12:50:47 JST
バツ子(痛いの痛いの飛んでけ;;
@lain @insurgentem @SleepyAdam without government the wolves eat the sheep and nobody bothers to vote -
lain (lain@lain.com)'s status on Thursday, 24-Feb-2022 12:50:49 JST
lain
@shmibs @insurgentem @SleepyAdam indeed, that's why I'm against government -
バツ子(痛いの痛いの飛んでけ;; (shmibs@tomo.airen-no-jikken.icu)'s status on Thursday, 24-Feb-2022 12:54:00 JST
バツ子(痛いの痛いの飛んでけ;;
@lain @SleepyAdam @insurgentem (i.e. lynch mob) or else the wolves make their own government for efficiency and leave the sheep out (i.e. cortés -
バツ子(痛いの痛いの飛んでけ;; (shmibs@tomo.airen-no-jikken.icu)'s status on Thursday, 24-Feb-2022 13:13:42 JST
バツ子(痛いの痛いの飛んでけ;;
@SleepyAdam @insurgentem @lain sorry ranting; just point is that long-term stability requires long-term planning, meaning centralised oversight that actively intrudes. from the viewpoint of single liver cell, plodding immune system that barges in and kills its friends is wasteful intrusion getting in the way of growth. but take it away and suddenly you have cancer. or everyone ignores cultural history and builds houses and things right next to the coast because profit boost, and then one day it's 3.11 and all that work and those lives are destroyed.a humanity of autonomous individuals without governments could maybe survive, but it could never reach complexity, stability, and comfort. and we aren't such a humanity to begin with, so in practice erasing government means growing a new one
-