Do you say this about the bed rotting folks talk about on tiktok?

Thank you for providing a source. I am not who you were replying too, but this exchange is a funny little microcosm of the conversation.

I doubt many will read the full piece, I doubt many know Roderic Day, and the text shown was fully opinion. There were not detailed citations in the text that would require checking, this wasn’t a study, there is basically nothing to the point outside the text itself, except the notoriety of the author, but the knee-jerk reaction seems to be to ask for a source. Would it change their opinion if it was written in the comment itself? Does it make it more legitimate if had been a published book? What level publisher does it require to make the case meaningful? Would it suddenly be a worthwhile point if this was taken from a New York Times op-ed?

To restate the point of the text, to a degree there is no reason to expect them to study the source of the quote, because they wield “Source?” like a club.

I believe it’s TMP 2.0 support

Hey that’s not fair, they recently added tabs to their file explore. I mean sure it has a shared history, so if you open a new tab and navigate, then return to the previous tab back takes to you their useless ‘home screen’, but still, there are tabs kinda!

I mean, if you can’t talk about killing oligarchs, is it really action??

Well that’s the power of federation.

I don’t understand what you mean.

Killing someone because of their nationally, race, or job, is wrong.

One of these things is not like the others.

What about this, instead we just take that 1.5 mill a year and put it towards things that actual solve problems, rather than making sure we have the best and brights super soldiers doing traffic stops and taking notes on your break in.

Electoralism in this context means the idea that elections are the solutions to the political issues of our time, that the primary focus of energy from the left should be in winning elections so the elected officials can do as they were selected to do and solve societal ills.

Many Marxists and other leftists ideologies disagree and feel that the four options you’ve given show that electoralism is a trap for the political energy to change.

One would think this limitation would give economists some humility when finding conflict with other fields, but it seems quite the opposite.

For you to make the comment in this context, I think they are more equal than you are willing to admit.

deleted by creator

“If you own a plantation, slavery is in your best interest.”

This was the term I’ve heard, but damn does it sound terfy…

Humans always reproduced to the absolute limit

My understanding is that this is not true. The big factor seems to be infant mortality, as that drops so does the average number of children per breeding pair.

Agreed, I don’t think the solution exists electorally.

I’ve never been more excited about ruining my eyes 🤩

Trump is absolutely poorly qualified, and terrible beyond that. I think fundamentally I believe more in politics and values than competence in navigating the systems of a white supremacist country.

With regards to a ‘left maga’ you say but still, but still what? If someone broke norms, rules, even laws in service of dismantling the prison industrial complex, jailed politicians in service of making right the genocide in Gaza, or instituted a state of emergency over climate change to align with the scientific consensus, would you argue that the norms of our country are more important?

The tea party had a lot of astroturfing. Again we look at how Sanders, AOC, and Hogg are treated to see how the structural power of the part will be turned against those that push back even a bit on their insular geriatric views. I see value in what you’re describing, I think I just see transforming the democratic party as more of a trap of energy than causing the needed change that people actually want.