I think I will print and frame this.
@ShrikeTron i mean sure, or you could point out that the cruelty is the ultimate point, and the motivation and mechanism by which it is achieved doesn't really matter, which allows seemingly opposing ideologies to unite in a common goal.
@thegarbagebird @lauren Yes, but I'm also pointing out the opposite.
Dems **existentially need** to compromise toward ultimate good. Allow seemingly opposing ideologies to unite in the common goal. That's what the platform used to mean.
Current "Purity Games" has been a losing game.
@ShrikeTron the purpose of a system is what it does. the dems need to compromise, yes. they need to allow opposing ideologies, yes. but not towards ultimate good. they need to block aoc from the oversight committee despite her popularity because that is more their purpose. their existential need is to facilitate the status quo, even if the status quo is a slow decline and gradual rightward shift. it has been for ages now. the purity politics is perfect for them as it allows them to perform goodness, while obstructing any actual progress. you saw it all throughout the most recent campaign. that was the club used to beat anyone who was upset that biden was a hard border guy, that harris started her campaign by promoting us military superiority, that both of them were facilitating genocide, that they abandoned police reform and healthcare reform. they were told to grow up, that the only way to reach ultimate good was to continually accept the lesser of two evils.
@ShrikeTron
that is what the democrat party exists as. consider dual power systems, passing state-by-state ballot measures that move towards vote reform, with the eventual aim of shifting away from the fpp electoral model, reclaiming individual school boards from the conservative phone-tree-and-mlm-based organising (a big task, there are multiple redundancies in place). the democratic party with it's current reason for being, while it certainly shouldn't be considered an enemy, is not a reliable ally. they won't work with you, you have to work around them.
@ShrikeTron also i apologise for misreading the tone on your original reply, i spent five minutes basically telling you what you were saying all along, what a muppet.
@ShrikeTron family-values evangelists can comfortably align with ethnonationalists who believe that rape is not only an ideologically pure way to preserve the white race, but is a necessary thing to counter oh, say, a diversity and inclusivity movement, because the cruelty is the ultimate goal.
meanwhile an anarchist and a statist communist will have to navigate around constant tension, because there is not necessarily an ultimate goal, other than the continued effort to improve. so the mechanism by which that is achieved takes more focus.
cruelty is easy. a punch in the face hurts most people pretty similarly. something that helps one person might be totally pp
@lauren @ferricoxide
I think this is like the “tolerant people must tolerate intolerant people” conundrum: If tolerance is a “virtue”, then the virtuous must tolerate the sinners; but if tolerance is a “social contract”, then the intolerant broke the contract, and the contract no longer binds the tolerant.
If “rule of law” is a virtue, then we must rely on the legal process. But if it’s a social contract…
@Red_Shirt_no2 @lauren @ferricoxide
Even so, I think the point holds. There are many examples of a revolution replacing a bad ruler with another bad one, because people were so busy hating the old guy they didn't look too closely at what the new guy was like. Your mind probably went to an example already.
@Red_Shirt_no2 @lauren @ferricoxide
Also, evil doesn't accept all applicants; when evil people get into power there's usually a prolonged period of knifefighting between them which makes Leftist infighting look tame.
Imagine you're an airline CEO who backed Trump because you thought he was going to be corrupt and anti-environmentalist in a way that'd make you more money. Now, fuckin' oops, your planes can't safely take off because there's no ATC and so your ticket sales are down badly.
Imagine you're that US Latino guy who campaigned for Trump and then got illegally deported to Mexico.
Evil is currently purging people from its payroll who didn't make the cut. I'm not going to lie, there's a certain amount of schadenfreude here.
Which is why democrats should start breaking the law and dare people to take them to court.
@jamesbritt @ferricoxide @lauren "people" won't need to do anything, the whole point of authoritarian government is to vigorously apply the law to enemies of the state. I expect we will see Democrats expelled from elected positions as soon as they start acting up.
It'll be interesting watching fash response to the planned day of protest. The context of some states having laws allowing lethal action against protestors might be important. And the coup pardons ditto.
Brilliant 👏
@lauren @lisamelton
also because breaking stuff is easier than building it[1], and producing bullshit is easier than refuting it[2]
[1] Second Law of Thermodynamics
[2] Brandolini’s Law
A lack of discriminating taste is a hallmark characteristic of a thuggish cartel or mafia syndicate.
I'd like to add as well that, by and large, the only time I "give up" on someone is when they indicate that my needs and human rights do not matter to them.
My philosophy is "everyone is equal, including whoever you hate, and that one, and the other one".
Equally, just because everyone deserves (in their own time) forgiveness, they do not necessarily deserve it *from you* or *from their victims / survivors*.
Like, there is an amount of self-congratulations minus actually changing ANYthing that prompts me to question someone's motivations:
DO they care about reducing unfairness, or DO they want to be known as someone who says they want to reduce unfairness?
And many people are naturally trusting (not necessarily bad either).
So anyone saying "I want bad things to happen less" is probably a widespread sentiment worth sharing. But stopping there -- and *not even noticing* -- is the problem for me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVgNJf6CsBA seems relevant but only just noticed it
That apparently saves time for evil to do evil, while good is still caught up in the red tape.
Evil is plenty happy to eat their own.
@lauren Another one of the reasons why Evil momentarily triumphs over good, from time to time, is that many people who would align with good also happen to be racists, and so they do not align with good.
"Oh I would support a better candidate, but all the better candidates also want to stop hurting black people, so I am not gonna, because that is too extreme for my tastes"
That's probably a bigger reason than the first one.
"Friend" feels a bit much.
I'd go with "The enemy of my enemy is potentially useful."
CBGrey (Chris)
Lauren Weinstein
James Wells
okanogen VerminEnemyFromWithin
SpaceLifeForm
author_is_ShrikeTron🔠💉x7
the gripe ibis
ferricoxide
Red_Shirt_no2
Passenger
James Britt
Moz
Jacqueline
Sad Trombone 
Mastodon Migration
Class Wario
bls
argonaut
MamiyaMan 🇨🇦 🇺🇦
Brian Vastag
Nicole Parsons
Yazad
Erin
Mx Verda
JohnW
PhDog
SS2K
I am Jack's Lost 404
Androcat
Chuck
Rhinos Worry Me