I don’t expect everyone to know the different features of a “stable diffusion” style AI, but you can easily do something called img2img or inpainting, where you use transformations on a base image to help generate something more realistic. The current state of the art can easily generate readable text.
I wish democrats would start kicking conservative and Israel supporting dems out of the party. It is NOT ok to support Israel regardless of your other positions.
It’s also not ok to splinter the coalition with purity tests. If someone is pro democracy, pro LGBTQ, pro women’s rights, pro science, pro immigration, pro education, pro Ukraine, and pro Israel, I still want them in the fight.
As someone who grew up where it is absolutely normal to support Palestine and has been for 40 years (Ireland), women’s rights are not on the list of why this is the case.
You absolutely can…there are a LOT of people that are supporting Israel because that’s the de facto American position. They aren’t chronically doom scrolling…if they are its from an algorithm that was designed to validate every pre-existing belief they’ve held. If they heard you say remember Aaron Bushnell, they’ll probably assume it was another POC shot in back by a cop. Being a low information voter in an environment designed to make you so isn’t a moral failing, and if you just write those people off, you’ll never grow your coalition.
Being a low information voter in an environment designed to make you so isn’t a moral failing
Disagree tbh. It’s only acceptable if you don’t vote. If you’re actively voting without understanding what you’re voting for, that in itself is wrong and you’re also much more likely to vote for something immoral.
America isn’t feminist, at all so if anything, you should be giving the side-eye to anything America is doing if you call yourself a feminist. I’m not “writing these people off,” I’m challenging them. Saying “I’m a feminist” without understanding what that means, isn’t useful to anyone except rainbow capitalism, and whoever the next neo-liberal woman ghoul to run for president is. If you are a feminist, and someone says you can’t be a feminist and support israel, you should do some introspection.
That would require the dems to oppose those things when in reality conservatism and being pro-Israel are core democratic party values. They’re far more likely to push out anyone who opposes this genocide.
Wow I’m not from the US but it really seems like either there are some agent provocateurs out there or you guys just want to dither like idiots while Trump fucks up your country even more
The main lesson I took away from Bernie’s runs is that trying to reform the Democratic party is a lost cause because the entrenched interests are too strong.
This explains the phenomena better than anything I ever read. I’m not being funny, I really mean it. I’ve seen both sides, this rings true. Rings LOUD and true.
I’ve read that article. It does to city culture what it claims city culture does to rural culture, IMO. I had a slightly more nuanced objection the last time someone posted it, but I’m not going to take the time to read it again now. IIRC It’s worth a read, but that man paints with as broad a brush as anyone he criticizes in that article, and folks should go in knowing that.
Edit -
By coincidence, here’s an article about a book that takes an opposing view, and the current Lemmy discussion about it. As of this moment I’ve not yet read more than the first para of the article:
In the popular imagination of many Americans, particularly those on the left side of the political spectrum, the typical MAGA supporter is a rural resident who hates Black and Brown people, loathes liberals, loves gods and guns, believes in myriad conspiracy theories, has little faith in democracy, and is willing to use violence to achieve their goals, as thousands did on Jan. 6.
According to a new book, White Rural Rage: The Threat to American Democracy, these aren’t hurtful, elitist stereotypes by Acela Corridor denizens and bubble-dwelling liberals… they’re facts.
The authors, Tom Schaller, a professor at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, and Paul Waldman, a former columnist at The Washington Post, persuasively argue that most of the negative stereotypes liberals hold about rural Americans are actually true.
They do not mince words about what this means for the future of democracy in America. “Rural voters—especially the White rural voters on whom Donald Trump heaps praise and upon which he built his Make America Great Movement—pose a growing threat to the world’s oldest constitutional democracy.”
And Schaller and Waldman bring receipts.
In a book filled with reams of data to back up their arguments, Schaller and Waldman show that rural whites “are the demographic group least likely to accept notions of pluralism and inclusion” and are far less likely to believe that diversity makes America stronger.
Edit: I’m a dumbass and I did not read your comment very well so feel free to ignore this rant. It probably has nothing to do with your post but it’s too late meow. I’m not deleting it.
Hey I know it’s kind of late to reply to things in this thread but I was just thinking about this article again today and I wanted to see what other people had to say about it.
It does to city culture what it claims city culture does to rural culture
Yes, my friend, this was the point of the article. You yourself may not feel like you stereotype folks who live in rural areas but there are plenty of people who do. Some of the folks who stereotype rural people feel they are justified for doing so because they DO see rural folk as “less-than”, and admittedly it’s sometimes hard not to absorb this view due to the perceived ignorance of these rural people. It is a broad brush, but it’s an appropriate brush. He’s not saying it’s correct, he’s putting the shoe on the other foot.
I work in customer service in a very unique part of the country (Near Chicago but not inside) so I interact with a lot of different people with very different backgrounds. Some people take the train to visit my workplace and rarely drive or visit our part of the state unless they’re showing up where I work. Some people don’t leave their hometown of literally 500 people unless they’re visiting my workplace which is a mere 40 minute drive for them.
I almost never hear open racism where I work (though I’m certain there are plenty of legit racists, they just keep it quiet). We occasionally have to describe people by their appearances, and “basic-ass old white dude” has been both a physical description and a personality description I have heard and nobody pressed back against. It’s a stereotype, people hold it. And, my coworkers are left-leaning (me too) so it does just become shorthand for “this guy probably voted for Trump and is scared of my nosering”. It isn’t a healthy way to view your neighbors, nor is it an assumption you can make about people.
I noticed your last quote:
In a book filled with reams of data to back up their arguments, Schaller and Waldman show that rural whites “are the demographic group least likely to accept notions of pluralism and inclusion” and are far less likely to believe that diversity makes America stronger.
It’s not a race to see who holds the least stereotypes or the least offensive stereotypes. It’s important to identify your biases, which is what this article is asking you to do. It’s not an us-vs-them thing.
The authors, Tom Schaller, a professor at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, and Paul Waldman, a former columnist at The Washington Post, persuasively argue that most of the negative stereotypes liberals hold about rural Americans are actually true.
Most? Okay which ones are wrong? Does it mean all rural people are closed minded bigots? There probably is at least one rural american who isn’t a close-minded bigot, but it doesn’t matter because they’re mostly all the same right?
Don’t think for a minute I think rural folks are justified for their ignorant and fearful bullshit, I’m just pointing out that stereotyping people doesn’t actually do anything but hurt the people who don’t suck.
I’m a dumbass and I did not read your comment very well so feel free to ignore this rant. It probably has nothing to do with your post but it’s too late meow. I’m not deleting it.
It actually seems like a mostly reasonable rebuttal from someone who might have different opinions than I do, but I’m not going to argue with you about most of it because of this disclaimer. 🙂
I’m just pointing out that stereotyping people doesn’t actually do anything but hurt the people who don’t suck.
Which is why I object to, or at least would want people to be aware of, the fact that the article promotes stereotypes of (for lack of a better word) ‘city folk.’ Writing an article about the dangers of stereotyping, but predicating it on stereotyping a different group, seems firmly in the “two wrongs don’t make a right” category to me. Especially because, with as often as I see this article referenced, I’m sure plenty of the folks he’s trying to “explain” for the rest of us have read this article and found within it someone who “gets” them - and so will be primed to accept every one of his swipes at urban dwellers as confirming exactly the stereotypes they already had.
He closes by implying anyone who disagrees with him “have gotten angry, feeling this gut-level revulsion at any attempt to excuse or even understand these people. After all, they’re hardly people, right? Aren’t they just a mass of ignorant, rageful, crude, cursing, spitting subhumans?”
My father grew up on a single-family private farm, lived in a farmhouse with a partial dirt floor that used the same fireplace for heating and cooking, attended a one-room schoolhouse, and had to walk to the outhouse to take a shit. To this day I doubt there are even five thousand people living in the town he grew up in. The author is not the only one who has had a foot in both camps, he doesn’t speak for everyone who has, and I think it’s reasonable to point out that he was at pains to paint a very fair picture of rural folks while doing absolutely nothing but promoting stereotypes of urban folks.
Bottom line - we’re pretty far past it mattering on a personal level why maga is tearing down our democracy, rolling back anything resembling equitable treatment of LGBTQ+, rolling back women’s rights, suppressing education about slavery and diversity, etc. They are doing those things. I might care about their plight, but I care about stopping them from further fucking up the country more.
It’s 100% because of propaganda. These people wouldn’t feel this way if right wing media outlets weren’t all competing for the “building full of the worst scum on earth” award. They’d have the common gripes we all do about inflation and general life satisfaction, but they wouldn’t be frothing at the mouth and wishing for a civil war so they can kill us.
I don’t talk to him too often and while my dad hasn’t done a full 180 yet, his amount of Democrat/liberal bashing and general anger has dropped quite a bit since he started a new hobby instead of going home and sitting down in front of the two minutes hate programming on Faux News.
Fox News, Newsmax, and the like are the true dangers to democracy. Without their legitimizing of Trump and their willingness to use him to their own benefit we wouldn’t be in this situation where there’s only ever increasing threats of political violence.
I have one actually on Firefox mobile, and the ads don’t show up. I still get “advertisement:” with blank space underneath, but nothing shows up. I get ads for their other articles though, and the information density is very very low. You have to scroll for days to read anything. It feels like one of those websites with articles written by LLMs.
@FlorianSimon
I can read the article without any ads. I'm using Brave browser on my Android phone. Is it that they used to be clogged with ads, like articles were broken up across 16 pages with a ad in between each page? That might have been the case for Cracked awhile ago but doesn't seem to be the case now.
I love this author. I hope people don’t write it off just because it’s on a comedy site - he’s very thoughtful. I read the monkey sphere a long time ago when cracked was popular and it really gave me a lot of perspective.
I didn’t realize David Wong was a pen name until your article. I recognized his style immediately.
There was a great article called The Sociology Of Brexit that discussed how Britain made the choice to leave the EU. The TLDR was that it was because for many years, despite some prosperity, there were large parts of the country, especially white, uneducated, working-class people that felt things weren’t going well. A strong economy didn’t translate to a better life for them, and all they saw was others in a totally different world prospering.
The reason I mention it is because it was written before Trump came to power, but it accurately predicted that Trump would beat Clinton. It said that there were similar groups in the US that felt the same, and that they are often a much larger demographic than you’d think. The main point of the article is that these people don’t care if the radical in charge will fuck the economy, or do things “incorrectly”, because those things are so detached from their life that it won’t change anything. It’s the political equivalent of giving yourself chemotherapy to get rid of a cold.
While many of these people are justifiably criticised for their extreme views and actions, they’ve been radicalised through inaction. If you ignore a problem like the racist assholes that moan about foreigners taking their jobs, in several years someone will combine those voices and have a platform to exploit.
Exploitation is the right word here, because what many conservatives are now finding is that the shift towards the right is often at odds with their parties core beliefs. In the UK, Boris Johnson gutted the party of anyone that disagreed with one of the core tenets of the party (unionism) to push Brexit along, and if that party loses the next election, they will arguably have no one left outside of right-wing nutjobs. The US will likely find the same, in that MAGA have replaced what their party stood for, with none of these leaders planning for the future. If you are a traditional conservative in the Republican party, you’ll probably struggle for the next 5-10 years, and a presidential campaign is highly unlikely. If Trump loses to Biden, it might mean a generation of inaction and inability from the Republicans, in the same way that Conservatives around the world are being wiped out
It takes two to tango. Moderates steamrolled the primaries and got a geriatric establishment candidate elected knowing full well progressives and leftists would have a problem with it. Moderates backed Biden while he shredded the BBB. They backed Biden when he reverted on his campaign promise for $50k in student loan forgiveness. They backed Biden when he increased the defense budget. They backed Biden when he blocked the rail strike. They backed Biden when he told federal workers to return to the office. They backed Biden as he tasked Powell and Yellen with going to war with American workers. And they continue to back Biden as he continues sending weapons to Israel.
You could possibly make a case that both moderates and the farther left movements are to blame. But the fact is moderates are the majority and thus they hold the majority of the responsibility. Plus it’s a bit absurd that moderates accuse farther left movements as being unwilling to compromise when the compromises made by the moderates have been immaterial.
the idea that we’ll potentially lose democracy altogether
Would you rather lose Democracy or use the reconciliation bill as a bargaining chip to get the BBB passed?
Would you rather lose Democracy or follow through on the promise of $50k student loan forgiveness?
Would you rather lose Democracy or reduce the defense budget?
Would you rather lose Democracy or stay out of the rail strike?
Would you rather lose Democracy or allow federal workers to continue working remotely?
Would you rather lose Democracy or stop sending weapons to Israel?
When the former is chosen time, and time, and time, and time again the question has to be asked. Is Democracy all that important to you? Because all of these choices sound like a bargain to me.
The thing I don’t understand here is just - do you expect Trump to go pass BBB, forgive student loans etc? In the primaries, sure, go out and vote for more progressive candidates. But if I’m asked if I want a tooth filling or a root canal, I don’t bitch about the filling material and hope to go get a root canal.
Like, practically, what do you expect to get better if Biden loses?
Is Democracy important to you? Then encourage moderates, establishment Democrats, the DNC and Biden to compromise with the leftists and progressives in order to get the votes he needs to win the next election. If you’re not willing to do that then accept the consequences.
Biden isn’t the one saying he wants to be dictator, that seems to be Trump. As far as I am aware, we needed to run a different candidate in the primary, that’s where you push people to come more to the left. Going hard right because Biden wasn’t left enough for you is kind of insane to me. That’s all.
Do I love what the Biden admin does 100%? No.
But you seem to be saying you’re rather have Trump than Biden, which is a position someone can take, but a very strange one for someone who’s left of Biden. To me it’s like saying It’s 70 degrees in here and I’m cold. One person says I will set the thermostat to 72 degrees, the other says I’ll set it to 60 degrees, and you would like it to be 75 degrees. Because the 72 degrees isn’t hot enough, you’d prefer the 60 degrees. Weird way to express your preferences to me.
I don’t think I understand your questions to be honest. I’d strongly prefer to keep democracy, and to reverse the course of our system so it’s getting more democratic. I’d prefer not trying to make the point being cruel to outgroups or anyone.
Specifically I would never make the case that we’d lose democracy from trying to do any of the things you listed as “or”. The “Might lose democracy” is about Trump’s actual statements about wanting to be a dictator, and the republican party that seems to be all for that.
The first 3 questions are to congress or maybe the supreme court - Biden tried to do loan forgiveness, it wouldn’t pass congress, and the supreme court struck down his ability to do it in an executive order. This is not something that Biden can change, it’s something that needs more people to vote in democratic congressional representatives. So these questions seem completely irrelevant to me in terms of the presidential election. I’m in NY, we vote in democratic senators and a lot of democratic representatives. I’m not sure what else you’re asking me to do.
The last 3 questions are more salient to Biden, and I personally would not have done any of that. I don’t know how the government can actually block a strike if the people were really serious they could all quit and let the companies deal with that.
If I was president knowing only what I currently know now - I’d have told the companies to fricken pay up, not say the strike can’t happen. I’d channel that FDR meme where he hauled the one company away from the person not coming to an agreement so stuff kept running.
I would tout federal workers working remotely as both something good for labor, and good for the environment with less car pollution, and potential for a broader recruiting base. If I was feeling snarky I might also try and throw in it might let the government recruit more people from low cost of living areas and save money.
On the Israel issue I’d probably throw it to congress at this point. I just don’t really know what the stance to take is because I don’t know enough about our alliance terms, the strategic goals, etc.
I have to point out - theres presumably a lot the President / Government knows that I do not about each issue. There may be things that if I knew it, I’d change my position. One thing I think Biden needs to do is get on TV or whatever and explain to people why he’s sending arms to Israel at this point, and why he’s not strongly pressuring Israel to get out of Gaza and stop this war.
Given the above - I’m not really sure what compromise you’re talking about that I’m “not willing to make”? I didn’t choose Biden - no one else was running in the primaries that I’m aware of. It’s not that people didn’t hear that no one was excited about Biden running again, it’s that whoever makes the political decisions didn’t choose anyone else even hearing that. And TBH, politically, other than maybe John Stewart (as I’ve said elsewhere, and who they obviously didn’t get), I don’t know anyone who’s even as well known as Biden on the Democratic side that also would have any chance in a general election. The swing voters who decide elections seem to be very resistant to anyone who’s not an old white man. I wish we didn’t have the electoral college that even makes swing states TBH, but it’s what we have to go by. Pretending that it’s not is not engaging with reality.
I think you are casually forgetting all the times that the Biden administration tried to pass good stuff and it was blocked by the GOP ‘just because’ or SCOTUS because they are captured by the Sith.
No. Everything I listed was a choice Biden made and had nothing to do with Republicans. Take a breath, drop your proconceptions and read my comment again.
It’s not just moderate Dems, ANYONE that thinks not voting in protest (voting third party is slightly different but almost as bad in our current system) in the us general election is sending a message has a misunderstanding of the mechanisms of our elections especially those whose ideals are not mainstream. Participation is essential for a healthy democracy, and not participating is forfeiting one’s ideals and influence. It should be obvious that political campaigns aren’t likely to cater towards ideas that nobody visibly supports and risk alienating groups that reliably turn out to vote. None of this is any one person’s fault, but leftist refusing to vote only serves to shift the representation that much further right each election and spite the effort of other voters on the left, especially so if those withholding votes didn’t participate in primaries and vital local elections. It’s also very important to realise that this is very slow and can take decades.
In essence, each election skipped, no matter how small, is like your friends getting pizza for the party, and when they ask what you want, you say something like “It doesn’t matter to me, anything is fine.” But then when those friends come back with a pizza you really don’t like such as pineapple pizza, which most of the friend group asked for then it’s hard to blame them. And it’s certainly not helpful to get mad and announce that because you don’t like it you aren’t going to tell them what you want next time either. You will only ever get what you want by pure chance this way and it’s very unlikely to happen if your favourite pizza happens to be anchovie or barbeque chicken.
The Americans that participated chose Biden and trump And it turns out a lot of them want or are okay with fascism if they realise it or not, and have propelled trump. Biden has to consider those reliable voters on the right that are alienated by this if he wants to be re-elected
Do the leftist come out to push back and fight against the influence of the right simply by voting? Or do they do nothing and let things get worse because the rest of the people that put the effort in and participated in democracy didn’t choose what they wanted. I hope you can see that it really is the fellow progressives that this mindset hurts the most.
There is c/leopardsatemyface@lemmy.world but the moderator locked and abandoned it about a month ago. I would guess Admin will eventually do something about that.
I’m sure I’ll catch heat from this but I try and avoid instances that don’t block threads. I know it’s generally futile but, to me, it shows where the admin’s priorities are and that’s somewhat important to me as well. I imagine a leopards might popup here or elsewhere one day.
I mean, when the dictator is in-office that’s not usually what they do after they line up the dissidents. Those folks should feel lucky they just got the preview.
I mean, not really. They’re at the ‘lunatics running the asylum’ stage. They underestimated how much they had radicalized their base and completely lost control of them in 2016. Now, that radicalized base is starting to be elected into office and the old guard are too afraid to try to take control of the party back.
Add comment