I would however note that you can't have a gender reveal party (assuming 'Anonymous' was talking fetuses), because ultrasound scans do not reveal gender.
Funny events in anti-woke world
- Thread starter Agema
- Start date
The Energy minister had an interview this morning. Basicslly, they think they are on track and will do absolutely nothing to get to Net Zero. In otherwords, it's their old plan but now they are winners
Them 'joining the winners' just leads to them imposing their old ideas to the new side and not realising what people had to fight for to get this far
We're now being 'saved' by billionaires. (And state governments) which is going to cause a whole heap of problems in the future
Then there are no Capital C Conservatives, just adherents of other ideologies and naked opportunists.
Which, given that progress is basically inevitable regardless of direction, Conservatives are always losers defending against inevitable change.
Progressivism is the gas pedal on the car, pushing us to new places. Conservatism is the brakes, stopping us from crashing. If the car reaches new places without crashing, the brakes haven't failed.
Neither are an ideology, neither concept tells the car which way to turn.
Always was. People have this idea that emissions going up is moving further from net zero and going down is getting closer, but that's not how technology progresses. People, on average, moved further and further from the moon for millennia and then flew from Earth to the moon in a few days when the technology matured. People have been moving away from carbon neutral for centuries, and we look primed to turn the corner fast now that the technology to do so is maturing.
A lot of the people profiting off fossil fuels invested billions in green energy research. Genuine trillions have gone into making renewables work better over the last decade. The people with money are doing stuff.
Hilarious defense of "American conservatives only believe in small government if they are the ones in charge and will happily use larger government to bludgeon local governments they don't like because they don't have actual principles", thank you
It's not entirely wrong either, though. We should expect perhaps that emissions go up with more population and economic activity, and down with new technology (both efficiency and new energy sources). But technology doesn't magically go from 0-100, it gets phased in. Discovering nuclear fusion would be a sudden introduction of technology, but it would still take decades to gradually convert power generation to nuclear fusion. We can take electric cars: they're viable and available now, and there will probably be a "tipping point" very soon. But there will still be substantial numbers of petrol and diesel cars on the roads in 2040.
The rate of adoption of new technology can be influenced. We can talk about billionaires and the state investing in renewables all we like, but it's a mere fraction of what they've been investing in (or subsidising) fossil fuels. I think, in fact, it's estimated renewables investment is about half of global fossil fuel investment at the moment - and that's even with renewables investment as high as its ever been.
Bluntly, we as a society have been far, far more lax about renewables investment than we could have been. Research and development cannot be infinitely compressed in time, but chances are had we taken renewables more seriously back in the 90s, we could have been 5-10 years ahead of where we are now. We were lax because the people making so much money from fossil fuels and happy to do so invested a lot of their profits in lobbying and marketing to dissuade us from doing anything, and they were very successful at it.
How about the "We Believe in Limited Government, and limited amount of people who have access in choosing that government" tactic they've been implementing of late?
Sometimes I wonder what is the goal of the anti-woke crowd. Like other then mocking the liberals, what objectives are you trying to accomplish by being so anti woke? I say this as someone who doesn’t pay much attention to the current political climate as I tend to be apolitical.
Maintaining the status quo- acceptability of police violence against non-whites, promotion of white-favorable education, and whatever else it takes to keep America "white and clean".
Well, I mean obviously you don't want the wrong sorts of people to have a hand in picking a government. They might vote wrong and then the conservatives will have to use a larger government to crush them
That you can accurately predict the race and class of people deemed to vote wrong is mere coincidence
Specifically? Their main purpse is to make money. Most are vapid and regurgitate each others points. They have blacklists they share between each other of people they shouldn't let onto their platform.
I'll give this to Charlie Kirk. He is at least talking to the Lefr
That's literally what the Founding Father's said while writing the Constitution. That's why most men weren't allowed to vote
Gonna be honest. I'd trust Sir Humphrey to run the country far more than I'd trust most other people. He's an unscrupulous, manipulative, elitist, classist and probably a lot of things I'm forgetting - because I think he's a great character - but I feel I could trust him to put the country's interests first in a way that doesn't torch alliances.
I think the basic idea of Yes, Minister was the reality that the civil service did in truth run the country. Of course, this did not sit well with modern politicians, which is why the last 40 years or so have involved a concerted effort to squash their independence and power.
The end result, naturally, is the current situation of a bunch of dilettantes passing whatever ideology their richest backers are paying them to with a dose of populism to keep the plebs happy. Does it surprise anyone they might make critical policy errors?
Does anyone know what's going on with Philadelphia? There is lots of crime, people literally doing donuts in their car near city hall. No wonder Joe Biden didn't defund the police, he just funded social workers, and police.
Granted I don't want police to have MRAPS. But crime is spiking in every metropolitan area, and I have a feeling it's not just minorities doing it as many conservatives believe. It's poor whites as well. If even Tucker Carlson or Trump were smart, all they would have to do would be to adopt a tough-on-crime stance, and if they are smarter than that, then they can run like Canada's Erin O'Toole.
Look I generally don't like my suburban neighbors due to many watching Fox News, and voting for Trump, but they re right when it comes to having streets with less crime. Crime creates bad cities.
Granted I don't want police to have MRAPS. But crime is spiking in every metropolitan area, and I have a feeling it's not just minorities doing it as many conservatives believe. It's poor whites as well. If even Tucker Carlson or Trump were smart, all they would have to do would be to adopt a tough-on-crime stance, and if they are smarter than that, then they can run like Canada's Erin O'Toole.
Look I generally don't like my suburban neighbors due to many watching Fox News, and voting for Trump, but they re right when it comes to having streets with less crime. Crime creates bad cities.
You present another good example for clearing up how all this terminology ought to be used: "small government" is not an especially conservative position in America. The bigger government Republicans are genuinely more conservative at this point in history than the very vocal small government people. A Republican supporting welfare programs is more politically conservative than a libertarian type.
I'm not going to deny that there are hypocrites or hypocrisy within the Republican Party, but you're not going to be successful at pointing at it if you use a bunch of different words that mean different things as synonyms.
I think the pretense by which Philadelphia is rationalizing the traffic stop law change is incredibly stupid, but I'm not going to complain about it, because traffic stops on busy roads over mild misdemeanors that most often result in a fine at worst is one of the dumbest things I think we do as a society. Like, I'm generally for the "broken windows" style of policing, where the idea is that you stay vigilant on the small infractions because most of the dangerous criminals are also violating the little laws, but blocking the shoulder and standing inches from moving traffic so you can ruin someone's day for going 5% too fast is a bit like exterminating some cockroaches by setting your own house on fire. Traffic stops should be reserved for obvious and immediate dangers to the public that justify an extreme response.