- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
One more reason the establishment democratic leadership is allied with the right in trying to do everything imaginable to sabotage or at least marginalize and dismiss Mamdani’s mandate and popularity.
The more he stands up for what people actually want, and stands up for marginalized or “controversial” groups and ideas, the more glaring it becomes how they won’t.
Unfortunately, the average liberal, middle-class American is largely ambivalent on things like trans-rights still, BUT that doesn’t mean they don’t care. A lot of people DO want to see people protected broadly. This can influence elections, this can become a tipping point for “regime change” in the Democratic party.
The current Dem leadership loves the fact that liberal america is ambivalent about trans rights and will work actively to keep it that way, because it means they don’t have to take a stance on it, they don’t have to actually care, and this lets them court the neo-libs and conservatives as the Overton Window is bought and sold on the market to whoever has the deepest pockets.
If any group doesn’t have rights, than everyone else can easily lose rights.
Doesn’t matter who you are, ICE could grab and disappear you and no one would ever know.
So you just need to not give anyone the right for the removal of anyone’s rights, and boom, problem solved.
But the oligarchs donot want the problem solved. They want us fighting over this instead of asking why we let them hoard all of our wealth.
LBJ said it one time after seeing racist graffiti in an area where everyone was experiencing severe poverty.
“If you can convince the lowest white man he’s better than the best colored man, he won’t notice you’re picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he’ll empty his pockets for you.”
It wasn’t that he was advocating for it, it was the blunt realization of how effective republicans were using racism to distract from wealth inequality. There’s a lot of racists in power, but the people who put them there don’t care about race, they see anyone who isn’t a billionaire as not a real person, regardless of race.
it was the blunt realization of how effective republicans were using racism to distract from wealth inequality.
Definitely. I notice my colleagues, who are kind of on the right, are more animated and vibrant talking about culture wars. Not once I have heard them talk about wealth inequality. I mentioned it in another post that it’s easier to stoke angry emotions towards one another.
my colleagues, who are kind of on the right, are more animated and vibrant talking about culture wars. Not once I have heard them talk about wealth inequality.
Bring that shit up.
Be a broken fucking record about it.
Either you’ll get thru to them, or they’ll avoid talking “politics” around you because you always just being up how it’s the billionaires fault…
Which they do agree with, and they even understand they agree with.
But then you’re not having to talk to them and a constant reminder that whatever they were about to bitch about:
Yeah, but also billionaires shouldn’t exist
Wouldn’t it be nice to just support human rights? The one thing all of these groups have in common is their humanhood.
Well at least until we reach a ‘body of Theseus’ point in technological augmentation. Then we may need to rebrand ‘human rights’ to ‘consciousness rights’ or something more catchy.
Well at least until we reach a ‘body of Theseus’ point in technological augmentation.
Yah I’m sure that will be any day now.
Progress is being made. I’ve been smacking coconuts together these past couple days.
We don’t even know what “consciousness” is, let alone any kind of “consciousness rights”.
Like, it’s just not something really anyone’s been looking into, with the exception of probably the legit worlds smartest human who “retired” from physics 30 years ago
Like, one old dude dicking around in retirement, and a couple of associates.
There’s a long way to go before we can replicate a consciousness.
Lets also bundle it with getting cool things
You want new cool things made sooner rather than later, and existing stuff to be maintained better then focus on building up people instead of destroying them
That would definutely get a lot more people on board. From left and right. More so right
Physicists are often pointed to as the ‘smartest’ among us, yet when they turn to other fields, their genius isn’t always transferable. I personally would prefer psychologists or philosophers to determine what is consciousness.
Also, I wasn’t suggesting we replicate consciousness. I was touching on whether a human is still a human if, to put it extremely, neck down is machinery instead of biology. I might be okay with a Wall-e body.
It’s Roger Penrose…
Dude started with “pure math” gave MC Escher the ideas for his most famous artwork from doodles, then decided applying math in physics was better, so when he and Stephen Hawking finished up Einstein’s work, Hawking was the charismatic “face” everyone knew while Penrose was doing the real heavy mental lifting off screen.
When he reached a normal retirement age, he devoted 30 years to the study of consciousness, most of that time he was literally the only person researching it.
Like, it’s good to doubt, and I didn’t drop the name at first…
But it’s not like he jumped from computer science to biological engineering.
It’s like 70 years of research along a continued evolution from pure math to consciousness…
Like, he literally “wrote the book” on how it’s all connected. Someone who doesn’t know anything about science can read “The Road to Reality” and learn everything from 1+1=2 to what’s still pretty much bleeding edge physics.
Literally no one who has ever existed on the planet Earth is more knowledgeable on what consciousness really is, and how it works
I’m aware of Penrose and his position relative to Hawking.
When I wrote psychologists or philosophers, note I didn’t write psychologist or philosopher. It’s great work Penrose did to be sure, but I’d prefer not to rely on a foundation of thought laid by a single mind, no matter their intellect or dedication to science.
With respect to you, I made a quick joke about whether human rights would be applied to cyborgs in the future, I was not questioning the fundamental nature of what it is to be.
Well at least until we reach a ‘body of Theseus’ point in technological augmentation. Then we may need to rebrand ‘human rights’ to ‘consciousness rights’ or something more catchy.
It’s gotta be 100% replacement to be Theseus but arguably even just a preserved brain in a robot like fallout wouldn’t still be “you”.
So I took it as replicating a brain, which for a long time was built on the assumption we just needed to replicate an amount of neurons. So that’s why I went off on a tangent. We don’t know 100% how it works, just that replicating neurons alone won’t replicate a consciousness.
Interesting viewpoint. I disagree the Theseus argument requires total replacement, but that’s minutiae not worth getting into at the minute.
I always considered the more complex question of the thought experiment not being if the whole is different when the components are replaced, but when that change would occur if you assume change occurs in the first place.
Difficult to think about. I might need a bigger brain.
reminds me of the game soma by the authors of amnesia
Fascists? White supremacists? Eugenicists? Genocidists? Rapists?
That’s what’s neat about human rights. Even people who are bad at this particular point in time have them.
I’m not sure what’s going on…
It seems like you started listing people who took other’s rights away, but then you threw “eugenicists” in the middle, which make me think you just listed things people dont like to be called?
I 100% understand that you knew exactly what you meant. But literally no one else knows what your thinking bro.
You think eugenicists didn’t take people’s rights away?!?
I think ones that are also fascist, or even just authoritarian do…
Like, I don’t think nuclear energy is bad just because we can build nuclear bombs with the same technology.
We’ve “beat” evolution, we have zero evolutionary pressure right now. And because most mutations are detrimental and very very few actually beneficial, everything goes downhill relatively quickly.
Like, you know the result of no evolutionary pressure is the Dodo, right?
And even if humans hadn’t shown up, any know and of predator showing up would have had the same result, and realistically was a matter of when not if.
Like, were really not that far off from humans not even carrying their own children in an evolutionary timescale. Genetic screenings are already a thing for IVF…
If done properly it’s not taking anyone’s rights away, it’s preventive measures to prevent lifelong incurable conditions.
Like, I know it’s tough, but can you try to actually type your thoughts out? I’m going to get tired of this kind and of exchange very quickly.
But you really don’t seem to know what that word means, and unfortunately it’s important enough these days I want to try and help.
We should not forcibly sterilize people, or murder those that are deemed inferior.
Agreed.
But that not what a eugeniist is or what they believe in…
It’s just the betterment of the human genome. Saying every eugenicist was like the Nazis is like saying every communist is like Stalin.
What’s ridiculous about it, is every human is a eugenist on a personal level. Every time you feel attracted to someone, it’s because you think mixing your genes with theirs would improve your offsprings genes.
Like, I know I’ve said this a couple times, but you just fundamentally don’t understand the meaning of the words your using, and I’m starting to understand why you’ve never learned…
Nobody is superior to others. We are all equal.
Imagine the deep dark hole you had to climb out of to write that and genuinely stand by your demented conviction.
Get help.
