Most likely they are, actually. But of course, their inheritance was a lot different than these senators…
Unless you’re looking for the off-road capabilities this doesn’t seem like the most practical way to get around.
For 1-2 passengers and limited cargo electric motorcycles or mopeds are likely the best option.
If you need to regularly carry more passengers or cargo, the more conventional EVs will make sense.
As others have pointed out, the anti-car movement is mainly focused on cities and urban design because using cars as the dominant mode of transit there just doesn’t make sense. But that doesn’t mean they’re bad in every scenario. Living in a remote area without a fast vehicle seems impractical to me, so I would just focus on making sure it’s powered by renewable energy and operated safely.
That said, I would argue that other urbanist ideas like dense town centers might still make sense in rural areas. Unless you’re engaged in agriculture or some other activity that needs acreage, concentrating living space, goods, and services into a smaller area just makes good sense. This is the way all small towns were built throughout the entirety of human history until the last 100 years.
Yes, but less than I did. Mostly to visit my local sub. The one one Lemmy is just me shouting into the void it seems...
Is the behavior of one of the biggest tech companies in the world not relevant to technology? That seems a strange view to me.
For using the word government??? What kind of crazy gatekeeping is this?
Kinda cool. To be honest I’m mostly posting this to test it.
Edit: It works!
Referring to camas as a potato is an interesting choice…
OK thanks for your thoughts, I’ll try to stick to that in the future.
I’d like to apologize for my part in this toxicity. I think I could have approached that thread in a more civil manner.
But maybe you can give me some advice for the future. What got me fired up was statements by people defending or advocating for indiscriminate mass murder. To me this seems beyond a mere ideological disagreement and it feels wrong to leave this kind of content unchallenged. But would it have been better to just report it and move on? I considered this but wasn’t sure if it constituted rule-breaking content per se. And I was wary of reporting something that might not be against the rules.
What is the best way to respond to this type of content which I unfortunately see all too often on Lemmy?
Depends on what you mean by condemn. All of those things were bad when they happened. But we can’t forever condemn the descendants of warlike people as tainted colonizers.
On the other hand, in the case of some of the more recent events, we still have people today who are marginalized, impoverished, and lack access to land as a result of those past atrocities. Most notably for the west, this includes native Americans and Palestinians, among others. This situation calls out for a just solution. The redistribution of land, extra services, reparations, etc. should all be on the table for the descendants of the colonized. But notably, the expulsion of the descendants of the colonizers should not be—this will just perpetuate a similar injustice into the future.