andrewrgross

OY

This fuckin' timeline

100%.

I try to remind myself, though, that it would be a waste of time trying to yell at this tidal wave of rage that's bearing down on us just as it would to yell at an actual tidal wave. I think we need to be grabbing sand bags and securing our food supplies and looking to get to the other side of this period of history. I think it could easily last a generation. And if we're really, really effective (and lucky) it could be as short as another decade. But there's no use rubbernecking or bellyaching. We just need to focus on fixing this broken-ass world.

I think you're right not to spend any energy on this, and I agree that it would be performative to pretend to be sad that he left the world. In some ways, our society is better for normalizing honest reactions to things.

However: I want to encourage you to think about what it means to define him as vermin. Within the meaning of this word is the belief that he is low enough on a hierarchy of worth that he no longer falls under the protections and values we afford to "human". And furthermore, he is of a group that can only be effectively dealt with through extermination.

Personally, I don't think this is a useful philosophical concept. It's very central to the philosophies that Charlie Kirk sought to popularize: the idea that some people, through their worldview and lifestyle have forfeited any minimum universal protections we afford to humans, and instead should be eradicated. Obviously, his criteria of human worth was more or less an inverse of yours, but personally I'd reject his overall framework.

I'm really sure whether I truly disagree with it. But I definitely believe that the framework itself inherently benefits the fascist project far, far more than it could benefit a socialist project.

I definitely don't encourage you to mourn him. But I would encourage you to ask whether you really think there's utility in agreeing with him at all on the principle that humans can be vermin.

Researchers following the adoption of AI predict around 92 million jobs are projected to disappear by 2030, even as roughly 170 million new roles are expected to emerge, McKinsey & Company has found.

What in the fuck does this mean?

Huh. That looks kinda interesting. It's not a game I'm likely to buy, but I'm fascinated by the design of this. Thumbs up.

Return? /s

I think your points are very agreeable. I don't disagree with most of that.

I do think your thinking is flawed in presenting the government regulatory environment as simply a dial to turn between corporations and regular people.

Do you play any games? Either board games or video games? I wish more people took an interest in game design, because it's a really complicated and fascinating field with a ton of relevance to social policy.

Instead of viewing the government as the decider between who gets to be the dominant force and who is the disadvantaged actor, we should try to design systems to counter balance effectively. A classic example is the division of powers between branches of government. That's a great idea that has worked pretty well, and most people understand.

In this case, I would suggest that there should democratic mechanisms that allow small groups to challenge intuitional power (including both corporations and the state) but also for bigger groups of people to challenge small groups. This woman files a lot of legal challenges where she has no real stake. There should be mechanisms for local residents and environmental groups to restrain some of the legal tools she's abusing. In other words, I don't want to empower the corporations she's fighting, I want to empower GOOD environmentalists (yes, she is an environmentalist, even if she sucks) to cut her off. Kind of like how many states are finally addressing the problem of SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) lawsuits.

We should have mechanisms to allow limits to the number and duration of challenges. A lot of this is about filibustering projects. Let people challenge them, but require these challenges to be adjudicated quickly and then place limits on repeat challenges and delay tactics.

Again, she's wrong and fuck her. But that's not a political project, that's just complaining. I'm proposing we put our energy where it makes a difference.

Setting aside the whole ecofascistic bent of your writing...

There's nothing really actionable about that. Unless you are interested in literally unaliving someone for this, that just sounds like complaining on the internet.

Changning our laws is a plan. I'm not interested in just bitching online: I think we should work to DO things. And for better or worse, your solution doesn't sound like one you're willing or interested in actually applying.

Also: from a practical perspective, how on earth does one keep this a secret?

'Alright sweetie. Dinner is on the counter. If you need anything Becca next door said to just knock. Promise me you won't stay up to late, okay?'

'Sure Mom. But where are you going?'

'I've told you sweetie: don't ask questions. Bye!'

That makes no sense.

Most people tend to overestimate how universal their own experiences and reactions are.

And to clarify, this applies to you AND to the people you're disagreeing with (and myself as well!).

Good advice is context-aware. Is often about offering guidance to help someone assess their situation from a third-party view.

For instance, if you asked me how to give good advice to a stranger I wouldn't say "tell them to get more sleep and exercise". I'd say to focus on helping them figure out what their goal is and what their options are. You see the difference?

Growing up, my mom owned a women's lingerie store on the main commercial street in the heart of our neighborhood. My teachers and classmates bought their bras and panties from my mom, and everyone knew this. Obviously, this isn't exactly the same as sex work, but I can tell you I was served well by the fact that I never grew up inheriting any awkwardness or discomfort. My mom was proud and unembarrassed of her work, so then so was I.

Live a truth you're not ashamed of and share that truth with your kids at an age appropriate level. You don't need to be graphic, but tell your kids you work at a club. Tell them you're a stage performer. If they say, "do you strip?" You can say yes or you can say that stage performances are for an adult audience and you would rather not discuss the details. But if you acted ashamed, you're giving your kid that shame.

As a parent, one of the most important things is that we be the kind of people we want them to be. If you want your kid to be brave/mindful/proud/kind/patient/etc. you gotta try and live it.