frisbird

Everyone needs to do exercise with resistance (weights, bands, bodyweight). You will not get too muscular by accident. It will prevent aches and pains, it will prevent injuries, it will make it more likely you survive car accidents and false.

Everyone needs to floss, there are no exceptions.

Everyone needs time outside in nature. If you live in a city, get to a park every week, preferably every day. It changes our brain chemistry. We aren't organized to live in boxes all day.

Learn how to breathe. If you think that sounds silly, you're the example.

Learn to cook. When you can't contribute anything else, being able to contribute food is universally accepted

Full on sarcastic

You mean Biden who believes we would have to create Israel if it didn't exist, who continued the war drive, who delivered weapons and training to genocidaires, who put infants in solitary confinement at the border, who was instrumental in ensuring that the prisons were full of black people who could be used as slave labor, who pardoned the judge who took bribes in exchange for sentencing 8 year old to juvenile detention for jaywalking, who failed to do anything meaningful to stop Trump, who failed to do anything meaningful to limit the power of the executive so it couldn't be abused, who failed to do anything to stop fascism at all?

Those 4 years where voting a different guy in didn't do literally anything to stop fascism in the least?

Sure. Do it again. I am sure continuing to not stop fascism is exactly how we stop fascism

Totally valid. You're right. Under those conditions, voting will definitely work. But only if you shame people on the Internet to vote the correct way.

But can't defend against soldiers with no helmets and no armor?

And yet Ukraine can't seem to defend against them? Russian territory gains have been accelerating over the last 4 weeks. Pretty bad situation if Ukraine can't defend against unarmored and unarmed soldiers

Ok, idolize/glorify is different than praise. Go ahead and argue that point. I am interested in understanding the position.

They said they didn't praise Stalin, you said that saying good things about Stalin is praising him. He disagrees with your definition. I don't. I think you're right. That's praising Stalin. But I don't see anything wrong with praising people for the good things that they did.

Further you didn't say they should admit that they idealize Stalin, you said they should admit that they praise Stalin. There's definitely a difference in those two words. You're moving the goal posts again.

You think I am projecting that I have a problem with cognitive disaonance based on what evidence? I am not trying to get you cross some moral line like "admit to everyone here you're just a dirty liberal who thinks Obama was a good guy". I am engaging you and critiquing you. If you can't tell the difference, I can't help you yet.

And if you can read the thread, the thread you are replying to invokes Rule 6 which is what caused the commenter you are debating against to start this conversation about praise/deification/etc

Read

I am claiming that you pretend malaria and bad humors are both bad. One exists. The other doesn't. You don't seem to have the willingness to acknowledge that. The social credit score in China that effects individuals does not exist. Sure. You can say both the US credit scoring system and the nonexistent Chinese personal social credit score are bad, but that would be foolish.

You could be saying that the US credit score system and the Chinese social credit score that is used to manage negative externalities of businesses are both bad, but I would disagree with you.

But I am pretty sure you don't know that the social credit score for individuals does not exist.

Rule 6 says "idealizing/glorifying". A poster in this thread. Dogbert said the word "deifying" in this thread. Maybe you don't think those are interchangeable. I could be convinced either way.

As for what I am talking about, the fact that Dogbert praises Stalin is apparently a problem for you. It is possible to praise people for the positive things they have done. Some people argue against that praise because they think the negative things the person has done are more important. Some people go so far as to believe it's not possible a person has done anything praise worthy ever because of the bad things they have done and that therefore anyone praising them is clearly morally derelict and that their opinions no longer matter.

The fact that you are trying to paint Dogbert's praising of Stalin as something he should "admit" is a way of drawing a boundary between acceptable and unacceptable beliefs, a form of thought policing, and also a way to create an echo chamber where you can't be confronted with positions that challenge your own position and threaten some of the beliefs that you hold tied into your identity.

So what I am talking about is you, choosing to interpret Rule 6 as applying to a positive analysis of Stalin's actions in office because you can't really handle discourse that runs counter to an orthodoxy that you adhere to.

You said "you don't know how much I considerer both systems" in another comment.

That's pretty much all the back up one needs.

The social credit system in China does not apply to individuals. It was originally designed for businesses. A limited pilot in certain locales was applied to individuals. That pilot program was shutdown in 2019.

So sure, go ahead and consider both systems that actually really exist. Go ahead and claim that both things can be bad. Keep on pretending!

signs of the same authoritarian and imperialist cancer

China accounts for 75% of poverty alleviation globally

China has not dropped any bomb in 36 years.

China invented the social credit system in response to dairy producers cutting corners and poisoning people. It was punishing profit seekers that harmed the people. It then ran a limited experiment with some local governments to apply it to people. It did not go well, and the democratic will of the people was that the program should end, so it did.

China's opposition to the West is a bare minimum requirement. The alternative is an integration with the West that subordinates the needs of the people to the needs of the Western elite. It doesn't stop there, but it's a necessary prerequisite.

Once that bar has been cleared, the next problem becomes one of defending against Western interference. One cannot be materially opposed to the West and not materially capable of defending against the West. So the second bar is whether the nation is capable of defending against the West. China is clearing this bar as well, but it includes authoritarian behaviors in order to stop covet operations. There is currently no known way to stop covert ops without use of authority.

From there each individual thing you want to discuss needs to be discussed on detail, but the overall picture is one of separating from the imperialist cancer and maintaining that separation and an attempt to build a space for healthier growth for which there are no models and there are not successful experiments that can be drawn from, which means creating sufficient space for experimenting and that means sufficient space for doing it wrong, and likey doing it wrong more often than doing it right for a significant period of time. (Looking at Mao)

No, tankies don't see the same imperial cancer because it clearly isn't the same imperial cancer

The Chinese government ended the pilot programs for social credit scores for individuals in 2019 because the Chinese people didn't want it, so Xu Xiaodong is likely one of those examples where a local government running their implementation of the pilot overreached and the central government, responding to the will of the people, ended it.