this post was submitted on 25 Apr 2024
551 points (99.3% liked)

196

17082 readers
2090 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.


Rule: You must post before you leave.



Other rules

Behavior rules:

Posting rules:

NSFW: NSFW content is permitted but it must be tagged and have content warnings. Anything that doesn't adhere to this will be removed. Content warnings should be added like: [penis], [explicit description of sex]. Non-sexualized breasts of any gender are not considered inappropriate and therefore do not need to be blurred/tagged.

If you have any questions, feel free to contact us on our matrix channel or email.

Other 196's:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 27 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 117 points 10 months ago

I love how the cat joins in to play with the mice

[–] [email protected] 93 points 10 months ago

Sleeping outside is a crime. Sleeping inside is trespassing and also a crime.

Now, I can't find legal text specifically banning that sort of thing, but that definitely seems like a "bill of attainder" and against the spirit of the 8th amendment to to the US constitution. Of course, I know the courts don't actually care, but if they had spines they would.

[–] [email protected] 40 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Liberal solution to homelessness:

[–] BaldManGoomba 61 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Build more housing, build different kinds of housing, build housing that has built-in social worker and nursing help, make it government owned and non for profit

[–] [email protected] 21 points 10 months ago (3 children)

That's the logical solution, the Liberal solution is to use cops to arrest homeless people.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 10 months ago (4 children)

That word, I don't think it means what you think it means.

[–] Cosmonauticus 13 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

The current mayor of Portland pushed for laws making homelessness illegal. In this case its wealthly Democrats and Republicans pushing to making homelessness illegal

https://www.yahoo.com/news/portland-mayor-proposed-ban-homeless-013240948.html

[–] AlataOrange 19 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Democrats are a right wing party. Republicans are a far right party. Neither are left of center.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

People hate being reminded of that.

[–] TotallynotJessica 1 points 10 months ago

Relative to all countries on earth, not so much. In a sane world they would be, but not our world.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 10 months ago (4 children)

I don't believe you understand Liberalism. "Scratch a Liberal and a Fascist bleeds", if you want to see it in action watch how quickly they switch the topic to Trump whenever someone critiques Genocide Joe.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Heads up, neoliberal (which is what is meant in the phrase scratch a liberal and a facist bleeds) is not the same as a liberal.

Usually just saying Liberal means Neoliberal - but for situations like this the difference helps

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Even Liberalism is inherently flawed, it's still a center right ideology

[–] [email protected] 10 points 10 months ago

do you really think about the world on such a singular spectrum

[–] [email protected] 13 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Don't democrats constantly complain about the president unlike republicans that complain about the president when it isn't their side that won?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago

And yet we're seeing tons of people blindly support him

[–] TotallynotJessica 4 points 10 months ago

As much as liberals suck, they're not fascists. They will do fascist things in a similar way to Soviet states, playing to masculinity, bigotry, nationalism, and violent repression. They often slide into fascism and ally with fascists.

However, most of them do believe their own bullshit. Most people do. They think their fascist actions are justifiable in service of democracy. They think capitalism is compatible with democracy, and that it's even necessary for democracy.

They're willing to believe that because their jobs depend on supporting the status quo. They don't think about it consciously, as the unconscious mind can blind us to inconvenient truths. They don't perceive the contradictions.

[–] Pilferjinx 4 points 10 months ago

Are you referring to the American Democratic Party and it's supporters or just left leaning liberal ideology? It seems like you're confusing them to me.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 10 months ago

Maybe he means neo-liberal... Which is basically a conservative thinking society changed when he became rich.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

they're being edgy online Marxist and quoting Mao. the kids these days say anything mainstream is "Liberal". it's pretty politically ignorant but don't bother starting them down the road arguing it or they'll just start quoting books they haven't fully read. to them "liberal" just marks another point on a line

they'll figure out in time that the world is more nuanced than left/right, or maybe they wont.

[–] TotallynotJessica 3 points 10 months ago

They're more referring to supporters of capitalism without substantial changes. Liberalism is a mostly useless term because it's so broad and varied, but words only mean what we think they mean. They often want to make the world a better place, but they're totally unwilling to do what it takes.

The colloquial definition has the downside of becoming a tool to discredit the good ideas related to Liberalism. Properly curtailing property rights can be worked into the liberal democratic model as a way to maximize freedom and stabilize society. However, the colloquial attitude of selfish naivete cannot.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 10 months ago (1 children)

funny I don't remember reading that in any Hobbes or Locke. I guess I need to review classical liberal philosophy

[–] TotallynotJessica 4 points 10 months ago

Locke would've just enslaved them or something for being minorities. Hobbes might point out that the state can't tolerate people living outside the system, making their very existence a threat. He might support prison slavery to maintain the system. He also might not if he had context about the modern world. Locke would definitely support modern liberalism though.

[–] Cheems 10 points 10 months ago

I'm not sure if we live in the same reality

[–] [email protected] 8 points 10 months ago

It disgusts me that us US government treats homeless people like pests or criminals

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago

For those who actually don't understand: Trump openly started that he's gonna build internment camps for them.

So that's cool.

Just a little concentration camp as a snack.

[–] Sam_Bass 3 points 10 months ago

How many beds does a typical city counselpersons residence contain?