![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/8f2046ae-5d2e-495f-b467-f7b14ccb4152.png)
This one was also pretty good.
This one was also pretty good.
The public dislikes Harris, for the same reasons I could see her becoming the de-facto president by remaining in her position. Big business interests and Donors would love to have an empty-suit like her to push around.
There’s no need to “restore democracy” when you don’t overthrow it in the first place.
shaving should come before haircuts.
deleted by creator
…because we weren’t responding to you?
I’m pretty sure that sometimes it’s a result of how the voter feels. Other times i’m not so convinced it’s humans voting.
…especially once they’re serving their* second term.
[edit] they’re, their, there
well that article was exactly as awful as the headline sounds.
Umm what does that even mean? How can anyone feel neutral to another human being?
I just meant indifferent really.
All I am picturing is you know someone exists but any amount of pain or pleasure they feel doesn’t impact you.
There are a lot of people that currently exist and are in pain but it has little to no impact on me even though providing help would require nothing more than some more time and manpower.
Like if you could push a magic button to make them happy you wouldn’t bother since that would require effort and you are neutral.
This, I think provides for an interesting thought-experiment. Do we know how long it takes to press a button? Is the button-press speed limited by the latency of the circuitry it’s connected to? Exactly how many people are currently in pain? It’s obviously lots but can we come up with a relatively specific number? With what frequency does the number of suffering people change?
Then there are also some questions with more relative ethical implications that might also be: How many hours a week should a person spend pressing this button? How many people should press this button? If all previously suffering people are getting their buttons pressed then how will we know when someone is happy and flourishing? Isn’t suffering an implied opposite of flourishing? What other implications of the anti-suffering button are there?
I don’t know the answer to these questions, but you have certainly given me lot’s to ponder.
[edit][post] On further research I guess this sounds kind of like Negative Ultilitarianism which appears to be a subset of Utilitarianism.
On the Dollop podcast if you’ve ever heard of it, one of the hosts is named Gareth. Gareth points out in an episode that in American culture we only ever call “heroes” the people we deem ‘expendable’. I have been unable to find a counterexample to that claim ever since I heard it.
That very much comes off sounding ableist
How do you feel about people who feel neutral about your kids?
deleted by creator
If it were a production directed by Armando Iannucci, I’d watch it.
It works. Until somebody clarified it as cornflour i was hoping these folks got crucified.
Yeah, the stats regarding population size is one general aspect of a very large and complex issue. For example at least one of the countries reporting no homelessness is still reported to practice indentured-servitude as a form of modern-day slavery -which would take the place of most vulnerable
You can learn a lot about a country by looking at how they treat their most vulnerable.
Most of us do but unfortunately only about half of us are under the impression that other systems are better and more sustainable. Entrenched financial interests run our government and a large portion of those entrenched interests made their fortunes from this medical system
I can’t wait to see how these laws get misused. My local municipality banned camping in various public places, and if I understand correctly the police used that law as justification to falsely arrest campus protesters back in March/April.