"never!" they cry, as the first Muslim Democratic Socialist is elected mayor of New York in a landslide.
Showerthoughts
A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted clever little truths, hidden in daily life.
Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts:
- Both “200” and “160” are 2 minutes in microwave math
- When you’re a kid, you don’t realize you’re also watching your mom and dad grow up.
- More dreams have been destroyed by alarm clocks than anything else
Rules
- All posts must be showerthoughts
- The entire showerthought must be in the title
- No politics
- If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
- A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
- Posts must be original/unique
- Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct and the TOS
If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.
Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report, the message goes away and you never worry about it.
And the largest party in the Netherlands has a gay guy married to a guy from Argentina as leader.
Which doesn't mean much, really, since the fascist party in Germany has a lesbian leader married to a lady from Sri Lanka who lives in Switzerland.
...in a landslide.
Actually, for me, it was shockingly close. How could an absolute fraud like the Independent have gotten so many votes? How could there be so many people in a huge city like that could make such a terrible decision, seemingly based on making a string of prior, terrible conclusions?
Weren't many millions of dollars spent directly against Mamdani?
I'd say it's one of the most hope inspiring things I've seen, personally — given the propaganda roulette we're faced with in the MSM.
The mainstream media? Yeah, it's getting fricken' scary. The Washington post being taken over by Bezos, and CBS being recently taken over by... who is it again?
But you're right, I wasn't totally accounting for all the manipulated voting. More and more, it seems that late-stage capitalism really is a tyrant...
no lol
utopias are integral to motivating cultural shifts
dream of universal basic income, get political efforts toward subsidized wellfare and paid parental leave
nordic countries show this in a hundred years of history books from five countries
Not with that attitude
just be aware that making claims about a highly contigent future (u dont know) is a decision that influences the outcome.
yeah that's what I'm saying
I know just wanted to say it some more
Just today finished this podcast episode about that same topic
Citations Needed: Episode 157: How the "Culture War" Label Is Used to Trivialize Life-and-Death Economic Issues
"Let the Culture Wars Begin. Again," The New York Times announces. "How the 'Culture War' Could Break Democracy," warns Politico. "As The Culture Wars Shift, President Trump Struggles To Adapt," NPR tells us. "Will Democrats Go on the Offensive in the Culture Wars?" Vanity Fair wonders.
Over and over, we're reminded that so-called culture wars are being waged between a simplified Left and Right. Depending on who you ask, they tend to encompass issues under very broad categories: "LGBTQ rights," "abortion," "funding for the arts," "policing," "immigration," "family values." While there is some validity to the label of "culture war issue" – say, Republican opposition to an art installation, or tantrums over the gender of M&Ms – most of the time, the term is woefully misapplied.
Despite what much of the media claims, LGBTQ rights, police violence, abortion, and so many other issues aren't just "culture war" fluff in the same league as the latest Fox News meltdown about a cartoon character. Nor are they both-sides-able matters of debate. They're matters of real, material consequence, often with life-and-death stakes. So why is it that these are placed under the "culture war" umbrella? And what are the dangers of characterizing them that way?
On this episode, we discuss the vague nature of the term "culture war"; how this lack of clarity is weaponized to gloss over and minimize life-and-death issues like police violence and gender-affirming healthcare; and how the only consistent criterion for a "culture war" seems to be issues that impact someone other than the media's default audience, i.e., a white professional-class man.
Our guest is The Real News Network Editor-in-Chief Max Alvarez.
Episode webpage: https://citationsneeded.libsyn.com/episode-157-how-the-culture-war-label-is-used-to-trivialize-life-and-death-economic-issues
The culture war is purely a distraction of everyone from the class war. Artificially funded by the rich after occupy wall street.
And the center fights for the overton window, wherever it may be.
That would be endless growth. It is the culture now.
Have you considered forming a coalition government? That’s how much of Europe has been working for a while now. There’s usually a little bit of blue, red and green in the mix. Maybe some other colors too.
You're speaking of the US?
In theory that's what the federal system is supposed to be; states are the mix of red, white, blue and green. Though obviously it would be great if more states themselves were coalition govts, and if the feds didn't have quite so much reach.
In a mostly theoretical sense. America can’t fix its politics without making some radical changes to the voting system, but I don’t expect that to happen anytime soon.
The current system naturally gravitates towards a two-party system, which isn’t quite what I would consider a coalition government. If you have three or four parties actively negotiating about major decisions, that’s when you begin to see the benefits.