Sir, this is a Lemmy.

Here’s a creative way to do it.

1. Print out the downvote symbol and a screenshot of the ad.
2. Dip the paper in dog shit to emphasize that the ad is a shitpost.
3. Send it to 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway Mountain View, CA 94043.
4. ???
5. Profit.

Thanks for giving me your take on it. My take on the Forward party in general is that it is somewhat of a single issue party focused on improving our democratic system through issues such as Ranked Choice Voting and open primaries. I do agree that a they could conceivably function as a advocacy group, and I also can see how organizing as a party can have advantages as the entire point of parties is to influence public policy like voting. They are essentially acting as an advocacy group for candidates who support their proposed reforms right now. If a state representative or senator promises to support their policies, they will help to funnel support to them by endorsing and promoting them.

State representatives are the people who have the power to change the voting system like they propose. But they do not have really have any reason to in our current system. If they replace our current First Past The Post voting system they would be opening the door for allowing more parties to have a chance to represent their constituents.

Sure, there are some conservatives that have joined, but I think you are exaggerating that the party is only run by them. Yang is on the board and he is no conservative even if he is willing to ally with them. I can understand and sympathize why you don’t like the association with conservatives. I don’t either really. I’m sure that part of the reason the UBI and elimination of the electoral college is absent from the platform is to get those conservatives willing to work with the party.

Conservatives control the vast majority of the state legislatures that make the rules for voting. Apparently Repubs hold 28 and Dems hold 19 currently. Both of those parties are pretty conservative by and large. One is regressive and conservative. The point is if you want to change the voting system you have to have a voice on the legislatures that make the voting rules. That is what they are attempting to build. It’s not something that’s gonna happen overnight.

You are welcome to believe they are a scam. I believe all parties are scams to some degree. Even so, I don’t see how instituting Ranked Choice Voting is really a conservative position. It is changing the existing system which is by definition not conservative.

Yeah, I’m not gonna watch an hour long video. If you put it in your own words why you are opposed to them, I will certainly listen. I don’t come to lemmy to watch videos telling me who or what I should support. I come for discussion. So if you want to convince me, explain your view.

Anyone who wants to run on ranked choice or proportional representation will get my vote

There’s a newish party for that. See the forward party.

It is an extremely prevalent delusion to think that we can only choose from the 2 parties nominees for president or any other office. But it is a very convenient delusion for party insiders and elites of DC that neither party is interested in dismantling.

That is not to say we shouldn’t be strategic in our votes. That means voting for the best(This is highly subjective and will usually come down to the lesser evil) candidate there is for a given race. Because it is also a delusion to think that everyone will suddenly realize they don’t have to vote for either party and elect a different candidate. Especially when other candidates aren’t really much better than the party candidates.

I agree strategic voting is a good thing. I never said or implied it isn’t. But it seems like your trying to straw-man me here.

Please explain how not voting for someone = handing someone else a vote.

To put it in another context, if I say I don’t want to go to applebee’s, does that mean I’m supporting going to olive garden? Here’s another one. If a republican withholds voting for trump in the general, does that mean they are handing a vote to biden even if they don’t vote for president at all?

Or worse, someone who actually believes voting 3rd party is not handing a vote to the fascist party.

Ahh yes, everyone not a democrat or republican must be a nazi. Totally sound reasoning /s

The pentagon literally needs to be dismantled or broken up. Any other organization of a comparable size that failed to account for its assets for 6 years would be in deep doo-doo. But because it’s funded from stolen wages largely from the working class, I guess its okay.

Damn that last paragraph is spot on.

I understand your justification for your beliefs and even share some of your moral beliefs. It seems to me like you didn’t really answer in the way I meant to communicate it. I’ll try to rephrase my original question to what I mean clearer. What causes you to rank your own values in the way you do?

Why do you think access to guns is more important than your beliefs on abortion? Or why are they more important than not getting overcharged on everything from housing to education to healthcare?

I like how you call out some terms used to dehumanization. Fetus, baby, and child also fit into that bucket imo.

So ,to clarify, you want the government to restrict and punish abortion? I thought libertarians were for less government.

Why should the government have a monopoly on violence and force in this case? Instead shouldn’t the enforcement of moral law like the NAP be up to their peers or free market hired private contractors?

There no caveat or exception. Don’t fuck with other people.

But my hand is tired.

/jk

Kudos for sharing. Feel free to ignore those who challenge your values. It takes a bunches of mental energy to argue and it isn’t necessarily worth it to argue.

With that said, I will still would like to ask you a question, if you are up for it.

How did you form your values?

I only ask because it is easy, when you are raised as Christian, to uncritically accept the teaching, values, and views of those around you as your own.

As kids we are conditioned through school, parents, and in general just information asymmetry to accept what adults say as fact and not question it. It is easy to carry that same tendency over into our values and viewpoints. Kids and adults have a hard time separating fact from opinion. We tend to treat widely held beliefs as fact instead of as the opinions they actually are.

Most people have a hard time accepting criticism. They interpret any perceived attack on their beliefs as an attack on them (their ego). Once their on the defensive, you have a tiny chance of convincing them. Instead, they might justify their position and/or simply attack or dismiss your argument at best. But if their not feeling nice, it’s more likely they resort to namecalling such as sheep / lib / commie / dumbass etc.

As far as how you can watch videos remotely between multiple people, there are some websites where you can stream videos through a virtual browser. You can visit a website in them and have the content of the website be shared between multiple people. Usually they also have a way to comment, or talk to the participants. Some of the better examples include:

1. https://watch.hyperbeam.com/

2. https://caracal.club/

I’m not up to date on any communities to find people to watch videos with in real-time , maybe someone else can chime in on that front.

Was that a private or public school? As far as I know Montessori schools are largely private.

Socializing in school is only really allowed in the ~20% of time not made up of lectures / homework. E.g. Recess/Lunch/In-between classes. The other 80% is largely made up of lectures and homework. Ideally those percentages should be flipped. 80% learning via social learning(socialization) / 20% lecture.

Call me crazy, but I think humans learn best socially(conversationally) not by lecture via teacher. Talking and socializing should be integrated in how we learn and teach. The learning should largely be social between the students so that they actually learn material instead of just learning to temporarily remember the information for the next test.

The teacher should drift between the groups of students and clear up any misconceptions or disagreements that occur.

Yeah, you’re probably right to some degree. It may not have been fully intentional on the part of the designer.

However, since the elites of the time controlled the government, the government would tend to favor institutions that elites think will benefit from.

Relationships are discouraged through school, in favor of competition, so we can be more effectively exploited by the elites (and all hierarchical societies). That is by design. Healthy individuals with good relationships are harder to sell to and to exploit. It’s relatively hard to convince someone who is satisfied with their life and image to buy something. It’s a lot easier to convince them to instead seek emotional satisfaction through excessive buying (escapism). Each new item (or service) you get can temporarily fill the emotional void and provide a fleeting sense of excitement or comfort.

Gulp. … Can yu ear nw?