loungeiguana.bsky.social
Lizard.Still sorting out my pronouns, but they/them will do fine. Cocktails. 🏳️⚧️⚧️rights, TERFs/GC will be blocked. Left-leaning but finance background, go figure. Climate change and renewable energy: ask me about my heat pump at your peril. UK-based.
1,796 posts
419 followers
449 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
I hope that makes a difference.
comment in response to
post
My point exactly. The thing about revolutions is that they're led by revolutionaries.
comment in response to
post
Russian revolution
comment in response to
post
TIL I'm doing Bluesky wrong
comment in response to
post
Regime change happened in 1917 as well. If you think that was a desirable outcome, we part company.
comment in response to
post
interesting times indeed.
comment in response to
post
Even Hitler needed the enabling act at the beginning. I suppose it depends how far along that road you've travelled
comment in response to
post
Cannot allow another election? The Dems seem hell bent on handing them power from what I can see.
Unless you mean they want Trump to violate the term limit?
comment in response to
post
Thanks for the info - appreciate it
comment in response to
post
I have hope that you're right.
comment in response to
post
This article is so full of bad faith arguments. They've determined that upper body strength allows you to cast further.
No shit. Now prove trans women on E have greater upper body strength than cis women.
The truth is that a couple of high profile TERF anglers threw their toys out of the pram.
comment in response to
post
I'm not a US citizen, but interested in what you thought of the Alex Garland film. It gave me the chills. 'It couldn't happen here' is such a lie.
comment in response to
post
I tend to think the arc of history bends towards whoever is doing the bending.
Sometimes it's us.
comment in response to
post
Dumb question: isn't the President described as the Commander in Chief?
comment in response to
post
I agree with your last sentence.
comment in response to
post
In some places. I remember living through it, and how the hope that it was a widespread flowering of democracy withered on the vine.
I'm on the same side you are, remember. But these things can go wrong. There's no immutable rule of history that I can see.
comment in response to
post
They'll believe what the news tells them
comment in response to
post
I don't know, honestly. If it's a catastrophic implosion for the Trump regime, I'll bring popcorn.
But realise that amounts to a military coup. Those don't often end well.
comment in response to
post
Off the top of my head, the first that comes to mind en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Sp...
comment in response to
post
From your skeet to g*d's ears
comment in response to
post
I mean, I like the way you think. But I can't help thinking your examples are a bit selective.
comment in response to
post
If this is Miller's endgame, this seems to be the only question worth posing at the moment.
Sure they want to bully LA like they want to bully Harvard. What happens if it doesn't work?
comment in response to
post
Trump will them invoke the insurrection act and bring in the military?
comment in response to
post
ICE forgets some of these migrants came from real war zones.
comment in response to
post
Reindorf's argument that no rights have been lost because they weren't real rights in the first place could apply to literally any reduction of rights: e.g. US women didn't lose rights after Dobbs, because they never properly had the right to an abortion in the first place. It's obvious sophistry.
comment in response to
post
This is straight-up Great Replacement fear mongering.
comment in response to
post
Absolutely. When its whole modus operandi is plausibility, coupling that with malice is chilling. Particularly as it allows the process to be automated.
Productivity gains indeed.
comment in response to
post
But bullshitting is all it does, by design. It knows nothing about ontology or truth, because it only deals in patterns of language.
comment in response to
post
I mean, I don't need convincing. But it's still a bit shocking to see it mimic the behaviour of a complete gaslighting sociopath.
This is a great example of the inverse Turing test fallacy. People assume that anything which can hold a conversation is intelligent.
comment in response to
post
Imagine if, instead of being a boxer, she wanted to, say, marry a woman in her native Algeria, or to study at Eton, or become a Catholic priest. I'm pretty sure precisely the same people who are now calling her a man would be entirely adamant she is and will always be a woman.
comment in response to
post
Yes. The right can just create controversy by deciding to disagree with something, and because there's now "legitimate debate" the papers have to air the right's views or appear partisan.
The phrase "culture war" isn't appropriate. It implies there's two equal sides.