8370 pts ยท July 18, 2012
Do you mean like, "passionate"? Whats performative mean here?
This comment appears every time this post does, its interesting! I wonder how widespread / whether its false
And we've had what, 6 mass shootings in the 27 yrs since, and Im fairly sure most of those were the shooter killing their own family then themselves. No public space shootings since port Arthur (I think)
Relatively left-wing to LNP - Labor hasn't been left of center for a long-ass time, they are still absolutely beholden to mining interests and have no interest in the kind of large scale social and tax fixes we'd need to ease housing crisis, cost of living etc
My dude they wont have to - theyve already damaged the reef so far beyond repair, I think pretty soon they'll de-list it as a tourist attraction and wreck the whole thing. Nobody will pay a cent or take any responsibility. This tax avoidance move is good but we are still owned and operated by mining giants
It does affect everyone, thats why the idea that "stupid people think they know more" is misleading. They make the same mistake everyone else does of thinking theyre above average. Smart people also assume this, it will just happen to be correct in fields they are actually above average in (sounds obvious when said like that) https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-dunning-kruger-effect-isnt-what-you-think-it-is
Only last for 25 years, wow! TIL.
Meaningful as in its not a token gesture that can be rescinded as soon as its not convenient. Its in the country's actual constitution which protects it. Im not saying "meaningful" in some virtual signalling way - as in how much use it will actually provide, and what that says about the people instituting it.
Your below comment is a good point - I mean if they deliberately wanted it to fail then yeah this was a good way to do it. I hope not, honestly, but I thought the point was to have a constitutionally enshrined advisory board. Not one that can be immediately dismantled by the next govt. That said, also is more of a meaningful gesture if its embedded constitutionally rather than using existing measures. Not that we even USE existing measures anyway
My local area was 29 / 33% YES, whereas our closest cities were all >50. Where have I seen this pattern before... honestly gross that even in the cities it barely cleared 50% YES
Humanity as a whole are just rotating the trophy for Most-Heinous-Thing-This-Week, we won today sadly. You can have it back
I totally replied this whole chain to the wrong comment, mbad
They weaponised peoples own laziness into a NO vote. Despicable. That said, plenty of my older family and relations all voted no due to sheer racism. "The aboriginals will use laws to take our stuff!" Was a mind boggling response I heard a few times. Like, what? 1. Thats not even in the ballpark of what this does, and 2. For people that decry apology and Sorry day, now you're worried first nations will treat you like we all treated them? Awful
I think a big problem was the misinfo campaigns were common and well thought out. I think the whole thing is a little silly honestly - the Voice doesnt get any actual power? After everything we have put them through, all they are allowed to do is advise? We already completely ignore first nations advice. It felt like a placation, but at least it was something. But throughout the leadup I heard plenty of the same bs talking points - "its not specific enough", "it wont work", "i dont know enough"
The problem was the YES campaign never countered the NO side's misleading bs about "oh well they havent told us everything so vote no". The YES side shouldve doubled down on th3 deliberate simplicity but they dropped the ball hard imo. I think you're right that the YES side let this happen - but not for lack of detail. There was no detail deliberately
This was a classic misinfo point "but there wasnt enough info in the proposal!" Yes that is extremely deliberate. Consitutional amendments dont go into specifics, deliberately. Its just a seal of approval to make legislation and further decisions. Right now they cant do any of that. Think of the american gun amendment (2nd?). Right to bear arms - what arms? When? Where? How many can you have? Can you duct tape them all together? All of that is left out of the constitution deliberately
Im sad because the people I asked about voting No all had incredibly racist reasoning or talking points backing their decision. Not a genuine concern for political process, or wanting to go further, or a lack of government trust. Instead, ppl I spoke to (my family, partners family, friend group, etc) either parroted complete misinfo about the constitution, feared aboriginal people would strip away their rights, or think they dont deserve a voice. Not rational, worth-considering lines of thought
As much as the Yes team mishandled it, i didnt hear a single person legitimately claiming bad politics. It was always downright racism ("the aboriginals will take all our rights away!") through to misinformed ("it should be more specific and its supicious it isnt all explicity spelled out!")
Best you can do is call it out where you see it, slowly make the people around you see it as you do. Then hopefully, a few generations down the line, the sentiment helps shift voting - but we have a long way to go :/
This is my opinion too, sadly. I saw a lot of carbon copies of the same idiotic No arguments from different folk, or just downright, totally racist reasoning - and none of it surprised me. Im disappointed, but the yearly reaction to invasion day, outrage over having to do even the smallest healing gesture, etc makes this feel inevitable
Yeeeep!
It really depends where you happen to be at the time, the crowd youre with, the sentiment of the post, etc. The same sentiment can get you front page or downvoted to hell. Consistency isnt really a selling point of social media beyond a few key points. I expressed sympathy with unwilling soldiers in wars (which included Russian soldiers) and got slaughtered. Few months later, same post, same war, upvotes for days. Roll of the die!
I feel like her's is the dumb counterargument I see most often - they assume priviledge means they had zero difficulties and immediately answer that "well, It wasnt 100% easy so I am clearly not privileged!" When in reality privilege just means, generally, most people had it *harder* than them. Same reason that commonly, people overpaid or gifted things will over time slowly start to convince themselves that they earned it
Does a fanny pack make you bad at leading? Potentially its got helpful stuff in it. In fact id say the forethought to wear one shows you are better prepared and therefore more useful than someone wearing nothing
Thats a great question. Maybe "I wish everyone had empathy enough to ensure the general, long term, average wellbeing of themselves and their geographically closest 5 people" gets us closer. Which leaves animals out in the cold but I dont know how to support every ant
Can I fuck *on* the bridge or is the bridge to be used for sex? Or does the bridge reproduce with other bridges (a solution for aging infrastructure perhaps?)
They deserve a raise for all this hard work!
Thanks!
Do you mean like, "passionate"? Whats performative mean here?
This comment appears every time this post does, its interesting! I wonder how widespread / whether its false
And we've had what, 6 mass shootings in the 27 yrs since, and Im fairly sure most of those were the shooter killing their own family then themselves. No public space shootings since port Arthur (I think)
Relatively left-wing to LNP - Labor hasn't been left of center for a long-ass time, they are still absolutely beholden to mining interests and have no interest in the kind of large scale social and tax fixes we'd need to ease housing crisis, cost of living etc
My dude they wont have to - theyve already damaged the reef so far beyond repair, I think pretty soon they'll de-list it as a tourist attraction and wreck the whole thing. Nobody will pay a cent or take any responsibility. This tax avoidance move is good but we are still owned and operated by mining giants
It does affect everyone, thats why the idea that "stupid people think they know more" is misleading. They make the same mistake everyone else does of thinking theyre above average. Smart people also assume this, it will just happen to be correct in fields they are actually above average in (sounds obvious when said like that) https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-dunning-kruger-effect-isnt-what-you-think-it-is
Only last for 25 years, wow! TIL.
Meaningful as in its not a token gesture that can be rescinded as soon as its not convenient. Its in the country's actual constitution which protects it. Im not saying "meaningful" in some virtual signalling way - as in how much use it will actually provide, and what that says about the people instituting it.
Your below comment is a good point - I mean if they deliberately wanted it to fail then yeah this was a good way to do it. I hope not, honestly, but I thought the point was to have a constitutionally enshrined advisory board. Not one that can be immediately dismantled by the next govt. That said, also is more of a meaningful gesture if its embedded constitutionally rather than using existing measures. Not that we even USE existing measures anyway
My local area was 29 / 33% YES, whereas our closest cities were all >50. Where have I seen this pattern before... honestly gross that even in the cities it barely cleared 50% YES
Humanity as a whole are just rotating the trophy for Most-Heinous-Thing-This-Week, we won today sadly. You can have it back
I totally replied this whole chain to the wrong comment, mbad
They weaponised peoples own laziness into a NO vote. Despicable. That said, plenty of my older family and relations all voted no due to sheer racism. "The aboriginals will use laws to take our stuff!" Was a mind boggling response I heard a few times. Like, what? 1. Thats not even in the ballpark of what this does, and 2. For people that decry apology and Sorry day, now you're worried first nations will treat you like we all treated them? Awful
I think a big problem was the misinfo campaigns were common and well thought out. I think the whole thing is a little silly honestly - the Voice doesnt get any actual power? After everything we have put them through, all they are allowed to do is advise? We already completely ignore first nations advice. It felt like a placation, but at least it was something. But throughout the leadup I heard plenty of the same bs talking points - "its not specific enough", "it wont work", "i dont know enough"
The problem was the YES campaign never countered the NO side's misleading bs about "oh well they havent told us everything so vote no". The YES side shouldve doubled down on th3 deliberate simplicity but they dropped the ball hard imo. I think you're right that the YES side let this happen - but not for lack of detail. There was no detail deliberately
This was a classic misinfo point "but there wasnt enough info in the proposal!" Yes that is extremely deliberate. Consitutional amendments dont go into specifics, deliberately. Its just a seal of approval to make legislation and further decisions. Right now they cant do any of that. Think of the american gun amendment (2nd?). Right to bear arms - what arms? When? Where? How many can you have? Can you duct tape them all together? All of that is left out of the constitution deliberately
Im sad because the people I asked about voting No all had incredibly racist reasoning or talking points backing their decision. Not a genuine concern for political process, or wanting to go further, or a lack of government trust. Instead, ppl I spoke to (my family, partners family, friend group, etc) either parroted complete misinfo about the constitution, feared aboriginal people would strip away their rights, or think they dont deserve a voice. Not rational, worth-considering lines of thought
As much as the Yes team mishandled it, i didnt hear a single person legitimately claiming bad politics. It was always downright racism ("the aboriginals will take all our rights away!") through to misinformed ("it should be more specific and its supicious it isnt all explicity spelled out!")
Best you can do is call it out where you see it, slowly make the people around you see it as you do. Then hopefully, a few generations down the line, the sentiment helps shift voting - but we have a long way to go :/
This is my opinion too, sadly. I saw a lot of carbon copies of the same idiotic No arguments from different folk, or just downright, totally racist reasoning - and none of it surprised me. Im disappointed, but the yearly reaction to invasion day, outrage over having to do even the smallest healing gesture, etc makes this feel inevitable
Yeeeep!
It really depends where you happen to be at the time, the crowd youre with, the sentiment of the post, etc. The same sentiment can get you front page or downvoted to hell. Consistency isnt really a selling point of social media beyond a few key points. I expressed sympathy with unwilling soldiers in wars (which included Russian soldiers) and got slaughtered. Few months later, same post, same war, upvotes for days. Roll of the die!
I feel like her's is the dumb counterargument I see most often - they assume priviledge means they had zero difficulties and immediately answer that "well, It wasnt 100% easy so I am clearly not privileged!" When in reality privilege just means, generally, most people had it *harder* than them. Same reason that commonly, people overpaid or gifted things will over time slowly start to convince themselves that they earned it
Does a fanny pack make you bad at leading? Potentially its got helpful stuff in it. In fact id say the forethought to wear one shows you are better prepared and therefore more useful than someone wearing nothing
Thats a great question. Maybe "I wish everyone had empathy enough to ensure the general, long term, average wellbeing of themselves and their geographically closest 5 people" gets us closer. Which leaves animals out in the cold but I dont know how to support every ant
Can I fuck *on* the bridge or is the bridge to be used for sex? Or does the bridge reproduce with other bridges (a solution for aging infrastructure perhaps?)
They deserve a raise for all this hard work!
Thanks!