what a toxic mindset

“just travel the world bro!” wow incredible advice, please write a book

Lumping the entire label with Democrats seems like sectarianism to me.

I love the Kuleshov effect.

That can’t be true, I’ve been assured both are exactly the same!

oh are DemSocs cancelled now too?

he used to be an imperial flight cadet, where surely there was propaganda making the Jedi seem misguided and unimpressive

Then he should be able to remember them at least

But we still know that Al Qaeda existed 25 years after 9/11

Dr. Marijuana Pepsi

look I just think George made some mistakes with the prequels

Out in the outer rim, most people probably haven’t seen a jedi and they would seem a lot more like fairy tales

Anakin was able to spot one instantly, and he was a slave on a planet so divorced from the Republic that they didn’t even take credits.

Han acknowledging the Jedi as a fairy tale would be an improvement, but in A New Hope he just straight up says “I’ve been all over the galaxy and never heard of any shit like that”

You don’t need to see a Jedi to know that they are real though

But even little Ani on backwater Tattooine knew about them, it doesn’t add up.

It still makes no sense for the Jedi to be forgotten in the same time. Han Solo, a traveling pilot who is older than the Empire, speaks of the famous galaxy wide peacekeepers like they’re a fairy tale.

Brother you are literally stalking me for months because you think I’m a lib, you need to stop projecting.

Yeah, stalking users would be really pathetic, wouldn’t it? Stay mad

There are better things to do than argue with accelerationists.

Sorry for living in your head rent free

Whatever makes you feel better

You’re playing semantic games to avoid believing/saying that you’re supporting fascism

I don’t think it’s semantics, I think there is a very clear distinction.

There is no “voting against” only “voting for” (in this context, obviously- for the presidential race)

I disagree, when only 1 of 2 outcomes are possible, choosing the preferable one is not a complete endorsement of everything they represent.

but I don’t believe there is a “right” or “wrong” with this

Why not? If you value harming less people, how is the “right” choice not the one that harms less people?

I enjoy these kinds of discussions as thought experiments, but there’s a time & place for it (and this thread isn’t it, imo)

It’s not a thought experiment though, it’s the possible outcomes of the election: D or R.

abstaining and voting third party are both valid options

Not if you want to actually influence the outcome. See, you’re engaging in thought experiments, I’m talking very pragmatically.

Other people, like myself, prioritize long-term consequences, principles, etc. over immediate consequences.

Long term consequences such as what a worse administration could do for 4 years? Like all the climate goals that got immediately revoked, is that long term enough? There is a long term impact to letting the greater evil win. How are Republicans better in the long term?

but it’s dishonest to try to absolve yourself of culpability with semantics.

Well at least we can agree on that. Abstaining and voting third party are objectively valid options, as in you are not literally forced to pick between only D and R, but that’s semantics, because there are only two outcomes.

I think if your “principles” include less bad things happening, they wouldn’t prevent you from choosing the less bad outcome. It seems to me like your principles are more about purity