27
I'm starting to empathize with Texas trying to leave the Union.
(sh.itjust.works)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 23 May 2025
27 points (76.5% liked)
Casual Conversation
3308 readers
352 users here now
Share a story, ask a question, or start a conversation about (almost) anything you desire. Maybe you'll make some friends in the process.
RULES (updated 01/22/25)
- Be respectful: no harassment, hate speech, bigotry, and/or trolling. To be concise, disrespect is defined by escalation.
- Encourage conversation in your OP. This means including heavily implicative subject matter when you can and also engaging in your thread when possible. You won't be punished for trying.
- Avoid controversial topics (politics or societal debates come to mind, though we are not saying not to talk about anything that resembles these). There's a guide in the protocol book offered as a mod model that can be used for that; it's vague until you realize it was made for things like the rule in question. At least four purple answers must apply to a "controversial" message for it to be allowed.
- Keep it clean and SFW: No illegal content or anything gross and inappropriate. A rule of thumb is if a recording of a conversation put on another platform would get someone a COPPA violation response, that exact exchange should be avoided when possible.
- No solicitation such as ads, promotional content, spam, surveys etc. The chart redirected to above applies to spam material as well, which is one of the reasons its wording is vague, as it applies to a few things. Again, a "spammy" message must be applicable to four purple answers before it's allowed.
- Respect privacy as well as truth: Don’t ask for or share any personal information or slander anyone. A rule of thumb is if something is enough info to go by that it "would be a copyright violation if the info was art" as another group put it, or that it alone can be used to narrow someone down to 150 physical humans (Dunbar's Number) or less, it's considered an excess breach of privacy. Slander is defined by intentional utilitarian misguidance at the expense (positive or negative) of a sentient entity. This often links back to or mixes with rule one, which implies, for example, that even something that is true can still amount to what slander is trying to achieve, and that will be looked down upon.
Casual conversation communities:
Related discussion-focused communities
- !actual_discussion@lemmy.ca
- !askmenover30@lemm.ee
- !dads@feddit.uk
- !letstalkaboutgames@feddit.uk
- !movies@lemm.ee
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
ha its not the implementation of a fascist police state, its 'ai' that did it for ya?!
oook
I kind of doubt an independent Texas would be any less of a fascist police state.
oh, i agree wholeheartedly.. thats where the current federal administration is getting a lot of their terrible ideas.
i think what op is referring to is a general 'but my states rights' even though the original idea was 'i want my state to have the right to be an absolutely racist piece of shit'.
They are certianly trying to beat the rest of the States to 1862 levels of fascism.
Texas has been a fascist state practically since its inception.
A big part of the "Texit" movement finds its legs as soon as the presidency changes to an insufficiently fascist bureaucrat.
That scares the hell out of me too.
I just happened to read about the bill and had a thought and posted it.
~~I guess I'll work on considering you and being more of a perfectionist. Lemmy needs that. There's too much content as there is. /s~~
Edit: okay I get I was poking back pretty hard. Definitely a bit of a lash out. Sorry.
People on the internet are prone to criticize, it's okay to have gained an appreciation for the idea of states rights vs federalism from a slightly lower impact or more niche issue rather than one of the huge ones.
Its always a tradeoff both ways. The more rights the states have independent from the federal government, the harder it can be to get everyone on the same page about doing good things, but it's also a lot easier to independently build good things when the trend nationally is garbage.
The question is what compromise feels right to you, and personally I can respect and empathize with a number of positions on the topic. There's a reason the framers (fallible as they were) debated this architectural question so much- it really changes the shape of what exactly the federal government is.