139
submitted 2 years ago by HarryLime@hexbear.net to c/news@hexbear.net
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 24 points 2 years ago

No comment in the substance? Just going to keep on hoping we can age into a just world?

[-] stolid_agnostic@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago

You’re underselling today’s youth. We’re all dinosaurs and they see the world in a completely different light.

[-] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 21 points 2 years ago

If you're just axiomatically committed to bullshit, there's nothing I can do about that, but I'm a young person and, uh, no, zoomers aren't special. They've got just the latest iteration on time-honored brainworms, and the disparities between them and their elders can be explained by difference in social position, both the traditional "young people are poorer and less institutionally entrenched" bit plus the more unique problem of median downward mobility, but that pushes radicalization both ways and it doesn't push them evenly in an uneven environment. Going just by the odds, what stands out about Gen Z is that they are the most likely generation in the last several decades to be at the helm of a successful fascist uprising, which is much more likely than them doing socialist revolution (though them just finding some new way to be neo-neoliberals is still more likely than a socialist revolution in the US).

I'm on a communist board, it's not like I don't want the Zoomer Vanguard of Marxist revolutionaries to be a real thing -- and I aspire to help instigate it -- but hope and love are not enough to make it so, and we cannot hope to contribute to making the world better without a solid understanding of how the world can [and may] be worse.

[-] stolid_agnostic@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 years ago

You have an agenda and you’re angry about it. I frankly stopped reading your responses about three back. Why not devote your efforts to someone who is interested and take a persuasive instead of hostile tone?

[-] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 16 points 2 years ago

What is my agenda that it would slant me against your thesis?

[-] stolid_agnostic@lemmy.ml 3 points 2 years ago
[-] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 18 points 2 years ago

"People who disagree with me have an agenda. People who ask me to explain what the agenda is are tedious."

[-] stolid_agnostic@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago

Congrats. You get to be my first block on Lemmy!

[-] Zodiark@hexbear.net 18 points 2 years ago

You're not explaining yourself to garbageshoot, you're explaining to the rest of us.

Please consider putting more effort into your posts instead of asking us to Intuit and vibe our way to your viewpoint.

[-] GarbageShoot@hexbear.net 15 points 2 years ago

All this effort instead of just explaining what my agenda is doing

[-] space_comrade@hexbear.net 15 points 2 years ago

You're really being a baby about this. You don't get to be pissy because people aren't impressed by your puddle-deep analysis.

[-] stolid_agnostic@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago

People shouldn't badger, and that was what I took exception with. I'm happy to engage in a good faith disagreement, but person was being a douche nozzle about it and it wasn't worth that level of drama, which is why I backed out.

[-] space_comrade@hexbear.net 9 points 2 years ago

but person was being a douche nozzle

No he wasn't, he gave you a reasonable, if slightly rude response to your argument and you didn't respond back but instead just started bitching about "agendas". You're the douche nozzle tbh, if you can't handle people on an anonymous forum being slightly snarky at you maybe just log off.

[-] stolid_agnostic@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago

Not really, though. Person took great exception to my opinion and was determined to make me accept defeat instead of just accepting that people can hold different beliefs. There is absolutely no point in engaging with someone like that any more than there is engaging with an angry person on Facebook. His agenda was the need to win the argument at all costs rather than assume that someone can have a different belief set.

[-] space_comrade@hexbear.net 5 points 2 years ago

His agenda was the need to win the argument at all costs rather than assume that someone can have a different belief set.

Yeah that's how Internet discussions work genius, not every discussion needs to end with "ah man it's all so complicated it's ok to have different beliefs", you're allowed to have a strong opinion on things.

Your agenda is to hide behind some vague concept of civility instead of actually engaging in the discussion. Literally nobody forced you to respond to his comment at all if you found it so grating, you consciously chose to be loudly pissy about it.

[-] stolid_agnostic@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

No, my agenda is that I am allowed my opinions and I don't have to explain myself if I don't want to. Your argument is that I am required at all times to fully explain everything I ever say. It doesn't work that way, I have a right to disengage. I disengaged with that person and I am disengaging with you. Neither of these conversations are worth the amount of effort I have been forced to expend on them, and that is time and energy that will be lost from me forever.

[-] space_comrade@hexbear.net 3 points 2 years ago

I have a right to disengage.

You had that right also like 10 comments ago. You just have a bruised ego because people on the Internet dared to not just nod along to whatever bullshit you were saying.

[-] stolid_agnostic@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago

Love it. You go ad hominem when you run out of ideas.

this post was submitted on 19 Oct 2023
139 points (100.0% liked)

news

24512 readers
443 users here now

Welcome to c/news! We aim to foster a book-club type environment for discussion and critical analysis of the news. Our policy objectives are:

We ask community members to appreciate the uncertainty inherent in critical analysis of current events, the need to constantly learn, and take part in the community with humility. None of us are the One True Leftist, not even you, the reader.

Newcomm and Newsmega Rules:

The Hexbear Code of Conduct and Terms of Service apply here.

  1. Link titles: Please use informative link titles. Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed.

  2. Content warnings: Posts on the newscomm and top-level replies on the newsmega should use content warnings appropriately. Please be thoughtful about wording and triggers when describing awful things in post titles.

  3. Fake news: No fake news posts ever, including April 1st. Deliberate fake news posting is a bannable offense. If you mistakenly post fake news the mod team may ask you to delete/modify the post or we may delete it ourselves.

  4. Link sources: All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. If you are citing a Twitter post as news, please include the Xcancel.com (or another Nitter instance) or at least strip out identifier information from the twitter link. There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance, such as Libredirect or archive them as you would any other reactionary source.

  5. Archive sites: We highly encourage use of non-paywalled archive sites (i.e. archive.is, web.archive.org, ghostarchive.org) so that links are widely accessible to the community and so that reactionary sources don’t derive data/ad revenue from Hexbear users. If you see a link without an archive link, please archive it yourself and add it to the thread, ask the OP to fix it, or report to mods. Including text of articles in threads is welcome.

  6. Low effort material: Avoid memes/jokes/shitposts in newscomm posts and top-level replies to the newsmega. This kind of content is OK in post replies and in newsmega sub-threads. We encourage the community to balance their contribution of low effort material with effort posts, links to real news/analysis, and meaningful engagement with material posted in the community.

  7. American politics: Discussion and effort posts on the (potential) material impacts of American electoral politics is welcome, but the never-ending circus of American Politics© Brought to You by Mountain Dew™ is not welcome. This refers to polling, pundit reactions, electoral horse races, rumors of who might run, etc.

  8. Electoralism: Please try to avoid struggle sessions about the value of voting/taking part in the electoral system in the West. c/electoralism is right over there.

  9. AI Slop: Don't post AI generated content. Posts about AI race/chip wars/data centers are fine.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS