not all murderers are criminals, in fact I would say the worst weren't
whether or not the murder was legal is of no consequence
this is like me saying "trans people are cool" and you replying with "actually blaire white is a fascist and she is trans"
nah criminals are cool, the issue with politicians is that they make law
well i write out the script and related information in a big document, I could probably share that from a burner account for my videos
and for information overload, the point is that it is as condensed and short as possible, i deal with a lot of people who need that level of information to stay engaged. This exists as an alternative to those slow 2+hour essays. Ultimately that will likely always be an issue for a good portion of people
well ultimately it is looking at 2 things at once, do you have any suggestions?
i mean, democracy is a hierarchical idea in the first place so its not like it makes much of a difference to me. I mean in the general sense here though specifically, so I think the tense is fine
it is clear when you look at ecosystems for example, if a single disease can wipe out all adult trees in a forest it kills all new sprouts and it stops being a forest. (Tree sprouts tend to not do well in direct sunlight because they expect the shade of trees above them and all that)
so if you only have one kind of trees you are on a timer
this is the same with how we interact, and why organizing in systems that can coexist with as many other systems as possible is a requirement for survival. This is one of the biggest reasons why I'm an anarchist, because the point of the state is to force everyone to exist within one set of rules and such
I'm autistic, I've been called "detached and academic" my whole life, if you are inclusive how about you try including how I like to communicate instead of treating my existence like a problem to be fixed
what makes you think attacking me how I interact makes me want to interact more closely?
i mean i did mention replying to comments though, so idk how they could assume that i was planning on ignoring them?
idk it feels like bad faith assumptions
like people keep saying im not going to use peoples pronouns when i didnt say anything about that?
deeper context involves like, reading the last 10 posts someone made to get an idea of who they are before responding, is that expected here? I am not understanding what you want from me
I never said anything about not seeing people as complex humans? I'm confused
a lot of their harm is built around dependence on them
we can do stuff about many forms of it without direct interaction, and we do not need their permission for it