What about Putin and Trump working together the rhetoric of nuclear deterrence?

IIRC, Russia+USA = 90% of all nuclear weapons in the world.

A big whammy hammer if they (hypothetically) fight together.

Also, if one really have the need of passing paper on the butt, then do like this guy and have your own organic green self-grown toilet paper: https://www.robingreenfield.org/growyourowntoiletpaper/

I hope it isn’t like the similarly named subreddit where the moderator was against calling Elon’s salute for what it was.

I’ll be honest and a bit jaded, These “uplifting” comunities do feel a bit like the “this is fine” meme (https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/this-is-fine)

Not that I am against uplifting news. I’m just cautious because I’ve seen a fair share of nazi dogwhistle associated with this idea.

Be careful that anti-theism may e as harmful as any fundamentalist religion: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3D4tMVaO7k

What I think is not that we should “abolish” religion (granted that I know you did not propose that. I’m just extrapolating from “religion is a plague”)

I think we should move to exploring different religions without holding any of them as superior to the other, or at least not judging before reading a it more on your own accord and desire.

Someone pointed about issues on buddhism, which are true issues.

But eastern religions take from buddhism, taoism and confucionism religions and it is not uncommon to take a few different takes from each one of these as one goes in their own studies.

Same way, I think the rise of pagan religions would be useful to have the idea of being exposed to different concepts of religious ideas

Or similarly, different philosophical ideas, like reading from plato, but also from hume, but also from descartes, but also from…

As long as one doesn’t stay stagnant on the same philosophical pool, there is no harm browsing (with sufficient care) other ideas.

Edit: I sort of missed the first part talking shit about gen x liberals and dirt poor zoomers while also affirming that the republicans aren’t changing ^(Citation needed) and “based”. The nuance there is just a thin veil for hate speech.

It requires a second or third reading to catch on this, but it is surely a bad take

the post of the previous commenter was nuanced.

usually it is a good thing, but since the far-right is blatantly nazi, there are some risk with “nuance”

overall, the previous comment seems to be analyzing how this divide is happening.

my only complaint is that the comment doesn’t make clear who are the fuckers who are driving the social divide (spoilers: the right who is nostalgic about the post-war period and want to create a “new” post war period by, well, going full nazi)

As someone said on reddit they don’t want a safe space for them.

what they want is to be enabled to shit on everyone else’s food and smirk at us while we try to separate their shit from our beans.

It is a power dynamic where they want to force their shit upon us.

they already have their safe space on r/conservative where they go to circle jerk around “the left is bad”.

They do get tired from that and there is no new “left is bad” if the entire political spectrum was composed of them.

Far right and conservative hate is a self cannibalizing movement.

Even if they killed all gay, black, hispanic, asian, autistic, disabled and any sort of “the other”, then, they would need to find new “others” to start to hate and kill. Their fight is always inward, against the enemy within.

They will proceed to kill white people because either they are not white enough or that they are too white (“ginger” people which should’ve be considered the “correct type of white” if racism ever made any sense since they are paler than almost any other ethnicity).

So, they need an existing enemy and a platform that enables them to shit on us.

If they ever come to lemmy, the correct path is to ban as soon as they shou their true colors and start to throw shit around.

It only requires a few probing question to know if someone is in good or bad faith.

When the comment goes into 5 or more replies, it is almost always for sure that the conservative answering is in bad faith (only exception is if they clearly show that they are learning something with the discussion and adapting their viewpoints with each new comment)

I ask you to also be careful!

you don’t need to feed the trolls to help them see the light.

Treat it like an authoritative (but not authoritarian) parent:

You don’t let the kid do whatever inappropriate shit (that is a neglecting parent style), but you do state firmly the rules and give the consequence (authoritative) without making them fear you through spanking or other kinds of abuse (authoritarian).

I agree we should not be authoritarian.

But we should also not be neglectful!

Specific example:

If someone comes saying that trump did a roman salute, the authoritative answer is: “The nazi salute is a roman salute and both are used to promote fascism (link to wikipedia)”.

Simply and blunt, yet “non-judgemental” answer

Now if they reply saying shit like how they are actually different, then just call their bullshit off by saying things like: “I see no reason for someone to defend a roman or nazi salute unless that someone is a nazi. I really hope you aren’t a nazi, but if you are, know that you’re in the wrong. Period.”

Then stop any sort of further replies and start reporting if they keep harping on this (it would be similar to the time out that parents do to younger child).