3 ms·
> Really, someone ought to do that for all such scenarios. Agreed. I had a lawyer-gf at one point in my past, and she executed some variant of this on me every
by ci5er 9y ago
> Really, someone ought to do that for all such scenarios.
Agreed. I had a lawyer-gf at one point in my past, and she executed some variant of this on me every time a vacuous proposal left my mouth. Any proposal at all, really.
But, I did not understand the intent behind what you were writing. Can you restate this for those of us slower members of your audience?
- jessaustin 9y agoWell, this whole thread is a glob of implausible proposals justified by implausible assumptions. "We'll eat no more meat or bananas!" "Because we won't burn any more oil!" "Because oil will be illegal!" "Because sustainability!" This is all just silly. Credit to 'workthrowaway27 for responding in reasoned fashion, but that hasn't dissuaded any of the silly folk in their silliness. They suggest catastrophic changes to the lives of everyone on earth, and the reasons they offer are transparently based on personal psychological idiosyncrasies rather than on a practical understanding of reality. All of this tyrannical bullshit won't happen, not only because it shouldn't happen, but also because it can't possibly happen. One does admit it to be a lovely dream, because one understands that lots of people dream of denying the agency of other humans. This is an impulse to indulge in daydreams, not in the political sphere.
- ci5er 9y agoEverything here is hypothetical responding to anecdote. And vice-versa. I have enough life experience to build a rich (and often sorrow-ful) anecdote, but that's all it is. Thank you.