4 ms·
By the time I'm dead in 2070 we'll have two dictionaries, one for the left and one for the right. At least we'll have flying cars.
by coding123 4y ago
By the time I'm dead in 2070 we'll have two dictionaries, one for the left and one for the right.
At least we'll have flying cars.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- hotpotamus 4y agoConservapedia is long established.
- wahern 4y agoPeople seem to underestimate the degree to which political groups internalize their opponents arguments, or even occasionally swap sides. For every dispute in the current moment, I could identify many more prior disputes where one group now agrees with their opponent's original claim. (Of course, this begs the question of group continuity, but either way the consequence is the same--partisan differences generally don't grow unbounded.) American conservatives today have internalized many mid-20th century liberal civil rights arguments, especially regarding 1st Amendment jurisprudence. Conversely, over the past several decades conservatives have been so successful in selling constitutional Originalism that liberals now reflexively (and without any sense of irony) resort to making Originalist claims. Indeed, one reason conservatives don't realize they've adopted what not too long ago were extremely far left beliefs is because of exhaustive efforts to re-contextualize them in terms of newly revealed historical narratives. The more general belief that history can indisputably resolve claims has slowly been internalized by liberals, too. It's why both sides now endlessly bicker over historical narratives and regularly put forth ever more bizarre and facially false historical claims. Somewhat similarly, conservatives and liberals seem to cycle through periods where one side or the other relies on "science" to provide irrefutable answers. In another few decades don't be surprised if conservatives become stalwart defenders of programs and rules intended to address global warming, while liberals advocate for programs seemingly in conflict.
- DontchaKnowit 4y agoGod this is such a good comment. Absolutely yes. It is such an absurd clown show. I've heard politics compared to professional wrestling and I feel that is very apt.
- mixmastamyk 4y agoWould be cool if there were a list of these somewhere, but it would be an lot of research work.
- Mountain_Skies 4y agoIt'd need to be temporal in nature since both sides would gleefully swap definitions depending on who is in the White House at the time.
- viraptor 4y agoI'm not sure how that applies here. What are the left/right sides of the disputed change? (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Recession&diff=1100966700&oldid=1100955875 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Recession&diff=11...)
- Ekaros 4y agoI'm rather doubtful about one of those... And it is the flying cars.
- Schroedingersat 4y agoJust redefine "flying" as weighing 5 tonnes and being covered with anti-pedestrian spikes and you're all good.
- Mountain_Skies 4y agoWe essentially did something similar with the hoverboard craze a few years back. Ten years ago no one would have said a hoverboard should roll around on wheels but now they do.