7 ms·

My favourite related blog: https://squareallworthy.tumblr.com/post/163790039847/everyone-will-not-just https://squareallworthy.tumblr.com/post/163790039847/ever

My favourite related blog: https://squareallworthy.tumblr.com/post/163790039847/everyone-will-not-just https://squareallworthy.tumblr.com/post/163790039847/everyon... > If your solution to some problem relies on “If everyone would just...” then you do not have a solution. Everyone is not going to just. At no time in the history of the universe has everyone just, and they’re not going to start now.

anileated 2y ago
It is possible to get everyone to just, it’s just that it only works with smaller sets of everyone. Everyone everyone would certainly never going to just, but you could just pick a smaller everyone (like everyone in this room or something).
- saulpw 2y ago
  It's difficult for me by myself to just, and if the stars align I might be able to get a second person to just, but any group of N>2 it is impossible.
  - anileated 2y ago
    > any group of N>2 it is impossible Not true.
- chii 2y ago
  so as long as it's not everyone, it just works.
  - anileated 2y ago
    No one really means everyone when they say “if everyone could just”. There is always an implied scope. The problem is only when scope is too large. Reduce it and everyone could literally just.
- hinkley 2y ago
  I can get a few people to do a lot of things, and a lot of people to do a few things, but it's rarely 'just'. You have to acknowledge that it isn't free and it might not be easy, but convince them the rewards are worth the effort often and significantly enough that if once in a while they aren't, it still comes out in the wash.
mistermann 2y ago
The world of politics needs some of this sober thinking. That said, Lopatin below also makes a valid counterpoint.
komali2 2y ago
This reminds me of an anarchist article I recently read against voting. https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/william-gillis-the-case-against-voting https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/william-gillis-the-c... > The argument for voting is very Kantian: “act so that if everyone acted so…” and “if no literally one voted then voting would matter again” but if literally no one voted the government wouldn’t maintain legitimacy. And in any case this is not an actual causality. When you vote you don’t magically cause everyone else like you to vote, you are a distinct agent with distinct internal thoughts. Your individual actions have only very weak externalities beyond the direct consequences of your choice/vote. > Unfortunately the delusional thinking behind voting crops up in leftist inclinations in general. They want to build giant organizations, giant armies, with individuals all acting in low return-on-investment ways, in hopes of aggregate impact. They don’t search for opportunities of high impact individual direct action. I was getting into an argument with some people who were yelling at me for voting third party in the USA federal election. Because I'm a Texas voter it's my fault the state won't turn blue. "If all Texas non voters voted, and if all third party voters voted democrat, the state would turn blue." And if only people would just stop committing crime, if only people would just not steal from their employees, if only people would just Do The Right Thing...
- pixelatedindex 2y ago
  Thanks for the link. As someone who feels disenfranchised with a countercultural thread running through, a lot of it resonated with me. I do tend to vote third party as well (maybe not this election given the state of the GOP) — after all, it’s your vote, why give it to someone you don’t agree with? Though I will say that if you didn’t vote, then you don’t get to complain about the system because after all by not voting you’re rejecting a core tenet of the system. I gotta read more things out of this library, this is fun to noodle on.
  - SllX 2y ago
    > Though I will say that if you didn’t vote, then you don’t get to complain about the system because after all by not voting you’re rejecting a core tenet of the system. I gotta read more things out of this library, this is fun to noodle on. As a previous water-carrier for this form of “if you don’t vote you don’t get to complain” propaganda, it’s crap. If there isn’t one single person you want to vote for on the ballot, you’re fully entitled to not vote and complain loudly about it. Making the choice to not exercise the one right does not preclude anyone’s use of the other.
Der_Einzige 2y ago
Authoritarians actually do implement "if everyone would just". Don't pretend like they don't.
- baxtr 2y ago
  If the world could just get rid of authoritarians…
- pwdisswordfishz 2y ago
  Except for the "just" part.
- xboxnolifes 2y ago
  Except they don't. They aren't sitting up in their ivory towers thinking: "if everyone just did X, then everything would be better". No, they are executing plans to get to that outcome. They are recruiting people, coercing people, killing people, manipulating people, seizing power, etc. All working toward their goal.
- barryrandall 2y ago
  They claim to. Their advisors, lieutenants, and propagandists report great success. Their people just know better than to talk about it.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
esperent 2y ago
I kind of disagree with that. Everyone has "just started doing" a ton of things in history. For example: * Brushing their teeth, about a hundred years ago * Regularly washing their hands, maybe 150 years? Less? Etc. Of course you can find people who still don't/do all of these and any other examples you come up with. But the point is that society as a whole has changed their view of these things, and what was abnormal is now normal. Which I'm pretty is what the "if people would just" folk really mean. Nobody is dumb enough to expect 100% of people to change 100% of the time, and it's unfair to their intelligence to assume that's what they mean. Edit: removed one example that was too emotional and distracted from the point.
- bongodongobob 2y ago
  Some people just don't do that.
- reqqqles 2y ago
  I don't do either of those things. * I don't think there's actually any scientific studies proving brushing works, but the toothbrush definitely sheds microplastics into your body. Same with flossing. * I don't see the need to completely obliterate all bacteria living on the surface of a part my body just because I touched my penis for a minute. * I don't use shampoo either, it was brought from India just 200 years ago. Anti-dandruff shampoo isn't real and we don't even know exactly what causes it. Outwardly I'm a pretty normal person.
  - grahamj 2y ago
    > I don't see the need to completely obliterate all bacteria living on the surface of a part my body just because I touched my penis for a minute. It's not because you touched your penis, it's because you're going to touch things in the world that other people will also touch and you respect other people's preference not to touch your penis bacteria because you're not a sociopath. Right?
    - kjs3 2y ago
      * because you're not a sociopath. Right?* I think I spotted the flaw in your line of thinking.
hinkley 2y ago
The four words every software developer dreads: "Why can't you just..."
- switch007 2y ago
  My mind automatically filled in "...add a button to"
  - hinkley 2y ago
    What non technical people think is easy is usually inversely proportional to what programmers think is easy. Making things easy for the user is really fucking hard most of the time.

anileated 2y ago

It is possible to get everyone to just, it’s just that it only works with smaller sets of everyone. Everyone everyone would certainly never going to just, but you could just pick a smaller everyone (like everyone in this room or something).

saulpw 2y ago
It's difficult for me by myself to just, and if the stars align I might be able to get a second person to just, but any group of N>2 it is impossible.
- anileated 2y ago
  > any group of N>2 it is impossible Not true.
chii 2y ago
so as long as it's not everyone, it just works.
- anileated 2y ago
  No one really means everyone when they say “if everyone could just”. There is always an implied scope. The problem is only when scope is too large. Reduce it and everyone could literally just.
hinkley 2y ago
I can get a few people to do a lot of things, and a lot of people to do a few things, but it's rarely 'just'. You have to acknowledge that it isn't free and it might not be easy, but convince them the rewards are worth the effort often and significantly enough that if once in a while they aren't, it still comes out in the wash.

mistermann 2y ago

The world of politics needs some of this sober thinking. That said, Lopatin below also makes a valid counterpoint.

komali2 2y ago

This reminds me of an anarchist article I recently read against voting. https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/william-gillis-the-case-against-voting https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/william-gillis-the-c... > The argument for voting is very Kantian: “act so that if everyone acted so…” and “if no literally one voted then voting would matter again” but if literally no one voted the government wouldn’t maintain legitimacy. And in any case this is not an actual causality. When you vote you don’t magically cause everyone else like you to vote, you are a distinct agent with distinct internal thoughts. Your individual actions have only very weak externalities beyond the direct consequences of your choice/vote. > Unfortunately the delusional thinking behind voting crops up in leftist inclinations in general. They want to build giant organizations, giant armies, with individuals all acting in low return-on-investment ways, in hopes of aggregate impact. They don’t search for opportunities of high impact individual direct action. I was getting into an argument with some people who were yelling at me for voting third party in the USA federal election. Because I'm a Texas voter it's my fault the state won't turn blue. "If all Texas non voters voted, and if all third party voters voted democrat, the state would turn blue." And if only people would just stop committing crime, if only people would just not steal from their employees, if only people would just Do The Right Thing...

pixelatedindex 2y ago
Thanks for the link. As someone who feels disenfranchised with a countercultural thread running through, a lot of it resonated with me. I do tend to vote third party as well (maybe not this election given the state of the GOP) — after all, it’s your vote, why give it to someone you don’t agree with? Though I will say that if you didn’t vote, then you don’t get to complain about the system because after all by not voting you’re rejecting a core tenet of the system. I gotta read more things out of this library, this is fun to noodle on.
- SllX 2y ago
  > Though I will say that if you didn’t vote, then you don’t get to complain about the system because after all by not voting you’re rejecting a core tenet of the system. I gotta read more things out of this library, this is fun to noodle on. As a previous water-carrier for this form of “if you don’t vote you don’t get to complain” propaganda, it’s crap. If there isn’t one single person you want to vote for on the ballot, you’re fully entitled to not vote and complain loudly about it. Making the choice to not exercise the one right does not preclude anyone’s use of the other.

Der_Einzige 2y ago

Authoritarians actually do implement "if everyone would just". Don't pretend like they don't.

baxtr 2y ago
If the world could just get rid of authoritarians…
pwdisswordfishz 2y ago
Except for the "just" part.
xboxnolifes 2y ago
Except they don't. They aren't sitting up in their ivory towers thinking: "if everyone just did X, then everything would be better". No, they are executing plans to get to that outcome. They are recruiting people, coercing people, killing people, manipulating people, seizing power, etc. All working toward their goal.
barryrandall 2y ago
They claim to. Their advisors, lieutenants, and propagandists report great success. Their people just know better than to talk about it.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

esperent 2y ago

I kind of disagree with that. Everyone has "just started doing" a ton of things in history. For example: * Brushing their teeth, about a hundred years ago * Regularly washing their hands, maybe 150 years? Less? Etc. Of course you can find people who still don't/do all of these and any other examples you come up with. But the point is that society as a whole has changed their view of these things, and what was abnormal is now normal. Which I'm pretty is what the "if people would just" folk really mean. Nobody is dumb enough to expect 100% of people to change 100% of the time, and it's unfair to their intelligence to assume that's what they mean. Edit: removed one example that was too emotional and distracted from the point.

bongodongobob 2y ago
Some people just don't do that.
reqqqles 2y ago
I don't do either of those things. * I don't think there's actually any scientific studies proving brushing works, but the toothbrush definitely sheds microplastics into your body. Same with flossing. * I don't see the need to completely obliterate all bacteria living on the surface of a part my body just because I touched my penis for a minute. * I don't use shampoo either, it was brought from India just 200 years ago. Anti-dandruff shampoo isn't real and we don't even know exactly what causes it. Outwardly I'm a pretty normal person.
- grahamj 2y ago
  > I don't see the need to completely obliterate all bacteria living on the surface of a part my body just because I touched my penis for a minute. It's not because you touched your penis, it's because you're going to touch things in the world that other people will also touch and you respect other people's preference not to touch your penis bacteria because you're not a sociopath. Right?
  - kjs3 2y ago
    * because you're not a sociopath. Right?* I think I spotted the flaw in your line of thinking.

hinkley 2y ago

The four words every software developer dreads: "Why can't you just..."

switch007 2y ago
My mind automatically filled in "...add a button to"
- hinkley 2y ago
  What non technical people think is easy is usually inversely proportional to what programmers think is easy. Making things easy for the user is really fucking hard most of the time.