7 ms·

How about over 60? That's more likely to have a positive effect on society

• qup 2y ago
  How's that?
  • immibis 2y ago
    [flagged]
    • Juden1488 2y ago
      [dead]
    • NotLongNow 2y ago
      [flagged]
    • pc86 2y ago
      Here's a crazy thought maybe it's not actually fascism.
      • lern_too_spel 2y ago
        Then why do the people he hand-picked say it is? Should I ignore the words coming out of their mouths and pens? Should I ignore the words coming out of Trump's own mouth? Then what should I use to determine whether it's fascism or not?
        • roenxi 2y ago
          That is actually a pretty interesting question, fascism doesn't seem to have any actual meaning. It is very hard to outline what a "fascist" is unless they self-identify. I thought briefly in writing this comment and I can't actually rule out Trump being a fascist, based on the fact that any policy that isn't explicitly in the liberal or communist traditions may technically be fascist. Anyway; it has reached the point where I no longer believe people who claim Trump said something negative. Back in the 2010s I spent enough time reading up primary sources to reveal it was a misquote. Possibly a malicious misinterpretation, possibly the man just makes people so emotional that they can't listen to him for a full minute and try to interpret with a neutral lens. He appears to be close to a saint given how much time his opponents have to spend making up stuff about him to dislike. Realistically there are a lot of real problems that people should focus on; like bad policies.
          • lern_too_spel 2y ago
            Within the past 24 hours, you said that "poisoning the blood of this country" is "Nazi rhetoric." Can you explain how both of Trump's recent usages of that "Nazi rhetoric" were misquoted?
            • roenxi 2y ago
              Literally all the links provided were nbcnews.com. As far as I'm concerned there may as well be no evidence at all that Trump said it. They may be reliable on other topics but they aren't a credible source of reporting on what Trump says. Like I said, I followed up on that sort of thing in the 2010s and by now I'm happy to just ignore them as discredited. As far as I'm aware Trump was running on deporting illegal immigrants. He's not planning on gassing anyone. Except maybe with all the hot air he blows, heh.
              • lern_too_spel 2y ago
                The NBC News links gave sources. Here they are: https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/111593149429973351 https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/1115931494299... https://youtu.be/RKPFjAhd3KQ https://youtu.be/RKPFjAhd3KQ
                • roenxi 2y ago
                  And even in 40 seconds of context, what do we get? He's not planning on gassing the Jews. He's not advocating rolling back democracy. He's not even talking about invading Russia (something of a rarity these days). He is, in fact, talking about that wall of his that has made the press so much for the last 8 years. Between that and bumping abortion from a Federal to State jurisdiction we may indeed be dealing with Hitler reborn. He represents the faction of US politics that wants to enforce a secure border and his rhetoric is ugly. That is pretty normal for anti-migration rhetoric, by the way. It makes him nasty, maybe even cruel, but not a fascist. This is why it is a waste of time trying to follow up NBC News articles. They're distracting from a real issue (migration, border security, what have you) with ... I don't even know how to characterise it. Abuse to try and shut people up, perhaps. Playing silly gotcha games, maybe. That quote isn't Trump trying to revive Nazi policies, as we all might have expected from the outset.
      • threeseed 2y ago
        Which of the characteristics do you not think Trump embodies: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism It seems pretty text book to me.
        • avazhi 2y ago
          Militarism and ‘strong regimentation of society’ are two that very obviously don’t apply to Trumpian politics. Trump was an isolationist militarily in his first term - an expansionist nationalist military is a sine qua non of fascism. And Trump’s fetish for deregulation works against the second one.
          • threeseed 2y ago
            > Fascism rejects the view that violence is inherently negative or pointless but rather views imperialism, political violence, and war as means to national rejuvenation Trump has advocated for nationalist, North Korean style military parades and the use of the military against protesters etc. And there this myth of him being anti-interventionist but America was very active in Syria during his term.
            • avazhi 2y ago
              I think you are conflating nationalism and fascism. Nationalism has a lot of gradations, and while it can be a subset of fascism it isn't inherently fascistic. Fukuyama said: "But it is not clear that nationalism represents an irreconcilable contradiction in the heart of liberalism. In the first place, nationalism is not one single phenomenon but several, ranging from mild cultural nostalgia to the highly organized and elaborately articulated doctrine of National Socialism." And using the military against mobs of people that are ransacking cities is not under any construction 'fascism' - property rights are after all pretty important in the Western Anglo-Saxon tradition and using force to protect property rights is not 'fascism'. Not sure what you mean by America being active militarily in Syria, either - are you referring to Trump ordering the bombing of ISIS targets? By that logic when Obama ordered the Navy Seals to kill bin Laden the US was engaged in a fascistic military adventure in Pakistan which... would probably make you the only person in the world to think that. Trump is a lot of things. A fascist as that word is understood by historians is not one of them.
    • EasyMark 2y ago
      I think leopards are the animal you're looking for here.
      • nick3443 2y ago
        Dingoes mate
• nelox 2y ago
  Even better, how about <16 to >16?
  • lnxg33k1 2y ago
    I've always been a supporter of those, my view on democracy is not to be mature enough, but to be a part of society with needs and ideas, school students neee to be represented because they're part of a society
• skhr0680 2y ago
  Countries around the world need to bite the bullet and implement that for voting too.
  • omeid2 2y ago
    Voting rights should be proportional to remaining quality-adjusted life years remaining based on life expectancy. I am joking of course, but there is something to ponder about the growing number of childless people over 40 voting with little concern for the long term.
    • Nursie 2y ago
      As a childless person over 40, wtf are you talking about? People don't all vote purely on self-interest, some of us vote on how we think human society should be run, and what we think is genuinely best for everyone. Not just for our own immediate bottom line. This whole ageist line of reasoning is pretty offensive.
      • kortilla 2y ago
        It’s not ageism so much as they are prejudiced against people not raising children. We childless folk have had a quiet 25ish years and now the pendulum seems to be swinging back the other direction. I’ve noticed quite an uptick in memes about childless people being selfish monsters and taking away our voting rights is right in line with that.
        • kredd 2y ago
          Doesn’t really matter when the percentage of childless adults is growing every year. I just scoff and move on.
      • omeid2 2y ago
        Exceptio probat regulam.
        • 2y ago
• EasyMark 2y ago
  Last I checked if you're over 60 then you're an Adult and can do adult things. You have long since stopped growing into your body by then. Children are not finished yet, and continue to have their brains mature and grow into the early 20s
  • tyre 2y ago
    and in advanced age there is cognitive decline the median seventy-five year old’s brain is not in the same condition as the median thirty year old’s
    • belfalas 2y ago
      75 and 60 are vastly different.
    • foxglacier 2y ago
      It doesn't matter because the 35 year old isn't using his brain to vote anyway. He's just going by what social media, the news, and peer pressure leads him to. If anything, an older person has better established understanding of the world even if they're not better at working things out.
      • tyre 2y ago
        Anecdotally the elderly in my life vote far more off of vibes than my immediate social circle does. You could say it’s a bubble or bias, but it’s the difference between coherent programs and policy decisions vs “anti-freedom” or “socialism”
        • foxglacier 2y ago
          You actually know people who vote because of the programs and policies the candidates are expected to implement? I know people often pretend to but from what I've seen, it's always just the ones that the media has told them to think about and only used to justify favoring whoever they've already chosen anyway. I don't think it's even reasonable to expect voters to pay attention to such details because there are too many for everyone to be an expert on but if they vote based on broad philosophies like freedom or socialism, they can expect the politicians will make the many small decisions that more-or-less align with that.
• lnxg33k1 2y ago
  How about we only allow those who have our same ideas? That's great for democracy, true democratic values
• safety1st 2y ago
  [flagged]
  • cultofmetatron 2y ago
    > We don't have any studies showing that old people harm society using social media an an american who just watched the recent election go down, I have to strongly disaagree with this.
    • safety1st 2y ago
      [flagged]
    • tgv 2y ago
      That's obviously a biased statement. I happen to share your bias toward the election outcome, but I'm afraid analysis shows that GenZ has moved towards Republican in comparison with similar aged voters 4 and 8 years ago, while people over 60 have moved towards Dems. So your assumptions are not correct, apart from the fact that they're not even relevant to the discussion about the influence of social media (and mobile phones) on young people.
    • _Algernon_ 2y ago
      How can you justify that view? Harris lost because of voter turnout. I don't see how >60s are to blame for that. I also don't see how >60s are to be blamed for young people moving right.
      • lupusreal 2y ago
        > I also don't see how >60s are to be blamed for young people moving right. Rebelling against the perceived establishment as presented to them by their teachers (some of whom are that old) probably had something to do with it. (Their parents too, but their parents aren't >60) Young men particularly have been getting dosed with idpol messaging about men by their predominantly female teachers from a young age. Anecdotally, there's also a general thing where the older a teacher gets the more embittered by experience they become, and they become more likely to fall into negative behavior patterns like having "nemesis students" they like to pick on, or exhibiting flagrant bias in the classroom against an entire gender.
• ajrehg 2y ago
  Do you attribute the Trump victory to people over 60? What about German right wing parties? I assume similar can be found in the U.S., but I did not have time: https://www.nzz.ch/english/why-are-young-germans-voting-for-the-far-right-ld.1846613 https://www.nzz.ch/english/why-are-young-germans-voting-for-... The most insane left culture warriors who wanted to relive a second spring on the other hand are indeed approaching or over 60. Fake culture warriors like Pelosi and Biden are over 80. Fake culture warriors in software organizations like Python are approaching or over 60. You know, the exact same people who read Ayn Rand and supported ESR when it was politically expedient for their careers 20 years ago, because they always go with the herd, no matter how stupid it is. These culture warriors, through their purges and insane statements, have so thoroughly destroyed any trust in the Democrats that there is a landslide victory for Trump now. It will take years to restore that confidence.
• shirro 2y ago
  The claim is that it protects the mental health and welfare of young people. Young people have special protection from the law in many regards including sexual consent, contracts, employment etc. A 60 year old is expected to have the capacity to make informed choices. Whether they do is down to personal responsibility. Many of us will be 60 one day.
• georgebarnett 2y ago
  What sort of positive effect would you expect? What do you think is wrong with people over 60?
• the5avage 2y ago
  Thats too simple. The problem is that a lot of democracies have a demography skewed towards old people and at the same time a simple majority can dictate over s.th. like a minority of 30% of the voters.