3 ms·

sounds like you are saying that "people should just" stop making that argument and that "people should just" pass legislation. Most of what you said can be app

sounds like you are saying that "people should just" stop making that argument and that "people should just" pass legislation. Most of what you said can be applied reflexively. Humans will and agency is the foundation of society. It is required to pass legislation or taxes as well.

havblue 1y ago
At the risk of splitting hairs, I was suggesting that people "promote the right to repair" more and not necessarily "pass legislation". While I agree that it's a good goal to buy less plastic junk, the subject probably needs more of a positive narrative behind it to gain traction. Repairability is a positive way to look at our stuff (eg speed queens and Toyotas last forever!). Plastic junk is a negative.
- s1artibartfast 1y ago
  We probably agree in our interests. Almost nobody is for "plastic junk", described as such. Im not opposed to repair rights in general. I think it is relatively niche, but that isn't a reason to oppose it (people can be for multiple thing). What I do think is powerful is cultivating anti-consumerism or selective consumption behavior and belief. The desire for reparability falls within within this.
tombert 1y ago
Well, no, when I say "people should just" arguments, I'm referring to arguments that talk about society at large. I think those are bad arguments. I didn't say "people should stop", I just think it's a bad argument, they're obviously free to make bad arguments. I wouldn't take that right away from them even if I could. "People should just" pass legislation would be specific to congress, so not quite the same thing, or at least not the kind of argument that I was referring to. You're free to think it's a dumb argument but there's a slight pedantic difference.
- s1artibartfast 1y ago
  >People should just" pass legislation would be specific to congress, so not quite the same thing, or at least not the kind of argument that I was referring to. Isn't that even worse? In that case it's entirely externalizing the problem. I think I take the opposite position to you. I think that arguments (or discussions) about society at large are the most important and critical. I think there is a common trend to ignore and dismiss the importance of decentralized social values and individual choice, instead only focusing on concrete policy proposals. The latter is almost never productive without consensus on the former. If 90% of people want disposable crap, it will be difficult to shove a law down their throat preventing them from getting it. Either way, as a result of being triggered by social opinions, you seems to miss the point of the parent post, namely, that right to repair only addresses a tiny fraction of consumerism, nor is it a prerequisite to buy less garbage in general. The solution to people buying single use toys and inflatable Jacuzzis on Amazon is not to mandate their repairability.
  - tombert 1y ago
    I think religion is stupid. I think it’s harmful. If I said “people should just stop being religious” and acted like that in itself was in any way insightful, you would consider that a dumb argument. To be clear, this isn’t to say community outreach is bad or a waste of time. I think getting the larger populous onboard with the narrative that you think is going to make the world best is a good thing, please don’t let me stop you. I have mostly seen these arguments pop up with giving teenagers access to birth control, with conservatives saying stuff like “people should just stop having sex out of wedlock” or something to that effect, and act that argument along is an insightful or useful comment.
    - s1artibartfast 1y ago
      The people were going to church and getting harmed and someone proposed a 5 cent wafer tax as a solution, a response that "no, people actually just need to stop going" is useful and insightful. It points out that the tax doesn't solve the actual problem. It points out that any solution will require people not wanting to go to church. It is not a complete instructions set. I think you are confusing use in normative statements (value judgments or opinions) with instructional statements (step by step how to).

havblue 1y ago

At the risk of splitting hairs, I was suggesting that people "promote the right to repair" more and not necessarily "pass legislation". While I agree that it's a good goal to buy less plastic junk, the subject probably needs more of a positive narrative behind it to gain traction. Repairability is a positive way to look at our stuff (eg speed queens and Toyotas last forever!). Plastic junk is a negative.

s1artibartfast 1y ago
We probably agree in our interests. Almost nobody is for "plastic junk", described as such. Im not opposed to repair rights in general. I think it is relatively niche, but that isn't a reason to oppose it (people can be for multiple thing). What I do think is powerful is cultivating anti-consumerism or selective consumption behavior and belief. The desire for reparability falls within within this.

tombert 1y ago

Well, no, when I say "people should just" arguments, I'm referring to arguments that talk about society at large. I think those are bad arguments. I didn't say "people should stop", I just think it's a bad argument, they're obviously free to make bad arguments. I wouldn't take that right away from them even if I could. "People should just" pass legislation would be specific to congress, so not quite the same thing, or at least not the kind of argument that I was referring to. You're free to think it's a dumb argument but there's a slight pedantic difference.

s1artibartfast 1y ago
>People should just" pass legislation would be specific to congress, so not quite the same thing, or at least not the kind of argument that I was referring to. Isn't that even worse? In that case it's entirely externalizing the problem. I think I take the opposite position to you. I think that arguments (or discussions) about society at large are the most important and critical. I think there is a common trend to ignore and dismiss the importance of decentralized social values and individual choice, instead only focusing on concrete policy proposals. The latter is almost never productive without consensus on the former. If 90% of people want disposable crap, it will be difficult to shove a law down their throat preventing them from getting it. Either way, as a result of being triggered by social opinions, you seems to miss the point of the parent post, namely, that right to repair only addresses a tiny fraction of consumerism, nor is it a prerequisite to buy less garbage in general. The solution to people buying single use toys and inflatable Jacuzzis on Amazon is not to mandate their repairability.
- tombert 1y ago
  I think religion is stupid. I think it’s harmful. If I said “people should just stop being religious” and acted like that in itself was in any way insightful, you would consider that a dumb argument. To be clear, this isn’t to say community outreach is bad or a waste of time. I think getting the larger populous onboard with the narrative that you think is going to make the world best is a good thing, please don’t let me stop you. I have mostly seen these arguments pop up with giving teenagers access to birth control, with conservatives saying stuff like “people should just stop having sex out of wedlock” or something to that effect, and act that argument along is an insightful or useful comment.
  - s1artibartfast 1y ago
    The people were going to church and getting harmed and someone proposed a 5 cent wafer tax as a solution, a response that "no, people actually just need to stop going" is useful and insightful. It points out that the tax doesn't solve the actual problem. It points out that any solution will require people not wanting to go to church. It is not a complete instructions set. I think you are confusing use in normative statements (value judgments or opinions) with instructional statements (step by step how to).