▲ 1208 ▼ "I would never bully someone for being autistic!" (fedia.io) submitted 2 years ago by SuddenDownpour@sh.itjust.works to c/autism@lemmy.world 195 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 23 points 2 years ago (3 children) Hexbear isn't a leftist space. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Zozano@lemy.lol 13 points 2 years ago I would say they're "alt-left" in the derogatory sense. permalink fedilink source parent [–] ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) They're leftist by virtue of being tankies. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 years ago* (1 child) Tankies aren't leftists; I've yet to read a coherent and useful way of defining "leftist" that includes tankies as well as other groups that identify as such. That is to say, if we allow for the existence of entities that are mistaken or lie about being leftist, we are forced to exclude tankies. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kichae@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 years ago (1 child) But their unity-through-force ideology, which is totally not just an excuse to be edgy and feel morally superior, but really and truly a coherent belief system, is definitely practical and pure, and not some slighly skewed picture of fascism with a handful of socialist buzzword decals slapped on top. So, therefore, Left! . . . /s juuuuuuust in case permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 years ago Well I can honestly say I can't argue with that. 😂 permalink fedilink source parent [+] John_McMurray@lemmy.world -8 points 2 years ago (1 child) Lol. Ok permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 years ago* (1 child) I looked through your comments to understand why you reacted like that, and I realized you're either wildly politically illiterate or you can't do math. When your supporting argument for Wyoming being underrepresented is "they have 1 congress person" instead of an argument about the number per population it's kinda hard to tell which it is. The talk about the state being "big" makes me suspect it's the former, however. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] John_McMurray@lemmy.world -4 points 2 years ago (1 child) How many more square miles do you want that one person to represent, Professor? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 years ago* (1 child) Take some number of citizens C. If the population of the state is P, let the number of Representatives (R) be P/C, rounded up [R=ceil(P/C)]. Note how land area is not a part of the formula. If Texas were the size of Detroit while maintaining the total population size, would you argue in favor of reducing their representatives to 1 or even 0? If the answer is yes, you need to take a civics class. Your question is like asking how much wax you need to make a crayon be blue; the hue of the crayon is entirely independent of the total amount of wax. Hopefully that's an analogy you understand. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] John_McMurray@lemmy.world -4 points 2 years ago [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Zozano@lemy.lol 13 points 2 years ago I would say they're "alt-left" in the derogatory sense. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 years ago (1 child) They're leftist by virtue of being tankies. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 years ago* (1 child) Tankies aren't leftists; I've yet to read a coherent and useful way of defining "leftist" that includes tankies as well as other groups that identify as such. That is to say, if we allow for the existence of entities that are mistaken or lie about being leftist, we are forced to exclude tankies. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kichae@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 years ago (1 child) But their unity-through-force ideology, which is totally not just an excuse to be edgy and feel morally superior, but really and truly a coherent belief system, is definitely practical and pure, and not some slighly skewed picture of fascism with a handful of socialist buzzword decals slapped on top. So, therefore, Left! . . . /s juuuuuuust in case permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 years ago Well I can honestly say I can't argue with that. 😂 permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 years ago* (1 child) Tankies aren't leftists; I've yet to read a coherent and useful way of defining "leftist" that includes tankies as well as other groups that identify as such. That is to say, if we allow for the existence of entities that are mistaken or lie about being leftist, we are forced to exclude tankies. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Kichae@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 years ago (1 child) But their unity-through-force ideology, which is totally not just an excuse to be edgy and feel morally superior, but really and truly a coherent belief system, is definitely practical and pure, and not some slighly skewed picture of fascism with a handful of socialist buzzword decals slapped on top. So, therefore, Left! . . . /s juuuuuuust in case permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 years ago Well I can honestly say I can't argue with that. 😂 permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Kichae@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 years ago (1 child) But their unity-through-force ideology, which is totally not just an excuse to be edgy and feel morally superior, but really and truly a coherent belief system, is definitely practical and pure, and not some slighly skewed picture of fascism with a handful of socialist buzzword decals slapped on top. So, therefore, Left! . . . /s juuuuuuust in case permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 years ago Well I can honestly say I can't argue with that. 😂 permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 years ago Well I can honestly say I can't argue with that. 😂 permalink fedilink source parent
[+] John_McMurray@lemmy.world -8 points 2 years ago (1 child) Lol. Ok permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 years ago* (1 child) I looked through your comments to understand why you reacted like that, and I realized you're either wildly politically illiterate or you can't do math. When your supporting argument for Wyoming being underrepresented is "they have 1 congress person" instead of an argument about the number per population it's kinda hard to tell which it is. The talk about the state being "big" makes me suspect it's the former, however. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] John_McMurray@lemmy.world -4 points 2 years ago (1 child) How many more square miles do you want that one person to represent, Professor? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 years ago* (1 child) Take some number of citizens C. If the population of the state is P, let the number of Representatives (R) be P/C, rounded up [R=ceil(P/C)]. Note how land area is not a part of the formula. If Texas were the size of Detroit while maintaining the total population size, would you argue in favor of reducing their representatives to 1 or even 0? If the answer is yes, you need to take a civics class. Your question is like asking how much wax you need to make a crayon be blue; the hue of the crayon is entirely independent of the total amount of wax. Hopefully that's an analogy you understand. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] John_McMurray@lemmy.world -4 points 2 years ago [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 years ago* (1 child) I looked through your comments to understand why you reacted like that, and I realized you're either wildly politically illiterate or you can't do math. When your supporting argument for Wyoming being underrepresented is "they have 1 congress person" instead of an argument about the number per population it's kinda hard to tell which it is. The talk about the state being "big" makes me suspect it's the former, however. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] John_McMurray@lemmy.world -4 points 2 years ago (1 child) How many more square miles do you want that one person to represent, Professor? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 years ago* (1 child) Take some number of citizens C. If the population of the state is P, let the number of Representatives (R) be P/C, rounded up [R=ceil(P/C)]. Note how land area is not a part of the formula. If Texas were the size of Detroit while maintaining the total population size, would you argue in favor of reducing their representatives to 1 or even 0? If the answer is yes, you need to take a civics class. Your question is like asking how much wax you need to make a crayon be blue; the hue of the crayon is entirely independent of the total amount of wax. Hopefully that's an analogy you understand. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] John_McMurray@lemmy.world -4 points 2 years ago [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] John_McMurray@lemmy.world -4 points 2 years ago (1 child) How many more square miles do you want that one person to represent, Professor? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 years ago* (1 child) Take some number of citizens C. If the population of the state is P, let the number of Representatives (R) be P/C, rounded up [R=ceil(P/C)]. Note how land area is not a part of the formula. If Texas were the size of Detroit while maintaining the total population size, would you argue in favor of reducing their representatives to 1 or even 0? If the answer is yes, you need to take a civics class. Your question is like asking how much wax you need to make a crayon be blue; the hue of the crayon is entirely independent of the total amount of wax. Hopefully that's an analogy you understand. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] John_McMurray@lemmy.world -4 points 2 years ago [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 years ago* (1 child) Take some number of citizens C. If the population of the state is P, let the number of Representatives (R) be P/C, rounded up [R=ceil(P/C)]. Note how land area is not a part of the formula. If Texas were the size of Detroit while maintaining the total population size, would you argue in favor of reducing their representatives to 1 or even 0? If the answer is yes, you need to take a civics class. Your question is like asking how much wax you need to make a crayon be blue; the hue of the crayon is entirely independent of the total amount of wax. Hopefully that's an analogy you understand. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] John_McMurray@lemmy.world -4 points 2 years ago [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent
[+] John_McMurray@lemmy.world -4 points 2 years ago [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent
