But you still made the comment you did. As I said, criticism is and has always been allowed.

Criticism by itself doesn’t accomplish anything. Sure, mollifying centrists has not been ideal, but unless there’s an actionable alternative, it’s the best we’ve got at the moment. I’m all for alternatives, I just see a lot of social inertia and none of the alternatives I see are capable of offering a better outcome in the face of that inertia.

If you have a suggestion to elevate progressives into office, I would sincerely love to hear it; that is my preferred outcome. But complaining about the dominant strategy without offering an actionable alternative is, as the top comment identified, splitting the left.

Criticism has always been allowed, you’re doing it now. How do you actually secure a better alternative?

What is your actionable alternative?

I’d say more “select from” than “churn out”. It’s not about generating a hypothesis, it’s about having a collection of hypotheses and deciding which should be your default until additional evidence is provided.

Hanlon’s razor says “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity”, and “adequately” is pulling at least as much weight as “never”. If stupidity becomes a less adequate explanation, nothing stops you from considering malice as an alternative.

People use things wrong all the time, sometimes the vast majority of the time (e.g. “literally”). Just because people use a concept pseudologically doesn’t make it intrinsically pseudological.

But razors aren’t supposed to be logic in the first place. They’re not objective analytical tools to arrive at a conclusion, because they weren’t designed to be. They’re framing tools to help establish an initial hypothesis.

Occam’s razor doesn’t claim that the simplest explanation is true, it merely says it’s the most practical assumption, all else being equal. If additional data provides more support for a more complicated explanation, Occam’s really doesn’t require you to cling to the simpler one.

Similarly Hanlon’s razor doesn’t claim that stupidity is universally a better explanation than malice, only that is the most practical assumption, all else being equal. It does not require you to ignore patterns of behavior that shift the likelihood toward malice.

Hey now, it’s not clear that it was accidental.

I can see that, but you can always focus on meeting in person. Just use tech to vaguely call meetings.

Locally

Civilization is basically just bureaucracy integrated over population. Some people figure out how to game the system via the chasm of abstraction between; that’s a function of any sufficiently complex system, look at the speed running community

But ultimately, civilization is just people. All the bureaucracy placed on top of it is just a collection of systems made by people to coordinate themselves. A lot of the dark theatrics are the result of the population becoming so vast that even at the lowest levels, the bureaucracy is distant and abstract. That abstraction alienates people from one another, so they only really know how to interact through the lens of that bureaucracy

The optimism is that you can engage your community. You can meet your neighbors, learn their trades and share yours, start a group chat. You can organize barter networks, childcare rotations, handyman services, mutual aid.

You can join local political groups. Start local political groups. Go to protests and meet people in neighboring areas. Network.

You can promote candidates for local office, and encourage others in your network to do so. You can run for local office, and encourage others in your network to do so. We’ve seen what the other side is offering so far as administrative competence, you think you’re worse?

Go to local events. Talk to your neighbors. Organize with your neighbors. The big system is very top down in its perspective, but it’s really ultimately dependent on the composite people. You can organize the people from the bottom up, and get your friends in nearby neighborhoods to do the same.

If all the neighborhoods are organized, bloodless revolution slides quite comfortably into the realm of plausible futures.

Google “ferengi rule 34”

Bookmark the stuff that warrants a bookmark.

Close the stuff I’m not as interested in as I thought I’d be.

Group remaining tabs by subject (books, articles, products, etc. I have a system).

Close redundant tabs in groups.

Is there a reference I’m not getting? Guerilla action is grassroots, but there’s non-guerilla grassroots action

I’d consider that a subset.

Yeah tankie praxis only works if you actually have the tanks. And not just some tanks, the tanks. You need the military apparatus of the state, and its associated monopoly on violence, to make that work.

It was never going to work when the opponent is the existing military. It’s gotta be grassroots, nothing else is gonna work. Build your community. Like actually, do it.

The theory I’ve read is that lots of people are into a bit of the taboo/forbidden partner aspect of an attraction they have toward a real person in their life: their neighbor, platonic friend, co-worker, etc. But most of these connections don’t really feel all that taboo when it’s someone else, so the “step-” angle is just a generic stand in that carries the forbidden aspect without going too far.

Look into the kabbalistic concept of tzimtzum, it’s an interesting take.

Y’know, if anywhere was going to have an ATM machine, it would probably be Costco

That would be included prominently in the “sweeping socialist reform”. Absolutely a high priority, but negligible odds of success under the current composition.

Priority one is achieving a Congress that will pass RCV.

They still do good things sometimes, they generally do fewer and less bad things. Definitely need to be entirely reformed, but practically that’s a future us problem.

Priority one is dismantling the other party. Blue collar Americans love socialism when you don’t call it that. Start a “right wing” party that’s just leftism wrapped up in Jesus and 'Murica. Split the right, let the neo-libs stabilize things for a couple cycles while the 'Murica party siphons the working class from Republicans. Then, after the Republican party is dead, hard shift on the left from Democrat to 'Murica, massive mandate, start passing sweeping socialist reform.

I think the main point is “the desire and the power”. There are a few with desire, but without numbers they don’t have the power. The more people with desire we can get into seats, the more power they’ll have, collectively, to do something.

A roofer listens to his heart, not his wallet