this post was submitted on 09 May 2024
69 points (94.8% liked)

politics

19145 readers
2723 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 22 points 6 months ago (3 children)

Sabotage oil and gas infrastructure?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 6 months ago (1 children)

This one is probably bad but I actually really like it.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I’m really into the book “Ministry of the Future”. It has a lot of shit like that in it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I read that last year, actually. Potential spoilers:

Just difference of opinion but I wasn't a fan. I obviously think the subject matter is interesting and I liked the sociopolitical basis of the story. But I felt it was bogged way down by an author who was trying to make several parts into some weirdly verbose report to give it a sense of realism (I seem to recall an entire chapter being a written-out list of fictional committee names that were being created to fight climate change). At the same time, when he was writing about the terrorist attacks like swarms of drones attacking infrastructure, it felt really vague and Hollywood, dare I say, even boomer-esque. Just a bit lofty for the sake of action.

You're in good company though, I remember reddit fuckin loved that book so it's probably just not for me. I'm also sensitive to hype and it didn't live up to it.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, not every book is for everyone. Doesn’t really change whether or not I liked the book.

The book has flaws for sure, but it seemed like it was almost as alarmist as it should be. It seemed utopian to me in the end. He completely missed out on how fascists are going to react to all this for instance.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

Yeah, I agree. We need more books like it these days...

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

And animal agriculture

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

Have to be careful on this one as you don't want to cause more harm than good. Make sure it's all focused on disabling pumps and valves while not increasing the likelihood of releases.

Some idiots would go around blowing things up causing massive environmental damage when what we really want to do is just leave the stuff in the tanks it's already in, or in the ground it's already in.