Aldo on Nostr: nprofile1q…37ytg > "Better in principle" but not in practice, ergo, it doesn't work ...

nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnddaehgu3wwp6kyqpq0lnelsae3zhv6y3kz8jla2fkwjxrpws0j8vehrv54zg7tfsd3p2sf37ytg (nprofile…7ytg)

> "Better in principle" but not in practice, ergo, it doesn't work in "reality" (Cofnas is obsessed with "living in reality")

> "False dichotomy" I didn't say it was an either or. I said that one is better to pursue than the other, just looking at it objectively. I'd rather have a society that prides itself on "egalitarianism" than one based on "yes men" (Trump's "yes men" are also very "diverse" as well, which is an irony in of itself).

> "Might makes right". This theory is cancerous nonsense that never works out long-term (the "mighty" always fall, either due to their own hubris or due to their victims ganging up on them). "Unfortunate reality" my ass. It's the "reality" that sociopaths made and then sold to their people to try and justify their behavior.

> "Depends on elites". Cofnas is saying that he supports elites who want to perpetuate the very same system that led to Trump in the first place (unequal C(r)apitalism), thereby repeating the same cycle. Hardly "elites" worth supporting for their "care for society" nor "elites" with good, forward-thinking ideas. If anything, they are backward-thinking. Those same "elites" were dragged before the guillotine in France for being secret Royalists. Foreshadowing?

> "The implication...". He is against Trump, then for Trump, then against him, then for him, then against... As I wrote earlier, he wants to perpetuate the system that we have now. Trump, in his view, wants to destroy the system. Both are bad, obviously. But there is nothing here about "reform" or "fixing" the problem. THAT is the issue. The system needs to be reformed so that the ordinary man can benefit again (like under FDR; a "New Deal"). Cofnas argues that just revert to "default" and go back to Reaganism (under "high IQ C(r)apitalists") will solve the issues (even though Reaganism destroyed the American economy and society in the long-term).

> "Objectively that's simply false". This is like Stephen Pinker saying violent conflicts have decreased and then cooking the numbers and refusing to give a concrete definition of "violence" to suit his thesis. "Source: Heritage Foundation", I mean come the fuck on.

Even then, any "good" that has happened in the last 50 + years has been brought about by (some) Democrats regulating the excesses of C(r)apitalism, not because of Republicans removing regulation and making the market more pro-C(r)apitalist and libertarian-oriented (Thiel/Musk axis).