And it seems like a lot of Americans don’t understand FPTP or the Electoral College, or even the amount of voter suppression there is. Your vote only counts (and only maybe) if you live in a swing state. The votes in rural areas count for way more than in urban ones but those are already captured by R. Let’s not even get into the other branches of government:

Landholders ought to have a share in the government, to support these invaluable interests, and to balance and check the other. They ought to be so constituted as to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority. The senate, therefore, ought to be this body; and to answer these purposes, they ought to have permanency and stability.

• James Madison

Some of the dumber white libs I’ve talked to honestly believe 51% of American voters voted for Trump 🤣

They don’t know what voting does or how it works but they’re sure it’s the only reasonable solution!

Some festivities… or even a party of sorts.

Capitalist theorists, you say? I call them astrologers for the wealthy.

That’s the neat part, it’s a scam

Hey, check this out, you might find it interesting. From Parenti’s Contrary Notions:

If what passes for objectivity is little more than a culturally defined self-confirming symbolic environment, and if real objectivity—whatever that might be—is unattainable, then it would seem that we are left in the grip of a subjectivism in which one paradigm is about as reliable (or unreliable) as another. And we are faced with the unhappy conclusion that the search for social truth involves little more than choosing from a variety of illusory symbolic configurations. As David Hume argued over two centuries ago, the problem of what constitutes reality in our images can never be resolved since our images can only be compared with other images and never with reality itself.

Good point

Sure, objective morality is the belief that certain actions are inherently right or wrong, regardless of individual opinions or cultural beliefs, that moral truths exist independently and can be universally recognized. The second question I haven’t the slightest idea, but it would be interesting to find out.

I don’t have a position, I was asking a question.

the world doesn’t even have objective morality

Deductions based on subjective information got you here. Or did you objectively observe (through, for example, objective experimentation) that there is no objective morality?

That’s what therapygary was trying to tell you, but not sure why they expected your subjective experience to realize the contradiction it itself is based on, lol.

Making a meme where your position is in the ‘right’, doesn’t make it true or even sensical.

Great points, I like it. Someone else pointed out that perhaps there’s no objective morality, but perhaps another explanation is that there are no individuals, that’s why it seems like that.

Hmm, that’s a weird opinion. What are you assuming “my position” is?

You mean your subjective experience?

XD

Poor guy, he will never be free of that stigma XD

evil people with integrity are usually just racist

lmao spot on. You can have integrity and shitty principles (evil) or integrity and good principles (good), so I don’t really see it as corruption vs. integrity.

Yes, I think greed is definitely there in the mix somewhere.

Wow that’s good!