Egon

joined 2 years ago
[–] Egon@hexbear.net 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

First off thank you for your answer. I am writing this follow-up because I feel my question was phrased poorly and thus led to an answer to a different query than the one I had in my head.

I'm not talking about passing judgement on others, but I can see how that's what I described with my phrasing. I'm also not talking about caring about what others spend their money on, but again, I phrased it poorly.

If I give financial aid anonymously to someone , whom I know abuses drugs which can kill them*, and I know this person is stuck in a pattern of financial aid they needed for housing or food on drugs instead, and I keep giving them money whilst they complain that their drug habit has gotten worse, and they then OD...
IF all of this in this very long and needlessly complex hypothetical happened, would I not then be some kind of enabler? Isn't there a point where me giving money unconditionally to someone who spends it on harmful and addictive narcotics (who complains about their habit) becomes hurtful instead of helpful?

  • I specify this to make it more extreme in order to more clearly phrame what I am asking about, not in order to eliminate nuance or grey zones. Its easier to draw the line here than with less harmful drugs, and I feel like that's a bit of a pitfall of a discussion which isn't really what I'm trying to ask about, but I also feel the need to acknowledge that by making it about OD'ing I am phraming the discussion in a certain way. So therefore this footnote.
[–] Egon@hexbear.net 21 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Isn't there a point where you just become an enabler though? I don't know if you can OD on meth, but if someone abused heroine and a community financed that abuse until the user OD'ed, wouldn't that kind of be on the community?

I'm genuinely asking by the way, not trying to do some weird debate thing of thinking up some odd hypothetical or some shitty rhetorical framing in order to shame people for helping. The example is just to explain my thought process.

I expect it's the kinda thing that doesn't have a clear answer, but I feel like there's also people who know a lot more than me about mutual aid, who will have a much better answer.

[–] Egon@hexbear.net 26 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

They did show them: Corrupt government with ineffecient bureaucracies focused on giving money to an old boys club rather than do what the government ostensibly claims it exists to do.

Clarifyer: I know you're referring to that dumbass redditor joke, I just felt like being cheeky

[–] Egon@hexbear.net 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Seizing power and building a new society under your type of government is a win. Everything else is a means to that end

[–] Egon@hexbear.net 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

This doesn't in any way contradict the previous statement, what are you trying to say?

[–] Egon@hexbear.net 52 points 1 year ago (1 children)

WHAT THE FUCK DOES AUTHORITARIAN MEAN YOU PEOPLE NEVER DEFINE IT ITS JUST AN ADJECTIVE MEANT TO SIGNIFY "BAD FOREIGN GOVERNMENT" ITS DUMB AS FUCK INTERROGATE YOUR OWN VOCABULARY

[–] Egon@hexbear.net 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Gustavo Fring and Hectors dialects make me sad. Don eladio 🤮

[–] Egon@hexbear.net 45 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Their secret police our undercover cops.
Also define totalitarian without using the words authoritarian or tankie.

I hate these people lukashenko-tired

[–] Egon@hexbear.net 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

WELCOME TO THE HOLODOME, GIVE ME YOUR GRAIN stalin-spoonstalin-gun-2
Sorry the way you spelled it made me think it

[–] Egon@hexbear.net 3 points 1 year ago

We had a Prime Minister write a book called "Minimal State" which more or less argued we should be like the US. This was in the 00's so fine I guess, but the idea is still very popular which I don't get at all. How can you look at the US in 2024 and think "yeah, that's headed in the right direction"

[–] Egon@hexbear.net 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Don't worry, it'll all be sunshine and lollypops in the 9-12 months leading up to the election + the media is gonna find a flat-earther or something from SF who they can make out to represent the entire leftwing, and they'll make another documentary about Lazy Robert. Lars Løkke will make another new party which will actually be left-wing this time (he says so himself!) which the media will give immense coverage whilst saying nothing of value and also make out to be it's own block or something.

This isn't biased coverage because they get equal amounts of complaints from "both sides", nevermind the complaints from the right is about showing brown people on TV and the complaints from the left is "please interview us when you're going to cover us or at least not directly lie please"

I am not bitter about the moderates at all.

view more: ‹ prev next ›