“To the Feds, I’ll keep this short, because I do respect what you do for our country. To save you a lengthy investigation, I state plainly that I wasn’t working with anyone. This was fairly trivial: some elementary social engineering, basic CAD, a lot of patience. The spiral notebook, if present, has some straggling notes and To Do lists that illuminate the gist of it. My tech is pretty locked down because I work in engineering so probably not much info there. I do apologize for any strife of traumas but it had to be done. Frankly, these parasites simply had it coming. A reminder: the US has the #1 most expensive healthcare system in the world, yet we rank roughly #42 in life expectancy. United is the [indecipherable] largest company in the US by market cap, behind only Apple, Google, Walmart. It has grown and grown, but as our life expectancy? No the reality is, these [indecipherable] have simply gotten too powerful, and they continue to abuse our country for immense profit because the American public has allwed them to get away with it. Obviously the problem is more complex, but I do not have space, and frankly I do not pretend to be the most qualified person to lay out the full argument. But many have illuminated the corruption and greed (e.g.: Rosenthal, Moore), decades ago and the problems simply remain. It is not an issue of awareness at this point, but clearly power games at play. Evidently I am the first to face it with such brutal honesty.”

Post got removed in .world for not being a “news source” even though Klippenstein is definitely a very established independent journalist, so trying again here I guess.

  • Sundial@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 days ago

    Not many people are pure leftists though. We all have our inherent biases based on things like social class, upbringing, religion, nationality, etc. Just because a consistent framework is there doesn’t mean people just fit so well into it.

    • SoJB@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      17 days ago

      That’s the funny thing about leftism being objectively logically and ethically correct. The framework of theory also consistently addresses those exact points and material conditions.

    • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      17 days ago

      The frameworks are consistent and have “correct” conclusions, which means over time individual biases erode into established tendencies.

      • bloup@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        16 days ago

        It’s important to distinguish within a political philosophy the normative values that inform it and the actual strategy, if any, that it prescribes. Especially on the left, there is an extremely large amount of common ground with respect to normative values, and what distinguishes the different tendencies almost always boils down to little more than arguing about why the other person’s strategy will actually not work and why their strategy is what we need to be doing. But like something else I notice is very rarely do people actually engage with the context of situations and they also think in very absolute terms which makes them feel like by identifying with a particular tendency they are attached to and constrained by it. What’s even more interesting to me is this common ground doesn’t even end at the left and quite frankly even the average politically disengaged individual will agree with so many of the normative values expressed by leftists, and with a thoughtful rhetorical approach can usually be made to see all of these issues for what they are.

        this is all to say that the idea of being any particular kind of “-ist” in the sense that it means you can’t be also at the same time critically engaging with or even simultaneously identifying with other kinds of “-isms” has for a very long time felt extremely incoherent to me and even worse is when people try to project these labels with certainty (typically at the exclusion of other possible labels, no less, other labels which are simply assumed to be impossible to synthesize together) onto others on the basis of random public statements they have made.

      • Sundial@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        16 days ago

        Rarely. Humans can be very inconsistent due to their inherent biases and emotions. If what you say were true we would have been able to observe it take place by now.