My brain is settling down after having been thoroughly scrambled.
A lot of the time I am annoyed at any further wait time before surreptitiously getting back to work in a way that isn’t so repellant it would turn people like me off from science work were it seen.
Or similarly understated community that again doesn’t turn people like me off from the concept.
And distance from jerks. There aren’t many humans who are mostly jerks, but there are some.
I am cavalier only with pushy, manipulative self-serving jerks, sleazebags and creeps. Carlin was pretty cool wasn’t he. But I can do without “Dudesy”.
For the rest with these damn many people it strains most tempers at times and at other times one’s innate humanism in its non-diseased form salvages one’s brain.
I might be an absurdist philosophically. Why oh why....
At least the obnoxious type A or the scheming jerks are no better off than me by now..ha ha suckers.
I have been trying to untangle a skein of thoughts I have on religion, conservativism, politics (real, sports teams adjacent, disingenuous), gender, personality, context, machines, humans, how much I hate Zuckerberg etc’s minions, emotions, the sensitivity ranges of one’s various dars, politicians and public figures).
It is a work in progress.
The point is that what is bothering me is probably tied to “constitutional law”.
I have to parse this, as I rather like Aziz Huq:
https://www.bostonreview.net/forum/the-dead-end-of-checks-and-balances/aziz-huq-responds/
https://www.bostonreview.net/forum/the-dead-end-of-checks-and-balances/
Lina Khan works in anti-trust law, which is probably applicable as well, but not as directly. I saw another legal scholar Nina Farhany, but she seems like a very nice person so I stopped following her.
Society is dealing with some very malicious forces..man Lina Khan was so awesome.
Lina Khan will be remembered by history. I am rarely a fan or an enthusiast as a rule. She was an exception.
I suppose people felt that way about FDR. The one time an actual, real supporter of sanity got into the system. As opposed to the usual- “okay that’s the best on offer..I suppose one has no other options.”
Anyway that debate is more akin to honest disagreements one sees in science or other areas where people just have different opinions without acrimony or malice.
I often don’t have strong opinions absent malice or deceit or stupidity or where ott stuff is not peddled like denying obvious errors or insisting that limits to growth do not exist; racial IQ (that one is too stupid to bother with); that the planet is not overpopulated and that Koch style migration is the fix.
After Trump and what I have been through I think laws need strengthening for migrants, women etc in ways that Koch/tech/assholes/ai companies etc have no say in and which have bipartisan humanist support. You cannot throw away women’s rights and portray that as a girlboss vs a good guy thing.
Separation of church and state is important at a time of ubiquitous malicious influence that strains communities.
Say what you will about JD Vance, his anti-democratic instincts are really solid. He understood that the solitary Catlady is someone to kick out of society for this fascistic project to succeed.
= new reply since forum marked as read