We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Fursuit of Happiness.
“The personal is political” was originally intended to mean that the oppression you experience as an individual is patterned – that there are structural patterns underlying your experience. It encouraged individuals who were experiencing oppressive situations – a woman abused by her husband or a worker exploited by her employer – to view these situations not as personal problems but as political problems that require coming to getting with others to address the issue in the public sphere.
It is no small irony that the phrase “the personal is political” is now often used to mean something opposite of the original meaning. While it once meant that personal problems are not really personal, but are structural problems that require collective action, now people use the phrase to advocate uncoordinated individual action (buying organic shampoo) as somehow constitution a political intervention.
Jonathan Matthew Smucket – Hegemony How-To. A roadmap for radicals.
Fertilizers used by farmers are good for plant growth, but often contain harmful amounts of nitrate. Excess nitrate from crop fertilizer drains into nearby waterways, making it harmful to ecosystems and human health.
In a recent study, NSF-funded researchers found that wetlands significantly reduce nitrate pollution.
Using water samples collected over a four-year period from more than 200 waterways in the 17,000-square-mile Minnesota River Basin, researchers isolated the effects of wetlands on stream and river nitrate concentrations.
They found that when stream flows are high, wetlands are five times more efficient at reducing nitrate than the best land-based conservation practices. The results also demonstrated that the arrangement of wetlands in a watershed is a predictor of the magnitude of nitrate reduction.
Researchers say the study shows that wetland restoration could be one of the most effective methods for improving water quality in the face of climate change and the increasing global demand for food.
Highlights of this article include the people who made the algorithm suggesting that denial of essential care is no big deal because they are “not going to live that long, probably”, says that cuts to essential care are “rational” and not cutting is “irrational”, and compares suggesting medicaid should not guarantee care to not dusting under the bed, and defending denial of essential care as a cost cutting measure.
This is eugenics. Flat out transparently eugenics.
actual quote:
As for the transparency of the system, he agrees that the algorithm is
impossible for most to easily understand, but says that it’s not a
problem. “It’s not simple,” he says. “My washing machine isn’t simple.”
But if you can capture complexity in more detail, Fries argues, this
will ultimately serve the public better, and at some point, “you’re
going to have to trust me that a bunch of smart people determined this
is the smart way to do it.”
presumably Fries is not a big fan of democracy, either
Saying “Gender is fake so how are people trans?” is like saying “Money is fake so how are people poor?” Like as much as we facetiously say gender is fake, “social construct” is not synonymous with “fake”
“Eventually you can’t help but figure out that, while gender is a construct, so is a traffic light, and if you ignore either of them, you get hit by cars. Which, also, are constructs.”
Urocyon's Jaunts 2.0 
You must be logged in to post a comment.