Thank you for this! I was going to post asking for sources to these kinds of posts. I want more grounded evidence of authoritarianism within the US, so I can be better informed and can properly inform others, to help make a case, and I also want to avoid practicing misinformation and practice building my media literacy - I should hope that is what "free thought" is about and what is promoted and supported here.

Any way we can tag a moderator about sources? Or request the OP to edit the post to add your PBS link? Or is the only option to make a new post, based on the PBS article and providing that as a source?

"Tyranny is the deliberate removal of nuance" - Albert Maysles

I'm not an "official" card-carrying member, but am interested in the discussion and answer, if there's any bylaws or something that officially preclude that.

I personally would hope it's an inclusive space that makes good on the "democratic" ("of/by/for the people") aspect. That doesn't mean it has to be super big tent and open, but that welcoming more people into the fold will help build and grow power to continually implement these kinds of policies and societal change.

I like this take, especially the end line where the nuances are explored about a full spectrum of what it means to truly create public safety. I think a lot of the abolitionist and BLM movements are doing the same in the sense of redefining community wellbeing and safety, and how money could be better allocated to provide for "safety" - less with the shooty shooty kind, and more with a vast spectrum of services to support different use cases.

At Burning Man, there are Law Enforcement Officers (armed), but also there to have issues escalated to around any assaults that may occur. BUT, they also have a suite of services like Zendo to handle psychological issues that may arise, and Rangers (volunteers not LEOs), who are like community risk observers that help people understand risks from different activities (not traveling with water, climbing something very high off the ground that might result in large medical injury, etc) and also have comms on them to be able to route issues to medical teams or escalate as necessary.

For the first part about root causes, I tried to find the source, but I remember reading about indigenous cultures that would help prevent resource exploitation from the commons, and help prevent a culture of excess and wealth hoarding, by using lightweight shaming or community humor to put into place any hunter that came back with too much, or didn't give away enough. In a sense, that's a form of community "policing" on cultural norms and what behaviors and values are permissible.

Has anyone here watched "Moon Haven" (discontinued) on AMC? A very solarpunk-esque world with a society on the moon to solve earth problems. It centers around a "police" force that are mainly detectives, and provides interesting angles to these kinds of challenges.

I tend to agree. Curious your take on r/bioregionalism ? Perhaps borders for helping steward natural localized geo defined ecosystems? I'd be interested in having defined governing stewardship borders along rough bioregional "lines"

I appreciate the critical lens being applied here and I'd like to continue pulling on these threads if you're down. Curious to learn and explore rationales.

1. Yeah, it may not be explicitly solarpunk, but we could imagine a zoomed out view of each of the snapshots, showing renewable energy powering things (maybe even fusion?).

2. Perhaps more automated industry would be helping with the contributions? This would be more akin to FALC perhaps (Fully Automated Luxury Communism). Then I guess the question would be, how do you feel about robot taxes and not letting the "owner" of the "IP" of the robots and automation just siphon money away, but go towards public goods?

Or another angle might be: should children in a family not be entitled to the contributions of their family members? Or orphans? I'm not trying to strawman, I'm just exploring the boundaries of the idea of who gets to benefit from other's work? I guess the Marxist angle would also question if managers or owners of property should benefit from the direct labor of others?

Clean water - presumably there would be solarpunk tech to reclaim water, store rains, and better storm water management (or if there's somehow too many people, we can Dune Fremen it)

Housing - this is definitely a core constraint. Singapore does some interesting housing policies to ensure near housing for everyone in their very small land mass. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_housing_in_Singapore It's a slippery slope argument to say if we can't house everyone, we shouldn't try to ensure we can. There's a lot of housing policies that could change to encourage smart housing zoning and denser development, near transit etc (see https://www.reddit.com/r/transit/comments/8wafcv/meet_the_numtots_the_millennials_who_find_fixing/  for fun)

Education - I feel like... Education scales near infinitely? If done well online and in community? Imagine ChatGPT guiding you through any of the open courseware from MIT or other institutions? Or local Meetup groups to teach green collar jobs using a shared tool library and working with robots for the harder stuff?

Healthcare - this is also a tricky one to me. On the one hand, I see a possible moral hazard of de-risking really risky behavior that could still have huge health risks (e.g. dumb stunts, fast travel, unsafe sex, etc) leading to increase in healthcare use overall. I also think, at least in the US, we don't have the system set up to provide integrated health at a scale that's needed already. But I'd imagine if people are housed and didn't have to worry about that, have access to nutritious food and didn't have to worry about that, clothes, community, that there would actually be less strain on the healthcare system. It's also another slippery slope to suggest if we can't hit the goal, why start down the path of trying. But good to consider edge cases that might break the system.

1. I see where you're going with that assumption of implied solution, but you also seem to take a logical leap to how it would inevitably be violent and backfire. Perhaps there's a threat of force behind taxation (and perhaps you consider taxation theft to begin with), but plenty of people pay a "membership/subscription" fee to a government (ideally one with public oversight from the people they collect from IMHO) or state who can redistribute it in a way that better serves these stated (pun partially intended) end goals. Perhaps there's an underlying assumption that those with the resources will not be pleased to have it redistributed, or want to have a say with how it would be redistributed. I think there are plenty of examples that counter the former assumptions (https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/nearly-three-quarters-millionaires-polled-g20-countries-support-higher-taxes-wealth#:~:text=66%20percent%20of%20people%20with,standards%20and%20hinders%20social%20mobility.), and currently provide for the latter assumption (see: voting for elected reps who develop and sign off on budgets).

I hope you see I'm discussing in good faith and presenting arguments or counters to try to pursue a better nuance and direction on the issues brought up. Again, I do appreciate valid critiques so that the movements can improve overall.

Interested in your take if/when you get to it if you're able and willing (and in good faith too).

🖖🏼☀️🌎

Impact Strategist

I consistently synthesize and seek to merge them all, but also, I have found a job as a "strategist" and that lets me learn about a lot of different things, from a lot of different POVs, and then come up with solutions and strategies (creatively!).

I would suggest other multipotentialites check out roles like that, since it lets you take your various learnings and practices from your multiple pursuits and apply them in novel innovative ways to different problems and ideas.

Also re: "not living up to your potential" I will share the POV that says that is a perfectionist mindset that assumes there is some ideal potential out there that you will always chase. That chase will leave one feeling miserable because it's not meeting some ill-defined ideal.

A therapist I saw was the first to tell me I was a perfectionist. For those who have a similar mindset, consider looking into how to become a "recovering perfectionist" which usually involves learning to be ok with what is and seeking progress over perfection.

This also helps frame it: https://youtu.be/ERbvKrH-GC4?si=fqlJgjmse9rNliQf

Wrong sub

And also (for relevant fun, not for OP):

Penalizing families through fines for non-compliance of items in school bags could be considered a form of a poverty tax. Abolish the fine and the problem is solved at a higher order systemic level.

New problem set: How to equitably distribute wealth into educational school districts given geographical distributions of wealth.

Welcome! Thanks for your volunteer efforts in stewarding the r/legal and larger reddit community!

A suggestion: when people want to suggest "find/hire an attorney" can they also strive to give guidance on what kind of lawyer, practicing what kind of law? And perhaps what search terms or certifications to look for? Or maybe there can be a pinned post for that?

IANAL, but I've heard from lawyers that they're like doctors - you don't go to a cardiologist for a podiatrist issue. And maybe visiting a Nurse or Physician Assistant is enough for certain situations, versus a board certified surgeon that takes forever to book an appointment with. Perhaps there are equivalent levels of certification that can be explained to help folks understand their options, while in most cases a barred JD is required.

tl;dr help people take the next step and get the right advice for their situation, after "hire a lawyer" is the recommendation.

Edit: for typos

I appreciated this open frank debate to play out the scenarios and find common ground on a deeper issue while also denoting different POVs.

A lot of colleges also offer "study abroad" opportunities (may vary by country where the college is) so you can learn and travel along the way. Some countries do "gap years" too, where you could maybe take one year to travel, stay in cheap hostels around the world, and meet people, before starting a 4 year program. There are also programs like: https://www.semesteratsea.org/

As for absurdism, for me, part of my interpretation is that there is no 'one absolute way' to 'do it right' - it's about being mindful of one's circumstances and seeing what creative things you can do and how you can negotiate with those circumstances and people around you to find something that is meaningful to you with your life, and what makes you 'happy' and 'successful' based on what you want for your unique loved conscious experience for a blip of a cosmic moment, and not what others necessarily want for you.

Girls just want to have fun (and not feel unsafe or hit on all the time). Dancing it up is the way.

"The real problem of humanity is the following: We have Paleolithic emotions, medieval institutions and godlike technology. And it is terrifically dangerous, and it is now approaching a point of crisis overall." - E.O. Wilson, Biologist

If anything, we need to set new norms if this kind of thing. Like bringing your own reusable water bottle, or mug for coffee. Electric micro mobility is the future! So bring it in with pride (but not like...overly douchey holier than thou pride.. Have to make it inclusionary, not exclusionary)

I really like this thoughtful, measured, nuanced reply. Thank you for taking the time to write it out, to express the logic and perspective behind it. My only issue that I'd appreciate you expanding upon, is that it doesn't seem to take into account the GOP and Trump. I can understand the arguments for feeling like it weakens leverage against the Dems, but I don't think it addresses at all the alternative of the GOP or Trump winning and the after effects to what decades of movement work have delivered and more socialist directions. This I feel is the bind of the two-party duopoly in the First Past The Post Electoral College system. But part of being tactical needs to take into account this very real part of the whole equation in my humble opinion.

This - I think this has to be the strategy. Primaries are where there is more room and more of an Overton window for debate and discussion of policies, and pointing out flaws in the current system and party dynamic. Wins there unlock a hell of a lot (e.g. AOC), and if there's not a primary win, there's still: - the organizing and funding infrastructure that was built as a result of the primary push - people exposed to the ideas at the early levels - lessons and feedback to improve messaging

And a vote for the relative centrist afterwards isn't defeat, it's a chance to keep the conversation going, whereas the right option will take us backwards and undue progress that's been fought for by movements for decades.

I'm sorry you were assaulted 😞 That shouldn't have happened and I hope you're able to get support and care and a proper healing resolution.

Can I see your super interesting fact, and raise you that all our senses and receptors don't actually "touch" on the atomic level? So all our perception of things is based on whatever force is happening between atoms? So temperature would be how fast atoms are "bumping-but-not-really" against you, and wind I guess would be pressure density gradient differences over time of atoms "rolling-over-you-but-not-really"

I think it's something like that. Some physicist here can confirm or refute. Some philosopher here can speak to the implications of that.

This is a fact I didn't recently learn, but is something I do feel everyone should know. ⚛️

So sorry that happened to you and others. Raves should be spaces to play and feel free, connect with the music and each other in a non-threatening and consensual way, and create amazing memories as others have mentioned.

This might be a relevant framework to understand some of the dynamics: https://meaningness.com/geeks-mops-sociopaths

As others have mentioned, I agree it's partly due to the mainstreaming and lack of honest, authentic embodiment and upholding of rave culture (namely PLUR, though I personally feel rave culture is more than just PLUR) as they've grown in popularity.

Culture lives and dies based on what's upheld and valued (or not).

Appreciate your thoughts on this. And your window situation is unique and actually may apply to a situation I'm in (and maybe other too) so documenting here. "any energy efficient building envelope component" would presumably be a window, and perhaps a skylight as well. Not sure how they define an "energy efficient" window as you say, but it's part of the envelope.

Skylights might arguably be energy efficient by: - helping create a seal for insulation purposes - use natural light instead of electric light in the home (saving energy) - help with natural cooling if it opens for natural air - if solar powered to open, then it has its own power source which saves on grid electricity to operate

As it so happens, at least one huge skylight manufacturer--Velux-- has gone all in with their marketing and messaging, including letters from the execs attesting to their solar powered skylights or regular skylights with solar powered shades counting for the tax credit. They disclaim any certainty and say talk to your tax people, but I'd imagine if they're going so hard for it, and were to be challenged, that could lead to a large class action suit (IANAL). I don't know if they're hinging on the "energy efficient building envelope" (solar powered options = energy efficient?) language or the solar language (solar powered and on your roof = a version of rooftop solar?) for their claim.

But then the "in conjunction with" is also vague. Is that.. - with the same contractor? Probably not since electrician is usually not a skylight/roof installer - around the same time as? How many days apart is too many for it not to be "in conjunction"? - for functional reliance on each other? As you said, that's be weird to have a window and electric panel rely on each other one way or another (and that's why the argument for main panel upgrade alongside rooftop solar seems to make more common sense, even though the law seems not to back that up at the moment).

Anyways in my situation I: - just replaced the roof to prep for solar (and was bummed to learn reroofing generally doesn't count for the solar tax credit, so mine does not) - have to get my skylights replaced too, so opted for velux solar opening. That's scheduled and happening in the next 5-10 days - have to get my panel upgraded and bent overhead riser fixed to prep for solar (what led me to reddit research on this re: tax credit) and that's happening in the next..2-4 weeks pending utility scheduling.

So in my case (and hopefully helpful to others), and only if I'm understanding correctly (especially the 'in conjunction with' language) -- because I'm getting the panel upgrade and the solar skylights around the same time, then the panel upgrade looks like it could qualify in a quirky but legit way? Too liberal of an interpretation?

Outside of all that, I wish Rewiring America would make some phone calls to any connections in Congress to get the language straightened out and more clear about panel upgrades with solar since that seems like a no brainier and would solve a lot of confusion.

Hey thanks for all this. Based on your reply, would that mean that Rewiring America's take is incorrect? https://www.rewiringamerica.org/app/ira-calculator/information/electrical-panel

"25D likely provides households a 30 percent uncapped tax credit for an electrical panel upgrade if it’s upgraded in conjunction with rooftop solar."

Are they legalese-ing by saying "likely provides"?

Thanks for continuing the discussion and I like the additional questions. I'd say nothing in culture is ever truly immune (or similarly, in actual virology, viruses evolve around immune systems, and immune systems can get depressed or malfunction). From a cultural evolution standpoint, there's also "cultural selection theory" which says we've advanced enough that "natural selection" doesn't play as much of a role in deciding who lives and does and passes on traits, but culture does. The cultures that collaborate to get shit done will likely beat out the ones that in-fight. The cultures that have a better time, and are more fun, beat out the ones that are boring af. A stretch, but you get the idea. So I'd say if burner culture continues to be selected for over rigid (and ossifying) social structures that are vestigial from when monarchs ruled and imperial hierarchies said "you can't dress that way or enjoy yourself in that way because King/god/church/authority says so" then it will leak and permeate into those cultural areas. Even outside of this question about Burner culture, I think this holds true for any culture, and is why there are always "culture wars" between different values/beliefs/behaviors as they brush up against one another. Even religious institutions are "queering" and opening up to things that were formerly"forbidden" by their social cultural immune system.

As for the top-down comment, I think certainly having social influencers (in the abstract sense, not social media sense, though social media influencers could be considered subsets) decree "this is where it's at and you all should (or need to) do this" can help ... well... influence adoption. But I also think bottom-up occurs more regularly, through word of mouth of people who attend and spread the culture to their networks in a decentralized and distributed way. Imagine both in effect when, a local politician hears about BM, attends, gets inspiration, then brings part of the "culture" into office with them in terms of thinking about policy. This has and does actually happen.

I just have a fluid field model (systems paradigm?) of culture in mind when I bring up these POVs. I think it's very dynamical and never truly fully completely separated or immune-blocked. Now attacked by existing immune systems...yes!

Edit to clarify: Cultural "leaks" likely happen bottom-up through direct experience and transfer of the culture, which also may bypass cultural immune systems (e.g. "hey..this person who went to BM...isn't too bad...maybe they're on to something when they talk about how BRC is...") But the vast majority of humans at scale likely need (or only get) a top-down conveyance of the culture from cultural and societal norm arbiters (e.g. news media reports, IG Influencer posts) and so form their opinions that way, and maybe the culture still "leaks" but through the lens of whomever is framing it in their mass media messaging.

I believe so, yes. I see what you're looking for, but that metaphor doesn't fly (ha) because gulls and penguins are physiologically structurally different, and genetics moves slower than culture. Culture is fluid and transmissible across society and civilization (this was the original concept behind "meme" : "memes" are to culture/society as "genes" are to biology). A benefit of the "soft" sciences perhaps compared to the "hard" ones.

One example (that my confirmation bias in support of BM philosophies is cherry picking to share), is that I went to EDC Las Vegas this year and they had "Ground Control" which was a trained volunteer supporting layer between law enforcement and attendees. Very similar to "BRC Rangers" acting as trained volunteer supporting layer between law enforcement and participants. To me, that was evidence of the cultural overlap and how it's spreading from "underground" into "mainstream" culture. And it's accelerated because of the overlap in art, music, and philosophies (Peace, Love, Unity, Respect PLUR has lots of values overlap with BM principles IMHO).

But I do agree that "default heads" might be difficult for the philosophy to propagate into if it's coming from such a different paradigmatic framing. Consider a different kind of "default head" thinking: let's say..religious belief in God, but countercultural atheists want to spread their gospel (ha) to change religious minds...that's not going to be easy. But if there's a shared paradigmatic framework to open a new way of seeing/believing about the world, then it's possible. Or if there's enough exposure to the blasphemous atheists that they see "hey...not too bad...maybe I can incorporate some of what they're saying..." that can help the philosophy or culture spread. Not the best analogy in my part either perhaps, but just trying to demonstrate that philosophies and cultural values, and worldviews are not set in stone, but are moreso a dynamic field/ocean and so can influence each other.

For more, here's a great reference that informs my current POV on this: https://donellameadows.org/archives/leverage-points-places-to-intervene-in-a-system/