SubstantialNothingness

I guess I just see what I would call cynical analysis called doomerism enough that I felt the need to speak up about it. It's one thing to attach a bunch of qualifiers, but in general the term just does not seem productive to me - and the bloomer stuff even less so.

Yeah, tightening the existing rules might be a good fix.

Then I think we're just about on the same page. My conversation today has largely been in the context of a ban, but in individual occasions where I am knowledgeable enough to speak up, I also make it a priority to discourage unwarranted despair.

I try to transform that despair by investigating the individual's expectations and disappointments. Someone earlier in this thread mentioned that the forces of change do not operate on our personal timetables, and I find that reminding people of this helps them to find more comfort in their place in the current context (in the vein of planting a tree for future generations to enjoy) - without asking them to handwave away their concerns.

100%. It doesn't really effect the resistance. It almost exclusively effects us as the users.

It seems the discussion has turned to the proposition under the sticky to actually officially restrict doomerist posts. And since the rules effect us infinitely more than the physical resistance, I do believe we should consider our own priorities when deliberating them.

In that light, I would completely understand if the group wanted to restrict those posts in order to facilitate health, enjoyment, etc. I'm nowhere near the most well-adjusted person on the planet - and I would miss you all - but if my shouting into the void wasn't wanted here or I otherwise felt the urge to leave, I know I'd be fine finding a different void to shout into. It's not like hexbear is where I do my praxis. I think that would be the appropriate response for anyone who might feel pushed out.

Nonetheless I'm also going to speak my piece and participate in the dialectics so long as it is welcome, and I have two fears: 1. If my favorite posters don't post because they are afraid of being labeled a doomer and breaking the rules, I'm going to be less motivated to visit, and 2. If posters I disagree with stop posting, I'm also going to be less motivated to visit because one reason I come here is to absorb other lefties' opinions which disagree with my own (so they I can consider changing my own position and so that I can better understand my allies who I don't see eye-to-eye with). I can tolerate sorting through bullshit, but if there is a chilling effect on posting, then I fear that there's going to be less value here for all of us.

Our priorities are a perfectly legitimate debate imo - I'll be curious to hear how others feel. I think I've probably spoken my fair share's worth by now.

lol i've been (jokingly) countering my friends with posadism when they start spiraling lately, they have no idea what it is but that's just as well.

Okay, but people can agree with everything you just said and still get called a doomer for their opinions. So where's the line drawn? As far as I can tell, it's wherever the good vibes end.

I wouldn't be commenting if I hadn't already encountered many of these interactions. Certainly, in many cases particularly on the news mega and regarding Israel, there are ungrounded analyses that rightfully get called out for being ungrounded.

On the other hand, there are grounded analyses that also get labelled as doomer. And it's not just regarding Israel - it's a common thought-terminating cliché on most topics.

P.S. - I agree that panic is not analysis. Although as someone who has actually suffered from panic attacks, I have to laugh at the idea that panic can be stomped out. If you think people are stomping out panic when they call people doomers, and that the stomping is a good thing, then I suppose that could be a source of the difference in our opinions.

Then fix your own errors and don't mock the rest of us. I have seen utterly detached analyses called doomer, but I have also seen the accurate recognition of short-term challenges called doomer on a regular basis.

I am very well aware the forces of change do not operate on our own personal timetables - I have repeatedly urged patience regarding retaliatory strikes - but the resistance also does not exist in a sandbox, and so we shouldn't be satisfied with simply resting on our laurels when the facts are inconvenient. But when we consider any cynical analysis as not valuable, that's exactly what we position ourselves to do.

It would be one thing if this disparagement was restricted to discussion of the conflicts in Ukraine or Occupied Palestine, but it's much more widespread than that. Don't contribute to damning us all just because you lost touch on an issue once or twice.

Bloomer opinion: Ignoring the inconvenient parts of reality will put us all in the ground, and then we can turn into blooms and fix climate change!

But surely libs are winning because of their toxic positivity.

If we just emulate them better, we can start winning too!

I'm guessing wish fulfillment fantasies where the player inserts themselves into the world rather than playing a role.

I also curious about the real answer, though.

I don't know about vaporware, but it's going to take a lot longer than 4 years before I expect to see anything groundbreaking out of it.

Funding QC research in the near term is going to be spent on things like materials science and engineering imo, which could have many use cases outside QC even if QC itself never pans out.

I think the MIC wants more money for aircraft research and that she's trying to sell it as a non-militarized thing.