That assumes that like-minded people exist in sufficient quantities to do this. If they do, why haven’t they voted already if they do? Why do they need to be told to do something or united at all when OP doesn’t? What’s different between them?

What’s one guy gonna do against 52% of Americans who came together in their communities and expressed the democratic will to choose Fascism?

Is that why I feel so fucking good drinking those San Pels…?

We just defederate.

A European PA is more like a US NP afaik

Yeah thanks. I said pseudo because I do t really know the meaning of these words apart from vic3, nor do I know of anyone from the americas :D

If I want to come off as a pseudo-intellectual I call them Yankee for east-north and Dixie for south-west (but also Florida and the bible belt) and gringo for hispanic Americans. I don’t know if any of those terms are really correct to use in that context and my definitions are entirely vibes-based.

All anyone wants to do is lecture me about how they are right, and I am wrong if I think different than them

The only relevant question is - are you wrong?

Is your take actually valid? Based on sound imperical data? Is not fallacious? Does your reasoning stand up to scrutiny? Is it fact, or a belief? Is it a justified belief?

Ultimately you shouldn’t need to be coddled if you have any allegiance to the truth.

It’s one thing if a 3-year old gets 2+2 wrong. It’s another when it’s a 33 year old. Would you waste energy on that, or would you assume that the 33-year old doesn’t care enough to bother no matter what approach is used?

The unfortunate reality is that democracy as a vehicle for progress is a failure because not enough people have an allegiance to the truth, nor have the basic epistemological tools for determining what’s knowledge, what’s belief, what’s a hypothesis, what’s theory or what’s valid evidence or any idea of what the scientific method even is, or what an axiom is etc.

They favour their delusions (I don’t mean religion specifically) over truth.