It's different perspectives, I've come to learn.

The people I know who support this regime do so because they feel completely left out (they're low income so I'm not sure that applies to software developers).

When there's nothing for you why wouldn't you want to just burn it all down? Then you can build a more "fair" system.

Please note that I do not agree with literally anything current admin does, this is just the perspective I hear often.

> When there's nothing for you why wouldn't you want to just burn it all down? Then you can build a more "fair" system.

Notably, the people who lived under legal oppression for centuries in this country did not take this approach. Instead, they worked inside the system and were able to affect change. The "burn it down" side ended up having its cities literally burned down.

I think most oppression got ended by burning down. I am not aware of too many movements that successfully changed things from the inside.

My comment, like OP, was specifically about the US. Burn it down has a worse track record here than working in the system.

People think things can be better, but don't realize things can be easily worst. They'll be the last to feel the impact

I got to think there's more to it than how it is voiced.

They probably also feel left out by their current regime, and "just burn it all down" would be done more efficiently by other ways, or with other choices.

There's still a part that resonates enough that they're willing to support a specific message.

Left out by what? Left out by whom? Are these people actually satisfied that what the administration is doing will improve their lives, or did the administration just tap into their anger and prejudice for votes?

You'll have to forgive me for being suspicious, but I hear these arguments, too, and the people I see who feel "left out" are largely left out because they hold fringe beliefs or because they are told they are left out despite actually being part of highly influential groups.

Left out by society in general, and the modern world specifically.

Rural Middle- to low-income folks are who I interact with mostly.

No fringe beliefs, just the unfortunate circumstance of being born in places that peaked 60 years ago, but with family roots deep enough to keep them planted. Not who I would call influential. Mostly just working class Joe's trying to make it and struggling, even though their parents were FAR more successful with FAR less education, training, and pressure.

But why would low-income people hitch their cart to a spoiled, whiny NY rich bitch who made a career out of stealing from blue-collar people and has never put in an honest day's work?

That's the truly infuriating part.

Because he talks like them, and they know he's a scumbag, but he's their scumbag, which they sic on the people they hate most: the vermin liberals, the immigrants poisoning the blood of the country, the parasitic federal workers whose lives they want to make miserable, the trans people they deem as all predatory groomers, the academics and scientists they're defunding because it's all woke. It's about taking their lump of flesh. They excuse the open corruption as at least being open corruption, since they assume everyone else is ten times as corrupt behind closed doors. That's why they were fine withholding disaster relief from blue states in 2020.

It makes me angry as hell. They hate us and you can't say anything about it because if you're not nice enough to them, they act like you're being mean to them and the personal reason they'll continue to vote for people that demonize and hate you.

And of course they flag my post because this entire site is an echo chamber of pompous, crybaby cunts. Run by pompous crybaby hypocrite cunts who think nothing of stealing from users... who serve as unpaid shills for their cunty behavior.

What the "burn it down" crowd fail to realize is Trump and those like him will always put guardrails in place to ensure they come out in top in the new world. Unless they're willing to be part of an actual revolution, they're still just voting for "new king, same as the old king"

Intelligence also shouldn't be assumed to cross between disciplines either.

Being able to code isn't the end-all-be-all skillset the industry likes to pretend it is.

Intelligent people also have come to realize that our government is essentially one performative instance after another and see a "uniparty" of legislatures (Congress) who have optimized for local maxima (getting reelected) and not global maxima (constituents well being). Some of them see this administration as a way (and perhaps the only way) of disrupting that inertia, just like they agree with how startup's disrupt existing markets (see Paul Graham's "you should be a little mischievous"). So, to me, it's not a huge surprise many of them voted for this admin.

For the record - I think those same intelligent people overlook the externalities (a personal military for the executive branch) of such a disruptive administration, or irrationality disbelieved it would ever happen.

Thus failing the Game of life at the very core, with corresponding last moments full of regrets if available. Yes we all have met those folks, only fools (or similar but less successful folks) wish they would be those people.

> corresponding last moments full of regrets

That’s why they’re burning money on life extension moonshots.

Which will in foreseeable future end up as we all expect... there is still some form of justice in this world, and no money can really hack around it. trump will eventually die, so will putin and similar folks. The only hope for common people.

And what will happen in 22nd century and onwards is no great concerns for us here.

Even then it's still dumb since they're unlikely to be rich enough to benefit. Nor did they figure out that the main economic policy Trump campaigned on was idiotic and would make things worse for everyone.

> And they could be completely correct.

Given the consistency of the source material, this seems unlikely to be true.

Prosperity gospel.

And religious people like to point to charitable giving.

But studies performed by religious organizations themselves (who, if anything, are likely to skew the numbers more positively) show that across the board, "Local and national benevolence receives 1 percent of the typical church budget," and an additional 5% goes to "church-run programs" (be it after-school care, social, or group activities).

If a secular charity - and let's go to Charity Navigator here - Top Ten Inefficient Fundraisers (https://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay=topten), we see some of the worst charities spending 15% of their donations on "program expenses" (i.e., doing what they are being given money to do).

I'm not familiar with the monitoring of 501(c)3 groups, but I suspect if charities regularly spent only one percent of their givings on what they were entitled to enjoy tax exemption for, they'd likely have such a status revoked.

And, if you factor in this average percentage (even the six per cent combined, which is generous, as as much fun as social and youth activities are, they're not necessarily serving a critical need), and start to question 'how much money is being spent on 'spreading the word', patting themselves on the back, competitions in Texas to see who can built the world's biggest cross just down the road from where the world's previously biggest cross was built at costs of millions, there comes more and more skepticism of just how highly you can value "giving to your church" on the scale of charitable contributions.

A study by ECCU (http://web.archive.org/web/20141019033209/https://www.eccu.o...) stated that churches use 3 percent of their budget for children’s and youth programs, and 2 percent for adult programs. Local and national benevolence receives 1 percent of the typical church budget.

So.

Your link is broken. Please fix as I'm very curious to review the evidence here.

Too late to edit, but: http://web.archive.org/web/20141019033209/https://www.eccu.o...

What? Plenty of religious people chase wealth and power. "Prosperity gospel" is a thing. The Catholic Church is one of the largest landowners in the world. Etc.

> Atheism isn't known for the consistency of its source material either.

Atheism isn't organized so there's no way to quantify your bullshit.

What? If something, I'd talk about spirituality instead. There can be a spirituality without religion, but also a religion without spirituality. Beware!

I pursue material wealth because it provides for my family, my lifestyle, and allows me to support causes I like. But even if I was poor I would be content because family and friends are truly what matter.

Surprisingly many people who claim to care about "family" don’t seem to have any qualms about leaving their children and grandchildren a considerably worse world.

From my perspective the world is getting better every single day. I wouldn’t want to live in the past

Sad and short-sighted view. Which is of course what got us into this mess, and is actively working to make things worse in any timescale longer than quarterly.

It’s sad to me you are miserable