660
submitted 5 months ago by Wilshire@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 41 points 5 months ago

Hey a half a loaf. Its Zenos paradox of legalization. With progress like this, in another 40 years we'll be another halfway there to legalization.

[-] Lukewarm_Tea@lemm.ee 29 points 5 months ago

It will at least open up research for cannabis drug development into FDA approved products.

[-] RaoulDook@lemmy.world 16 points 5 months ago

It also basically will legalize Medical cannabis federally. This could lead to many other benefits. Get a medical card, it's legit with the state and the feds, then there shouldn't be any grounds for drug tests to affect your employment.

[-] Dkarma@lemmy.world 7 points 5 months ago

The big thing is federal contracts.

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 12 points 5 months ago

That all depends on when Democrats get congressional majority. Congress is responsible for legislative decriminalization.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3617

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world -2 points 5 months ago

You make the assumption that Democrats (the politicians, not the voters) actually see this as a legislative priority.

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 16 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Kamala has been treating it as priority, and speaking in favor of it every chance she gets. The bill was co-sponsored by 114 Democrats.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3617/cosponsors

[-] frezik@midwest.social 4 points 5 months ago

Which party voted for all the state level legalization efforts?

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 9 points 5 months ago

For people like me who use it medicinally, this is a huge win.

[-] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 5 months ago

Society is like a big vehicle. It takes time to change its course. Calm down.

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago

Calm down.

The world doesn't actually improve in fits an starts. Incrementalism is a fallacy. The world improves in large sweeping movements that are eventually ground backwards. We make major improvement through bold action, not trivial improvements.

I have no obligation to support a muted political movement incapable of accomplishing its purported objectives.

US Democrats could have done this a decade ago. They could have codified abortion rights. They could have made so many things a priority: they choose not to. I owe nothing to a failed approach to politics.

[-] donuts@kbin.social 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Ok, so... What big, sweeping things are YOU doing to make society better? Where's your list of accomplishments?

The Democrats don't have a perfect track record, not even close. But being part of the online peanut gallery of whiners doesn't get us anywhere. I'm so tired of people who are all commentary and no action, people who aren't going to be part of progress (big or small) are part of the problem no matter how smug you act about it.

[-] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 5 months ago

US Democrats could have done this a decade ago. They could have codified abortion rights. They could have made so many things a priority: they choose not to. I owe nothing to a failed approach to politics.

I must correct you there. There is a theory that says that politics has to fulfill the will of its average voter. It can not lean further left than that. Otherwise it looses voters on the righter side.

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world -2 points 5 months ago

What you have is a convenient and wrong interpretation of how politics work.

Its interesting that when its a step in the authoritarian or right-wing direction, its always possible. When its a step towards humanism or the left, its never possible or only ever an epsilon of progress.

Why do you think that is?

The fallacy thats baked into your thinking that causes you to make this mistake is shown by this assumption you make:

Otherwise it looses voters on the righter side.

The idea that voters exist along a symmetrical distribution is the mistake you are making. People are not randomly coming up with their beliefs and there is no reason you should assume it would follow a gaussian.

Its a persistent and wrong assumption, that resulted in the kind of demonstrated impotence of the American Democrats.

Interestingly, the American Right wing doesn't share that belief around real-politik. And because they don't make this wrong assumption, their voters actually get the policy decisions they want into law.

[-] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 5 months ago

Its interesting that when its a step in the authoritarian or right-wing direction, its always possible. When its a step towards humanism or the left, its never possible or only ever an epsilon of progress.

Why do you think that is?

Because people are, in fact, pretty right-wing authoritarian.

The idea that voters exist along a symmetrical distribution is the mistake you are making. People are not randomly coming up with their beliefs and there is no reason you should assume it would follow a gaussian.

I never said that it was a symmetrical or normal distribution. I am well aware that it is not. But it is still a distribution.

And people do come up with their own beliefs. It's not as if you can just tell them what to believe. People's will comes first, parties and their ideas come second.

this post was submitted on 16 May 2024
660 points (99.0% liked)

News

23265 readers
3188 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS