I responded to your other comment, but I like this question too. I haven't been addicted to a substance, but I can firmly say for other things that the answer is "No". I'm not blacked out, I'm completely present when I'm making this choice, but sometimes there's a constant justification of "ok I'll do it this last time and tomorrow is when I'll resist it." And you keep doing that. And that voice gets weaker over time to where you just start accepting that this is what you do now. And that often comes with self-loathing and frustration.
Well, that's the difference. At different points in my life I've had varying levels of self-control. You have a higher bar than I do right now for what requires a self-control check.
My username is what it is for a reason. I don't think being on a site like this improves my health or mentality in any way, yet here I am. I still go on Reddit on a desktop when I'm working almost out of habit, even though I'm kicking myself mentally the whole time I'm scrolling. I wake up, say "30 more minutes" to myself knowing full well that will make me start work later, less prepared, hungry, and unshowered and I'll have to work later into the night (when I work from home). I watch YouTube until 1 am or later most nights because I don't want to sleep even though I'm tired and I know it will make my day miserable tomorrow. Dishes are piling up because I say I'll get to it later.
People have different thresholds for this and at other times in my life I could just shut off many of these urges. Right now, because of my mental health, that ability for self control is near zero. Just think of that push-back you get when you say to yourself you're going to go for a run and imagine that push-back to be stronger and applied to literally anything that requires effort or mental presence.
The people of Wyoming don't have the same representation as the people of California. They have way more relative representation. That's saying that rural votes mean more than urban. A Wyoming resident has 3.6 times more voting power than one in California.
This is a similar argument for accelerationism in Marxism. That we should make the world as capitalist as possible because the system will fail quicker and get replaced by something more just.
It's hard for me to believe that this would actually work in either case. The destruction in the meantime would be too great and it may reach a point where we can't climb back. In the case of Trump, he wants to be a dictator, and he may push voting rights so far in one direction that the people won't have a say at all.
I would argue that "the right to vote is fundamental to a democracy" has never been an American conservative ideal. Conservatives have always tried to limit the number and kind of people that can vote and still do: non land owners, ex-slaves, black people, women, ex-felons, and all minorities now. Conservatives have also made a very successful effort to limit the relative power of people's votes when it doesn't suit their agenda through gerrymandering and unequal representation.
Also, really not sure what "the Senate should represent the states and not the people" means. Like it should represent the land? Not the people inside the state?
@lets_get_off_lemmy
@reddthat.com