• SeverianWolf@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    People who litter. Throw their rubbish out the window of the car. Or who throw rubbish in public, like into drains or sidewalks.

    It’s in the mentality, and I say the lack of education is the reason for it.

    It’s sad to see the people of my country do this, and to see it with your own eyes.

  • const_void@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Reckless driving, speeding, having a loud car, having a lifted pickup truck.

  • pH3ra@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    Whataboutism”, or if you are unfamiliar with the term:

    “The act or practice of responding to an accusation of wrongdoing by claiming that an offense committed by another is similar or worse”

    People that use this mechanism are “poorly educated” and unable to hold a conversation and they should just be mocked by whatabouting even harder, so they can maybe understand that they’re dumb and that’s not how you should debate.

    Example of the last argument I had recently with my dumb c*nt father:

    • Me: You shouldn’t idolize that politician, he evaded literally billions in taxes and that befalls on citizens like you
    • Dumb c*nt father: Yeah? And what about that other politician?
    • Me: What about the disappearing middle class?!
    • D.C.F.: What…?
    • Me: WHAT ABOUT THE BEES!?!
    • torknorggren@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Nah, addiction plagues the well and the poorly educated. I was acquainted with a couple of Nobel prize winners who smoked like chimneys.

  • salarua@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    taking Ayn Rand’s work seriously. five seconds of critical thought and her entire philosophy comes crashing down

    • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      One thing that few people seem to accept when saying that they believe in Ayn Rand’s philosophy is that you are supposed to pay people what they are worth, not what you can negotiate with them.

      For instance, in Atlas Shrugged, it is made explicit that Rearden pays his mill workers far above typical salaries because it is worth it to him to have the best staff working in his mills. Rearden is also the kind of person who isn’t going to make racist or sexist jokes because he wants the best person regardless of sex or color.

      What Objectivist is that moral?

      • AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        That’s actually the root of all social philosophies: they require decent people.

        No matter which system you take, capitalism, communism, anarchism, monarchy, democracy, etc. they all would work perfectly fine, if people wouldn’t be stupid, selfish and about 1% downright psychopaths. And I’m not even talking about real crimes. In your example it would be perfectly legal, to pay the workers the absolute minimum possible, but it would be a dick move.

        At the end of the day, a system always has to answer the question: How do you reign in assholes? That’s it. Designing a system based on Jesuses is trivial.

        • metallic_z3r0@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          It’s not enough to reign in assholes, the system has to be designed in such a way that carriers of “dark triad” traits (i.e. the usual bad faith actors in a system) are still incentivized to contribute to or improve society without gradually dismantling it to increase their wealth/power/status. That’s a hard problem to solve.

  • fluffy_birb_01@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    Using terms like ‘u’, ‘ur’, etc when writing. No one charges by the letter, it’s simply lazy.

    • adelaide@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Doesn’t this depend on the stylistic environment of the text? Personally, I’d consider it alright given that the sender and the receiver are in a casual relationship. It only makes one seem uneducated if they are using it in a more formal, or perhaps a public context.

      • Monkeyhog@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        If I know someone personally and they text me with abbreviations and such like that. I do judge them for it.

  • atlasraven31@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    Not being able to entertain ideas. “What would the world be like with 100% renewable energy?” “Would basic healthcare for every person help our country?”

    I tried to explain the 4 day work week to someone that gets paid by the hour. You make the same money but work 4 days a week instead of 5. Insisted he got paid less. Had to explain like a Bingo card with a Free Space, 1 day he is paid even if he stays home.

  • Antik@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    Being a republican. Sure there are some educated grifters who decide to label themselves as republican, but your average republican voter is a mouth-breathing fucking idiot.

  • stolid_agnostic@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    People who are proud about their lack of knowledge on a topic as if that somehow means that they were not programmed prior to the encounter.