Why is the definition of biological life relevant to a conversation about nuclear sentience? You’re the only one throwing the word “life” around. Arguing against its misuse when I haven’t actually used it is classic straw manning.

You seem to have extrapolated quite a lot from such a brief comment. Is it possible you may have misstepped in some of your assumptions here?

I’m not saying you’re wrong, but should we be gatekeeping calls to investigate genocide?

I don’t think so? The only “zombies” I can think of are Lazarus and Jesus, and neither got married after their resurrection.

Only if you define it that way, which means that you need an alternative term for non-biological entities which, otherwise, fulfill all the actually functional landmarks of life: sensing, processing, and subsequently interacting with the environment. There’s no proof that these phenomena are implicitly bound to biological systems.

Call it what you want, but there’s absolutely no evidence (besides the circumstantial evidence of observed phenomenon in an implicitly biased environment) that biology is the only way to achieve sentience. Our knowledge of the mechanisms of sentience is woefully limited. Biological-chauvinism only cements your own myopic biases, skepticism taken to the extreme of prejudice.

I’m claiming that carbon and hydrogen are both atomic elements composed of protons, neutrons, and electrons. You’re claiming that hydrogen is the only legitimate substance and carbon, by definition, isn’t a real substance.

You say that as if mixed race people aren’t routinely ostracized by both sides of their mix.

Correct. So assumptions like “life must be biological, and alternative claims are outlandish” places you objectively further from the truth.

Children try to help with tasks they are incapable of doing as well, that does not mean we should alter our actions to cater to them.

How has this worked out so far?

Understandable

Not really, no. My position is objectively based on fewer assumptions than yours. Occam’s razor is certainly useful, but it is not a tool for determining truth. It’s only a tool for determining the simplest explanation.

Your assumption that sentient beings, and their heads, must be biological places your claim in a much more precarious position relative to the razor than mine.

Robots are not biological, yet many have heads that fulfill the same sensory function as biological heads. It is very possible that non-biological sentient entities exist, and in absence of some convincing evidence or argumentation otherwise, it doesn’t make sense to definitively assume nuclear sentiences can’t exist.

The dripping tap won’t be turned off by the suits in charge of the world, and our future’s hanging on by a thread

I mean, that’s a pretty human-chauvinistic view. You can prove that the sun is a gigantic nuclear furnace, but you can’t really prove that gigantic nuclear furnaces aren’t what disembodied godheads look like.

My environment is apparently steeped in sin based on current wrath levels, and only shows signs of increasing. Additionally, I am one of God’s cursed races, I bear the Nuclear Overlord’s most spited complexion.

The problem here is that helping the working class hurts the people with lots of money to throw at attack ads. As you said, the people are gullible morons, they are not immune to propaganda.

If, hypothetically, the DNC were to fully shift to a pro-working class platform tomorrow, with the policies that implies, their capitalist donors would shift their donations to endless propaganda against them. Everything from half-truths and mischaracterizations to straight up lies.

Elections are not won by superior policy, they’re won by superior popularity. Even if that popularity is based on lies and misinformation. The DNC has no incentive to adopt popular policies if adopting popular policies causes them to lose voters due to gullible morons being convinced by propaganda to vote against their interests.

Frankly I think holding out for the DNC to step up as leftist saviors is silly and ignorant of reality. The Democrats have been, and likely always will be, the less bad capitalist establishment party, which only gets support from the left as strategic time-buying votes (and rightly so, I will continue to vote blue-no-matter-who so long as the probable alternative is fascism). They’re not likely to save us, and we can’t pragmatically expect them to go from less bad to actually good.

What Solar Piety Factor ointment do you recommend?

Because marginalized groups are weak because they don’t grasp their power. Numbers are irrelevant without coordinated organization. A hundred separate marginalized groups taking separate action can never compete with centralized power. Only when those groups unify with a common purpose and course of action can the power of their numbers be actualized

T

I’m really, really excited for the new InfoWars.

If it helps you focus, it’s just another form of rubber ducking