• neatchee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    Are you implying policy only has meaning if it supports your specific goals? Because there has been plenty of meaningful policy that does absolutely nothing to protect or advance the very narrow goals you’ve defined above in this conversation, or even what one might call moral and ethical. What exactly is “meaningful” when it comes to policy? That is such a vague, garage term in this context

    • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      Are you implying policy only has meaning if it supports your specific goals?

      No? I have no idea how you got any of that from what I said.

      I’m just trying to make sense of what the hell it means to “actually govern” if not “enacting meaningful policy.” I thought maybe you were suggesting that, after the initial period of actually governing and enacting policy, they spend the rest of the time enacting meaningless bullshit policies that might win votes but don’t actually affect anything. Based on your response, I’m guessing that’s not what you meant, but that just leaves me even more in the dark about what you do mean.

      Can you please just spell out the distinction you’re making? If they’re enacting meaningful policy, how is that not “actually governing?” Stop making me guess.