camilledockham

Les logiciels libres, en tant que code, sont des communs soit déjà transnationaux, soit ayant le potentiel de l'être. Il faut pas que la volonté de boycott se transforme en campisme. En revanche, le travail de production de ce code peut être soutenu par des entreprises ou des "non-profits" à l'état d'esprit très entrepreneurial, et tu peux te dire que tu ne veux pas les soutenir, surtout si comme mozilla ou wikipedia leurs conseils d'administration s'en mettent plein les fouilles. D'un autre côté, lae dev qui met son code sur github et demande $5 sur "buy me a coffee", c'est pas du tout la même chose.

C'est le terme d'origine. "Zone A Défendre" est un détournement, qui a particulièrement bien réussi.

Je pense qu'il faut aussi se poser la question de l'efficacité des réfutations, et de leurs buts.

Si on cherche à faire admettre en public, immédiatement, que la personne en face a tort, c'est même pas la peine. En revanche si on le fait pour le public, souvent invisible, alors déjà c'est plus facile et a un plus grand effet.

Ensuite trop de debunks se concentrent sur ce qui est dit explicitement, et donc alignent juste les contre arguments. Alors que derrière les phrases réfutées, il y a un processus, des présupposés. Je pense qu'il faut se servir de la discussion comme d'une occasion pour expliciter la façon dont autrui en vient à de telles conclusions, si possible en lui demandant, et d'en montrer les failles. En somme passer de "que dis tu" à "comment tu en arriver là".

Enfin, la discussion devrait être un prétexte pour faire passer des principes généraux, autant sur le sujet de la discussion, que sur comment on est convaincus et on se convainc. Par exemple, comment on peut dire qu'un événement qui en suit un autre a bien été causé par lui.

A boycott is all about seeking specific consequences. If you turn it into a rigid, simplistic stance you fail to grasp what it is. Here my point is that boycotting even powerless Americans in need of support and who are even targeted by their government does nothing to achieve the goals of a boycott, or very little, and even help with Trump's plans. I attribute the failure to understand that to nationalistic thinking, because it's such a simple argument. At no point have I equated a boycott to nationalistic hate. You are confusing everything with everything.

You can chose to consider that someone represents a group or not, by informing yourself and thinking critically. Moreover, refusing the principle that Trump represents all American contributes to undermining his power. Saying "the real world" means nothing, you could retort that to support any idea, it's vacuous.

It's owned by a French Christian fascist billionaire, Vincent Bolloré, that is building a media empire to push his views and make Le Pen elected. He also turned a normal 24/7 news channel into Fox News lite(-ish). Here's an overview of his deeds: https://desarmerbollore.net/appel#call-to-disarm-the-bollor%C3%A9-empire

I don't remember Macron doing any of that, tonight he talked about the nuclear umbrella and holding some meeting about European defense.

I do agree our Les Républicains are assholes, but the main issue is the Rassemblement National.

Indeed reality is complex, and a single act has several consequences the moral value of which may be contradictory. Good judgements involves understanding how they balance out. In that case, I believe supporting struggling americans, who didn't want any kind of trumpism, is better than attempting total attrition on every level.

What about donating to the development of libre software? I regularly see "buy me a coffee" badge on github repos for programs by a single person.

Thanks, it does often boil down to having or not having money, to move out, get basic treatment, sleep somewhere, eat… What Trump is doing is hugely favoring the very rich, and seriously affecting the already poor. And if people can put their energy into something else than the absolute basics, then they can focus on protests and such. For example 50501 is named so because it's 50 protests in 50 states on a given day, and so those living far away from a state's capital city would need to have a car or enough money for a uber or train to get there and back or sleep there for a night. If the american economy further deprives them, and potential support from abroad also dries up for them, it won't help displace Trump, on the contrary. You can follow tags like #mutualaid on the fediverse, or look into what small time creators do and ask for in terms of donation, like on ko-fi.

Since you link to wikipedia, I assume you treat it as a reliable enough source. It lists that many votes for Harris: 75,017,613. That's 75 millions persons. There is also the phenomenon of voter suppression (wikipedia), which means there are people who would have liked to vote, but couldn't. Should they also be treated the same as those who supported Trump?

Je pourrais imaginer au débotté "se pistonner entre eux pour se faire encore plus de blé", selon le contexte.

Pareil pour ton pseudo !