Lucky for you the linked article explains the acronym!

Wait, you’re not one of those people who only reads headlines, are you?

If you can’t come up with any answers to those questions on your own then I don’t think it’s worth my time responding to this.

What do you think the command would have been, then?

What about Ween?

Of course it’s not a good reason, but it’s also not the main complaint. That’s a disingenuous argument.

The problem is that the locations that offer IDs become political footballs.

Imagine that you change the law to require a certain type of ID in order to vote (even though you already have a social security card, it doesn’t count for voting purposes), and that said ID cannot be acquired via mail.

Imagine, then, that the place you go to get the necessary ID is closed down, or intentionally understaffed via defunding/budget cuts. Hours reduced to 10am-4pm Monday through Friday, perhaps, when most people work. The next nearest location may be hours away. It may not be accessible via public transit. It then becomes incredibly burdensome for someone with limited time, transportation, or income to get the necessary ID. Now you’re able to control access to the IDs in lower income areas by shuttering or defunding locations.

This isn’t just a theoretical situation. This occurs.

Now, I think you’ll find that most people are onboard with requiring ID to vote, provided that the barriers to getting the ID do not have a chilling effect on low-income voters.

But that’s not the way things tend to go.

Present a plan that expands access to the ID printing services and watch the resistance to these sorts of policies disappear. Or better yet, mail one to every eligible taxpayer the first time they file a tax return. It’s not particularly difficult.

That’s totally fair, and I agree with you. I probably shouldn’t have used the phrase “high form of humor”. I more meant “worthwhile form of humor”.

I’m not the comedy police or anything, I just don’t want to end up here:

That’s me! Cringe and proud.

Shitposting is just pretending to be stupid/racist/shitty for laughs/attention, right? Pretty low form of humor, if you ask me (no one did), but I’m also guessing a lot of shitposters aren’t just pretending.

I like a laugh as much as the next person, but we can’t sit around going “Why are people in this country so fucking stupid/racist/shitty?” while simultaneously elevating “acting” stupid to some high form of humor. You see how that’s counterproductive, right?

“Infidelity does not consist in believing, or in disbelieving; it consists in professing to believe what he does not believe. It is impossible to calculate the moral mischief, if I may so express it, that mental lying has produced in society. When a man has so far corrupted and prostituted the chastity of his mind, as to subscribe his professional belief to things he does not believe, he has prepared himself for the commission of every other crime.” - Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason

“Any community that gets its laughs by pretending to be idiots will eventually be flooded by actual idiots who mistakenly believe that they’re in good company.” - Jason Garrett-Glaser

Where did I claim that DEI is rational or irrational? DEI is an evidence-based practice.

Ed: Be sure to look at who you’re engaging with. I have not “changed my argument” as I have only just begun discussing this here.

Never assume rationality in an irrational world. We don’t live in econ 101 class where the assumption of rational actors is used to simplify equations for freshmen.

Putting Rational Actors in Their Place: Economics and Phenomenology

Law and Behavioral Science: Removing the Rationality Assumption from Law and Economics

What sort of evidence would it take to convince you that DEI programs have been a net positive for US businesses?

Too bad about all the lead in them. They’re not as bad as some brands, though.