SubstantialNothingness

Whatever gets one through the day!

Oof. That's rough. Take care. I hope you get to enjoy the sun again soon.

I would start by attempting to ask them a lot of questions. What I would do next would depend on the answers to those questions.

Read that as "CBD" first, which, you know, would still be valid

That helps too, but not as much as the THC that comes along with it

But yes CBT is fairly effective imo as long as it isn't being approached like "The Secret" or used to mask negative external stimuli instead of actually dealing with them. I failed to appreciate many beautiful moments in my life because I wasn't ready to embrace them for what they were - it helps with stuff like that.

Turns out Lenin's daily affirmations were only enough to net him a big country, and then his discipline slipped and that's how he had a stroke

What a fucking poser!

I hate this sort of thing due to my experiences with depression:

Visualizing your dreams and maintaining positive thinking can really help a suffering individual, but all you hear about is this "The Wish" sort of zealotry and you think "Obviously I cannot achieve literally anything and everything in life" which makes it all feel hopeless - like the only kind of people who benefit from positive thinking are those who already don't have any problems.

For people like me it takes massive amounts of CBT plus lowering my expectations and dreams to things that are realistic in my situation (which sounds awful but has made my life much better), and it causes a lot of dissonance when people act like it should be as easy for me as it is for them.

I don't know what your relationship with your dad is like, but if I was in your shoes and comfortable doing so, I would consider telling him that you appreciate his good intentions and that you will do your best to keep your head up and make your dreams come true, but that there will be failures and setbacks in life and it is not helpful not productive to pretend that anything is possible. That puts the onus for any and all failures entirely on your shoulders which is extremely unfair as well as a self-destructive perspective. And moreover it's not the way the world works - or else some of those would-be world rulers would have actually been successful by this point in time.

There are traditional libertarians (i.e. anarchists, anarcho-communists, etc.) and there are Rothbardian libertarians (liberal market reformists primarily in the Anglosphere). These two groups tend to be diametrically opposed to each other.

The latter is never serious (except as a grift). It considers freedom to be a pathological form of positive liberty, where socioeconomic status grants the right to oppress lower classes (which is of course very appealing to conservatives). The US Libertarian party belongs to this version. It was named after traditional libertarianism but it is not actually a descendant ideology (as demonstrated by conflicting stances on fundamental principles).

The former doesn't believe in the "magic of the free market," and focuses instead on eliminating the financial systems that create hierarchy out of inequal access to resources (because the chains of capital impede negative liberty / the right to not be oppressed). As such, it is incompatible with Rothbard's version. This type may organize with socialists or communists, or may seek an immediate anarchist revolution, depending on the variety and individual. I'll let you judge this type of libertarianism for yourself. A common criticism is that it is too "Pie in the Sky."

On a final note, I will argue that the Wikipedia entry is incorrect in stating that Libertarian socialism is unique in rejecting private property. In general, all traditional forms of libertarianism reject private property because it is a vehicle for inequality that propagates hierarchy and oppression. See anarchist communism for another libertarian ideology that opposes private property.

e: I should add I'm mostly talking about the radical, unadulterated versions of these ideologies. Individuals can be more or less radical, serious, committed, aware, informed, etc. If you were to say almost no libertarians see it this way and that in practice they are nearly all silly, I wouldn't really feel compelled to argue lol. That's been my overwhelming experience too, although with a few notable exceptions IRL.

Updates on floods in West and Central Africa this year, and a discussion of climatic trends in these regions (not good):

[Phys.org] Climate change-worsened floods wreak havoc in Africa

Look at that, the climate change subs captured by climate change deniers are on the list.

I would bet that almost every sub on their list is already full of astroturfers talking to themselves lol

Honestly at this point I think Bernie's currently vocal "supporters" are actually conservative Dems using him like a cudgel to guilt-trip and exploit progressive voters into moving to the right. Bernie doesn't seem to mind playing right into their strategy - maybe he doesn't know, maybe he doesn't care.

At the same time I don't think progressives are even a functional political bloc anymore which makes it all kind of funny. It's like the conservatives crossed the finish line and won the race 4 years ago, but they didn't realize it so they're still out there running all by themselves.

not willingly, no