854
Kamala Harris backs Zohran Mamdani in New York mayoral race
(www.politico.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 23 Sep 2025
854 points (98.6% liked)
News
38985 readers
3627 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
It's kinda how I feel about corporations supporting good things. People will point out that they're only doing it for money or whatever, but I don't care. If they all start supporting and normalizing good things, I don't care that it started for dumb reasons.
I studied environmental sciences in school, so the metaphor I think of is that of indicator species, which provide information about the state of an ecosystem. For example, the presence of mayflies indicates good water quality, since poor water quality disrupts part of their lifecycle. Similarly, corporations supporting good things indicates that they feel it is profitable to do so. It indicates the state of public sentiment, and I don't see how that's anything but good news.
Same with Harris (indirectly) endorsing Mamdani: Maybe she's just bending with the wind, but it's good news because of the way the wind is blowing.
good business just backs both sides, hence why media like Time will release editions with "conservative"/democrat leaning cover-arts, for specific parts of the country.
anything and everything to keep people inside their bubbles
Depends on the company, for the most part i'm with you, but if say Monsanto and Phillip Moris are backing things, it makes you ponder what you don't know and if it's a bad thing.
I disagree. Does only the end goal matter? Or does intention also matter?
I would argue that intent is actually more important in the long run. I could perform an act today that helps people, but if my intent wasn’t to help people, then the act will be singular. There will be no “drive” toward greater acts that help even more people. No continuous improvement. No learning from mistakes and growing. Why? Because if I don’t actually care about helping people, none of that background stuff is happening which actually moves you toward your goals in the long run
I would rather you do one act today that helps people for completely selfish reasons and never again, than have you do zero acts that help people.
What is the intent in each case? I perform one act today with selfish intent that happens to help someone, but what about tomorrow? Or the next day? Am I improving on the act to see if I can help more people tomorrow? Not with selfish intent I’m not.
Today I tried with good intention to help someone. It doesn’t work. But, my true intent is to help- so I learn from my mistake today because I genuinely care, and tomorrow I now help one person with my act. I continue to improve and grow as a person, and over the next few years, I am helping out many others and bringing joy into the lives of those around me, inspiring others to also live their lives with good intention, creating a ripple effect.
I believe that is much more important than any kind of selfish intent, no matter how much the selfish act happened to help today.
Intent matters but it's not more important than the act itself.
Person A does a helpful act today for selfish reasons. Person B wants to help people but wants to make sure they are helping in the right way, so they don't do anything today while they try to figure out the best way to do it. Tomorrow they both get hit by a bus.
What's more important? That Person B had good intentions, or that Person A actually fucking helped someone?
Long term growth vs short term gain. Person B reflects and realizes they spent the day trying to be perfect, since they have good intention, and thus will reflect on their actions in an effort to improve. Next day they stop trying to be perfect and instead act.
Of course, both getting hit by a bus tomorrow makes my argument null, since it’s predicated on long term growth over short term gain. But most people aren’t getting hit by a bus tomorrow.
Do they? You invented a lot there about someone you don't know.
Person B continues to let the perfect be the enemy of the good. They keep getting overwhelmed by options and never end up helping anybody.
Person A helped in order to get recognition at work. It worked and helped give that extra push that got them promoted. They continue to do this on a yearly basis despite not liking it because it makes them look good to their employer.
It can go either way, someone helping for selfish reasons might be the start of them helping for genuine reasons or might be the last time they help at all. You can't know. I'll still gladly take someone helping for selfish reasons than them not helping at all.
Would it be better if they had good intentions? Of course! But it would also be worse if they didn't act at all.