Post

If you've ever wondered why the Electoral College still exists, takes like this are exactly why. @mtsw.bsky.social believes only conservatives live in rural states and those people do not deserve government services. Why? Because they vote Republican. It's an ignorant, elitist, and naive take. 🧵 1/9

First, one point of credit to @mtsw.bsky.social: broadband companies have proven time and again that they simply take gov money and run. There are countless examples of this. This is the one bit of shine in the entire thread. He's right. Great job. 2/9

That said, what we're looking at here is horseshoe theory in the wild. Who else says they shouldn't pay for gov services they don't (think they) get something out of? Libertarians. It's a classist argument that strikes at the underprivileged--who exist in both rural and urban settings alike. 3/9

To say that broadband is more expensive to run and therefore these rural folks shouldn't get it is to ignore the countless government services that bloat in urban areas: homelessness, transportation, environmental conservation, waste management, public safety, public health services, education- 4/9

When it comes to the prospect of federal broadband, if it even can be implemented in terms of infrastructure, the benefits are vast. Equal access to educational resources, job opportunities, telemedicine, and other essential services. Economic development. Agricultural technology. 6/9

Increased innovation. National. Fucking. Progress. And, yet, @mtsw.bsky.social would say that we just don't get anything out of it. How is this a different argument for the homeless or drug-addicted? Do all the under-privileged deserve nothing or only the conservative under-privileged? 7/9

If they're under-privileged and conservative but live uban should we deny them, since they're hampering social progress, just unsuccessfully? If they're underprivileged and even more left of @mtsw.bsky.social, do those people deserve services or not? After all, helping them won't help you! etc. 8/9