A problem that occurs when you don’t eat anything for a very long time. It’s like extreme hunger. What makes it worse is that when you end up eating something you’ll feel nauseous and lose appetite quickly.
Someone 1: “Why didn’t you finish your food? 10 minutes ago you said you’d die from starvation.”
Someone 2: “Nope that’s all I can eat today.”
Someone 1: “You just ate 2 slices of pizza.”
Someone 2: “Exactly.”
The micro-level, moralistic cousin to famine rationalization. It personalizes hunger, suggesting an individual's starvation results from a lack of hustle, poor planning, or divinewill, rather than from dispossession, engineered scarcity, or the violence of markets. It turns a social condition into a personal failing.
Example: "They're hungry because they don't budget properly or value education." This starvation rationalization ignores the reality of food deserts, unlivable wages, and the time poverty of working three jobs. It rationalizes a society's failure to feed its people by blaming the empty stomachs themselves.
Texas is categorized as a swing state in presidential elections, but has voted for Republicans more times than for Democrats in recent history. As such, as demographics change political alignments, some Democrats believe that Texaswill vote blue, or Democratic, due to their Hispanic and African American voters, who often align themselves with the Democratic Party's liberal wing.
Blexas has been cited as possible in the upcoming decades, but only if Democrats continue to win the Hispanic vote in bigger margins.
Democrat 1: What is your prediction for the 2024 presidential election?
Democrat 2: Well uh, Blexas!
Democrat 1: You've been saying that since 2008 though.