A Bipartisan Case for Dark Mode

Political consensus is rare and getting rarer. So when it appears, we should stop and admire it, the way you would stop for a rainbow or a parking spot directly in front of the building.

Here is one: nobody, anywhere, on any part of the spectrum, wants to be flashbanged by a white background at two in the morning.

We have checked. We asked around. The response was unanimous in a way that nothing else has been unanimous in some time.

The argument from the right: dark mode conserves resources, respects the individual's ability to configure their own environment, and does not impose a default on anyone who did not ask for it.

The argument from the left: dark mode is an accessibility feature, it materially reduces harm for people with light sensitivity and migraines, and it costs a company approximately nothing to provide.

The argument from the independents: it looks cooler.

All three arguments are correct. They arrive at the same place by different roads, which is, historically, the only way anything has ever gotten done here.

This site respects your system setting. It always has. In these times, that is what passes for statesmanship.