Work toward an eventual full withdrawal from NATO and an overt and full political and military alliance with Russia.
I'm not joking.
Work toward an eventual full withdrawal from NATO and an overt and full political and military alliance with Russia.
I'm not joking.
Yes - it is sociopathic.
That's not a coincidence.
Ironic that the thread is about men dying on average younger than women, and the majority of the responses are people completely ignoring that fact and instead just taking an opportunity to negatively stereotype men so they can shit on them collectively.
Well... except that "cis" is actually a shortened form of the precise, latin-rooted, technical term "cisgender," which is the opposite of the precise, latin-rooted, technical term "transgender."
And it has nothing at all to do with heterosexuality, or with sexual preference in any way, shape or form.
So he's not just wrong, but wrong in pretty much every way he could possibly have been.
Which seems to be pretty much par for the course for the world's richest middle-aged teenage edgelord.
Yes - he must face whatever penalties are appropriate and justified.
Exactly as the Jan. 6 participants and organizers must face whatever penalties are appropriate and justifed.
Pleased (if surprised) to see that we're in agreement on that, Donny.
Good.
It's reached the point (or had a couple of years ago, which was the last time I went to a wiki hosted there) that it's virtually impossible to even read an entry, since there are so many ads that the actual text of the article spends more time off the screen than on it.
Years ago, on IMDb, a poster called rabbitmoon kept a thread going for years on the Rambo board that is still the best I've ever seen.
The whole thing started with him posting that he was shocked when, about a third of the way through the movie, there was a scene in which a character was shot with a bullet from a gun. Then he countered, completely earnestly and deadpan, every response he got.
The original thread is long gone, and the only thing I could find of it is an excerpt that was posted on Reddit - LINK
It's to the point that he might actually have benefitted the UAW by doing this.
It might well have reached the point that he's so widely recognized as a shallow, childish, fatuous, vindictive douchebag that he's a sort of reverse bellwether - his opposition to someone or something actually leads to increased overall support and his support leads to increased overall opposition.
It's less efficient than a centralized forum would be, but efficiency isn't the only or even the highest priority. Decentralization is the explicit point of the fediverse, and to the degree that that requires sacrificing some measure of efficiency, that's just the way it goes.
The goal was to build a system that would be robust and relatively seamless while remaining decentralized. That's more or less what they've done. There's a fair amount of fine tuning and tweaking left to be done, and actively being done, but the basic system is what it is because it best balances all of the goals.
Of course they are.
A pertinent point that Solzhenitsyn made in Gulag Archipelago - he said that in all the time he spent in the gulags, he never once met a person who had not been legitimately convicted of a genuine crime.
The way it worked was simply that the USSR had such an extensive and nebulous set of laws that it was effectively impossible for anyone to obey all of them all the time, and so much information on all its citizens that whenever an official wanted someone disappeared, it was just a matter of checking through their records and finding which law(s) they had broken, then arresting them, trying them and convicting them.
The US oligarchy is actively pursuing the same basic strategy, and for the same basic reasons.
"The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one's time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.". ― H.L. Mencken
So... aren't these wannabe twitter competitors going about the whole thing bass-ackwards?
I saw a broadly similar article the other day about some sort of shakeup in the Mastodon board of directors.
It's as if they think the way do do an internet startup is to first appoint a board of directors and hire a raft of executives, then... um... you know... um... do some business... kinda... stuff....