Voting for Biden/Dems isn't much of a plan either, it's just stalling. But you need to stall for something, you need something that you are buying time for.

In regard to third parties, my country has a different system, a parliamentary one (technically semi-presidential, but for the purposes of the topic, it's parliamentary), but nevertheless, up until recently we had 2 major parties, and so far only one of the 2 ever won an election, and all my life I've often heard the argument of "useful vote" ("voting for someone else is a waste of your vote") as a justification to vote for one of them, even from journalists and pundits. But the far right, for one reason or another, simply didn't care about a "useful vote", and just voted for who they wanted; that is why in our last elections, and for the first time since we've had elections, everyone was now talking about 3 choices for a useful vote.

I know it's a different system, but the point of the story is that you are engaging in a self-fulfilling prophecy. Neither democrats nor republicans will ever want to change the system because it will hurt them. Voting blue instead of red is a stalling tactic to stop/delay the fascists, but it doesn't actually solve anything.

I think they mean if you're a woman (trans or cis), it can be terrifying to meet with people. At least that's how I interpreted it.

Edit: Perhaps they are also talking about non-binary people, which is why they chose the words "not male presenting".

The fact that most comments here seem to be talking about stone henge says otherwise. If not for what happened to stone henge recently, people might not have paid this much attention to this.

It's an older game, but I would say Dragon Age: Origins (the DLCs/complete edition make it even better).

There are fewer companions and most of them are human IIRC, but overall I think they are better fleshed out and more interesting. I liked them all more than most BG3 companions, perhaps in part because they aren't all nymphomaniac bisexuals who try to jump in your pants as soon as you look them in the eye and say "hello".

The story is perhaps a bit more grounded than in BG3, but I overall liked it more and though the overall world and cast of characters were more interesting. You even get a unique starting area depending on your race/class! And even though BG3 is perhaps larger in terms of actual map area, but in DA:O you explore so much more of the world and go through so many different areas with different societies/kingdoms that it ends up feeling bigger and richer in lore, IMO.

Other than that, I would maybe also add Planescape: Torment(*), Fallout: New Vegas, Disco Elysium.

^Yes,^ ^I^ ^am^ ^aware^ ^I^ ^am^ ^a^ ^basic^ ^bitch.^

(*) Disclaimer for Planescape: Torment; the last third or so of the game was made by a different team, and you can definitely tell, but it's worth getting through to the ending.

EDIT:

I forgot to mention this, but it might be important to some people: regarding combat, in DA:O it's just ok, in P:T and FNV it's just there to get you through the story, and Disco Elysium doesn't even really have combat. BG3 has by far the best combat, so if that's something that is important to you, then it's worth to keep that in mind.

Yeah, god forbid people get angry when others make sexist remarks! They must be real misogynists for not liking sexism!

If you replaced the "man" with "black man" or "black person", or if someone said this with immigrants, it wouldn't need to be explained to you or anyone why this is a pretty fucked up thing to say, but for some reason when it's just "man" it's okay and anyone who disagrees is a misogynist, according to you. If I made a general frustrated remark about women, plenty of people would take issue with it, and I don't think you'd would be saying "it wasn’t meant to be a debate, it was meant to illustrate a point", would you?

How about just stop using sexist rhetoric? There are a lot of people on your side who would agree with you if you just dropped the needlessly sexist and divisive rhetoric.

And before you get there - and if not you then I'm sure someone will think of saying it - yes, it's true that the world and system we live in isn't as hostile to men as women, black people, and immigrants, but progressive spaces definitely tend to be the opposite. And believe it or not, that actually has an effect with pushing younger men into the arms of the alt right; you can insult them and just call them fascists if you like, but that doesn't change the reality that young hormonal men going into progressive spaces and seeing this kind of rhetoric will feel excluded, pushed out, and like the world is against them.

Maybe keep reading:

By the post-World War II period and its economic consensus and expansion, most social democrats in Europe had abandoned their ideological connection to orthodox Marxism. They shifted their emphasis toward social policy reform as a compromise between capitalism to socialism.[108]

In Britain, the social democratic Gaitskellites emphasized the goals of personal liberty, social welfare, and social equality.[111] The Gaitskellites were part of a political consensus between the Labour and Conservative parties, famously dubbed Butskellism.

You can also look at European countries which are social democracies, and you will see they are all capitalist countries. Here, also from wiki. I can tell you here in Portugal we have 2 parties which, according to the wiki, are also Social Democratic parties, and they are also the only two parties who have ever been in power. I can tell you first hand, I live in a capitalist system. According to the wiki, the UK's Labour Party "is a political party in the United Kingdom that has been described as being an alliance of social democrats, democratic socialists and trade unionists", do they seem socialist to you? And before you claim that they are because "they also have democratic socialists", that would mean that by transitive property, USA's Dem party is a socialist party. I guess the USA is socialist after all!

The two main avenues are slow change through existing means and violent revolution. The latter all but guarantees an autocratic takeover if the revolutionaries don’t already have a new government ready to go. Which is not something I’ve ever seen even touched in when people talk revolution.

Applied in practice it means that the period of the actual revolution, the so-called transitory stage, must be the introduction, the prelude to the new social conditions. (...)

To-day is the parent of to-morrow. The present casts its shadow far into the future. That is the law of life, individual and social. Revolution that divests itself of ethical values thereby lays the foundation of injustice, deceit, and oppression for the future society. The means used to prepare the future become its cornerstone. Witness the tragic condition of Russia. (...)

It cannot be sufficiently emphasized that revolution is in vain unless inspired by its ultimate ideal. Revolutionary methods must be in tune with revolutionary aims. The means used to further the revolution must harmonize with its purposes. In short, the ethical values which the revolution is to establish in the new society must be initiated with the revolutionary activities of the so-called transitional period. The latter can serve as a real and dependable bridge to the better life only if built of the same material as the life to be achieved. Revolution is the mirror of the coming day; it is the child that is to be the Man of To-morrow.

• Emma Goldman, Afterword of My Disillusionment in Russia

A few things to address:

1. There is plenty of room between "Social Democrat" and "Tankie"; and social democracy is still capitalism. I don't know exactly what idea you have of Europe, but we're not free from corporations.

2. I don't know if that is what you are implying, but accusing Biden of supporting genocide does not make someone a tankie. Plenty of countries have condemned Israel and accused Israel of genocide or "committing genocidal actions", are all of them "tankies"?

3. Republicans are (for the most part) Liberal Conservatives, the Dems (for the most part) are Liberal Progressives. They are all capitalists. Biden vs Trump has nothing to do with this conversation.

Read up on the Paris Commune, read Homage to Catalonia by Orwell, read up on the anarchists from Manchuria. Those are just the bigger ones I can think of from the top of my head, but there are plenty more (usually smaller scale) examples. Also, read David Graeber's work, especially The Dawn of Everything like another user suggested.

The common point of failure for those, was being a smaller entity that was surrounded and attacked by imperialist forces; some of which received help from other, more powerful, imperialist forces that had a vested interest in these groups failing.

I'm trying to remain cordial and nice, but it's quite difficult when it seems like usually the people claiming "no viable alternatives have been shown to work" have never actually looked into any alternatives; it hardly feels like good faith argumentation.

When I studied Computer Engineering, I met several other students who had a lot of trouble using the Windows file system, and navigating a file system through a terminal was a Herculean task for them.

Most people growing up now, and since over a decade ago, are only tech savvy in the sense they know how to use smartphones, tablets, and social media; none of those require any understanding of file systems, and even using desktops doesn't really require it that much for most people.

I agree completely with what you're saying, but what the other user is saying isn't wrong either: there is always a reason for something to be illegal, and, before you decide to break a law, you should make sure you know why it's illegal and what the possible consequences of breaking it (other than legal) might be.

It's sort of like writing a book or making a film. There are lots of "rules" to follow about how those things should be done, and there are plenty of good reasons for those rules to exist, however all the best artists tend to break those rules - but that's because they know what they are doing, and how to make it work. Another example is the billionaire submarine which crashed. They chose not to follow a lot of safety regulations in regard to the making/using of the sub, and the result was what we know.

In short, if you want to break the rules in regard to anything, it's important to be aware of what exactly you are doing, and why those rules exist in the first place.

A while ago I was trying to look up what plants were native to my area; I tried searching several different ways, even in my own language, but somehow every result ended up being about the USA or a specific state in the USA. Eventually I found one, but it took a while.

So if you're reading this, and you're a botanist (or just someone who knows a lot about plants), and not an American, I'd encourage you to maybe create some kind of site that lets the people in your area know which plants there are native. It could be extremely useful for someone one day!