I've conquered the tabs demon (cleared on exit, anything actually important goes in a proper to-do app) and the downloads folder demon (...mostly). But will I ever conquer the Inbox imp?
It's a common and well-understood word, you're completely correct, and really any word is a valid word, although it's pretty clear the teacher was trying to teach formal English habits (which unfortunately can be useful to know) and it ain't that.
You're not just gonna leave us hanging without a link, right? ...right?
It's a vibe, not an actual analysis of political economy.
People don't magically change their worldview because they have more money, but a person's economic relationship (e.g. owning a business, or being an employee) will guide their class interests - someone like Rowling who primarily makes money from ownership rather than work will materially benefit from conservative economic interests. And since capitalism rewards profit over social contribution, those of the business owners who don't care about other people enough to sacrifice profitability are (generally) more able to build wealth, so there are more right-wing types in mega-wealthy circles, not simply because they have wealth (this also includes those feigning left-wing ideals, like rainbow capitalism and philanthrocapitalism, to exploit real social movements for reputation and profit).
This Wikipedia page gives a quick rundown of how a person's politics and their role in the economy intertwine, although it's probably more useful to learn the concept through pamphlets or books which provide historical evidence, examples and related concepts. My recommendation - Not pointlessly academic or dated, relatively general, has nice and neat chapters for specific questions.
You also have to remember these people have a voice because we give it to them.
In some ways, sure, but these people also have a voice because owning-class mass media gives it to them. You can literally buy a figurative microphone. Pay for a platform. We don't assume people with money are worth listening too, they're simply the ones talking on every channel.
I don't know, but my guess is it might still be able to detect some cross-platform malware signs and detect malware intended for Windows on Linux machines (e.g. I can download a PDF or .docx that is harmless on my machine, but if I reupload and a Windows user downloads it, I've spread malware regardless). IIRC ClamAV is sometimes used to scan attachments on an email server, often looking for Windows exploits being sent through the server.
Spoiler in title.
Yes. There are also people who consider themselves apolitical and think excluding people for their beliefs is simply discrimination and therefore bad. There are also active neo-Nazis who pretend to criticism fascism to try and blur that line. It's a complex world.
In the history of fascist movements, being mean to them hasn’t stopped their political actions or their motivations.
That alone hasn't stopped them, but it does play a real part. Even just looking at resources alone, it detracts from their movement and its ability to operate. In my country, social ostracization has played a key role at thwarting their propaganda efforts and recruitment events, even reducing their reach in other reactionary circles.
They're talking about 'affiliating with' too. The plain truth is that people who aren't fascists themselves still enable fascism. (Yes, I know, the whole "1 fascist sitting at a table of 10 is just 10 fascists" line is a great slogan, but at the end of the day, there's no point wasting time flaming someone by calling them a fascist when they don't think they are one, it's semantics, the critical point is they're a fascist-enabler regardless and therefore responsible for and complicit in fascism)
I mean, it should be socially acceptable to punch Nazis.
Yes, it should be that way everywhere. In plenty of societies, it already is.
An international friend of mine in the UK was let off lightly by a judge for punching a Nazi, because the victim was a Nazi. Obviously judges can be a game of luck so I'm not claiming this is a low-risk action, but law isn't set in stone.
That's not the situation, and using codewords doesn't hide that you're referring to jewish conspiracy theories. Western governments aren't supporting the zionist regime because they're occupied by 'globalists' or because they're jewish. Jews frequently are anti-zionist and zionists frequently aren't jewish. Governments support the regime because it's tactically useful for their imperialism in the Middle East, which is rich in resources and an important land trade hub, among other things. The US especially benefits from having a strong military power in the region to threaten the surrounding countries.
As for globalism, that's really just the inevitable end result of capitalism once it can no longer grow in its own country, it must seek other markets to expand into or exploit for labor, either through military force (e.g. Opium Wars for forced drug trade, war in Iraq for oil acquisition), economic pressure, cultural power or diplomatic power. Global imperialism is driven by economics, whether leaders feel like conspiring or not is largely irrelevant to it because at the end of the day they can't survive by ignoring economics, by material factors, which demand them to either give up their position or expand into foreign markets globally.