I don't understand something....
By my count, 15 terms is 60 years if a term is 4 years. Even if you assume the first was super short and the latest one barely startes it's 52 years and 1992 isn't 52 years ago.
By my count, 15 terms is 60 years if a term is 4 years. Even if you assume the first was super short and the latest one barely startes it's 52 years and 1992 isn't 52 years ago.
One of the arguments for Ukraine that I find compelling is that if we let Russia have an easy time in Ukraine, then other regimes will go "Oh, is it conquering time? Cool! Let's go conquering!" and a bunch of wars will kick off because the calculation says you'll lose less in conquering than you'd gain by having a new border.
Historically speaking, we're in an unusual period of relative peace, and once that peace ends it could be millennia before we see it again.
The first big period of global peace was called the "Pax Romana", where the Roman empire was so powerful nobody really bothered doing much war because the hegemony of the empire destroyed the cost/benefit of doing so.
The second happened almost 2000 years later in the 19th century with the "Pax Britannia", where the UK was so overwhelmingly powerful it wasn't really worth doing war because the empire could step in.
We're arguably in the third big global peace called the "Pax Americana", where the (historically rather bizarre) American empire has been so powerful that for the most part nobody has really wanted to be involved in much war.
The Pax Romana lasted about 150 years, the Pax Britannia lasted almost exactly 100 years, and the Pax Americana is about 80 years old today. If it collapses, who knows when the next period of peace might come about, and who knows what sort of empire could bring it about?
Presently, we're seeing wars in Europe, Africa, imminent war in South America, a real threat of war in Asia, it's a powder keg that could go off and not pushing the cost up could really help dry that powder.
Previous eras like this include the 30 years war in Europe, and that wasn't a noble war like World War 2, it was a meat grinder that caused mass suffering. This isn't a period we want to allow to return.
Historically speaking, we're in an unusual period of relative peace, and once that peace ends it could be millennia before we see it again.
The first big period of global peace was called the "Pax Romana", where the Roman empire was so powerful nobody really bothered doing much war because the hegemony of the empire destroyed the cost/benefit of doing so.
The second happened almost 2000 years later in the 19th century with the "Pax Britannia", where the UK was so overwhelmingly powerful it wasn't really worth doing war because the empire could step in.
We're arguably in the third big global peace called the "Pax Americana", where the (historically rather bizarre) American empire has been so powerful that for the most part nobody has really wanted to be involved in much war.
The Pax Romana lasted about 150 years, the Pax Britannia lasted almost exactly 100 years, and the Pax Americana is about 80 years old today. If it collapses, who knows when the next period of peace might come about, and who knows what sort of empire could bring it about?
Presently, we're seeing wars in Europe, Africa, imminent war in South America, a real threat of war in Asia, it's a powder keg that could go off and not pushing the cost up could really help dry that powder.
Previous eras like this include the 30 years war in Europe, and that wasn't a noble war like World War 2, it was a meat grinder that caused mass suffering. This isn't a period we want to allow to return.
If these people were good at writing they could write their own books and make their living that way instead of slightly modifying other people's books.
But let me tell you: it's hard writing a book, it's harder selling the book, and it's incredibly hard to sell enough books to make that your living. So if you're just polishing works of other better writers it seems to me one should have some deep humility.
But let me tell you: it's hard writing a book, it's harder selling the book, and it's incredibly hard to sell enough books to make that your living. So if you're just polishing works of other better writers it seems to me one should have some deep humility.
"Since the Quran contains the story of Sodom and Gamorrah and it has been interpreted by Muslim scholars as saying exactly what everyone else has considered it to say and Islam considers the Quran to be the perfect and unquestionable word of God.... I am legally required to agree that killing gay people is good!"
Huh. Didn't have that one on my bingo card.
Huh. Didn't have that one on my bingo card.
Lol it's like Google search going "did you mean?" But instead of being a question it's a statement.
"the weather is not the climate, unless it's warm of course, then the weather is the climate and every warm day is a reminder that your world is one day closer to destruction so keep watching our channel and don't forget to donate!"
Big problem with laws when the government doesn't follow them is it takes 4 years to resolve.
"We think the problem is these people lack concentration for all the lessons we're giving them about the far right being bad, so we're going to set up a number of concentration camps over the summer!"
Most social media is at least trying to sell itself but If you don't put any work in then the fediverse will sit mostly empty for you. There is no algorithm to bring people to you or you to people (I saw this post because I saw someone I follow repost it, for example). There's some good lists online which have accounts that might be interesting to you, and the other key thing is to follow accounts you think might be interesting (and unfollow later if it turns out they're not quite for you, but that's the next phase -- you pull things you want towards you and push things you don't want away from you)
Another useful thing is that if you don't want to look for lists online you can search and even follow hashtags on mastodon. You might find people with common interests.
Another useful thing is that if you don't want to look for lists online you can search and even follow hashtags on mastodon. You might find people with common interests.
I feel like after a century or two looking for her ex boyfriends favorite rock you might get over it.
Ironically her horoscope said "don't day trade half a million dollars in bitcoin you trollop"
I do think that people don't realize that even in a system with a limited number of viable parties, there's tactics that have an outsized impact.
If you're not happy with either party, don't vote for either party. "But you're wasting your vote!" No, you're putting your vote out there and both parties are looking at that "2% libertarian party" or "2% green party" going "goddamnit, that's 2% I could've gotten. How could I get those?"
In the last Canadian election, the conservative party was so incredibly disappointing that Justin Trudeau won another minority. The conservatives would have kept on course, but I suspect that the PPC getting more of the popular vote than the green party followed by the trucker protests being wildly popular with a small but substantial minority are the reason why there's a new leader who has a chance of winning the next election and potentially actually making some substantial changes rather than just being the NDP but slower.
I do need to mention I may end up totally eating my words on this, predictions are hard and no predictions are harder than predicting the future.
If you're not happy with either party, don't vote for either party. "But you're wasting your vote!" No, you're putting your vote out there and both parties are looking at that "2% libertarian party" or "2% green party" going "goddamnit, that's 2% I could've gotten. How could I get those?"
In the last Canadian election, the conservative party was so incredibly disappointing that Justin Trudeau won another minority. The conservatives would have kept on course, but I suspect that the PPC getting more of the popular vote than the green party followed by the trucker protests being wildly popular with a small but substantial minority are the reason why there's a new leader who has a chance of winning the next election and potentially actually making some substantial changes rather than just being the NDP but slower.
I do need to mention I may end up totally eating my words on this, predictions are hard and no predictions are harder than predicting the future.
One huge counterargument is that it would be successful at doing the thing we'd be aiming for. If you make it so businesses are smaller then you can't get super megacorps completing megaprojects that take billions of dollars to do, since any shareholder in an endeavor may find themselves on the hook for whatever the entire enterprise does.
As a direct result of making enterprises smaller (perhaps even to the extent of just people working together without any sort of organization around them), for example you wouldn't necessarily have giant factories pumping out mass amounts of merchandise because the process of making that factory could have considerably higher risks associated with it, and you might not have giant megamines that take billions of dollars of infrastructure to build.
As a direct result of making enterprises smaller (perhaps even to the extent of just people working together without any sort of organization around them), for example you wouldn't necessarily have giant factories pumping out mass amounts of merchandise because the process of making that factory could have considerably higher risks associated with it, and you might not have giant megamines that take billions of dollars of infrastructure to build.
Because like a good little pawn he claims to believe whatever he's told to believe by the establishment.
Loves who he's told to love, hates who he's told to hate, thinks that he's told to think.
If the establishment told a guy like him to start locking people up in concentration camps, we got to see exactly what they'd do -- comply enthusiastically.
Loves who he's told to love, hates who he's told to hate, thinks that he's told to think.
If the establishment told a guy like him to start locking people up in concentration camps, we got to see exactly what they'd do -- comply enthusiastically.
I used to donate annually, but it was a more innocent time back then and it seemed like the right thing to do.