True, but imagine if we gave everyone an automatic weapon and told people they need to be responsible for what they choose to shoot. True, but we probably shouldn't have given out so many weapons.
It's a terrible metaphor, but there's an intersection between personal, collective, corporate, and technological responsibility that we need to consider, and it's hard to articulate in a few sentences. IMHO we're all in an ouroboros of thought and action, internally and externally.
We saw the uniforms go mostly black in DS9, so I think it is meant to show how the Federation isn't totally recovered from the Dominion war...I wish they had pushed than angle harder re: the struggle to help the Romulans, the Synths, etc. At least by Lower Decks they're back to the more colorful uniforms!
Thanks for inspiring me to take a crack at it myself! If I actually wind up starting a tank, I'll try to remember to send you a message
Well it's a good thing you did the work and spoke with every Jewish person in north America to be able to paint with such a broad brush. I guess all the people I've spoken with we're lying about their ethnicity.
In seriousness though, simply adding "many" or "a plurality of" is enough to add nuance to the discussion. Starting with the blanket "the Jews" isn't a good look.
Oh agreed: I just thought the meta-nature of the players themselves being unsure of the veracity of character information might make things weird for folks uncomfortable with gossip. In any case I think it sounds like a fun idea!
No, I just didn't think the second part negated the first part. I read it as the defense being to some degree legitimate, but that he was doing so out of self-interest. I was trying to underscore how absurd his so-called defense was.
In other words, my apologies! I didn't intend for my attempt at an explanation as criticism of you, or start some pointless quibbling internet argument (because I imagine we're all tired of those). Take care out there.
Ah, so when you said the "rest of the world", you are excluding Latin America. Where is your high horse located, and what do you think the rest of the world includes?
So my point from the start is that it seems inevitable that capitalists would levy their economic power to gain political power. The laissez-faire ideal sounds good (for those with capital, anyway), but without institutional protections against it, those with the most money would be dumb not to levy that money so they can rig the system.
So we're quibbling over different thresholds at which government intervention means it's no longer "Pure Capitalism", but from my perspective Regulatory Capture is kind of inevitable, without protections against that happening. So that's why I think it's just part of Modern Capitalism in most places, and an "Oligarchy with a Capitalist Facade" is just a different life-stage of Capitalism. I'm all in favor of the institutional controls against corporate takeover/influence of governmental bodies. Corporate lobbying is a cancer, because it's drowning out the public's voice in politics.
Reminds me of a great pair of line from a Warren Zevon song: "I can saw a woman in two, but you won't want to look in the box when I'm through."
It’s not disingenuous. Jewish people literally just weren’t there until very recently. You’re talking like 1000+ years ago.
This is the central question everyone can't agree on, right? Which group that conquered the region and eradicated their enemies has the "rights" to the land? I'm seriously ignorant on the subject, and more than happy to delete this comment if it's not really adding to anything, but we're calibrating our standards of who has the rights to a region based on what the latest Empire said, be it Ottomans or Romans or however far back we want to go, until we're talking literally Neolithic folks showing up, right? I'm not religious, so there's a critical part of this conflict I simply cannot fundamentally understand.
The difference between making claims based on occupation in the late 1800s versus late 800s seems arbitrary, to me. That said, I know that can sound patently ridiculous, since we're talking generations we can count on one hand versus the same number of Empires controlling the land: so this is where I throw my hands up and just cry a little. Solidarity to everyone suffering oppression and terrorism, in whatever forms they take.
Are you familiar with the term 'tautology'?
Thank you for explaining what your point was, but it's absolutely a non sequitur. My original point was about the validity of criticizing something because it's happening by more than one bad actor. Not quibbling about whether an small part of my statement ("little influence") is 100% correct or not. My point wasn't about litigating whether or not the US is a democracy, so: it was a non sequitur.
That said, it's clearly a waste of time to engage with you, because if you're going to be bent out of shape for being "accused" of a non sequitur and then start calling me "a schlub that lives in a fascist empire", then you don't have the temperament to actually fight a fascist empire. Some of us do more than vote and complain online.