i’ve always been fascinated how american cops just erupt into chaos whenever something did’t go how they wanted it to, despite not telling the person what they wanted them to do.
and then be confused why people anre’t following orders when shouting conflicting commands from 3 different officers with a dog barking uncontrollably in the background.
thank god the police takes itself more seriously where i live.
Whether it was intentionally designed this way or just something that stuck because it benefitted them, the way they are trained teaches them to behave in that confusing way, and results in them being more often able to justify the use of force (just justify it, they use force whenever they want) because “the suspect wasn’t following orders”.
My mother is a sweet law-abiding citizen, always follows the rules. But cops make her supremely nervous, and she’s terrified of going to jail (even though, like I said, she’s done nothing wrong, but that doesn’t always matter). I’m afraid she’s gonna get pulled over for a broken tail light or something and end up getting hassled because she’s “acting suspicious”.
I would assume cops get training for dealing with people in stressful situations, but from all the instances of things going downhill so fast for little to no reason, it doesn’t seem like the training is sufficient (or like you suggested, maybe they are taught the wrong things altogether). Their mere presence can make people anxious, and stress alone can cause people to have difficulty processing the situation (not to mention the conflicting orders, the dogs, the yelling, the flashing lights, etc). I know that, for the things I’ve been trained to do, it’s a constant struggle to remember that others don’t know even the basics of my field, and assuming that they do is a recipe for miscommunication. But when i communicate poorly, it doesn’t end with people getting shot.
American police are just professional schoolyard bullies. They will beat you up, take what money you have on you. If you’re a woman or girl it’s not unlikely that they will rape you. They will shoot your dog and are hoping with every fiber of their being that you will give them half an excuse to shoot you. Every bit of that can happen with no provocation at all.
Denying profit to corporations is theft, so using adblockers will be put on the same level as digital piracy. How dare you consume content without letting your eyeballs get force-fed ads.
Using ad blockers is piracy, insofar as you’re avoiding paying the price the content provider has set for that content. The price is watching the ads, rather than being something directly monetary, and you’re not paying it.
That said, neither that nor piracy are theft, and in both cases I gladly pirate because the prices in most instances have gotten away too high for what you get. Either in terms of subscription cost, or the time and quantity of ads delivered.
If blocking ads is piracy, then ad-viewing is equated to money and showing ads while either failing to provide the service the user wanted or not providing any at all is theft.
Who pays first? The user, the content creator, or the content host?
I couldn’t care less. If my adblocker is that final straw that caused a company to go out of business, brings on the collapse of the internet as a whole, and ultimately the breakdown of western civilization, then all of it deserves to die. With that knowledge, I’d still update by block lists and donate to adblocking projects.
It can certainly be both. A worse service might be worth a cheaper price. And people will pay extra for good service. That’s literally the airline ticket business model.
It was also 100% a payment issue back when I was a broke student and paying for things simply wasn’t an option. The fact that Steam offered a more convenient service than the pirates at the time was irrelevant because I couldn’t afford it.
If you cannot pay, then you either pirate or not - you don’t buy, because you can’t. In either case, the producer loses nothing, because there is nothing to gain.
In the other case where you could pay, but doing so is much more painful than pirating, the producer is the idiot - they made it painful to buy. They are losing sales not because people don’t want to pay but because they make buying the product painful.
To this day, I have never bought something because of an ad. I get the concept of letting people know your product exists, but I know Raid Shadow Legends exists already and I am not interested, so fuck off.
So you admit that you’re a thief? If you see an ad it’s MANDATORY to buy that product otherwise the owner of the ad spent money for that ad for nothing!!!
after all that capital invested in marketing people better fucking buy. coca cola now spends more on marketing than on producing the products. they are literally spending hundreds of millions of dollars to advertise the best know brand in the world.
Absolutely right. In fact, it should be illegal to see a product for sale and not immediately buy it. How dare you see a helpless corporation in need of money, freezing in the streets, and not immediately empty your wallet in exchange for trinkets that they so lovingly engineered to break in a set amount of time? You monster!
Make a game where I can interact with everything and it might be fun but trying to find the fucking key on the fucking desk or the fucking note on the ground in a dark room is a gameplay mechanic that needs to fucking die.
you can easily find out by rightclicking the image and showing it in a new tab and copypasting the url into a texteditor, then rightclicking the image in the discord, copying the url, and pasting that too, and comparing both up to the ? (ignore everything afterwards)
Palestine is not a religious entity, and have been in favor of religious coexistence since the very beginning. It is the Zionist state that is exclusive of other religions by design.
When they’re celebrating the killing of civilians at a dance party, or the beheading of babies, it is a problem. Religion is the cancer that keeps that entire region either at war, or the brink of war
You’re gonna have to substantiate that claim. Show me evidence of Palestinians celebrating “killing of civilians at a dance party, or the beheading of babies”. Without evidence, your claim is to be ignored.
Israel is by its own definition the Zionist state founded on religious exclusivism. An ethnocentric state in a land inhabited by other religions and ethnicities. It should absolutely be taken down.
as I already said above, it is because it is an ethnoreligious state that excludes people of other ethnicities (Arabs, Africans, etc) and other religions (Muslims, Christians, etc). It has engaged in massacre and forced expulsion of those people, so it must be taken down and the genocide must cease.
No it is not their business to genocide ethnic and religious minorities lmao. Would you say the same about the Nazis too? was the US justified in genociding native americans also? ridiculous.
Forced expulsion is dtill inside their own country
yes it is. I hope you dont mean that this makes it better. I may be failing to understand this genocide sympathizer logic.
So you take them down with a genocide yourself?
No. The only one committing genocide at the moment and in this conflict is Israel itself.
There’s people who see the world all lowering birth rates and predicting a heavily geriatric global population in 50 years time, and who are already starting the “live life, suicide by 60” death cult mentality. The water wars would just kill even more young people, so I’m afraid this death cult thing is going to be more fact than fiction.
Microplastic a found in FUCKING CLOUDS!! That nonsense is absolutely everywhere, and will be there forever. And wherever you go, it’s going to follow you. Rubbish
When I was a kid my mom used to get American cheese sliced behind the deli counter all the time and they always gave us the slices in a stack and it never combined.
I can’t stand American cheese, nasty fake stuff, but I got cheddar cheese slices behind the deli the other week for the first time in awhile. Instead of just slicing it and giving it to me in a bag like every other time in my life, they individually wrapped every slice in a thin plastic. I got home and was like what in the plastic hell is this? So wasteful and it was a real PITA unwrapping it all.
My local grocery is at least nice enough to put paper between each slice to help pull them apart. Individually wrapped in plastic from the deli seems so strange.
Considering that the USSR only claimed to be socialist and used propaganda (in accord with the US) to convince the people that state control is the same as worker’s control over the means of production (it isn’t), the girl is probably correct.
The upheavals in Eastern Europe did not constitute a defeat for socialism because socialism never existed in those countries, according to some U.S. leftists. They say that the communist states offered nothing more than bureaucratic, one-party “state capitalism” or some such thing. Whether we call the former communist countries “socialist” is a matter of definition. Suffice it to say, they constituted something different from what existed in the profit-driven capitalist world–as the capitalists themselves were not slow to recognize.
First, in communist countries there was less economic inequality than under capitalism. The perks enjoyed by party and government elites were modest by corporate CEO standards in the West [even more so when compared with today’s grotesque compensation packages to the executive and financial elites.—Eds], as were their personal incomes and lifestyles. Soviet leaders like Yuri Andropov and Leonid Brezhnev lived not in lavishly appointed mansions like the White House, but in relatively large apartments in a housing project near the Kremlin set aside for government leaders. They had limousines at their disposal (like most other heads of state) and access to large dachas where they entertained visiting dignitaries. But they had none of the immense personal wealth that most U.S. leaders possess. {Nor could they transfer such “wealth” by inheritance or gift to friends and kin, as is often the case with Western magnates and enriched political leaders. Just vide Tony Blair.—Eds]
The “lavish life” enjoyed by East Germany’s party leaders, as widely publicized in the U.S. press, included a $725 yearly allowance in hard currency, and housing in an exclusive settlement on the outskirts of Berlin that sported a sauna, an indoor pool, and a fitness center shared by all the residents. They also could shop in stores that carried Western goods such as bananas, jeans, and Japanese electronics. The U.S. press never pointed out that ordinary East Germans had access to public pools and gyms and could buy jeans and electronics (though usually not of the imported variety). Nor was the “lavish” consumption enjoyed by East German leaders contrasted to the truly opulent life style enjoyed by the Western plutocracy.
Second, in communist countries, productive forces were not organized for capital gain and private enrichment; public ownership of the means of production supplanted private ownership. Individuals could not hire other people and accumulate great personal wealth from their labor. Again, compared to Western standards, differences in earnings and savings among the populace were generally modest. The income spread between highest and lowest earners in the Soviet Union was about five to one. In the United States, the spread in yearly income between the top multibillionaires and the working poor is more like 10,000 to 1.
Third, priority was placed on human services. Though life under communism left a lot to be desired and the services themselves were rarely the best, communist countries did guarantee their citizens some minimal standard of economic survival and security, including guaranteed education, employment, housing, and medical assistance.
Fourth, communist countries did not pursue the capital penetration of other countries. Lacking a profit motive as their motor force and therefore having no need to constantly find new investment opportunities, they did not expropriate the lands, labor, markets, and natural resources of weaker nations, that is, they did not practice economic imperialism. The Soviet Union conducted trade and aid relations on terms that generally were favorable to the Eastern European nations and Mongolia, Cuba, and India.
All of the above were organizing principles for every communist system to one degree or another. None of the above apply to free market countries like Honduras, Guatemala, Thailand, South Korea, Chile, Indonesia, Zaire, Germany, or the United States.
But a real socialism, it is argued, would be controlled by the workers themselves through direct participation instead of being run by Leninists, Stalinists, Castroites, or other ill-willed, power-hungry, bureaucratic, cabals of evil men who betray revolutions. Unfortunately, this “pure socialism” view is ahistorical and nonfalsifiable; it cannot be tested against the actualities of history. It compares an ideal against an imperfect reality, and the reality comes off a poor second. It imagines what socialism would be like in a world far better than this one, where no strong state structure or security force is required, where none of the value produced by workers needs to be expropriated to rebuild society and defend it from invasion and internal sabotage.
The pure socialists’ ideological anticipations remain untainted by existing practice. They do not explain how the manifold functions of a revolutionary society would be organized, how external attack and internal sabotage would be thwarted, how bureaucracy would be avoided, scarce resources allocated, policy differences settled, priorities set, and production and distribution conducted. Instead, they offer vague statements about how the workers themselves will directly own and control the means of production and will arrive at their own solutions through creative struggle. No surprise then that the pure socialists support every revolution except the ones that succeed.
Am I the only one out of the loop? I don’t recognise anybody in this picture, and I don’t know what happened. All I can see is some guy waving a hand in front of someone with a very nice cleavage.
If you’re not a yank then you probably won’t know but basically one of their republican morons who shouts about trans people being a sexual danger to children and calling them rapists etc was caught having her very nice cleavage fondled in a theatre full of children.
So I trust that she’s been arrested, fired from her position in government and barred from returning, jailed, and put on the sex offender list for life right?
Let’s not stoop to their (the right/GOP) level with the misinformation. While there may have been children present in the theater, most of the people there were adults.
There’s plenty enough wrong with what they were doing without trying to demonize them with additional lies.
“Full of kids” doesn’t mean all of them need to be kids.
Even 1 kid in the theatre is enough to not do sexual acts around. But even according to you there were a tons since only “most of the people were adults”.
Especially if she thinks people in drag are sexualising kids. Since that makes her a hypocrite.
Man, even if there were no kids there, that’s still not the place to do it. I’d have been there to see Beetlejuice, not to see the “beetle” get juiced.
Do the semantics matter? It’s a public theater regardless.
You can’t demonize more if the situation is already bad. If you want a full sentence, then “fondled in a theater full of children and adults” which is equally as bad.
Also it was Beetlejuice? That’s not exactly a clean show
I hate the “think about the children” line being applied to everything, even places where children aren’t expected. It’s such a pearl clutching tactic.
It’s like when will good smart people learn there is no good/right side only common people with supportive good communities where we uplift positive attitudes and as long as no one is causing damage as in actual harm; mentally or physically to others then live and let live. Currently we are all part of an existential blob of shit. There shouldnt be sides.
If you do not know who she is – do yourself a favor and do not research it. Unless you are a voter in her district or you are a US citizen, then by all means, do it and make her go away.
"I see you've been through enough traumatic experiences that you've developed age inappropriate styles of communication as a defense mechanism" is really what that means.
memes
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.