Swiss and fucking everyone over getting in bed with authoritarian governments. You’d think the mountaincunts had money left over from the gold they pulled from the mouths of victims of the holocaust.
Torture’s ‘appropriate’ use case is to ask multiple people questions and then compare the results to find commonalities. Torturing one person is essentially useless.
You should watch The Torture Report with Adam Driver. It’s a very good examination of how torture programs start and then continue due to a need to prove they were justified in the first place.
I’m amused by the implication that Russians and Ukrainians have a strong, brotherly bond; but that Russians are perfectly fine with shooting their brothers, taking their brother’s land. Even the cheery Russian propaganda paints Russians as monsters.
They are saying that they only destroy westernised deviations, liberating true pure Great Russia. Some Russians really believe that. Turns out this “deviation” is the entire Ukrainian nation, tens of millions of humans.
If you leak sensitive military documents just because you can't stand losing an online argument, your voting rights and driving licence should be revoked. You are simply too stupid to exist in normal society.
Treating people as sub-human - no longer with the same basic human rights, like the right to vote, as others - just for committing a crime, is an extremely dangerous fascist road to go down.
Criminals exist, they are people, and they have as much right to take part in the democratic process as anybody else. Equality is the cornerstone of democracy.
Didn’t they voluntarily give up their equality when they committed a crime? If they didn’t give that up by their actions, then they couldn’t be locked up at all. Violent crime could then potentially only be punished by a stern warning or a fine. Why are felons not allowed to own firearms in the US?
With that logic the fact that the government has criminalized an act makes everyone who does it “sub-human” or “voluntarily given up their equality to other people”?
I’m not sure that’s a good road to go down. You don’t give up anything when you commit a crime. The reason we can imprison/punish criminals is that the social contract includes being subject to the outcome of a fair trial.
Right…but now we’ve drilled down to discussing the many and exciting types of crime. Some times, while waiting for a trial, the man or woman accused of maiming/killing has made it clear that he or she would prefer to maim/kill some more. Let’s call this the Putin type. Rare type, but it happens. So we prevent him or her from doing that. Do we agree that keeping Putin types locked up before trial is a good idea? What road are we going down, again? Please be specific, I’m not sure we even are in disagreement on anything, because I’m not sure what you’re arguing for or against. Putin type kept away from fire arms, yes/no? What are your premises?
You said criminals give up equality to other humans when they voluntarily choose to commit crimes.
I said all people are equal even if they break the law. The reason we can punish criminals is not because they give up equality or become sub human, but rather because the social contract includes justice.
I don’t see how the type of crime or the type of punishment is relevant. I don’t see what Putin has to do with this either.
No, they did not. They aren’t suddenly inhuman because of a crime. Crime is the effect not a cause. The fact is, it is well known that something as simple as a temperature increase leads to more crime. The taking away of rights for felons after they have done their time says that the government doesn’t believe in Rehabilitation of criminals which is the reason prison was created instead of just killing them. The fact is that because felons lost the right to vote and such, the conditions they are in have become deplorable with no way to rectify it because assholes like you that have never seen the inside of a prison have more control over its condition than someone that was there for 10-20 years
Ok, I don’t mind being called a fascist, but I’ll be danged if I’m an asshole. I identify as a lady woman and therefore, should be referred to as a cunt. You’re jumping about and making an argument from emotion. You’re moving too fast to explain my views to me. Explain my views, again? Bringing up Putin was a asinine and humorous attempt to stay somewhere near the thread topic , but I can see those days are past. Let’s both take a deep breath. If we don’t talk about Putin or F-117s, we’re both going to be warned by the mods that we are BOTH acting like cunts. They’re pretty tolerant of tangents, but not that tolerant.
Wait, when people call others body parts, some people are reducing that other person to just that part and don’t mean it metaphorically? Does everyone else know that there’s these two ways of interpreting those insults? Why wasn’t I taught this in school?
It makes the interpretation of some of those as sexist make some sense, though I’ve always seen each of them going along with a vague set of behaviors/traits.
Like a dick is aggressively cocky.
A pussy is a coward.
An asshole makes things shitty.
A cunt is an aggressive asshole that goes out of their way to ruin things.
An ass makes a fool of themselves.
A bitch makes their problems everyone else’s problem. Not a body part, I know, but another one that gets called sexist.
I’ve always seen all of these as something someone of either gender can be.
Good point, don’t take it seriously though. It’s simply my opinion that being called a cunt is a feminine privilege. I just think it should be reserved for The Layyydeeez. It’s a “safe space”, IF YOU WILL.
Frankly your comment here means very little to me “lady woman”. You say a stupid point, Prepare to be told off, I don’t know what else to tell you. I live in a state that in the 1990’s had conviction via Majority not unanimous jury. I don’t take kindly to anyone saying their fellow man in unworthy of human rights. If they want to ban me so be it. I would rather be banned from every Lemmy instance, than have to see someone say something so far beyond what is a reasonable take, that you think democracy doesn’t count for some people.
Are you SkinnySeagal from a better timeline, here to save us all? One in which he perhaps tries hard to take care of himself mentally and does occasional kung fu charity events?
The only exception I would make to this is cases of electoral fraud. If you are part of an attempt to manipulate the votes you should lose the right to vote.
Some countries other than the USA that have criminal disenfranchisement laws have them ONLY for crimes targeting the state/democratic order. As of 2012, Germany, Norway and Portugal are doing this. Though most countries just let their criminals vote.
I agree with you. Did you know that criminal disenfranchisement is not an invention of the USA? We turned it into an artform, to be sure, but it has a long history and is still a thing in many other countries (old article, couldn’t find anything more recent easily).
The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.
Now explain “first past the post”, gerrymandering, or the D’Hondt method.
Voting rights should only be impacted in cases of electoral fraud. If you are part of a widespread campaign to illegally impact the vote then and only then should you lose voting rights
They leak online documents because its usually Gaijin’s braindead mods rambling about superior russian technology that gets implemented as invincible in game lol.
Also pretty much all these leaks are considered sensitive info, not top secret. It’s not common on the internet, but really easy for many people in the military to access because its usually basic things like a flight manual.
Not to mention its also mostly retired or previous generation tech, so this material is probably coming from off service members anyway.
Hell even the China MBT “leak” wasn’t illegal because it was already declassified.
But surely wouldn’t that imply the existence of such thing as a ‘goal post war’? Because the term is meant to mean ‘(moving goal post) (war)’, and not ‘(moving) (goal post war)’
The Internet hatred for furries always bothered me. I’m not into it, I think it’s weird, but so what? I think BDSM is weird too, but we don’t treat people into BDSM like we treat furries- as if they’re some sort of disease. I’ve met a few working at sci-fi/comic cons over the years and they’ve always been really nice, decent people. They just have a kink. Lots of people have kinks.
I think it's the fact that furries tend to bring their kink public. I have not consented to engage in your sex games. If he showed up to a ceremony in leather and a ballgag no one would be ok with it, but the fur suit is the equivalent and I'm expected to applaud.
Some do, many don’t. A fursuit is a costume, as a cosplayer in fandoms do, and I guarantee there are cosplayers that have sex in their costumes.
Knowing quite a few fursuiters there’s less of them that want to have sex in suit because it’s hot as fuck, makes you a lot more clumsy, and those suits are expensive as hell as they’re custom made.
So the distinction I feel here is that women are people. If a man wants to dress like a woman, sure, most people can interact with women in public, whatever. If you want to call them both, broadly, a form of cosplay, then drag is a costume that doesn’t fundamentally change much. Animals aren’t people.
I mean, Halloween is explicitly a cosplay event which subverts social norms. I think it’s pretty disingenuous to conflate Halloween with typical daily interaction
furry meet ups are explicitly a cosplay event which subverts social norms. i think it’s pretty disingenuous to conflate people with hobbies with sexual deviants.
We established that there is sexual and non sexual furries. As each of my examples is both non sexual and sexual for some people, it is impossible to deem the one as right and the other as wrong on that basis.
Interestingly it is you, that seems to consider animal suits and behaviour as a sex thing. So maybe you need to own up to your kinks you little furry.
I mean if someone gets off by not hurting or interacting with you then your consent isn’t important. What happens in someone else’s head is theirs. How they act toward others is important. Feel free to be skeeved out, tho.
A big part of this misconception is actually from That Episode. You can actually google the phrase That Episode. No need to even specify the show, just those two words are enough (but the show is CSI). There’s a bunch to read into if you’d like, but the important bit is that a big part of public opinion - which has only recently begun to change, and only in some parts of the internet - comes from That Episode’s portrayal of furries
I blame the astroturfing early on. The furry community never really overcame the weird allegations from their first major convention. It also doesn’t help that people think furry is JUST a sexual thing.
And many replies here are people hating on furries, and people actually thinking fursuits are primarily a sexual thing, this is wild lmao.
From someone actually from the community, fursuits are NOT a sexual thing for the VAST majority of furries, and should not be treated as such. Can’t believe I still have to say this.
Echoing what pugjesus said below, it would be easier to empathize with if it were a sexual thing. Sexy times have gotten weird, especially with the modern internet and the specificity of porn. Most people could imagine how a fursuit might spice up things in the bedroom, not to mention the anonymity of wearing a mask. But few people understand the desire to wear a fursuit for day-to-day activities. I imagine it would be too warm and uncomfortable, and I wouldn’t get any joy or comfort out of it.
Personally, I’m on the live and let live team. I don’t have to understand your lifestyle or your hobbies, nor do I feel the need to justify mine. But that’s probably why you have to keep explaining it to everyone.
My kid is into the whole Furry scene. She makes the art, she’s learned valuable skills working on the suits and things.
Here’s the thing though. She doesn’t wear a fursuit for “day-to-day” activities. She does this stuff only with friends online. It’s just a creative community working with each other and building on each others work. I don’t get it, the appeal that is. It’s silly to me.
Most of the people she talks to are into drawing and creative type stuff. They’re musicians and artists from around the world. They have this odd thing in common that gives them a reason to create something familiar, quite often, with friends.
It isn’t her whole personality, it’s just a part of it. A social part even. It’s something to give them a sense of community and belonging.
I’m not a social person. I don’t have close friends and I don’t have any interest in sharing hobbies with other people, so it’s super foreign to me as a person on almost every level.
I just think people have serious misconceptions about what it is they’re doing. They’re just roleplaying and goofing with friends while being creative.
Sure, there’s a seedy side, but people make Simpsons porn for fucks sake. The difference in how we feel about that is that we all know the Simpsons and we know that’s not what it’s actually about. It’s just a few degens making weird shit. That’s the deal with furries too. A few degens make it sexual or make their whole life about it.
It’s goofy, but they’re having fun and meeting people.
It bothered me bad when my kid started getting into it because of all of the bullying those folks get.
She’s a teenager and she’s having fun. She’s learned to draw and sew because of it. I haven’t seen anything even remotely worth my concern. They create characters and stories and just have fun. She’s learned to use 3D modeling software and serious art software. I got her a decent drawing tablet and she draws things for the kids who can’t draw. She’s developed some serious skill as a result of her interest in the stuff.
The problem is that the sexually charged furries have trouble understanding and respecting other’s boundaries. This is an even larger problem when you’re dealing with a community that tends to appeal to younger people. It doesn’t help that there have been several very public cases of well known furries being engaged in things so horrible I’m not even comfortable mentioning it here (hint: age and/or species and/or aliveness).
It’s the same shit with the tankies on Lemmy. They write these essays like they are payed per character and link the dumbest shit you can imagine. My favourite being some dude on youtube saying “It was the CIA, CIA man told me, trust me it’s CIA man in trenchcoat, tiananmen square did not happen and if it did it was scary CIA man”.
This sentiment is very common around the world. Every time something goes wrong it’s not the government: “It’s the USA/Europe/Jews! AAAARGH! They fear us so much! That’s why they sabotage us all the time!” I hear this shit in my own family from time to time and it never stops being funny. I wish I could deep dive into an alternate reality like they do.
I mean tbqf Russia is explicitly a capitalist state and China is literally but less explicitly a capitalist state, no matter how many times tankies claim the PEOPLE'S billionaires are totally left praxis
I mean, the USA and Europe did fuck lots of shit up during the cold war, let alone before then. Totally fair if people from South America, Africa and Asia are wary of us. No excuse for including jews though
Yeah, sure, but there's a difference between not wanting other nations interfering in your country's affairs (which is completely fair) and supporting Russia engaging in a blatantly imperialist offensive war just because they oppose "the West". That's just hypocrisy.
Jesus Christ. What fucking bond? My fiancée is Ukrainian. They fucking hate Russians. Not just now but always. They tried fucking with Ukraine for forever, even before there was Ukraine as it is now.
I knew a Ukrainian in ~2016 who was SUPER into Russia. He and his family all spoke Russian more frequently than anything else and would talk about Russia all the time. I didn’t understand it, but kind of assumed it was the norm. The last couple of years have made me very curious about him
Plenty of ukrainians speak russian at least sometimes. Even now. Freely. It is possible to speak russian in Ukraine more freely than to speak russian in totalitarian Russia.
Some ukrainians liked russia, most of them stopped. Some might still do, but out of hundreds I know, from east and west, north and south, not a single one does.
There are brotherly ties, relatives, but it’s not a healthy family, russians always thought they are the only ones that matter, the rest is deviation.
Now it’s so much more clear, ukrainians who were russian speaking and mildly russian friendly now hate russia more than anyone, being bombarded does that, they feel betrayed.
I had a weird coworker that claimed to be Ukrainian and is married to a Russian woman. Mysteriously had to go see his dying family member right before it all started and he has not been heard from again. I just feel like he was some kind of weird Russian spy or something. He would call her 10 times during his shift and spoke in Russian and had an air of manipulative “kindness” that made you really wonder what the fuck this guy was involved with.
hell don’t most people around russia detest the country? like even if two countries with slavic influence hate each other they will probably shake hands on hating russia more…
It's been bizarre some of my interactions with group A and B. I've been active in leftist circles for most of my time on the internet. I definitely get and agree with a lot of the criticisms with the US, NATO, and the EU, but I don't get how so many people think the Russian or Chinese government are any more righteous, especially considering the human rights violations and encroachments on sovereignty we've seen from both countries. Not just in their past either, but within the last decade!
The situation kinda feels like how Japan justified its imperialism to the outside world during the Invasion of China, South Asia, and the Pacific. Their official stance was they were aiming to rid Asia of Western imperialism and replace it with a sphere of co-prosperity, Despite this message however, they were absolutely brutal to the lands they occupied. The murdered and raped indiscriminately, and those they kept alive they enslaved and worked to death in brutal conditions. No sane person today who knows the extent of their harm would ever defend them as a power, even if their supposed message was "anti-imperialism."
You can oppose western imperialism, US hegemony, and capitalism without siding with other imperialists, fascists, and psuedo-communists. The actions of a country should speak for them, not the messages their propaganda tries to make you believe. Considering what I know from Russia's Soviet legacy with Eastern Europe, the actions they took against Chechnya and Georgia, their local treatment of dissidents, the brutal persecution of queer people that makes Florida look tame, the war crimes and human rights violations committed in Syria and Africa by Wagner, and the bombing, killing, raping, and kidnapping of civilians in Ukraine. I don't see how anyone could defend them or their actions. I know the US is guilty most of it through out its history too, but you shouldn't oppose a monster by supporting another monster.
Because they only exist to push the putin agenda. They’re the Jordan Peterson of the left, but I wouldn’t even call them leftists. They’re red fascists.
I posted on lemmy.ml calling out tankies as terrible human beings. Pointed out the term was coined by communists disgusted at their fellows cheering on the Soviet’s brutal oppression of other communists. Said tankies don’t deserve the title of “communist”, because at its core the ideals of communism are equity and human dignity. Called Marx “flawed and written for a world that existed 175 years ago”.
I mean, Marx never claimed to have all the answers. His whole schtick was that society was progressing to a new and fairer stage of human civilization and economic organization, not that he knew the smoothest way to get there.
I always think of Marx as a brilliant economist, because he identified a lot of real issues with capitalism as industrialization was in full swing.
He really sucked on the political side of things though. “Dictatorship of the Proletariat” will always result in an Animal Farm situation. Just human nature.
I think communists fell into the trap of thinking that because a dude is right about a lot of things it means he’s right about everything. It’s kinda like a cult in that way.
Every time I read someone expressing this view, I feel like encouraging to read something from Graeber, for example “Debt”. Not for the discussion on debt itself, but mostly for the different ways societies were organized over millennia.
Orwell wrote a critique of modern society, soviet Stalinist society in particular, in animal farm. It’s not an anthropology book, it’s political satire that came from a socialist (!). I am not sure your induction that it applies to all humans under every circumstance was therefore intended by the author (lord of the flies might be a much better example in this case).
Graeber is actually far for boring, and as an anthropologist his writing tend to be a bit more general.
As Marx once said, "If one thing is certain, it is that I am not a Marxist."
That being said, 'Dictatorship of the Proletariat' is very widely misunderstood, in no small part due to Marxist-Leninists using it as cover for their vanguard bullshit.
I think that at least some of it is a knee-jerk reaction to the narrative that is pushed. There is no analysis, no debate, at the moment NATO is sold like some kind of NGO, countries that until yesterday were bombing others with zero concerns today are standing in (justified) horrors for the Russian war crimes, like if we discovered war in 2022. For some, this narrative is simply unacceptable, even if it ends up in the right place (i.e., supporting Ukraine in defending itself from an imperialist nation). The problem comes with the NAFO-fellows and the likes, where immediately as soon as you say anything to bring up these very contradictions, you are a genocide denier/enabler/supporter.
I am sure that for others is a matter of countering the US, or the mainstream media or whatever, though.
This one looks like it’s not restricted in USA/Europe, but still technically export controlled, thus the removal. All the foreign states definitely already have it, but they removed it since it’s technically restricted
79,000 rpm/88 guns = 897.7 rpm/gun, but Wikipedia has the PPSh-41 rate of fire listed as 1250 rpm, which would make this 110,000 rpm.
But, that drum magazine only has 71 rounds, so you could get 110,000 rpm for about 3 seconds (71 rounds/1250 rpm = 0.057 min = 3.4 sec) … and then what? Fly back to base so you can swap out 88 individual drum magazines? And also do maintenace on any of the guns that jammed?
It’s safer than putting 88 people in the line of fire with the same circumstances. Theres the whole it’s less accurate angle, but its safer, man power not put in line of fire could be used to reload and swap magazines.
The biggest reasons this straight sucks are: identification of friendlies/civilians from the air, not getting blown up at extremely low altitudes, how crazy spread out everything in real life combat
The spread of an explosive bomb is WAY more than a bullet. So you only bomb places you know there are no friendlies unless you’re using forward facing guns
It’s ww1 thinking. Aerial darts were fairly effective, not really damage wise but fear wise. They imagined the save idea but it doesn’t have the same effect since they aren’t that loud and visually don’t make a s much of an impact as seeing you homeboy suddenly turned into a gruesome pincushion.
Just for fun: Assuming they are firing perfectly staggered, 110,000 rpm at the top speed of 528km/h (1,833rps at 1,466m/s) gives us a dispersion of 1.25m/bullet. Not bad at all. If a person is standing in this line, there’s a 14.4% chance of being hit (18cm head diameter). If they were crouched or lying down it would be even higher, up to 100% if they were unfortunate enough to lie in the direction the plane is traveling.
Also, if the plane is traveling at 1466 m/s it will cover 4984m in 3.4s. So that’s about 1.25 bullets for every linear meter of travel (6248 rounds), but we have to account for the width of the targeted area which would depend on the spread at the distance from the muzzle (dependent on the altitude). Let’s assume it’s a strip 5km long by 10m wide for simplicity… and we’re looking at like 1 bullet for every 8 square meters… that’s going to be mostly miss. If the infantry have any cover at all it’s going to be a very futile exercise.
You’d probably be better off dropping hand grenades out of the plane than dealing with that ridiculous contraption.
Also worth noting that flying low enough to be in effective range for the mounted firearms means that the plane will be in effective range for firearms… which is not really where you want to be in a bomber giant target. I wouldn’t want to fly this mission.
First, you tell us walking is better for the environment and then you tell us that it won't be possible because some stupid numbers law thing? What do you expect us to walk on? Our own fucking meaty feet?! They go all ouchie after a time!
Musk saying he wants his internet to be used for peaceful thing is pretty funny considering the direction of twitter, and his overall points of view, let alone his blatant disregard for the health and safety of his employees.
I guess peace is another of the words that change depending on the situation, for musk.
noncredibledefense
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.