Also, it will just swap back to a Torie afterwards who will become equally unpopular. On and on it goes, new fresh faces to be the heel
this is the same take as when chuds think they've solved mass shootings by saying "everyone in the venue should have dogpiled onto the shooter! They can't beat 200 people with sticks!"
thank god we didn't have the internet during WW2 or you people would be posting Nazi infographics and whining that Nazis have won
jesus christ shut the fuck up
hey seriously go log the fuck off, using the death of a martyr to score gotcha points and then embracing great man theory and israeli narratives.
and there's no shortage of fresh water, and you can re-supply quite cheaply (relatively)
America did have a large problem with alcoholism at the time and needed some sort of intervention. The problem is with how it was implemented, with the feds deliberately poisoning batches of alcohol to trace where it went and mobs gaining control of everything. There was a way to get help for the huge portion of society that were antisocial violent and abusive drunkards without throwing them in jails or driving them into the arms of the mob.
even a completely "dead" and polluted Earth is 100 times more hospitable and easily repaired than trying to terraform Mars
Same with going to go live on Mars and the moon and Jupiter’s moons, etc.
Like homies. We ain’t even brought civilization to our oceans or mountains right here on Earth, which are much closer and more hospitable.
You would think the next big bazinga thing would be seasteads and terraforming new islands and the like on Earth, but they blew right past that. China, Saudis and the gulf states are the only ones trying to do the terraforming sci-fi stuff.
Plenty of places in the world where gambling industries are banned, and it works pretty well.
nah, any bookie or house or casino needs to go. There shouldn't be any "officials" allowed to take bets whatsoever, as this leads to gambling industry. Small scale bets between individuals is fine, but once a house is involved and taking a cut it's crossed the line
I couldn't care less if someone wants to smoke themselves to death.
do you really truly believe this? would you say this about your parents or loved ones if they were smoking a pack a day and had emphysema and lung cancer? You wouldn't stage any kind of intervention to try and get them to quit and get them help? If they kept smoking, you wouldn't take their cigarettes away from them?
I extend the care that I feel towards my immediate loved ones to society at large. I am deeply saddened by deaths of despair, of millions of people killing themselves slowly with alcohol, tobacco and opiates. I don't think it's right to let them die without trying to help, just like I don't think it would be right to let someone you notice struggling to swim drown right next to you. We have obligations to love and help each other, and I would never let a loved one drink themselves to death if I could help it, so why would I let my fellow humanity do it just because I don't personally know them?
Libertarianism, individualism and voluntarism that you espouse completely ignores human interconnectivity and our obligations and duties. It pretends there is no obligation or duty to society.
it's following your logic to its ends. If I have the right to drink myself to death then I also have the right to sell my body into slavery right?
it won't be "me"
it will be the democratic bodies of the working class. And yes, they will get to set rules and regulations and laws you have to follow
only idealists scream for consistency in everything. embrace living in contradictions and struggling with them
oh ok lets get rid of labor laws, since I signed a contract agreeing to the risk of harm for the money. It's all part of the voluntary exchange and I don't want no nanny state government telling me I can't sell myself into contract slavery! It's my body!