ok

Before concluding that it's self-censorship I say we need a comparison. For example, if you go up to someone in the street and ask "What is a toothbrush?" you will probably see them tense up and look shifty. This is probably not because they are censoring their thoughts. It's more likely because some stranger has just accosted them with an unclear and possibly provocative intent and they are not sure how to react. — Cuthbert

But than they would answer with "it's that thing that you brush your teeth with", instead of "eee... it can be whatever you want to be, who am I to judge?"

As Nietzsche again puts it: “Life always lives at the expense of other life’—he who does not grasp this has not taken even the first step toward honesty with himself.”
“The horse eats the grass; the lion kills the horse; the man rides the horse and kills the lion. Life is an ongoing struggle between strong and weak, predator and prey. Cooperation and trade are possible, but they are superficial interludes between more fundamental animal facts about life.

Probably people mirror their own emotions onto others. A weak person, who is afraid of all kinds of suffering or violence, will be overly protective of others. Same a person who is ok with suffering himself as an inevitable part of life, doesn't have an urge to rid the world of suffering at any cost, as they understand that some degree of suffering is needed for one's growth and without it people would become weak and pathetic.

But if, for instance, a film-maker makes huge money through a porn movie or a movie that celebrates evil deeds (like murder, rape, asf.), then that money should be taken away and put into something more brookful (useful) – perhaps even given to said space-faring billionaire! What I propose in this example is to effectively hinder the buyers of the porn movie from wasting their money on porn; the film should never be made, and its would-have-been-buyers should invest their money into spaceflight instead of porn. — Tristan L

Proponents of the free market would argue that having a single entity that determines what is "good" or "bad" for other people would be way more dangerous than having every person spend his own money as he pleases. As you have already see the government waging the war on poverty and losing, waging a war on drugs and also losing.

Putting it simple, different people have different values. For example you care deeply and Ulyana and despise someone having a yacht. While someone else cares deeply about his yacht and despises people like Ulyana.
And, of course, each side is perfectly assured of their self-righteousness.

I don't think many countries make their goods all the way up from raw materials. Maybe China does?

But I get your point. Manufacturerung isn't their forte, but they do meet a lot of their own needs through their own industries. — Tate

We'll see how that works out in the upcoming month. )

Russia’s machine-building industry provides most of the country’s needs, including steam boilers and turbines, electric generators, grain combines, automobiles, and electric locomotives, and it fills much of its demand for shipbuilding, electric-power-generating and transmitting equipment, consumer durables, machine tools, instruments, and automation components. Russia’s factories also produce armaments, including tanks, jet fighters, and rockets, which are sold to many countries and contribute significantly to Russia’s export income. Older automobile factories are located in Moscow and Nizhny Novgorod; the largest plants are those at Tolyatti (near Samara) and at Naberezhnye Chelny (in Tatarstan; a heavy truck factory). Smaller producers of road vehicles are in Miass, Ulyanovsk, and Izhevsk.

Even if they are building something, it heavily relies on foreign components. Like the Kamaz trucks having a US build engines and German transmissions. Or their Sukhoi Super-Jet having French engines and US avionics, etc. They can get some parts from the grey market, but the final product still won't be exportable.

such as? :) anything that would not contain like 90% of foreign components.

The potential magnitudes are dramatically different. In theory 'normal' countries experience economical crises / bubbles bursting now and than, like the US had in 2008. It wipes out some 20-30% of the GDP, people need to scale down a bit and generally in a few years they are back to normal.
Russia is a completely different case - they don't manufacture anything. They sell oil & gas and buy everything they need. So being unable to sell those completely wipes out all other parts of the economy, as they just have no money to buy stuff. In the 80s there was at least some manufacturing, but now there is none.

Depends on who takes his place and what their policies would be, how would they deal with the upcoming economic crises, paying reparations, keeping the federation together, etc.

The EU just sanctioned 2/3 of his crude oil. So at best he would be able to sell a small part of it at a huge discount.

I don't see a big difference whether he dies on his own or is killed by his cronies, after Russian economics are rolled back into the 1980s.

Oh yes, those were the times! :halo:

If the left aren't for transing kids, why such squealing about the Florida's 'wait til 8' bill?

I would say not as much, at least they are not transing kids and such.

That's why republicans seem to be losing.

Inducing unhealthy behavior, be it shooting someone or a child getting chemically castrated, etc.

Then it’s their stupidity that led them to do it, not the words of someone else. — NOS4A2

Hm, not sure why you don't want to hold your opponents accountable. )

I don't, but there always are stupid people, who do.

If a politician says that cops are just running around murdering innocent people, some imbecile believes it, shoots a few cops... shouldn't the politician be held equally responsible? I think he certainly should.

If people are basically organizing or calling for a riot, why not?
I mean the problem with righties is that they want to be friends, while the lefties want to win.

:clap:

Looking at the issue from a philosophical perspective, I'd say that most people swallow hook, line and sinker of a narrative they are given and are completely unable to critically evaluate whether the facts support it. Be it about Trump, covid, climate change or whatever lunacy would come next.

A FOX talking point would be why the democrats, that inspired BLM riots, aren't in jail?

One could reply with "oh, that's just a CNN talking point." :joke:

How many people did the violent Trump supporters kills? How many guns and rifles did they bring with them?

Why should he be? So isn't Hilary or Hunter, but that's yesterday news.

Is he still a thing?

I'd say only by eliminated all people from the face of the earth. So no, conflict is a part of human nature and it's not going anywhere. Moreover, if you are able to keep some population safe and wealthy for a few generations, like the EU, they become weak and start fighting over imaginary stuff or someone with a stronger willpower would roll in and take them over.

I was referring to the original post.

Like what? As I see it, the left creates a completely unrealistic narrative, comparing the right/Trump to Hitler and naive people fall for it, ripping the country apart.

How many policeman killed on jan 6? How many killed during the blm riots?

prooflink? :D

How many people died as a result? Which side did the shooting?

White supremacist or Nazi? Hatred of Blacks and Jews, racism equal to the German past? American exceptionalism, or German superiority? Hail Hitler or Hail Trump? Reactionary politics and civil rebellion. culture wars, the threat of Evangelical control that is no better than being forced to live with Shia law, because both religious groups are driven to control. How different are we from fascist Germany? — Athena

I am not a big fan of Trump or Evangelicals, but perceiving them as Hitler and Nazis is outright delusional. America has lots and lots of problems, but most of them come from the left trying to keep people angry and fearful, be it climate, covid, blm, Trump, etc.

Argument:
1. The consumption of meat will never be perfectly ethical, but the consumption of well cared, pasture-fed animals, is much more ethical than factory-farmed animals and is beneficial to human health.
2. A vegan diet is directly morally ethical, as it does not involve direct animal suffering, however, it may have indirect ethical issues given the environmental and health impacts.
[For the sake of the argument, please assume the scientific side of premises 1 & 2 is true]
3. It is more ethical to consume humanely raised animal products for the sake of human health and the prevention of climate change. — Louis

1&2 - why do you assume that not eating animals is ethical? why being ethical is good? if a wolf eats a rabbit, is he ethical or not ethical?
3 - why do you assume climate change it bad? what is the optimal temp. and co2 levels, why do you believe that?

in short, all your arguments are based on pretty much baseless assumptions. if you take those assumptions at face value, than yes, your conclusions sound logical. if you question those assumptions, your conclusions fall apart.

Which is why we should ban nuclear weapons. But even if a crazy dictator did get his hands on nukes— say the threat or possibility was real. Is it worth losing literally everything? — Xtrix

That's because you are a coward. Luckily so is Putin, so knowing that NATO would drop a small nuke on his head if needed, he won't go too far. So in this case mutually assured destruction is better than banning nukes.

The majority of countries have not changed their trade relations with Russia and for the time being Europe is not free of its energy dependence on Russia. — Benkei

Europe is quickly moving in that direction and the map shows that countries that were buying Russian gan/oil and among the ones that are implying sanctions.
Being able to trade with some Paraguay, or even China for that matter, doesn't really help Russia much. They can buy stuff from China, but they need dollars/euros first, so they need to sell stuff to Europe.