Content moderation is gonna be tough, especially when advertising for absolute freedom of speech. It’s possible trolls will ruin the environment in a very short time if moderation and its rules wouldn’t be very clear and applied when necessary

Well, the statue will be more than material when he will be judged by the law.

The most funny thing is that you believe the infernal potentates are all aligned and following a ruler. By definition the hellish powers are independent and individual in their scopes and objectives, Satan fought God exactly because he didn’t recognize its ultimate authority over his own free will. Confusing Satan with Baphomet is like confusing Drumpf and Putin: they both are evil and terrible people supporting one another when their interests collide while also ready to jump at each other throat should the situation require so, but I would never accuse Drumpf of having moved war to Ukraine since it was Putin to do so.

But I don’t see you as a reasonable person so I presume this distinction will fall flat at your feet. Oh well, nothing bad, the guy will still be judged for his actions and will suffer the consequences (hopefully) for his sensless violence. Keep seething in your ignorance good boy

Okay, you go first tho. I’m following you, believe me, just jump from the bridge first

Kinda sure that’s not Satan but Baphomet. Completely different characters if you know what you are talking about; which is not your case since your Christian mindset doesn’t allow for the retaining of useful information as it is normal for a sheep mindset

That’s not Satan, that’s Baphomet.

A bit of demonology (or culture in general) can go a long way in helping these people avoiding this kind of nonsensical responses.

It’s like if someone were to deface a statue of the archangel Michael and I went on a tirade about how evil all the cherubims really were. Michael is an archangel, not a cherubim. Similar but not the same.

Love how you ran away from your stance as soon as you were required to provide the evidences cited in your comment. Really a true conservative

Ah yes, the Grand Old Projection party.

The “party” p is lowercase because the name is not referring to a proper political party but rather to a group of people came together to have fun among themselves while making the lives of everyone else a living hell, just like frats do during off-seasons.

I’d much prefer a panel if doctors deciding my fate rather than my mother or my father who may be blinded by their own emotions.

Even more if my family members were part of a sect like the Jehovah’s witnesses, for whom not even blood transfusions are acceptable. How stupid do you have to be to leave a loved one to die just to follow the instructions given by illiterate people living 2000 years ago? This kind of decisions should be informed but should also have limits around them. Keeping religion outside if this realm should be a very clear one for instance

First of all, gun laws have been more or less the same for the past 100 years in the U.S., so how can they be the cause of the recent rise in mass shootings? Simple answer: they’re not.

But they are, would your laws be stricter the appearance of these mass shootings would drop significantly since they perpetrators would have to go through a much mor rigorous screening process before being allowed near a firearm. The copycats and emulators are able to repeat these crimes ALSO because they have easy access to firearms, don’t act like this wouldn’t be a root cause for the mass shooting problem

Secondly, mass shootings make up a tiny fraction of gun violence; the fact that so many White liberals harp on mass shootings really just shows that they only really care about the gun violence that threatens to affect them and their kids. If they were serious about curbing gun violence, their focus wouldn’t be on mass shootings so much as smaller-scale gun crime

Those who commit small-scale gun crime use the same laws in place for mass-shooters and everybody else to access firearms used in their crimes

Third, many liberals are openly willing to kill a hobby that most gun owners enjoy without harming anyone, because they personally find said hobby unsightly and stupidly think they can stop gun violence in the U.S. by getting rid of gun stores—because that’s always put a stop to gun violence in other countries wherein it’s illegal to buy/sell guns (/s).

The Australian experience after the mass shooting in Port Arthur at the end of the 90ies tell a different story and it shows that guns buyback/confiscation can and will reduce crime committed by guns

I personally want to see many improvements to our gun laws in the U.S., such as more stringent background checks, laws against people with histories of serious psychiatric illness having access, laws against people with violent criminal histories having access, etc, but getting rid of all guns? No, total overkill, and such hardline, unreasonable stances are costing Democrats much-needed votes and ironically helping right-wing Nazis get closer to taking over the country. These views make no fucking sense when you scrutinize them and are clearly fueled by emotion rather than logic.

Tell that to the republicans, who see any intervention on the existing gun laws as an attack to the second amendment. More background checks? No thanks. Red flag laws? No thanks. Limiting firearms possession to those convicted of violent crimes? No thanks.

Who is the party operating according to feeling and who is the one operating according to common sense and logic? Let me give you a hint, it’s not the blue one who is using scare tactics to keep everything as it is

I’m really sorry to bother but the link provided does not work for me, I also tried to use the way back machine but it seems no one has saved a clear copy of the page so far… Have you another link to a non-paywalled version of the article to share by chance? Thank you for your help in any case!!

Covfefe*

There’s actually another side to consider, religious zealotry and extremism. American Christians (and also some European ones I would imagine) see the existence of the Israeli state as the cornerstone of the prophecies surrounding the return of Christ and the end of times.

This blind belief by itself it’s enough to justify the expenses and costs related to maintaining an Israeli presence in the holy land. They want Jews to be there because it’s part of their prophecy that when Jesus is going to return he will have to punish the people who betrayed him and his father.

When they tell you that drugs are bad and damage your brain they are confusing drugs with religions.

Fucking losers

Here in Italy the first one to learn and adapt is always the mafia. The state is so clunky and unnecessarily complicated that it takes ages for it to change and adapt its ways, once this happens the mafia has already changed and transformed to keep away from the law enforcement hands as much as possible.

Nowadays mafiosi do not go around in poor clothing with weapons on them, the wear nice suits and briefcases filled with documents to keep on their shady businesses as they did from the Borbonic times

Yeah, I know, but even his story is far from being over. He might be dead but his clan and his way if conducting business are certainly not over: assuming the opposite is exactly what mafia would like us to know since it requires ignorance from both the people and the state to thrive at the best of its abilities.

Cave semper canem when talking about mafia and choose your words carefully as they are vmmasters if trickery and deception on top of being horrible human beings (if such kind of animals can be even called “humans” at this point).

Peppino Impastato forever an hero, Messina Denaro forever a shitstain on the heel of the Italian boot

puts the end to a story of violence and blood

Yeah, sure Biondi, we can rest easy knowing mafia has been defeated once and for all. /s

What a fucking clown in a fucking circus if a country. Mafia will never be healthier than when we think it to be dead, they thrive in the shadows and in the cover this kind of happenings provide.

Let me lmao at you and at your view of how a state should actually function. A state is not at the service of its enterprises, it should only be concerned with the well-being of its inhabitants and citizens: should a state work according to your view then we shouldn’t have any public transport, public school or public health. Basically nothing should be founded by the state given that all of these investments do not bear direct returns after they are placed.

Why don’t workplaces arrange training courses to ease the entrance of their workforce in their ranks? Is it maybe to save on costs while maximising profits? And why should the state be responsible to form the companies workforces if it doesn’t receive anything back from the same companies asking for trade schools instead of colleges?

Late stage capitalism must fall and this moment will never arrive soon enough

I do absolutely agree with you, the mistake we are making is the value we place on management jobs: as of today society thinks of managers as above the production workers but, in reality, it should be the other way around.

A good management can increase the profitability of a workforce but will never be able to do the same job the workforce does.

On the contrary workers can and have proven to be able to do the management work if tasked with this request and can even do better. This scares the managers who are doing whatever they can to hide this truth from their employees.

We just need to understand the power we do have in our hands to finally win this uphill battle against interest groups, and COVID has greatly helped us in this sense. Even in your case you could arrange a strike with your colleagues to force your manager to understand how shit he is at his job and force him to resign by going to his direct superior should he not be able to change his ways. Should he be the owner of the company: leave. It’s better to be between jobs that to be chained to a desk which makes you unhappy everyday of your life IMHO.

I don’t feel the need to get into the weeds on the meaning of words with you.

Oh my, I’m sorry you commented on my post, I’ll try to avoid you commenting again in future to my replies. Facepalm

You’re not intent on living in reality - in fact, you believe Marx coined the term “capitalists.”

I’ve never said Marx coined the word “capitalists”. I agreed with the OP to this thread that he was together with Hegel the one rationalising and explaining class warfare to the masses.

Strong agree.

Less LMAOs and more debate then

This is not a “succession planning” the owners of the companies left and the workers were faced with a choice: loose their jobs or take the place of those who betrayed them. They went for the latter option and re-arranged the companies structures by themselves, proving that workers can do the management job without problems. Read the article that I attached to my comment please. I still haven’t heard one single example of the contrary from you.

It would be literally impossible for me to explain in a single comment how disastrous that was for the company.

It was such a disaster that you are not able to explain it in a comment nor to find an external reference which may do that in your place. Must be hard being this comfortable in your world view without any supporting evidence. Furthermore I reckon this company is still up and running. Tell me, would an equal percentage of the working force had left instead of the middle and senior management do you think you would still have a job today?

Almost as spectacular as the void left by your reply. You assess I misinterpreted the literal vocabulary definition of “capital” yet you don’t provide any alternative definition to counter my argument

lmao

Risus abundat in ore stultorum