Why did she not choose to return, out of curiosity?
Why did she not choose to return, out of curiosity?
None. Norway might be close but they still participate in whaling and their Nordic model is not as social anymore as it used to be, I’ve heard. Which is a shame, as I think more countries would benefit greatly from a Nordic model as a stepping block to a freer and more peaceful world.
Personally I favour a council socialism where all are equal, regardless of any circumstance; none has lasting power, no central government is apparent, no permanent imprisonment exists, and direct representatives can be called and revoked at any moment for specific issues. Everyone has free studying, healthcare, housing, and food.
Where one can enjoy the fruits of another’s property, that should be fairly shared, instead of the “owner” being able to set prices. This would be done by nullifying any possibility to set prices or gains from this property.
There would be only multiple random ballots if votes occur. All options proposed shall be on the ballots, regardless of circumstance.
The challenge is making not only a central government not exist, but making it impossible for such a central government to gain foothold, and also to make it unattractive for communes to grow too big lest they become authoritarian.
This can be achieved by two methods:
Revolution, preferably peaceful.
Or by reform. One possibility is living together in a commune. To make money effectively meaningless, first all must benefit equally from the influx of money, without sensing a need of money. All people’s income towards a collectively owned bank account, for example, that buys basic needs like food, housing for everyone, and gives personal property. Nobody has money themselves.
Ideally, this would start from one suburb, as then a core of a moneyless world can be built, but can be done internationally too.
A commune is delineated by: being the smallest amount of people that can sustain itself on its own labour and own populace, and being the largest amount of people where everyone could know one another.
This would in practice mean a commune of about 100-500 people, maybe 300.
To me, honour is being answerable to your duties of being a good citizen. Being honest, being helpful, being civil, having integrity - all that can be part of honour.
Jetski.
Wouldn’t take race in there, unless if you wanted the alien to treat the human differently because they’re of a different race, which comes with its problems.
So do I. But unfortunately, even here, not all places offer actually decent LGBT+ safety and affirming healthcare. And as ally I think that that’s terrible.
The Dutch monarchy isn’t too harsh on lèse-majestè, though I did shift from monarchist to republican almost overnight when our king said that “if you as a civil servant don’t like the far-right party PVV ruling, then you should be free to look for work elsewhere.”
Well gee it’s not that easy for everyone to get accepted in work if you get discriminated, and gee, you need money due to this stupid capitalist system. While all the king does is look pretty and pay less tax… any person in the top 10% of their economy should pay way more.
This is untrue, you can drive if you have autism. However, formally you’d have to undergo an extra “examination” which in practice is a 5 minute talk that’ll cost €300, oh and, you have to pay it yourself.
Even driving instructors tell you it’s bullshit and won’t bat an eye for not doing that.
If you get found out of not having done this examination, and an accident occurs, however, then the police may be an ass. Which is bullshit as there’s your medical diagnosis, and autism should by itself not have consequences for driving ability. Dementia however…
I’d add access to medical health and physical safety.
For the ruling party: yes, or at least adjacent. The government has actively been suppressing LGBTQ+ minorities, with violence too, and they espouse nationalism, being opposed to a fully fledged democratic state.
Still is ongoing. And nobody got life imprisonment and all wealth confiscated for this degree of lying, nobody of them got prohibited from calling people who criticised or tackled them “ecofascists”
I don’t think I ever saw someone wear clogs there. Bicycling on an omafiets/opafiets is the way to do it.
Sure, it might be AC1 in its “purest” form, but that is because it’s just the first game, which sets the tone. I give it credit for doing that, but that’s it. I do recall that at the time it was received relatively lackluster.
Exchange Odyssey with 1, correct for what the consoles and computers were capable for at the time, and you might say the same, that it would’ve been AC in its purest form, and nowadays it’s all underbloated and too poor, not rich in detail.
Personally, I found the parkour in the first few games very boring. It certainly did have restrictions of movement. You could not climb outside city walls, or stones, or trees. May I remind you that games from III (when Desmond died) and on, actually started in that?
I fear your memory might be selective, but no one is holding you back from playing the older games. I personally prefer the newer ones as they actually do have deeper stories.
So, yes: I do give the first game crap, because it is not accessible for handicapped people (eg. a lack of good subtitles), and it was very glitchy (you could only attack the Lionheart when you pushed him through the corridor, when this was not intended gameplay). And all that, while it should have been accessible and less glitchy and repetitive, even compared to other games at the time.
You simply have a rosy coloured view of the past, I’m afraid; try looking more rosy towards the future, be thankful, and there may be less reason for chagrin. Have a good evening.
I remember all of them and honestly, actually no. Of the modern games, only in Odyssey was the acting a bit bad in that people would always do the same repetitive arm movements (lift arm, raise, even when angry, or sad, or it was exaggerated).
You probably misremember the missions being repetitive. I dare you to play AC1, that one was real repetitive compared to literally everything after.
TIL we have it. That is very useful, thank you!
The ‘funny’ thing is that Trump never had won. He gained fewer votes than Hillary in 2016…
Similarly, Bush imo is an illegitimate president, as he didn’t gain more votes than Al Gore.
Yeah, you’re right. I find it strange that people here literally would prefer to save a cat over a human. Would they really let their friend burn over a cat? A stranger who likely has done nothing except work and be generally kind to others? I think that they who let the stranger burn, then have worse morality.
The question is bad because it features an animal the person is assumed to have a band with, and a stranger. I think a better example would be:
Who would you save in these scenarios:
Neither because I don’t have a cat, and a stranger first, because they are human too. Saving both is the goal, but first I’d save the stranger, then the cat, and depending on how bad they are, the worst enemy. If that enemy did only a bit of bullying, save. If that enemy is likely to not do anything good back, and has caused suffering, no saving.
Link for those not using TikTok
(at the end it features that vid)