271–280 of 301 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Rome took some unexpected Ls against the barbarians too. Didn’t change the trajectory of the empire.
The "trajectory of the empire" is that it became the Roman Catholic Church. Rome still rules a sizable portion of the world's population. I wonder if the USA is going the same way. Democratic Church of America?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Voting the way you really want in primary elections might be counterproductive. Let's say in the main election 45% of the population will vote for whatever candidate represents side X, 45% of the population will vote for whatever candidate represents side Y, and 10% is more-or-less in the middle. If, during the primaries, side X votes for a far-X candidate, they will definitely lose the middle 10% to a moderate-Y can…
It does not stop far X candidates becoming president though, does it? Your current president is surely not moderate? The UK has winner takes all parliamentary elections but still has multiple parties represented in it. There seem to be a lot of other barriers to other parties in the US doing the same.
The elevation of the Executive branch the last and this century has led to this primordial autocracy. Say no to the royal perogative, and accept the more limited powers of Execution of Law. https://jach.law.wisc.edu/exec-power-royal-prerogative-found...
It would help if Congress wasn't sabotaged to enable this; and to have a major political party that effectively wants a king. We were rightfully warned on the dangers of political parties and it's well demonstrated that that warning was correct in its assessment. The fact that millions of Americans declare themselves to be loyal to their party first and foremost is terrifying. Evil people have weaponized the tribal s…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It would help if Congress wasn't sabotaged to enable this; and to have a major political party that effectively wants a king. We were rightfully warned on the dangers of political parties and it's well demonstrated that that warning was correct in its assessment. The fact that millions of Americans declare themselves to be loyal to their party first and foremost is terrifying. Evil people have weaponized the tribal s…
That exists in every single country, your political system not being able to handle that is the main issue. The voters are never the issue, the system is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empathising–systemising_theory
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am still amazed by the typical internet American's (Yours also I presume) love for voting, despite having long degraded into a two-party charade. Your sentiment starts out fierce: "constantly, actively..." and is immediately cut short "... choose to (only?) vote it that way." You point out that voicing one's interpretations of the 2nd amendment is powerless - but voting, reduced to such a miniscule gesture, is also…
> The choice between a galloping right wing and a stagnant center-right is no choice at all. American elections are a facade for decisions already made on top. This critique had its heyday in the 2000 election. I can't fathom still holding fast to it. The last 26 years have been a continuing, relentless stream of evidence to the contrary.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's nonsense, clearly, because we've just elected two - no, make that four Presidents in a row who used the Military Industrial Complex in radically divergent ways to different ends. If we test the theory that American Presidents are beholden to the military industrial complex and not vice versa, compared to actually authoritarian countries in which the military basically is the government, we can see all sorts of…
"The world needs American war crimes", said nobody ever. Your Presidents changed flavor according to the whims of the superficial pretend-democracy culture, such that it is - the very real victims of their crimes however, didn't. >An objective observer who wasn't being paid or hadn't bought into authoritarian propaganda would at least compare and contrast our legal system with the true, terrible, and numerous actual…
You can't blame the state of the Middle East on America, or on the one non-Muslim country there, as much as you wish to. The Middle East has been a basket case since one branch of Islam went to war with another branch over succession, and it will continue to be a basket case until that religious feud stops, which is probably never. American intervention, as much damage as it caused, is a late arrival.
Also, lets note that prior to American intervention, Iraqis were being gassed by their dictator, as well as thrown into a war against Iran which killed half a million people. America's crime there was that it didn't care whatsoever until the same dictator made the mistake of invading Kuwait.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Perhaps this is a topic that isn't easy to discuss openly? Give it a few years. > J.D. Vance might represent a kind of domestic counter-force in the U.S. that leans more toward 'America First' rather than prioritizing Israel. Do you mean like he’s going to drain the swamp?
> Do you mean like he’s going to drain the swamp? I'm not entirely sure either; after all, perhaps only Americans themselves know best. In China, Vance is generally considered to belong to the nativist camp. He doesn't support the U.S. attacking Iran and has been surprisingly quiet on this matter, as it would primarily benefit Israel rather than the United States. Therefore, if he were elected as the next president,…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
HN will flag you for being stupidly confrontational or promoting known conspiracy theories; you can introduce facts provided you back them up with non-insane sources.
In two of these posts, people might take issue with some of the sources. The rest should all be considered trustworthy by anyone. All flagged: Posts flagged for showing how politics has meddled in science (unfortunately one of those facts was overstated, as a commenter kindly alerted me to. Including the correction did not prevent flagging): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48578344 https://news.ycombinator.com/i…
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48578344 is being deliberately obtuse; it's not engaging with the parent's statement at all, just claiming false equivalence and expecting other people to know what you actually mean.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48164242 is like a powerpoint slide with too many bullet points. It's a list of article titles without making any effort to explain how they show bias and in what direction. Again, you are expecting other people to fill the gaps in your own story.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48524049 already opens with a childish and illegitimate claim. I didn't even bother to read the rest, if you open with such a bad assertion you are just asking to be flagged.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46615611 is yet again not an argument. There is a hollow claim and a link. Why are you expecting others to make the effort to read an article and make your argument for you when you can't even be bothered to articulate your own thoughts on the matter?