That really is a stark contrast. What do the apologetics say about this?
Spzi
joined 2 years ago
So is social media, and the openness of free societies to internal (the rich owning the media) and external (foreign adversaries) tampering. Spreading misinformation, eroding trust in institutions and truth itself, poisons like that.
Many democracies are crumbling this way. We yet have to find an effective antidote.
Regardless of the voting system, there still is a worryingly large portion of voters who were corrupted to serve other's interests. And that is true to all (?) countries. That not just any two democracies fall first, but GB and US, kind of shows us that it could be anyone.
So while it is easy to look down on the fallen, or feel ashamed to be that - we're helpless in this together. Hate to end like that.
There is so much in this direction. For a fraction of the budget, you could obliterate both the Russian army and economy, without losing any soldiers. What an opportunity, what a deal. Unless you're owned by Russia, of course.
Oops, thanks. Meant Transnistria (to which the answer would be Putin, although I guess you would not have asked if I had not made that mistake). Sometimes, the letters in the middle of a word do seem to matter.
Very nice, exactly the signal The Free World needs now. Now, that the previous leader vanished in a puff of Kreml propaganda.
It's now more than ever at stake wether Ukraine can fend off the invasion (the outcome of which is another signal to autocrats eyeing future invasions, for example Taiwan, Transnistria*). It's a question.
One answer, one possible scenario is that each individual EU country feels overwhelmed to shoulder the additional burden. Or that the Union cannot muster enough support to replace the U.S. This scenario can be self-reinforcing. If it seems likely that the combined response would still be insufficient, a plausible outcome is everybody holding back, which already would favor the Russian aggression.
So this is why I want to highlight how much good news this is, because it's exactly the opposite kind of example. Literally stepping up.
*) Transnistria: Edited thanks to a comment, original wrongly said 'Tasmania'.
none of the people critiquing Bernie have offered up a tangible suggestion for what Bernie should be doing instead, rather just pointing out how ineffective they feel Bernie is.
People reacting to activism, in a nutshell.
it’s dumb and silly when people go…
‘OK, so this bird, that feral bear, and these goblins are going to man this racecar and attack you!’
Heh, just before writing that comment, I thought of something similar.
"Ouch! Shoot that creature who just attacked us!" "Mylord, we can't." "WHY??" "It is still there in plain sight, but no longer a creature. We have to wait until the driver has finished lunch, hopped back into his seat, THEN we may shoot it!"
Care to elaborate? I agree, but I'm curious wether for the same reasons.
I'm still stuck to the idea that MTG is (or should be, in my opinion) a game about wizards having a battle, which is mostly fought out by summoned creatures.
And this simple and appealing concept is kind of ruined by adding a plethora of ways in which, well, no battle takes place. ~~The~~ One pinnacle for me are unblockable creatures. That's just so lame.
Generally, all the "I hit you and you can do nothing about it" mechanics (to which I somewhat count vehicles) turn what could have been a challenging game, into a mindless slaughter, or a matter of luck (can my deck so something about the other deck?). Even more generally, much of player ambitions seem to be focused around "how do I prevent others from playing that game" (including counterspells, land destruct, infinite loops), concerning for game design.
So far my rant, care to add yours?
Germany could always turn on them when the time is right.
That's too close to history to be an accident. I take the whole 2nd paragraph as satire, which I like.
That is, wow. I guess it's true, but ATM it feels too high to be real. Like I also heard about two states having closer to 20% voter turnout. Which surely are outliers (and WTF is wrong with people to not vote with so much at stake), but still 84% is very high.
Sooo I just make a comment on social media stating my opinion asking for other opinions ... Alright I found something more useful: https://www.wahlen.info/bundestagswahl/wahlbeteiligung/
It seems conservative Bavaria was pulling the turnout train.
Deutschland 2025: Was ist noch Mitte, was ist schon rechts? | Die Anstalt
Oh no! You have a great point for horror fans there.
I'd even say, it probably is somewhat necessary in order to resume administration. What a beautiful, postfactual dilemma:
The Reps fear an ideological, systemic witch hunt, which they use as an excuse to replace government workers. The new workers are ideologically aligned with the Reps, encouraged to assist the dismantling of non-Rep institutions and carry out the King's will above and beyond the law.
Now when votes swing the other way, the new administration kind of has to revert some of this damage to assume functioning.
Which is where the circle closes; the prophecy fulfills itself. Now the Reps have evidence for their previously baseless claims. The whole system is locked in a back-and-forth mud wrestling of replacing workers based on ideology.