I think in general it’s supposed to be about decentralisation, but god knows scammers will hop straight onto anything with “point-oh” in the name
I think in general it’s supposed to be about decentralisation, but god knows scammers will hop straight onto anything with “point-oh” in the name
If someone can manage to build themselves a mega yacht from scratch they can keep it
Now, in a scenario where they are about to commit violence, or the justice system has failed, the balance may be different
Left your reading comprehension at home?
The argument I was supporting is that you don’t have carte blanche to do whatever you want to intolerant people. The argument I am making is that you have a moral obligation to rely on the law first because that IS the social contract. Not because the law would punish you for it.
Not all police are the same everywhere, but regardless, you can’t just stab people who are being racist.
There’s an important difference between actively pursuing an endorsement and being endorsed. They didn’t go to Reagan staffers and beg for their endorsement. You can’t make people not endorse you, even if you reeeeeally don’t like them.
It’s a .ml account crossposting from hexbear and grad 😬
.world is just where this community is
But there’s an important difference between allowing intolerance, and letting the legal system be the arbiter of how it should be disallowed.
Vigilante justice not only deprives the perpetrator of their right to a fair trial and proportionate punishment (yes, being intolerant does not deprive you of your human rights) but also denies the victims their right to see the perpetrator receive justice.
YOU do not get to be the arbiter of justice, just because you think someone is a terrible person. Maybe they’re mentally ill. Maybe they have dementia. Maybe they’re also a victim of abuse.
Document the incident, protect and comfort the victim, contact the police and allow actual justice to take place.
Because in your scenario they are not a threat of imminent violence, and by being a vigilante you prevent society from enforcing consequences in the way the social contract defines - through the justice system.
Now, in a scenario where they are about to commit violence, or the justice system has failed, the balance may be different.
Lula Brazil is very different from bolsonaro Brazil
From your first source
Figure 1 shows that China had very low inequality levels in the late 1970s, but it is now approaching the US, where income concentration remains the highest among the countries shown
You can’t possibly make a reasonable argument that Kamala Harris is a fascist lmao
If they’re exclusively supporting the right wing candidate, they’re not a centrist, then
Oh they absolutely do, but ml has a reputation for being particularly poorly moderated
Why are you unwilling to enlighten us?
This list isn’t by percentage with a home - it excludes people who rent, so all this shows is that nobody rents their home in China
Holy moly
Too little, too late, though, in classic Congress style
The Myanmar Rohingya genocide was nearly a decade ago now, and we’re somehow still at the “asking Mark nicely to do a better job of moderation” step, somehow
I guess the police at least are able to order Facebook to remove it (sounds like that’s what happened) but then yeah, as you say, I expect they will have just escalated to the county/state police, if anything
You mean the most widespread language on earth?