I would recommend actually learning about what you support. You don't seem overtly hostile, but remember you are on the same end of the scale with people who have decided that my ethnic group has no right to exist.
You might say "Those guys are evil! I would never support that!" You don't need to support it directly, anyone who is even complacent is supporting those people.
That's just one out hundreds of possible problems with being a "Centralist". They simply don't exist. You have those fighting oppression, and those oppressing. Being neutral means you have picked your side.
You can see them here decently. Stalin was very self conscious of them, and many photos were edited to remove them to keep up state appearances. Plus photography was limited as is.
Basically his face had some splotches, and was very pitted.
The Hawaiian state government handled this situation in the worst possible way, but what is the US federal government supposed to do to response as instantly as people want?
Hawaii is thousands of kilometers from the west coast and it’ll still be several days until the federal relief and military convoys (which were immediately displaced on the first day) from California reach the island, and resources for anti firefighting operations were scarce since the magnitude of the disaster was never expected, and there were little to no personnel equipped to handle the disaster on the island itself since most US firefighters are centered in the Pacific Northwest and Canada currently.
Meanwhile Beijing is quite literally the capital of China, so of course response times will be near instant from relief efforts.
Something in me doubts that a country in an active state of war with an information blackout, air and missile attack, severed telecommunications, curfews, strong emotional attachments, etc is going to create a good sample.
Yes, but at the same time that’s mathematical statistics. You still have to contend with countless types of biases that skew results in plenty of ways.
Where did they get these people from? The Donbas or Kiev? I’m sure they would have different answers. What ages are the participants? What are their previous political affiliations? Why did they remain in the country when millions of other fled?
Not to mention the biases of the information taker, as those can be nefariously purposeful, or also accidental.
Getting statistics to be as clean as they are in the math will always be next to impossible.
It’s not meant to be spoken, it’s supposed to be a writing standard as opposed to a spoken one.
“E” is also pretty common and it seems to be used interchangeably with “X”. That’s probably more of a personal choice.
“X” is also commonly marketed as “Yankee solution finding”, when it was first proposed by a Puerto Rican Psychologist to challenge the gender binary of Spanish. It is not an American invention, it just gained popularity there first.
I have seen many Hispanic people in South America writing Latinx on signs, posters, applications, news articles, etc. Its not extremely common but I have seen it plenty of times personally in many places across Equador, Argentina, Colombia, Costa Rica, and Mexico.
Its not a "Yankee" cultural imperialism.
Hilariously even Bad Empanada has a video of himself in Argentina where he says he'll walk out of his house, walk in a random direction, and then end the video when he comes across Latinx in a small city in which almost no one speaks English.... He made it less then 2 minutes before coming across a poster for a local community gathering that was advertised towards, Latinos, Latinas, and Latinx. Again, this was in the middle of a non-English speaking small Argentinian city.
This isn't your typical alt-right garbage, this is advanced to the degree where it sounds like what he said could pass as the words of an SS officer.
It is also very sad to say, but even those who are brainwashed or are on drugs aren't usually this vitriolic, and there is a very strong likelihood that your cousin is very very mentally unwell and suffering with a mental illness.
Yes, but don't forget that you usually had 4-8 people per household, if not more, so its not like everyone is getting their very own individual television.
Also I wasn't saying that television was massive, I said the concept of them were and there was immense research and development into the technology. Effort that was redirected because of the war. There was great interest into the technology and as soon as production was shifted from military to civilian goods, the number skyrocketed.
"In 1946, 7,000 TV sets were sold; in 1948, 172,000 sets were sold; and in 1950, 5 million sets were sold. In the year 1950 per the United States Census, just under 20 percent of American homes contained a TV set, but by 1960 the figure had reached 90 percent." -Encyclopedia Britannica.
Woof, TV’s were already a popular concept before WW2 in the US, but their development was halted by the war. However once the war ended, television exploded in popularity with the establishment of a dedicated signal network, and it was a staple item in almost all homes by the mid/late 40’s.
The South African regime was good if you were a Boer emerald mine owner. If you were anyone else? Not so much.
You can build your own AM radio in less then an hour with a large metallic object (car, bike, large piece of scrap metal, basketball pole), some aluminum foil, a small piece of copper, a battery, and any sort of speaker.
It’s a pretty common childhood science experiment where I am to build functional jerryrigged radio.
But you are right, building functional AM radios was and is pretty common for how cheap the components are. Plus I’m pretty sure I can still go to a store and buy a small working radio for less then 20 bucks.
By the 50’s it was extremely customary for most homes to have a TV and at the VERY LEAST a radio if they weren’t very well off. Radios were dirt cheap.
True, but even with the war, emigration, and massive demographic shift, the population is still 43x that is Chechnya by official records. If we take the liberty of being generous and subtracting 8 million additional people, the population of Ukraine is still 35x that of Chechnya, and Afghanistan in the 1980’s would still be 12x that of Chechnya.
Chechnya is infinitely smaller then Ukraine or Afghanistan, with a fraction of the population, little to no industrial base, little international support, poor morale, poor infrastructure, no modern weaponry, and only one real major city.
Comparing Chechnya to Ukraine or Afghanistan seems laughable.
That’s like saying “The US could take on Grenada in days/weeks, so why did they struggle in Vietnam?”
ComradeSalad @ ComradeSalad @lemmygrad.ml Posts 7Comments 439Joined 3 yr. ago
I would recommend actually learning about what you support. You don't seem overtly hostile, but remember you are on the same end of the scale with people who have decided that my ethnic group has no right to exist.
You might say "Those guys are evil! I would never support that!" You don't need to support it directly, anyone who is even complacent is supporting those people.
That's just one out hundreds of possible problems with being a "Centralist". They simply don't exist. You have those fighting oppression, and those oppressing. Being neutral means you have picked your side.