The shooter was supposedly a fan of history, a history buff. Let's assume the meme about men thinking about the Roman empire was true. The guy might've been a fan of democracy, looked at the fate of the Roman republic, saw the writing on the wall, and decided that he wanted to prevent that, and also make history in some way too.
Sorry I keep editing my original post, added a few things. I don't disagree with that sentiment. Just thought I'd put out some information that not a lot of people here in the US or in Europe, may know much about.
The "Han Chinese" ethnic category is actually a lot less secure in its definition than one would think. Not defending the Chinese government, far from it actually. The CCP has a vested interest in promoting a unitary ethnic identity in the idea of "Han Chinese".
Despite that though, strong identities often tied to the various unique cultural differences and "dialects"(modern day linguists often consider alot of these "Han Chinese" dialects as really, distinct languages with unique and sometimes mutually unintelligible phonetic differences, with the caveat being somewhat similar grammar, tied together through a common logographic script and considered part of a broader family tree of sinitic languages), survive despite that.
It's why overseas Chinese who sequester themselves in various Chinese communities, oftentimes identify as "Cantonese" or "Teochew" and other terms that, although tied to this greater "idea" of "Han Chinese", they think to be distinct from one another.
Like they were their own ethnic groups.
"Han Chinese" is, at least I think, an idea closer to pan-ethnicity, than it is it's own ethnicity.
When it comes to the Chinese language, the main "dialect" is mandarin, and the CCP has done a good job in slowly eradicating other "dialects"(languages). With one of their strategies being, well, classifying as many sinitic languages as possible as, "dialects". The loss of these "dialects", these languages, are tragic.
"A language is a dialect with an army and navy" - Max Weinreich
Don't get me wrong, I don't like this too, but let's be realistic. The rich wield political influence through their funding of various media and propaganda groups, which tends to have a big effect on a population. Then again this is France, and maybe my American cynicism is bleeding through...
I dislike the nature argument since it's often used to entirely sidestep the nurture argument. I think that maybe it might be better as a society to restrict children(not legally) from, or atleast reduce their usage of, social networking and social media sites, atleast until their teens.
I mean I wouldn't call all people who want Biden to drop out as intentionally being for Trump. Alot of it is fear, panic, and maybe a bit of ignorance of historical trends. By alot of historical metrics, it does increase the chance for Trump winning, I'll admit that. But I wouldn't say that it's guaranteed.
I don't think it's realistic or pragmatic to expect a perfect direct democracy system. Trying to get as close to one as feasibly possible can be a goal though, and once we're at that point, try to continually and slowly improve that direct democracy system until it's even closer and closer and closer, ad infinitum.
Spore prints can be useful for identification too