I agree, It is really sad for the family of this guy, and I feel bad for them.
That being said, I feel WORSE for the millions of families who have lost a family member due to this CEOs sociopathic decisions.
I think you put it really well with the criminal comparison. This CEO was a criminal, just one that was above the law of the US, who was never going to be brought to justice for his crimes in any other way.
A sociopathic one. An arrogant one(I can't imagine ever walking around without security if I got rich off of deciding who gets to live and die, but then again I'm not evil or stupid enough to do any of that).
He was human, but that doesn't mean he should have gotten a free pass to be evil. The "justice" system was obviously never going to deal any justice for the millions of families who lost a beloved one to this mans' sociopathic decisions.
Sometimes when you do evil things, you win evil prizes.
To play devil's advocate, none of those vanguard parties were ever allowed to exist peacefully. They were always attacked, from the inside and out, by capitalist and fascistic powers. It's kind of hard to get rid of the state when it is needed to defend from other nations and groups looking to destroy it.
I'm not saying that a Vanguard party would necessarily ever voluntarily give up it's powers and disintegrate into pure communism without a large part of the world struggling against it, but it would be more likely to.
That is just pure speculation, though, because we live in a world that has shown that it will struggle against communism until the end. The Vanguard Party idea is flawed, because it fails to account for this indefinitely long struggle, and fails time and time again to offer a valid exit strategy into the next stage of Socialism/Communism.
Yes, alcohol is technically a depressant, but I guarantee that the majority of people who sign that form don't know that.
It also says, "or any other controlled substance", implying that the list is made up of controlled substances, which alcohol is not.
I think a good lawyer could argue that alcohol doesn't count here, but no lawyer could ever argue that marijuana doesn't count, as it is specifically listed.
I think there is a lot of historical evidence that dismisses your claims. Polyamory, and/or communal parenting, has existed in many forms amongst many different indigenous peoples, and it is still practiced today. There was a time in our past where children being raised by many different parents was the 'norm', and an argument could be made that it is a more natural form of child rearing than our 'norm' of monogamous parent couples.
There is no evidence of people that practice communal or group parenting having issues with violence or jealousy, that is just your assumption. There is evidence that these kind of situations could be advantageous. The child has more people to pay attention to them and can feel a better sense of community. They are also being socialized better and are being shown a wider variety of perspectives, etc.
I would definitely suggest you look into it for yourself, if you are curious why your assumption is wrong.
When people talk about psychedelics converting everyone to the left, I think about Joe Rogan, and how he has had many many more psychedelic experiences than your average person. Also, assholes like John McAfee, exist. So, psychedelics don't seem to automatically make everyone empathetic, like is so often preached.
Centrist liberals are the "left" you are referring to, here. The average Lemmy user skews a bit to the left of that. If you go far enough to the actual left you get your guns back, as long as you are a prole, anyways.
Look into groups like the SRA if you want to see what I mean.
Does fluoride-enhanced water actually do this, though? Or just pure fluoride? Yes, pure fluoride has an effect, but I always thought the miniscule amount in our water is not enough to actually make a difference to the natural calcification of our pineal gland, anyways.
I can point to multiple denominations of religious people that literally say that being gay or trans is forbidden, yet I can not find one Atheistic group that does the same. To act like religion doesn't do it's part in perpetuating this kind of hate is foolish.
I'm not saying all religion is bad or worthless or anything, just that it definitely contributes to this problem. I'm also not saying that all religions are the same, its mostly just the Abrahamic ones that seem to perpetuate the hate more than others.
They exist, but let's not act like religion isn't playing a huge role in the perpetuation of trans hate. If a person says that they dislike trans people, 9/10 times they are going to be religious. A lot of other cases will stem from a person coming from a religious family, or culture, if they aren't religious themselves.
It's not a requirement to hate gay and trans people to be an atheist, but it is a requirement to at least act like you do to be a member of many different religious denominations.
I have read about them, but the crossover between people who voted for Trump and AOC is so small, though. Its nowhere close to the total 71 million who voted for Trump.
I think it's the "boo-hoo poor me I'm a man" sentiment that I initially felt reading that, even as a man.
I felt the same way. Ok, yea we have the disadvantage of being seen as the bigger threat by other males? Because we typically are? Because of some of the many advantages we have as men?
It feels weird to even call this a disadvantage, because it comes from having a bunch of advantages, if that makes any sense. We wouldn't have a disadvantage here if we didn't have natural advantages, in the first place.
Besides, this particular situation didn't have as much to do with his gender disadvantage as his racial disadvantage, anyways. It was all exacerbated by the disadvantage of the cop having no discernible brain cells.
Maybe a percentage of those votes were because of this, but you can't actually believe that 71 million people voted for him because he somehow represents the working class better than the dems would. The vast majority people who were protesting the dems not representing the working class, did so by not voting or voting 3rd party, not by voting for Trump.
99 percent of those people voted for Trump because of 3 reasons: Racism, Misogyny, or ignorance. There is a fourth group of rich voters who voted for him to line their pockets, but they are a miniscule portion of his votes. This fourth group mostly just invests money to encourage the racist, misogynistic, and ignorant ones to go vote.
Nazism and promotion of terrorism are explicitly illegal in some places, while death threats are not explicitly illegal everywhere. So does your opinion on these flip flop depending on where you live?
How about grow a spine and get some morals of your own? Ones that are not dependent on whatever is legal where you are currently located.
If nazism and promotion of terrorism are fine with you, I don't think you are going to find very many friends here.
I agree, It is really sad for the family of this guy, and I feel bad for them.
That being said, I feel WORSE for the millions of families who have lost a family member due to this CEOs sociopathic decisions.
I think you put it really well with the criminal comparison. This CEO was a criminal, just one that was above the law of the US, who was never going to be brought to justice for his crimes in any other way.