I agree the glee some have around China supposedly failing is misguided at best and just spurred on by propaganda.
That said the last decades of explosive economic growth in China is because they adopted more Western economic policy, albeit with more far reaching government control. Calling the economic system of China "communist" is misleading, sure it's the communist party that rules and set the system up. But it shares much more with a modern capitalistic system than the economic systems we've seen in other communist states.
As for political system it feels very ominous to read a text that very clearly hints that democracy is not any better than authoritarian systems. I also strongly feel that is a bit of a reverse from how it normally goes.
Democracy is the ideal state, the good in theory but with flaws in practise. Just as marxist / socialist systems are wonderful in theory but in practice has had problems.
I reject the notion that anything existing today is optimal. And I very much believe that the optimal path is somewhere in-between China and US policy for a lot of things. And to the left of China for some.
Finally, excusing human rights abuses by proclaiming "they do it too!" is just distasteful.
Yeah, personally I have strong issues with "daddy" roleplay where the girl / woman obviously acts, talks and dresses like someone underage or even a little kid (commonly referred to as age play). But I also accept that what they do is their business and no one is harmed. I also strongly object to scat play and animal play but once again. Their business and no one is harmed (well, scat play can be iffy... But it's consensual and you're "harmed" by BDSM or boxing in a much more direct manner).
In essence I see this as really no different than allowing GTA where you play as a thug with the ability to slaughter innocents with impunity. It's all fantasy and we (the majority) don't believe it actually increases the likelihood of you doing it for real in any meaningful way. Same applies to all forms of roleplay, virtual or in real life.
As such this is just daft fear mongering and as you say dilutes child abuse in a way that can move resources away from protecting / helping actual kids to stopping safe and consensual adult roleplay. Which is very counterproductive.
The problem really would be if the police want to investigate properly or not. It's often very easy to see if the body has been moved into a place where you're allowed to threaten them, i.e. a "premise" as defined by the law in question. And further easy to see if any weapons present are planted or not. And wether any traces exist to prove or disprove the charge claim. Like footsteps, distance between where the shot was fired and the body etc. but it's of course entirely possible that the Police go "his story checks out, the illegal charged him with a weapon". Without doing any police work. But in that case very few laws help anyway.
"
B. A person may use deadly physical force under subsection A only in the defense of himself or third persons as described in sections 13-405 and 13-406.
"
Yeah, it still doesn't give a license to kill trespassers. Only ones that could be perceived as a threat to you or someone else, which basically means that them trespassing is moot since that rule is in place already under justified self defence.
The only change here really is clarification that any form of structure that could lodge humans you have a right to defend via threats of violence. You're still not allowed to actually carry through those threats unless the trespassers get violent or threaten violence. Before a barn would likely not stand as being a building you're allowed to defend via threats of bodily harm but now you can.
Some just eat a lot. I do sometimes, not frozen pizza but other stuff, but then I also regularly skip both breakfast and lunch or dinner without really thinking about it so on the whole I don't think I eat more than others. I'm around 60 KG. The one that makes people look is when I pack away 30 pieces of sushi while they ordered 10 pieces and are somehow satisfied. That or how I can kill a full bag of potato chips (300 g) in one sitting, a cool 1500 kcal of crispy goodness.
Not fully decriminalized no, you're right, but it has come a long way. And the step from illegal to decriminalized is much larger than decriminalized to legalized. The latter is also a way to boost the tax revenue and strangle gang income, with a slight risk of giving them legitimate revenue instead of illegal.
Germany doing it will likely set precedent in all of northern Europe. My prediction is Denmark will follow in 2 year time, Norway in 3-4 years and Sweden likely last at 5 years, even though I think we consume more of it per capita... Swedish stance on drug use has been extremely conservative for many, many decades by now and is super rooted in the common Psyche, which is why so many die of overdoses and kill themselves if it comes out they use. The stigma is heavy.
Huh looks kinda fun but Netflix games? I guess this is one attempt at a killer app and I applaud the "no in app purchases" approach but will it be enough to get people playing on a "platform" that is not only new but just plain weird?
Edited because I wrongly assumed the reply was from the person I responded to. Changed subject/pronouns below in response.
What.
They replied to me literally stating that my opinions were flawed from the get go based on very big assumptions. Not only my opinions but everyone calling themselves moderate or centrist, we're talking millions of people you just said hold an inherently compromised position. That's some seriously dumb shit. That doesn't make them dumb, just that opinion and I clearly stated that paragraph was what I called out. I then addressed their other concerns and statements.
It's them who are shutting down any debate here. Not me. And yeah "enlightened centrist" is for sure a problem, people that think their position is inherently better because it doesn't adhere to an extreme. But I do not subscribe at all to that line of thinking and hold extreme opinions that I stand by.
And "civil" discussions are impossible over text, It's literally impossible to read and respond correctly to feelings in text and human beings aren't, by and large, capable of disconnecting their emotions from discussions, even less when it's political. And I argue we really shouldn't either. If we can't respond to strong emotions then we're not fit for debate either. Just look at literally any political debate anywhere in a democratic nation, it tends to get pretty heated. I argue more heated than necessary/reasonable right now but that circles back to my point about politics being too tied to morals and identity. But still, emotion is an inevitable and reasonable part of political debate.
That said my intention was never to hurt their feelings, my intent was to strongly reject what they stated, and "I strongly disagree" does not capture even close to how strongly I feel about that statement.
As such I'm sorry and I understand if they have no wish to engage in any debate. I really don't even see anything to really debate here either. Unless they want to defend their first paragraph I guess.
I gotta love that even US hegemony is challenged on Lemmy, here not even Western superiority is a given which is at least something the vast majority on Reddit can agree on.
That said nuanced discussions seem impossible still, it's less a balanced mix where every spot on the scale is represented and more a fairly even balance of two extremes.
My current theory is that the majority of actual moderates (not US politics moderates) between two extremes just aren't interested in the debate, whereas the extremes very much are. I do gotta say that I too generally want to weigh in on things I either agree on completely or things I vehemently oppose, so I guess that kinda helps me understand how and why this is... But it makes everything seem like the extremes are the only two choices, which couldn't be further from the truth.
I agree the glee some have around China supposedly failing is misguided at best and just spurred on by propaganda.
That said the last decades of explosive economic growth in China is because they adopted more Western economic policy, albeit with more far reaching government control. Calling the economic system of China "communist" is misleading, sure it's the communist party that rules and set the system up. But it shares much more with a modern capitalistic system than the economic systems we've seen in other communist states.
As for political system it feels very ominous to read a text that very clearly hints that democracy is not any better than authoritarian systems. I also strongly feel that is a bit of a reverse from how it normally goes.
Democracy is the ideal state, the good in theory but with flaws in practise. Just as marxist / socialist systems are wonderful in theory but in practice has had problems.
I reject the notion that anything existing today is optimal. And I very much believe that the optimal path is somewhere in-between China and US policy for a lot of things. And to the left of China for some.
Finally, excusing human rights abuses by proclaiming "they do it too!" is just distasteful.