Shit was so bad, that the US didn't need to run any covert operations to subvert, discredit, arrest, jail, or even, allegedly, assassinate the prominent figures and leaders of progressive, socialist, and communist movements -- I mean, if they did, they certainly wouldn't have called it COINTELPRO. It'd be a dumb name anyway.
Bruh - where'd anyone say there isn't a genocide happening in Ukraine?
Let me be clear: The question of Russia's genocide of Ukrainians is no less uncertain than Israel's genocide of Palestinians. If one is genocide, both are genocide.
You're acting like this is some big-brained, "checkmate atheists" point you're making, but it completely falls apart when you consider who is and isn't getting help.
The US is arming Ukraine in it's defense against genocide.
The US is arming Israel in the perpetration of genocide.
If the US was arming Russia instead of Ukraine, you could bet your ass that "the kids" would be "whining" about it just the same, and you'd still be calling it manufactured outrage.
On the other hand - this all begs the question - would the US be so readily aiding Ukraine if the population weren't white and culturally similar? What if the Palestinians were white and christian?
Even if the third party candidate was literally the best candidate possible in the eyes of every American - they still wouldn't have a snowball's chance in hell at getting elected under a first past the post system.
We must enact and enforce a ranked choice voting system nationally, otherwise it will always come back to red vs blue, and a third party vote is electoral masturbation.
I'm not really sure what point you're making, but really do appreciate the documentary shared.
I look at this in the same way that I deal with dementia patients. Oh wow, that's very interesting, hey I think "price is right" is on TV, let's get you to the couch, and I'll go get your lunch.
Why are we letting illogical opinion carry the same weight as tenured legal expertise and documented objective evidence?
I'm not sure that person meant that the obese should be made to pay more in automobile taxes specifically, but rather in health insurance premiums, or some other kind of fat excise tax.
I'm of the opinion that, assuming that a licensed medical provider has performed an appropriate evaluation that excludes the diagnosis of an underlying metabolic disorder that specifically causes one to be obese, there should be remuneration made to the health system for the consequences rendered by their behavioral decisions.
Theres already precedent for this with tobacco use.
I mean, having some water nymph toss a sword at someones feet is at least as good of a justification for governmental power - and if I'm honest, a better one at that.
It's like 40% more creative than "I have all the money and the big boogey man in the sky said I have the right to reign supreme - who are you to question God?"
Thank you for the hardcore wiki linking - sincerely, I appreciate the labor you put into this reply.
C3 is a certified Deutsch.
Wild that they could just... Change their house like that. "Oh all that family lineage and history, no, no the name sounds quite too much like those jerries - the peasants won't like it much - what now? yes yes, Windsor we are, always have been, chip cheerio - get in the trench my good chap, and fight my former brethren, I mean those awful germans."
Totally out of the loop on UK royalty, because they're basically just a medieval version of the Kardashians that's hung around waaaaay too long.
I was under the impression that the monarchy's power was predicated on their right to rule being divine, which could only be maintained by keeping their bloodline inbred pure.
I'm not saying they have any chance - just making the point that "legal" and "illegal" are arbitrary and determined by whoever is the dominant power. Texas seceding is "illegal" only so long as the US remains powerful. If by some unholy miracle, Texas were to win independence from the US, they would probably write their own laws to say rejoining the US is illegal.
Another pair of cases to make my point - the Holocaust was "legal" to the Nazis. After they were defeated, the UN made genocide "illegal." But how many genocides have occurred around the world since 1949?
Laws are only as good as they are enforceable, which is exactly what you underscore by citing the strength of the US military. Is it "legal" to make drone strikes or drop a nuke on Texas? 🤷
Where are these "men's groups" you speak of? As a "man," I've not heard of any, at least none that aren't inherently linked to toxic masc MAN-man personality traits.
I got downvoted elsewhere for saying this, but let me ask - if they just ...went rogue and reeeeeeally started stirring shit up - like setting blockades on highways, rail stations, and ports, stopped exports - like really tried to cause the US economic trouble - attacking federal buildings etc.
What's any legal precedent matter? Aside from justification for getting totally railed by the US military.
Lol. Nice erasure of the existence of McCarthyism.
Is This Tomorrow? America under communism!!
Pfft