The question of giving the ring to Bombadil to take it out of the equation is asked and answered at the council of Elrond - at no point he could or would end the war.
They don't give a shit about theocracy or anything else, they only care about power and money, there is no core idea they won't abandon and their rhetoric is as bendy as a wet noodle - they simply didn't sign up to lose, and this guy doesn't look like he's helping them win.
Reading "at Bluesky" in every second sentence gave me futuristic dystopian movie vibes.
Not sure about fediverse following along given that, essentially, creating an account on a server is adopting the server admin's moderation policy.
Having said that, there might be some value in being able to overlay multiple moderation filters - though not sure at what point you create such a siloed experience as to be a net negative.
Try to name it and follow it back to its roots. WHAT am I feeling?
A great tip and a start to a meditative practice.
As an addendum: Many times, curiously observing your feelings is watching those feelings ebb away and disappear.
If you can stay in that space, or keep on going back to it you'll be distinctly less likely to be overwhelmed by those emotions, as you'll be creating some distance between the feeling and consciousness.
You come across as a good and thoughtful person - trying to help someone you identified as in need. I do hope the OP reads your response, identifies with something in your writing and follows your advice.
W11 can run unlicensed indefinitely with the only downside being inability to customise the desktop background and a nag at the bottom right corner. They prefer to have the users rather than not. Though not sure re limitations in joining domains and the like.
It's quite painfully transparent seeing the fyp page filled with videos immediately agreeing or cheering whatever the Chinese gov has decided their agenda is this month. And of course you need to go hunting to find the mildest of criticism of Chinese gov policies and absolutely nothing on individual high ranking members of CCP.
Government is bad except when it comes to brutal subjugation of out-groups I don't like, while the in-group gets protected and treated with kid gloves by the same.
Unfortunately most of them are the dupes not the protected class they think they are - "they're hurting the wrong people" summed it up when it was uttered..
I mean you are right, but hopefully we learnt our lesson when we got the current supreme court because Hillary was not pure like Sanders.
So long as we keep in mind that their goal is to split the working class in manageable little pieces we can put our differences aside to come together to at least stop the slide and hopefully take a few steps in the right direction.
Have you heard of virtual debit cards? You can't charge what's not there.
Also, at least AWS will in fact send you an email when you approach the end of free tour usage.
Having said all that, most devs can host the few hundred visits they might get over a month with a $200 home server and a free CloudFlare cache if they know what they're doing.
This is their classic pincer maneuver employed by the establishment - and it works really well: the left wing candidate is both too left and not left enough.
You see it in every election.
It works so well because they own mainstream media so they can run all narratives at the same time as opinion pieces to hamstrung the left. That's how the ratchet works also.
First move of any new management is to take the worst possible stocktake and shine the worst possible light to last management's figures. Then any meagre positive movement or even if things remain the same will look like improvement.
I didn't project beyond what conclusions your comment lead me to.
Please do not put words in my mouth
See, if I were to quote you directly I would have done it like this.
Instead I used quotes without the indent, to paraphrase you in a way that I thought both accurately condensed and focused what you wrote in a way that highlighted what it came across to me as a ridiculous question.
Given the threaded discussion structure where anyone can go back and see exactly what a person has written, the idea that I am somehow able to misrepresent you is a rather odd take.
Perhaps "defeatist"?
No.
Sounded more like existential nihilism to me.
Paraphrasing me as saying "they'll win anyway" in regards to fascists (nazis or otherwise) strips what I said of important context.
You literally wrote
until fascism wins anyway
But I did strip the context of neoliberalism because I answered it a sentence later by urging you to get involved to make the world you want.
There's nothing "lucky" about voting, anymore there's lucky in cleaning. You either clean or you'll live in filth. You either defend your rights or you have them eroded and taken away.
The Republicans were not always fascists and the Democrats were not always so neoliberal which means things can change if enough people get involved to change them.
Unions, local elections, political activism etc all matter.
You don't expect perfection, you get involved and you vote in the public transport analogy.
This "they'll win anyway" is some miserly nihilistic take - we've won against the Nazis before we'll win again.
"how many times are as supposed to vote to prevent the fascists from gaining power?"
Until you can no longer physically vote.
You are part of a society that still allows you to politically organise around your beliefs, so get involved in your local politics and help bring your vision of a better future to more people - change doesn't happen by itself.
It's literally nonsense, and the equivalent of Christian Zionism / eschatology in that it's a set of incredibly harmful, baseless beliefs that advocate for mass misery in the name of vague hope of an accelerated magical delivery of human kind to a new era of happiness and joy.
They're all, perhaps with the exception of raw steel-cut oats, or plain bran, pretty simple carbohydrates, and you add sugar in the form of lactose on top to eat them. Pretty sure none of them are a net positive to health.
They need to dress what they're very serious about as sarcasm because saying it seriously is a crime.
Delivering something in a sarcastic affect doesn't necessarily make it a joke if the context doesn't support it.
There's nothing funny about calling insurrectionists "martyrs", having a written plan about how they'll gut the government, seeing how they behave in states where they have complete control where they have actually gutted the possibility of anyone else coming to power.
Trump's mouth is both like the broken clock analogy and like the proverbial 10,000 monkeys with the typewriter.
He also continuously parrots the last thing he heard.
At that point he was getting presidential briefings and folders of intelligence from the 3 letter agencies when he was visiting other countries, and his top advisers about concerns he should raise with his counterpart.
He just parroted something that put his host down publicly both because it made him look smug, because he's a brute and a sexist and because he didn't like her.
The content may have been true but that's no way to conduct international relations with a close ally.
These concerns are raised in private, unless your intent is to torpedo the alliance - but at the same meeting he told them the us will not come to their aid if Russia attacked, so that's what it was.
It's not real unless it happens to them.