♻️
The world is largely full of masochists ruled by sadists.
Never underestimate people’s desire for servility in the name of stability.
The vast majority of people have an exceedingly high tolerance for their own subjugation if it means they don’t have to think or act to avoid pain or responsibility.
Okay, I admit that I basically said the same thing 3 times with different wording. Personally, I just hope that I’m not as docile as I fear that I am.
I’m going to be flogged for saying this as well, but I don’t understand why you’re being down-voted.
I lost a lot of money being furloughed and was on the verge of declaring bankruptcy, and many old friends of my father in India died in that global cluster-fuck. Granted, there were many environmental benefits for our ailing biosphere, and I found many moments of peaceful solace as a result of not having to be in public, but average people were eviscerated by that virus on many levels.
I agree: despite the inevitability of another one, to wish for another pandemic is, at best, an idiotic, selfish, and angsty teenage opinion. Along with the obvious health risks, people now have even less trust in institutional health and scientific organizations, leading me to predict that the next one will be even worse because people refuse to think and learn nothing from the past.
Even worse, people regard their unbridled skepticism of expert opinion, research, and their own scientific ignorance as a virtue. We experienced the Dunning-Kruger effect at a global scale and will do so again because the average person despises humility and thinks they know everything about anything.
Kind of like a bunch of bratty teenagers.
Ah yes, “insert'Muh'MemeLanguageHere” argument/excuse that we all heard a bajillion times
Even the BBC is
towingtoeing the line.
Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power.
The practical ethos of every authoritarian in history (including the self-styled “champions of the proletariat”) is:
It’s not just that I have a lot; it’s that I must always have more than everyone else, and they must be compelled to desire this. Forever.
Short answer: no. But one should define terms, especially with legal implications.
“Hate Speech” always sounded a bit Orwellian to me. Just like “Homeland Security”.
In general, I believe the jurisprudence of free speech in our country (USA) essentially says beyond, libel, slander, inciting violence, or sedition, the government can’t imprison you for expression or forcibly silence you in a public forum.
Private organizations and companies can regulate speech within their domains and property to the extent that they don’t violate other laws or rights of other parties within and without their said domains and property.
I think that’s pretty fair.
Sure, dude. Sure.