Hatfort

I'd say in human societies there's a consensus for what's considered a man and a woman, that's common in all cultures. In other words, a social construct. Does this have a relation with what we know as the biological sex of men and women? Undoubtfully yes, most cis men fall into the men construct and most cis women in the women one. Are there biological men and women that recognize themselves as the opposite sex and prefer to present themselves as that in society? Yes, those are what we know as trans people and in some cultures as the two spirited or things like that. Does this mean that every person that connects in one way or another with what is known from the opposite sex is trans? Not at all, a lot of people do connect with the opposite sex's social constructs but do not necessarily feel and present themselves as the opposite sex. Those are still cis people then, no matter how feminine or masculine. These things don't work like exact mathematics, we are in the psychology and sociology fields here, so the metrics are different and valid in different ways.

Kind of did, yes, the same way as China. Both were massive countries with huge undeveloped areas in extreme poverty, meaning people dying of hunger and no real economy at work. Both got a central government developing all the basic services as we know them, like infrastructures, transport, healthcare, army, police, etc... It has been argued that part of what capitalism does is to take private control of what before was in the hands of the state and charge at least the same, plus the benefits for the corporations and its bosses and shareholders, which is a bad deal for the service takers. There should be a healthy improvement of the orange state, but there are also very problematic ones, I think some hardcore capitalism defenders fail to see that. Not all countries have followed the same line, but it's kind of going from blue to orange. You cannot skip one, look at undeveloped countries in Africa. Maybe what they need is a bit more of state organization and control before getting what oranges call freedom, which in reality leaves more people in poverty and zero freedom about their lives. And it's not exclusive to undeveloped countries, it's happening in developed ones too, there should enter the green.

In case nobody said it, I think Elon Musk is a big narcissist. Sociopath would be too much to say though.

lol Apparently, he didn't get that any chance he may have gotten to apply for the job ended on January 6, 2021.

The war between the Soviet Union and Finland during World War II ended in three months with the diplomatic way of the Moscow Peace Treaty, where Finland indeed ceded border areas to the Soviet Union. Afghanistan won what? That was the cold war, the Soviet Union was obviously in, but it wasn’t an invasion like the current war. What happened was that the USA armed and trained the most radical Islamic fundamentalist men, the Mujahideen or Taliban, who then took power and destroyed any sign of advancement that was happening and now we don’t like because they don’t let girls go to school and destroyed the Twin Towers with two planes in New York in 2001. Brilliant! Those have taken power again, now that the US has decided to leave after 20 years of war with hundreds of thousands of victims. My thoughts are that Ukraine struggles with the number of men, so just sending weapons may not be enough. On the other hand, Russia seems to be able to hold most of what they already have and may be able to slowly and effectively gain more land, or regain whatever bits they lose in next Ukrainian offensives. No other big country can risk getting directly involved. We'll see how it develops.

Whether you like it or not there is a balance to maintain that prevents a third world war. In this balance, if some other country sends troops to Ukraine, that's an act of war and Russia would be allowed to retaliate, so the help is limited to sending weapons. Are we really helping Ukraine by sending them more weapons? Yes, but if there are not enough men to use them, weapons won't win the war. I'd say Russia has numbers in its favor. China has already Tibet invaded, and nobody cares. Well, I care, but China won't listen to me.

The corporate US seems to be interested in prolonging the war, indeed. The US has Europe at its knees with NATO, it's unbelievable how the EU governance is all in with this, as their economy is being crushed. It's hard not to take Ukraine's side, as the one being attacked, but dismissing any diplomatic route is not good for Ukranians, they are the ones dying. Russia seems to be the one slowly expanding now on Donetsk, a region that they've claimed for them from the start. Perhaps it's wiser for Ukraine to negotiate now and just lose the Eastern regions and hold the center and the West. Zelensky is not for it. I don't think he can win the war with weapon supplies and good propaganda only. If they don't have enough men, weapons do nothing. Yes, both sides use propaganda.

Could be, at least his name is out there and that's publicity. Maybe he is also putting himself second in line, just in case Trump's legal battles prevent him from running. But Trump is the real drug for right-wingers, a cheap imitator that says 'woke' every two minutes will feel like a big downgrade from the real deal they are used to. I see Biden winning in 2024 in both cases, but not for granted at all.

In 1895 Marconi invented the instrument to transmit radio waves that became known as the radio. 138 years later, Elon Musk and Ron DeSantis have failed to make a decent live audio broadcast. Worst candidacy announcement ever. Congrats to both! The left is laughing at him. Biden is laughing at him. Trump is laughing at him. Rightwing people prefer Trump, he is going to lose the primary.

You got it wrong, man. Green is not in power in Europe. There is a big problem for European local youth, orange state has rampaged with housing, and job conditions and wages are shit because unchecked orange as well, that's why locals are not having kids or having them very late. Immigrants are coming, they are usually more easily exploited, that's the truth. In any case, there's no way of Europe becoming Islamic, not even close. The greener the region, the better the coexistence and integration. Even if some come from red or blue places, they adapt well if you let them. Do you want local people to have kids? Go green, and improve living conditions for youth. House and job access at the very least.

I don't think he was ever yellow. He was using some green stuff like electric cars, but from an orange place, not the other way around. He got very good at fooling everyone to get Tesla stock up, government subsidies, and also good government contracts for Space X. Everyone was fooled, at least with the autopiloting car story, I was too. All bullshit, they were remotely controlled. But did Tesla shares go up? Oh yes, they did. A lot, and he owned a lot back then.

... is that there aren't enough of them.

I gotta say it's amazing the way he got caught.

Twitter is corrupted by a huge debt, it has to seek every way to monetize. Elon Musk like three days ago said free speech is not free, that you have to pay for it, but that will make it worse than it was before. First it should regain the trust of advertisers, but Elon tweeting is its worse enemy for that. As well as for Tesla.

So Elon Musk banned the account that was making a follow-up of his jet flights for security reasons, although he said he would not because he believed in absolute free speech. The thing is, flights are not private, precisely for security reasons they are public and anyone can check them, including his. There are many websites that offer real-time information about this. https://www.flightradar24.com/ I guess you gotta check deeply to find something like Elon's private jet flights, but it can be done. I don't think it's fine to publish it, I can understand he banned that guy for my own standards, but not his. However, he has suspended many accounts of journalists that were informing about this just because they included a link into this person's Twitter account, which was already suspended, as part of their information. He is just suspending journalists that he doesn't like how they inform about him, accusing them of doxxing, which they didn't do. He is clearly bending the moderation terms in his favor as he pleases. Then there are the polls. He made a poll to rate the approval of his actions. Well, people spoke, as he says, and he lost. So then he decided to make a new poll with only two options. People spoke again, and he lost. By the way, asking your followers to vote about something as validation is so stupid and unprofessional, I don't even know what word to use. He is also suspending the accounts of his competitors like Mastodon. Sorry, but that's not freedom of speech. He is already being worse than whatever his predecessors were accused of. Lastly, he has still the problem of monetizing Twitter, which he has not solved at all.

Whatever. It was a delight to see this.

This or Elon Musk is disliked by much more people than those considered wokes.

I wasn't judging his jokes and I'm not going to. The point about mentioning this is that Elon was blaming wokeism for the booing but it's unlikely those wokes were present in Dave Chappelle's show because they had a problem with one of his shows very recently.

Elon Musk on Dave Chappelle’s show being strongly booed by the audience, who would have guessed it? He is used to having a troop of dickriders on Twitter, but out of that context, other common people spoke. Twitter is a big bubble, but still a bubble. Precisely we know for certain that Chappelle’s audience is not particularly woke, as the man had some controversies with his jokes about the trans community very recently, so those were already filtered in there. The original video posted on Twitter was removed. What about that? The freedom of speech absolutist is really fast at removing a video that harms his image. He says in another tweet that technically 90% of the people were clapping and %10 booing. I hightly doubt it, it seems like the majority in the video booed him.

Well, what I understand about Sinema is that she is not a centrist, she is very effectively blocking any leftwing policy as much to the right as she can from her position without being kicked out. Basically, being a rightist on a leftist position. When I refer to the right-left parameter, I mostly mean economical issues like inequality, taxation, public budget spending, working-class rights, poverty, housing, social protection, etc... I know the right is conservative and the left more progressive about those other culture war issues, there must be reasons for that, and I think Biden is fairly open with the LGTBQ+ people, which is cool, but that's not where I was framing his position on this right-left frame. Nobody needs to chop his dick. I don't want to make this thread about trans issues, and I'd say it's enough to live and let live with respect, dignity and treating everyone equaly in essence. Unfortunately, I don't think that's enough, as there is a historical and current hostility towards trans people, many times violent, which makes them a vulnerable community that may need specific measures of protection.

Well, I disagree, I think Biden is in the center at most. But one of the politicians that's blocking him is precisely Sinema.

There is the center, and then there is the right. Sinema is on the right. Perhaps Biden is in the center, it's like the Democrats chose the most acceptable candidate for the right in aesthetics and past politics like the failed war on drugs. Only Bloomberg was worse, who should have been a republican candidate, but maybe he fulfilled the job of making Biden and others look more centrist than they really are. To be fair, Biden is being better than I would have thought, but he has much room left yet. Sinema and Manchin have the best position in the world to be lobbied. I'd say it's not easy to get there, so my congratulations to them and their interest. They are Troyan horses in the Democratic party working for the Republican-aligned policies. They have my congrats for that and my big despise as well. Not that they care, but all for them. Sinema was not going to make it in the next primaries. Her best position to continue being funded and lobbied by companies is to face Democrats as an independent next time and maybe divide the vote. That's her last move.

What she says about being independent is bullshit. No senator of the Democratic party should always agree with everything, that's a given. But they are there representing their voters, not themselves and their personal interests. There may be instances when deviating from whatever the party says could be fine. But, come on, this woman was against all policies that could affect big companies one bit in favor of the people. She got to be in power by advocating for a much more progressive agenda and then she just changed her mind, in some cases being a decisive vote. She didn't get there on her own, no way she could have done that without the Democrat apparatus. Unlike Bernie Sanders, it didn't work against her, but for her. This is also a calculation for her own interest, she wasn't going to make it in the next primaries, so she prefers to at least run as an independent. This is just the best way for her to continue doing what she was already doing, supporting the economic conservative agenda. She may be done though, we'll see.

Replacing policemen with social workers doesn't work like sending them to dangerous crime scenes in their place. No, the police is still needed, it's naive to think otherwise. Of course, they are not saints, but they do dangerous things when needed (not in Uvalde) and their presence serves as a persuasion for people not to commit crimes as well. The job of social workers can be preventive, it's needed and it lowers crime rates by a lot. Most people who engage in violence are in social and economical exclusion situations. People with income, shelter, food, and basic needs fulfilled don't engage in violent crimes, they have more to lose. But some people and some communities have it harder, and they may be more exposed to violence in their surroundings. But social workers can't do enough without funding, money is required. Social workers are also needed after crimes. Jail or detention centers rarely fix any root problem, make them worse probably. I'm not saying people who commit crimes shouldn't be punished, but there has to be a culture of reinsertion as well. Again, funding. What's happening in the USA with guns and fire weapons is lunacy. In most of Europe, nobody has firearms, it's mostly the law enforcement corps, hunters, and not many more than that. You obviously need to have a legal license to have them. The regular municipal policemen don't have firearms on duty. Gun confrontations are extremely rare. If a lunatic like Kyle Rittenhouse would show up with a rifle in a riot, the police would go to detain him on the spot. Militias in the streets full of rifles and guns would be stopped too, probably by the army. It's crazy. The US population has been brainwashed into this madness, there are lobbies dedicated to that. But you do you. Are the police in the US easy with the trigger? Probably yes. It's not a paranoia they have that anyone can have a gun hidden, it's the reality. I'm not justifying them, it's their job to be sure that someone has a gun before shooting theirs. You don't like it? Well, be a firefighter then.

They discuss how people that don't accept Jesus Christ shouldn't be allowed in positions of power and even jobs. Those are the libertarians, right?