I was so ready to fight you with that first half, not gonna lie. I’m very much so in the camp that Charlie Kirk no longer being alive is a good thing, however, I do think the way he died may be a bad thing in that it kinda makes him a martyr. I think one huge mistake that people make with things like this is to not recognize that truly evil people were indeed still human. The most evil humans to ever live in Imperial Japan’s Unit 731 needed to die by any means necessary, but they were still human.

I think that the belief that all humans are good or that all humans are bad is something that fundamentally distorts how we think about others, especially in political spaces. Humans aren’t innately morally aligned, work is put in to align anyone one way or another. People change, and, again, work must be put in to do so. All that to say that someone deserving death for how evil they are isn’t something easily determined, neither is it so black and white, nor can you ignore the potential for change. I think Charlie Kirk is a good example as I’m not really convinced he was reasonably unlikely to change versus someone like Nick Fuentes. However, the damage he has done to political discourse would be something difficult to overcome and can’t be ignored due to the scale. While I agree that him being dead is a net positive for humanity, I can’t agree with anyone saying it’s an easy slam-dunk determination to make.

Tbf, in a vacuum, alcohol consumption isn’t all that bad. However, given the levels of consumption, the historical significance, the cultural ties, and insane normalization of binge drinking, yeah, this shit’s a fucking problem. Among the preventable risks listed, I think alcohol is absolutely going to be the most stubborn problem, as at least tobacco usage has a growing stigma around it. And I think another big problem with how stubborn alcohol as a problem will be versus smoking is that smoking is bad for you if you do it at all. Alcohol isn’t necessarily that bad having a drink or two on occasion, but, considering the state of things, maybe it wouldn’t be so bad to have a little more health stigma around alcohol than there is now.

He’s also a hyper partisan bitch. I clearly remember hearing this ghoul saying “I will be the grim reaper of liberal legislation” when it came to the Obama administration. Didn’t give a fuck about the content of any particular bill as long as it wasn’t “the other side”. He’s such a slimy piece of shit that he filibustered his own fucking bill in 2009 just because a dem co-sponsored it. He lead the charge in the senate to repeal the Affordable Care Act just because it had Obama’s name attached to it, with no plans to put something else in place, not even fucking Romneycare. He also became the face of resisting already allocated funds to be paid to the families of first responders who fucking died during 9/11. Any kind of evil slimy bullshit that came out of the senate basically always either had his name attached to it, or straight up had his dumbfuck turtle face plastered on the front fucking page of it. He’s responsible for an appalling amount of human suffering and the world will be a better place whenever this fucking ghoul dies.

Okay, sorry to be that guy, but had you read the article, you would see that this is about SpaceX working with Ukraine to kick the Russians off the Starlink network. There’s plenty to criticize Elon about, but the Russian military using Starlink for drones isn’t one of them.

He sure does seem spooked by his name popping up in the Epstein files, though. Fucking lol.

Man, that’s some real cartoonish mustache-twirling evil shit. Seriously, how hard is it to just leave people tf alone?

I like how their entire argument is just “nuh-uh”.

They didn’t say anyone was preventing them from doing this, they just expressed a desire. I don’t understand why you would go on the offensive for such a tame post, even if it is a bit cringe.

I find it important to dogpile and emphasize your point on the importance of organizing. I hope my echoing your message makes it louder to everyone.

The second amendment doesn’t mean shit if you don’t get some fucking friends and organize. Dropped some feds trying to unlawfully break into your home because you have the right to defend yourself in your own home? Neat, you’re a target now. Have a support network of people? You can relocate quickly, you have places to hide while the initial heat dies down, you have greater access to acquisition of legal council, you have help with cleanup, you have that many more voices to speak out on your behalf for media coverage and legal defense, you have more places to reliably keep your pets and kids safe, and if/when it really comes down to it, you have more guns to point toward your oppressors with multiplied efficiency. People tend to neglect to consider what to do in the aftermath in these situations, and the answer, like literally every other political scenario, is to have some fucking friends in the first place.

Guns or no, the most important thing is always to have a community. There is not a single scenario where gun ownership is more important than securing and cultivating a community. Guns, much like food, water, shelter, other tools, cars, medical supplies, etc is just one of the words that come after “community and”. For any political movement or even just plain survival, community is NOT optional. Go make some fucking friends. Go network. Go organize. It has been and always will be step one.

Don’t be ridiculous, of course there won’t be some kinda rip in spacetime or whatever.

The universe will simply not let anyone enter.

Almost like the gun laws in Cali were made specifically with the Black Panthers in mind or something.

Ah yes, the same PD that definitely isn’t known for being the poster child of police brutality. May everyone echo the words written specifically for them: “fuck you, I won’t do what you tell me!”

Hell yeah! Looks good, comrade! I know from experience how difficult curly/wavy hair can be, so I hope you can appreciate my genuine congratulations!

I’ve generally had luck with the Shea Moisture leave-in spray. Seems to do fine even with using less while leaving my hair a little more wet after a shower. I’ve had the same results with cerave lotion. But yeah, wavy/curly hair is such a fickle beast to tame.

YES. Even includes my two favorites in IX having a special place in my heart for multiple reasons like being why I met my wife and IV being the very first video game I ever played, though it was called II at the time in NA. I know I’m not the only one that love these games for more than them being good games, so I’m glad to see them preserved in another major way. Sakaguchi really created something special in this franchise and I’m thoroughly convinced Uematsu is video game music god.

Yeah, for sure, it’s difficult to reconcile putting yourself in someone else’s shoes with what they should be ideally doing. I know I can pretty easily lose perspective myself. It’s easy to look back at Germany in the 1930s saying that people in general should have done more, but I think we do a disservice to those that actually did their best with what they had on top of just trying to survive in the first place. And for others, we don’t know all the reasons they may have had for their inaction. I don’t know if we could even honestly say they would know what to do if given the option.

And while I certainly agree with the sentiment of resistance by any means vs a dictator taking over your country and killing people extrajudicially, it’s hardly ever that black and white, neither is it really ever very clear what fighting in a way that actually matters looks like. So while it would definitely be more satisfying to hunt down ICE agents like the ghouls they are, this would only serve to escalate an already volatile situation and make matters worse for literally everyone where more peaceful and boring solutions are still available. I think our best bet rhetoric-wise is to strongly encourage good actions and movements already happening, rather than yell at and further discourage those not engaged.

Yeah, it’s still a bit early for midterm campaigns, but I imagine the “campaigning” they’re talking about is the general campaign stratgizing the election organizations do as a job. Midterms usually start kicking up around springtime.

I mean like, what are we supposed to do with this? You can say that democrats aren’t doing anything about this, but what does that even mean? The author goes on and on about the dangers of fixed elections and all, which, I mean, yeah, but it’s pretty easy to shift the burden of proof by making a claim that people aren’t doing anything about it. Okay? I can’t help but notice the author didn’t mention what they think they should see to “do something about it”. The only thing he mentions the dems are doing is running a campaign like business as usual, but nothing else. He makes the claim that this is the dems just ignoring the threats, but not only is that not necessarily true, it’s actually a legitimate political tactic used to fight said election fraud. I don’t know if the dems are actually doing that or disregarding the dangers and pretending like everything is fine as the author implies, but the author also doesn’t know that. This reeks of doomer/defeatist bullshit.

Let’s not get it twisted; I’m not defending the dems at all. My take is that some of them are doing things, and lots of establishment dems are doing nothing to the point of obstructing any form of resistance other dem officials are trying. I think the reason the establishment dems are like this is just plain apathy and complacency, but that’s just speculation. In terms of democrats resisting election interference, I think they’re just too scattered and aimless in approach to make meaningful progress.

So to my point, if it is the case that dems(or literally anyone else) are actually doing some form of something, then that gives people something to join and something to do. However, if we’re faced with “the dems are doing nothing”, then boy does that sure give fuel to those that want us to be hopeless and do nothing. So, again, what’s the point of this article?

So, something stands out to me here:

Since americas president is threatening to invade my country’s territory, your fake ass opinion means nothing to me.

Umm… what? What does the actions of the head of state have to do with the opinions of the people of said state? That doesn’t make any sense. That would be equivalent to me meeting a regular ass Russian person and saying “PUTIN IS DOING AN IMPERIALIST INVASION OF UKRAINE AND THREATENED TO NUKE MY COUNTRY, SO YOUR OPINION MEANS NOTHING TO ME!” The Russian people aren’t responsible for the things their government does. That’s why I always make sure to be accurate in pointing out that it’s Putin and the oligarchs doing the imperialism, not [all] Russians. I meet a Russian actively supporting Putin and his imperialist ambitions? Yeah, fuck that guy, then. But, in my personal experience, I have yet to meet a single Russian person IRL that didn’t fucking hate Putin. It’s almost as if people have lives independent of their state of residence and those that run that state.

So maybe redirect your anger at those who earned it? Something tells me that might be more constructive than directing your anger at random people for arbitrary reasons.

Aww, look at that, they think I’m wise.

… what? Who is making that argument and what are you even trying to say? What you’re describing here would not necessitate calling it war, it could more accurately be called terrorism. In the context of the post and article, yeah, they’re playing very loose with their definition of war. I would indeed call it a war if, as they propose, a state’s national guard actively took up coordinated armed resistance against the federal government,but that’s not what’s happening. They try to imply from a hypothetical war game that a university put together having parallels with what’s happening in Minnesota and Illinois right now Proves that we’re in the beginning of a civil war. This is over-sensationalized and just plain irresponsible. Not to mention they failed to demonstrate that what’s happening now necessitates that we’re “In the first phase of civil war”. The kind of civil unrest and state-sponsored terrorism we’re seeing in our country has happened countless times in the past without leading to war. So yeah, to say this is what war looks like is a very loose definition of war and generally just irresponsible.