I still remember well how the New Labour faction, in order to attack Corbyn, deemed him an anti-semite by association because in a conference he sat on a panel with a guy who compared the actions of Israel to those of the Nazis. Turns out said guy was a Jewish Holocaust survivor, so they they were saying that a Jewish Holocaust survivor was an anti-semite in order to slander Corbyn by association.

Also quite a lot of Israel-linked “Jewish” associations cooperated in that whole campaign of slandering Corbyn and Labour as “anti-semite” (remember how the Labour Party was said to have “many” anti-semites, and they turned out to be in a lower proportion than society in general and way less than the Tories) to bring Corbyn down and replace him with somebody from the New Labour faction, which succeeded.

The New Labour leadership has quite the debt to the Zionists for that, so don’t expect them to be any less unwaveringly supportive of a genocidal ethno-Fascist Israel than the Tories - at best it’s going to be like Biden in American: claim to want Bibi to stop all the while by action de facto supporting him.

Your “you’re not with us so you must be against us” is an old Fascist trope.

Might want to tone down that rabid tribalism as your “arguments” are awfully close to the other guys style of argumentation.

That’s the rational take and I’m sure plenty of people will vote Biden following that rationale.

The top poster’s “pestilence is a good thing” (i.e. Biden is a “good guy”) statement on the other hand is insanelly tribalist and pure fantasy.

Being a Lesser Evil by comparison with an extremelly Evil option is not at all the same as being Good.

Lots of talk, no action: that’s bullshit Political Propaganda 101 when a politician in power wants to do something which most of his voters are strongly against.

His Administration’s actions are exactly the opposite, from the weapons shipments to Israel going around Congress that included 2000lb bombs to UN Vetos and saying that the ICJ shouldn’t even be evaluating the case against Israel for Genocide (clearly this Administration fears a veredict of “guilty”, which means they do believe Israel is likely comitting what amounts to Genocide under International Law).

The non-sociopath path for America would’ve be “Perfect Neutrality” (no action at all), yet Biden choses actual military and diplomatic support, including condemning anti-Genocide demonstrators as “anti-semitic” and condoning the use of police violence against them all the while in this specific subject lying just as shamelessly as Trump.

I’ve noticed that the loudest the politicians in a country rant about how great a Democracy that country has, the less of a Democracy it is.

In Europe, for example, you get British Politicians going on an one about how the country has the “Oldest Democracy in The World” (this in a country with a King who a few years ago - well, his mother - was found to actually have some power over what legislation gets passed, an unlected second chamber with members who inherit their seat from their parents and First Past The Post for Parliament) all the while in The Netherlands (who, IMHO, have probably the most Democratic system in the World, including Proportional Vote, though with a powerless King) politians pretty much never rant about the quality of their Democracy.

At least in the West, the most loud and relentless proclaimers of how great their Democracy is by a large margin are American politicians.

The American voting system is not Proportional Vote and instead is massivelly Mathematically rigged with (for Congress) huge single representative electoral circles which in some cases have borders designed exactly to make it near impossible to defeat incumbents (aka Gerrymandering), with (for the Senate) even larger electoral circles (literally, each state) with 2 representatives, and something somewhat similar for Presidential elections (though worse since ultimatelly it all adds up to a single representative electoral circle with 300 million voters for a position with lots of power, unlike most European countries - with some notable exceptions like France - which either don’t have a President or have one which is mainly symbolic and has little power).

Further, the very nature of the system will, beyond the Mathematical rigging, push the people who would otherwise go for a 3rd party to instead go for the “useful vote” (i.e. chose an electable candidate instead of the one they want) - it’s not by chance that the heaviest argument of the Biden campaign was “vote Biden to defeat Trump”.

Since new parties take various electoral cycles to grow, it’s pretty impossible for them to do so because it’s Mathematically near impossible for them to even establish a foothold that shows its earlier supporters they do have a chance to one day influence what laws are made in the US and how the country is ruled, so new parties invariable lose steam after the first or second election they go through.

You can see something similar to this in the UK, were for example the Green Party gets 1 million votes out of 40 million (2.5% of votes) but only 1 member of parliament out of 300 (0.33%), and remember this is with lots of people chosing electable candidates from other parties, so the Green Party natural vote would likely be larger in a different system

This stands in marked contrast with, for example, The Netherlands, were vote is Proportional and there are 15 parties in their Parliament (Tweede Kamer).

Please don’t become the thing you likely abhor (Trumpists and alike) by reacting in a knee jerk fashing to things that “insult” your tribalist morals with a variant of the Fascist take “If you’re not with us, you’re against us”.

It’s perfectly rational and reasonable to think that Biden is not a “guy with good intentions” whilst also thinking that Trump is no better, whilst it’s irrational and unreasonable to think that just because one doesn’t like Person A, one must like Person B.

By any human being standards anybody who supports somebody mass murdering children with weapons is a shit person, hence Biden is a shit person. That doesn’t mean Trump is any less shit.

Even by American President Moral standards (which, sadly are way lower than Normal Person Moral standars, when they should be higher), activelly supporting with weapons a nation committing Genocide is pretty bad, though far from novel.

The point being that trying to pass that specific sandwish as “gourmet” doesn’t make this less of a contest of shit-sandwish vs double-shit-sandwish.

The take of top poster of this thread - that Biden is an “old man with good intentions” - is quite a different and far more tribalist and propagandistic take than your “the one that’s a bit less enthusiastic genocide supporter”.

Your take is perfectly reasonable, whilst the original take is, as the previous poster pointed out, complete total bollocks for anybody but a complete total sociopath (who would be ok with mass murder) or ultra-tribalist numpty (who is ok with whatever their tribe’s leader supports, no matter how inhumane).

A guy that supports a Genocidal ethno-Fascist regime doesn’t have “good intentions”, not even by the lousy standard of the subset of politicians that climb their way into the position of “leader of a major country” - normal human beings don’t give guns to people purposefully murdering tens of thousands of children, starving 2 million people and targetting journalists and medical personnel.

“Not quite as extremelly bad intentions as the other guy” would be a more correct take.

Trying to spin this as a “good guy vs bad guy” is quite a tribalist take on a plague vs pestilence contest.

Democracy requires its 3 pillars - the Judicial, the Press and the Political - to be independent.

In the US all three are tied, some even Constitutionally.

It’s thus not surprised that the country only ever got close to being governed for the Many rather than the Few at times when other Civil Society movements (such as Unions) were strong and healthy. Certainly that’s not the case nowadays, not even close.

You were supposed to have an antenna.

Extreme behaviours such as exhibitionism and a very high concern with one’s public image are actually quite consistent with not growing up in a good and well-balanced environment.

Well balanced people aren’t overly concerned with being seen as stylish and heaving fun all the time, unless they’re in a profession that requires managing the image one projects to the outside world (influencer, performing artist).

It’s only wild if you believe their fable that their nation represents all Jews.

If however you see them as just another bunch of ethno-Fascists, it actually makes sense that many of the victims of the other large ethno-Fascist group in the last century wouldn’t get along with them simply because they recognize many of the same signs.

Even without the whole Religion angle, racists the world over just love ethno-nationalism: each ethnicity living in their own corner, separate from the rest, is exactly what these people want.

That would make it plagiarism, which ethically is a whole different matter than merelly copying that which is free to copy.

For starters, bulk copying a person’s documents without their approval sounds like mass copyright violation.

Since the user did not approve it, it sounds like mass copyright violation to me.

Not in the EU it doesn’t, unless they got the user to review that Agreement and agree before the sale took place.

After the implicit contract which is the sale has been agreed to by both parties (the buyer gave the money, the seller took it), one of the parties can’t force the other party to agree to a new contract before they’re allowed to get the contractual benefits of the original contract (i.e. the buyer getting to use the product they bought, the seller getting to use the money they got).

It doesn’t matter if the seller has such power de facto - legally they most definitelly can’t blackmail the buyer by denying them their side of the contractual rights they got in the Act of Sale by blocking their use of the product they bought until they agree to a new Agreement from the seller.

Real Life^TM is a Role-Playing Multiplayer Game with the best graphics resolution in the Industry.

Sadly, it suffers from severe game play balance problems, most notably that most of game play time is spent in boring tasks which should’ve been simplified into just the core gameplay element for a better gaming experience, plus it’s heavy reliance on grinding, to the point that most players literally have to spend at least 8h per day in the game grinding merelly to not lose the game.

And don’t get me started on it’s Pay To Play elements.

To add to both your posts, a pretty good general rule is: don’t confuse famous with knowledgeable.

The only knowledge they’ve proven is of “how to become known in a specific domain”, which at least in social media is mainly about self-promotion (and more generally it’s about grifter skills) rather than specific domain knowledge.

So yeah, the likes of Andrew Tate will do it by looking confident whilst telling tons of bullshit and plenty of female influencers will do it by looking good and showing some skin - they’re good at self-promotion online but that doesn’t mean they know shit about anything else.