It might be helpful to know where this is.

The easiest answer regardless is become active in local politics, try to get into the municipal government, and allocate funds to building up infrastructure in your area.

I think several factors play into its lasting popularity.

1. The series was written and first made into movies at a different time. A time when being a misogynists alpha male was aspirational for many, many more men. The unexpected success of the first movies created the foundation to an intellectual property that generations of mostly fathers introduced to their mostly sons. It never went away. Even in years where lawsuits prevented making new movies or when the latest installment of the franchise was considered controversial for whatever reason, the popularity stayed high. And the older the series gets, the more controversial everything becomes.

2. Very few movies have what I would call a great coherent plot. They are going through checklists: we need a bonkers villain, a weird henchperson, a fancy car, at least one love interest, a gadget, a plan for world domination, and a witty line or two. Throw in a location in the Caribbean or the snowy Alps and that’s the formula. It’s Batman from MI-6 in London, really. It’s a comic book story that tries to seem somewhat realistic, in each movie’s release year’s contemporary time. And the more time passes the less jarring the obvious differences to reality become, and the more they are enjoyable as “leave your brain at the door”-popcorn-eating entertainment. Also, I think, the fact that many actors have played different roles over the years, sometimes overlapping with other cast changes, mostly unaddressed in the films why that happened, added to this “brain at the door”-ishness.

3. They’ve gone with the time - to an extent. Where Sean Connery bedded every (young) woman he met and discarded them with a pad on the butt saying things like “man talk,” Daniel Craig’s lady conquest numbers were much lower and the sex less gratuitous - within the formula. Pierce Brosnan’s Bond was called a misogynist pig by his female boss. Under the stewardship of Broccoli/Wilson, the second generation in charge of the franchise, they have incrementally changed the formula.

4. Because the series is so long lasting, there is tons of free publicity in the media, e.g. who will be the next Bond? Will be be less sexist? Will the female lead be more than a conquest? They don’t really need to buy ads for this. Also, there are plenty of companies willing to product place for a hefty price. If there ever was a time when the makers were considering if this was still of the time, the economic interests will surely push those progressive thoughts aside.

I think that if we lived in a world where the Ian Fleming idea had not been adapted into film during the early years of the cold war, nobody would greenlight this project today. And it is its entrenchment in popular culture that keeps it going.

The appeal is definitely more male but I know women who like Bond movies as well. I know this is very stereotypical: men look at the Aston Martin, the gadgets, and the boobs, women at the dresses, the pretty scenery, and how well the Bond girl stands up for herself. And while I’m sure that a subgroup of men looks at the Bond character as a role model, I would say the majority knows this is fiction and just a tad less comic-bookish than Ironman. It’s the male version of a cheap romance novel on a silver screen with more mass appeal.

If this has not become clear from this dissertation: I’m a fan. I can enjoy these movies without wanting to revert to 1960s gender role models. I also know it’s not for everyone.

You’re trying to apply conventional logic to the orange one. That doesn’t work. Stop doing that. It’s all about his frail ego, flooding the zone with bs, denying everything and never giving in, and blaming everybody else for stuff he’s done.

And just to give the poor, battered, beleaguered, ever-so-stable leader a break, there are sea lanes and flight routes available to the cartels as well. They didn’t have to go through the US (but probably did).

For my answer I’m going to assume - because it wasn’t all that clear to me - that you are also female and you’ll be teaching somewhere in the United States of America. If I’m mistaken, stop reading here.

Kids don’t care. If you tell them this person loves that person and that’s why they’re together, that generally settles that. The problem here is their parents or other influential grownups in their lives … if they’re a-holes or just always have something negative to say about LGBT+, or worse. If news filters through to them and they’re fond of the MAGA hat, I would not be surprised if at the very least you’d be heavily discussed in a text thread of like minded parents.

I would like to say “eff it, it’s 2025, you do you! Shout it from the rooftops. You have nothing to fear in reprisals.” But I’m thinking “sh!t, it’s 2025 in America, there is a chance that you will have to deal with a ton of it if you’re unlucky.” So the question becomes one of your inner fortitude: do you think you can do this job while facing sh!t every day? This ranges from hushed chatter to outright questioning and condemning you for your identity, from kids to parents and possibly to the faculty? Do you want to risk putting quite a heavy load on your shoulders on top of what teachers carry in general? If you say yes, or you can find other work when it gets too much, go for it. If not, I’d be cautious to make it about you. You can talk in general about how relationships are described in Spanish without casually mentioning where you stand.

Personally, I want all of us to live in a world where any of these considerations seem laughable. My gut feeling tells me that we have been closer to that ideal in the past decade than we are today.

The most famous fountain for coin tossing/wish making is Trevi in Rome (and I wouldn’t be surprised if the whole concept came from there). You are legally forbidden from taking money back out of it there. The moment the coin sinks into the water, it belongs to the municipality, so taking it back out constitutes theft. The municipality is allowed (and indeed forced) to clear the coins from the fountain (otherwise there would be no water left after a while) and AFAIK they donate the cash for a good cause.

Trump is vindictive and petty. He would take revenge somehow. Whether it is just a very STABLE GENIUS tirade on lies.social or trade sanctions or a threat to invade the country is anybody’s guess. But they’re all on the table and he’s got the eternal memory of an elephant. That’s why every leader knows they have to go in with some honey first. They pay him a compliment or bring something he wants or likes. Then they can play hardball if they have to but you gotta appeal to the frail ego first. And that’s why few leadership people will call him stupid in public or even to his face. They will hide the stupid medicine in some rhetorical sugar until their country is economically and militarily independent from a Trump government.

I am no leader, praise the heavens, and I wouldn’t call him stupid. He’s uneducated in many areas outside real estate development. He’s got the interpersonal maturity of a 4yo. But he is street savvy and media savvy. There’s a reason why he is this popular with his followers.

Just for some German context: the Nazi salute is not covered by any freedom of expression or opinion in a political context. What Elon did on stage would have landed him in a German court. Similar restrictions apply to displaying certain symbols, e.g. the swastika. German cops are legally required to intervene when they see them in public.

I don’t know the video in question, I don’t know if the cops overreacted - a reaction was required though.

Party manifestos are dreamy wishlists for a parliament, in which they have the absolute majority. Merz’s CDU tories did not win one. He’ll need to form a coalition. Most likely outcome is one with the SPD social democrats. Coalition talks have a way of grinding these wishlists down. And they take time. So keep a watchful eye but it’s too early to despair.

I don’t think they know for sure where it will end up but no matter what it will be, it will be brilliant, it will be the greatest, and it will have been the plan all along.

Rich people like to keep their money. So the only objective right now is to dismantle the oversight within government. It’s not government efficiency they’re after but removal of impediments to big business interests. That’s the Melon side of the plan. It’s his ROI. It’s also is MO. Tabula Rasa everything and then build anew. It didn’t work for Twitter. I don’t think it will work for a federal government. We’ve already seen lots of unintended side effects. Oops, we fired the guys who look after the nukes. Lives will be lost here and there but, cynically, not enough to mobilize the masses.

It is of course worrying that Trump said as much as wanting to enlarge the US again. I’m not sure yet if that’s just a dead cat he’s thrown on table to distract us from Melon or if that’s really the plan. It worried the US NATO ally Denmark enough to massively increase their defense budget over Greenland. Trump likes to be contrarian. He feeds off the stir he causes. He never built the wall, Mexico never paid for it. But he reveled in the reactions. Greenland could be a similar thing but I’m not sure yet.

It’s worrying me the amount of sh!t the lgbtq+ community is getting, especially the T. There is danger there. I don’t think Trump cares an awful lot about this issue, he just likes it as a way to unite the sleepy, the anti-woke behind him. But there are people behind him and with power now that do care, that do want to please their leader. And that creates a maelstrom of zealous a-holes trying to one-up each other with cruelty to score browny points with the boss. When I think this through, I fear citizen liberty is most under threat here.

I don’t believe a world war with nukes is what they’re after. You cannot really prosper as a corporation if the planet is barely habitable due to the radiation and the nuclear winter. It would be bad for Wall Street. But they wouldn’t mind a few conflicts comparable to Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine. While nukes have been threatened, they haven’t been used. So it’s a conventional war and that’s good for arms manufacturers.

In simple terms, Trump’s cozying up to Vlad actually decreases the threat of a world war III, at least in the short term. It reduces the number of trouble hotspots. There were big ones between the US and Russia (until January 25) and between the US and China. Trump parroting Kremlin talking points and showing the rest of NATO the middle finger reduces hotspots with Russia. Russia is on relatively friendly terms with China and could probably meditate issues between China and the US. At least in the short term, that’s not a bad thing. But it isn’t stable. It remains to be seen if Europe plus Canada plus X can fill the vacuum and that would reignite hotspots with Russia again.

I do agree that climate change poses a threat. I don’t think the billionaires worry so much about it beyond buying New Zealand and blanketing it with villas with bunkers. But it is a threat to maintaining order when the people get hit with more severe tornados, droughts, etc. Best way to maintain order is an authoritarian government.

I believe you should fart excessively around it and indeed encourage fellow commuters to join in, as it will provide terrible air quality results here. Which will in turn improve ventilation measures in this area, which would not have happened otherwise. Checkmate! The act of observing alters the results!