Rottcodd
By “peace” what they actually mean is “submission.”
Russia’s already getting a return on their investment.
The next year or two is just going to be an orgy of face-eating leopards eating faces.
There was a time when I would’ve sympathized with and supported the Israelis.
But that was 40,000 murders ago.
While the decision to stop publishing the six books was made by Dr. Seuss Enterprises, right-wing outlets like Fox News mischaracterized it as a book ban.
Unsurprisingly, it has actually been Republican-backed laws like Tennessee’s that have resulted in the banning of Dr. Seuss books from schools.
And that’s the way it works pretty much without exception - private individuals and businesses and such make independent decisions and the Republicans scream that they’re being oppressed, then they pass laws in the name of freedom.
Even with as insane as the Republican agenda is, and as deluded as their supporters necessarily must be, that particular aspect of it really stands out to me. It’s just so perfectly Orwellian.
Certainly there are some who are just parrots (and they might even be the majority), but I don’t think that’s generally the case with those who are out there competing with each other to call for the most egregious possible punishments. I think the parrots tend more to be relatively passive consumers of that content rather than active participants. The ones who are actually in there competing to be the most vindictive are self-evidently more motivated than the passive consumers, and I think that that additional motivation comes from an overt pleasure taken in the suffering of others.
Yes, I’ve noticed that. It’s hard to miss really.
I assume it is, exactly as you say, virtue signaling.
Virtue signaling isn’t just an end in itself. It’s often (generally?) a feedback loop - the person is not just trying to demonstrate that they’re virtuous, but to reassure themselves that the standards upon which they’re measuring their nominal virtue are legitimate.
So calling for ever more draconian punishment is not so much the point - more, the point is to call for draconian punishment, then have somebody else applaud and even amplify that call. That helps to solidify the sense of moral superiority since it’s not just that I believe that I’m morally superior because [X], but other people do as well. We all agree that this is the morally superior position, so we must be right.
But underneath it all, what it really is is just foul, vindictive, hateful assholes who enjoy the thought of people suffering, and try to excuse it with the belief that, by whatever standard, this person deserves it.
Though they’d be the last to admit it, the nominal crime isn’t the point. They just get off on the suffering of others, and the nominal crime is just an excuse.
And since their whole position is a lie - because their real motivation is just a sick pleasure in the suffering of others and their moral posturing is just cover for their loathsomeness - they need constant feedback to convince themselves that they’re in the right. And conveniently enough, there are plenty of other people in the same situation, so they can, and do, reassure each other.
I’ll never stop being cynically amused by the fact that the self-styled American patriots are letting the Russian government tell them how to vote.
Setting aside the anti-health and anti-sanity aspects of this, the thing that gets me is that Republicans somehow continue to believe that they’re the party of freedom when everything they do involves ever more regulation.
They frame things as if the Democrats are oppressing people and the Republicans are fighting for their freedom, but the exact opposite is actually true - the way that things actually work, consistently, is that Democrats want to give people the freedom to do things and Republicans are fighting to destroy those freedoms. Their reaction to every single thing they encounter is to pass a law against it, which is literally the exact opposite of freedom.
Now granted - most of their positions are insane, so it’s not as if rationality should be expected, but this just seems to be something so simple and so obvious that they can’t possibly miss it. Yet somehow they do.
Do people just not know who and what Chris Roberts is?
This is what he’s done throughout his career - the only thing that’s notable about Star Citizen really is the scale of it and thus the opportunities he has to find ever more things to obsessively tinker with.
It’s entirely possible that if Microsoft hadn’t bought out Digital Anvil and given him the boot, this wouldn’t even be Star Citizen - it would be Freelancer, coming into its 25th year of delays.
