docAvid

I must not be educated. Please, what are the dangers of communism? And what, exactly, do you think the word "communism" means?

Why? Can you provide an accurate definition of communism, and a theory as to why you think it cannot be done without becoming a dictatorship? Can you provide an accurate definition of capitalism, and why you think it is more free?

Putin isn't a communist, though. Far from it.

Thanks, @EunieIsTheBus@feddit.de and @justlookingfordragon@lemmy.world, for clearing that up. I forgot you have to leave and come back for the rock to become scenery. Makes sense.

I mean great, I support this, but 450 people is "a massive march"? How did 75 organizations only come up with 450 people? That's only 6 people per organization. Here's hoping this grows a lot by the convention.

That's hilarious. After the Korok cutscene, normally the rock seems to be removed (as a physics item), and a scenery "rock" replaces it in the circle. Does the rock stay on your weapon?

The UCC I went to every Sunday of my childhood (Dad was the minister, so kinda had to go) would have a loaf of really good fresh bread. Some was cut up in cubes, to take neatly, or you could pull a hunk off the loaf if you liked. One side of the drinks tray had grape juice, the other had wine, again, your choice, although obviously when I was young, I didn't reach for the wine in front of my mom. Little tiny snack was the best part of church.

Lincoln was pen pals with Marx, probably the most progressive president in our history, though sadly his time was taken up with stopping the slaver traitors. Imagine what he could have done if the bastards hadn't killed him.

So, do you not think the principle of ensuring a justice doesn't have to worry about their next gig is valuable, or do you think youthfulness is just more important?

I think the court should be expanded, quite a lot. There is nothing magical or constitutional about the number nine. Congress could easily expand it to twenty, or fifty, or more while limiting justices by terms or age would require a constitutional amendment. Nothing says every justice has to sit on every case. A larger court would be significantly less prone to extremes, reducing the importance of individual nominations.

I barely know Vim, I'm an Emacs guy. Every time I pair with a colleague using an IDE, I find myself having to exercise great restraint, and not complain about how slow and fussy everything they do is. When I've worked with skilled vimmers, I have to admit that they invoke the deep magic nearly as efficiently as I do. Hotkeys? Pshaw, child's play.

Democrats have pretty much been the same since Clinton, not really drifting right. Yes, Democratic centrism enables Republican extremism, but the neoliberal agenda of Democrats, regarding domestic economics and foreign affairs, has stayed pretty constant, while they have actually improved on social issues. Clinton or Obama would not have handled Israel's recent actions differently, they might even have done worse. On domestic issues, Biden is probably the most progressive president since LBJ. Now, granted, that's really a condemnation of American politics since then, more than it is praise of Biden - but still, we are finally moving in the right direction again, at least, and it's important to acknowledge that, if we want it to continue.

STAR is ridiculously bad, it just has good marketing. It favors the preferences of voters who pick extremes, ranking everybody either a 1 or a 5 - likely the least informed and thoughtful voters - over voters who carefully weigh whether a candidate deserves 3 or 4 stars. Ranked choice is simple and effective, takes more granular voter preference into account, and provides runoff for each virtual round, rather than just the last. It also has a simple variant that works equally well for multi-seat elections.