Hurting because of the government shutdown?
Reminder: When a private company "shuts down" for any reason, its competitors can immediately swoop in to provide the missing services.
Every single shut down service is a result of government seizing a monopoly on something that the free market should be providing.
nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnddaehgu3wwp6kyqpqks4j70qusuv7hnaqcrr3azks95fxjpz4sx29sy9h35z3vltwauns8vhyrk I’m not arguing your narrative about the politics behind the Bill of Rights. You’re changing the subject.
Have you ever actually READ the second amendment? It consists of a short justification, followed by something that the state mustn’t do. There is nothing about anarchist warlords, which was the subject of your original post.
(This is coincidentally the very Grimm’s-fairytale-style warning which, according to the narrative pushed by most statists, is the inevitable outcome of any reduction in the reach or power of the State. So you’ll forgive me for questioning the motives of your propaganda)
A refresher, if you encounter someone who tries to use the "fire in a crowded theater" doctrine to try to argue away the First Amendment:
The line, often quoted by censorship advocates, is from a 1919 Supreme Court opinion (Schenck v. US) by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes. It de facto outlawed trolling.
It was later overturned in a 1969 case (Brandenberg v. Ohio), which severely limited the situations in which speech becomes actionable. It added litmus tests like "imminent", and "likelihood".
The "fire in a crowded theater" argument is not only NOT a law (it came from the judicial branch, not the legislative one), it's not even CASE LAW. It's nothing. A historical note. An error by the Supreme Court that they corrected 50 years later.
The First Amendment is part of the US Constitution. It is the very first change made to the Constitution, once they realized that the government needed to be explicitly constrained from infringing on human natural rights. It is the law of the land. Do not believe a misinformed (or politically biased) authoritarian who thinks a Constitutional amendment can be overruled by a erroneous deprecated court paper.
I agree, experience is a great teacher.... But do you know a way to do it without dragging in the rest of us who don't need the lesson? The problem with Marxists is that they're determined to make all of society pay for their shitty ideas.
Beware when a leftist uses the word “we”.
“We should give money to this cause.” “We should all change our behavior.”
What they mean is they have already decided they want whatever it is, and they don’t care what you want because they intend to force it on you anyway.
A large number of settlers move to a new place, bringing with them their own culture, traditions, and societal norms. They refuse to adopt, learn, or even care about the traditions or societal norms of the people who were already there. Their very presence does irreparable harm to the indigenous culture.
Q: What is this phenomenon called?
Modern leftists have two different answers:
If the settlers have light skin, then they call it colonization, and it's a bad thing.
If the settlers have dark skin, then the leftists call it immigration, and it must be encouraged.
nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnddaehgu3wwp6kyqpqsr92xvmaxdmqac64d9exptc2qw9wd2pwd593jhrak0raqt4njnhqgwwfye nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnddaehgu3wwp6kyqpqd4hv0ypkhaegc96p5a6vjdt32p9lhqz0e2cnuf4ep9lnrc53mf5sjumgef
That sounds more like hell, considering the physical fitness level of the average American.
There's a reason they only cast fit and attractive people on that show.
nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnddaehgu3wwp6kyqpq89cj209pgv5pxy3rxepvlp0hcjgvqt8uvhspyxnn2we0hh867jmsualwkx the Communitst Utopia is "you'll own nothing and be happy."
To the Marxist faithful, once the world reaches their promised utopia, there will be no need for ownership or property. Scarcity will be eliminated, and nobody will want for anything. So yes.
Think of the Federation from Star Trek. Beautiful towering cities, everyone in sparkling hippie gear, and anything you could possibly want can be acquired by asking a computerized hole in the wall. Just don't look behind the curtain at who is controlling everything.
nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnddaehgu3wwp6kyqpqsq8qlc7cvwxw8a662mkcvh0em9hunkwd9a642r0s6l6urkzx3v9s096y3l You make a good point. Drop government funding to all schools.
Exactly which part is "nonsense"?
To whom it may concern at Harvard:
Nobody is trying to restrict your freedom of expression. Nobody is trying to violate anyone's First Amendment rights. You are welcome to continue being a breeding ground for Marxist ideology and a communist indoctrination camp. That is your Constitutional right.
We just don't want to pay for it anymore.
Signed,
Americans
For the first time since FDR, Democrats are arguing for limits on governmental power.
Yet another win that Trump can take credit for.
nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnddaehgu3wwp6kyqpqks4j70qusuv7hnaqcrr3azks95fxjpz4sx29sy9h35z3vltwauns8vhyrk Cultist ideologues always eventually eat their idols for being merely human, and not superhuman.
Trump didn't start this populist movement; it has been growing under various names (eg: the Tea Party) for 25 years as a reaction to unmoderated progressivism. He just arrived at the right time and took advantage of a strong anti-woke backlash.
He'll be gone soon enough (likely sooner considering his age), but remember the man did literally dodge a bullet. That's worth at least a little bit of superhuman cred.
Funny how the moment someone got democratically elected that the leftists didn’t like, “democracy” suddenly stopped being worth defending.
When an overeducated person is losing an argument, they will often throw out the title of some obscure book, written by someone who did their thinking for them. It is implied (or even said) that if you haven't read that particular book, then you're too ignorant to have an opinion.
It's usually an effective way to shut people up in online forums (thus "winning" the argument), because there are so many books out there, the probability of an internet rando having read the one they picked is almost nil.
I don't care how awesome your reputation or your news story is. If you put the word "BREAKING" in front of a headline, you are doing propaganda, not a journalism.
News peddlers’ top priority seems to have shifted from telling the news accurately to telling the news quickly. Verification, fact-checking, and in many cases even spell- and grammar-checking take a back seat to publishing as fast as possible.
There is even an industry-standard warning label that they put right at the beginning of the headline: “BREAKING” (always in all-caps). If you see this, you know that the article is poorly researched. It almost certainly has some facts wrong, and may be entirely fake news. But at least you got it fast.
According to the fediblock search, 22 instances have blocked bemrose.social (23, if you count the one which blanket blocks *.social), and I briefly wondered why that might be.
I honestly don't think it's for that blanket catch-all category of "harassment" (one of the only reasons for censorship that has any rational arguments behind it, even if it is overly broad and far too subjective to be prescriptive). I don't recognize any of those instances, and I'm quite sure I haven't interacted with, let alone uncharacteristically attacked any of their members.
Some of the blocks give vague reasons like "misinformation" or "hate speech" or "fascism", all of which are vague catch-all categories used by the woke which all mean "I don't like what this person says". One even says "COVID misinformation" which, even if intellectually dishonest, is at least specific.
And so I must conclude that what search is actually giving me is a list of fedi instances whose admins are closed-minded ideological fools, and who happen to have noticed my nothing little instance amidst the tens of thousands out there, and whose cult teachings were sufficiently challlenged by what I had to say that they were forced to lash out and react the only way their ideologies will allow - by putting their heads in the sand and shutting out the wrongthink, so that they may feel safe in their corrupt moral superiority, as long as they pretend that contrary arguments and evidence doesn't exist.
This list is evidence that I must be closing in on the truth. I take it as a badge of honor.
nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnddaehgu3wwp6kyqpqq3sle0kvfsehgsuexttt3ugjd8xdklxfwwkh559wxckmzddywnwsxeuf7k Well that's a non-sequitur. Would you like to re-read what I actually said?