Maybe motivation for an action shouldn’t be with how more/less worthy it makes you, but rather how it adds to the world and improves/worsens the lives of others.

That being said, the image is bullshit, cause if you become a pedo, you are now less worthy, and that’s putting it very lightly.

I was calling out that the other person, and now myself, get downvoted predictably for saying anything not outright pro communist/socialist/Marxist/Leninists/etc. That is adding to the conversation.

Haven’t been reading much lately, but I’ve been pushing myself to read more. I’m probably at one book a month now. Just finished reading the novelization of My Neighbor Totoro to my kids. I’m starting Slaughterhouse Five again. Just bought a beautiful version of The Three Musketeers and I’ll need to work my way up to that.

Honestly, I’ve been at a sort of stale spot and need something fresh to listen to. I listened to the new Jamie xx album, which was good, but I’m already done listening to it. I already feel like I’ve heard it a crazy amount of times even though I’ve only listened to it maybe 2 or 3 times.

I’ll be listening to some of the stuff that gets posted here though, maybe I’ll find something new and refreshing.

That self-regulation bit is very true. It’s super difficult to go through all the noise of teaching it, so I think parents avoid it altogether.

Not arguing, just not quite understanding what you mean when you said, “That would be great if it weren’t definitively proven to be otherwise.” Which part of my comment(s) are you referring to?

I appreciate the way you’ve written your reply. Too many here (and in the world) are hostile and combative with their words, whereas you’re seeking actual discourse, and I thank you for that. The world, and especially the USA, needs more of that. I also appreciate the book recommendations - I like to challenge my views and the views of others, for it’s not entirely beneficial to be trapped within an echo chamber. I’m aware of Marx and Lenin, but not of Luxemburg. Thank you again.

I’m well aware of wealth inequality and how bad it is right now. Those that seek wealth and power will abuse any form of government they can to exploit it and give themselves more wealth and power. It is not inherant to the system of government exploited, it’s inherant to human nature. How many communist governments have had leaders exploit the system to give themselves wealth? This has nothing to do with the conversation you’re replying to lol.

The way anyone here looks at Communism is idealistic and Communist governments never fall into that ideal definition. Does that mean Communism is a bad thing? No. It simply means we haven’t found a way to make it work. Is Capitalism a bad thing? No. It can be great when it works. It’s just not working right now in Amurrica.

Nothing you underlined indicate that it’s owned by a small number of people, just that’s privately/corporate owned.

1 person can own one business in a market, and a separate person can own a second business in the market. A million different people can own a million different businesses in that market. All are privately or corporate owned.

Wrong. Capitalism is not defined by its criticisms nor by any eventual outcome. Everything OP said is the definition of capitalism. Everything you’re saying are the criticisms of Capitalism which state that eventually, Capitalism will lead to that. Early capitalism does not have a small few controlling the majority of the means of production, but it is still capitalism.

That’s like saying Communist governments are defined by never reaching full communism, or that a First Past the Post voting system is defined by a two party system. Those are not what define those things, but they are the criticisms of them and their eventual outcomes without something new implemented to correct it.

100%

Uh oh, something not blatantly anti-capitalist! Here comes the down votes!

Gerrymandering does affect the electoral college, which affects the presidency.

All states except Maine and Nebraska use a party block voting, or general ticket method, to choose their electors, meaning all their electors go to one winning ticket.

This system has a winner-take-all nature similar to first-past-the-post voting for single-member districts, which is vulnerable to gerrymandering and majority reversals.

Gerrymandering has been a huge problem for a while, what makes you think this time it played a pivotal role in Trump’s victory? If that was the case, he would have won the electoral vote but not the popular vote, but he won the popular vote, first Rep pres to do so in 20 years apparently. It helped secure past Rep presidencies, but doesn’t to have done so this time around.

RedNote doesn’t offer any incentives or promotions themselves, but there are external opportunities for content promotion. Source

Not saying they weren’t bribed to go over, since Insta and YT pay more apparently, but it would at least pad content Creator’s revenue some.

That kind of talk is why Trump won.

Or if the chest area of the duck was filled with something to provide balance

Also, any number of interviews that is more than one is too many interviews.