Enkrod

What Fritz doesn’t understand is that you can be very much in favor of the existence of the state of Israel, without supporting the current genocidal Israeli government. That one can be very much in favor of jewish life and culture all over the world, but support a two-state solution. That one can agree that Israel is an apartheid-state and still want to preserve it, only differently. That one can absolutely blame HAMAS for their violence and terrorism and at the same time support palestinian autonomy.

He get’s two more rounds of voting, and will likely be elected in the third round. Otherwise the CDU/CSU will have to forward another candidate, since the election was for the party, not the candidate, they remain the strongest party and could propose anyone to be elected chancellor. But this might crash out the proposed coalition government if they think that the SPD cannot keep its promise to vote for him.

And the inevitable decline of neoliberal politics. People have been taught and indoctrinated by the media, that the right is economically proficcient but hindered by the left. And now they double down on neoliberal bullshit politics because not going hard enough didn’t help them and going more left is generally presented as an economically worse choice.

The sad truth is: Going more left would leave “the economy” (the stocks / rich peoples wallets) worse of but help the real economy by giving expendable income to people who right now, cannot spend what they don’t have.

Hmm, honestly, I feel like that isn’t necessarily the case and often connected to the audience, especially if such a comment is offtopic.

Personally I have felt that on Lemmy effort and care are very much appreciated. But there is a breaking point in regards to the insightfulness and the length of the comment. Like there needs to be at least X amount of new and interestimg information per paragraph.

Upvoting the selection of truly impactful comic books. Guess my collection is missing Saga. Thank you for that.

Because the servers are subject to their respective national laws and regulations and the governments are all to happy to take down uppity servers full of people who are opposed to those governments.

The rules regulating speech on our servers are not there to protect the rich or the system, they are there to protect the servers, so we can continue to call for direct action, even if we can’t outright call for violence.

It’s either regulated speech or no speech at all.

Haha, oops

Boeing: “All those damn regulations exist only to keep us out of the european market!”

The regulations: “Plane must fly safe”

Criminals absolutely do use Signal! Sometimes they even invite journalists to group chats.

That entirely depends on the other parties.

As long as they have less than 50% the other parties could (in theory) band together against them and create a coalition government.

The problem arises when that coalition has to become more diverse. As you can imagine the populist right would rather work together with the far right than with the populist left, so the coalition becomes shaky, paralyzed because they cannot come to agreements. The common denominator will be so small that basically nothing gets done, and the oppositional party will profit from that.

Shaky coalition governments can lead to government breakups and snap elections which in combination with the resulting loss of trust and inability to do anything of the government will likely lead to an even stronger opposition and even more shaky governments or right out majority for the plurality party.

Also, the leader of the opposition usually chairs important committees like the Budget Committee, the opposition also gets important roles in the committees for Foreign Affairs, Internal Affairs and Defense. It also gets priority in debates, which is usually a good thing, since this works as a check and balance to hold government accountable, but when this role is in the hands of populists, they will certainly use it to further their own narrative.

What he has to say about it is bullshit, because he’s reframing totalitarianism as global oligarchy (which is a little too close for comfort to “the globalists”) and ending on the libertarian fever idea that capitalism of all things will destroy oligarchy.

No, you can take IngSoc at face value, Orwell was strongly in favor of democratic socialism but as much opposed to Stalinism and authoritarianism in general. He should absolutely be viewed as an anti-fascist and anti-authoritarian socialist with strong bonds to anarchy. He claimed that since his time in spain he had become a socialist, but the USSR had abandoned socialism and turned to totalitarianism.

“Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism, as I understand it.”

— George Orwell