The US government SHOULD be put in that situation since they are war criminals. I don't understand why we should give leeway to criminal organisations.
Democracy is eroded by people not thinking uniformly? That's an interesting thought. I believe that was only required for totalitarian types of government like Fascism and Communism.
The NYT do not lie? Do you remember the Jussie Smollet case or the MAGA hat teenager case? What about the misinformation campaign re: The Iraqi weapons of mass-destruction? That's just out of the top of my head.
They do lie a lot. And nowadays they mostly lie by omission. It's just a different kind of lying than Breitbart's.
Why we are still hang-up to the time were NYT actually had journalistic integrity which is over 20 years ago?
Outrage is contagious. It doesn't help that politicians bait people into getting outraged (Trump on the right, Sanders & AOC likes on the left). Build enough outrage and people will protest, doesn't mean it's justified or rational. It's very easy to get brainwashed into believing that the inherent unfairness of life is somehow a product of 'the system'.
Do you know who gets outraged and 'protest' regularly? Children.
By the fact that Hunter Biden is a crackhead an he probably didn't even remember that. The guy went high to test into the army, the incredulity barrier is lower than you think.
I dislike Varoufakis as much as the next guy but that's pure fake news. What he wanted to do is introduce a welfare system that was backed by crypto-currency issued by the Greek government in order to make welfare more transparent and efficient.
I do fancy the moral superiority exerted by some against the Greek populace profiting by a bad line of credit.
Do they also protest German and French banks betting on Greek bonds that yielded very high interest rates? When you own a financial instrument with great upside it means it also carries a lot of risk. So, according to some, profiting from high interest rates is dandy but when it's time to pay the piper (your borrower made YOUR risk materialise) they don't want to get bankrupt, just transfer back the risk you took in the form of debt.
And of course the loaned money is not used to re-invigorate the local economy. It is going back into the French & German economies because the local economy of Greece is destroyed and their companies go in and undercut the local competition. e.g That's how shit-show supermarket chains like LIDL wiped out of existence very solid Greek supermarket chains that existed and were profitable for multiple decades before the financial crisis, but then had to do mergers or shut-down.
Genius plan. And that's why Greece didn't deceive anybody to get into the Eurozone - the members just looked the other way.
The Greeks should have had defaulted and let the creditors who where profiting all those years from junk bonds (because that's what Greek government bonds were) take the hit. They would have recovered much better by now.
Finally, it's bizarre to me how many people still believe that governments represent the 'people'. No they don't, they represent their friendly neighbourhood bankster - as long as they get a good cut of the money - and the special interests which fund elected politician campaigns. Greek people preferred a default over loan bail-outs from the start. They protested heavily and in the majority but were completely ignored. Numerous MPs had the audacity to admit that they never even read the terms of the bailout. As the great George Carlin said, "They are a big club - and you ain't in it buddy"
In theory.. But in practice, when men are trying to acquire more resources for other marginalised men e.g shelters for male victims of domestic abuse, who is lobbying against them? Feminists.
I don't understand why you are getting downvoted. What you are saying is basic economics and I guess people in here are too ideologically invested to accept it. The claim that governments foster healthy competition when their effect is the exact opposite is ridiculous.
Regulators don't care about stopping it, they only care about lining up their pockets. You have a corrupt agent and then you expect another corrupt agent to do you justice.
The author is just trying to shoehorn his political ideology into a completely irrelevant topic to score social points with his friends and pat himself on the back. There is no need trying to find anything of substance here. He is hearing hoofs, and imagining zebras instead of horses.
Feminism is about women's rights. Whenever men rights groups(or egalitarian groups for the matter) fight for men's rights - like increased domestic abuse shelters, parental rights, custody rights etc. - they find feminists lobbying in the opposition.
I agree that women have historically gotten the shorter end of the stick in this area. But that's hardly classified under suffering - especially in an era where the barrier of entry for women in everything they feel marginalised in has been lowered artificially to accommodate them.
What suffering? Did they fight in the front-line or plough fields old day long? The handful of males at the top didn't make ALL men not suffer, neither did make ALL women suffer. Royalty women had better lives than the 99% of men throughout history. That's revisionist history at it's finest and the same BS reasoning the writer of this blogpost has.
That's not true though. There have been countless of instances where perfectly reasonable positions have been branded by leftists as 'Fascist' in order to justify themselves in initiating aggression - unprovoked. Then they perform Olympic level metal gymnastics to justify themselves on how they are not at fault but the other side's fault for 'spreading hate'. People are starting to see through authoritarians like those and have increasingly stop falling for that bullshit.