Populism Updates @PopulismUpdates Tell me your most radical position that cannot be placed on the left-right political spectrum
Admiral Snaccbar @Chris Mench Serving shrimp with the tail still on when it’s already mixed into something (pasta, rice, etc) is insane.
You must log in or register to comment.
When driving you are making things more dangerous and less efficient by waving people in. If it is your right of way take it.
Be predictable, not polite.
Almost got into an accident last night on this. Car 1 stopped at a 4way to my right, Car 2 opposite me stopped, then I stopped. Distinctly. Whole ass seconds between all stops. Me and 2 are waiting for 1 to go. It’s 11:00pm. I can’t say for sure, but I just KNOW Car 1 was waving his hands at us, who can’t see through his windshield because that’s how night time works. Way too much time passes, and me and 2 are like, fuck it and start going, then 1 flashes his brights and goes narrowly missing both of us. Was he just really wanting to be an a car accident? Is he drunk? Who knows, but half the accidents I’ve narrowly avoided involve a 4 way stop and an idiot.
Drivers that want to queue in single file when you should use all available lanes and then merge at the front.
REEEEEEEEEE!!!
Simple, orderly zippering when a lane actually ends is the way. Wasting that useful pavement to create slower traffic and more traffic jam is insane and should be ticketed.
The most infuriating are the wannabe policeman that straddle both lanes to stop people passing.
Like, if you wanna sit in a queue for no reason then good for you, don’t stop people passing that have actually bothered to read the highway code.
Got into that with my MIL once.
When confronted with the idea of leaving an emergency lane in a traffic jam, she also vehemently insisted she’d never done that.
That woman shouldn’t drive.
In my city there is a very popular good samaritan trap on the main drag into town, and I am waiting for the day something nasty happens at that particular parking lot entrance, so then they maybe redesign that section of the street or something.
Misunderstanding “right of way” is half the problem.
Right of way is ability to make a road, or the road itself by extension. You can’t have the right of way - it’s usually the government’s - and you can’t give it away. This is why wording is consistently who must yield the right of way, and not who has the right of way.
If it’s a driver’s turn to act, they are obligated to act. It’s not their option or right to act.
I’ve usually heard “right of way” used in terms of sense 3 of the dictionary. I’ve never heard it used to refer to the ability to make a road – that just makes me think you have a skilled construction crew on speed dial.
Dictionaries list common usage - even if incorrect. Look up the definition of right of way for your state or other government and I’m certain it will be the thing on which you travel or the right to create and manage it, not your “rights” while traveling on it.
I couldn’t find a list of all definitions by state but the three states I checked all use that.
It would be weird if they didn’t, since that’s been the term since before automobiles existed: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_way
Am I out of touch? No, it’s the dictionaries that are wrong.
Indeed, in the boating world, the words are “stand-on” or “burdened” vessel, which makes it clear that the vessel that should continue its course has the obligation to do so under the collision regulations. The “give way” vessel should alter its course or intentions to “keep clear.” Nobody — nobody! — has the “right of way.”
There’s actually no legal definition for “right of way” in the UK. Despite it being a widely understood concept, if you go to court to defend yourself in a road traffic accident and your defence is “it was my right of way, your honour”, you could find yourself in trouble.
deleted by creator
Not only does pineapple belong on pizza, ham & pineapple pizza is the only pizza that is consistent in all three states: fresh and hot, cold, and reheated.
The reason why it’s good when reheated is the moisture in the pineapple. It keeps the dough from becoming a rock formation when reheating.
For non-pineapple pizza, adding a bowl of water into the microwave has the same effect.
That said, the argument is not whether pineapple is good on pizza or not, ofc it is, everything is good on pizza. But is it the best topping? No, that’s anchovies and capers (olives are good too).
Hmmm while I agree about Hawaiian pizza, I will say that cheese pizza shares the properties of consistency of all 3 states.
I also love some pineapple on pizza, but a plain cheese pizza is my favorite
Olives. Green, black or Kalamata.
Every bathroom everywhere should have a bidet.
Absolutely. I got one for my house and having to use the shitty 1-ply paper in public bathrooms sucks so much. It feels terrible and doesn’t clean nearly as well.
Hicks and Newt had to die in the beginning of Alien 3 in order for the film to thematically even be an Alien film.
At their heart, the films are about Ripley being alone, more in common with the titular alien than with her termporary allies. She’s an outsider in her crew. She’s a civilian among marines. She’s a woman among convicts. She’s lost her child, she’s lost 57 years of her life. The Alien is her only real touchstone now, and in a way that is very expressly shown in the films, that becomes a kind of “relationship” in itself. She’s closer to the alien than she is to the people who surround her.
If Hicks and Newt survived and were part of Alien 3, it takes that away and makes it an ensemble cast, which thematically doesn’t fit, and (I think) it’s one of the reasons that a lot of the new Alien films just don’t feel like Alien films; they’re missing that key thematic ingredient. Ripley is a tragic character, doomed to battle alone against the only thing she has left in her life.
Are Ripley and the alien in a situationship?
The Xenomorph has been the only constant in her life throughout the entire franchise. Everyone else is temporary. So basically…yes…in so much as a nemesis can be a situationship.
I mean they made a baby together in Alien Resurrection…
Aliens also didn’t thematically fit with the first Alien. As the title indicates, there are many aliens not an alien that was alone. Burke was also a civilian, so Ripley was not the lone civilian. And at the end of the movie she was not alone unlike in the first one. Well I guess Jonesy made it out ok, so she wasn’t alone at the end of the first one either.
Aliens was not thematically consistent with the first one and that’s what made it great. There really isn’t a mystery about the Alien and how dangerous it is after the first one so trying to recreate it wouldn’t work. So instead of working class people being forced into a situation they didn’t understand and weren’t prepared for, we see a group of well armed soldiers going into a situation they were briefed on. This time the humans are going to kick ass! Except no, they get their asses to them. And themes about motherhood can be added (both for Ripley and the Aliens).
Alien 3 wasn’t entirely thematically consistent either. I do remember it exploring some themes about religion (it’s been a long time since I watched it tho) which is something the previous movies didn’t go into. Also Ripley dies at the end which inconsistent with the theme of survival.
To me story is more important than themes anyway. If Ripley has to be alone at the beginning of every movie it makes the story of her character really boring.
Alien was a horror film and Aliens was an action film.
I defend this position. Still, they should have given those characters better deaths.
they should have given those characters better deaths
That I absolutely agree with. They did 'em dirty with how they took them out.
Execute this man as an enemy of the state.
None of the doom and gloom really matters, every human in history has lived in a time of crisis. How we handle the challenges at hand determine the challenges for those that follow, but panicking about it is a waste of energy.
It’s really hard to accept this these days. Before new media, people often had no idea what was going on outside their town or villiage. Must have been bliss (Except for the entrenched poverty, filth, disease and oppression of course lmao). Now it’s hard to avoid learning about who got killed in what gruesome way today.
When someone does not like garlic bread, Allah Willing, they shall know no happiness, and shall not live long.
Same with meat on the bone for me. Like… I love a biryani, but it’s so much better when the chicken/lamb is boneless. I get that the bone imparts some flavor, but I don’t think it’s worth the effort and mess.
Anything I can’t eat with my hands, should not be covered in a sauce that I don’t want on my hands.
Fried shrimp with tails = fine. Bone-in chicken legs = fine. Bone-in chicken in biryani = not ordering. Shrimp with tail in pasta = sin against god and crime against humanity.
I once had pasta with whole mussels mixed in. Could never be too sure my next bite wouldn’t have a big chunk of shell in it. Shit was expensive for what it was too, they definitely could have paid some guy just to stand there in the kitchen and remove the shells as it goes onto the plate for what we were paying. Not a radical opinion this just reminded me of it.
People who order and eat chili mussels (with shells) at restaurants are insane and are getting ripped off. it is the least practical dish, and by weight, half of it is inedible. I think it’s also a massive pain in the ass for kitchen staff to prepare.
We’re fucked. We’re probably witnessing the last decade of relative stability.
People have been saying this for thousands of years, though. In some cases, they weren’t even wrong to think it. But for a country as wealthy and well insulated and exhaustively policed as the average Western state?
Come on. We don’t even have COVID era crime rates, much less the lead /cocaine fueled crime bonanzas of the 1970s and 80s.
Relative to what? The Great Depression? The Civil War? The collapse of the Aztec Empire?
We’re a blip on the radar.
Climate refugees are going to turn the “migrant crime” rhetoric into overdrive. My opinion, but it’s clearly the Boogeyman that Fascism is rallying against. There are great swaths of land that are experiencing temperatures and severe weather that are incompatible with human life.
Souls games should have an easy mode and it’s fine if only the original hard mode is a well balanced experience. I just want to have fun and enjoy the view.
They are all nice experiences, and it’s rather sad i can’t share that experience with my more casual friends :/
I’ve never played a Soul game because of the difficultly. Your comment made check online if an easy mode mod exists. Apparently it does.
Unfortunately mods are only available on PC
Blindly supporting the Two-Party System, and bullying those who don’t, is anti-American. It will only lead to fascism.
No one supports the two party system. We recognize it exists and work within it to change it. But it’s designed to not change, so it’s hard.
Stomping your feet and voting third party for president is performative at best, disingenuous at worst.
Local elections, vote third party if you want.
Is that bullying? I lost track of the line between facts and harassment.
Voting for and propping up bad politicians is support. You were doing great until you said, “Stomping your feet…”. That’s devaluation of a position you don’t agree with and defamation of the opinion haver all in one. It’s generally considered bullying. Just consider if everyone who shared your view voted third party instead of voting for a Republican in Democrats clothing?
Easy to be idealist when you never hold office. 3rd parties never have to show where they would comprise, because they are not running for these higher offices in a meaningful way.
The republican agenda is so profoundly awful, and the US electorate has not yet resoundly rejected it. Meanwhile, we’re too busy “trying to send a message” to recognize that the democrats are the only party even marginally open to progressive policies. Depending on where you live, there are a lot of groups pushing for election reform, and many places where that will be on the ballot. Get involved, help make that change happen…but you can do that and also flush the big orange turd.
How did I get dragged into this in a joke thread??
If you’re never given a seat at the table, then how can they talk about their compromises? I agree with a good portion of what you said. I wasn’t trying to fight people, but it did ask for “Radical Ideas” lol.
How can your third party ever have a seat at the table when they put all their resources and funding into national elections they can’t win?
I agree that only focusing on national elections is not good. A quick search will show that there are independent and third party representatives though, so while some candidates fall short, cough Jill Stein cough I would hope not all are discounted.
Yeah, it’d be great to see more 3rd party candidates in down ballot races. Should your first seat at the table nationally be the presidency?
It wouldn’t be the first seat. A quick search shows that there are independent and third-party representatives. I agree though.
It is literally to have a viable third party under First Past the Post. It boils down to Duverger’s law. Or more broadly Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem
We need to focus on the actual voting system before we can start generating and supporting Third Parties.
Specifically we need a cardinal voting system. It’s literally the only way to gain viable third parties that are not just extensions of the major two.
Sadly it’s too late to get voting reform on any more ballots this year.
But you can still get involved.
I know there is the Ranked Choice Voting concept which sounds appealing. I’ll read on this too. Thank you for the information!
Ranked Choice is an Ordinal voting system that fails Arrow’s Theorem.
In some rare cases, it can produce a result even worse than First Past the Post. There are a bunch of flaws in RCV, because it was invented before mathematical evaluation was as robust as it is these days.
Simulation, and some unfortunate real world examples, show that if you vote in and election with at least three somewhat viable candidates, and keep strategy in mind, you can rate your preferred candidate second and improve their chances of winning.
No voting system should be able to do this. RCV has more flaws in addition to this already game breaking one.
OK, Ill keep that in mind. I need to read more. Thank you for the education, I know it isn’t your responsibility.
No, that’s not how our system works.
In our system you never vote FOR anyone. You are always voting AGAINST the worst candidate. That is literally how it is set up. That is the definition of a two party system.
Voting against a worst candidate is not propping up that system. Because one of those candidates is going to win either way due to the electoral college.
If everyone, literally everyone, that was Democrat decided to vote Green, then they’d still lose. Again, electoral college. Nevermind the fact that getting everyone to do it is literally impossible.
What you described is also not how our system works. The Electoral College does what it pleases. See the elections from 2016, 2000, etc. I do agree that the EC is a major issue in this.
That too. Faithless electors are a train wreck waiting to happen. some states have laws thankfully, but not all, and that’s a huge issue.
Everyone should just ignore their actual incentives. Wow. What a wonderful solution to collective action problems; why didn’t anyone ever think of that before? Come on. I don’t believe you are that stupid.
They gave facts and you dismiss them with a label because of a little ridicule? Your ending suggestion doesn’t even do the job… we can grant you the impossible, sure all those people vote third party. Result, still a loss, and their least preferred major party wins. Whoops, all those voters we granted you picked different third parties. Because as little as they barely agreed on preferring one of the major parties, they agree on a ranking of the “third parties” even less. If you ask for us to grant the impossible, at least make it one that would work.
This is currently a multi-tiered 170,000,000 people system we are discussing. History and mathematics are against simplistic appeals for quick changes. Propose childish thinking, and it is little wonder you get ridiculed as acting childish.
Your post is a prime example. i didn’t dismiss what they said. I pointed out where I disagreed with their concept of support, pointed out what bullying is, and then asked a consideration. I don’t need you to agree with me. I just was asking for consideration of a concept. Your generalized dismissal is enough.
I presented a position on the topic. You ignored it in favor of discussing my comment’s tone.
As for the concept, I considered it decades ago. The math was the same then as now, and time has only added those decades of supporting evidence.
Ridicule of the ridiculous is warranted. And characterizing ignoring the reality of political systems as stomping one’s foot is the mildest of ridicule. It isn’t bullying. If you weren’t dismissing the facts in surewhynotlem’s comment, then I’m glad you accept them.
Your position was not ignored. You spent your first paragraph insulting me, that isn’t tone. I’m reading on the math you mentioned to better educate myself regardless of your “tone”.
Jesus, it’s always “bullying” when people get told the consequences of their choice. You don’t need to believe in politics, it will still fuck you over. A lot of people don’t have the luxury of not participating because they aren’t spoiled white suburbanites able to just hide from the consequences of ignoring how their country functions.
I think you missed the point of my comment. Detailing consequences is not the issue, losing the plot is. I’ll work on my delivery for the future. I agree with your overall statement though.
Do people blindly support it? I live with it and vote accordingly but I also advocate for alternative voting methods. People voting third party do not fully understand that our first past the post system makes it so their candidate has no chance.
Yea my bad. Blindly wasn’t the right word to use.
As far as I can tell the incrementalist argument goes like this:
- The two-party system is destroying the country.
- But one of the two parties will destroy democracy imminently, so we have to vote for the lesser evil this time, and then,
- …
- The two-party system is destroying the country.
- Resoundly reject the party that is actively pushing for a weird christofascist state. <-- the us electorate has not yet done this!
- Actively push for election reform <-- AK, AZ, CO, DC, ID, MT, NV, OR, and SD will all have ballet initiatives this November regarding election reform. VOTE!
- Get involved with organizations that are moving to further the causes you care about, and get active in politics.
Voting for president is the smallest part of civic participation, not the end-all-be-all
We need work to end the two party system, NOT work that demonizes people for making rational choices under current circumstances.
the truth!
This is the future of US politics.
2024 - vote Democrat or the Republicans will end democracy.
2028 - vote Democrat or the Republicans will end democracy.
2032 - vote Democrat or the Republicans will end democracy.
2036 - vote Democrat or the Republicans will end democracy.
2040 - vote Democrat or the Republicans will end democracy.
And so on.
At some point, people will have to start voting third party because the two major parties will never give up the status quo.
The trick is to support ranked-choice voting in the meantime
And primaries are the “real” elections to get us there. General elections will continue to be major party A vs. major party B, with a “this is the most important election ever” backdrop, while primaries are where we have to try to get our important issues (like election reform) carried by generally electable candidates to get those issues injected into the parties.
And the amount of money spent on primaries confirms how influential they are capable of being.
I pay excessive money at a restaurant to ensure I have to do no work and everything within reason is edible. If this is not the case when I get it, I love nothing more than sending it back, and if I don’t think they’ll not mess with my food or give me any attitude I will leave and they’ll eat the loss (and maybe the tails).
To this end, korean bbq is a fucking scam. You have to cook the food yourself. It’s so stressful.
As Americans, we should eat more meat organs. The amount of Americans who get excited by eating a chicken leg but then get disgusted at eating the chicken gizzard is too high.
Eating gizzard sounds offal to me
i chuckled, good one
Looking at my own country and other countries I’ve lived in, I think it’s to do with poverty or at least recent poverty - Portugal was very poor back in before the Revolution in 74 and still now it’s far more common around here to eat all those parts of animals (and, curiously, one of my favorite dishes is a local version of tripe) than that I noticed in The Netherlands and the UK (though the Scots do have the famous Haggis).
The funny thing is that nowadays at least some of those things have been found to be quite healthy to eat.
We have a traditional dish in the UK which are meatballs made from minced pork liver and heart, mixed with bacon, onion and breadcrumbs. Unfortunately, I cannot name this dish because it shares the same name as a homophobic slur but they are known as “ducks” in Yorkshire, Lincolnshire and Lancashire.
I had to look up the recipe to figure out the slur you were alluding to…yikes. I don’t blame you for not repeating the name here.
Steak and kidney pie also a classic. Liver and bacon as well.
You don’t see much organ meats in the Netherlands and the UK much because they are shipped to France where the price is high (and being a part of the EU, the isn’t any extra taxes for that). It’s market choices, not dietary, combined with they were never a huge desire for them there.
It’s also why you don’t really see much chicken feet for sale, they are shipped to China where the price is high.
And yet, curiously, they’re not shipped from Portugal to France even though it’s not all that much farther way than England.
If it was all about the price being high in France then surely the Portuguese slaughterhouses would be shipping that stuff there, not selling it to butchershops in Portugal.
I think you might be confusing cause and consequence: it’s not that the Brits and Dutch can’t eat that stuff because it all gets shipped to France as the prices are higher there, it’s that because the Brits and Dutch are not eating that stuff the prices are lower in Britain and The Netherlands than in France (were they do eat that stuff) so it mostly gets shipped to France. This latter hypothesis does explain why a country were people do eat that stuff and with lower purchasing power than France does in fact have that stuff available locally rather than it all having been exported to France.
I think you might be confusing cause and consequence: it’s not that the Brits and Dutch can’t eat that stuff because it all gets shipped to France as the prices are higher there, it’s that because the Brits and Dutch are not eating that stuff the prices are lower in Britain and The Netherlands than in France (were they do eat that stuff) so it mostly gets shipped to France.
I think you’re confused. You literally repeated what I said.
You don’t see much organ meats in the Netherlands and the UK much because they are shipped to France where the price is high (and being a part of the EU, the isn’t any extra taxes for that). It’s market choices, not dietary, combined with they were never a huge desire for them there.
I never said that they can’t, it’s that they didn’t normally so they ship it out which now prevents people from developing a taste for it as it now goes out for a higher price.
As for the other part of why Portugal keeps it, it’s for a local market and the issues that deal with it. Think like most Asian nations won’t ship out rice for a higher price on the open market.
I recently saw some packaged chicken sausages that said “all white meat” and I was confused.
It’s breast. Leg is dark.
Legs are fine and dandy, but Ill always be a thigh guy
We should certainly be equally disgusted with all meat.
Except with that delicious billionaire meat.
Billionaire meat is vegan because they’ve consented to being a billionaire.
You can just eat the tails
Excellent source of dietary Chitin
I usually cut my spaghetti. It’s just more convenient to eat.
That’s basically how I eat spaghetti, except I use my teeth once the fork is in my mouth.
If it’s too short to twirl, how is that more convenient?
You just poke a bunch of it with the fork until a suitable amount is stuck between the tines, and then you don’t have a long tail of pasta that’s trying to get sauce all over your shirt.
As someone with rich Italian heritage, you disgust me. May god have mercy on your soul.
Most original italian pasta is short tho.
