In which daredevil version did he and daredevil get splashed by the toxic waste in different ways?

He is gay, married another bro.

Why do these fuckwits come to power again and again? Seriously, humanity can’t catch a break.

“I have the right to kill people and take their stuff, but they’re not allowed to fight back.”

The idiocy is astounding even to me.

“genocide joe”

That’s the bait to get you here.

Pierre pressure!

“Back in my day we used to use pork lard and goat intestines for that!”

Trick post. That contains Gowron’s ghost.

Simple trick: “If you don’t do exactly as our religion says, you’re blaspheming god”.

Too late. It already clicked.

Just like an onion.

It is said ignorance is bliss, so they’re probably making drugs out of us.

Breaking Bad - The Galactic version

Ed: Take a ride on the Milky Way!

Truth is subjective.

You understood nothing from my comment and are completely wrong in every main conclusion you drew from it.

And this difference in thought, expression and interpretation is proof enough that while people can come together to form a community and pursue a goal or a project side by side, conflict still arises. Magnify this at the size of states and you have what exists today.

In the US, it was a minority that placed Trump in office. And a minority that voted against him. The majority did not care or was unable to care. Same for the protests a few days ago. As long as these initial protesters persist and continue to organize, more will gather around them. But if they stop now, the protest will either die or deviate in an unfocused direction.

The direction is fought for by the few leading the many. Every protest in history that succeeded or failed had or lacked a guiding voice. And without that guiding voice, the majority will scatter. This is a social fact that doesn’t need any paper to prove it and governments love making use of it since quite a while back ago.

And speaking of papers, your dependence on them is a bit foolish. It was only a few months ago when it was shown here on lemmy that many papers get published for the sake of publishing. A corrupted monopoly seeking grants, funding and subsidies without a care for accuracy or merit and where the “peer” reviewers are privatized and have no qualifications whatsoever.

I trust your papers as much as I trust the toilet paper in a public restroom. (Which is not at all, if you didn’t catch my drift.) …

The more time i spend here replying to your comment, the more i see you as a walking contradiction. You talk about people coming together to work side by side, yet post that kind of venom above.

So I’ll stop here before I somehow manage to worsen my opinion.

It’s not ethics that brought us in our current situation, but the lack of it.

Nice theorycraft, but it’s just theory. In real life, it doesn’t work.

For one thing, by our own definitions, life is inherently evil. It takes, consumes, destroys, selfishly breaks down something else in order to sustain itself. We may rationalize it in different ways, but it can’t escape that attribute. And as long as an individual has to sustain themselves, they will have no choice but to commit evil. But we selectively view badly those who indulge themselves.

Another is that perfection cannot be achieved, wastage is unavoidable. We have to produce more than is needed or we will end up with less than required.

Accidents, logistics, incompetence, corruption and the like cannot be completely prevented. There will always be something beyond the calculated parameters that can and will eventually overwhelm a system.

And let’s not forget about the desire to control. Whether tyrants or the utopic society you’re implying for, it’s about control, whether to control oneself or all others. But is the mind that easily controlable and should it be? The desires we have and the willpower to pursue or restrain them aren’t that easily defined.

We are not all of the same mind. Neurodiversity proves that people are different in thought and in feeling. The pursuits and responsibilities two different individuals can maintain for themselves over their lifetimes can go below or above the set standard and a civilization must take into account the satisfaction of its citizens in order to avoid its own downfall.

Also, what was achieved in one society will likely not be accepted in another. So good luck expecting everyone, everywhere to accept a unitary system simply because it’s better. I sincerely have my doubts that anyone can succeed in that.

This all has to take into account the planet’s uneven geographical resources distribution as well. Our current production rates barely give a damn about sustainability. Soil nutrition, water consumption, population density, logistics and so on have to be taken into account, so this means population relocation, specialized production specific to regional conditions, limitations of product diversity and availability.

Anyway, what you want can’t be done and if it can be done, it can’t last because people aren’t static pieces of paper. A near-perfect distribution of basic needs requires a level of sacrifice and constant maintenance that we lack the willpower and stare of mind to accept responsibility for at this point in time.

…

Tl;dr:

To make it simple with a one-off example, will you feed fascists or racists if it meant their continued oppression of minorities? And if so, can you ensure everyone else will do the same?

Equal or equitable basic needs indeed need equal or equitable behavior, but we ourselves lack that. And due to that lacking, we make do with what we do have.

What should be doesn’t matter, only what is.

Because resources are finite and frugality is needed at times.

Don’t worry, she’s probably getting deported/disappeared soon.

Nah mate, it’s the “rich ppl need to experience poverty in order to empathize” argument.

Smoking roaches gets you high.