If you fail to see the analogy then I don’t know what to tell you.

If a murdering horde invades your home, your neighbors, and you face near impossible odds to survive, you can’t just give up. You reach for any opportunities to save your home and family.

Invading a country in order to conquer and exploit it, is entirely different from “invading” a part of a country as a peace talks influence. They have stated zero intent in keeping the land, and even a troll like you must agree that there is a difference between burning your neighbors car for fun or to exploit the grounds, your land, under it, versus burning your neighbors car to make the neighbor stop burning everyone’s car, after you having to watch them burn several neighbors’ cars.

And if you can not understand figure of speech, clear nigh 1:1 analogies, then maybe you should re-evaluate whether you are actually competent or developed enough to take part in actual conversations with words.

Edit: Also, just for fun, what would you do if that rapist with a mental disorder refuses to admit to any raping, even while clearly doing it in front of you, and refuses any help on the grounds that they need none? They call it special penetration operation and keep going. You just let them, or do you forcibly detain them and throw into an appropriate facility to heal them and figure out what’s wrong with them being so delusional, aggressive and unhinged? Just a thought.

And, what? If there’s a house full of rapists nearby, and the rationale to just roll over and get raped is that if you do not, the rapist will just bring over more of his rapist friends, that’s a fucked up situation that I would assume everyone would agree has to be solved and ended.

The very reason to fight against the rapist is to deter the entire house full of rapists to come over for easy prey. What are you talking about? Just let them do it is what you are suggesting? Even if you do see a car ripe for burning which could save you all from getting constantly raped? Of course you try the car. Doing nothing is just letting them do it and keep doing it, despite there being opportunities to, you know, end the entire rape? You’d want the rape to continue?

I feel stupid having to explain this. You can not be serious, I refuse to accept that. Absurd.

Am I? Please enlighten me.

Edit: Ah, the very last paragraph of yours. Right. I was responding to you as a whole, the entire conversation thus far.

If running to start a fire in the rapists car in their own yard helps your family avoid rape, making the rapists run to save their car, then maybe that just might give you time to organize the defense of your own home and other your neighbors.

At least, for now, some of your family and friends are safe.

In the long run, if you conquer the rapists yard as a whole, you can talk trade with him. Maybe they leave you alone if you return their yard.

Yeah I don’t think you can wrap your head around the idea of defending one’s home, family, friends and/or culture. You talk about hiding as if that’s the default if you can’t bribe someone…? To me that just sounds outlandish.

Most want to do something to protect their sisters from rape and their homes from being pillaged to shit. Not run and hide like you seem to view this.

Those who don’t want to fight always have the option to protest and serve an appropriate length of repercussions in prison. And that’s only if you can’t arrange your service to be something non-violent such as homefront logistics or information technology etc. Often you can. And this is if one has ideological or otherwise good reasons not to hold a gun. If one’s just scared, then unfortunately that is not enough of a reason. Everyone is scared when a murdering horde invades. It’s why you do all the things you never wanted to, even your worst enemy, to do. So that others, who can not, may once feel safe again.

Those who run or hide are saying that there is nothing worth protecting and defending, which is fine. Not everyone views their country as a good place. Let the rats hide, I say. If it feels shameful, then maybe they ought to think why that is? At least show some backbone to stand your ground if you refuse to defend your neighbors. Go to the prison. Make a point. That’s honorful at least. Running or hiding? That’s just not humane. That’s leaving others to die.

Anyway, there’s no dimension where wartime order retains the civility and comfortableness of peace time. If rapists and murderers come rampaging in your home, you either fight or you leave your family to their own devices, to be raped and murdered. Remaining peaceful will only result in you watching the horde rape your mother and sisters and children. You are helping them to, in fact.

Once you fight them off, it takes time before all is rebuilt and safe, comfy again. And during that time, when the murderers break in to kill your siblings, mother, father and your children, you don’t get to choose doing nothing. You fight, or you help them by doing nothing. How many will let the rapists get to their business with their family? Not many. You fight. Because you can’t remain peaceful anymore. They already broke in and are rounding up your family, destroying your home. Conscription is just the organized, civil way of going through this process as a community, rather than everyone having to fight alone separately against the horde. It’s not nice, true, but what else is there to do?

Yup, that seam/twist there on the foreground is almost a definitive giveaway

Edit: I mean I guess that especially a rich person could, for some reason, wear a weird ass scarf designed by someone who thinks in a very out-of-the-box way… but which is more likely?

In the very rural areas I would assume there to be ambulance/rescue helicopters, boats and snowmobiles etc that get dispatched. I was born and lived most of my life in a very rural area with the closest actual hospital with proper 24/7 er and more advanced surgery etc capabilities being some 160km away. Roads and road-bound vehicles just aren’t a thing you’d want to use or depend on in an emergency, if you live that rurally. So that’s really not a good argument to make, in my opinion, though maybe if you lived in the US, you wouldn’t have that and if you did, it’d bankrupt you if you made use of it, so you were going to be fucked either way. It’s dangerous to depend on rural roads if your only recourse is speeding. That’s just endangering everyone else too, be it only you as the driver the extra casualty. So the answer isn’t keeping the current dangerous system dangerous, rather maybe reconsider the way emergency response and general welfare and healthcare is organized and structured… if something like this would one day push you guys there, then I’d consider that only good. This is assuming you are from US of course. But I can’t really see any other country lacking basic services and needs like that, if internet and proficiency in English language as well as access to cars is taken as granted, which would mostly rule out third world countries since we are talking about rural areas.

Well, despite all the good work and against common sense, surprisingly many still turn bigot. But much less so, luckily.

Seems like some people just can’t be content and happy, no matter what. And you have to direct that anger or bitterness or whatever to something. Too often it’s hate.

Just saying, Steam controller is great and works amazingly still, made only better by the ongoing updates to steam input.

I’m not sure what else they’d need to do. Other than still produce it, I suppose 😅

Well, you might reconsider whether thinking like that actually makes the world much less fun and tolerable to live in than not. No reason to be so cynical and self-centered, friend.

I’m guessing the situation being as dire as it is, as reported lately, they are desperate to use any bit of rhetoric or leverage they can. Being silent doesn’t really help securing the support they so acutely need. Maybe this doesn’t either, but at least they remain in the news cycles around the globe, which helps still.

Well, if they rise to power via legitimate democratic means, then by all means it is what we deserve, and I will either work against it, as an extremist, or move to a less hostile country towards people of my kind, be it political, racial or some other aspect. I’m not saying I’m better than whoever gets labeled an extremist. I am saying that whatever the current political or ideological or whatever climate is, if it is democratic, it is the environ in which I exist, and c’est la vie.

I have a hard time believing a fascist or otherwise extremist powers would take hold of my country, but I’m not naive so as to think it impossible.

I, same as anyone else, simply exist within a complex framework that isn’t under my control.

That being said, I don’t think I hold any “right” or “correct” or necessarily “better” views or ideologies, it just so happens majority right now share that set of beliefs and I happen not to be an extremist in that sense.

At any time I could become one, and I do not think it would be wrong. It would be exactly as “correct”, I would just happen to hold stances against that status quo. That doesn’t change my initial reasoning at all. I have to believe people are mostly rational, emphatic, sensible and good in general, which would translate to my stances having low chances of becoming deemed extremist. If that happens, I would just accept it as entirely understandable, from that point of view, if I was banned from places. And work either against it, or moving my life elsewhere, where there wouldn’t be extremist (from my point of view, not general) powers in rule. And if that was not possible, I’d be imprisoned or killed, which, if happens, was always out of my control, and such is life.

Your argument would require anyone that subscribes to it to believe to be better and more right in the things one beliefs. I do not think so, so I can, with clear mind and consciousness, live with this stance.

Edit: Note that I originally used the word democratic very consciously. Anything outside that bound, would be an entirely different ball game, and that is for wiser and more philosophically minded heads. I consider the realities I live in and which I know, because that is the bound of my experience and understanding. I’m a simple man. But I do hold beliefs, grounded in what I know, and those I like to share if prompted.

Your concern is of course valid, too. Just not something that is necessarily against my stance here. It’s just a hypothetical, which I think I have considered enough to still stand this ground.

Edit2: to answer your question, it would play by the same rule, if they banned me, and I would understand it for the same reasons I understand it now. I wouldn’t agree with it, is the difference, but that doesn’t change the logic of it.

Of course they would ban me, if most of the people thought I was an extremist. I wouldn’t think it my privilege in that scenario to be able to share my extremist views. I would find other channels or fight against that system, or just move to a better suited environment. But I would not think it unfair from a general view, it’s exactly as understandable as the Bolsonaros or whoevers of the world now being banned.

Not really. All extremists should have severely limited platforms to spread their hate in, and who else would see to that, if not democratically elected officials? Even if not democratically elected, I would personally trust almost any even remotely democratic government’s official to enforce something like that than to trust in some edgelord billionaire twat like Musk to do anything other than go the other way and signal boost that extremism instead.

And since I believe this, it would be hypocritical of me to criticize Brazil for this very thing, especially if a far-right populist like Bolsonaro (or anyone Musk likes for that matter) is involved.

But you might hold different views. And fair enough. But I firmly believe we should not give platforms to extremists or traitorous assholes, period. And should work to actively limit that, instead.

I.e I would not like to see, for example, ISIS leaders sharing their beheading videos on any social media platform. By that same logic, I would not like any other kind of extremism there either. I can’t just cherry-pick which kind of extremism I like to be limited and banned. If I believe that there exists entities or influences I would not like to spread, I should accept that those influences exist outside of my personally agreed views of what should be limited.

This, this is our thoughts exactly. Very well put from them. It’s so depressing, though understandable in a way. Makes you sad and angry towards yourself too, however warranted or unwarranted that may be ultimately.

I’m not, and we already have ongoing country-wide strikes and other worker rights fighting measures in my country going on, although not for these reasons, so that’s not really an option either, media already saturated on these actions.

But a good recommendation nevertheless, thank you.

This is severely disturbing and dystopian, I can not believe we are just letting all this happen, the same as with Ukraine.

Earlier I was talking with my partner about these things from my safe home, far removed from these situations, and we realized this must be how the original nazis happened. It had puzzled us both, and many we had talked with in the past, how it was even possible to come to be.

I guess now we know. This is how it comes to be.

Feels so powerless and diminishing, but at the same time very human. Can’t realistically do more than vote locally when we can, but that’s not going to help anyone right now, or realistically even in the short term of a few years…

It’s so heart-breaking, and it’s bizarre because we probably don’t even know a fraction of all of it…

Sorry for tacking in with an unrelated question, but as someone who isn’t from an English-speaking country, could you elaborate as to what your last phrase means? Is the guardian considered a bad news outlet? I had the vague impression the brand was associated with more or less “better” quality reporting and/or journalism in general, and can remember donating to them years ago. I now wonder if something has changed of if I was supporting something bad in my ignorance 😕

”Most of the arsenal of NATO”?

That’s just ridiculous. Not a single NATO country has compromised their own defense for this, which can be argued to be a bad or a good thing from either side, and most everyone’s been buying up new gear and investing heavily on new tech; they are, with a few minor exceptions, basically sending the scraps that’d go to landfill if it wasn’t convenient-ish to send them to Ukraine instead….

Man, you had a good point initially, but now you’re just really stubbornly defending a position you must realize is a really thin one. You’re arguing that they implied defederation isn’t important, but that’s a straw man you yourself constructed, not what they said at all.

I think you might have lost sight of what’s rational for pride or something.

Well, I might have an idea why it’s downvoted so.

While I agree with the sentiment, and as such, upvoted to boost the message, it’s still very combative and needlessly passive-aggressive with its kumbayah and the stereotypical hippie talk, “man”, which really just annoyed and cringed myself too.

But to each their own. I still like to boost if the sentiment is valuable as a pov at least, here I happen to also agree. But the passive-aggressive tone is really uncalled for.

Edit: I read further ahead, and this person in question continues their combative and provocative tone. I’m tempted to recall my upvote just because of this, but it’s a good perspective to consider, so I’ll stick with boosting this specific comment with an upvote (though not the later ones that ramp up the toxicity). But I really do not like the tone… I can very clearly now see why many would downvote.

I think the more contemporary meaning for the word is “classic” rpg. Which better communicates the old isometric view and party-based adventuring.