In a way, you could say that. It’s also a societal one. Its a whole lot of problems rolled up into one, really.

Body dismorphia is only a mental illness in the sense that it causes a lot of emotional distress. Not in the sense that it is a delusion or the person is crazy, or anything.

I’m sure I am speaking to the choir here, but body dismorphia is the mental illness here, and transgenderism is the cure.

Pre-transition transgender people are mentally ill, due to the emotional pain that comes from being trapped in a body that they don’t feel represents themselves. The cure for that illness is, of course, transitioning into the gender that makes them feel like themselves. So, a fully transitioned transgender person is no longer mentally ill, at least from body dismorphia.

Therefore, people who are against things like puberty blockers and HRT are literally trying to keep mentally ill people from getting better. I am okay with body dismorphia being referred to as a mental illness, in accordance with medical science. The fact that it is a mental illness shows the cruelness of the people fighting against the literal cure for it.

However, I am sure Facebook is going to just let anyone refer to perfectly happy and fully-transition transgendered people as mentally ill, which is most definitely not true, and shouldn’t be allowed.

Obligatory Fuck Zuck.

Europe has many more Social policies than the US, but it is nowhere close to equally parts Socialist and Capitalist.

Socialism means that the Workers own the means of production, and there is no country in Europe where that is the case.

Social policies != Socialism.

Capitalism is better than feudalism, yes. The problem is that Capitalism inevitably gets to the point where it is more detrimental to the population as a whole than it is beneficial (Global Warming, Wealth inequality, power imbalances, etc.), and that point is now.

Capitalism did bring us many advancements, but we have outgrown it. Just because it did good things at some point doesn’t mean that there isn’t something better. We should all be striving towards better as a species, but we aren’t.

It’s not that the union head should be neutral. The head of a union should be openly and unapologetically pro-union. Going on a podcast and agreeing with someone who is right-wing extremely anti-union, is a very bad and traitorous look for the head of the union.

Its not illegal, though. I can go out into public right now and say it with no repercussions. If it was illegal, how would anyone possibly inform other people of actual fires and bombs?

The thing that is illegal is causing a panic in a large group of people. Has nothing to do with the words used.

I just feel that the nuance is important. Any combination of words could get you in trouble if it happens to cause a riot.

This is a common misconception. It’s not illegal to say anything like “bomb” or “fire” in a public place, at all.

What you could get charged with in those situations is something like, “inciting a riot”, or “disorderly conduct”. These depend on how people around you react to your words or actions, but doesn’t depend on the actual words used.

I think you missed my point, entirely. I wasn’t saying that governments committing atrocities in other countries versus their own people were any different, morally speaking.

I was simply pointing out that the quality of life for the working class, and low amount of wealth disparity, etc in this country is largely due to Socialist policies keeping Capitalism in check, and also pointing out that Capitalist policies cause atrocities, in general.

This was in response to the comment saying that countries were hiding atrocities behind the banner of Socialism.

Atrocities of any kind are abhorrent and I agree that they need to be denounced. I also agree with pretty much everything else that you said. Socialism is near dead and dying in Europe. I just think that the sprinkle of Social policies that is left in the EU still holds back Capitalism from being quite as horrible as it could be.

All of those ‘Socialist’ governments in the EU, with the highest quality of life, highest quality of happiness, and some of the least wealth disparity in the world, are committing atrocities against their own people?

Some of these governments probably commit atrocities in countries other than their own, but that would be because of Capitalistic and Imperialistic policies, not Socialistic ones.

Also worked there. There is no McDonald’s that has ever allowed tips. It’s against their corporate rules. I even saw an employee get written up for accepting a tip, once.

He was a white collar working class guy. His work history is full of positions at various tech companies working as an engineer. It doesn’t appear that he was handed any sort of dynasty.

He was upper class, and he had better opportunities than your average American, but he was still a worker.

Maybe his family did, but judging by his work history, he wasn’t personally wealthy enough to be owning a country club.

If he was “owns a country club” rich, his work history would mostly just say “Owner and CEO of whatever country club”.

There’s no reason to work any sort of normal job if you have that kind of income rolling in.

Here here. I’m poor as shit, got no insurance whatsoever, 60k would be somewhat life changing for me. I would never ever squeal on a comrade like that, even for millions.

No way that he personally had more money than the CEO, from just looking at his work history. Maybe his whole family has more money than the CEO, but if we compared whole families against each other, the CEOs family would still come out on top.

This was my thought process, too. If they got a framed guy here, the actual CEO killer would likely or hopefully do something else to let the public know that they were still out there.

Systematic (and alleged automated) denials of claims are highly immoral, unethical and possibly illegal thing to do.

Immoral? Yes. Illegal? Obviously not, considering the amount of people who have died due to these exact kind of denials.

It’s not illegal because the same people making money off of denying claims and killing people are using this vast wealth to lobby and propagandize against any step towards universal health care.

I just think this doesn’t solve the root problem and just adds one more death without fixing it.

I think you are probably right, but I think it at least sends a message to the people who can fix it. I don’t think it’s going to make the root problem worse, either.

He was a human.

A sociopathic one. An arrogant one(I can’t imagine ever walking around without security if I got rich off of deciding who gets to live and die, but then again I’m not evil or stupid enough to do any of that).

He was human, but that doesn’t mean he should have gotten a free pass to be evil. The “justice” system was obviously never going to deal any justice for the millions of families who lost a beloved one to this mans’ sociopathic decisions.

Sometimes when you do evil things, you win evil prizes.

To play devil’s advocate, none of those vanguard parties were ever allowed to exist peacefully. They were always attacked, from the inside and out, by capitalist and fascistic powers. It’s kind of hard to get rid of the state when it is needed to defend from other nations and groups looking to destroy it.

I’m not saying that a Vanguard party would necessarily ever voluntarily give up it’s powers and disintegrate into pure communism without a large part of the world struggling against it, but it would be more likely to.

That is just pure speculation, though, because we live in a world that has shown that it will struggle against communism until the end. The Vanguard Party idea is flawed, because it fails to account for this indefinitely long struggle, and fails time and time again to offer a valid exit strategy into the next stage of Socialism/Communism.

Yes, alcohol is technically a depressant, but I guarantee that the majority of people who sign that form don’t know that.

It also says, “or any other controlled substance”, implying that the list is made up of controlled substances, which alcohol is not.

I think a good lawyer could argue that alcohol doesn’t count here, but no lawyer could ever argue that marijuana doesn’t count, as it is specifically listed.

I think there is a lot of historical evidence that dismisses your claims. Polyamory, and/or communal parenting, has existed in many forms amongst many different indigenous peoples, and it is still practiced today. There was a time in our past where children being raised by many different parents was the ‘norm’, and an argument could be made that it is a more natural form of child rearing than our ‘norm’ of monogamous parent couples.

There is no evidence of people that practice communal or group parenting having issues with violence or jealousy, that is just your assumption. There is evidence that these kind of situations could be advantageous. The child has more people to pay attention to them and can feel a better sense of community. They are also being socialized better and are being shown a wider variety of perspectives, etc.

I would definitely suggest you look into it for yourself, if you are curious why your assumption is wrong.