delusion

Very very very odd law, is it not? Right to exist?? What does that even mean and why would a government force you to subscribe to it?

Running free instances is a) way easier if you're a government, and b) gives you important moderation control.

Also, a government running an instance that allows and promotes material that is very critical of said government could very well happen. It might sound contradictory, but allows for future control over "problematic" movements, if the need ever occurs.

Alright, I guess we simply have (somewhat) different opinions on the matter. Also I'm European so my general news intake might (should?) be less focused on domestic US politics and more on foreign policy.

It was nice debating with you, take care :)

You almost get me!

Vote for whoever you want! What I am saying is that your anger towards your peers who happened to indulge in different propaganda and voted for something different is misdirected.

The voters are not the problem.

In this scenario, I'm not the one choosing, Bob is. And when Bob says "five", i will be angry, but it will be nothing in comparison with my Anger towards Alice who now can kill five people instead of the two she has been killing on a regular basis before. She's the one presenting the alternatives, Bob isn't. She's the one performing the murders, Bob isn't. She's the one that deserves my anger.

In a similar fashion I am not angry with anyone saying "two" either, "beacuse they could've said none yadayada". I am, almost exclusively, angry with Alice.

In my example I very clearly am rallying against Alice. In every possible way. I would be fuming, throwing stones, screaming to everyone around me. But I would not accept her proposition to Bob. I would not claim that I "have" to play Alice's game, because she's in charge and I have to accept that. I don't have to accept that. At all.

I would do everything I could to stop her, and almost all of my Anger would be towards her, not towards Bob (I obviously would be angry with him too but he's after all not a murderer - Alice is).

Keep in mind that in the example, Bob probably believes for some reason that when Alice says two, she means ten.

Paste of part of my answer from another reply:

Imagine if Alice is a murderer, and she asks Bob if she should kill two people or five people. Bob says “five”. Now, I will of course be angry at Bob for choosing the obviously worse alternative, but I will in no way claim that he is the cause of the problem. I will not go out and rally support for “Only two people”, I will rally support for “Let’s get rid of Alice”.

You seem to completely misunderstand me. Voting for any of the two main parties, both of whom want the country to be a tyrannical military megaforce that is no stranger to overthrowing democracies, is like accepting the faith of the bullet. Going against any such system is what I am advocating - NOT accepting the bullet. We simply seem to have different views of what the bullet is.

Imagine if Alice is a murderer, and she asks Bob if she should kill two people or five people. Bob says "five". Now, I will of course be angry at Bob for choosing the obviously worse alternative, but I will in no way claim that he is the cause of the problem. I will not go out and rally support for "Only two people", I will rally support for "Let's get rid of Alice".

No. A systematic de-democratization for decades combined with a non-democratic elective system to begin with is to blame. Don't take out your anger on the average Joe, it is worth so much more to be angry at someone with actual power.

Country: Has undemocratic two-party system. Elects a nutjob.

You guys: "The people are the problem!!1!1! Just vote for the only other party even if you don't agree with them on anything!"

Draw a symmetrical thingy, the calculations are then simple. I'll let you figure out on your own what calculation is connected with what geometry:

sqrt(24^2+7^2) = 25

25 + 7 = 32

sqrt(32^2+24^2)=40

40/2=20

x = sqrt(25^2-20^2)=15