And further proof he's the much better diplomat/politician than those who exclude him.
Spzi
joined 2 years ago
why bother reporting?
Here are some of the many ways this could be answered:
- To exercise this core freedom, to not lose it. What comes out of it is a much less important question. The day news outlets remain silent about wrongdoings because they believe nobody cares anyways is going to be one of the darkest days towards the death of democracy.
- Separation of powers means the Press is not the Legislative, which is not the Judicative. The question seems to assume they were all one, or since the Press lacks the means of the other two, it's mission would be kind of futile. But since these powers are separated, it is irrelevant to the Press wether and what legal actions follow (aside from being stories worth covering in themselves). It's simply not the job of reporting to carry out arrests, and the lack of arrests, even when necessary, does not devalue the reporting. Maybe even on the contrary: It's probably of much more value to society to report about things which aren't already dealt with.
- It is totally relatable to feel powerless, maybe even getting accustomed to things going south. But I think we should be extra careful how these sentiments are communicated. A necessary prelude to that darkest day from above, is when outlets still report, but are met with nothing but indifferent "water is wet", "can't do anything so why care at all?" comments.
Woah. Fassungslos, wie sehr Arbeiter und Arbeitslose gegen ihre eigenen Interessen gewählt haben. Ohne diesen beiden Gruppen zu nahe treten zu wollen (denn so ist es nicht gemeint), die AfD ist halt schon die Partei der Dummen. Und wenn man bedenkt, dass die Hälfte der Bevölkerung dümmer ist als der Durchschnitt, steckt darin leider eine Menge ~~Wahlvieh~~ politisches Potential.
Ich glaube, um eine wehrhafte Demokratie im digitalen Zeitalter sein zu können, dürfen wir nicht so zimperlich beim Toleranz-Paradoxon sein. Faschisten müssen diskriminiert und eingeschüchtert werden, sonst schwirrt schnell im ganzen Diskurs nur noch deren braunes Zeug herum. Kein Bock auf Nazi-Bar.
Wtf. How I hate muzzle velocity politics. Put those guys in camps, they are a threat to public safety.
Ja, ich dachte das wäre ein Instrument, "ähnlich" wie Xylophon. Mit der Verwendung in dem Satz da weiß ich auch nicht, was gemeint ist.
Fellow Eurobros, I know it's unlikely, but if it came to this which front would you rather fight at?
It seems most people get it, but I don't - Care to explain?
Not sure how 0.00006 helmets per capita is the better figure, but there you go.
Yes, I mean, for Germany, being the 3rd largest economy in the world (only surpassed by the USA and China), it would be a real shame if they were not among the topmost supporters in total. Here, it makes much more sense to use per capita numbers, relate to GDP or whatever. Compared to it's economic potential, Germany is merely #15 in supporting Ukraine with Denmark, Finland, and the Baltics doing at least twice as much.
If you deem the bit about the 0..6 helmets per capita to be false, what's the correct take?
Remember how it took like two days to overturn 70 years of precedence of “no weapons delivery into crisis regions”?
Oh, thanks. Yeah, now I remember making that jump, too, although it took me more than two days. Wild times.
Hofreiter (Greens) put it quite well ... something like ... not our ideals have changed, but the world has changed, brutally so.
I think you did well in dialing back my comment and adding more context, although I still think there was truth in it.
Truly a shame, but does not lead to your conclusion. If you cannot get the irony about you publicly complaining that you cannot publicly complain much like in Russia, then I'm afraid I cannot help you further.
We either stop them and oppose their military spending
You notice that's a luxury exclusive to one side in that conflict? This freedom of speech, even forming a vocal political opposition. There have been people trying to do exactly that in Russia, but they all have died, vanished or gone silent.
If the dictatorship takes over (for example, due to a lack of resistance), you lose these privileges and are then sent to the grinder anyways.
Hah, strong reply. 👍
Ja, absolut. Wobei ich auch hier anfügen möchte, dass ein Ausschluss gewisser Elemente notwendig ist. Der Marktplatz der Ideen oder Argumente funktioniert nicht so schön wie gedacht, wenn dort manche gar nicht durch bessere Argumente, aber dennoch gewinnen wollen. Funktioniert nicht in der postfaktischen Zeit. Das entbindet Linke (aller Parteien) nicht von ihrer Verantwortung, bessere Argumente zu haben und verständlich zu machen. Aber ganz ohne eine separierende Dominanz verlieren diese auch schnell an Wert, und sind nur noch eine ideologische, gefühlte Wahrheit unter vielen.
Die Klammer war der Versuch genau das hier zu verhindern, aber stimmt schon, war schlecht formuliert. Ein stichwortartiger neuer Versuch:
Besonders mißlungen war glaube ich der Satzbaustein "[nicht] zu nahe treten wollen". Ich meine, dieser besagt, dass Kritikwürdiges vorhanden ist (wie hier z.B. Dummheit), was aber aus Gründen der Höflichkeit nicht angesprochen wird. Und damit waren es einfach die falschen Worte, die eine andere als die gemeinte Idee ausgedrückt haben.