“Computer Science” is a terrible name for the field.

In dutch physics used to be called “Nature Science” (natuurwetenschappen). I always preferred that over “physics” :)

France -> Frenchland

Jesus, dude from the bible

Show people that the left and center are able to provide

I wonder if they can, with the reversed population pyramid most EU countries experience.

In the early 90s something similar happened in Belgium (1).

What lessened the extremism in the following couple of elections was investment (in infrastructure, healthcare, economic opportunities, etc) outside of the cities as well.

It turned out that for every tax frank gathered, 80 cents were spend on prettifying the larger cities and the major port. People were mostly (rightly?) pissed off that government represented a terrible ROI for the same group of people for decades. They would’ve been better of without a federal government. They saw their lives get worse, whilst at the same time that government applauded themselves for the great things they achieved.

I’m not sure how feasible the same solution is today, as there’s very little investment budget anyways. Most of tax revenue goes to pensions and healthcare of a reversed population pyramid.

those thoughts are prevalent enough to cause this problem.

Can take people out of the soviet, but can’t take soviet out of the people (1).

Sadly it’s a system of thought that isn’t concerned with observable reality. It’s a sentiment I recognise in most (political) extremists: the idea that your problems must be someone else’s fault (the brown, women, billionairs, … pick your poison).

And, as you noticed, banning it will indeed only validate that sentiment.

(I grew up in DDR, luckily left in early 90s. A solution is therapy, as those people are stuck in generational trauma, which is known to lessen or completely void you of empathy. But that doesn’t scale to halve a country).

I prefer someone with neither napoleon nor jesus complex.

There’s no room next to the onion. That’s where I keep my other onion.

Using “us”, as if your opinion is consensus :) And at the same time ignoring all the abuse resulting from your point of view.

It’s indeed a pointless conversation if one party can simply ignore all the hurt, pain and destruction their proposal causes.

China is a bad relationship?

It’s an exploitative autoritarian regime, institutionalising severe human rights abuses (1).

I’ve got some bad news for you but 90% of what you own is made in China.

That’s not news. It’s not because an abuser buys you gifts, that there’s no abuse going on?

I don’t get the abused spouse like logic, where because you get out of one bad relationship, you’d need to start a new one?

that do not engage with politics in China

There’s no such thing. A person nor company can unilaterally decide “not to engage with politics”, as politics engages with them in thousands of ways. The best they can do is self-censorship, which, even when successfull, is in itself a form of political engagement.

which one is the dictatorship?

False dichotomy 🙄

We need them more than ever now that the US has decided to go full mask off.

Who’s “we” in this case? And why would they “need” someone now, because of stuff in the US?

I wonder if complex numbers predate the discovery of electromagnetism

Further, the guy above goes “look at how Xi is suplexing Taiwan?!?!”

I think you’re the only one reading it that way. The rest of us understand that it happens within a context of an autoritarian regime.

which is in the hands of a private company which largely operates independently of the government

Independent untill the party decides they’re not independent. (Eg).

the guy alone has that amount of crushing power.

Nobody of right mind takes this at face value. This isn’t a pro wrestling heavyweight championship belt, with Jinping suplexing the Hong Kong protestors.

It’s obviously as head of an autoritarian communist regime, using corona measures and a militarized police to suppress people for the extravagant act of desiring freedom from the CCP.

In a hierarchical society, those on top will use any existing govt structures to their benefit

That’s exactly why there’s separation of power! The idea being that executive, legislative and judiciary are of equal power. One can block or strenghten the behaviour of the other on an independant, case-by-case basis. Those properties should, imo be strenghtened, not weakened.

people affected by a decision should be the ones to make it, not merely to vote for those who promise to do right by them.

Samesees. My utopia would be liquid democracy.

But even here, there would be law! It’s a necessary good, to combat arbitrary prosecution, imo.

Would you say we’d be better off by merging executive and judiciary, doing away with legislative?

I think about it quite similar to you. I’d even go a bit further: shortsighted and bad laws are the biggest source of problems.

Often the kind of law that a populist gains popularity/notoriety through.

Plenty of examples where both public and executive and legislative would’ve deemed certain behaviour problematic, yet the perpetrator, of marginal power, walks free.

I’d say the law also gives power to the marginalized, when the judicial behaves independently, as they should.

I agree with you there are perversions to this ideal, such as elected judges, plea bargains.

Nice 🤜