It only requires a supermajority to do something the other party doesn't want to do
WldFyre
joined 2 years ago
Making people happier is bad, actually!
/s
That's actually the main reason I didn't want Bernie as president. His campaign staff were terrible for both of his runs.
No I just suck at English apparently haha
Fair enough, had never heard it before but that makes sense
I get that, didn't think it was a political meaning. Just seems like an iffy word to me personally, hard to put my finger on it.
Maybe since the inverse would be "wrong-think"?
"Right-thinking"??
I agree with you here but you didn't say friends, you said lawyers
Why is it more meaningful coming from lawyers then from family? I don't follow
There's no way socialism would provide that either on the scale that the Western world consumes chickens. We should still go vegan in a socialist economy.
I remember Hasan saying "Russia won't invade, this is just the US manufacturing consent" the week before Russia invaded. Then right after they invaded it was all "it was only a matter of time, and here's why it's NATO's fault." It's almost like their "material analysis" is just retrospective bullshit lol
I do actually agree with this, but this is not what it seemed like you were implying. How would making the few happier at the expense of the majority be increasing stability and reinforcing the status quo?