NoneOfUrBusiness

their consequences are social democratic implementations in places like scandinavia.

Their consequences are basically all labor rights in the world. The problem isn’t that the bad discredited the good, it’s that the good is intentionally ignored by mainstream politics. That’s why the average person doesn’t know how much of their quality of life they owe to militant leftwing action. You shouldn’t treat political discourse as a truth seeking exercise because it isn’t.

Protest doesn’t, direct action does.

I wasn’t expecting much from a literal banker, but what the heck Carney? Just… what?

Why not “the optimates?” The answer doesn’t necessarily need to be one person.

Weird way to spell “the Bill of Rights.”

I appropriate the history of Rome to support and spread my extremist (radical leftist) ideology.

No, because it’s people are almost universally made uncomfortable by it. It’s not like there’s a segment of society whose values and beliefs entail having sex in public. That still doesn’t support your point. I could make the exact same argument for Iranian hijab laws.

Ah, yes, [thing] is like [completely different thing]. You can believe that as much as you want, but you haven’t explained why your beliefs should be enforced on others via state violence.

The only public prayers in recent years were done by far right extremism who were protected by the police from the counter protesters.

This is most likely not the case. It’s very much not a newsworthy thing, but Muslims will occasionally just do one of their daily prayers on the side of the road/in a convenient corner, and this law empowers the police to harass them for doing so.

Why…? This isn’t much better than, say, Iran’s morality police.

To be “fair” to the Brits on both counts, it’s not that partition leads to violence, it’s that colonialism leads to violence.

Idk when I’m studying history I mostly feel like I want to sigh.

Neoliberals will literally kill us all to enrich shareholders.

Eh, I’d argue the system is broken. Not because it’s exploiting the poor, mind you, that part is intended. The unintended part is how it’s starting to encroach on the authority of the rich. The system is supposed to “sustainably” make the rich richer and the poor poorer, which is of course complete balloony but that’s neither here nor there.

I also hate it when your mom is right.

The modern US seeing this bullshit: “This sounds like a perfectly fine system to bring into my chief legislative body.”

Yeah. Pls help.

Wait can you elaborate on that?

The answer to a question in the headline is always going to be such that it decreases the reader’s faith in humanity.

-Betteridge or something Idk.

You have won capitalism today.