Pastafarian
The people could easily overthrow the U.S military and all the police who protect the corpos and stuff.
Why haven’t we? It’s not for lack of gun
That’s just Florida being stupid
Perhaps, but the Florida Window is wide open
only thing that can save America is a revolution, and for that we need to be armed
The keyboard is mightier than the gun
Form meaningful trusting relationships with other people
People make arguments like “If you ban guns why not knives? They are both weapons.” The counter is the addage “don’t bring a knife to a gun fight”
You’re right you could make firearms in your basement, but they would be far less effective that something that came out of a factory.
Apropos of nothing, doesn’t reducing ease of access to something inherently hinder the use of it? Here, if you are reduced to having to 3d print or cast steel to have a weapon, isn’t that hindering use? Material conditions.
With an armed population, the state at least has to keep a venture of morality and legitment to the people
Or they need to be more heavily armed. Which they are.
Most of the world’s countries have already fallen to extreme orwellian authoritarianism and they are working on the U.S right now
And yet only we have armed drones in schools to prevent school shootings.
Moral enterprise 🤣
Making small talk, humor, lying, empathy all work, but here I would suggest blaming something that mutually fucks you over. In this case insurance companies. And learn to lie in ways they couldn’t verify, and never offer unnecessary information that would fuck you over. (I.e. DO NOT mention the doctors)
So I would say something like “this is supposed to be a routine procedure, but insuranc3 needs to verify it is necessary. My grandma died from shit like that. Fuck them. I’m going to do everything I can to help you <insert name>”
ALWAYS learn people’s names. Fuck you if you “are bad at learning names” you are just lazy. Try until you can do it, even if you have to ask more than once. People actually appreciate it. Here, it personalizes the bullshit you are slinging and gets the person to believe you
Once you download wikipedia, you can edit it and distribute. Other people with their own copies can merge your changes into theirs, or you can push your changes upstream. Even if they need to be signed to accepted. Doesn’t that make Wikipedia more like the Linux Kernel and less like The Encyclopedia Britannica? Sure, for the kernel there is a “main and central” repo, but the whole point of git is that it isn’t centralized. It’s distributed.
In fact, in a loose way, wikipedia meets the criteria of Free Software. You can:
edit: wikipedia is predominately licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA) and the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL)
Agreeish? (M)any one of us can download wikipedia. Does that still make it centralized when it is designed to be distributed that easily? That design choice is baked into the ethos. Centralized vs. Decentralized seems not to be binary.
Harambe