Big Miku

Time to move to the glorious nation of Kazakhstan, the top producer of potassium, to get some of those magic minerals to protect my countless buildings.

It goes to 9 minutes from 8, since every single communication gadget will yell out that the sun has disappeared as reports come in from the other side of the earth.

The part about voting is pretty simple logic.

In a voting system where the one who gets majority of the votes wins, the other votes don’t really have an impact. Of course they are part of the race to win, but outside of that, what do the other votes do? Nothing. In other systems those votes would cause a second round to happen, but in the US system they don’t. Those votes are just… gone.

Sure, you could argue that it’s about “sending a message”, but… why? Why do this now while the Project 2025 looms over the US if the Republicans win? The Democratic Party won’t change before the elections and no amount of threatening to vote for 3rd party will change that.

The part about “if you don’t vote for Biden, you vote for Trump” is not literal. It’s more… abstract if that makes sense. Since if you vote for parties that have no realistic chance of winning, it means that a party that has a chance of winning doesn’t get that vote and the party you least want in power is one vote closer to win the election. This logic goes for both Democrats and Republicans. If a Republican votes for third party that has no chance of winning, their vote metaphorically goes to the Democratic party, since the Republican party will be one vote further away from the Democratic party. Hell, this same logic, to some extent, also applies to other systems, but not as much as the US system.

So unless you are predicting Jill Stein to be making history and winning as a third party, a thing that hasn’t happened, that vote won’t affect the elections and the party you least want in power is just one vote closer to be winning.

In a two round system, your vote would matter more, since your vote would be affecting everyone’s chance of getting an absolute majority of 50% all votes. And since everyone, but your chosen party, is one vote further from the 50% mark, a second round has a higher chance of happening.

Could you elaborate, since I have absolutely no clue what connections significant enough you are making to say this.

Mainly mercantilism which just means that everyone wants to only export and importing stuff is literally the worst thing in the world. Mercantilism also had a lot more state restrictions on it compared to capitalism.

Feudalism mainly died out in the 1400’s when more of the power was centralised to the king instead of their vassals.

Oh damn, an article containing a topic about Russia and Cuba. I hope this post will contain a civil conversation about the topic without it derailing into a giant fighting pit about the United States.

It was never meant to be an equivalence. I made it to draw a rough picture of how a person can have some good ideas, but be a person no one wants to associate with due their other ideas.

They have brought up some good points, but the good points they make are over shadowed by the whole genocide denial and “dunking on libs”.

The following example is not meant to represent hexbear users, but to show an example of how I could see it.

Think of a fascist who brings up some good examples of modern problems in about 1/10 of their messages, while the rest are talking about how Mussolini was actually good, since he brought up the living standard in Italy and expanded the public sector. And when someone brings up the bad things Mussolini did, the fascist just says “It’s clearly western propaganda”.

You wouldn’t want to read their messages, since they are full of this fascist apologetic garbage, and the good points they bring up are ignored because of their other opinions.

It doesn’t matter how good willed your opinions are if no one wants to associate with you.

The factory must grow!

That’s what Big Non-Dino-Oil wants you to think, so they can get all of the moneys from everyone.

The modern way of doing this would involve reversing the process of dinosaur bones turning into oil. So you just put into the oil-to-bone-inator and bury those bones back into the ground where they originally came from.

If this happens they’ll do the “A person who swears to tell the truth and nothing but the truth says what” ordeal. If that doesn’t work they will just let you leave

I couldn’t find a single mention of a fascist movement in the uprising. So either it was neglible in size, or you are just lying.

“Insufficiently oppressive”. What? Hungary was a really oppressive nation during that time, and you wanted it to be more oppressive?

And opressive to who? Fascist? They can just lie about not being a fascist. That leaves out to just guess who is a fascist and that sounds like a wonderful time for the citizens.

Patton really was correct about the Soviet Union.

Let’s take a look what started that “fascist” uprising. Years of economic mismanagement, opression, and being forced to pay a big chunk of their gdp to the Soviets for war reperations were all factors that lead to the Hungarian Revolution.

And who did these “fascist” pick as their leader? Imre Nagy, the man who was ousted from power by the soviets for having the audacity to be a more moderate communist than hardline stallinists.

The US doing something bad doesn’t justify someone else doing bad. Think about a nazi who uses that reasoning, they would sound like a nazi apologist.

Yes, the US did some bad stuff, but I still view them as the lesser evil when compared to the USSR or China.

Also Hungary doing something 65 years later doesn’t justify the actions of the Soviets.

But wouldn’t that invalidate the usage of that word in the circles that use it wrong, and not for those who use it properly.

Like if there was a hypothetical town where the word “good” was used to describe bad things, would that town invalidate the word “good” for every single town? Of course it wouldn’t, it would only invalidate the usage of that word by the ones who use the word in question wrong.

But that wasn’t said in your original message, was it? In your original message you were implying that by the USA spending more money in their military to spread their influence, would make the US government a tankie(?), thus invalidating everyone who uses the word tankie.

Also if your point was that the word tankie lost its meaning by usage in invalid contexts, why did you mention the USA? Wouldn’t it have been more appropriate to explain that it lost its meaning by the usage of it, and not by the actions of the US government, since the US is not the only nation who has people who use the word tankie?

Either you are willingly redefining a word, or you don’t even know what it means

Tankie means a person who supports an authoratian communist state.

The word comes from the Tianamen Square Massacre, where tanks were used to silence and kill protester, which some people think didn’t happen.