Creddit

100% destroy that potato. It's survived 7 years because that is absolutely a horcrux.

I don't follow philosophical literature, but I almost 100% agree with that.

The only thing I would add is that modern American "liberals" are like the modern American "religious". They vote for people who call themselves "liberal" and they call themselves "liberal" but they don't read and they don't really believe canonical "liberal" things if those positions do not serve them personally on issues they care about.

I do not believe there is a monolithic "liberalism". To have a philosophical discussion about "liberalism" we have to paint in broad coalition strokes to stipulate that "liberals" are a cohesive group anymore(going back as far as I can remember, not just the last decade).

I think the prevailing popular realization is that both the Democrat and Republican parties are parties of the wealthy capital class and, importantly, that the wealthy capital class majorly overlaps with an unethical and violently extremist "Epstein" class.

Progressive candidates begrudgingly run under the Democrat banner while Libertarian candidates begrudgingly run under the Republican banner, but there is now a single "liberal"(read "change") issue on the minds of the American electorate across both parties: Will the candidate bring the "Epstein" class to sufficient justice?

I think this single issue will override voting axes for a decade, beyond even questions about going to war or annexing another country.

I don't think "liberalism" is a charade per se, I just think Americans are facing so many existential political problems that they have to prioritize and I'd wager they will prioritize voting for someone who will force Trump's cadre of pedophiles to trial even if that someone is also annexing Cuba.

I'm pretty sure invading Cuba during this Trump administration would result in the next(Democrat) administration following through with complete annexation and, I'd wager, the creation of a new US State of Cuba.

It may even result in Puerto Rico statehood and D.C. statehood simultaneously.

Because, by the time Trump is out of office, the news cycle will have moved all the way through outrage to regret to acceptance and finally to "what is the most humane thing to do now?"

Democrat liberal voters will conveniently conclude the most ethical path is to make more left-leaning states while they have the chance, because not doing so means the following elections lean rightward again and risk another Trump-like administration takes over.

As soon as the militant right wing fucks up, it's no more politics in public allowed.

The sad thing is that everyone agrees, until the right forgets they're the bad guys and then it's RIGHT back to red caps and thin blue lines EVERYWHERE.

No, it often cannot. That's what I mean by "fully enclosed", and I can see how you might have thought I just meant walls and no roof. I should have been more clear, but I was trying to differentiate between just having walls vs having full private enclosure for recreational spaces, which is common in Iran and also in a good chunk of other countries.

Schools or gyms often do have roofs as well, with vents or small/high windows for air circulation but no way to actually see inside because physical privacy is especially valued in Iran - not just because of the government but also because of cultural and religious traditions.

It is very common for buildings in Iran to be surrounded by high cement walls and fully enclosed courtyards, even private residences. This is partly due to their oppressive regime and a desire to keep having parties and generally normal private indoor lives.

What are the geopolitical implications of him striking Iran? Will any allies likely retaliate?

I would think Iran would be on its own, given it's people are also attacking the regime from the inside.

This is some BS propaganda from the Iranian regime. It isn't believable at all.

Everyone who knows an Iranian, knows that real Iranians want their regime outright assassinated by any country willing to do it.

What is the similarity? Just dead people?

This is a government killing its own people. Israel has been embroiled in a conflict with an outside nation, albeit a conflict of disproportionate forces.

Why do strangers photograph and spend time thinking about what other people do around them when they have zero contextual understanding of what is going on in those other people's lives?

I'm pretty sure this photo tells us more about the photographer and OP than it tells us about the kid in the photo, because we can see more of what the photographer sees(and thus understand more of what the photographer is doing/implying) rather than what the kid is seeing/doing.

Yeah, that's what apps like "jobright" do.

All language is a mental model, shared between the speaker and the audience. Math without any context like this is just a language like any other, encoded for two or more parties to communicate something abstract.

If the speaker and the audience both believe two plus two equals five, then it is true.

"Five" might look like "4" and be called "Five" or perhaps "Two" is instead written "2.5", but the truth of the original statement is only actually dependent on the shared mental model of the speaker/audience.

There is no telling what the objective meaning could be, if there was ever an objective meaning at all. For example, the entire meme itself could be a password that means "buy Bitcoin".

Or for another example, two plus two is five if this is a shorthand for two 1.25lb baskets of strawberries plus two 1.25lb baskets of strawberries being equal to five 1lb baskets of strawberries.

You might say "Hey! That's adding outside context! Not fair, it's nonsense!" but consider that the original statement didn't specify any context for the numbers at all. What are the numbers in reality, without any context? They represent nothing but the concepts they represent until they relate to a physical context anyway, just like any other fragment of communication.