San Francisco to allow police 'killer robots'

[Draco Dracul]

Well I did say under simplistic terms. Adding more to it doesn't make it simplistic.

Funny thing is about cancel culture. That has existed far longer than what it's being used for now. And guess who was the main culprit?

The right because they have institutional power.

[CmdrKing]

Even if we set aside the obvious historical examples like McCarthyism, compare the self-described “cancelling” of people like Dave Chappell or Louis CK to the treatment of the Dixie Chicks or Sinead O’Connor for running afoul of right-wing taboos. It could fairly be said they STILL haven’t fully recovered, while Louis CK basically… laid low for six months.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Also Freedom Fries.

[Dragon Ball Fan]

There are reforms happening, I forget what exactly it was but there is the LAPD removing that one policy that was misused to target minorities and seems to be working.

Leftists say they'd cut cops slack if they improve but how am I supposed to believe most of them when they seem to hate every thing, every single cop does, regardless if it's good or bad?

And even if policing is reformed from the outside, why should anyone want to join, when, everyone would still hate them for no reason?

I was abused for being autistic and that gave me an "all sins are equal" mindset when it comes to prejudice, "mere" interpersonal prejudice, included. Any win for activists is a victory, of course but I won't be satisfied till even the most innocuous prejudice is eliminated from the human condition, forever.

I also noticed you skipped my point about leftists removing agency from criminals, which is just as insulting as the way right wingers treat them.

Proving once again, that your apology and promise to not engage this anymore was worthless drivel. Great job, DBF. (o.-)b

I really thought I was done, this time and I believe I am still mostly on topic, here.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Although logically there doesn't need to be any connection between political affiliation and other traits, researchers have found consistent patterns between personality and politics.

At least in the US, 'leftists' tend to believe responsibility and power rest outside of the individual, while 'rightists' tend to believe in individual power and responsibility. In both cases, regardless of the facts of a given situation.

It's not surprising that leftists would tend to take power away from individuals in favor what is 'supposed' to be a collective response.

Collective power means that most individuals gain significantly more power than they have now as most power is held by a small number of individuals. The vast majority of people currently have nearly no power only the option to vote between the kill you fast party and the kill you not as fast party.

In simplistic terms under that simplistic narrow view of things, being on the left is about the collective. Everyone getting their fair shake, everyone pays their fair share, etc. Right would be about the individual and their freedoms. Doing or saying anything under the law. Their level prosperity is their level of capability and drive.

Under simplistic terms.

Problem is something as simple as freedom of speech and how it's interpreted. That is what drives that wedge between right and left. Left for example and would be about you can say something but doesn't protect you against repercussions. Whereas the right would say you should be able to say anything without repercussions.

In realistic terms, right wing insinuates lack of directive power, whether by person or constitution. Left wing insinuates principle judgement foremost before familiarity.

[clearspira]

Although logically there doesn't need to be any connection between political affiliation and other traits, researchers have found consistent patterns between personality and politics.

At least in the US, 'leftists' tend to believe responsibility and power rest outside of the individual, while 'rightists' tend to believe in individual power and responsibility. In both cases, regardless of the facts of a given situation.

It's not surprising that leftists would tend to take power away from individuals in favor what is 'supposed' to be a collective response.

Collective power means that most individuals gain significantly more power than they have now as most power is held by a small number of individuals. The vast majority of people currently have nearly no power only the option to vote between the kill you fast party and the kill you not as fast party.

In simplistic terms under that simplistic narrow view of things, being on the left is about the collective. Everyone getting their fair shake, everyone pays their fair share, etc. Right would be about the individual and their freedoms. Doing or saying anything under the law. Their level prosperity is their level of capability and drive.

Under simplistic terms.

Problem is something as simple as freedom of speech and how it's interpreted. That is what drives that wedge between right and left. Left for example and would be about you can say something but doesn't protect you against repercussions. Whereas the right would say you should be able to say anything without repercussions.

Disagree with that last point. The right thinks THEY PERSONALLY should be able to say anything without repercussions, but not the rest of us. If they believed everyone should be able to say anything they wouldn't be doing the book bannings and such.

No, McAvoy got it right the first time. You are living in a Grade-A echo chamber there.

You're projecting so hard I could use you for PowerPoint presentations.

You simp for "make it illegal to let children know racism or queer people exist" DeSantis every time his name gets mentioned on here, you know damn well what you stood up to be counted with.

Nope. Grade-A echo chamber. A world where the Left dances under silver moonlight with frolicking unicorns and the Right breathe fire and have red skin.

Also, are you going to respond to your absurd idea that the Left doesn't try to ban books? Or is it that you cannot, and deflecting towards DeSantis is the only weapon you have?

[clearspira]

Well I did say under simplistic terms. Adding more to it doesn't make it simplistic.

Funny thing is about cancel culture. That has existed far longer than what it's being used for now. And guess who was the main culprit?

The right because they have institutional power.

The Left do not have institutional power even though you have a Left wing government with a Left wing controlled Senate that trades drug-dealing lesbian basketball stars for violent arms dealers? I can REALLY see the latter happening under Trump. Yep. Totally.

Face it, what you just said is crap. Its not the 1950s anymore.

[Draco Dracul]

Well I did say under simplistic terms. Adding more to it doesn't make it simplistic.

Funny thing is about cancel culture. That has existed far longer than what it's being used for now. And guess who was the main culprit?

The right because they have institutional power.

The Left do not have institutional power even though you have a Left wing government with a Left wing controlled Senate that trades drug-dealing lesbian basketball stars for violent arms dealers? I can REALLY see the latter happening under Trump. Yep. Totally.

Face it, what you just said is crap. Its not the 1950s anymore.

Because people that crush organized labor are totally left wing.

Liberalism is at best a centrist ideology in the current world because it is the dominant one. Like outside of hard core monarchists even most conservatives and reactionaries are still liberals because the system the want to conserve or go back to is itself a liberal one. And the current brand of liberalism is significantly more economically right wing than the one of 50 years ago.

[TGLS]

The Left do not have institutional power even though you have a Left wing government with a Left wing controlled Senate that trades drug-dealing lesbian basketball stars for violent arms dealers? I can REALLY see the latter happening under Trump. Yep. Totally.

Yeah, because the Russians would never arbitrarily arrest somebody. And they'd never trade political prisoners for their foreign agitators. And Republicans are so homophobic they'd leave Americans to rot in the Gulag instead of attempting to do something.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Well we traded for the basketball player because liberty is something we actually value as a fundamental. And we actually have the diplomatic power to do such things peacefully, I might add, instead of adding to international instability. All doing this without bolstering the esteem of any right wing authoritarian government/kingdom that will listen to our missile strikes on Syria.