MxM111

Fire. The rest followed.

USSR was one of many.

Define “good”. If you define as equity, then yes, I agree. Nearly everyone was equally repressed in socialist countries. Realizing freedom and human potential, no. Democratic capitalism is better.

No true Scotsman fallacy.

I will also argue that with human nature as it is, building socialism without totalitarianism is not possible. Or without mind control.

The fact is that totalitarian socialism is the only one that was possible to realize.

Under representative democracy, policies are not defined by voting. Representatives are voted in, to make the decision. They supposed to make decisions based on facts (including scientific facts) and interests of the constituents. In order to do that, institutions are created, such is bureaucracy, executive branch, committees, etc., those will employ scientists as needed. But a policy can not be made just by scientists. Climatologists can not make policy about climate change, for example, because those should rely on many aspects, including economics, security, international relationships and even internal politics (different states have different needs).

Yes, you can see an apple in its mouth.

You misspelled hungry.

Cats have 9 lives, so saving them just save one of their lives. But there are people in this word who’s death means happiness of millions and saved live of thousands. Why would I want to save such person?

Saving cat is just a bonus. And I would still do that.

Yes, saving a cat is a nice bonus.

You should - that’s the most pleasant part of the morning :)

So, a third thing then. :)

Unrelated, but it is interesting that people ask for addictive games rather than for good games. Those are not the same.

So, before #1?

Nah. It is DOS with Norton Commander.

Aren’t you confusing cynicism with skepticism?

I doubt.

Nothing much. I am on kbin.social and it is fine…

It is like you are in the loop.

The answer is yes. He can create such rock.

Sounds like contradiction, yes, but it is just incorrect phrase. You do not have to be intolerant to be tolerant.

The society have to be intolerant to intolerance to be stable, not to be tolerant or intolerant.