That's a pretty iffy statement if you've ever talked to a veteran or active duty member. Sure, most might be loyal to the constitution, but the military votes republican for the most part, and that included in 2016 and 2020.
escapesamsara
joined 1 year ago
There are practically no American 'communists,' and more importantly there is statistically no American 'left;' that being said those of us that are left-wing never stopped being armed. Unlike American conservatives in either the democrat or republican party, we are staunchly against all gun control. As a reminder: “Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered,any attempts to disarm the people must be stopped, by force if necessary.” is a Karl Marx quote, not one of the American right-wing. When the US government started rounding up and killing communists in the 1940s and 50s, we started ensuring that we were armed, and that we absolutely were not 'card-carrying communists,' those of us one or two generations removed now remember the stories we were told, how it affected our family, and how important it will be to stay armed regardless of whatever 'Liberals' say is necessary for a free state. Liberalism has lead to fascism in every fascist regime, the 'left' does not recognize gun control.
While not the cheapest, IPAs are relatively easy to make and extremely easy to iterate on. IPAs in general allow brewers to fine-tune flavors and thus pump out multiple novel flavors quickly in order to find a market. If you go the stout or lager route, there's really only so much wiggle room as they're mostly 'solved' beers; as in buyers know exactly what they want to taste, and you better deliver that taste. IPAs are also really, really easy to dial in alcohol content without giving up flavor, where as lagers like Budweiser can only lower alcohol content while lowering the overall taste profile, hence the term 'piss water' for low alcohol lagers.
Nuclear power is exactly as renewable as solar power; and 'highly' radioactive waste is a fraction of a fraction of the waste generated, with most waste being less harmful than living within 50 miles of a coal mine, or 100 miles of a coal power plant. It's also entirely defeated by a relatively small amount of one of the most common metals on Earth. Additionally, if we were to power the entire world with just nuclear power, the amount of unusable waste generated per year globally would be smaller than a compact sedan, requiring a little less than a box-truck sized container to store it safely anywhere on the planet. It would take several tens of billions of years to accumulate to a problematic size for safe storage.
The short answer is the fossil fuel industry and those who support it desperately want to encourage any kind of infighting among any and all people concerned with the climate; Greenpeace itself has been funded massively by the oil and coal industries throughout its lifetime specifically to oppose nuclear power. It's news now because as we look towards energy generation over the next 50 years we can either have large amounts of LNG and coal power plants while we pretend there's enough Lithium on Earth to support a renewable-based grid, or we can essentially eliminate 100% of natural gas, coal, and oil-based power plants in the next 15 years and work towards renewable grids with post-lithium power storage over the next 150 years. That latter scenario would nearly eliminate the global coal and natural gas industries, and severely harm the oil industry. So the more 'division' they can sow to delay a decision in either direction, the better it is for them.
Renewables generate more toxic waste per mWh than any nuclear reactor design.
Modern nuclear reactors do not used enriched uranium, and thus cannot be used to build a bomb; but go off I guess.
DeSantis was a lawyer for Gitmo; Trump wanted to execute five innocent black men before he had any political ambitions; Vivek fully embraces the caste system that benefited his family in the past, and has pretty openly suggested he wants to use violence to implement it here. We know the people who are running for president are blood thirsty, they don't hide that in any way. They chose to run on a conservative platform, violence is inherent to the ideology, and on top of that frequently advertise how well they would play the role of violence if elected.
Most conservatives, as in all of those not in charge, have issues with empathy; specifically imagining the inner world of any other human being. That's not to say that cannot do this very simple human activity, rather they specifically cannot imagine any other human on the planet thinks any differently or has any other motivations than them. Therefore if they would do something in a situation, then everyone in that situation must be trying to do the thing that they would do.
They believe democrats are weaponizing the justice system, because it's what they would do, and thus they assume anyone that failed to do that before now was simply prevented from doing so -- now that they see 'weaponized' justice happening, they think it's fair game for their guys to do it.
I actually have tried to use reddit multiple times, however they've soft-disabled most new accounts. It's around a 50% chance in my experience if your account is shadowbanned immediately, with a slightly lower chance it'll be shadowbanned within a week, regardless of what you post. If you use a privacy-focused email provider or use a vpn, or use a browser that is resistant to fingerprinting, you're basically persona non-grata at reddit. Which is honestly fine with me at this point, half of all content you encounter in almost any major sub is either bot posted or "totally a legitimate user that uses the site 24/7" posted.