RationalWiki:Saloon bar/Archive358

Anarchy
So a thought occurs to me. (Yes, that happens on occasion!) When we were kids in school, there was a social hierarchy of sorts, with some kids more popular than others and able to get away with things others weren't.  I don't mean "getting away with" as in "not get detention from the authorities", but rather "face fewer consequences from fellow students". Granted it's not a perfect example as the rich kids tended to have a bit of an edge over everyone else, but still, it existed when everyone should've been "equal" as no one had any job or position of authority over the others. Thus, even under a proposed Anarchist society, there will still be a hierarchy. Even if social status is no longer tied to wealth, even if no one is a police officer or mayor or nobility, there still won't be complete equality.

So, does this expose an inherent flaw in Anarchy? To clarify, to me, "Anarchy" means a rejection of all hierarchies, whether that hierarchy is one where people are subject to the rules of the state (authoritarianism), a system where one gender is subservient to another (sexism), one's race entitles them to different rights than another race (racism), one's wealth determines how the rules are applied (plutocracy), whether one is required to defer to elders on all matters (gerontocracy), or any other form where one is required to be subservient to another. Yet, under an anarchist system where people are ostensibly equal and ostensibly no one has authority over another, a hierarchy will naturally form and some will always have more than others, even if it's as simple as something like "more options on whom to take to prom". It seems that hierarchies can never be entirely eliminated. CoryUsar (talk) 20:34, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Anarchists reject unjustified hierarchies, anarchists have no problem with deferring to experts on important matters for example. So your perceived "problem for anarchy" isn't one at all. — Oxyaena Harass  08:15, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * It's not about experts, it's arguable that hierarchies arise naturally because some people seem to be natural leaders and some are followers: even anarchist movements have informal leaders/icons/spokespeople/role models/influencers. You can see this even with kids playing. The issue of whether human beings are naturally hierarchical creatures (like chimps) is debated but not really settled. I don't know if you could say being a charismatic leader is a skill which means other people should defer to it just as they defer to engineers, physicians etc. Anarchism in practice doesn't seem to preclude leadership (anarchist trade unions elect representatives, anarchist armies elect officers, etc), so maybe the question is whether obeying leadership is compulsory or voluntary. The question of how to avoid cliques forming in anarchist groups (e.g. communes) is another problematic one. --Annanoon (talk) 12:20, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * And who gets to decide what is and is not an unjustified hierarchy, hmm? Maybe we live in a violent world, and women need protection of a strong man, and perhaps it makes sense that being a strong man should come with extra perks.  Perhaps resources are too limited to have everyone train for war, so we should set aside a few families that are to be well fed and dedicated to warfare and diplomacy, living in fortifications while the rest of us toil in the fields, and perhaps this status should be inherited as well.  Perhaps workers who produce more should also have more, but who's to say managing others isn't a useful form of production, why shouldn't the wealth structure of society follow a Pareto distribution with the people organizing the labor at the very top?
 * Yikes Shabi  DOO  10:18, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * And who gets to decide which is the expert and which is the crank? After all, we have plenty of cases of people who are both.CoryUsar (talk) 09:14, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * That's antithetical to the point of anarchism, others have written more on this better than I can, I recommend this website: — Oxyaena  Harass  11:08, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Einstein went to see a Psychic? Aw, man... Gunther8787 (talk) 16:48, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

A Poem called "The Glass"
Ahem

The Optimist says: The glass is half full

The Pessimist says: The glass is half empty

The Realist says: There's a glass of water there

The Skeptic says: I see a glass, but I'm not 100% sure whether there's water in it or not...

The Fundie says: The glass is not filled with Holy Water, therefore this glass does not realise that Jesus died on the cross for it's sins!!

''The Centrist says: I do not want to side with the "half full" people, nor with the "half empty" people. Nor do I wish to agree with those that say that there's a glass of water on that table or that Jesus died for it's sins. Let's just all agree that there something standing on that table.''

''The Racist says: What kind of water is it? What!? Evian??? French water in our beloved AMERICA??? Deport it at once!!!!!'' (this is from an US standpoint, since the majority here is American, so)

The Socialist says: This glass of water needs more rights.

The Green Activist says: This glass of water is not ecological enough...

''The Communist says: This glass is clearly Oligarch. As for the water that's in it, definitely Bourgeois. Only true Proletariat water is made from the blood, sweat & tears of The Working Class!!''

The Conservative says: Has this glass of water already payed it's taxes?

''The Weeaboo says: This glass of watew is not Kawaii enough! UwU It needs mowe CUTENESS!! OwO'' (I'm cringing now...)

''Donald Trump says: This glass of water is definitely FAKE. You can clearly see that it's just something that CNN fabricated to make it look like a glass of water, just so they can spread more lies like they always do. So sad...''

Kim Jung-Un says: This glass of water needs a rocket.

''The Conspiracy Theorist says: This glass has mindcontrol molecules fabricated in it. You can CLEARLY see this with the naked eye. As for the water that's in it, Not only is it poisonous tap water that will turn humanity and the frogs gay, it's also filled with experimental leftovers from those CIA labs funded by The JEWS, Evil Muslims, Soros & Obama to Paralyze the sheep and throw them in the FEMA DEATH CAMPS. But I'm on to you, glass of water. I KNOW what you're up too..!''

''Rob Smith says: I'm not even going to go near that glass of water. Clearly Hillary has been messing with it, trus me!''

The KKK says: Is this water PURE enough!?

''The MRA says: This glass of water is filled with feminazi molecules. This is exactly how they transform men into cucks!''

GamerGate says: This glass of water was put here by Kotaku, who in turn got payed by Sarkeesian to place it there, to convince enough people to remove violence from video gamez!

''Nigel Farage says: This glass of water has clearly been the victim of the European Union! Therefore it must IMMEDIATELY be freed from it's burdens!''

Stalin says: The glass of water needs to be purged.

''Hitler says: THIS GAS... I MEAN, THIS GLASS OF WATER NEEDS MORE GAS!''

I thank thee. Gunther8787 (talk) 21:50, 6 May 2020 (UTC)


 * The Trump one was funny. Made me laugh out loud. I tried rewriting a few of them under the classic comic writing principles:


 * totally literal:
 * MGTOW: What's the point of drinking water if I'll never have anyone to share it with?


 * extreme literalism and misdirection:
 * KKK: I don't drink water but only the sweat of pure blooded straight white men. That way I know its manly and pure. And it also totally turns me on. I'd lick it right off their faces if I could.


 * Opposite:
 * Nigel Farage: I'll only drink the water if it's come from Baden-Baden Germany because the UK's water is as shitty as its heritage and culture.


 * Obvious statement and then obvious irony:
 * Conservative: I'll drink the water because I need it to live, even though it's been poisoned by CNN and the gay agenda.


 * Understatement and then absurdity:
 * Conspiracy Theorist: Doctors say that its not a bad idea to drink water. Of course they'd say that and then what happens when I drink 20 litres and get water poisoning? Of course I have to go to the hospital and pay a bill I cannot afford and lose my house. That's exactly what they want.


 * nonsense and then a true fact:
 * Kim Yung Un: I lost a bottle of water in a roll of belly fat and it took days to find it and get it out of there. I was so annoyed I had my favorite uncle executed.


 * logical argument that doesn't make sense:
 * Hitler: One day all oxygen will be german and all hydrogen will be german and so all wasser will be german which :was the final plan all along.


 * self-reference:
 * Gamergate: Drinking water isn't the point. It's high standards in bottling sanitation that matters. Also aren't chicks the worst gamers ever...am I right?
 * Shabi DOO  16:16, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

The creationist : If the earth is billions of years old, the water would have evaporated. Teerthaloke101 (talk) 15:48, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Nice! Shabi  DOO  22:10, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * That's pretty good. So I thought of my own creationist one: "If oxygen combines with hydrogen to make water - why is there still oxygen?"Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 08:55, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * LOL Shabi  DOO  16:32, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

The believe anything person: These new age moms think they're so hip keeping their placenta and then eating it afterwards. I bottle my own water when it breaks cause its full of anti-oxidant hormones according to an informative youtube video I partly watched! Shabi DOO  22:10, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * The problem with bad poetry is it's always pressing something, and never describing anything. It's still clever, but like, Weird Al clever. Pick a moment or a feeling or an image in your head. I like your this is like that thing, but as comedy, not as a poem.  Gol Sarnitt (talk) 01:29, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Your groin smells like dity tire water! Shabi  DOO  16:35, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * pull your snout out of it, if you don't like the scent. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 05:17, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * TERF: Trans and men are taking the glass from real women (Probably not my best). --Racia zombio94 (talk) 23:08, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Death row inmates and organ donation
If death row inmates are being executed anyways, why not make them useful and have their organs donated? Why throw away perfectly good organs like trash when someone could use them. If someone slaughtered a bunch of innocent people in cold blood, just yank out their organs as execution. Who would shed a tear for a Neo-Nazi or a KKK member or a religious extremist? --Racia zombio94 (talk) 01:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Everyone knows evil organs are haunted. 147.147.41.78 (talk) 06:49, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I'd rather die than get a donor kidney that turned me into a murderer or a terrorist! Shabi  DOO  06:50, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * How does a kidney that belonged to a murderer or a terrorist turn you into one aswell? Gunther8787 (talk) 07:53, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I think it has to do with liver toxins or something like that I think. Shabi  DOO  08:52, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Why not? The same reasons you should not have capital punishment in the first place. You really don't need another addition to the list of things making the American prison system a horrific disgrace. AMassiveGay (talk) 09:50, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, once you are legally killing people - you might ask why not? Of course you would then need to kill them in such a way that you didn't damage the organs.  Probably on an operating table which might give rise to some medical ethics problems.  Once you had that sorted out then you might run into some of the problems you can see here.  But, if you have a state which is sufficiently immoral to kill its citizens in cold blood then then I'd say it's a logical next moral step.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 10:32, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * also, The us executed 22 people last year. I can't imagine it would provide an overabundance of organs, not without massively increasing the number of executions to chinese levels of state murder. Unlikely I would hope. AMassiveGay (talk) 13:51, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Taking organs from the dead without consent is dangerous because it encourages more lax requirements on killing people in order to get their valuable organs. It makes the execution problem worse by giving it a fiscal benefit that the greedy can exploit.  MirrorIrorriM (talk) 15:20, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I think it's better just to give prisoners some magnet therapy and a good vegan juice flush-out and they should be totally rehabilitated. No need for the state to murder people and then they can become good citizens and volunteer to donate their now healthy organs when they die of old age or some pandemic. Shabi  DOO  15:37, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * This, I hope, is satirical. The reason we shouldn't put people to death is that if we fuck it up one single time, that's state sanctioned murder.  And who wants to live in a murder state?  So, granted, peoples sentences are delivered by judges, who get to their appointments by sine means of delineation, whether cool or not cool, death row is administered by the state.  That's a fight that is already hell, would we want private prisons to have the extra incentive of "potential organ donor."  Gol Sarnitt (talk) 01:56, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Another idea
How about if a prisoner wants a reduced sentence they have the option of donating blood and organs. Not enough to kill obviously since my original idea did not go over very well. I can see why --Racia zombio94 (talk) 16:16, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Why stop at blood. Should female prisoners also give birth to babies for barren couples? Could knock off 5 years? Or they could give up their left kidneys and knock three years off their sentence? Shabi  DOO  17:49, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Probably still too far in the wrong direction if it's codified (if this was factored into a parole board ruling as an indication of penitence, seems almost harmless). Still creates a perverse incentive to lock people up and for a prisoner however rightly or wrongly incarcerated to go under the knife. If you want or need an example of perverse incentives, private prisons are the prime example. They're corporations, therefore they have a financial incentive to keep people locked up and to lobby for harsher criminal justice laws like mandatory minimums. They're basically just modern American slaveholders. Artificius (talk) 17:54, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Indeed. If you want crime to keep festering the best thing you can do is find a way to make the criminals pay more and while you're at it do nothing about poverty, inequality, non-existent social programs and low quality education and non-existent health care. If your focus is: how can this perpetrator be made to pay even more for their crime (while they are already quite sufficiently punished) and not: how can we avoid future crime and diminish it...then you should certainly enjoy a continuation of dangerous streets and a dysfunctional society. America, compared to pretty much the rest of the developed world...has a very harsh punitive justice system and it always baffles me how much people focus on squeezing out as much atonement as they can from a criminal instead of dealing with the conditions that help most crime fester. Though it should be said that some states do seem to be doing a whole lot better than others. Shabi  DOO  18:22, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I will be honest- I did not fully think this one through and used hyper simple reasoning. I feel stupid for mentioning it. After reading the responses I agree with you all. --Racia zombio94 (talk) 21:58, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Hey, you needed to mention it in order to sort out what was wrong with it. You asked around for a critical approach, got it, and responded by thinking from angles you couldn't see before. Realizing the faults you recognized the problem and changed your position as a result. I think that shows some character. Semipenultimate (talk) 23:24, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Totally. I don't encounter that many people who have the extremely important skill of admitting they may have had things wrong or hadn't thought about things in a certain way. The greatest intellectuals are the first to take back something they said they can no longer defend. Shabi  DOO  00:25, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Reasoning is never simple. There may be stupid ideas, but there are definitely stupid processes (and they all cloak themselves in "Common Sense"). You put your shit out there for other people to correct. Good on you dude, that's like an acid test for stupid. Now stfu and keep learning. Keep reading (or start reading if you're not a reader, just don't digest information with emotional BS). Artificius (talk) 01:51, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

So there was a judge who received cash for sending more kids to prison. The existing system is so crap that trying to milk it for extra benefit is not a good idea.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 11:06, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Maybe, just maybe, ACAB. — Oxyaena Harass  04:20, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * How about, instead of imagining ourselves as prisoners, we imagine ourselves as the wardens. you would say prisoners could mitigate their sentence by virtue of having the right blood type? Awful. Madness, bit misappropriation of the morality of voluntary organ donation and incarceration.....Splash. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 06:13, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * its a common sentiment really. hangings too good for em type thing. some people don't dial it back though . some would have us reduce the prison population to zero via chainsaw. prisoner rights are hard sell. especially in the us. the land of free imprisons more people than any were else in the world. it has more people in solitary confinement, a form o torture, than anywhere else. in the land of the free, slavery is alive and well, its never not had slavery. chinas justice system probably more brutal, third world prisons even more so. but they don't sell themselves as the shining city on the hill. its fabled constitution, its bill of rights are rolled out so we can see what real freedom looks like. the us would have us believe its where democracy is done right, life liberty and happiness and justice for all. then we see the worse prisons in the developed world. why so bad? why could organ harvest look like a good idea? it because us prisons have 2 things that America despises most of all. its got lots of poor people, and lotsa of black people. lots an lots of them. prison is awful because in America, these two groups are less than human even before they are sent down.


 * poverty, the poor - these are life style choices. even if born poor, work hard with a can do attitude, you'll be rich in no time. stil poor? its because you are a degenerate. poverty is a moral failing. you are lazy, degenerate. the prosperity gospel says if you are poor, god hates you. no welfare state or safety nets for vermin. get a job. poverty itself is criminalised. broken window policies means steep fines for petty offences handed out like confetti to poor folk. cant pay because you poor? us prisons are debtors prisons. you'll be in prison before trial too if you cant afford bail. access to your legal representative is restriced on remand so don't expect the fairest of trials. not posting bail tells the jury you are guilty. the plea deal is 5 years for compliance, or 50 years if convicted in court as punishment for exercising your right to the a fair trial. if you at the racial element expect the same treatment times ten. the racial disparity really is massive. more blacks in prison than any other group. a culmination of a system of racist discrimination starting more or less at birth, harsh, excessive, frequent punishment for minor infractions at school that white student would incur. by the time they get to prison, its seems all the deserved when they always in trouble at school.

the us has the longest prison sentences. arbitrary 3 strike rules, mandatory sentencing, broken windows. death sentences. its draconian. punative. it makes certain that in prison, you are there for as long as they can keep you. and make sure you reoffend so you come back. on release, your debts will have increased. poor job opportunities even poorer as a ex felon. what few benefits you were entitled to arnt allowed for old lags. no shit re offending is so common.


 * so the poor. the black. this are the prisoners. these are not people. these are degenerates. vermin. savages. the slave caste. prison slavery today does what it pretty much did when it started after the civil war. trap nwewly freed slaves to keep slavery alive, only know they are often descendants of slaves. you can do anything to these people and no one would care. the brutal prison environment is filled with violence and rape. ts horrific but here is little more than punchline. we scoffed at organ harvesting, but using prisoners, without consent, all kind of medical trials. angola state farm, once produced some the finest foods, fruits, veg in the us. while the prisoners producing it were malnourished, literally starving. the mass incarcerations resulting from war on drugs didn't see people shocked at a sudden massive increase in prison populations. tough on crime polticians always do well. the no nonsense cant do the time don't do the crime approaches never fail to make it all more discriminatory. no one wants rehab programs - they are wasted  on this scum. the numbers of blacks in prison isn't evidence of shocking discrimation, its proof that all the racist associtions of criminality are all true. they really are all thieves, rapists, murderers. is a good they are all locked up. dont spend money on social programs when a bit of hard work is all you need. welfare rewards these degenerate savages. high crime rates just prove innate degeneracy.


 * a marker of civilisation is how it treats its poorest, it most desperate, its criminals. this is how they are treated in the land of the free. it has an impact throughout society, on racism, on politics. on health. informing and informed by more than just prisons. hearts are hardened to injustices, elected officials are openly hoping for people to die because money. we can see another example of justice for all in the recent impeachment and we can see no one is above the law. the president himself is the American dream incarnate, an example of what hard work can get you. hes a self made man after all, and now hes president. the system works, and there is nothing you could do a prisoner that wont have people who think its not tough enough.AMassiveGay (talk) 13:14, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * attorney general William barr, noted cunt and trump supporter, wrote the thesis 'the case for incarceration' and was instrumental in the mass incarceration and expansion of private prisons that is the focus of my incoherent rant. hes also reintroduced the death penalty at the federal level. he is the epitome of tough on crime shitholery. so tough his department the case of micheal Flynn, despite a confession, and got roger stone a lighter sentence, while his dept has refused to inestigate his own incidents obstructions and contempt. there limits on who should go to jail it seems. justice for all AMassiveGay (talk) 21:45, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

People are tut-tutting at you for supporting the death penalty
Yet other users seem to be arguing that cops are justified in shooting anyone who runs away from them. 21:50, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * 1. Duce are there any circumstances where the state should be justified in murdering a citizen for committing a crime?
 * 2. Should police be prohibited, regardless of any circumstance, from shooting a fleeing criminal? Shabi  DOO  22:03, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Also I didn't think anyone was criticizing the supporting of the death penalty. Does Zombie even support it? He was talking about mandatory organ donation (after the fact). And the two arguments against it, the biggest being: very few people are executed so is this policy even worth the time and money? and 2. it can create a huge slippery slope leading to ghastlier policies and problems. All entirely reasonable whether you support the penalty or not. Shabi  DOO  22:06, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I have absolutely no idea to what the above comment refers to. I am happy to accept or respond to criticism of anything I have said, whether it be incoherent, wrong, complete dogshit even. inferring hypocrisy over something I have no clue to what it refers seems like something that would be unfair criticism. If it helps my general policy on shooting people is leaning towards against shooting people. I hardly ever shoot people, today ive not shot anyone. I might be wrong in that, It might be I should absolutely shoot more people. im sure shooting people is best practice in lots of cases, and indeed being shot by better people than I. I am very much and very sincerely sorry for allowing my own short comings to interfere with the need to shoot more people. but, you know, I have difficultly sometimes ordering my thoughts, I cant always trust my own eyes or what I think I am saying is what I am actually saying. what I am saying here though is when it comes to shooting people, im maybe not the best judge. I might need more context there. but I am confident in my belief the brutality within American justice and its prisons is a horrific disgrace, and should not be viewed as a function it working as intended.
 * I hope that clears things up. AMassiveGay (talk) 23:00, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I have, before, stated that this specific situation is maybe justified, on account of the victim having a gun and being passed out drunk in a parking lot with a gun in his lap, and now the public story is a little different.  But when I made the argument that police are in a stressful environment and something so strange as this needs to be considered, it was part of a guns-make-everything-worse argument.  I talked about it, I had a point that was "In this situation, the police had to do it" and I had a reason "guns are bad."
 * What it looks like now is I didn't have all the info, and it's still bad, and you know what?  Guns are still bad.  Gol Sarnitt (talk) 01:37, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

What if...
Trump was a doctor, would you go and visit Dr. Trump? Remember, he'll make your health GREAT again and he's probably the BEST doctor in the field. :P Gunther8787 (talk) 13:38, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I would just for a laugh, it would be hilarious! --Racia zombio94 (talk) 14:01, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't it be a beautiful irony if he proved to be a better doctor than politician? Perhaps even the level of doctor that he thinks he is a politician? Kencolt (talk) 15:48, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I guess he could pass for the internationally famous international medic: Doktor Bleachinjector.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 13:24, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * What about General Jack de Reeper? Anna Livia (talk) 14:06, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * How about reading research papers from world famous medical scientist Doctor Kent Hovind? His research must be top notch. --Racia zombio94 (talk) 21:16, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Trump interview with David Muir
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBCx5BydeRI&lc=UgwzJ3leGyu-Z6WrV6F4AaABAg.98JxOmqMWwn98KmdxbFD6N

This one is a real gem dug up from the mine of bullshit. Trump actually has the nerve to say that he has been affected more than anybody.

I doubt Trump has lost family or friends from the virus as he can afford the best doctors and treatments. I also doubt that Trump has lost income and suffered financial strain as he has many businesses and lots of money to fall back on.

When he loses loved ones and loses income, then he can complain. Actual people are suffering emotionally and financially. If he wants to make that claim then he can walk among infected people without any form of protection and he can give up all his cash. --Racia zombio94 (talk) 14:15, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * "..We have to get this enemy defeated!" Bloody hell. On a lighter note, what does he think taking out a piece of paper with a graph on it conveys to the average viewer? Will they think, "oh, he's got the intel and knows what's going on" or could it be, "Look at that flimflam man waving facts about the place, trying to dupe us?"
 * It's true what they say, you get the politicians you vote for. The United States really is in need of massive collective inward assessment. Mind you, take a look at the UK, fucking hell. They really are putting the "special" into special relationship these days, aren't they? Cardinal Chang (talk) 14:59, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * As his valet has tested positive for the virus if Trump also does so in the near future would there be 'The butler did it' comments? Anna Livia (talk) 14:57, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * We can live in hope. Sounds like a new version of Cluedo (or Clue for the yanks) it was the Valet, in the presidential limo with ignorance. Let's see Tim Curry ham that right up. Cardinal Chang (talk) 16:36, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Actually, I don't think Trump getting Corona would be that good just because so much of Biden 2020 is "He's not Trump" and if Pence is forced into the ring one of Biden's biggest advantages is gone. Since it is no longer about deposing the worst president in history angry Bernie voters could easily convince themselves to stay home and even these so-called "reasonable" conservatives who criticize Trump would be happy to vote for a Rent-a-Republican like Pence.-Flandres (talk) 16:55, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I wasn't saying it would be good. I was saying "'The butler did it' comments?" would be good. In all honestly, none of the US Presidential candidates in recent years have inspired much hope for humanity's future. Cardinal Chang (talk) 17:36, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Out of all the bullshit and bluster he put forth in the interview, the one that boggles the mind is where he blames the previous administration for leaving broken testing kits for covid-19. Now, am I missing something? Is he honestly trying to say The Obama Administration had testing kits for a virus that didn't exist 9 months ago? And not only that, but decided to leave only broken ones behind when Trump et al took over 3 years back? That's some fucking excuse, I tell ya. Cardinal Chang (talk) 16:54, 8 May 2020 (UTC)
 * 'The butler did it' is/was a crime fiction trope, but not on this list. Anna Livia (talk) 18:16, 8 May 2020 (UTC).

Why are you going so hard on Trump? He's working so hard he sometimes misses lunch! That must put him on the same level as frontline health workers.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 09:47, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Maybe Trump dropped a penny, might count as loss of income? --Racia zombio94 (talk) 19:40, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

I hate it too
Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more; Or close the wall up with our English dead. In peace there's nothing so becomes a man As modest stillness and humility: But when the blast of war blows in our ears, Then imitate the action of the tiger; Stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood, Disguise fair nature with hard-favour'd rage; Then lend the eye a terrible aspect; Let pry through the portage of the head Like the brass cannon; let the brow o'erwhelm it As fearfully as doth a galled rock O'erhang and jutty his confounded base, Swill'd with the wild and wasteful ocean. Now set the teeth and stretch the nostril wide, Hold hard the breath and bend up every spirit To his full height. On, on, you noblest English. Whose blood is fet from fathers of war-proof! Fathers that, like so many Alexanders, Have in these parts from morn till even fought And sheathed their swords for lack of argument: Dishonour not your mothers; now attest That those whom you call'd fathers did beget you. Be copy now to men of grosser blood, And teach them how to war. And you, good yeoman, Whose limbs were made in England, show us here The mettle of your pasture; let us swear That you are worth your breeding; which I doubt not; For there is none of you so mean and base, That hath not noble lustre in your eyes. I see you stand like greyhounds in the slips, Straining upon the start. The game's afoot: Follow your spirit, and upon this charge Cry 'God for Harry, England, and Saint George!'
 * I hate it too. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 02:57, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * ... hate what? Kencolt (talk) 03:16, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry, that's the point. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 03:21, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I guess a more modern version would begin: "Once more unto the bleach ..."Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 09:01, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

A sad lament
Alcohol tastes like piss, too bad I`m only 18.... sobs It has a good buzz tho, which more than makes up for the taste, like when I had that can of beer. Calmed my nerves down a lot lol. It was pisswater, you know, 'Murican beer, nasty shit but good buzz. I've tried cherry wine too, when I was like 16 or 17. Due to my autism I have heightened senses, which means that the cherry flavor didn't mask the taste of piss. Spit it out almost immediately. — Oxyaena Harass  06:22, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * There are worse things than not having a taste for the stuff, to be sure. It's a fairly expensive habit anywhere (well, outside New Hampshire), even in moderation. And while I've never had more than a bit of a hangover myself it can sure put people in really bad situations; I once had to help a stranger who could barely walk get to her friend's car in a bad neighborhood, she was very lucky the much-larger man who first came across her was me instead of someone less well-intentioned. But on this one The Big A put me at the opposite end of the spectrum (har!); while my sense of texture is heightened my sense of taste is very dull, so I'm known to enjoy stronger flavored beer, sake, and (especially) more powerful types of gin. Don't let anyone pressure you into drinking, especially if you don't even enjoy it anyway. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい ) 10:06, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Wait, you're not allowed to drink beer when you're 18 in the US (I know 21 is the Age Of Consent (one of the few remaining countries that still has 21, together with some Arabian countries) in the US, but I thought Alcohol was allowed)? Gunther8787 (talk) 10:44, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh no, it's 21. You can thank these clowns for that. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい ) 13:20, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * It is 'somewhat variable' in the UK (you can be bought a drink with a meal if 16 or 17) and buy it at 18 (legally that is). Anna Livia (talk) 14:10, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * It’s been quite a while since I was 18 and I still haven’t “gotten” the taste of the most prevalent alcoholic beverages: Beer and wine. For me, the fermented, yeasty taste simply overpowers everything else. However, I did start to enjoy cider (and by that I mean the actual, real fermented stuff, not the “apple wine/brandy + additives” or “carbonated apple juice” varieties) some years ago, and I have even found a few types of mead palatable, so things may still change on that front, I guess.


 * By contrast, I do enjoy a good whisk(e)y or rum, or, for that matter, a nice cocktail. Being more or less stuck working from home in these COVID-19 times, I’ve taken to experimenting with and expanding my skills in making cocktails. Thus, I may enjoy one or two in the afternoon in the sun on my balcony, possibly accompanied by a good cigar. I also do have some bottles of wine and beer in the cupboard, but that’s for use in cooking, where I very much enjoy them and consider them essential in certain dishes. ScepticWombat (talk) 14:27, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * i'll let you all in on a secret. its not super powered sense of a taste that makes you still able to taste the alcohol, its because you can always taste the alcohol in something. fruit juices, cokes, unless significantly watered down. acquiring the taste for booze is the reward for ones dedication to getting lashed. that kick you get from a swig of whatever poison you imbibe is proof it is actually poison and will get you pissed. its like a pat on the back for time spent honing the art of getting shitfaced, as if to say, yes this is battery acid you are drinking, your liver will soon cease to function, and you wont make it through night. well done sir. that's fine drinking. where is your sense of achievement if getting pissed simply involved a refreshing beverage pleasingly tickling your throat as you neck it down? when every sip is painful ordeal that burning through your throat and leaving a bitter aftertaste and your voice is like gravel, the resolve required to get through another round will see your pride go stratospheric as you double over vomiting in the car park. you would have earned that right. you friends and family, pissed up on lookers will look on with awe and respect, in humbled tones they will declare that you are 'well wankered'. generations to come will speak of this day
 * if you want something fruity drink fruit juice. just remember though it a licensed premises, so you wont be allowed to the bar, and must be accompanied by an adult at all times whom I assume couldn't get a baby sitter for you.
 * foolish americans. you think you know how to drink, but you don't know how to drink. this lesson should be applied to all life. I no longer drink, but I take this knowledge of chemical excess to mind altering substances of another kind. I earn every ounce of drug induced psychosis, and when my time comes I will have earned my place amongst the pantheon of gods. not always sure what day it is though. I can see its Saturday, feels like a Friday.AMassiveGay (talk) 14:31, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Americans used to have the trashiest beer around but, a couple decades ago, seemingly out of nowhere they upped their game hard core. When I lived in Canada we used to drive to America to buy beer and American whisky (some of it is outstanding) not only was it sometimes 20% of the price of Canadian stuff but even their low cost small brand beer was really notable. And a few (some) of the micro-brews were outstanding. A company in Mass. started brewing Belgian style abbey beers and (I lived in belgium for 5 years so I tried them all) I couldn't notice much of a difference. The cock-tail bars in New York were, at least during happy hour, affordable and I couldn't believe the effort the bartenders put into making a drink. I think in Madrid or Brussels or Paris you'd have like 30 seconds of effort for a cocktail at most on a non-overly-elaborate cocktail but in New York zheesh they would go all out. Spend minutes, with flourishes, garnishes, high quality spirits and additives. Of course you had to tip the person but whatever it was worth it. Great cocktails. AND the bar tenders were often extremely good conversationalists when not busy. I cant remember the last time casually chatting with a continental European bartender...or fellow clients at the bar. And they can have a LOT of fun drinking. In New England there were boat races (two teams drinking pints), my friends university in Baltimore had extremely elaborate and competitive beer-pong (epic fun), drinking games with cards or watching a show/film and drinking when someone says or does something specific, shot competitions etc. Had a total utter blast. Okay maybe they can't drink a Scotsman or Albertan or Swede or Russian under the table but meh, bad livers and chronic hangovers aren't even that cool. Shabi  DOO  15:34, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Last time I was at the bar, I saw a Brit.Ariel31459 (talk) 22:10, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * But the are cool. Bongolian (talk) 07:25, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=joFkMSRXIl0
 * p.s. Oxy. A lot of people, myself included, didn't like my first dozen or so alcoholic drinks. Try a shandy (beer with fizzy lemonade or ginger ale) or baileys on ice well diluted with milk, or "Kriek" the belgian cherry beer, or very light drinks like orange juice with a tiny splash of vodka or cola with a splash of malibu. Sucks your country has a 21 year drinking age. What the fuck is with that? Shabi  DOO  22:18, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I can't drink beer. Too bitter. Instead I've developed a taste for mead and hard cider. 22:24, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm one of the few people who loved IPA at first taste, despite being warned by my brother how bitter it is. *shrug* 22:33, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I'll also chime in to say that I don't like beer. I do like sweet wine, margaritas, sangrias, and hard cider though. I guess I just like sweeter, fruitier alcohol. 22:35, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

(reset) I don't go for beer, (Scottish) whisky (too peaty etc) and various others. However a spoonful of fruit brandy in hot tea or coffee (without milk) can be very nice. Anna Livia (talk) 10:38, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm unfortunately a severe alcoholic and have been for nearly 15 years now. Problem with it is I can't get drunk at all anymore - I'm downing 5 bottles of wine per day every day and my health is fucked but I get no buzz. I don't recommend it to anyone. AceModerator 10:40, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Totally with you, Ace. My suggestion is to increase parameters, which is definitely more complicated than just giving it up, but also more practical and a little more fun.  Buy a breathalyzer, I personally try to give myself 12 hours a day of 0.00 BAC. 5 bottles of wine is a lot, I'd have totally drank it too.  Now I strive to hit 0.00 once a day, for around 8 to 12 hours.  At least try to monitor your BAC, and notice when it gets low enough to hurt, and note it.  I wouldn't want you to go through the DTs, I almost bit my lip off one time, right before Christmas.  Embarrassing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcVOYPUL5S4
 * It's rough, I can't exactly feel drunk anymore either, but I can put good faith limits on my excess. At least we won't drown in our own lungs, it's not Tuberculosis.  I don't exactly behave based on those breathalyzer numbers, outside of whether I'll drive a car or not, but I do, you know, accept what those numbers mean. And I think a lot of people would be surprised at their BAC numbers if they checked them when they were drinking.  Gol Sarnitt (talk) 03:42, 12 May 2020 (UTC).

I found this in my youtube video recommendations
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2nksGGP9SF8 I think this was brought up before, that there are some problems with "BreadTube" before (yes, the video is almost a year old)? Gunther8787 (talk) 00:22, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Well that sucks. Anyways, I'm back from my hiatus on RW for no apparent reason. — Jeh2ow Damn son!  05:12, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Who? — Oxyaena Harass  08:01, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Crazy Cervid Chaos
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2XtkXIRCVg — Oxyaena Harass  18:14, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Pfff. What's the big deal. It just wanted to have some highlights done on the tail. They should have had some artiodactyla friendly doors to make it accessible to all! Shabi  DOO  18:32, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
 * You wouldn't be so dismissive if that had been a goat. Kencolt (talk) 01:43, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
 * The deer had a bad case of goat envy. — <font color="Absolute Zero">Oxyaena <font color="Magenta">Harass  15:36, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Love it closing with "Bew Yorks #1 News." Just, made the whole thing worth it, nothing else required. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 01:42, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

RZ94's official apocalypse equation!
[Current Disaster]+[Half Baked Prophecy]*[Scapegoat^2]= Apocalypse.

It is mathematically proven! --Racia zombio94 (talk) 14:50, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Anybody else ever look through the coop archives?
Just started going down my rabbit hole and OH MY GOD I NEED TO GO BACK TO WORK I CANNOT POSSIBLY BE THIS BORED- "Shut up, Brx." 20:42, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I do, albeit only to get context for how coop cases work. It doesn't usually give me a inspiring new idea about solving disputes I must say.-Flandres (talk) 20:45, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
 * It's funny how the same users get cooped over and over again (yes, I'm aware I'm one of them). Frankly disappointed in my past self for some of the things I've said- "Shut up, Brx." 20:50, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Welcome back Brxbrx. :)Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 08:55, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

serious question
Trump said be treated with ultraviolet and cut funding for science(when became president and now hopes on vaccine at the end of the year) why was that don't enough for second revolution? people think he joke despite words:"My nuclear button is bigger"? and it's very good that Trump does not know yet about this bullshit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inedia &mdash; Unsigned, by: 157.245.67.115 / talk
 * If you mean an actual civil war, that's a good way to end up dead these days, given how weapons tech has advanced since the 1700s. Besides that, most people don't really want a war or anything like that from what I've seen, they just want the problems to go away. 00:43, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Main problem is that Trump said what his around fake news, but himself says "ultraviolet must help" that very informative...Probably yet never taxes of americans went to such a wingnut.Trump will kill USA that very sadly
 * they just want the problems to go away
 * it's sad too, i used to think if the president acts like a complete asshole american citizens can shut it in guantanamo,but now I understand on all continents same people(everyone wants quiescence) &mdash; Unsigned, by: 157.245.67.115 / talk
 * Well yeah, most people aren't very invested in politics unless something goes seriously wrong. 01:53, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I hear 9mm bullets are scarce like toilet paper was 2 months ago. There's some thread of imminent need for bullets that has reached handgun owners, and it ain't from the MSM, and that's fucking... troubling. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 02:26, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

A Left-wing revolution in the USA would be a disaster owing to the great might of the Military and how Republicans would no doubt use it to consolidate power to the point of one party rule even as demographics turn against them(I imagine a left wing insurrection is actually a dream scenario for right-wingers). It is strategically more sound to just wait for this country to collapse in the near future as its own domestic problems are exacerbated by climate catastrophe and then claim power over some small piece of America to create whatever you see as a better society. This is significantly more likely than "angry Democrats take up arms across the nation" and is just fairly likely in general(Certainty more likely than "Joe Biden wins and fixes everything" or "Joe Biden wins and fixes anything" for that matter).Flandres (talk) 02:31, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * But that sells bullets, apparently. There's fear about a left wing uprising or victory?  Left wing based on centrist policy and, what, documents about surveillance laws that were put in place by H.W. and abused by Obama, and now, what, being used by our current president but not like, for any personal gain, just everybody in the intelligence community over the past 20 years is mad at the way it's being used now.  Yeah, sounds like today is the day to go commie nutso-bonkers and ignore what's in front of us, instead of, I don't know, embrace leftist ideals of non-violence, transparency, and government as an office that works for the people as opposed to above the people.  Dip shittery, if anybody thinks the military is coming for their guns. I am not a centrist, and I didn't like the Patriot Act when Bush used it or when Obama used it.  Trump is like "They used it, against widdle ole me, of all people" fuck that, Trump is using it too, Guantanamo ain't closed.  Nobody is like "I don't like Guantanamo Bay, time to open our OWN Guantanamo Bay~" except dumbass kids.  Doxxing is stupid, surveillance is stupid, it only happens when people are being fucking stupid.  No genuine leftist is going to listen to their buddy say "yeah it's time to kill like Marx said!" without saying "Uhh, did you read Marx?  Or did Ben Shapiro just reverse Psychology you into a living straw man?" Gol Sarnitt (talk) 04:25, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Are some Americans really talking about civil war? As an Indian, I don't seem to make any sense out of this thread. Teerthaloke101 (talk) 10:14, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * There's always been a small fringe of life in America that talks about civil war and secession; except for one time, nothing tends to come of it. It is true that a significant portion of America has always been more sympathetic to fascism and authoritarianism than our "freedom!" bellicose jingoism would have it (ref: figures like in the 1930s, or how  for simply having strong pacifist views, and for a dose of how the fundie scam has been an everlasting force for much longer than you think, how about those fundie scam artists that funded the  stations in the early 1960s, that are better known today for playing the rock and roll that more uptight radio stations wouldn't?). The far left has never been terribly strong in the United States. But at least in the past the fascist/authoritarian right side of the US has been balanced by another side of our culture that celebrates the  types willing to expose excess business bullshit, and celebrates movements that have corrected other excesses (environmentalist pioneer 's name is all over the Western US for instance). Sure, we had our s and s but we never went as far as (limiting only to European nations) Germany or Italy did among European countries in that sort of tilt.
 * Compared to the past, the strong bipolar anti-intellectualism is the one thing I see that is somewhat new -- well, it's always been there to some degree, but I can't think of an American president that has been more anti-intellectual than Donald Trump, and pure populist news like Fox News is actually mainstream and not treated like the IQ point lowering dogshit that it is. In modern times, the real question I personally have is whether COVID-19, which has exposed not only some severe institutional weaknesses in the United States but exposed the huge weakness in the right-wing "fuck science" bro-business culture in this country, will change anything in this nation. Maybe, maybe not -- there's an awful lot that swallow the propaganda after all -- but it's easy to see why the United States literally has the worst infection impact in the world right now. Soundwave106 (talk) 13:16, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Stop!some americans think that only marxists can be far-left?but how feel about on rationalwiki such ideology(i called this left fascism) rights for LGBT, hard scientism,pro-capitalism, pro-feminism,but dehumanization and internment camps for right-wing...that very silimiar fucking marxism,really?
 * Not sure what you are babbling about, but pro-LGBT rights, feminism, science, and capitalism is pretty much "the mainstream", all accepted to some degree by mainline conservatives and liberals alike in US (as well as many other countries elsewhere). These are hardly "leftist fascism" at its core unless you are in one of those right-wing Internet bubbles that Rationalwiki likes to make fun of. :p Even regarding capitalism, the heaviest the popular left (Sanders/Warren/etc.) gets here tends to advocate Nordic-style democratic socialism, which is very capitalistic at its core, but with a (much needed IMHO) stronger social safety net.
 * Now, there is a large crowd on the right that indeed is skeptical of science, LGBT rights, and/or feminism. They are an important part of the Donald Trump coalition, and they are the main ones that get a boner over putting people like immigrants and "criminals" (such as those who commit the "crime" of jogging while black) in cages. There is a smaller libertarian crowd that worships the fruit of capitalism to a fault. And there's also a smaller but present leftist moonbat bunch that tends to be anti-science as well, or projects more radical (or misguided yet angry) views on topics like feminism, LGBT rights, and whatnot. and they will intersect with the right on certain issues (the anti-vaccination movement being a great example of this). These are generally "notable" but not something to over-focus on because these groups haven't had a lot of power until recently -- the exception, of course, is the Donald Trump fanboys and how they took over the Republican party. Soundwave106 (talk) 16:53, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * pro-LGBT rights, feminism, science, and capitalism is pretty much "the mainstream" This is not entirely true.conservatives "in our time" promote traditional value and nostalgia for the good old days and yet conservatives very hypocrisy they say, what do they protect freedom of speech but they ready destroy constitution for national security,isn't it?
 * First of all. Sign your posts. Secondly, US "mainline" conservatives are not pro-LGBT, feminism or science. They only thing they support is capitalism. It's mainline conservatives that peddle conspiracies about evil feminists and tries to repeal LGBT rights, demonize rape victims (though in hindsight Dems also do that when it's convinient) and ignore science. The oil industry is collapsing right now and Republicans are trying to punish banks that don't give credit to bankrupt oil companies.Tuxer (talk) 18:26, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * The key to my phrase is "to some degree". Even 37% of Republicans and 56% of Republican-leaning independents support gay marriage, for instance. I have not seen any polls on long answered topics regarding women's rights (suffrage for instance) because I suspect the number of people who think women's suffrage was a bad idea is loonie-bin fringe these days. If Trumpism and the populist empires that support this (Fox News, AM talk, etc.) is the new "mainline conservative" then you would be more correct, the group of idiots you are talking about was always pretty large to begin with, and we may be already at a point at least from a Republican party perspective where populist dumbness is king (fuck, we live in times where Dubya -- DUBYA -- actually is rebuking Trump for being a partisan dickhead). But there was a time when Richard Nixon (the bastard he was) proposed universal healthcare (and fuck, as sexist as he was, he signed Title IX into law), William Buckley was able to tell the racists at the John Birch Society to fuck off (Ayn Rand too), Ronald Reagan actually raised taxes and actually made a compromise on immigration, George HW Bush signed the 1990 Clean Air Act, etc. These folks had many faults for sure, but there was a time when being a conservative didn't mean being a *complete* anti-intellectual douche. To be honest I assume a few conservatives that have the ability to think and aren't of The Cult of Trump are still out there. (Or maybe they are all moderate Democrats now.) Soundwave106 (talk) 19:51, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Sign your posts
 * is it so necessary?but if that annoying you unsign i will sign 157.245.67.115 (talk) 21:06, 12 May 2020 (UTC)Supermodern_user
 * Also use the preview option to avoid spamming the changes and preventing others from editing the thread. 20:46, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * A civil war or uprising, in my opinion, is more likely in India. The main media, controlled by far-right BJP is producing propaganda against the Muslim community. There was even a small riot (50 people died) in our capital in February. Teerthaloke101 (talk) 02:39, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

A riddle
How much wood could a woodfuck fuck if a woodfuck could fuck wood? — <font color="Absolute Zero">Oxyaena <font color="Magenta">Harass  04:45, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * A woodchuck should chuck about as much wood as a woodchuck chuckin wood could. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 04:49, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh. You said fuck.  I dunno, fuck everything? I got my old adage response mixed up, anyway.  Fuck everything, final answer. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 04:59, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * It would depend on how well they whittle down the wood and how well their genitals can handle chaffing. If not they would destroy their members beyond repair...which maybe a handful of woodchucks wouldn't mind doing? So I'd say...it depends? Maybe they'd have more success finding another woodchuck or some other consenting animal? Shabi  DOO  13:15, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * None at all, assuming it could find another, compatible woodchuck. Kencolt (talk) 17:32, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Community Standards
There are proposed changes to the vandal blocking policy which are under discussion on the Community Standards talk page. This really needs a site notice, but I can't remember how to do one. :-( Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 08:59, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for reminding us. I got it covered. Cosmikdebris (talk) 13:37, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Excellent! Thanks!Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 13:39, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

(Audio) book I recommend
Feed by Mira Grant.

Yes it is a zombie novel although zombies are a backdrop in the story. It focuses on politics, science, religion and news media with a center-left stance. I am 70% through the book and I am enjoying it. The characters are likable, the atmosphere is tense, the zombie concept is interesting and the presentation is excellent. Won't spoil the details though. --Racia zombio94 (talk) 15:35, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

SCOTUS
Supreme Court hearing on Trump's tax returns is now ongoing. 16:06, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * This should be interesting. --Racia zombio94 (talk) 16:07, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Concerning the Republic of China (Taiwan): Should they go full independence and choose a different name or still claim that they are the real China
Personal opinion, I think that Taiwan should just go full independence. It is not like Taiwan can invade China, demanding that the PRC surrender. Taiwan would be crushed and their territory conquered. --Racia zombio94 (talk) 23:06, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * The problem is that the PRC has stated it will retaliate if Taiwan declares indepedence.Tuxer (talk) 23:33, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Exactly. Declaring independence would just be inviting the PRC to invade. For the most part, things here in Taiwan are fine as they are. Obviously, Taiwan's total non-participation in the World Health Organization is a serious problem and I hope that can be rectified. But although Taiwan doesn't officially have diplomatic relations with most other countries in the world, Taiwan's representatives overseas largely get the same respect as other diplomats. There was a case a couple of years ago when a Taiwanese fugitive arrived in the UK and, even though Britain doesn't have an extradition treaty with Taiwan because it doesn't officially recognize Taiwan, the British government sent her back to Taiwan to stand trial anyway. And most people here don't much mind that Taiwan has to compete in the Olympics and other international sporting competitions under the name Chinese Taipei, as long as the team wins. Spud (talk) 00:32, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Invading Taiwan would be China's Vietnam. — <font color="Absolute Zero">Oxyaena <font color="Magenta">Harass  00:48, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
 * It is a totally utterly independent state. They don't need to declare independence because it's a de-facto reality. The rest of the world ought to recognize that independence. And also recognize the big Chinese menace that they helped create, by playing China's game and refusing to recognize Taiwan in the first place.  Shabi  DOO  01:06, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I am definitely not up to talking about the politics, it's like asking if the UK should be Great Britain, Ireland, and Scotland in bizzaro world. I address a lot of international shipments, so I can only speak from a familiarity with literal street addresses, this is not a geopolitical statement, so please don't take it as such, but since the UK left the EU, shipping to Europe has been... less English.  It's not that big a problem, I took French and German in high school and failed world geography in college, I recognize a country code of DE instead of GER is Deutschland, but now instead of UK I get GB or IE, which all shipping services still lump into United Kingdom, and I guess the postcodes changed over there.  Setting up shipping to Taiwan is different from shipping to China.  Shipping to Hong Kong or Puerto Rico is different from shipping to the US or China.  If you want to ship to HK or PR, they are recognized as Countries/Territories.    You can't ship to Hong Kong with country code of CN, and you don't ship to Puerto Rico or Taiwan without a country code. I just hope we're not so geographically illiterate that we've forgotten Taiwan and Tibet are two different things.  I mean, D.C. as an address in relation to the US and Hong Kong as an address in relation to China are kinda similar, and Taiwan and Puerto Rico are kinda similar, but that's about all I can be sure of through my lens of domestic/international shipping.  International conflict is historically dumb from what I've heard, and any time it gets really dumb, I would remind the US that the metric system is actually fine, stop being dumb. Gol Sarnitt (talk) 03:06, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

corporations eagerness to keep china sweet so they can do business there, has many of them required to refer to Taiwan as part of china in official documentation. airlines I read must refer to Taipei, china as a destination for example. im not sure if there is an concrete effect by this, economic or political, other than a show of its influence over corporations and just letting Taiwan know that china can make things difficult for them. china isn't giving up its claim anytime, and while being taiwans biggest trading partner by far, is maybe aiming to increase Taiwan's economic dependence, with economic disruption to show displeasure at anti china government/policies until its people decide is part of china after all. I dunno what their plan is really beyond bringing Taiwan closer and closer to china while browbeating any suggestion it is not part of it. its claim to Taiwan gives china ways to isolate and influence Taiwan beyond sabre rattling, while Taiwans claim to china still sees Taiwan as part of china, dropping of which amounts to declaring independence. even its biggest supporters don't openly recognise Taiwan, opting for linguistic artifice to not have comply with one china policy. seems unlikely to be resolved until china recognises Taiwan or takes it over. no time soon. AMassiveGay (talk) 21:44, 13 May 2020 (UTC)