gon [he]

Was pretty wild, but things got resolved within a day in Portugal.

Cool!

This is kind of funny tbh

104%?

Is this the fucking Onion?!

Because capital hasn’t been affected just yet, is my guess.

Edit: Spoke with a Serbian friend and they say it’s because of the lithium mines.

How so?!

Oh, really?! That surprises me… Though, my biggest exposure to Lilo & Stitch was the TV series so, I guess that makes sense.

Oh? I guess you just happened to have this shower thought as this stuff started trending then!

Well, I don’t care enough about it myself to go look into it beyond what showed up on my FYP on TikTok… But it seems that the live action won’t have Pleakley in a dress and wearing a wig. This was a significant thing in the story, where despite being a “man” (alien), the character still chose to and preferred to wear feminine clothing. Well, seemingly, not in the live action.

I don’t know though, as I said, I don’t care about Lilo & Stitch, but that’s what I saw, so I thought that maybe that’s why you ended up thinking about woke Disney is or isn’t.

Let me guess, you also heard about the Lilo & Stitch live action remake?

I don’t even know what that is…

Nowhere did I claim that billionaires are good.

Of course, nor did I mean to imply you did so!

I do get your point, and, on the surface level, I agree. However, I think it’s an inferior analysis of the situation.

Take your tiger metaphor; naturally, the rabid and hungry one is the most dangerous. Nevertheless, as you pointed out, they are both existential problems. I simply can’t celebrate, be satisfied, or even be appeased by the knowledge that we’re harbouring a hungry tiger, no matter what hungry and rabid tiger we may avoid by doing so. That’s my point.

It does seem we’re on the same page about this, to be honest… It’s just that your initial reply seemed a little — how do I put it… — irrelevant? It’s the Maxim of Quantity. We both agree that billionaires are fundamentally problematic, then why did you go and specify which ones are worse?

1. “Here’s a bowl of cereal. By the way, I didn’t piss in it.”

Yeah… I get that, but why would you even bring that up? Why say that? It doesn’t imply that you’re someone that pisses in cereal, but it does give off that feeling.

2. “Billionaires are bad. By the way, that kind of billionaire is worse.”

Yeah… I get that, but why would you even bring that up? Why say that? It doesn’t imply that you’re someone that thinks billionaires are good, but it does give off that feeling.

Do you pick up what I’m putting down?!

So? No billionaires at all are better than both cases. Bezos is evil too, any investment going towards him is terrible to. It’s better than Elon, but all this is terrible. Also, Bezos is not trying to preserve the status quo, he’s only trying to protect himself and his pockets, that’s all.

Not sure about that, but I can’t really say I disagree, fundamentally.

Well, Amazon isn’t exactly great for the EU, but at least it’s not Elon, IG…

It’s nice that Elon is getting hit where it hurts. Hopefully the EU benefits from this.

Georgescu has strong ties to them

I see he’s praised the Iron Guard before. Makes sense.

Sigh… I really don’t like the way things have been going in Europe…

Yeah, I do suppose you’re right on that… We’ll wait and see. At the end of the day, I guess it’s the Romanian people that’ll have to decide whether this was acceptable or not, too.

This is the most reasonable assessment in my opinion.

I wasn’t really assessing anything per se, more so asking a genuine question about whether this kind of thing should happen. I’ll say, I know Lemmy can be a little… Politically interesting… But I was not expecting downvotes for such a mild reply.

But yeah, I’ve actually been thinking about this for quite a while. I really think that, if we want leftist policies implemented, we really do need a charismatic candidate and a compelling narrative that can compete with what the right is pushing.

Well, on one hand, I like the far-right getting some institutional push-back. On the other hand, I’m a little concerned with both the state of democracy — that such a candidate could get so many votes — and the disregard for the people’s vote — while there may have been significant Russian interference, to what extent should the courts intervene with what seems to be a genuinely popular candidate?