Main, home of the dope ass bear.
THE MAIN RULE: ALL TEXT POSTS MUST CONTAIN "MAIN" OR BE ENTIRELY IMAGES (INLINE OR EMOJI)
(Temporary moratorium on main rule to encourage more posting on main. We reserve the right to arbitrarily enforce it whenever we wish and the right to strike this line and enforce mainposting with zero notification to the users because its funny)
A hexbear.net commainity. Main sure to subscribe to other communities as well. Your feed will become the Lion's Main!
Good comrades mainly sort posts by hot and comments by new!
State-by-state guide on maintaining firearm ownership
Domain guide on mutual aid and foodbank resources
Tips for looking at financials of non-profits (How to donate amainly)
Community-sourced megapost on the main media sources to radicalize libs and chuds with
Main Source for Feminism for Babies
Maintaining OpSec / Data Spring Cleaning guide
Remain up to date on what time is it in Moscow
view the rest of the comments
Objectivity is a myth and it's purpose is usually depoliticization. I don't necessarily say this to say a judicial system should never be independent, but I certainly wouldn't use objectivity as a reason for why it should. Separating politics from law or justice is not possible and not desirable unless deception is the goal.
Objectivity is also a very fallible standard for determining truth. Ultimately, justice must be in the context of revolution not in the context of "objectivity." There must be a political ether for justice to rest on.
I suppose I'm just very much caught up in Western justice systems that uphold objectivity as the ultimate goal of a courtroom. That state the point of a trial is to determine the facts of a case and have an objective judicial body pronounce a verdict. I'm not really familiar with other approaches that are still fair to all sides and compatible with "innocent until proven guilty", which is a principle I find extremely important.