IMHO, if one's approach to the world is just - take it as it is and go with it - then probabilistic parrots creating the perceived elements of reality will work on that person because that's what they use to decide what to do next, but if one has an analytical approach to the world - wanting to figure out what's behind the façade to understand it and predict what might happen - then one will spot that the "logic" behind the façades created by the probabilistic parrots is segmented into little pieces of logic which are do not matched to the other little pieces of logic and do not add up to a greater building of logic (phrases are logic because all phrases have an inherent logic in how they are put together which is general, but the choice of which phrases get used in a higher logic which is far more varied than the logic inherent in phrases, so LLMs lose consistency at that level because the training material goes in a lot more directions at that level than it goes at the level of how phrases are put together).
The only thing that got modernized are the tools of barbarity.
Also Propaganda - Modern Propaganda is far more subtle and effective at covering the true depths of the depravity up and manufacturing popular consent for it using Entertainment crafted to show the aggressors in a positive light.
Victims and direct descendants should be compensated.
The money to compensate them should be taken from the aggressors.
If there is a case to be made to compensate later descendants of the victims (which sometimes there is), then it makes sense that the money to compensate them comes from whichever money inherited by later descendants of the aggressors. It's about confiscating the proceedings of the crime if still possible, not about punishing the descendants - they had no responsability in the crime but if they are benefitting from it, those undeserved benefits should be taken away.
This last part is what threathens "old wealth", whose money is almost entirely inherited from their ancestors' victimizing of others, including things like Chattel Slavery and Indentured Servitude.
Those trying to difuse the responsability for compensation across some general groups (such as "national responsability" or even "racial responsability") are de facto protecting the main present day beneficiaries of such crimes by making those who gained nothing from the crimes, directly or indirectly, pay for it instead of those who still today live a life of luxury from the proceedings of those crimes.
This is especially applicable in Britain were most of the wealth is Old Wealth and most of that comes from all kinds of crimes against Mankind committed during the Imperial days. Unsurprisingly, British politicians are big on claiming "communal responsibility" whenever there are calls to compensate victims of past actions under British rule.
PS: As for your first paragraph, I totally agreed - there are far subtler and realistic takes, but the shit being pushed by these puppets of the main political parties in Anglo-Saxon nations are (very purposefully, IMHO) very specific takes on "who to blame" which protect the billionaires and divide the oppressed setting them against each other.
* Finger wagging intensifies *
The almost entirety of Identity Politics is about stopping people from blaming the billionaires, even the part from the supposedly "opposite" side of these assholes: for example, the injustices suffered by people with recent African ancestry in Western countries are blamed on anybody who is white, rather than on those who gained from exploiting (and, often enslaving) the ancestors of those people, and whose wealth was passed down the generations (a lot of "old money" comes from that) often to people who still today exploit the very same families but now leveraging their poverty (their ancestors got thrown into poverty by racial discrimination, but from there onwards Wealth Discrimination took over, keeping them poor and oppressed down the generations even after the worst of the racial discrimination was gone).
All that domain, both "sides", has been weaponized to deflect responsability away from the people who gained the most from exploitation and oppression (of anybody, with whatever excuse they could use to exploit them, which at times was the race of the victims) - the very Wealthy.
The whole thing is a massive attack on traditional Leftwing politics that fights for "the greatest life for the greatest number" in general, and on both "sides" it works by pitching the exploited against other exploited, whilst giving the ultra-Wealthy a free pass.
Still, what exactly does a game of ever increasing "poke the bear" achieve, given the massive risk that the bear gets angry and properly fucks them up?
Russia getting away with it ... until they don't ... is a pretty likely outcome, but the point were they stop getting away with it is almost certainly at or short of territorial invasion, which means that all their getting away with it until reaching that point will have delivered them no concrete gains - it would all be provocation for the sake of provocation until the moment they get mauled.
So, say that Russia tests article 5. This has one of two possible outcomes.
- Article 5 is not honoured which is "yay for Russia" though not very useful for them since militarily they're stuck in a self-dug pit in Ukraine so don't actually have the excess military power for handling anything more than a small nation like Montenegro. Meanwhile NATO is hardly going to stop supporting Ukraine (and in fact NATO nations might double up on that support if they feel that NATO doesn't work anymore as strategically it's the best way to militarily bleed Russia and make it less dangerous)
- Article 5 is honoured. At which point, who knows how far NATO nations will go in crushing Russia to make sure an attack on a NATO nation doesn't happen ever again. At the very least Russia would be kicked out of Ukraine pretty quickly and lose pretty much all its air and naval assets.
My point is that this is a MASSIVE risk for Russia if they are wrong, with little concrete and currently achievable upsides if they are indeed right, mainly because they're stuck and bleeding in Ukraine and a logical fallback plan for European nations if NATO turns out to be toothless is to increase support of Ukraine even more, and specifically for the attacked nation it might even make sense to become a military ally of Ukraine since that's an ongoing fight in somebody else's territory.
So to me this sounds like bullshit or this "attack" Kahl is talking about is more of the same which they have already been doing: cyberwar, cutting submarine cables, financing extremist parties. social media disinfo and so on.
The absence of proper reaction to those would certainly explain why Russia would think that NATO's Article 5 would not be honored in case of a more overt Russian attack on a NATO nation.
Somebody tried to build a bridge between both groups but they ran into the conundrum that to get to the other side they would first need to get half way to that side, then get half way of the remaining distance, then half way the new remaining distance and so on an infinite number of times, and as the bridge was started from the science communicators side rather than the mathematicians side, they couldn't figure out a solution and gave up.
There is a launch configuration option under each game (under System Options tabs, if I'm not mistaken) called "command prefix" were you can put the firejail stuff (so if you put just "firejail -someoption" there your game gets launched with, for example "firejail -someoption wine ...") or whatever other sandboxing command you want to use (such as bubblewrap).
In the main Lutris options, there's a section with the default values for all those launch options for games, so if you put it in the "command prefix" there, all games get launched with that command prefix unless you override it in that game's launch options (so, for example, if you're blocking networking for all games but want to run a game for multiplayer over the net, you override the sandboxing wrapper options in that game's launch options specifically, which won't affect any other game).
Some years ago I saw some graph that showed the proportion of people in each country of Europe whose maximum formal education level was Primary Education, Secondary Education and Tertiary Education an Portugal had lots of people with only Primary Education, then few with up to Secondary Education and then lots again with Tertiary Education, and having that gap in the middle is quite unique in Europe.
The difference between the importance of Education for the Fascists (earlier, none at all, later just about enough to make them cheap factory workers) and for the post-Revolution governments (which were all leftwing), is like night an day, and Portugal definitelly shows how it's possible to invest in Education and undo many decades of severe under-Education of the population though you can't really undo the damage to the older generations (even with Adult Education, which was available if you lived in cities, but only used by a fraction of those who could've benefited from it).
My point is exactly that you should only go after wealth inherited from people who made that wealth by victimizing others, not from people who just happenned to be living in the same country or sharing the same race as the oppressors, even with claims that "they did nothing to stop it" (as if one's peasant ancestors during the age of absolute monarchy were even aware of Slavery much less had the means to stop it).
The whole point of the "it's the fault of race/nationality" crowd is exactly to steer people away from following the "who still now gains from it" link, by in practice chosing an interpretation of the blame for what happenned that turns the descendants of some victims of the oppressors the ones supposed to pay compensation to the descendants of other victims of the oppressors (often the very same oppressors), whilst the descendants of the oppressors can often just keep on enjoying the loot inherited from their ancestors which was accumulated thanks to that oppression.
I would say that in Europe the Brits are the most extreme example of this (both because of the vast numbers of people there whose present day wealth come from ancestors who made that money through extreme exploitation of others, and because of just how relentlessly the "common blame" fables are deployed by the entire edifice of politics to disperse the responsability from the few to the many), though other nations with a colonialist past also have mainstream political factions following the same template to insulate Old Wealth from the consequences of inheriting blood money.