binux

No this is Doug, he’s the premier of Ontario right now. They both crawled out of the same hellish crevice though

No I didn’t lol, you’re mistaking me for the other person. Just chill out

I think the idea generally is to replace the police with social welfare programs and unarmed crisis responders, but that’s jumping through so many hoops that it just sounds way too simplistic tbh. It sounds practical, but it treats the problem like it’s something that can be improved with just a few institutions reforming/being abolished.

There’s never been a society without some form of justice system since cruelty is a part of human nature, and at this point these systems are far too intertwined and embedded in our societies for them to change dramatically without some form of societal collapse or retraction.

Idealism is well and good but the things many want in place of police institutions seem like they’re ignoring how complex and non-specific the issues are as a whole. It’s definitely not a one size fits all situation, especially with how many factors there are. People can disagree with me but I’d prefer to hear why at least, there are probably things I’m not considering here.

This is just a blatant lie.

On my planet we back up claims with evidence

Fork found in kitchen

We need more paperclips and we need them now!!!

When his crackhead brother died the monkey's paw curled and now we're stuck with this 250 pound mosquito

Yeah, this is what a lot of people fail to take into account when it comes to the purpose of policing in society. There's obviously a lot of inherent problems with the way the police are structured in many countries as a whole, but to believe that we can just make do without something like them altogether is pretty shortsighted to say the least. I think that prevents a lot of otherwise sympathetic people from taking the backlash against police institutions seriously.

It was the same way with the Vietnam war. It didn’t stop because people were upset about the humanitarian crisis it was causing, it stopped because of how fiscally ridiculous it was, especially near the end.

This is how it’s always been.

You do realize that meat-eaters usually aren't subsisting solely off of meat, right? They don't need to rely on vitamin supplementation, that's the whole point of a balanced diet. If they eat all the stuff that's important on a regular enough basis, they'll be fine even if you take the supplements away from farm animals.

Cause they don’t graze on lush natural meadows anymore, they’re fed mostly corn.

This is too localized of a point, in Canada for example the diets of farm animals are regulated to consist of much more than just corn. Admittedly I'm not sure about other countries, though I'm sure there are others similar in that regard.

It's come to my attention that you're someone who genuinely believes Russia is not an imperialist nation (where you ironically also attempt to hand-wave the definition of imperialism as forceful authority over another nation and imply that the only right one is that it's a direct and unique result of capitalism—as if a word can't have more than one definition), so I doubt you're someone I can have a rational discussion about authoritarianism with regardless.

And again, you're fixing the term based on your own perception to make it support your point, which doesn't really have any merit when it comes to using these words as they are by academics essentially ubiquitously. Until we can both accept that authoritarianism has a set definition independent of many ideologies and therefore cannot be universally applied to them, this will remain a purely rhetorical argument.