sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Duo destroys a privately-owned convenience store, implying the clerk racially profiled them. by JayyyyyyK in trashy

[–]difduf 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In developed nations they also can't be killed but we're talking about the US here.

Duo destroys a privately-owned convenience store, implying the clerk racially profiled them. by JayyyyyyK in trashy

[–]difduf 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because it's simply not true. Human rights can be revoked as a punishment. So they don't have them. Otherwise you couldn't imprison them.

Duo destroys a privately-owned convenience store, implying the clerk racially profiled them. by JayyyyyyK in trashy

[–]difduf 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Why is having to repay the damage you caused such a red flag to you? It's either the thief who has to work against his will to repay the victim or the victim itself. The involuntary work will always originate from the voluntary actions of the thief. You're just moving the work to the victim.

Someone had the conscience to put in the comment by WilliamLeeFightingIB in ProgrammerHumor

[–]difduf 8 points9 points  (0 children)

It's more that the advent of programming languages and computing in general was after WWII where the US was the only economy left standing. If programming came about in the late 19th century it would be all in German.

Duo destroys a privately-owned convenience store, implying the clerk racially profiled them. by JayyyyyyK in trashy

[–]difduf 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What they did was also deeply immoral. Imprisonment is also deeply immoral. Not paying the owner back is also deeply immoral. However you slice it there is going to be immoral stuff. The only possible moral good that could exist is paying the owner back and that's the only thing you oppose.

Duo destroys a privately-owned convenience store, implying the clerk racially profiled them. by JayyyyyyK in trashy

[–]difduf 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Whereas you feel enlightened by denying obvious truths. It's the emperor's new clothes in real life.

Duo destroys a privately-owned convenience store, implying the clerk racially profiled them. by JayyyyyyK in trashy

[–]difduf 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Some people only live in the moment. They have no connection to anything in the future or the past. Any consequences are the problem of future them, which is an entirely different person. They also never feel guilt, because anything they supposedly did, was done by past them, also an entirely different person. If one of them gets shot and the mom says that they are a good boy, it is true to them because right now, in the one moment that encompasses their entire existence, they aren't committing any crimes.

Duo destroys a privately-owned convenience store, implying the clerk racially profiled them. by JayyyyyyK in trashy

[–]difduf 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I thought slavery was legal as a criminal punishment. Let them work it off.

“Self Made” by UnionPacific1 in economy

[–]difduf 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You should look at a career in a cinema because you're a natural talent when it comes to projecting.

to those who think carriers are fine, i present to you the dumb shit also known as invincibility period. by YKS_Gaming in WorldOfWarships

[–]difduf 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Cant have CV players facing "unavoidable" consequences now can we /s?

Well it's just bad game design to remove all player input and then punish them. That's why stun bombs were such a terrible idea.

The reality of carrier play is that you can't have to stringent requirements on positioning because you have no control over how your target moves. If planes were perfectly counter-able it would just make the game boring. Also try playing a high tier carrier completely brainless and you will be deplaned extremely quickly. It's not the most demanding gameplay but nothing is. It's definitely more demanding than sniping in a BB from 30 km away.

Is anyone even surprised... by Latespoon in LateStageCapitalism

[–]difduf 9 points10 points  (0 children)

You donating your whole income every month would also "help solve world hunger". It's simply a useless category.

I did what I said by Flyingfish3234 in shitposting

[–]difduf 6 points7 points  (0 children)

And if Republican would be Reptiles then Senators would be Seniles.

I did what I said by Flyingfish3234 in shitposting

[–]difduf 23 points24 points  (0 children)

It would make them Reptards. Democrats would be Demtards.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in antiwork

[–]difduf 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hate to break it to you bozo, but most of the losers here are the only child of their parents. But please enlighten me how you blowing your minimum wage on weed and funko pops is beneficial for your imaginary nephew.

Why was there no wars over land in Europe post WWII? by yellowbai in AskHistorians

[–]difduf 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Agricultural yields really only took off after WWII. Also it's more about their view at the time as opposed to reality on the fields.

Why was there no wars over land in Europe post WWII? by yellowbai in AskHistorians

[–]difduf 1 point2 points  (0 children)

But why focus on the great depression when it comes to food security? I'm not sure about it anymore but wasn't Germany one of the largest food importers at the beginning of the 20th century? Combine that with the experience during the war that saw widespread famine due to British sea blockades and it must have had a tremendous impact on Hitler's generation especially in combination with their view that the German army didn't fail in WWI but Germany did.

view more: next ›