The State of Global Politics Today

[Johann]

2 hours ago, XRay said:

That is true, but at least he is reading from a script, so it is one minor improvement there. I am really tired of crapping on this orange sack of incompetence, so any tiny achievement/victory he accomplishes, I can add it to my handful of things I like about him. It is not often that I can confidently say "I approve of what Trump did in regard to X issue."

This isn't really an improvement though. He reads from scripts every now and then. You don't have to like anything about him, especially since his most negative qualities and actions also being his most pervasive and consequential.

[Shrimpica]

2 hours ago, Jotari said:

Where are you flying from?

Germany.

They check your papers (in that case, ID or Passport), but they don't stamp it. 

Not until the end of the year/transition period.

2 hours ago, Jotari said:

The UK is a different customs area to the rest of Europe.

Not yet.

Not until the end of the year. They are outside of the EU for now, but they have to follow the same rules as us for the transition period.

I just checked the travel notice from my country, and they are still the same as when UK was in the EU.

Shengen isn't a customs area, but 'we take a meh approach on borders' and UK and Ireland were never part of it, and always had border checks even when part of the EU.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-50838994

Edited March 13, 2020 by Shrimperor

[Jotari]

53 minutes ago, Shrimperor said:

Germany.

They check your papers (in that case, ID or Passport), but they don't stamp it. 

Not until the end of the year/transition period.

Not yet.

Not until the end of the year. They are outside of the EU for now, but they have to follow the same rules as us for the transition period.

I just checked the travel notice from my country, and they are still the same as when UK was in the EU.

Shengen isn't a customs area, but 'we take a meh approach on borders' and UK and Ireland were never part of it, and always had border checks even when part of the EU.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-50838994

Yes, and it's those border checks that will record your recent travel history. You can't and never could fly (or take a train) from Germany to the UK (or Ireland) using a driver's licence. A passport is an requirement and like every other international border crossing it will be recorded.

(I did say customs union which is an inaccurate term, I should have said travel area).

[Shrimpica]

2 minutes ago, Jotari said:

A passport is an requirement

It is not. I didn't use my passport to go there. Only the ID.

3 minutes ago, Jotari said:

that will record your recent travel history.

Not on my passport or ID (they can't on the ID). On their own databases maybe.

Information usually not shared with other countries. Not that easily.

The ones who might share the information however are travel agencies/providers. And i am pretty sure that breaks some EU laws.

[Excellen Browning]

On 3/9/2020 at 6:18 PM, Falcom Knight said:

Sports events take place without audience and any kind of fairs are completly cancelled.

I don't know if this kind of "prevention" does bring anything.

Anyways the world is prepared for the next big recession after 2008.

It doesn't prevent so much as delay and slow down the spread. This is extremely important because ~12% of known cases need some form of intensive care, and a significant number of those need ventilators.(breathing apparatuses)

If the healthcare system gets overwhelmed, like has been the case in Italy for a few days now, lots of people start dying. It's a lot more manageable (and much more survivable) if, at any time, 5% of the population is sick. Rather than 50-60% all at once. 

The delay is needed to buy time to prepare, and to push into the summer because less people are ill in the summer. It frees up capacity to deal with covid-19 cases.

[Jason-SilverStarApple]

On 3/12/2020 at 8:39 PM, Karimlan said:

Sorry for wording it in a way that suggests the opposite of what you stated. What I meant to say was that the trend of political figures being chosen to lead their respective countries seemed to veer in favor of populists.

Isn't Democracy meant to be Populism? The rule of the many, where everyone gets a vote.

Also, I'm back. What did I miss?

[XRay]

On 3/14/2020 at 7:54 AM, Jason-SilverStarApple said:

Isn't Democracy meant to be Populism? The rule of the many, where everyone gets a vote.

According to Wikipedia, populism is characterized by the conflict between the "people" and the "elite." Basically, it is another way of saying anti-establishment.

Democracy basically means the government derive its authority from the people or citizens, commonly via voting. Democracy is a spectrum and can be blurred with other forms of governments like oligarchies or plutocracies, depending on how strict you define who the "people" or "citizens" are. It can be defined as narrowly as during the Roman Empire where you would hardly call it a democracy (even if you are part of the lucky few citizens, you had little say), or it can be as broad as most liberal democracies today, or it can be somewhere in between like the United States in the past.

Populism as a political ideology emphasizes the "us versus them" mentality, while democracy as a political ideology refers to how a government derives its authority or power. You can totally have a populist dictatorship, for example Nazi Germany.

Edited March 15, 2020 by XRay

[Etrurian emperor]

On 3/14/2020 at 3:54 PM, Jason-SilverStarApple said:

Isn't Democracy meant to be Populism? The rule of the many, where everyone gets a vote.

Also, I'm back. What did I miss?

Oh not at all. 

Populism claims to be listening to the people unlike those gosh darn establishment politicians but it goes a bit further then that. 

Firstly being a healthy democracy doesn't just mean that whoever gets the most voters gets to decide. It also has checks and balances to protect the minority from the majority. As a rule populists are deeply hostile to this concept and thus they aren't representing any healthy democracy. It has further checks on the elected powers in the form of an independent press and judiciary which populists are also deeply hostile towards. 

But more importantly the idea that the populists listen to the people is a fallacy. Because who are the people? Are they every citizens of the nations or just those that vote for the populists? If a populist claims that they alone fight for the people it not only implies that their opponents are enemies of the people but also that the people that vote for other parties are illegitimate and should be ignored.

Also I second's XRay's post. Populism thrives on an ''us vs them'' mentality, a fictional scenario where there is one united, benevolent and holy people that are stuck in some sort of death struggle against an irredeemably evil bunch of elites. But this doesn't exist because the people are far from united. Everyone wants something else and so no party can ever claim to be the sole champion of the people. 

[Jason-SilverStarApple]

6 hours ago, Etrurian emperor said:

Oh not at all. 

Populism claims to be listening to the people unlike those gosh darn establishment politicians but it goes a bit further then that. 

Firstly being a healthy democracy doesn't just mean that whoever gets the most voters gets to decide. It also has checks and balances to protect the minority from the majority. As a rule populists are deeply hostile to this concept and thus they aren't representing any healthy democracy. It has further checks on the elected powers in the form of an independent press and judiciary which populists are also deeply hostile towards. 

But more importantly the idea that the populists listen to the people is a fallacy. Because who are the people? Are they every citizens of the nations or just those that vote for the populists? If a populist claims that they alone fight for the people it not only implies that their opponents are enemies of the people but also that the people that vote for other parties are illegitimate and should be ignored.

Also I second's XRay's post. Populism thrives on an ''us vs them'' mentality, a fictional scenario where there is one united, benevolent and holy people that are stuck in some sort of death struggle against an irredeemably evil bunch of elites. But this doesn't exist because the people are far from united. Everyone wants something else and so no party can ever claim to be the sole champion of the people. 

When you say "the independent press Trump attacks", do you mean the  massive media conglomerate megacorps that constantly attack Trump and his followers, try to whip up anti-Trump hysteria out of nothing(while failing to cover his actual mistakes sufficiently), made a typo in one of his tweets (cofeve) worldwide news, parroted Jussie Smollet's absurd "I was attacked by a white conservative who called Chicago Maga Country!" lie and failed to issue a correction when his lie fell apart, and celebrated when Julian Assange got screwed over? Or do you mean the actual independent press, which has all sorts of different opinions on him?  An attack on a journalist's ability to print the truth, and an attack on free speech rights, is an attack on the free press. Not Trump tweeting "lol wrong" every time NY Times spin-doctors some bullshit. He's a president, not a pastor. I don't care if some washed-up former porn star who waited 50 years for some reason chose now to claim he snogged her on his own wedding night in front of his wife and children.

Furthermore, are the existing "checks and balances to protect the minority from the majority" actually working? Or does the mob get what it wants when it forces people to compromise on their gun rights every few months? I challenge you to justify any of California's nonsensical and arbitrary limitations on the people's ability to own guns. One week, it's "You don't need more than 14 bullets". When the anti-rights activists have their way, they're back again and just as angry the next week claiming "You don't need more than 11 bullets". I honestly don't know where this claim of yours came from.

Also, "If a populist claims that they alone fight for the people it not only implies that their opponents are enemies of the people but also that the people that vote for other parties are illegitimate and should be ignored.", huh? Remind me again, how long did the mainstream "Independent Press" spend insisting that everyone who voted for Trump was a "Racist, sexist, xenophobic russian bot who hacked the election"? In fact, isn't labelling democracy not going your way as "Populism" labelling everyone who voted in a way you don't like as illegitimate?

As a final point... "one united, benevolent and holy people that are stuck in some sort of death struggle against an irredeemably evil bunch of elites"? That sounds more like Marxism and its "Class war! Race war! Intersectionality! Everyone must unite against ze straight white men! Workers and Carlos Mazas of ze vorld, unite! Islamic extremists who throw gay people off rooftops wherever they can, team up with the LGBT crowd! Everyone, even wildly different groups that want each other dead, must unite against my personal boogieman!" nonsense to me.

Isn't it strange how typing "Kill all men" or "Eat the rich" or "I want to murder Trump Supporters" or "Kill the 1%!" on a leftist-owned platform like Facebook doesn't get you censored or get you jail time, but typing "Liberals are wrong about [insert liberal position here]" results in a chance at both. Remember that time four democrat criminals kidnapped a lone mentally-ill white man, tortured him live on a facebook feed for the world to see, stabbed him, forced him to drink their toilet water, said "This guy is all Trump supporters!"... and CNN's hosts defended the torturers on air? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A57VZJzG-BA

Populism is just what Democracy gets called when the people of a nation democratically decide to do something the people crying "Populism!" didn't like. Please stop attacking Trump badly, I don't like defending him and I don't like him. Trump jokes are a black hole of comedy. We get it, orange man bad, his skin is an unusual colour and his hands are small. Way to fight body-shaming and fight against treating someone differently based on their skin tone, guys. He also calls the corrupt mainstream media megacorps fake news. Oh, the humanity. Please, won't somebody think of the children who write articles for those megacorps. They can dish it out but they just can't take it.

6 hours ago, XRay said:

According to Wikipedia

Yeah, and according to Wikipedia, Gamergate is still classed as a "Hate movement against wimmins", rather than what it actually was: A Consumer Revolt against overwhelming corruption in mainstream video games journalism. The reveal of "GameJournoPros" speaks for itself, really. I'd sooner trust Urban Dictionary to define an adult activity than trust Wikipedia to define a political term.

A few times in the previous posts, you two talk about "The People" as if it's a mysterious and undefined concept that can mean whatever those "eeeeevil populists" want it to mean. But Trump won the hearts of the working class by trying to do right by American workers. I personally don't think he's done enough in that regard, and I wish there was a better alternative who wants to try and outdo Trump at the good Trump wants to do. But the literal worst possible choice won on the left, unfortunately. Bernie winning that would be the best option, and Hillary coming back for round two would be the funniest option. The old guy who can't remember where he is or who's who? Watching him is just sad.

Donald Trump is a Civic Nationalist, and America was founded on the ideals of Civic Nationalism. You know, the belief that a Nation is a set of ideals held by a people rather than a group of people or the land they're on. I might be British, and I might take a vacation in America. I might coordinate with a Japanese friend of mine to have our vacation in America at the same time. We would be a pair of foreign tourists together, travelling around and seeing the sights without integrating. But if we got houses in America and moved there permanently, if we sung the American anthem and got jobs and bought guns and waved flags and believed in the American Dream and "Acted American", then we would effectively be Americans now according to the principles of Civic Nationalism. We'd be just as American as the neighbouring family who's been there for two generations and the other neighbouring family who's been here for a lot longer. People there would see us as Americans, and we would get to be slandered by massive megacorps that hate America, and the America-hating fans of those America-hating media megacorps.

Why do America-haters hate Americans so much, anyway? They throw their usual buzzwords around, but I don't think I've ever heard an actual argument against America. Besides the "America has bad bits in its history therefore it's bad now" argument. I probably don't need to explain why that one's a load of nonsense.

[Jason-SilverStarApple]

This is getting a bit heavy. How about something to lighten the mood?

Remember that time Snopes rated satirical news site Babylon Bee's "CNN just purchased an industrial-sized washing machine to spin news!" joke as False?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REm4rt8LLtU

 

[XRay]

3 minutes ago, Jason-SilverStarApple said:

I'd sooner trust Urban Dictionary to define an adult activity than trust Wikipedia to define a political term.

Wikipedia is not the best source, but it is quick and convenient, and unless you offer a better source that says otherwise, I think Wikipedia's definition sounds about right.

4 minutes ago, Jason-SilverStarApple said:

A few times in the previous posts, you two talk about "The People" as if it's a mysterious and undefined concept that can mean whatever those "eeeeevil populists" want it to mean.

It is not a mysterious or undefined concept. It has a pretty clear definition. However, that definition can be fluid.

I am not sure what you are trying to argue with the rest of your post, but I just wanted to highlight the difference between populism and democracy since that was the question.

And Trump is not a civic nationalist. Civic nationalism is the idea that the nation is composed of people who subscribe to the same set of core political values, regardless of religion or ethnic background. Trump's action is much more in line with ethno nationalism, and his core supporters in the far right are definitely ethno nationalists.

 

[eclipse]

WHAT PART OF MOVE IT TO US POLITICS WAS NOT CLEAR THE FIRST TIME?

[MisterIceTeaPeach]

On 3/14/2020 at 3:48 PM, Excellen Browning said:

It doesn't prevent so much as delay and slow down the spread. This is extremely important because ~12% of known cases need some form of intensive care, and a significant number of those need ventilators.(breathing apparatuses)

If the healthcare system gets overwhelmed, like has been the case in Italy for a few days now, lots of people start dying. It's a lot more manageable (and much more survivable) if, at any time, 5% of the population is sick. Rather than 50-60% all at once. 

The delay is needed to buy time to prepare, and to push into the summer because less people are ill in the summer. It frees up capacity to deal with covid-19 cases.

At the time I posted this, I kinda underrated the situation because I never experienced a pandemy in these dimensions yet.

Of course these preventive measures are completly right.

 

Seriously I am already scared to take busses and trains.

I had to use them yesterday, and I have a really bad feeling about this.

Still feeling ok, but the time of incubation takes 14 days.

Edited March 16, 2020 by Falcom Knight

[XRay]

4 hours ago, Falcom Knight said:

At the time I posted this, I kinda underrated the situation because I never experienced a pandemy in these dimensions yet.

Of course these preventive measures are completly right.

 

Seriously I am already scared to take busses and trains.

I had to use them yesterday, and I have a really bad feeling about this.

Still feeling ok, but the time of incubation takes 14 days.

I personally would not be too worried for yourself if you are young and healthy, I would be more concerned with the older relatives you interact with often. While some young people do die, vast majority of the deaths are from old people. For many healthy people, the illness is rather mild or unnoticeable, especially when compared to the regular flu. But unlike the regular flu, when it hits you hard, it hits really, really hard.

I think it is that variation in severity is one reason why it is difficult to contain. If it is deadlier, then the virus would be easier to contain in a way since the virus will kill it's host before it has the chance to spread. But since it is only deadly to some people and not very deadly to other people, it is easier for the virus to slip past with less detection.

[Imuabicus der Fertige]

So Mr. Trump has decided it´s time to go ahead and try to lure a foreign (in this case the German CureVac) pharmaceutical company into a contract over "exclusive rights"  about a potential vaccine for the US?

I am a bit baffled to be honest.

I would post sources, but the ones I have access to are all in German (Süddeutsche Zeitung, etc.).

[Karimlan]

@Imuabicus: Here ya go.

Germany confirms that Trump tried to buy firm working on coronavirus vaccine

There's a special berth in hell for this POS.

[Excellen Browning]

Leave it to trump to trump it all up.

When I first read that story, and that the response of the administration was "well, maybe he has reason to distrust the Germans" I immediately wondered if German government had ever said no to him building a trump tower or golf course in the country. Turns out I was fucking right

Now watch him cause another trade war over this.

Edited March 16, 2020 by Excellen Browning

[Imuabicus der Fertige]

Ya, I just read that apparently the original founder/share holder/owner whatever Dietmar Klopp (co- founder of SAP) has already declined that offer. Considering that CureVac also seems to be supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation, I don´t think they are exactly starved for money. Not to mention that, since there´s a national/international emergency going on, even if they accepted that offer, they might have had their stuff put under state control instead.

Then again it´s kinda disappointing. You´d think a modicum of cooperation without pissing contests would be possible.

[Jason-SilverStarApple]

12 hours ago, XRay said:

his core supporters in the far right are definitely ethno nationalists.

Lie.

That, right there, is a lie. And it will keep being a lie, no matter how often it is said.

If you go to a far-right ethno nationalist website, you will find pages of people calling Trump a worthless spineless sham because he has failed to build the wall in time or do anything about the declining white birth rate in America.

They are the ethno-nationalists who want America to be white, and they hate Trump because his goal isn't their goal. Trump isn't doing what the far-right ethno-nationalists want, because Trump is not a far-right ethno-nationalist. Trump wants to make America better for "The Americans", regardless of their ethnicity, and regardless of how that upsets megacorps. Megacorps know they can dupe stupid people into defending them and attacking people in the way of whatever terrible thing they want this week by throwing around buzzwords like "far-right" and "alt-right" and "super-duper-giga-right".

You might not understand why it's immoral to slander Trump's supporters and wear out words like ethno-nationalist and far-right, but you should.

By the way, when are we moving this Trump discussion to the US politics thread? We were told to do that, so we should probably do that soon.

[Etrurian emperor]

14 hours ago, Jason-SilverStarApple said:

When you say "the independent press Trump attacks", do you mean the  massive media conglomerate megacorps that constantly attack Trump and his followers, try to whip up anti-Trump hysteria out of nothing(while failing to cover his actual mistakes sufficiently), made a typo in one of his tweets (cofeve) worldwide news, parroted Jussie Smollet's absurd "I was attacked by a white conservative who called Chicago Maga Country!" lie and failed to issue a correction when his lie fell apart, and celebrated when Julian Assange got screwed over? Or do you mean the actual independent press, which has all sorts of different opinions on him?  An attack on a journalist's ability to print the truth, and an attack on free speech rights, is an attack on the free press. Not Trump tweeting "lol wrong" every time NY Times spin-doctors some bullshit. He's a president, not a pastor. I don't care if some washed-up former porn star who waited 50 years for some reason chose now to claim he snogged her on his own wedding night in front of his wife and children.

I wouldn't say its whipped up ''out of nothing''. When it comes to Trump there is just far much more to criticize. Trump's conduct is the main source of his criticism and if he makes no attempt to change his conduct then the criticism isn't likely to go away. With Trump there's just more to criticize then in your average politician because Trump isn't an average politician but a demagogue. Besides I would be careful in saying that the media is unanimously opposed to Trump. For one Fox News is a very mainstream media channel and all those channels supposedly being out to get Trump dutifully aired all Clinton's dirty laundry in the full knowledge that Clinton's supporters actually cared about the dirt while Trump's voters didn't. 

But this isn't about Trump. All populists attack and demonize the media, and the courts and most politician opponents along with it. This is because those are all unwelcome checks on their power. Trump demonizing journalist, the Dutch populist suing them or Erdogan locking them all up stems from the very same place. 

14 hours ago, Jason-SilverStarApple said:

 

Furthermore, are the existing "checks and balances to protect the minority from the majority" actually working? Or does the mob get what it wants when it forces people to compromise on their gun rights every few months? I challenge you to justify any of California's nonsensical and arbitrary limitations on the people's ability to own guns. One week, it's "You don't need more than 14 bullets". When the anti-rights activists have their way, they're back again and just as angry the next week claiming "You don't need more than 11 bullets". I honestly don't know where this claim of yours came from.

As far as I know the pro gun lobby is infamously successful in America so in that sense that minority is definitely protected. The idea that the minority should be protected from the majority doesn't mean that the majority can never get its way. It means the minority is protected from attacks on their rights. That racial minorities aren't legally discriminated against, that religious minorities won't be forbidden from worshiping who they want, that sexual minorities aren't oppressed, that a minority that doesn't vote for the grand leader won't get punished for it. And as a rule populists are generally hostile to these sorts of protections minorities receive.

You might argue that the right to own guns fits allongsides those instances of minorities needing protecting but I doubt many people outside of America would consider gun ownership a ''right'' in the same class as voting rights, right for freedom of religion or what have you

14 hours ago, Jason-SilverStarApple said:

Also, "If a populist claims that they alone fight for the people it not only implies that their opponents are enemies of the people but also that the people that vote for other parties are illegitimate and should be ignored.", huh? Remind me again, how long did the mainstream "Independent Press" spend insisting that everyone who voted for Trump was a "Racist, sexist, xenophobic russian bot who hacked the election"? In fact, isn't labelling democracy not going your way as "Populism" labelling everyone who voted in a way you don't like as illegitimate?

Apple's and oranges. Being a racist has entirely different and far less severe consequences then being an ''enemy of the people''. Being a racist might make people think you're a jerk and at worst your boss fires you if your racism proves to be a PR problem for them. Being an ''enemy of the people'' can get you locked up in some states where democracy is under severe strain or already dismantled, and in a still healthy democracy being an ''enemy of the people'' can get you assassinated by a loony populist fan. And that's likely how it designed to work, the phrase ''enemy of the people'' is chosen because it invokes such strong reactions against these supposed ''enemies'' that they are cowed into submission. 

It also brings out a distorted image of the electorate because if only those that vote for the populists belong to the people then it means everyone that doesn't vote for the populist secretly isn't part of the ''real people''. That's usually an excuse to do people harm when democracy falls. Many a purge has happened to root out such ''traitors'' who twart the holy will of the people. But its also just a very weird scenario because populists don't always win. In my country populists never get more then 20% of the votes so if only the populist voters belong to the people it means that 80% of the Dutch people....don't actually belong to the Dutch people. In America more people voted against Trump then for him so are the majority of Americans not real Americans then?

14 hours ago, Jason-SilverStarApple said:

Populism is just what Democracy gets called when the people of a nation democratically decide to do something the people crying "Populism!" didn't like

Not....really. Many populists or even demagogues just happen to share a certain set of traits with each other. The need to scapegoat others, hostility towards court and press, a certain degree of shortsightedness, a reputation of racism, being faux folksy, a lack of trust in the international community, often very chummy with the church and selling a fictional narrative of one united people against those dastardly elites. Trump does it, Erdogan does it, Wilders does it, Le Pen does it and Bolsonaro does it. Its not at all weird to put these politicians in the same category when they act the same, just like its not at all weird to classify the social democrat politicians as social democrats for being exactly that. 

1 hour ago, Jason-SilverStarApple said:

Megacorps know they can dupe stupid people into defending them and attacking people in the way of whatever terrible thing they want this week by throwing around buzzwords like "far-right" and "alt-right" and "super-duper-giga-right".

I'd be careful with saying populists are inherently against ''megacorps''. Trump might not be bought by big business like other politicians but that's because he himself is already big business and thus already works for the interests of big business. Its no coincidence that one of his first legislative achievements was a tax cut for the super rich. And many populists are like that. They are often from the upper class and work to maintain the wealth of the upper class, no matter how faux folksy they speak to the public. 

12 hours ago, eclipse said:

WHAT PART OF MOVE IT TO US POLITICS WAS NOT CLEAR THE FIRST TIME?

Just to be in the save side I'd like to point out that my post is mostly about populism as a whole which is now a very important factor in global politics. 

[XRay]

Norway just called us a shit hole country! Ha! They did not literally say that, but it is HEAVILY implied. We totally deserve the shithole moniker now though.

[Tryhard]

delete

Edited March 16, 2020 by Tryhard

[Jotari]

On 3/13/2020 at 11:42 AM, Shrimperor said:

It is not. I didn't use my passport to go there. Only the ID.

Not on my passport or ID (they can't on the ID). On their own databases maybe.

Information usually not shared with other countries. Not that easily.

The ones who might share the information however are travel agencies/providers. And i am pretty sure that breaks some EU laws.

I'd say it's shared on a database that any airport or border crossing in the world can access. Otherwise it would be a pretty major, and obvious, breech in security with or without a pandemic. You could just steal someone's card and cross an international border repeatedly with a false identity. Knowing when someone crossed a border is like a super useful piece of information to have. When you say ID I'm also guessing you mean a European National Identity card and not any form of identification (big difference). National Identity Cards in Europe effectively are passports and should have a computer chip in them for automatically recording all this information. IIfyou have a lot of free time and money try going to the USA now. If you could I'd be very surprised at that this obvious backdoor wasn't shut as it is a massive, glaring, weakness.

Edited March 16, 2020 by Jotari

[Jason-SilverStarApple]

7 hours ago, Etrurian emperor said:

As far as I know the pro gun lobby is infamously successful in America

Can I take a vacation in your world? It sounds nicer than reality. Because in reality, the pro gun lobby is infamously unsuccessful in America. Do you have any idea how many compromises have been forced upon them by the anti-gun rights lobbyists? And they have gained nothing in return for these compromises. Seriously, have you seen what Cursed Gun nonsense Californians are forced to do to their guns to comply with this month's nonsense regulation until they can afford to move out of that state? You can't justify that. That's why you skipped my "Justify commiefornia's nonsensical arbitrary limitations on gun rights" challenge.

edit: Anyway, onto more global topics...

What are your thoughts on the queen of england?

Edited March 17, 2020 by Jason-SilverStarApple

[Shrimpica]

1 hour ago, Jotari said:

You could just steal someone's card and cross an international border repeatedly with a false identity.

When a passport/ID is stolen it get's reported to the police then to the relevant authorities.

1 hour ago, Jotari said:

IIfyou have a lot of free time and money try going to the USA now.

1. UK was added to the ban, last i checked.

2. If i would travel now, i would go with the original trip i had planned (and postponed thanks to Corona) and not the USA.

3. Why would i ever visit the USA in it's current State?

Edited March 17, 2020 by Shrimperor