

Hikuro-93
Is it violence only when there’s a bullet fired, a knife stabbing or an explosive collision?
There are plenty of ways to inflict violence on another just by way of policy and letting extremists have their way with no constraints.
Would you say the millions upon millions of people who died under Hitler’s policies aren’t comparable to the “lots of real people” of 9/11 just because it wasn’t Hitler himself firing all the bullets and setting off all the gas chambers? All violence can be traced back from the direct perpetrator to the one who gave the order, and both are accountable for it.
Is it violence only when there’s a bullet fired, a knife stabbing or an explosive collision?
There are plenty of ways to inflict violence on another just by way of policy and letting extremists have their way with no constraints.
Would you say the millions upon millions of people who died under Hitler’s policies aren’t comparable to the “lots of real people” of 9/11 just because it wasn’t Hitler himself firing all the bullets and setting off all the gas chambers? All violence can be traced back from the direct perpetrator to the one who gave the order, and both are accountable for it.
I think you should re-read. I didn’t say due process was “extreme and radical”. You’re reading what you want to read and trying to polarize and derail this discussion, like the other commenter.
Just to state this will be my last reply to this sort of reply, since there’s no discussion to be had with people who had their minds set on blind hate before even entering, which, ironically, is a rather radical stance to have by itself. I know you won’t believe it and try to distort it to suit your internal frutration, but I’m on your side. Cheers.
I wouldn’t call them “left stances” per se, as it’s something the right also tends to do. Especially when comparing it to the current administration, which despite expecting it to be bad, I certainly didn’t expect it to be this unprecedentally bad.
What I mean, mostly, is that if “you” want people to stand by you showing why the other side sucks isn’t nearly enough. The people already know the other side sucks - they want something better, not more of the same but with a different coat of paint. Unless you can convince the people you are better than the other options, badmouthing the opposition won’t do much to people who’ve seen this play out a thousand times before.
Why was Trump elected? (and note, I’m not entirely convinced he actually was, but that’s another whole discussion) Biden wasn’t doing anything nearly as outlandish as this administration is doing, but they were still concealing Biden’s mental state when it was obvious to most. Harris made sure to make her campaign pure spectacle and fanfare through celebrities and huge amounts of spending, focusing way more on appearance than on substance, while the people craved better living conditions overall. And regardless of the obvious answer, what did Trump run his campaign on? Precisely what the people were desperate to hear, even if they knew coming from him it might be bs (which everyone sees it actually was all along).
This is not just a political issue, but a cultural one as well. People don’t vote for policies, they vote for colors, for their preferred celebrities, and for whoever can throw the flashiest party - and on that regard allow me a bit of hippocrisy, as in my country it’s not that different, even if we do have more parties to choose from (I.e., what I’m saying isn’t valid just for the US, but for many more so-called democratic nations, which irks me to the bone). In practical terms there isn’t even any other option available because people won’t even consider them. And on that department as long as mentalities don’t change, neither will the system. And after years of this tug war by both sides pulling to themselves while badmouthing the other, one of them decided it was time to solve this impasse once and for all, by any means necessary.
The current administration, even if Trump kicks the bucket midway, is clearly not planning to leave unless forced through sweat and blood. Otherwise they wouldn’t go to so much trouble and not care about their unpopularity when someone else can just come later and undo everything they did. Of course the problem runs deeper than this already long text, but if discussed at lenght this would make a book.
It’s a tough situation. But in my experience, specially with small dogs who get easily intimidated by this world of giant, often noisy stuff, your best hope is consistency. And that takes time, and a whole lot of patience.
Try to let her know she always has an absolutely safe space in you, and that if she feels uncomfortable she can always seek you no matter the situation. Take time to let her calm down by herself, for her to see there’s nothing wrong and she isn’t in danger.
You can also try some trust exercises, though maybe at a time when she’s more consistently relaxed and trustful. I did that with 3 of my dogs, 1 small and 2 retrievers, and it did wonders in terms of strenghtening mutual trust and knowing in case of an actual emergency they’re less likely to panic and run off aimlessly.
Another thing is anticipating stressful situations, and preventing them as much as possible. For example, say you expect to receive visitors, and children among them. Some children tend to overstep the boundaries of pets, which can lead to the pet’s panic or worse, self-defense. In this example try to pay special attention to the dog and make sure even if she’s a bit nervous about the guests she’s safe with you nearby. Goof around with her for a few seconds, speak in a playful tone to her, so long as you signal that everything’s ok.
So, consistency. It’s hardwork, and it takes a long time, but usually the best bet especially with pets who are sinking more and more into the anxiety hole. Even then it’s not a guarantee, as the main disruptors will still be there pushing the other way, but still better than nothing.
Hope this helped in any way, and that you are able to counter this! Cheers.
Who said they should be deported? And if they are indeed commiting an illegal act under the written law, why shouldn’t they be subject to any consequences for breaking said law?
I don’t agree with authoritarianism, but I won’t defend lawlessness either. These extreme and radical stances from either party are why the US is where it currently is.
I cast my doubt over the the very foundation of the act of imprisoning these people, not if they’re innocent or not. Because without due process everyone is guilty until proven otherwise - and even then not really. I think you missed my entire point.
Of course experiences differ from person to person, culture to culture, and between different circumstances. But in my experience…
-
Have a brother-in-law who married my SO’s older sister many years before we even met. Had 3 children together. Out of nowhere he decided to run away and live with another woman, then got back, decided “people felt different” and left again, only to again try to return and be denied by my sister-in-law. They were the favorites of my mother-in-law until the separation.
-
Have another BIL, married my SO’s younger sister. 2 kids together, just months ago he threatened to leave to a younger woman (a friend of his younger sister). He was the only one to sympathize and side with the first BIL, guess why. Might still run away, because he clearly is only there for convenience.
-
Me and my SO, not married, 13 years together through thick and thin, we never saw any real point to it since we always built our relationship based in trust and mutual understanding. Still going strong and any time we have issues we face them together. Now my MIL tends to favor us over the other ‘couples’, now “marriage doesn’t guarantee anything after all”, not that I personally care about that.
The point being. Marry if you want, but never feel forced to do it. If you need a fancy piece of paper by the government or religion to stay together then it’s nothing more than a self-imposed cage, and it’s far from a guarantee against infidelity.
You only have this one single life. Live happily, don’t try to please everyone against your own happiness. Everyone will still be unpleased, and you’ll only get increasingly miserable.
At the moment the portuguese defense minister won’t rule out a cyber attack, and the task force created to investigate it says it seems like the problem originated outside Portugal.
If it’s illegal and all that, yes, they should be held to standard.
But given the fact that this administration likes to slap the word “illegal” on anything they don’t like, was it really? Or is it a boy crying wolf again?
I didn’t ask for “plastic toy pizza”, just an actual edible pizza.
It’s so perfectly fake. To the point it becomes really obvious.