Me too, thanks

Not to be confused with therians, a taxonomic group.

Very thorough and great answer, I’m curious though – what’s a she-wee? Is that the tool for peeing standing up when one isn’t born with the sausage?

Also, that coworker sounds affirming, when he told he thought that it doesn’t count as going after women - that’s kind of oddly sweet?

I also have a lack of omnipresent(?) dysphoria, though do have a bit there and there. Mainly not having the right organ down there and having too much hair, but other than that, it’s pretty much alright.

Mixed member proportional is nice, but it suffers from overhang seats.

I have a different proposal, but that one is pretty extensive.

It goes as following:

1. Replace the presidential system with a parliamentary one. Separation of powers is still as strict as it is. But it goes further. Veto power of the president, judges, anyone, it’s gone.

2. The head of government is chosen by both popular vote and consensus. The candidate with the most votes and approval from most members in parliament wins. They can be removed from position by parliament or by referendum at any time.

3. Change FPTP to proportional representation. Specifically, it should be party-agnostic, and have a 4% threshold, below which a seat holder still can vote and speak, but has less speaking time. Seat apportion will be according to the Hamilton method, and there will be an additional spare vote, so that main votes to parties falling below the threshold, will go to the voter’s spare vote, which is one likely to gain a seat. Party members can recall parlementarians, and people can do so too through referenda.

4. Abolish electoral districts. Furthermore, no person earning more than 3* the median US income (stocks and other earnings overseas and tax evasions included) may contribute to or participate in the elections in any way.

5. Split up the Democratic and Republican Parties into their ideological caucuses. Caucuses may merge, but no caucus may be bigger than 16% of the total US House of Representatives amount of seats.

6. Abolish the Senate. It’s a slog that slows down and only helps bureaucracy. The work it does can also be done by having a strong constitution (that actually does guarantee people’s rights to civility, safety, and liberty), and parlementary comi

7. Increase the House’s size to 700 seats. This way, the work pressure is smaller and the parliament can be more representative, and lobbying becomes harder. States’ seats will be degressively proportional in a similae way to the EU’s seats.

8. Faithless electors are forbidden, age limit. No officeholder shall serve a term beyond 5/6th of the median life expectancy in their residential region at their birth date - rounded down to the nearest year. In the US, median life expectancy is 76 years, so that’d mean 63 years.

9. More voting booths. One voting booth per area of 1000 voters, distributed such that as many people as possible have one within 1 km of their home. Remote areas with fewer people than this, will have a mail-in as default.

10. The US. Supreme Court of Justice is not appointed by any leader. This also goes for lower level courts. The court shall be appointed apolitically through multiple random ballots, out of a pool of all federal judges, whereas the latter shall be appointed by the same method, through a pool of all in their area, who have passed juridicial examination, whose passing requirements are determined by a commission of judges without any economical and/or political ties to non-judge figures.

The court’s size is determined as C•0.075 3sqrt(US current populace + 2), where C is the court size in seats. This would mean that there’d be 54 judges in 2020.

Which things for example? I’m curious…

That doesn’t look like a million euro house at all…

So it indeed is not the dying breaths of reactionaries, but a growing group.

Which we will push back against.

Reminder that Trump himself is in photos with Epstein.

Just a year??? How do you burn through shirts that fast?

I have some from like 8 years ago and they still hold up to today.

Why did she not choose to return, out of curiosity?

Idk, but I feel like Olof Palme (PM of Sweden) def got murdered by the USA for his criticism on the Vietnam War. Or by South Africa for his criticism on apartheid.

Reading more on her and wow, she’s a piece of work. What a turd. She’s not even conservative, but reactionary.

How did she get that reactionary in the first place? At least she died of cancer. That’s good. But she should have died earlier.

Seconded, great game

Also r/Israel (for obvious reasons). It’s sad, especially considering that so many people would benefit if the Jews and Muslims were living together in harmony. Which we don’t see due to the apartheid regime that is Israel.

Sorry, what is PGP?

Great point, are the lemmy devs (idk if it works that way?) aware of this?

Yeah, good point. I think it’s best to have multiple instances with similar subs so you can always move over easily. People should also make their accounts on different instances and be a bit more active there.

None. Norway might be close but they still participate in whaling and their Nordic model is not as social anymore as it used to be, I’ve heard. Which is a shame, as I think more countries would benefit greatly from a Nordic model as a stepping block to a freer and more peaceful world.

Personally I favour a council socialism where all are equal, regardless of any circumstance; none has lasting power, no central government is apparent, no permanent imprisonment exists, and direct representatives can be called and revoked at any moment for specific issues. Everyone has free studying, healthcare, housing, and food.

Where one can enjoy the fruits of another’s property, that should be fairly shared, instead of the “owner” being able to set prices. This would be done by nullifying any possibility to set prices or gains from this property.

There would be only multiple random ballots if votes occur. All options proposed shall be on the ballots, regardless of circumstance.

The challenge is making not only a central government not exist, but making it impossible for such a central government to gain foothold, and also to make it unattractive for communes to grow too big lest they become authoritarian.

This can be achieved by two methods:

1. Revolution, preferably peaceful.

2. Or by reform. One possibility is living together in a commune. To make money effectively meaningless, first all must benefit equally from the influx of money, without sensing a need of money. All people’s income towards a collectively owned bank account, for example, that buys basic needs like food, housing for everyone, and gives personal property. Nobody has money themselves.

Ideally, this would start from one suburb, as then a core of a moneyless world can be built, but can be done internationally too.

A commune is delineated by: being the smallest amount of people that can sustain itself on its own labour and own populace, and being the largest amount of people where everyone could know one another.

This would in practice mean a commune of about 100-500 people, maybe 300.

To me, honour is being answerable to your duties of being a good citizen. Being honest, being helpful, being civil, having integrity - all that can be part of honour.