huf [he/him]

ahhhh. haha, he has a patreon and his own DOCTRINE!

wait, this guy is not just a shitposter on twitter, he’s an actual nato person? huh.

i like how a lot of the house rules people play with try to soften the inhumanity of the game, which just means the game takes longer to get to the same conclusion: one player controlling everything, the rest having nothing.

it models social democracy :D

you’re right, spending half your paycheck on rent for your entire life is preferable to a tax on the proceeds of the sale of your property. very big brain there.

as tom scott explains: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LseK5gp66u8

not even the biggest bagger!

not even all muslims in china, just this one specific group of muslims in china. people are often surprised when i tell them china has other muslim ethnic groups…

Two things can be bad at the same time sweaty, that’s why we have to support America and balkanize russia

Liberals should be labelled “Thinks they’re the leftists and that conservatives are needed for good bipartisanship”

feet, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die

they’ll sometimes concede that both of them are bad, and then go back to supporting the US

the thousand year reich that ended in 13 years with germany being the fifth most powerful country in berlin… yeah.

amazing that to this day nazis want to try it again.

same, same. my god, there really is something to the hungarian-polish brotherhood…

the language is fine, the spelling just needs updating. which is easy, we just pick a dialect of english and base it on that.

which dialect? well, how about indian english. that seems fair.

The government can not directly influence anything that is done with this money.

ok. yes, this discussion is fruitless.

so the dutch government is terrible and does not base its decisions on human rights records, but somehow the journalists funded by them are unbiased. magically.

right.

do you see the disconnect here?

i’m not talking about the report, i’m talking about the dutch govt’s actions. you say they’re based on this report. i cant see how.

edit:
to try to explain what i’m getting at, i’m puzzled by this sentencve of yours:

Before you start bashing on it for it being biased because the TV program is government funded, a lot of Dutch politicians at the time strongly wanted to increase our trade agreements with China, this item was actively hindering that.

you’re going to have to explain how this item was hindering that and why only this item and why much worse violations of human rights committed by the netherland’s other trade partners do not hinder trade with those countries.

but again, it doesnt seem to bother either the politicians or the press when the netherlands trades with the worst offenders on the planet. and yet, in the case of china, it matters?

either the dutch are terribly inconsistent for no reason, or there’s something else in play.

or is it just me and this seems like a perfecly good explanation of their actions to you?

this seems strange to me. dutch politicians have no problems doing business with countries with awful human rights records. the absolute worst countries by this metric.

i think there has to be another reason here.

how was it hindering more trade agreements?