Not sure I agree with this. Many of those vehicles don’t even need to exist, so effort is better spent on eliminating them. Buses are among the few vehicles that actually provide public benefits greater than their costs, so it makes sense to invest in new technology to improve them.
And as you alluded to, the air pollution benefits can be substantial.
If only they’d succeeded in ousting him. If so many suckers hadn’t defended him back then maybe it could have worked.
I can’t even imagine. MAGA was already losing their minds in 2016 with wild predictions that Obama would not leave office, despite there being no indication of it whatsoever.
I think there’s also a high likelihood the Supreme Court tells them they can’t do this. Even though it’s totally legal as of existing precedent.
My understanding is they may be able to but to do so risks publicizing secret exploits, which could then be fixed. So they usually save these for very high profile targets to make sure it’s worth it.
From what I’ve heard this would also apply to Linux.
But I though a few murders was all that was holding us back from a spontaneous revolution?
Wait, what?! Have there been rulings on this since then? This seems huge.
Although, from the article it doesn’t sound like it would have relevance to federal immunity.
Most apes are awesome. I can think of a few I wouldn’t miss.
Should be fairly easy to defeat, no?
Fairly likely if the current political climate continues. Could be a big boon for Lemmy honestly, if we’ve got the porn and no one else does.
What if I am? Very ageist question.
I got a lot of people attacking me right now so I didn’t read as carefully as I should have, so I didn’t know it was a concept created before Lenin came into power. That changes my understanding of the context in which he created it, specifically.
However, that doesn’t change the fact that auth-left people use this confusing language that is in total contradiction to how the rest of the anglosphere uses the word exactly as it’s being used here–to deflect from actions that are very obviously of the same nature as historical imperialism. Yet because the PRC claims to be socialist, suddenly we ignore all of the power dynamics and all of the coercion and decide this is benign simply because it supposedly doesn’t match Lenin’s definition.
Such that even when it does match the common definition, I get tons of people attacking me and saying I don’t know what imperialism is when I’m not even using the word in the Marxist sense. Marxism isn’t of much interest to me, so yeah, I’m not an expert on it. That is not relevant to the fact that China’s attempts to crush Taiwanese autonomy and seize control of the island are textbook imperialism.
You’re right, Lenin, not Stalin. The two are very ideologically similar so I hope you’ll forgive my misremembering. It doesn’t change the validity of my argument however.
Any analysis that automatically rejects 90% of historical imperialism as suddenly not imperialism is unserious. If you wish to call it capitalist imperialism that would be one thing but one obscure and frankly not all that serious theorist doesn’t just get to tell everyone else in the world they’re suddenly using a word wrong just because they decided to and because it’s convenient for their, yes, imperialist politics.
Forceful conquering by military might or other coercion means makes it imperialism. There is no history that could make it otherwise.
Ok I’ll accept the correction, it was Lenin, not Stalin. Whatever. Two peas from the same pod whose ideological differences are frankly scarcely noticeable to most people.
The word imperialism relates to empires. It predates Lenin’s work and its definition continues to be used in that way by most people outside of your tiny political faction. If you want to refer to it as capitalist imperialism or something that’s fine but it’s absurd to claim that Lenin’s work invalidates the long-standing use of the term to describe the behavior of empires before capitalism before and through to the modern time. Especially when your new definition invalidates virtually all of its historical uses.
I am using the word imperialism as the dictionary defines it, not your weird made up version which you unilaterally declare correct in contradiction to the vast majority of English speakers.
I am familiar. How is that relevant here?
That’s just a nonsense definition invented by Stalin to apologize for his own imperialism. No one else uses that definition.
Although arguably the PRC has done that even by this muddled definition.
World power attempting to subordinate annd subsume its neighbor by threats of invasion? How is it not imperialism?
Not guilty seems very unlikely based on the publicly available evidence. I could see a hung jury happening though, as there are a minority of people who strongly want him to go free.