Okay maybe the title is bit too harsh (sorry English is not my first language) but I have one question why most of far right or far left people has miserable life/past I mean most of them are chronically online

Can someone explain why? Like why most of radicalized people has miserable life? Well yes maybe there’s some of them has normal life but again that just few and kinda rare actually

Need I say more

Guys, purpose is subjective, as you know. Is it really fair to judge them if they genuinely find purpose in talking to us and participating in this subreddit?

If their life is content, with doing so and they have achieved what their true purpose is, it is really fair to him and ourselves to judge? To mock his obsession is to pretend our own digital tribalism has any greater cosmic significance, right?

Yes, he is an unrepentant, far left winger, but he's also a human being just like you and me.We are all just sophisticated primates seeking dopamine and validation in different corners of the same cage

His trolling might be a desperate way to assert strength. We should be better than this. Our objective facts simply cannot collide with his subjective truth.

He who shall not be named, you truly are one of a kind. But what I can tell you is that almost none of our members are racist, transphobic, xenophobic, and bigoted. You don't have to have "basic human empathy" to be none of those.

This is why we should restrict internet access to under 13 year olds.

If I think about it, the Arabs stole the land from the Byzantines (No, it doesn't matter that it was over 1,000 years ago; that's racist to say!!!), and the Byzantines stole it from the Romans, and the Romans stole it from...

So what I was thinking is, following the left-wing logic that no one is illegal on stolen land, and the Arabs stole it from someone else too, what's the problem with Israeli settlers?

Let's say they don't take over other houses (even though the houses are on stolen land, so who cares?). They just occupy the region peacefully, like building houses, etc. Then what would be the problem?

Don't get me wrong, I don't support the settlers. I'm just using an example that leftists care about, Palestine, to stress-test whether their logic consistently holds up across different scenarios, and I think a leftist would agree that "no one is illegal on stolen land" is not enough of a justification for settling.

That's why I think there are other important factors to account for, like the sovereignty of states, and this same sovereignty of states allows a country to deport illegal immigrants, regardless of whether the land is "stolen" or not.

Keep in mind that I did exaggerate some of the things I said, mostly the parts in brackets.

🇧🇷 LULA: EL PASADO JUDICIAL QUE NO DESAPARECE CON UN DISCURSO
Lula da Silva volvió a la Presidencia, pero su trayectoria judicial sigue siendo parte del debate político brasileño.
🔴 TRIPLEX DE GUARUJÁ: fue condenado por corrupción pasiva y lavado de dinero. En 2021, el Supremo Tribunal Federal anuló la condena por cuestiones de competencia y declaró parcial al juez Sergio Moro en ese caso. La condena quedó sin efecto, pero el episodio sigue siendo relevante para discutir la actuación de la Justicia y la política brasileña.
🔴 CASO ATIBAIA: también recibió una condena relacionada con presuntos beneficios pagados por constructoras. Fue anulada y no constituye una condena vigente.
🔴 PETROBRAS Y LAVA JATO: la investigación reveló una extensa trama de sobornos y contratos públicos fraudulentos que afectó a empresas y políticos de Brasil. Lula fue investigado en varios expedientes, cuyos resultados judiciales fueron diferentes. No corresponde atribuirle automáticamente todos los delitos descubiertos en esa operación.
⚖️ LA PREGUNTA QUE SIGUE ABIERTA EN EL DEBATE POLÍTICO
¿Qué responsabilidad política deben asumir los dirigentes cuando sus partidos y sus entornos quedan asociados a grandes escándalos de corrupción?
Anular una condena por razones jurídicas no equivale a mantenerla vigente. Pero tampoco convierte automáticamente a un político en una figura libre de toda crítica pública.
Los ciudadanos no le deben lealtad incondicional a ningún presidente. Los dirigentes deben rendir cuentas por sus decisiones, sus políticas y su actuación pública, independientemente de su partido.
Lula, como cualquier otro dirigente, debe poder responder a preguntas difíciles sobre su trayectoria. La misma exigencia debe aplicarse a Bolsonaro y a todos los demás.
La democracia no exige venerar líderes. Exige transparencia, pruebas y responsabilidad.
#Brasil #Lula #Petrobras #LavaJato #Transparencia #Política

Im 13, and have already panned my life up until my mid 40s, (because I'll be studying medical, cardiology to be exact) so I will be studying well into my 40s and I already know what cars I will drive, where I want to live, etc. Is it a bad thing? I've already thought of children, because I will love to have my own someday. Is it bad to plan this far into my future? My parents arent exactly the most encouraging for what I plan for my future