![](/static/66c60d9f/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/8f2046ae-5d2e-495f-b467-f7b14ccb4152.png)
Why would they? Did any of it affect them negatively?
Why would they? Did any of it affect them negatively?
I’m assuming that’s dodgy translation of “involved in an organisation” rather than a literal “we live in a society”, right?
Looking through it now, I believe the conversation I was in was referencing this: https://www.nature.com/articles/npp2014236 , specifically because it’s not a random group of scans. It’s a rather ambitious study, from 1989, and is, as it was told to me, where the journos got ahold of the “25” number. In fact, the first article you link’s sources seem to all have the 1999 version as their first reference, probably because they’re all pre-2014. No mention of money in the paper, obviously, but it does talk of the study as “ongoing”, and I couldn’t find a newer followup, so, uh, yeah.
As I was digging, though, I ran into this: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-42540-8 , so the number you go with, if it even makes sense to go with a number, is still a matter of what you want to measure, I’d say.
I don’t see how their depiction of trump is related.
No, the biggest sin is convincing people caring about things is stupid. Followed by the manbearpig climate change joke.
It’s just th enclosure continuing in the non-physical space.
Has it ever occurred to you the short bus Che Guevaras were farting the phrases because they saw this coming?
IIRC, that study didn’t conclude it stopped at 25, it expected it to stop at 18, but it kept going, and they ran out of funding at 25. A likely conclusion is that it never really stops, it’s just that what was measured wasn’t really development, but “change”.
IIRC, the secessions were preceeded by a period where it was sort of an open secret of what’s gonna happen, with stuff like future confederate generals transferring cannon stock to southern bases, and moving themselves and their families south, and the North by and large stood by and let it happen under the rationale that “we shouldn’t anger them, they may still come around”. To the point that, again, IIRC, the commander of Fort Sumter saw trouble brewing across the river and requested reinforcements just before the war, and was turned down.
I mean, that’s kind of what happened with the last civil war too.
You mean “the other F”.
No, see, that would mean there are people out there who disagree with me who aren’t either tankies or maga, and that impossible because that would mean… that would… oh no…
More like take note people, this is how you get laws you want.
You’d think so, but I guess they didn’t.
“Amid violence”
No, it did it’s purpose: it made headlines.
Give it another 20 years, then release it with an accompanying series of articles about “wow, check out all the fucked up shit the CIA used to do, aren’t you glad they stopped!”
I was actually kinda pissed when I had to switch to a car with a CD player and couldn’t use it anymore.
I have a feeling abridged series are on average better than the originals.
It used to be illegal in the press too, IIRC ReagN abolished it.