The claim is that no antisemitism was present. Thats wrong. Hooligan fucknuts got punched, yeah, but they were not the only ones attacked.
belastend
People committing hate crimes.
Can stop cheering for either of them?
The ethical choice is dehumanization.
You are definitely the sane person here
You compare a flawed democracy to a non-democracy. Imagine moving the poorer half of America to one state, giving that state a single elector and letting them only vote if the vote so far has been perfectly split.
The US is on paper a flawed democracy and in reality an even more flawed democracy. The roman democracy did not even exist on paper.
Maybe its not that deep, i just don't like when people call Rome a democracy, when it did really come close to one. Or compare them to modern systems of government.
Haha, good one. Neither were democracies in the modern sense, in both cases voting right were so restrictive that large parts of the population did not matter.
Imagine a first past the post system but instead of states, you are grouped together by income.
And instead of voting simulaneously, the richest blocks votes first.
And now imagine, that 50% of the american populace gets one of 150 electors.
The vast majority of romans IN ROME never got to vote on any of the important positions.
Neither the PRC nor the ROC control both China and Taiwan. There is China and there is Taiwan. The realities on the ground reflect that.
Remind me again: What legislative power does China hold over Taiwan? And can the Brits reclaim their former territory too?
Tree Diagrams can be useful to structure a sentence, but the UG system of "assume one system fits every language cuz inherent ability" is bad.
If you want to check your understanding of how phrases, clauses and words connect to each other in a certain language, trees can be pretty powerful.
To the latter point: My biggest gripe with linguistics is the tendency to boil everything down to a simple system.
Do you want to elaborate more on how politeness cant be explained by gricean maximes?
Fortunately i am not american
Here the need part: you dont. Because chomskyite grammar sucks sweaty balls.
Tbf, by my second run through Intro to Pragmatics i got the maxims. But our prof had some really strange interpretations of them.
Now where the fuck did i cheer for them? No, seriously, tell me pls where i cheered for them?