You mean the law of the strong against the weak? We’re not winning that battle. We can’t even agree to vote consistently, much less in our best interest. What makes you think we can all agree on who’s the right person that needs killing?
Voting works, when people actually do it. It doesn’t work fast, but it works better than random killings.
Well it’s a good thing people are happy with the continued state of affairs where nothing has fundamentally changed!
Well sure, if we just kill everyone we don’t like, clearly things will magically get better.
How do we define that, though? Cause every decision made will make someone unhappy, no matter how much good it might do. Are you going to step up and decide what’s right or wrong?
Ah, so lack of solid opinion is your defense of your support of random killings. You don’t actually support it because you don’t support anything… but you don’t mind if someone else supports in just in case it might help you in the long run.
You’re a professional bystander, someone who hopes someone else does all the hard work in making your life easier.
Mostly due to the efforts of a lot of people working to make things better through political and social action.
But hey, they had that one time where they killed a bunch of people, that must have been the reason their lives are so much better. Clearly
Yeah, and they’re mostly bought by bootlickers.
Man, people really think this is actually going to change things and it’s hilarious.
Well, hilarious in that I have to laugh to keep from breaking down in tears. On one side you have people who will do anything to squeeze every last penny from our quickly decaying corpses, and on the other we have a bunch of people who did little more than bitch and moan until someone does something drastic and ultimately futile in which case they… mostly continue to sit back and watch while assuming everything is somehow magically going to fix itself for them.
People survive lots of heinous shit, that doesn’t mean it helps.
Well I guess we should just start killing people we don’t like just in case it makes the world a better place then, right?
Cause that seems to be the theme of your lack of confidence positions.
They’ll pause to call up more private security to keep themselves safe while they raise your premiums even more.
A Christmas Carol was just a story, not reality. You’re not going to scare CEOs into doing the right thing, especially not with threat of death.
… do you think killing a few CEOs is going to stop the shitty healthcare system we have? It’s nowhere near that easy to fix this broken system. There are thousands of MBAs just waiting in the wings to take over and do the exact same things.
It’s not a solution, it’s a reaction, and it doesn’t fix shit. Just escalates an already volatile situation.
Especially when you can just stick a hypo to their neck with some kind of future stimulant that apparently has little to no side effect.
Honestly, there aren’t enough good actors on the show. Picardo, Mulgrew, Phillips, and later Ryan carried the show… everyone else was kind of just… there. Couple that with very hit and miss writing and it’s easy to see why it doesn’t live up to the previous shows… but it was still a pretty good show when they weren’t going action heavy. Or throwing weird salamander sex in there.
I’m 100% with you on this one. Riker takes off Data’s arm and turns him off and that judge is like “you make a good point!”
Get Crusher in there to put her in a coma and amputate her arm and see how inhuman she feels.
I’d call Picard “Sir”, but I’d call Sisko “daddy”.
Give it a few months.
Voting.
It’s not direct, and it’s not simple, but it’s about as good as it gets in any kind of representative democracy.
Double strong, double sweet.