JayTreeman [none/use name]

Takes the same amount of effort to draw, but the energy needed to hold and therefore aim is substantially less. They normally refer to ‘let off’ in the specifications. 75% let off means that with a 100lb bow, once you get to a specific point in the draw, you’re only holding 25lbs.

I can’t believe I forgot about that episode! There’s two that deal with this subject!

Lol he did! There’s an episode about it! (9th episode of season 8)

I think we should start co-opting their points. Academia is broken! Let’s fix it!

I’ve seen a lot of stuff on the left about the election that’s largely positive. Let’s keep that

I listened to one of her podcasts, and she comes across as so genuine. I can totally see why people listen to her.

I’m very mistrusting of anyone online that calls them self an anarchist. I spent some time on some anarchist subreddits some time ago. They were pretty toxic and would throw out reasonable opinions because they didn’t align with their personal theory. The ones I’ve met in person are reasonable compassionate people that are more likely to take people’s opinions and view them as valuable. I sometimes picture the real difference between the theories as a top down vs bottom up approach. Marxist states shouldn’t exist when communism is achieved, and that’s pretty anarchist. It’s more about how to get there. We shouldn’t be fighting about that.

Well said. The real difference is Marxists want the transitional state while anarchists see that transitional state as problematic as well. My clumsy analogy is socdems vs socialists

I largely agree with you. My sticking point is the ‘anarchists want to be liked by liberals’. The anarchists I know acknowledge that working with the commies is how to move forward. At least commies acknowledge the importance of mutual aid and community. Liberals don’t. No one likes a liberal

TIL a lot of people have a hate boner for anarchists… Wow

From an anarchist perspective, the state is the problem. From an anarchist perspective, every state ends in some type of abuse towards citizens. The Soviet Union was a collection of states. I don’t disagree with you, but I think there’s also a theory reason. Keep up the good fight

This was a referendum on biden. People don’t like him. They voted him out, and at every opportunity Harris showed that besides the gender, age and race, they were the same person

MSM: why would we cover third parties between election cycles? That’s ridiculous. General population: These people only pop up when it’s time to get elected! It’s all a grift.

This is a reasonable response by someone trying to stop an escalation. The guy that’s got no power to stop an escalation, but can hope that some Iranian can read between the lines. The guy that made that statement is probably not who I’m talking about

Thanks for sharing. I was able to find it from a different site

Emma Goldman didn’t have good things to say about the Soviets. When she went there, the bureaucracy got in the way of her starting soup kitchens. She was also shunned by a lot of the left at that point for speaking about the problems of the Soviets. Which is all a round about way for me to wonder what the truth of Soviet occupation was like. I’ve got ancestors that were killed in Crimea by the communists, but I’ve always assumed it was because they were dirty capitalists because the story always mentions they owned a factory or mill. Makes me wonder because people don’t understand how horrible we’ve got it in North America. They’ve been brainwashed to think everything is wonderful.

her poor father. He probably did his best, but some kids want to rebel, and for a Marxist becoming president of the US is a pretty big rebellious faze.

My small pedantic addition to your good comment: neolibs are neocons. They share the same ideology. They both think Thatcher was good

You reminded me of the town hall where newsy Steve martin asked her about whether they need a border wall and the discussion went something like: ‘trump was bad at it.’ ‘But do we need it’ ‘Democrats are better at building it. Remember how much of a liar Trump is?’

Another point that proves the American military industrial complex is good at weapons but not at war. It highlights the typical capitalist need for planned obsolescence. A socialist military plans for the survivability and reparability of it’s personnel and machines. The capitalist wants the machine to have expensive repairs. If people die? Oh well. Interesting article

3 years ago: wow. Crime is a social construct, and maybe it’s not OK to make fun of someone for having the entire machine come down on them Now: I’d rather choose a hammer than a nail