sollte so ein Auto nicht trotzdem stehenbleiben, wenn ich die Bremse gleichzeitig mit dem Gas drücke? (bei Automatik, Manuell kann ich ja einfach Klupplung und Bremse drücken.
neeeeDanke
joined 1 year ago
Aber hatte sie einen Helm auf?! Und brauchen wir jetzt auch eine Kennzeichenpflicht für Bäume?
Sechsbär und Leminggrad seien wie
Davor unbeteiligter Cop:
Ich finds schön, wenn sie das unangemessen finden, wir finden das nicht unangemessen.
(sonst keine (gemäßigteren) Aussagen anderer Polizisten)
Aber gut das das nur einzelne sind, und es kein Systematisches Problem gibt.
Ich hab in meiner Aktuellen Wohnung fürl Lan unfd Strom zum Server Löcher durch die Wand gebohrt. Das Loch muss ja nicht so groß, wenn du deine Kabel selber Crimpst (für lan hätten da glaube ich 6mm gereicht), das bekommst du also beim Auzug auch wieder unauffällig zugespachtelt.
not really. In an ideal democracy you could simply vote those people out in the next election . In a well working democracy there is only so much they can do before they are not reelected.
The difference to NGOs is that in a democracy one person (ideally) has exactly one vote while your influence on non profits -especially when you are wealthy enought to afford your own- is mkreso connected to what you (can) donate, so how wealthy you are. In my opinion that makes relying on government more egalitarian whereas a system built on charities is more seceptable to oligarchigal structures.
(I understand that in many places Governments are (very) currupt or not democratic to begin with and there are many NGOs that are democratic (or meybe just plain better for the interests of the people) compared to those governments. And in those cases these NGOs are -for now- obviously better then the government. But imo with a stable democracy the government is a fairer morer stable and more equal solution.
what does it mean that europeans consider NGOs to be undemocratic?
In a democracy power should allways be held by the people. If you have a NGO -even when it does very good things- there allways is a danger that it could go against the peoples ideals or even their interests. You (as in the people as a whole) are also not as soverign when relying on NGOs for basic societal needs like a social saftey net as the voluntary donations founding them could stop any time. Thereby the power is transfered the donors (althought luckily most small-mid sized donors do not really exercize that power) who are mostly the wealthy as they just have more money to spend. A better solution is taxing fairly and using the common found gained throught that in a way the majority decides.
I recently watched an interesting video from Adam Conover on that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Cu6EbELZ6I. Altgought I do not agree with everything said (I don't think the Patagonia nonprofit in particular is problematic in my opinion the focus should have been set even more on the issue of something like that beeing possible) I agree with the key message for the reason provided above.
2 centuries? European colonialism continued well into the mid 20th century. There are still people alive who directly participated in them. Besides that, even thought most alive today did not participate directly they still benifit immensly from the colonial past of their countries.
And taking responsibility has been very slow/late and limited, often being limeted to apologies without reperations. The Belgian Crown for example only apologized for its involvement in forced labor and exploitation in the Congo three years ago. Germany only recognized its genocide in Namibia two years ago and refuses to pay reperations.
2 centuries? European colonialism continued well into the mid 20th century. There are still people alive who directly participated in them. Besides that, even thought most alive today did not participate directly they still benifit immensly from the colonial past of their countries as anouther comment allready mentioned.
And taking responsibility has been very slow/late and limited, often being limeted to apologies without reperations. The Belgian Crown for example only apologized for its involvement in forced labor and exploitation in the Congo three years ago. Germany only recognized its genocide in Namibia two years ago and refuses to pay reperations.
So yes for the shit they did (or bear a responsibility for if you wanna be more percise).
das war absolut nicht pöbelnd gemeint, eher eine Referenz zu dem Phänomen, das war auf Reddit relativ häufig bei solchen Karten (auch wenn die tbh einen stärkeren kausalen Zusammenhang hatten). Damal hätte ich eher den Sub verlinkt (ist aber mitlerweile recht tot).
Ich hätte halt gedacht das (er)kennt man als Anspielung darauf, daher die Wortwahl.
(fand aber tbh deine erste Antwort auch nicht gerade freundlich ;) )
yes but if you read the article linked in the reddit theread anouther comment mentioned this was in Berlin-Neukölln, which is predominantly muslim and known to have issues with (esp. young men/boys) radicals opposing queer people.