Edouard

I don't trust a company which is in a country where the absence of independence of the judiciary doesn't allow me to sue it if this company uses its app to violate my privacy.

I of course have 2 degrees in law so this is my favourite domain but History and Political Science is also a very great thing I did like Philosophy but it's not always taught objectively I did appreciate Sociological studies aswell in university and Education but Education is also a field of a lot of "ideological controversies" even if the topic really interest me. The problem with History studies is that you don't have a lot of jobs for it that's why I opted for Laws over History and Political Sciences aswell.

I am curious @Mothwoman but, do you know Judith Reisman?

Guild 1 better than Guild 2 you mean ! I love the athmosphere of Europa 1400 the medieval age merchants, it has this haunting music I still have the soundtracks in mind There were many more offices to go into politic With the 3 basic spies / guards / town servant offices Then the mayoral / church ones Then the sovereign You had to jump through 9 to 10 offices to get to sovereign and move through 3 different councils at least Compared to the massive reduction of offices in the Guild 2 They improved graphics but lost a part of the lore in my opinion The scenes were darker, more realistic in the 1st than in the second The player was less taken as a child than in the next game.

I join the cool @vcczar game The Political Process 95/100 for a 12 dollars game I played above 700h what I think sad is the demographic evolution, if they had it it would create several hundreds of playthrough CK3 95/100 contrary to what people think it's equivalent to CK2 and somewhat better for anyone who plays RPG, the issue is that after 350h I did make a turn of what I wanted to do Hearts of Irons 90/100 not a bad game but a difficult one when you are not playing USA/Germany or the Soviet Union, the mod End of a New Beginning was a greater game actually I played like from 1857 to 1892 to the end of a new beginning with France, and because they actually implement that manpower losses matter unlike in HOI4 where you can lose 12 millions people in a war and that's okay I won the Franco-Prussian war because I played a defensive war in which I let germans lose 600 000 men which did cripple their military in the mod unlike it would have been in HOI4 The issue with this mod is that it hadn't planned an alternative history so the mod is quickly boring to play after 20 years that's the issue, but it was a more ambitious and realistic game than HOI4 Victoria 3 85/100 Not that bad but quite basic The Guild 1 95/100 : My childhood game, I loved playing to it and I still play to it while the game has 21 years The Guild 2 85/100 : It has not the charm of the 1st game for me Assassin's Creed Odyssey : 100/100 : MALAKA, great writing, great game, I am not very fond of the Greek peloponesian era but they made me play 120+h to this and I played it till the end I even bought DLCs to continue Fallout 4 : 90/100 Good game just not very detailed on factions Fallout New Vegas 95/100 : Great game even for 2020 they need a remake.

I am not here to blame you at all @Mothwoman but to help you understand that even in your last reply, there is the assumption that I choosed to be attracted by men and not women. The point is here, I did not, I was kind of "family formed" probably the same as you with quite traditionnal and conservative views, or probably close to the family of Vcczar who is straight but has changed his views despite of this. If one of your child is gay it will not be "because" of your teaching, it will have been determined at the birth and they could not do anything about it, sexual orientation is the same as loving vegetables or not, there are people who love spinards and others who hate it, have they decided it? No they have not. Allow me to give you others historical examples https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippe_I,_Duke_of_Orléans He pretty much admitted it himself, so he was likely "direspectfull toward himself" More recently with Frederick there even were letters of him to his lovers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_the_Great Yet the sad but accurate society reality with Frederick is that he didn't buy the hatred on homosexuals for an obvious reason and did not call it against nature, but yet he was influenced by the antisemitic climate of his society which led to genociding millions of jews 150 years after his death, and this single societal example tells a lot about what society teaches us what to think about groups, and how the current period (with moderacy) allows us to distanciate ourselves from clichés or easy hatred. Of course I could give you plenty of additionnal names, but I take old enough and known ones so that you see by yourself it is nothing new and they had not decided, who would make this "choice" at the time they risked death? A lot because of society ended quite depressed and lived depressed lives for centuries, just like him https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_II_of_Bavaria Or more recently, him https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing

I rarely talk about myself on the forum, I do sometimes on discord but not here however I think this could help our friend to understand some things. I grew up in an aesthetically heterosexual environment at 200%. In the playground recreated at the age of 7 I liked to play the chef. When I saw two homosexuals kissing in a train station at about the age of 10, I didn’t even know what homosexuality was because my Catholic mother didn’t tell me it existed. I had this rather sudden thought of thinking, "Two men are unable to have feelings for each other, they’re weird, they’re actors." This thought I had naturally, because I had a family upbringing and no attraction having 10 years. It turns out that later, around the age of 11 to 12, I realized that I was attracted to men and not women, and I tried to convince myself that I was still bisexual until I was 16, and I probably tried because of society. I did everything I could to prepare my mother for my coming out, for about two years I tried to prepare her, and in spite of all that, it went very badly. I have been subjected to real harassment from her part and my relationship with her is not tinged with love, because she loves her son as a biological being, not who I am. I met only one boy one year older than I at the age of 17, and I’m still with him at the age of 25. Despite a long distance relationship for years I have never deceived him, I feel for him the same feelings as a man towards a woman, we are both male. He played American football and I played judo, in no case are we Hollywood products and in no case have any of us been determined. We’re both PhD students and we don’t really vote left, I’m a centrist and he’s centre-right. Why am I saying all this? Because there are clichés and preconceived ideas, which come not only from our speaker but also from the society that must be broken. No, homosexual person has not been "converted", no, it is not a perverted person, no, it is not a modern invention (look at Frederick, Richard the Lionheart, Alexandre and Hephaistion or emperor Hadrien for major examples), no, it is not caught, no homosexuals are not forcelly trans people. You can be cisgender and homosexual and cisgender and transexual just as you can be a transgender person and heterosexual, sexual orientation and gender affiliation are two very different things. I am a man and I never had a feeling of discomfort with my gender at birth yet I am homosexual since ever.

I strongly recommend Ionesco and particulary his theater representation of Rhinoceros. It shows how a society falls into totalitarianism. Jean Paul Sartre is an incredible writer but a bad ideologue, while Camus is a great writer and a good ideologue. Baudelaire was far too ahead for his time, today I don't know what he would write.

Guys and Girls. We have to make win Zeus, I call all of you to make hellenism triumph. @Dobs promised to read ALL comments of this video IF YOU vote for the only true faith.

Between candidates I always put society first but economy comes second So if several parties are progressives I will vote for the most economically moderate one, but if there is only one left wing economic party which is fiscally and societally progressive and one party which is fiscally and societally conservative I will go with the progressive party.

I voted FDR Kennedy Clinton and EU + Gorba. Quick reason for Bill : NATO stopped a human disaster in Balkans while the EU remained on the fense because France was pro Serbia and Germany pro Bosnia The EU can be credited for a lot of good things like the creation of a common identity around democracy and the rule of law, but Yougoslavia collapse certainly was the time NATO showed it was usefull.

We say the same on LBJ My bad for Wilson You do surprise me that Hillary would have done something if she had won the nomination, because my own impression is that Obama is initially a progressive who adapted his speech to the rules of power while Hillary is a more conservative person who could have been a republican politician if she had taken a different road. Not the most right-wing republican but still a republican. She was more right-wing than her own state on the issue. Maybe has she changed but it surprises me, Al Gore was the first nationwide democrat to come in support of gay marriage in 2008 but he was no longer in politic.

Domestic accomplishments Lincoln : Changed civil rights for good FDR : In terms of social rights he revolutionned LBJ : Kind of last major ambition against poverty, finished Lincoln job Eisenhower : Based on civil rights, but could not deliver all Obama : Great presidency for human rights but is it him or the Supreme Court? Trump doesn't deserve to be that low, he did quite well and not worse than some in the best category. No US president actively worsened US citizens excepted maybe Wilson when he did not veto the bills for prohibition.

The poll is interesting because it tells a lot about bias Harding is no more responsible of the crisis than Coolidge but coolidge is cool so the bias is to let him out why he did nothing to prevent the situation In full honesty for Carter and Bush they were presidents at a time where economy was bad everywhere the question is if their government performed better than others ones. 6% inflation is good right now for example. For Hoover however it can be said that he did nothing against the growing crisis or just too few by ideology and there he can be blamed. I don't see how Lincoln can be among the best presidents in a war time it's obvious that he couldn't. JFK has a too short termso that it can be said if he would have done good...

Biden presidential term is much better for me nowadays than it was 1.5 years ago. It's starting to become a good term but Ukraine will be a deciding factor.

The list of greatest leadership is extremely complicated On War clearly Washington Lincoln and Kennedy On Domestic issues clearly LBJ Lincoln and Eisenhower On difficult decisions FDR Truman and Kennedy National expansion Jefferson

I am unsure but there are two books I think I would write. The first would be a trolling book which would contain a lot of plots linked together to mock every abusive conspiracy theorists like a secret enterprise behind the election of Biden with ancestors who fought in the Wermarcht in WW2 and have been defeated and whose ancestors were from the templar order. The other would probably be scenarios of what if, how the end of the world can come via several scenarios which are realist just to see how our human situation is. Like for example I would love to sensibilize people at what they are doing and the consequences of it like how states are becoming polarized again in the USA and how a war rhetoric is coming back. Maybe also that I would enjoy writing alternative historical scenarios and also what historical figures would think about nowadays' era. I am quite romantic about the historical timeline. I think private fictionnal stories in historical timelines would be interesting. When I was a kid I wanted to write about the XVIIth century and I also started writing a book about Napoléon around 9/10 years old.

So this is a coup But this isn't an attempted coup As a french this is it for me https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6_February_1934_crisis

Biden is probably the best president for bipartisanship since Bill Clinton. I am surprised that they had put Obama among the best for compromises because his presidency was good in liberal reforms but not through compromises with republicans obviously. Not to say he could have done compromises actually but he is not the president of bipartisan bills. Bush senior legacy is underconsidered, he did a lot to compromise and it costed him the election in 1992 over taxs but even his Supreme Court picks were quite moderate.

This poll suggests me this idea @vcczar There is a trend to more societal liberalism in every countries but particulary in western ones. The old political division between economic and social left-wing parties and economic and social conservatism (in the old way to say it) has boomed. Right-wing parties have become more liberal on the society in countries like Canada and the UK but probably also in others countries. Conservative parties in those countries are no longer societally conservative but still are economically conservatives. Countries where the big right-wing party of power has not modernized on society like in France with the french Republicans, the consequence has been the political collapse. When the right-wing party tries to remain fully conservative it opens the door for third way parties like the one of Emmanuel Macron. In France in 2010 you had one major party which was both economically and societally left-wing (Socialists) and one party which was both economically and societally right-wing (UMP then called Republicans). It was not possible to imagine that 10 years later you would have a party of government who would push for a later retirement age and medical assisted reproduction for lesbians in the same platform. It is the political platform of the current government of France. This poll really suggests me that we are at a time where there is a national shift on society while economic political divisions remain the same as they were.

For those that it interest, here is how americans define themselves at large Liberal is less of a dirty word than it used to be, more people seem to switch toward the word "liberal" than they used to several decades ago when there were Moderates and Conservatives and where liberal was considered as an extreme bad word. That's also because the real term to call left-wing, progressive, is starting to appear It's interesting how despite a stable economic evolution, the society is becoming more progressive, this poll tells a lot about societal dynamics when you compare the 2 questions and how we responded. It's 50-50 about economic issues but not about society. And I of course know that in the case of Wv it's a switch on some key issues like drugs not everything about society.

Interesting replies ! For myself I have barely changed since 2013, I just went to the right on economic issues and a bit more to the left on society, but like vcczar I was mostly also influenced by parental influence my parents being far left. I have witnessed some people around me moving from far left to mainstream left and some others moving for extreme right wing in economy to mainstream economic conservatism. I called myself a left-wing person in 2017 but now I consider myself a centrist.

I watched it, I bet on Kansas just for the fun. I discovered how american football worked yesterday in addition, I think Kansas made a beautiful remontada even if Philadelphia played better for the whole game, just that they were very bad with keeping the ball while the Kansas team was much more opportunistic and it helped them to win.

Just for curiosity