who cares about them? they're wrong

if one of "us" drone strikes a country its permissible... but if one of "them" does it.. its bad

or not permissible.... its reasoned

excused

doesn't that depend on the justification?

depends on whether they are an "us" or "them"

wait what

i don't think it does

@kaolbrec sure but i guess nothing works as perfectly planned

when Obama deports over 3m people its reasoned/excused ... when Trump deports... whats the tally now? 250k? thats fascism and a dictatorship, and the worst thing ever

actually he might be up to 300k by now

so about 1 tenth

@brett0007wastaken sure but idk if this is a real point but more pseudo-science and its scientifically known that one of the major factors to humans being as sucessful as we are on earth, is the fact that we herded in groups - take us on as individuals then we are weak

equal groups? or hierarchical groups?

@xlD4NKlx no you are missing the point

a group of sheep can still lose to a single wolf

how do the groups form in the first place and do groups have internal hierachies?

a group of sheep cant beat a wolf pack with an alpha

sure but i don't see how that example is applicable to humans and is a niche example of that and also they can't if there is alot of sheep and male sheep/rams, but still a weak point

well before skipping the conclusion to pseudo-science, i would first provide and substantiate your points with scientific doctirine @brett0007wastaken

alot of people say similar stuff like this but get away with it because its pseudo-science and from observation, it tends not to necesarilly be true

@xlD4NKlx basic evolutionary priciples,

if you stockpile and hoard you have more resorces to spare

a pack of humans with no leader will fall to an organised militia of humans when the strongest rise naturally to the top

not necesarilly, but please again, link to a scientific source to not spread misinformation

as long as each human in the pack is given the opportunity to rise they (the pack) will become the strongest

all your points are cute and all but you need to actually substantiate them with evidence

I mean... any conflict throughout history...

nibba this is basic shit go look it up yourself, evolution as a process is based on competion between individuals and the gradual change over time of the enviroment and the population

thats not a point, atleast link me to something, but still if you are going to say these behaviours exist, you need to link me to a scientific source or keyword of some kind to prove this, otherwise its just misinformation and anyone can do this shit lmao

not just in battle.. but in economical sense too... any communist state vs capitalist states

"basic shit" isn't an excuse and lmao why do i need to substantiate your points when you are the one doing this.

damn i've been reading back but i haven't seen *you* link to any scientific paper on why communism would work

if its so basic then substnaite it

thats like saying... substantiate that humans can breathe... just look at the world around you

@Crafty im not a communist and i asked for their takes since they are the ones making that arguement and also its an economic article but they can be refuted and such and aren't necesarilly indicitive of human behaviour all the time lmao

thats a flawed arguement because that example is self-evidental, however this isn't and you are pretty much lying at this point if you don't substantiate it @wacka

it is self evident

so your stance is to just devil's advocate for communism without any evidence for it being a good idea.. okay

next you'll be telling us Labour failed miserably.. but that wasnt real socialism

@xlD4NKlx also you are objectivly wrong on the reason humans are sucessful, coopertive hunting is not the sole reason we suceeded, most canines and lions/hyenas are far better adapted to natually kill in packs, it was a combination of tool use and stamina that saw us exel at persistance hunting.