I’m not being disingenuous. I genuinely believe that this sub has a issue with polarization. That’s not to say right leaning communities don’t also have that in spades.

I unequivocally do not support the annexation of Ukraine, or the totalitarian Russian government in general. This is literally what I am talking about. You can have civil disagreements with others without attempting to label them as a part of some group, and then using that brand to discredit their points.

Firstly, thanks for the thoughtful response rather than just making a false insinuations about my stance on the matter. There’s, in my opinion, solid arguments for the Monroe Doctrine and Roosevelt Corollary. If we took a more passive role on the global stage we might not have been at war as much the past few decades. But the more interventionist approach has lead us to being a global power and allowed for the spread of American ideals.

As for Putin’s odds, personally I think his ability to actualize victory over most of our NATO allies is curbed by our mutual defense pacts. I don’t see Russia having the capacity to challenge America in peer to peer conflict, let alone all of NATO’s nations. Ukraine alone without the support nets likely would see greater troubles defending itself. But I wouldn’t say Russia would be at to great of an advantage then given the quality of their military.

If those 70 subscribe to the idea that inaction isn’t in itself an action, I would attribute that to evil but rather a difference in what they value from you. Perhaps support to Ukraine by other means might be more palatable to them (like tarrifs on Russia and it’s trade partners).

The required historical scholarship is particularly before the Civil War as after slaves were freed Southern states implemented a series of laws that obviously were meant to disarm free Black Americans. This point is regarded as being a shift away from the original understanding.

OK Corral’s shootout occured in 1881 (after the war).

Also when looking for historical precedent favor is to be given to the commonly accepted practice. So if one town did X and the rest of the country did Y, Y is the correct historical precedent.

I believe her argument was that “in use” meant to her like activity shooting threats with 11th-30th rounds in the magazine.

Join communities that interest you, maybe one day they’ll need a mod. We don’t need mods regulating communities that they don’t care about. This only leads to power tripping authoritarians like Reddit has. Power mods are bad.

Even with benevolent intent, you’d likely be moderating a community that you truly aren’t apart of. This is ripe for members of the community to reject moderators who don’t fully understand or appreciate them.

For example if you were moderating a firearms or car sub you might remove posts that you believe to encouraging illegal modifications or behavior simply out of ignorance. The community would instantly see you as some radical trying to destroy their hobby, creating discord in the community.

If you would like to help Lemmy grow continue to make posts and comments. Many communities for niche interests have only a few posts and aren’t competitive with their Reddit counterpart yet. Just like Reddit the value of Lemmy isn’t divined by the hosts or mods but by the users who engage with one another.

Maybe this whole time the ATF was secretly on our side and attempting to guide us towards the one true self-defense option, the 96" barreled Mossberg 500.

“In 1973, Sanders sued Heublein Inc.—the then parent company of Kentucky Fried Chicken—over the alleged misuse of his image in promoting products he had not helped develop. In 1975, Heublein Inc. unsuccessfully sued Sanders for libel after he publicly described their gravy as being “sludge” with a “wall-paper taste”.[6]”

Giga based: mass shorting Reddit on the IPO.