KⒶMⒶLⒶ WⒶLZ 2Ⓐ24

Removed by mod

they said fight, not hope

yes

I tried to meme her but everyone thought I was trolling

your accusation of bad faith is, itself, bad faith

duverger’s law is a tautology because, from a critical rationalist perspective, a tautological statement cannot be empirically tested or falsified. it’s true by definition. duverger’s law states that a plurality-rule election system tends to favor a two-party system. however, if this law is framed in such a way that any outcome can be rationalized within its parameters, then it becomes unfalsifiable. for example, if a country with a plurality-rule system has more than two parties, one might argue that the system still “tends to” favor two parties, and the current state is an exception or transition phase. this kind of reasoning makes the law immune to counterexamples, and thus, it operates more as a tautological statement than an empirical hypothesis. the critical rationalist critique of marginalist economics, which relies on ceteris paribus (all else being equal) conditions, suggests any similarly structured law should be viewed with skepticism. for duverger’s law to be more than a tautology, it would need to be stated in a way that allows for clear empirical testing and potential falsification, without the possibility of explaining away any contradictory evidence. this would make it a substantive theory that can contribute to our understanding of political systems rather than a mere tautology.

duvergers law is not a mathematical proof. it isn’t even a law. it’s a tautology.

you still haven’t shown the proof.

it’s not a mathematical fact. if it were you could lay out a proof instead of linking a YouTube video.

I was shouting “wrong side” at my tv screen. for some reason I thought there would be a black bloc out that day.

I’m an insurrectionary anarchist. please don’t associate them with me.

voting for a so-called third party is voting against Trump

do you know how I know that you didn’t read the article?

that blog post and petition are significantly more than just saying it’s stupid

as was already said elsewhere, advocating for an emoji is silly, and advocating against one might be sillier.

maybe you should use the public infrastructure.

maybe no one you talk to, but I assure you, it happens. it is happening right now, in this conversation

while there may not be an emoji for http, maybe there should be. there is sort of an unofficial one (a broken lock), and there are other protocols that have logos. as another commenter said, it’s kind of silly to fight for an emojii for it, and probably sillier to fight against it.

the sewer is infrastructure. i don’t think you understand the network protocol.

if you can’t present evidence, then you’re just spreading uncertainty and doubt.

if this is true, there would be some evidence