It's only a fantasy, of course, powerful people are not held accountable, see the dozens of arrests regarding Epstein we are still waiting for. We got something to play with, but accountability for the powerful? Gosh no.

But when FIFA was inclined to give the world cup to Russia, even such corruption somehow became a pressing issue, including FBI search warrants.

I agree it doesn't matter for most smaller entities, but it's relevant for larger entities and as the US does not anymore intend to be allied with Europe, the Western world, or anybody really, there's now actual incentive to move away from such systemic risks.

You got a good point, it's not always clear what people try to imply, on the other hand however I have experienced many times that interpretations were not really based on what was actually said/written.

I like the first article in that regard as it is based on quoted sections. It does quite hard framing on what's actually written, but at least it's easier to judge the merit of the argument when it's side by side with the original quote it's based on.

That doesn't sound like a far right position though, just advocating for less or even no migration (from outside EU I guess).

People are concerned about things that can't even be expressed without getting labeled as fascist or racist. While the concerns may be irrational and without merit, it should be talked and discussed with those people and trying to understand their concerns better. Instead the reaction is "no need to talk with them as they are racists".

And yes, there are many racists out there and they have gotten so much support lately because many people feel heard by them and only them.

Public companies stand for making (more) money, that's always been the case. In a democracy, the foundation of the power in a society is what people vote for and who they vote for. Companies adhere to what the administration decide, can't blame them to show no resistance to such a stupid thing. Out of all crazy things that orange grandpa does, this is really only minor.

And by the way, for most of the world the map looks different, even on Google maps. For me, it correctly shows "Lake Ontario" first and below it shows the crazy man's fantasy.

"Use the best of the best of the best practices or three cute little kittens will die" only brings you so far.

That's of course also why a little bit was taken out of Canada.

More sources: > Mithin kann das Recht auf Notwehr grundsätzlich auch bei einer Beleidigung greifen und nicht etwa nur bei einer Körperverletzung oder Ähnlichem.

> Consequently, the right to self-defense can, in principle, also apply in the case of an insult, and not just in cases of bodily injury or similar offenses.

https://www.anwalt.org/notwehr/

Yes, the specific sentence you quoted was too hand waiving, not every insult can result in lawful self defence, but generally, defending against insults can be lawful.

Similarly, not everything somebody writes is protected by copyright, but generally what somebody writes can be protected by copyright.

> Bereits der Diebstahl mittelwertiger Gegenstände darf nach herrschender Meinung jedoch auch mit einer tödlichen Abwehrhandlung vereitelt werden, sollten mildere Mittel (wie Warnschüsse oder Schüsse auf die Beine) nicht zum Erfolg geführt haben bzw. nicht zur Verfügung stehen.[73][55][56]

> However, according to prevailing opinion, even the theft of items of moderate value may be thwarted by lethal self-defense if less severe measures (such as warning shots or shots aimed at the legs) have failed or are not available.[73][55][56]

More specifically, a teacher slapping a child to defend against six year old children: https://www.lawblog.de/archives/2016/09/08/richter-billigen-... https://famos.jura.uni-wuerzburg.de/wp-content/uploads/2017/...

He was also hit by the six year olds, but the court explicitly mentions the attack on his honor as well as foundation for their judgement.

Slapping the child was deemed to be the mildest mean for defence and therefore lawful.

Just to iterate on the first point, even theft of values starting as low as 100 Euro could justify lethal force. Knowing that honor is a protected right, it should not be surprising that hitting somebody can be justified when one get heavily and continuously insulted.

Because when somebody attacks you with a knife, drawing a gun oftentimes will not even be an effective defense. But if that is all that's available to you, it's only reasonable to give it a try. You should shoot multiple times or empty the whole magazine though and yes, that's generally justified by the law if that's what it takes to stop the attack.

The exact thing has happened to police man and woman and yes, they get trained to shoot multiple times to defend themselves. Was an outcry in media a few times because people don't understand the situation those people were put into.