For me it’s enough to rearrange my legs so I’m no longer able to bounce them to stop. An easy fix tbh. Though I do enjoy bouncing my leg when it happens and I’m not bothering people but I don’t have to bounce.

Maybe I can keep riding trains until most of them have died from exhaustion.

Slithy toves did gyre and gimble in the wabe.

Obligatory post highlighting some oft the good stuff thats come out of Europe (without Britain or Australia):

• The Devil’s bath
• Portrait of a young woman in flames
• Call me by your name
• Another round
• Confessions of Felix Krull
• Sun and concrete
• All Quiet on the Western Front

Oh I’m stupid. I meant the other left.

What’s the second to the left figure

Eh, they could still claim that the information is something the British government has lerned.

I have a mothra in my comments. Maybe they’re relayed?

Those are lit!

This has gone too far

It’s still interesting

Yeah that’s true.

Yeah but they got to do something. They are the reason the police isn’t moving in. So if I were in their place I’d either coordinate with the police so they could move in or try to take the situation in my own hands or stop protesting all together because it allows people to do looting under my umbrella. That makes me responsible. If the looting happened anywhere else the cops would have done something about it long ago. So like go to a protest tomorrow that isn’t right next to a store that you must have taken notice of by now is being looted.

I am specifically talking about the guy in a wheelchair and at least 5 other people I’ve recognised that were in the midst of the protest before. Those are clearly protesters not criminals that randomly showed up or just tagged along.

They are of course only a small portion of the protesters. However no one calling the cops on them or hindering them makes them complicit.

Why tf are they looting a gas station?

That’s 3 from ‘Starwars 3’

Has Trump already tweeted something disrespectful about this?

Ty for saving me a few clicks

If you say that banning a party because it plans to destroy democracy itself destroys democracy then you are talking of democracy as am absolute. So after banning the party democracy vanishes and we live in a not democratic state anymore. That’s not the case though. It would still be a democracy. Banning a party is a dilemma, either you let the people have their say which is more democratic and then after you have let them then you don’t have a democracy anymore or you don’t and then you have less of a democracy in the sense that one position of planning to completely destroy democracy is not allowed but it still is a democracy on all the other issues at least.

As for whether the party will use loopholes to destroy democracy: that’s a complex issue and difficult to determine. We may not agree on that. That’s why we leave it to a court to settle.

Banning parties isn’t always anti-democratic. The reason why is a bit unituitive so I explained it quite detailed but I believe that’s necessary. Take for example a hypothetical party X. Party X will use legal loopholes to effectively destroy democracy when it gets into power (restrict free speech, manipulate ballots, lock up the opposition, etc.) . Now party X gets the majority. That creates a situation where Party X stays in Power indefinitely. Now at some point the majority of people people change their mind and now they wouldn’t vote for the party anymore so the government isn’t representative of the people anymore. But it doesn’t matter anymore because democracy is dead in the country now. So now the people have to go through the whole establishing democracy process again which costs many lives and many years of living under oppression. That could have been skipped if party X had been banned. Now the problem remains that a majority of people weren’t represented in a election. That’s obviously bad. However keep in mind that the only thing we need to ban to skip all those years of oppression is to ban a single thing that party’s just aren’t allowed to do. And that thing is being antidemocratic. So banning that one single thing allows us to keep all the other nice thing that democracy has to offer.