myata

And all of these great things minus all the bad ones, will just happen out of one face, cheeks and a tongue? No accountability, checks and controls needed, just believe?

In a binary political system? Isn't it like, the eternal (political) engine, reinvented? (and beating, hands on all laws of the sane nature)

Now our beloved leader "PP" with his magical tongue and hand-ridden caucus will say a few words and it'll all go away. Somehow. Magically. Just believe.

That is a great observation. What was the problem? How is it even connected to the subsequent actions of Israel? Isn't it supposed to be about pure justice and nothing selective? Looks like they just made more mess in an extremely messy issue. Looks like our feeble attempts at international justice havent' been working very well so far. The question is, why? What is behind those pretty words, is there a genuine understanding and commitment to shared vision and principles?

By the way, "voting" does not mean "making a meaningful political choice". Some, who forgot how the thinking is done may overlook the obvious difference. In any number of places folks "vote" with zero meaningful effect. Voting, the word or formal process, does not assure meaningful choice.

This may be the first election, where a critical decision: can any common crook be the president of the first tier democracy, would be decided not on objective factors but on the perception. That is, imaginary reality, not the real and objective one. And when this happens, it may very well be the end of democracy because it's not a gift from Heavens and not a wondrous gadget that will run to matter what you do to it. A functional democracy requires citizens that pay attention, care, and use reason and responsibility in their decisions. No magic will make it work otherwise. Someone didn't know, others just couldn't care or believed loudmouth liars in the end the reason doesn't matter one bit. Two millennia back Romans traded their democracy that was messy and required constant attention for emperors who made all decisions for them. There were many more examples since. A herd led by an alpha with unlimited powers to reward and banish is the normal, default condition of a social group of great apes. Anything different requires more attention, effort and energy. And that's just too bad.

Well, in a place that's lost its connection to the reason, one just can't get it right. The other party - twin face will come up with nonsense of their own: like canceling access to abortion for example. What, they couldn't how? If everything else fails, why couldn't we have referendums? We can have a referendum on monarchy too. If the majority of citizens care about it so be it. But they will know that it was their choice and responsibility. What could be wrong with it? Where the elites walk bonkers each their own way, and the common folk cannot be trusted with holding a fork what would be the solution?

How is it working, can it work and how? Why is it so impossible to think? What a puzzle!

Compare the amount of thought, discussion and effort of free, competent and patriotic citizens that went into creation of American constitution (that is not perfect, as the contemporary reality shows) with the Canadian one, only a few decades back. And already the count is lost of "no it just can't be done, would be such a can of worms". What a great f-up job fellas. Beat yourselves. F-ng mental laziness, at a level extreme in the developed world (and so unlikely to be sustained, the position in). No other reasonable explanations.

Well, it has to be blown on something... their favorite punching boy likes his things rainbow-style they prefer spending it on pictures with unclear semantic message. Go figure. This is Canada, a place of eternal mystery. Yes we would but it would be such a can of worms so no point bothering.

Can it (this kind of mentality) be classified as "astounding mental laziness"? We have one empirical case.

It takes about one minute to figure out that other than some historical oddity, in the real world it can quickly lead to real, serious problems. This individual is a citizen of another state, and has the first and primary allegiance to another state. Can one really have a "head of state" like that? Why has it been so hard to think? What hasn't been right with us?

Because the detachment is now complete. Have to think, what the next cause celebre will be because you're so far from the real problems of the people that cant even imagine what they say. What "mortgage" with 200K salary for doing button pushing, blank faced? What do you mean? So, a Q++ contest or monarch rebranding something needs to be done, now!

Not much luck so far. Could this be the real reason: And more of course, just round the corner: - What it does to the international order based on law and peaceful coexistence? - What did it do to the UN Charter and the system of world security? - How will it work out in the future, where every dictator thug respecting themselves will have a few hundred nukes, just in case? Keep trying your best to overlook the obvious.

There's a certain fraction in the population that cannot think, organically: jumping and shouting the only responses possible. Observe several fine specimen right here. Then, most anyone can turn their thinking off voluntarily. What binary, partisan system does is to amplify their commonly random noise to the societal scale. And at times it can carry the brainless momentum to the part of the population that is not used to exercise their critical thinking regularly. The result is collective insanity: a hallmark of our intelligent (as they say) species.

Canada is confused. That much is clear already.

How could a modern democratic country be run by a foreign monarch? Can we think still? Or is it too expensive already?

The two-tier system of world security is obviously in a dead-end and more importantly, cannot be taken from there by any magical trick (on which magical development so many hopes seem to be riding). No: world will not return to the happy status quo now. Yes there's a problem, obvious and glaring one: who will judge the judges? Can judges be seen and trusted to be infallible no matter what they do? The obvious answer is written in red paint through the human history. No, it want work. It was designed to fail, and the outcome is entirely predictable and almost certainly, unavoidable. When, not if.

Now, considering your position on Putin's war of aggression, presumably also "superior force" it's clear that in that view, it's superiority that dictates the right. It is just wrong to attack - or resist a clear unprovoked aggression of a presumably superior adversary. Hamas was wrong to attack; Ukraine is wrong to defend herself. Aka "the might is the right". Congrats on the ultimate clarity. Don't resist that bully, he is superior. Just give in and see what happens.

A major open war, an unprovoked full scale aggression is in its third year in Europe and yet the defense minister of the aggressor state is not charged with any of the uncounted crimes including razing to the ground of numerous settlements and several cities. "Selective justice" cannot be allowed he (the prosecutor Karim Khan) said. Ohoh. How far is it from solemn to outright ridiculous? He also choose to ignore (select) that totalitarian states of our time have learned how to weaponize, through incessant propaganda of hatred and selective violence, almost entire populations. Is it not incredibly "selective" to just ignore this obvious fact and pretend that some abstract holy paper demands the victim fighting for her very survival to fight with hands tied and "experts" watching her every step, having done nothing to prevent or stop the aggression? What would the reaction be if he came up with this idea in 1943 and 1944? The take: with decisions like this, ICC is driving itself out of relevance and no external help is needed.

Note how there are no intelligible answers? Let's try again: "Inevitable", what? A complete and final dismantling of the peaceful world order? The end (de facto already) of the Charter and with it, the whole concept of the United Nations? No means or foundations of security other then groups and alliances armed to the throat including nukes? This is "inevitable", that future? Great job: you've only proven who you are. Or brainless, brainlessly repeating obvious lies. Pick one or both. What other options?

And the buzzwave goes on and on and on. Only two harmonics: "Adore Him!!!" and "Anathema!!"

Deadbrain buzzwave has only two harmonics.

I'm not going to repeat again: there's no point in having an argument with a dead board. This was addressed (only) to those who can think (for themselves) and decide based on their reason, for themselves.

In a struggling and wounded system, one candidate is clearly unfit. The noise is trying to distract from this obviousness, but it changes nothing of the essence. The leader of a world-level democracy has to be an individual of highest moral standard and integrity, not just about any crook. This is essential, quite possibly, deciding distinction.