My understanding is that the Cybertruck is less likely to cause a pedestrian fatality than an F150 due to its lower hood height and better forward visibility.
But that's a pretty low bar. Crafting regulations that force the F150 back to the sensible dimensions it had last century would be an awesome side effect if it can ride on Cybertruck hate for support.
God I'm so tired of these pathetic attempts at evading the point. No, it's not against the principles of democracy to fight back against someone trying to destabilize your democracy. The tolerance paradox applies here, Elon is begging, daring the UK to do something, and all is fair in love and war.
AfD is not a neo-nazi party. They are one of the oldest parties and the second largest party in Germany, and there is a "pro-democracy" move to ban them and attack their members. They are conservative nationalists but so what? The whole point of any political party is supposed to be to look out for the country itself and its constituents first. I'm so sick and tired of liberals acting like it is some kind of ultimate racist evil to be against excessive immigration. I'm also really tired of having to be concerned with European politics. But for whatever reason, most Western countries have similar issues with bad policies.
AfD is not the oldest, or even that old of a party. And they absolutely are neo Nazis. Not sure if you're thinking about another party, or just sympathetic to their garbage worldview, but ignorance isn't an excuse to carry water for Nazis.
My bad, it indeed seems to not be the oldest. But it is certainly not brand new or unpopular. Can you give me evidence that they are Nazis? I don't mean finding a few Nazis that happen to be members, I mean proof that their platform is the Nazi program. As I'm sure you are aware, the Nazi party is banned in Germany and even displaying Nazi symbology can get you in trouble there.
> I don't mean finding a few Nazis that happen to be members
Ah the few local Nazis that just happened to stumble upon the membership, while the rest of them were just fine with it. Reminds me of the good old "you're not marching with Nazis, you are a Nazi".
The serious answer is this: Nazis strive to replace democratic government with a fascist dictatorship. They wish to get rid of people they deem as their enemies. Anyone who tolerates people with ideology like this cannot be viewed as anything but the same as them. So, if your party has a few Nazis, it's all Nazis.
>The serious answer is this: Nazis strive to replace democratic government with a fascist dictatorship.
So how is it democracy to ban this party and harass its members again? Should Germans be concerned about other parties adopting fascist tactics to control who they can vote for?
>They wish to get rid of people they deem as their enemies.
So like the left, correct?
>So, if your party has a few Nazis, it's all Nazis.
Nobody has presented me with proof that any Nazis are in AfD, and that there are no Nazis in other parties. I don't know if AfD is open like US political parties, where one can just claim to be a member. But unless someone is at least widely known to be an open Nazi, and the party registered them as a member with full knowledge of that (or at least refused to revoke membership of a known Nazi), it's all slander.
What is your take on the leadership of Ukraine having literal bonafide Nazis in it? Are they a concern of yours, or do you just accept what the "thought leaders" tell you?
After certain people have called Republicans in the US Nazis for the past 8 years, I'm so done with people who pull out that word for anyone they disagree with. Pony up some proof or buzz off.
> In January 2017, Höcke in a speech stated, in reference to the Berlin Holocaust Memorial, that "Germans are the only people in the world who plant a monument of shame in the heart of the capital" and criticized this "laughable policy of coming to terms with the past"
^ that is just one of the rather mild things that are just a constant in that milieu.
His statement is hyperbolic and perhaps strikes some people as insensitive, but what do you think it means to come to terms with something like that? A memorial doesn't seem unreasonable (though I have not seen the memorial), but what is unreasonable is expecting people to hang their heads low forever and sell out their own interests in contrition for that was done by a small number of despots in their country three or more generations ago. Most Germans even at the time had no idea that the Holocaust was happening, and were horrified to find out just like the rest of the world. What if the administration of your country decided to kill millions of people somewhere for whatever reason? It already has on multiple occasions, and is there any memorial for the victims anywhere in the capital for each occasion?
Dredging up the past might be educational or enlightening, but in some cases it inspires people who don't know each other to hate each other or else to become hypersensitive to offenses by other groups. Also, being against immigration is not bad. Some cultures just don't work well together and can't be mixed, like oil and water. When a situation like that is identified, then it should be talked about and reversed if necessary to PREVENT violence.
> what is unreasonable is expecting people to hang their heads low forever and sell out their own interests in contrition
What is that even in reference to? The AfD is fully neoliberal, they're the last to talk about selling out.
> for that was done by a small number of despots in their country three or more generations ago. Most Germans even at the time had no idea that the Holocaust was happening
Let's just accept that as face value: and then we found out, and decided this must NEVER EVER happen again. Not "not more than in one of three generations". And that requires teaching each new generation everything of what happened there. If you don't have the stamina and intellectual honesty for that, there's the exit.
And "a small number of despots" didn't commit the Holocaust, and the Holocaust wasn't the only crime the Nazis committed, "just" the one that shocked even people who had accepted all sorts of other atrocities -- as long as they thought it might mean they would win.
It's not a negative thing to teach, just like it's not negative to teach Americans about slavery. That is what happened, you cannot change it. And you cannot have dignity while denying the truth, period. Not ever. You can have some armband to identify with, but it doesn't make you more dignified, it just sets the real you aside to gather dust, while you stare at the armband.
> Dredging up the past might be educational or enlightening
If you use electricity, is that also "dredging up inventions from the past"? It's not negative to know what happened, and where this mindless identification with "sides" and slogans can lead to. It's a discovery we made and will keep, considering the price it came with.
> but in some cases it inspires people who don't know each other to hate each other or else to become hypersensitive to offenses by other groups.
Now that's quite the trick: teaching about how propaganda and peer pressure enabled persecution at such giant scale might "inspire people who don't know each other to hate each other"? How so? Who exactly would be hated, by whom, by Germans learning about and staying aware of German history?
> Some cultures just don't work well together and can't be mixed, like oil and water.
Yeah, like people from Hamburg and Bavaria, right? What cultures are you talking about? What is "the" German culture, what cultures are compatible with it, based on what properties, and what cultures aren't, based on what properties? Because I only ever hear the generic adjective as if it means something, from people who want to somehow be "proud to be German", but then barely speak the language and are, time and time again, either unaware or dismissive of the history.
>Let's just accept that as face value: and then we found out, and decided this must NEVER EVER happen again. Not "not more than in one of three generations". And that requires teaching each new generation everything of what happened there.
Let's just accept that as face value, these events become less relevant to each passing generation, and you don't rightfully get to decide what your great(x20) grandchildren are concerned with. How many people in Mongolia do you think are mourning the atrocities of Ghengis Khan? Whether you believe it or not, the Holocaust will reach a point of irrelevance, just like basically every bad deed done under the sun.
>If you don't have the stamina and intellectual honesty for that, there's the exit.
Honestly, dragging up the past and applying labels to people when they don't deserve it is not going to prevent any atrocity. It's going to create bad blood between groups of people who otherwise would have no issue.
>It's not a negative thing to teach, just like it's not negative to teach Americans about slavery. That is what happened, you cannot change it. And you cannot have dignity while denying the truth, period. Not ever.
So, apart from "telling the truth" tactfully in a way that does not create improper appearances, I think disabusing yourself of your own dignity over things that a small percentage of the population of the country who happened to look like you generations ago is a bad thing. Do you believe children are responsible for the evils of their parents? If you don't believe that, then why do believe everyone who looks a certain way in a country is responsible for what other people who look like them did many years before? Demanding undeserved shame and even monetary consideration from people who have done nothing wrong is a good way to make yourself one of the most hated people in the world.
>If you use electricity, is that also "dredging up inventions from the past"? It's not negative to know what happened, and where this mindless identification with "sides" and slogans can lead to. It's a discovery we made and will keep, considering the price it came with.
It's not up to you what lessons anyone else in the distant future will learn. As for "sides" it seems to me that some people are quick to label anyone else they disagree with a tiny mustache man, which trivializes the German tragedy and totally qualifies as "mindless identification" and othering of everyone else. As in, "If you're not with us on immigration, you're literally a Nazi, and we don't talk to Nazis." So the lesson is not really learned now is it? Except when Jewish people literally enter the conversation, it makes no sense, and it is often used to shut down legitimate criticism of people who happen to be Jewish.
>Now that's quite the trick: teaching about how propaganda and peer pressure enabled persecution at such giant scale might "inspire people who don't know each other to hate each other"? How so? Who exactly would be hated, by whom, by Germans learning about and staying aware of German history?
How so? Are you kidding? It seems to me that on the surface, white German people are hated as a whole by at least a notable minority of every other group of Germans. Jewish Germans will be suspicious of non-Jewish Germans, especially nationalists.
To give you a non-German example of how dwelling on the past can be unhealthy, I return to the US. In the US it has become fashionable to associate racism with patriotism, as if you can't love this country without being a racist, simply because some people in its distant past used slave labor before (labor from both whites and blacks, and a practice which was common at the time). There are many examples of people who don't know each other getting into awful situations with other people who they don't know, all because of historical baggage that they were taught about people who look a certain way. I take it you have been privileged to avoid any such situations in your life, but they do happen. Why should a white person in 2025 be afraid to look a black compatriot in the eye because of misdeeds of OTHER white people hundreds of years before he was born? Why should a black person view any given white person with suspicion or even disdain, except for having been told that people who look like him (and were in truth VERY different people, living in VERY different times) did something against some other black people in the past?
>>Some cultures just don't work well together and can't be mixed, like oil and water.
>What cultures are you talking about? What is "the" German culture, what cultures are compatible with it, based on what properties, and what cultures aren't, based on what properties?
For the Germans? That would be the cultures of many of the Muslim immigrants who want a Muslim theocracy to enforce Sharia Law and burkas for all women, for example, compared to the culture of the natives. Basically all Western cultures are incompatible with that yet our overlords keep trying to push people together with incompatible cultures that have never lived together and have no desire to live together. I think they want to tear down any unity that can exist in any country, so that people are too distracted with each other to notice how they're getting screwed.
>What is "the" German culture, what cultures are compatible with it, based on what properties, and what cultures aren't, based on what properties? Because I only ever hear the generic adjective as if it means something, from people who want to somehow be "proud to be German", but then barely speak the language and are, time and time again, either unaware or dismissive of the history.
I don't know because I'm not German, but every group of people has its own customs. I imagine that Germans identify with many of the Western values of liberalism and democracy, have their own cultural habits, food preferences (including consumption of pork and alcohol), valuing hard work and precision in engineering, etc. There is a lot to the country and its people besides unfortunate events in the early 20th century. Up until recent decades it was also almost entirely white ethnic Germans living there. Why aren't they allowed to be proud of their culture, and to simply (and rarely) denounce awful things that they had nothing to do with, and for whose benefit should they hang their heads in constant shame?
America is a far more diverse place than Germany with a much shorter history and I think it would be foolish to insinuate that Americans don't have a culture or anything to be proud of, because of any of the unfortunate things that some Americans did in the past.
Your question becomes far more ludicrous if you substitute anything else for "German." What does it mean to be proud to be anything? Black, white, Chinese, Indian, American, British, Nigerian, Catholic, Protestant, Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim, tall, handsome, etc.... It is a little bit silly to be proud of something that is purely circumstantial, especially when it comes to culture, but it makes about as much sense as being proud of your own family. That is, you are part of your family and your family is a part of you (to the extent that you want either of these things to be the case).
> I'm so sick and tired of liberals acting like it is some kind of ultimate racist evil to be against excessive immigration.
Im also sick and tired of Liberals not realising that they are abetting corporate slavery via excessive immigration and rationalizing it that they are helping these immigrants. And arguing ”we need skilled immigrants”. What these Liberals are advocating is brain draining these countries which helps to perpetuate their poverty and backwardness if you take all their educated and skilled people.
What’s fucking sad is we have people advocating government seizure and destruction of someone’s private property just because they don’t like the rich guy who’s company made the product.
Yeah that's the only reason for sure, has nothing to do with the existing regulations on vehicle dimensions or the fact these things crumble or explode if you glance in their direction.
How about we consider a solution that doesn’t involve the seizure and destruction of someone’s personal property no matter the reason.
I am just spitballing here but maybe something like— ”We can’t allow you to drive that vehicle on the public roads, but instead of taking it from you and crushing it, feel free to just not drive it on the public roads or sell it to someone who lives in a place where they are allowed to be driven.”
It seems to have escaped your attention that they did the exact opposite and "felt free" to drive and illegal vehicle on public roads with no insurance, so anyone they hit wouldn't have any compensation. And you can't buy them here so they brought it in knowing they couldn't legally drive it on the roads.
Are you really arguing that the libertarian way is to consider laws optional?
There is no way he can legally use the vehicle on any UK roads, giving him it back, when he has already flagrantly violated the laws, is encouraging him to violate them some more.
>…laws optional?
When someone commits a traffic or road infraction in the UK is the response to confiscate their vehicle and demolish it? Probably not, I am not in the UK, but I am pretty sure that is not the penalty and never has been for road violations.
My guess is the driver is probably fined. If they are a repeat offender, likely a license to drive is taken away. Certainly if they drive after that, perhaps incarceration is considered. Not sure that there has never been a penalty where something akin to “smashing someone’s toys with a hammer to stop them playing with them” has ever been considered a reasonable penalty and effective deterrent.
But hey, maybe y’all have a different perspective. If so ah salud.
The amount of love for tyranny and hate for Elon is unreal. The UK definitely allows other bigger and more dangerous vehicles besides the Cybertruck, as proven by the fact that other countries allow thousands of Cybertrucks and electric Hummers. So it really is a matter of having adequate insurance and permits at the end of the day.
To be legal in the UK, vehicles have to have a certificate of conformity, getting one is the responsibility of the manufacturer. Tesla have done that for their other models, but not for cybertruck. I assume that's because the have decided the costs of getting cybertruck compliant with UK regulations would be too high, or not practical.
That's a business decision made by Tesla, not victimisation of poor old Elon, whatever the Musk fanbois think.
I'm not a Tesla fan but that sounds like a boring paperwork issue and not a real safety issue, as far more dangerous things are 100% legal to roll on UK roads 24/7. And to my original point, if this vehicle isn't permitted, cheering for it to be destroyed is a tyrannical anti-Elon response. I don't have to be an Elon fan to call that attitude out as deranged.
Is the cybertruck a commercial or a passenger vehicle? If tesla want to reclassify it as a commercial vehicle then they can do the conformity testing under those regulations, and then it will be subject to all the other rules such as class of license needed to drive it, having a tacho, having a speed limiter etc. If they want to sell it as a passenger vehicle then it needs to comply with those regulations - which, by the way, are still the same as the EU ones, so this isn't a UK-only issue.
My understanding is that the Cybertruck is less likely to cause a pedestrian fatality than an F150 due to its lower hood height and better forward visibility.
But that's a pretty low bar. Crafting regulations that force the F150 back to the sensible dimensions it had last century would be an awesome side effect if it can ride on Cybertruck hate for support.
Elon is playing dirty, so should the UK and EU. Hit him where it hurts. Ban the sale of Teslas. The enemy is at the gates.
I'm confident that many countries have massive Tesla tariffs being readied to roll out in response to the Trump tariffs coming tomorrow.
Raccoons sometimes create temporary 'day beds' in thick brush or dense vegetation.
Is that you Elon?
Shit posting on X = playing dirty?
Bankrolling a neo-nazi party (AfD) and almost the Reform Party is not shit posting.
I wasn't aware of that but wouldn't it be against the principles of democracy to penalize someone due to their political beliefs?
>to penalize someone due to their political beliefs?
That line was crossed a long time ago with cancel culture, so this isn't news.
God I'm so tired of these pathetic attempts at evading the point. No, it's not against the principles of democracy to fight back against someone trying to destabilize your democracy. The tolerance paradox applies here, Elon is begging, daring the UK to do something, and all is fair in love and war.
AfD is not a neo-nazi party. They are one of the oldest parties and the second largest party in Germany, and there is a "pro-democracy" move to ban them and attack their members. They are conservative nationalists but so what? The whole point of any political party is supposed to be to look out for the country itself and its constituents first. I'm so sick and tired of liberals acting like it is some kind of ultimate racist evil to be against excessive immigration. I'm also really tired of having to be concerned with European politics. But for whatever reason, most Western countries have similar issues with bad policies.
> They are one of the oldest parties
Founded 6 February 2013; 11 years ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_for_Germany
[Granted, many of the current political parties in Germany are from '45 so also not that old, but one of the oldest parties is a strange claim]
Perhaps they meant that AfD is a spiritual successor to one of the oldest, even pre '45 parties? You know, the one with similar ideas.
AfD is not the oldest, or even that old of a party. And they absolutely are neo Nazis. Not sure if you're thinking about another party, or just sympathetic to their garbage worldview, but ignorance isn't an excuse to carry water for Nazis.
My bad, it indeed seems to not be the oldest. But it is certainly not brand new or unpopular. Can you give me evidence that they are Nazis? I don't mean finding a few Nazis that happen to be members, I mean proof that their platform is the Nazi program. As I'm sure you are aware, the Nazi party is banned in Germany and even displaying Nazi symbology can get you in trouble there.
> I don't mean finding a few Nazis that happen to be members
Ah the few local Nazis that just happened to stumble upon the membership, while the rest of them were just fine with it. Reminds me of the good old "you're not marching with Nazis, you are a Nazi".
It was a serious question. You are free to answer it. I'm going to assume you're full of it if you don't answer it.
The serious answer is this: Nazis strive to replace democratic government with a fascist dictatorship. They wish to get rid of people they deem as their enemies. Anyone who tolerates people with ideology like this cannot be viewed as anything but the same as them. So, if your party has a few Nazis, it's all Nazis.
>The serious answer is this: Nazis strive to replace democratic government with a fascist dictatorship.
So how is it democracy to ban this party and harass its members again? Should Germans be concerned about other parties adopting fascist tactics to control who they can vote for?
>They wish to get rid of people they deem as their enemies.
So like the left, correct?
>So, if your party has a few Nazis, it's all Nazis.
Nobody has presented me with proof that any Nazis are in AfD, and that there are no Nazis in other parties. I don't know if AfD is open like US political parties, where one can just claim to be a member. But unless someone is at least widely known to be an open Nazi, and the party registered them as a member with full knowledge of that (or at least refused to revoke membership of a known Nazi), it's all slander.
What is your take on the leadership of Ukraine having literal bonafide Nazis in it? Are they a concern of yours, or do you just accept what the "thought leaders" tell you?
After certain people have called Republicans in the US Nazis for the past 8 years, I'm so done with people who pull out that word for anyone they disagree with. Pony up some proof or buzz off.
> one of the oldest parties and the second largest party in Germany
What? They were founded in 2013.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_for_Germany
As for being "nationalist conservative":
> In January 2017, Höcke in a speech stated, in reference to the Berlin Holocaust Memorial, that "Germans are the only people in the world who plant a monument of shame in the heart of the capital" and criticized this "laughable policy of coming to terms with the past"
^ that is just one of the rather mild things that are just a constant in that milieu.
His statement is hyperbolic and perhaps strikes some people as insensitive, but what do you think it means to come to terms with something like that? A memorial doesn't seem unreasonable (though I have not seen the memorial), but what is unreasonable is expecting people to hang their heads low forever and sell out their own interests in contrition for that was done by a small number of despots in their country three or more generations ago. Most Germans even at the time had no idea that the Holocaust was happening, and were horrified to find out just like the rest of the world. What if the administration of your country decided to kill millions of people somewhere for whatever reason? It already has on multiple occasions, and is there any memorial for the victims anywhere in the capital for each occasion?
Dredging up the past might be educational or enlightening, but in some cases it inspires people who don't know each other to hate each other or else to become hypersensitive to offenses by other groups. Also, being against immigration is not bad. Some cultures just don't work well together and can't be mixed, like oil and water. When a situation like that is identified, then it should be talked about and reversed if necessary to PREVENT violence.
> what is unreasonable is expecting people to hang their heads low forever and sell out their own interests in contrition
What is that even in reference to? The AfD is fully neoliberal, they're the last to talk about selling out.
> for that was done by a small number of despots in their country three or more generations ago. Most Germans even at the time had no idea that the Holocaust was happening
Let's just accept that as face value: and then we found out, and decided this must NEVER EVER happen again. Not "not more than in one of three generations". And that requires teaching each new generation everything of what happened there. If you don't have the stamina and intellectual honesty for that, there's the exit.
And "a small number of despots" didn't commit the Holocaust, and the Holocaust wasn't the only crime the Nazis committed, "just" the one that shocked even people who had accepted all sorts of other atrocities -- as long as they thought it might mean they would win.
It's not a negative thing to teach, just like it's not negative to teach Americans about slavery. That is what happened, you cannot change it. And you cannot have dignity while denying the truth, period. Not ever. You can have some armband to identify with, but it doesn't make you more dignified, it just sets the real you aside to gather dust, while you stare at the armband.
> Dredging up the past might be educational or enlightening
If you use electricity, is that also "dredging up inventions from the past"? It's not negative to know what happened, and where this mindless identification with "sides" and slogans can lead to. It's a discovery we made and will keep, considering the price it came with.
> but in some cases it inspires people who don't know each other to hate each other or else to become hypersensitive to offenses by other groups.
Now that's quite the trick: teaching about how propaganda and peer pressure enabled persecution at such giant scale might "inspire people who don't know each other to hate each other"? How so? Who exactly would be hated, by whom, by Germans learning about and staying aware of German history?
> Some cultures just don't work well together and can't be mixed, like oil and water.
Yeah, like people from Hamburg and Bavaria, right? What cultures are you talking about? What is "the" German culture, what cultures are compatible with it, based on what properties, and what cultures aren't, based on what properties? Because I only ever hear the generic adjective as if it means something, from people who want to somehow be "proud to be German", but then barely speak the language and are, time and time again, either unaware or dismissive of the history.
>Let's just accept that as face value: and then we found out, and decided this must NEVER EVER happen again. Not "not more than in one of three generations". And that requires teaching each new generation everything of what happened there.
Let's just accept that as face value, these events become less relevant to each passing generation, and you don't rightfully get to decide what your great(x20) grandchildren are concerned with. How many people in Mongolia do you think are mourning the atrocities of Ghengis Khan? Whether you believe it or not, the Holocaust will reach a point of irrelevance, just like basically every bad deed done under the sun.
>If you don't have the stamina and intellectual honesty for that, there's the exit.
Honestly, dragging up the past and applying labels to people when they don't deserve it is not going to prevent any atrocity. It's going to create bad blood between groups of people who otherwise would have no issue.
>It's not a negative thing to teach, just like it's not negative to teach Americans about slavery. That is what happened, you cannot change it. And you cannot have dignity while denying the truth, period. Not ever.
So, apart from "telling the truth" tactfully in a way that does not create improper appearances, I think disabusing yourself of your own dignity over things that a small percentage of the population of the country who happened to look like you generations ago is a bad thing. Do you believe children are responsible for the evils of their parents? If you don't believe that, then why do believe everyone who looks a certain way in a country is responsible for what other people who look like them did many years before? Demanding undeserved shame and even monetary consideration from people who have done nothing wrong is a good way to make yourself one of the most hated people in the world.
>If you use electricity, is that also "dredging up inventions from the past"? It's not negative to know what happened, and where this mindless identification with "sides" and slogans can lead to. It's a discovery we made and will keep, considering the price it came with.
It's not up to you what lessons anyone else in the distant future will learn. As for "sides" it seems to me that some people are quick to label anyone else they disagree with a tiny mustache man, which trivializes the German tragedy and totally qualifies as "mindless identification" and othering of everyone else. As in, "If you're not with us on immigration, you're literally a Nazi, and we don't talk to Nazis." So the lesson is not really learned now is it? Except when Jewish people literally enter the conversation, it makes no sense, and it is often used to shut down legitimate criticism of people who happen to be Jewish.
>Now that's quite the trick: teaching about how propaganda and peer pressure enabled persecution at such giant scale might "inspire people who don't know each other to hate each other"? How so? Who exactly would be hated, by whom, by Germans learning about and staying aware of German history?
How so? Are you kidding? It seems to me that on the surface, white German people are hated as a whole by at least a notable minority of every other group of Germans. Jewish Germans will be suspicious of non-Jewish Germans, especially nationalists.
To give you a non-German example of how dwelling on the past can be unhealthy, I return to the US. In the US it has become fashionable to associate racism with patriotism, as if you can't love this country without being a racist, simply because some people in its distant past used slave labor before (labor from both whites and blacks, and a practice which was common at the time). There are many examples of people who don't know each other getting into awful situations with other people who they don't know, all because of historical baggage that they were taught about people who look a certain way. I take it you have been privileged to avoid any such situations in your life, but they do happen. Why should a white person in 2025 be afraid to look a black compatriot in the eye because of misdeeds of OTHER white people hundreds of years before he was born? Why should a black person view any given white person with suspicion or even disdain, except for having been told that people who look like him (and were in truth VERY different people, living in VERY different times) did something against some other black people in the past?
>>Some cultures just don't work well together and can't be mixed, like oil and water.
>What cultures are you talking about? What is "the" German culture, what cultures are compatible with it, based on what properties, and what cultures aren't, based on what properties?
For the Germans? That would be the cultures of many of the Muslim immigrants who want a Muslim theocracy to enforce Sharia Law and burkas for all women, for example, compared to the culture of the natives. Basically all Western cultures are incompatible with that yet our overlords keep trying to push people together with incompatible cultures that have never lived together and have no desire to live together. I think they want to tear down any unity that can exist in any country, so that people are too distracted with each other to notice how they're getting screwed.
>What is "the" German culture, what cultures are compatible with it, based on what properties, and what cultures aren't, based on what properties? Because I only ever hear the generic adjective as if it means something, from people who want to somehow be "proud to be German", but then barely speak the language and are, time and time again, either unaware or dismissive of the history.
I don't know because I'm not German, but every group of people has its own customs. I imagine that Germans identify with many of the Western values of liberalism and democracy, have their own cultural habits, food preferences (including consumption of pork and alcohol), valuing hard work and precision in engineering, etc. There is a lot to the country and its people besides unfortunate events in the early 20th century. Up until recent decades it was also almost entirely white ethnic Germans living there. Why aren't they allowed to be proud of their culture, and to simply (and rarely) denounce awful things that they had nothing to do with, and for whose benefit should they hang their heads in constant shame?
America is a far more diverse place than Germany with a much shorter history and I think it would be foolish to insinuate that Americans don't have a culture or anything to be proud of, because of any of the unfortunate things that some Americans did in the past.
Your question becomes far more ludicrous if you substitute anything else for "German." What does it mean to be proud to be anything? Black, white, Chinese, Indian, American, British, Nigerian, Catholic, Protestant, Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim, tall, handsome, etc.... It is a little bit silly to be proud of something that is purely circumstantial, especially when it comes to culture, but it makes about as much sense as being proud of your own family. That is, you are part of your family and your family is a part of you (to the extent that you want either of these things to be the case).
> I'm so sick and tired of liberals acting like it is some kind of ultimate racist evil to be against excessive immigration.
Im also sick and tired of Liberals not realising that they are abetting corporate slavery via excessive immigration and rationalizing it that they are helping these immigrants. And arguing ”we need skilled immigrants”. What these Liberals are advocating is brain draining these countries which helps to perpetuate their poverty and backwardness if you take all their educated and skilled people.
Good. We should do the same here in Canada
Sadly they're giving it him back if he can prove he has insurance, should just crush it IMO.
What’s fucking sad is we have people advocating government seizure and destruction of someone’s private property just because they don’t like the rich guy who’s company made the product.
Yeah that's the only reason for sure, has nothing to do with the existing regulations on vehicle dimensions or the fact these things crumble or explode if you glance in their direction.
How about we consider a solution that doesn’t involve the seizure and destruction of someone’s personal property no matter the reason.
I am just spitballing here but maybe something like— ”We can’t allow you to drive that vehicle on the public roads, but instead of taking it from you and crushing it, feel free to just not drive it on the public roads or sell it to someone who lives in a place where they are allowed to be driven.”
Yeah, that seems like a better solution.
It seems to have escaped your attention that they did the exact opposite and "felt free" to drive and illegal vehicle on public roads with no insurance, so anyone they hit wouldn't have any compensation. And you can't buy them here so they brought it in knowing they couldn't legally drive it on the roads.
Not the sharpest, are you?
Are you really arguing for the idea that governments should seize and destroy private property?
I may not be the sharpest knife in the drawer, but at least I respect other people’s things. I’d rather be dull than a thief…but to each their own.
what about if I drive a military tank with a biological weapon inside, should I be able to or should government intervene and seize it?
Are you really arguing that the libertarian way is to consider laws optional?
There is no way he can legally use the vehicle on any UK roads, giving him it back, when he has already flagrantly violated the laws, is encouraging him to violate them some more.
>…laws optional? When someone commits a traffic or road infraction in the UK is the response to confiscate their vehicle and demolish it? Probably not, I am not in the UK, but I am pretty sure that is not the penalty and never has been for road violations.
My guess is the driver is probably fined. If they are a repeat offender, likely a license to drive is taken away. Certainly if they drive after that, perhaps incarceration is considered. Not sure that there has never been a penalty where something akin to “smashing someone’s toys with a hammer to stop them playing with them” has ever been considered a reasonable penalty and effective deterrent.
But hey, maybe y’all have a different perspective. If so ah salud.
The amount of love for tyranny and hate for Elon is unreal. The UK definitely allows other bigger and more dangerous vehicles besides the Cybertruck, as proven by the fact that other countries allow thousands of Cybertrucks and electric Hummers. So it really is a matter of having adequate insurance and permits at the end of the day.
To be legal in the UK, vehicles have to have a certificate of conformity, getting one is the responsibility of the manufacturer. Tesla have done that for their other models, but not for cybertruck. I assume that's because the have decided the costs of getting cybertruck compliant with UK regulations would be too high, or not practical.
That's a business decision made by Tesla, not victimisation of poor old Elon, whatever the Musk fanbois think.
I'm not a Tesla fan but that sounds like a boring paperwork issue and not a real safety issue, as far more dangerous things are 100% legal to roll on UK roads 24/7. And to my original point, if this vehicle isn't permitted, cheering for it to be destroyed is a tyrannical anti-Elon response. I don't have to be an Elon fan to call that attitude out as deranged.
Its not a mere issue of size, it fails to comply with UK pedestrian safety laws.
Is huge delivery truck safer for pedestrians than a Cybertruck? This sounds like a paperwork issue and not a legitimate safety issue.
Is the cybertruck a commercial or a passenger vehicle? If tesla want to reclassify it as a commercial vehicle then they can do the conformity testing under those regulations, and then it will be subject to all the other rules such as class of license needed to drive it, having a tacho, having a speed limiter etc. If they want to sell it as a passenger vehicle then it needs to comply with those regulations - which, by the way, are still the same as the EU ones, so this isn't a UK-only issue.