volvoxvsmarla

How about we collect the potential inheritance of everyone that passes and then divide it equally to everyone who became 18 that year. Or it goes to a government fund that pays for a 30k bonus to everyone turning 18 (or 25, etc).

I am seeing this myself. I grew up in a Munich suburb and everyone was growing up in houses except my migrant ass and the other migrant asses, we were in rented apartments. Then, when we became young adults, guess who didn't have to pay for rent, who was rather worryless about their housing situation long term? Because everyone knew they would inherit the houses that were surging in value and are now between one and several million euros worth.

Now I am getting older and am friends with refugees. You want to tell me that the daughter of the guy who worked himself off after leaving Afghanistan at age 15, learning German but only managing to get a salesman apprenticeship, deserves nothing as inheritance? Because this is what it is going to be. His parents have worked their asses off raising 9 kids in a small home, they had no money but they gave it all.

We are all in our very early 30s and we can already extrapolate how differently our financial situations, our security nets, and our children's security nets will be. And we are lucky living in a social democracy.

I still quote Dark on a daily basis so this one I guess

God that sounds disgusting. I think, for the first time in 4+ years of sobriety, I actually feel genuinely sad for not being able to try that one out. It sounds so awful it must be good.

His health issues have been in the news lately

His health issues have been in the news for like two decades. There's always another new article on how he has severe health problems and will die anytime soon. He's been terminally ill and dying since the millennium panic

I'm amazed no one has pointed out the possibility that this was staged by Putin himself as a prerequisite to enforce greater surveillance, military and police presence, claim opposition and Ukraine to be terrorists, and so on. This is, besides a malfunction, much more likely than a failed assassination attempt that went this badly, doesn't have a suspect, and got reported on.

Again - there is and must be a distinction between the blame, responsibility and guilt of an 18 year old uneducated soldier, nurse etc and a political leader. But this does not automatically absolve the former from all responsibility and guilt. You should and hopefully do focus on the latter's guilt and responsibility, as it is much larger than the others'. Focussing on the people who follow orders is not what I would advertise for and this isn't the intent, it is actually the exact opposite. By differentiating different aspects and kinds of guilt you have tools and language at hand to talk about it without putting everyone in the same boat.

It is not a black and white issue. Everyone got blood on their hands - you and me included - just in different amounts, in different ways.

Very honestly - I've still not read the book entirely and I have started because I felt some feeling of guilt myself for being a Russian living outside Russia. I think that's actually exactly what Jaspers, along with his students (the book is basically a dialectic lecture written down with results of work of his class from one semester), was trying to figure out. So I am not the best person to lecture you about that.

From as far as I have read these distinctions are exactly what allow people to talk about guilt, responsibility, trauma, the past, etc, without judging everyone by the same standards. Like, a criminal is judged by the court who defines for a crime they committed. A politician who took part in ordering crimes will be judged by the victor of a war. A soldier (just like a secretary) will be judged in dialogue with others and by his conscience for their individual actions, even if they were following orders. And a normal person who looked away or didn't actively do their best to stop the atrocities that happen in the world, well, this person's metaphysical guilt can basically only be judged by a metaphysical instance itself, be it God or another undefined transcendence. Basically all of us bear the latter.

They are very distinct and do not have the same repercussions. It is without doubt that political leaders have a much different, much more facetted responsibility for crimes committed. And we should focus on that. But this does not clean the people who followed their orders from all guilt, and their responsibility and crimes (against humanity) will be judged, just in a different way.

Edit: I've added a better phrased summary in my original comment above, since I have realized that translating German political philosophy isn't my strength exactly.

In the aftermath of World War II, Carl Jaspers formulated in Die Schuldfrage that there are four types of guilt (/responsibility). Criminal guilt, political guilt, moral guilt, and metaphysical guilt. It is a great distinction in general. Yes, political leaders bear a different kind of guilt for the actions than the soldiers, but acting on clearly morally wrong commands do not obliterate guilt from the soldiers. Just like everyone who basically didn't give their life in pursuit of the good and the right bears some metaphysical guilt for what is happening in the world.

Edit: I realized that, since I am neither an English native, nor very articulate in philosophy or politics, I would rather ask perplexity for a summary. So here it is: Karl Jaspers, in his work The Question of German Guilt, distinguishes four categories of guilt and assigns specific instances to each:

1. Criminal Guilt:

   Definition: Violations of objectively provable laws that are legally considered crimes.

   Instance: The court, which determines the facts and applies the laws in formal proceedings.

2. Political Guilt:

   Definition: Arises from the actions of statesmen and the shared responsibility of every citizen for the government of their state.

   Instance: The power and will of the victor, especially after a lost war, as in the case of Germany after World War II.

3. Moral Guilt:

   Definition: Refers to individual actions for which every person is morally responsible, even if carried out under orders.

   Instance: One’s own conscience and dialogue with others.

4. Metaphysical Guilt:

   Definition: A shared responsibility for all injustice in the world, based on human solidarity. It arises when one does not do everything possible to prevent injustice.

   Instance: God or transcendence.

Jaspers emphasizes that this differentiation is meant to avoid simplistic or generalized accusations of guilt. He rejects the idea of collective criminal or moral guilt for an entire people, arguing that guilt is always individual.

I know that's not your point, I just want to point out that toddlers aren't selfish as much as they just haven't developed empathy yet, as a sense of empathy usually only develops after the 4th birthday. The golden rule just doesn't work for toddlers, they can't put themselves in someone else's shoes and imagine how they feel. There's a riddle/test with a doll and a closet that illustrates this well.

Jesus Christ no no no, I take it back, I take dying from a cold please

From my knowledge, here in Germany, there was a strong flu wave this winter. Basically everyone I know got a severe and long RTI, but I mostly know other parents of kindergarteners, so there is a big bias. However, it wasn't even localized to my area, my family is in another part of the country and similar story there.

I am subscribed to a kind of weekly questionnaire about RTI by Robert Koch Institute, there is also a report attached to it. I remember reading that there was, indeed, a stronger RTI and flu wave this year.

First it was hanging, now it's shooting. Make up your mind. It might help to first get your head out of your ass though.