I reckon “polish american” means something like “culturally polish, but living permanently in america”

Beyond that, does it really matter? Labels are just shortcuts to give other a broad overview. Tell people what ever you want. You can always add more details later if you get to know them better.

There is no way to find text about anything without various biases and values embedded in it. You just need to approach reading with a critical lens. Obviously more critical in some domains than others.

deleted by creator

Yes. Perhaps fairly chaotic for a decade or two, but then much better 😅

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Political_systems

Have a read of Wengrow and Graeber’s The Dawn Of Everything. It’s a re-examination of the political implications of archeology, and it’s pretty inspiring. Definitely dispelled me of any notion that capitalism or communism or totalitarianism were the only plausible systems.

Vendor lock-in.

You still haven’t clarified what you mean by it…

1. Fixed definitions for words do not exist. Language is constantly evolving.
2. The US IS a representative democracy, and whether that’s actually functionally providing government by the people doesn’t really prevent this use of the term by a vast majority of people, whether you or I agree with it or not.
3. In the context of the question, I think the US seems to fit more into the OP’s democracy category. I agree I’m using the term loosely, but does your terminology disagreement actually add anything?

Between what? Democracy and oligarchy? Yeah, I guess. Most of those terms are often used pretty loosely…

Guess it depends on how you define the term. The US certainly fits the minimalist representative definition. I don’t think equity is inherently part of the definition… Obviously I think it should be, but that’s more of a value overlaid on the organisational system, I think…

I mean, if you’re rich and can leave for somewhere else, that still works for you. Assad being the latest example.

The US is a democracy (for now), and has backed multiple coups in other countries. Nicaragua is probably the classic example, but there are many, many more. See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_regime_change

Are you trying to say that authoritarianism is a component of fascism, but fascism isn’t the only type of authoritarianism? 'Cause that’s not super clear from your wording.

You realise the only laws relating to restrictions on freedoms around trans issues are being implemented by conservatives, right?

Sometimes the normal just-staying-up-to-date news is basically indistinguishable though

Is it also a case of survivorship bias? Like, I am not super versed in Nazi history, but… There are famous “smart” Nazis like Goebbels and Himmler and Speer - are they only well known because a) they slowly emerged as influential and/or b) it became clear years later that they were the ones behind the wheel?

'Cause I do think that trump and musk are dumb as bricks, but I don’t think Steve Bannon is, and there are probably others like him…

I work in the risk assessment space, so they are kind of critical to be aware of, for me :)

Adding my own explanation, because I think it clicks better for me (especially when I write it down):

1. Pick a door. You have a 66% chance of picking a wrong door, and a 33% of picking the right door.
2. Monty excludes a door with 100% certainty
3. IF you picked a wrong door, then there’s a 100% chance the remaining door is correct (so the contingent probability is p(switch|picked wrong) = 100%), so the total chance of the remaining door being correct is p(switch|picked wrong)* p(picked wrong) = 66%.
4. IF you picked the right door, then Monty’s reveal gives you no new information, because both the other doors were wrong, so p(switch|picked right) = 50%, which means that p(switch|picked right) * p(picked right) = 50% * 33% = 17%.
5. p(don't switch|picked wrong) * p(picked wrong) = 50% * 66% = 33% (because of the remaining doors including the one you picked, you have no more information)
6. p(don't switch|picked right) * p(picked right) = 50% * 33% = 17% (because both of the unpicked doors are wrong, Monty didn’t give you more information)

So there’s a strong benefit of switching (66% to 33%) if you picked wrong, and even odds of switching if you picked right (17% in both cases).

Please feel free to correct me if I’m wrong here.