There's a custom patched wine that can run version 1 reasonably well, and efforts were ongoing for version 2. Haven't really tried it since I'm not a artist. https://codeberg.org/Wanesty/affinity-wine-docs
"Who was Horst Wessel, and why are people comparing Charlie Kirk to him?
Within hours of Kirk’s death, opposite ends of the political spectrum invoked the Nazi martyr"
> While Kirk’s rhetoric was combative — he railed against immigrants, gender ideology and “global elites” — he operated in a democratic system and advocated for civil disagreement.
Kirk was openly happy about Pelosi shooting and advocated for a patriot to bail out the shooter.
Kirk should not be killed. He also was not someone who advocated civil disagreement or anything like that. He helped to create toxic culture that exists now and did it intentionally.
Horst Wessel was killed at time when Germany was nominally a democracy. Nazi took power only later. It was dying democracy, just like the democracy in the USA is dying.
Nonsense. You are making the assumption that laughing is always voluntary, and only to communicate that you find something amusing. Both parts of that are false - for example many people will laugh instinctively as part of a fight flight response when the perceive danger from others to communicate "hey im with you and not scared, don't hurt me more". People who hate veing tickled because they feel defenseless will still laugh when tickled, for one concrete specific.
You must be one of those people who have decided they're charming and funny, without realizing that people only chuckle at your "jokes" because they are worried about what you'll do when they tell you to stop making them uncomfortable.
Fault doesn't really have anything to do with the original assertion. In any case, that's a pretty weird take on comedy. When you hear a joke, do you ponder it, decide to interpret it as funny, and then deliberately choose to laugh?
I don’t think you understand why things are funny.
Almost everything that gets a laugh in a comedy show isn’t funny because it’s clever. What happens is the comedian says something “obvious”. They say something that you were kinda already thinking - even if you weren’t consciously aware of it. We laugh because we’re acknowledged and feel seen for what we were already thinking, and when lots of people laugh it feels good because we feel connected to the group. Our laughter is a release of tension connected to feeling part of the group.
If you don’t believe me, do the experiment for yourself. Watch a comedy show. When people laugh, ask yourself why they laughed then.
My favorite example is this clip of Billy Connolly from back when he would play the banjo on stage. Just as he goes to play the first note, the string on his banjo snaps. There’s this awkward pause, and tension in the audience. Then he looks up at the crowd and says “Well that’s just gone and F-ed it, hasn’t it?” And everyone laughs. My take is this: We were all holding tension. He said the obvious thing. We laugh because suddenly everyone realises we aren’t alone in our tension - suddenly we’re all (including the comedian) in this experience together.
“Offensive” humour is even more subversive than people think because it makes it common knowledge that we were all thinking some thought. It’s an opportunity to collectively acknowledge of our humanity. And that’s something some people (perversely) want us to deny.
I don't think this is true. Comedy is often times leading you down a somewhat obvious train of thought and then surprisingly diverting in a completely unexpected direction.
It's not that everyone in the audience knew exactly what the comedian was going to say, it's that the comedian made them think something and then surprised them with something funny or offensive that's completely different.
