You’re looking for counter-arguments for Solipsism.

Wikipedia’s definition:

Solipsism is the philosophical idea that only one’s mind is sure to exist.

Further reading: Solipsism and the Problem of Other Minds

Thread with some counter-arguments: https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/89321/what-are-the-best-arguments-against-solipsism

The one I personally chose for myself is the pragmatic one: Believing reality is a fantasy doesn’t actually changes your experience of it.

Edit: Broken links.

Probably. I haven’t tried that, but I should.

The learning curve there might be too challenging if not familiar with certain concepts beforehand…

It’s not that hard to achieve a working system with Arch, so not bad as a Linux 101.

That’s right. It’s a great recommendation for learning about Linux.

For anyone who needs something that just works, there’s a lot better options.

I like this list a lot. I’m actually going to bookmark it.

From that article:

Eco reduces the qualities of what he calls “Ur-Fascism, or Eternal Fascism” down to 14 “typical” features.

Which of those 14 typical features you see in Milei’s movement to call it fascism? Because I see none, honestly.

Edit: Grammar errors.

wasting argentinas money on himself

you mean like Cristina Fernández de Kirchner?

In case you need context (because most people commenting doesn’t seem to know anything about Argentina): Cristina Fernández de Kirchner served as Argentina’s president between 2007 and 2015. Then, she was vice president in 2019 with Alberto Fernández as president.

The other candidate Sergio Massa has been Minister of Economy since 3 August 2022.

What’s your definitiom of fascisim?

Do you think complete Dolarization of the economy and closing the central bank is not a policy? (Just to name the more relevant)

Do you think the other candidate, Sergio Massa (current minister of economy) had a real economic policy?

I’m asking for real here.

Amen.

For people who are not from Argentina, you should at least make the effort to understand the current problems argentinian society is facing.

If you don’t care to do that, why even share any opinion at all and just hate Milei.

There’s a lot of good reasons to hate the other candidates too. Even more than Milei if you ask me. The thing is, this guy does not come from the elite ruling class.

Disclaimer: I am not Argentinian, but I have family and friends over there.

Fuentes: Miami me lo confirmó.

Why the downvotes?

Saying “Nazism and Comunism are the same because National-Socialism” has the same academic rigor as saying “Liberalism, the convert name of Fascisim”.

Nothing alike.

Hold whatever opinion you want regarding any of those ideologies, but at least make the effort to base your opinion on something.

Stop being so based.

1st-world leftists are going to downvote you.

En español deberían decir estadounidenses, que es el gentilicio que tienen en este idioma.

En inglés es batalla perdida.

Mexico is also in North America though, not in Central America.

LATAM are usually pissy about the term “Americans” because the “geographical division” colloquially seem to be more of a third vs. first world division rather than a geographical division.

You can see how people from LATAM usually call themselves “americanos” to include everyone from The Americas, but Canada and USA think “North America” doesn’t include Mexico.

When referring to the entire continent, I’ve heard “The Americas” in English.

Just a reminder: Central America is another division of the American continent.

There’s also United States of Brazil.

But you’ve got “Mexican” and “Brazilian” for both of those countries that include United States in their proper names.

I’d continue to say “United statean” in Spanish because that’s an accepted name in the Spanish language. There’s no confusion to what country you’re referring to.

But in English it is a lost battle. If you mean to include people from the entire continent, you’d have to say “American, as in the continent”.

Edit: The current official name of Brazil is Federative Republic of Brazil.

That’s true about fossil fuels. But it seems you’re interpreting my comment as if I was defending the use of fossil fuels.

What I’m pointing out here is that the fact that hydroelectric energy production (although very clean) is not really an alternative for many countries as a substitute for fossil fuels. It is not a matter or decision lack of attention or investment. Many developed countries actually have most of their potential capacity installed, yet that accounts for very little of their electric demand. Take Germany as an example:

Germany had a hydropower installed capacity in 2016 of 11,258 MW (…). In the same year, the country generated 21.5 TWh from hydroelectric plants, representing about 3% of the country’s total electricity generation.

The hydropower capacity in Germany is considered mature and the potential already almost completely exploited, with limited room for growth. In recent years, growth in capacity has mainly come from repowering of existing plants.

Source: Hydroelectricity in Germany

Of course, there’s exceptions (% of total domestic electricity generation): Canada (59.0%), Norway (96%), Paraguay (100%) or Brazil (64.7%).

Actually, from what I can tell, hydro seem to be so convenient (it can be ramped up/down on-demand, used for storage, cheap) that most countries that can afford it tend to maximize their installed capacity to the extend their hydrography allows them to.

The thing with hydro is that it is limited by the hydrography of the country.

Once you’ve built all damns it was possible, that’s it. And that usually only covers a just small portion of a country’s energy needs.