I’m not from the US, but I believe the last time one of those entities meaningfully strayed from the line of the US government was 164 years ago. So, saying the US is basically a confederation with its members acting independently on the world stage is a bit of a stretch, don’t you think?
While I agree with the Duopolies are bad statement. I don’t see how Brazil or China would be able to break this in the near to medium future.
Brazil/Embraer are quite happy in the regional/ business jet niche. Their CEO recently said that they have no plans to break into new markets. And even if they would start developing a new narrow body aircraft, they would need at least a decade before they could deliver it.
China/Comac theoretically have a narrow body aircraft in production, but they seem to have lost the ambition to get this aircraft certified outside of China. Looks like they are unable to meet international safety standards with the C919. For the C929 or the C939 to be competitive , they would need to fly international and thus fulfill even higher standards than the ones already missed by the C919.
There is a fine line between valid criticism of gender roles & sexism.
An example of the former would be, “Men are dangerous for women”. Of course not all men are dangerous, but it describes the experience of many women & how they have to navigate the world, to not be assaulted.
This one describes the dynamic of a relationship between individuals & assigns a thought pattern to one of those individuals, based on their gender.
Maybe I missed some nuances here & I would be glad to be enlightened, but this looks like plain sexism.
Nope they didn’t do that. Neither did I. But maybe you should look up, what it means to be a citizen.
My question was rhetorical, and this doesn’t even answer it in the slightest.