Just too much power for one person. Even if they’re not in charge of a global internet provider, your average billionaire can singlehandedly affect the lives of millions of people (employees, customers, bystanders) with no democratic oversight at all. It’s just not something that should exist.
Meanwhile, until he was supporting USA and Ukraine, he was the good white hero for your ilk.
Yeah, because of that. This isn’t the gotcha you think it is, you aren’t uncovering a double standard. People deem helping Ukraine righteous, and helping Russia treasonous, this is no secret.
No I didn’t, I didn’t ignore anyone. I am answering your statement. We are talking in the context of whom was considering him a “good white hero”. As per your statement:
he was the good white hero for your ilk.
I’m not going to specify the whole context of the conversation when it’s clear whom I’m talking about. You established the group of people that worshipped him in your original comment, I explained why.
People deem helping Ukraine righteous, and helping Russia treasonous, this is no secret.
Oh you did ignore over 6 billion people that condemn Ukraine’s Nazism issues on the UN voting, and their support for Russia. Anglosphere consists of merely ~12% of the world’s population, and their Russia bashing undemocratic stance is NOT representative of what the whole world thinks. What white people think or say is not that important.
You seem to not understand how context in a conversation works. Look, The original comment said the following in a post about how Elon is acting agaisnt US interest:
This is why billionaires shouldn’t exist they are treasonous
So they are probably american. Then you answered them with:
he was the good white hero for your ilk.
Then I said the following, to you, after your comment:
People deem helping Ukraine righteous, and helping Russia treasonous, this is no secret.
In this context, “People” can mean everybody, yes, but can also mean the subset of people we are talking about already, which I obviously was mentioning. I don’t really get why you are being so confrontational because I didn’t include the opinion of everybody in the world when trying to explain why americans or the west now think that Elon is a traitor.
Let me give you an example in good faith. When there’s a meeting between neighbours, they vote on X, and the president of the community states “The people have talked”, are they also ignoring the other 8 billion people that exist in the world? No, because it’s obvious that “pople” in that context refers to the subset of people only referring to the neighbours.
I really can’t explain to you more how context works, if you are that hellbent in chastisizing me for explaining to you why “those people” think like that in general, we have nothing more to talk about.
It has to. You generalised that all people hate Russia and love Ukraine. A lot of the world is NOT what you imply to be the whole world, and is a mere 10-15% of the world’s population. Rest of the world fears the Nazi disease brewing in Ukraine, having the potential to travel around to Asia and Middle East. We do not want America-funded Mujahideen clones. Russia is helping us.
Here in the rest of the world we fear the brewing nazi diseases, and how Russia is already a country that is fully infected, whatever they bullshit on paper about nazis.
Wow doubling down are ya? So I take it your levels of humour and intelligence got so much praise at Parler/Coat/Truth Social/whatever so you thought to try your luck here. Lil’ trolling the lefties. Everyone sees through it.
If your definition of Nazism is “invading”, then USA seems to be correctly the biggest Reich empire on earth. Good, coherent logic! Maybe we can agree on something.
Russia is historically and culturally the most anti-Nazi country in the world, and by law, Nazism is fully outlawed there, unlike Ukraine, where Stepan Bandera is worshipped and there are monuments for these Nazis. forward.com/…/nazi-collaborator-monuments-in-ukra… Can you show me shit like this in Russia?
Oh, wait, I am not done with you just yet. For people like you…
Wait, and how exactly are any Ukrainians on Russian territory in order to paint blood swastikas on their women after killing them? They are defending their country, meaning they stay mainly in their country. Most haven’t had set foot in Russia since the start of the war. So what are the Russian women doing in Ukraine?
You know, this sounds a lot like Russian propaganda trying to make Ukrainians seem like fascists while they are not the ones invading sovereign nations.
Their leader is a Jew, you know that right?
So even if what you say were true, do you think it would have happened if Russia didn’t illegally invade a sovereign nation?
Tankie’s gonna tankie. This guy thinks he’s uncovered some ultimate hypocrisy which justifies Russia’s invasion. Like, America has neo-Nazi’s, therefore, it’s totally chill for Russia to use boxcutters to emasculate POWs (war crime), or execute civilians (war crime), or rape (war crime) civilians, or deport Ukrainian children to Russia (war crime).
Do you know the demographics of DPR and LPR, which is eastern Ukraine? They are full of ethnic Russians, the very people that Ukrainian Nazis have been oppressing and murdering since 2014. Ukraine was part of USSR, in case someone as illiterate as you did not know. You know, Russia was many countries before, so there are many Russians around the country of Russia. I know, hard to understand.
Last I heard, Zelensky is a Zionist. Zionists are not the same as Jews. I think you support Israel and Nazism, which may be a perfect combination for your western ideology. You are parroting pro NATO bullshit with nothing backing it up.
Edit: nevermind, that bullshit map you shared in other comment means you specifically came to hunt my comment history to reply me, and to spread pro NATO propaganda. Go to reddit.
I saw 95 and not 141 countries for some reason, with India and China abstaining from vote as well. I wonder why is that the case.
I also wonder why, until the above document you shared, this used to be the voting norm for the past 20 years (until 2022), and why only 2 Nazi countries used to oppose the vote:
Billionaires are treasonous because they live outside the laws of their country, hold power over the government there and gain their money through exploitation
Were you opposing Musk and billionaires since forever, or are you one of the fresh new liberal “converts” that hate Musk just because he shat upon the toilet of the town square?
I am usually skeptical of people calling out on posts with such polarised headlines and hypocritical standard. My bad, perhaps you are not one of those people.
“Patriotic socialist”, someone who claims to be a champion of the working class, but is actually more of nationalist. They only care about the working class of a certain nationality or racial group, and are generally bigoted in their view towards marginalized groups. Real socialists are internationalist. You wanting to get rid of Musk, because he’s not sufficiently gung-ho about a war fought between capitalists on the back of workers, implies you consider the national interest more important than the lives of workers. This is anti-worker class collaborator shit, which is what patsocs are really.
What the fuck are you even talking about? Russia is throwing thousands of „working class“ lives away, since it wants to expand its territory in aggressive moves since decades. They are forcing Ukraine to defend itself and yes, those are also working class people.
So you, as a good socialist, are probably on the barricades because of this unprovoked attack on the Ukrainian working class. How are you fighting to defend them from getting killed? Please don’t answer something in the likes of „Ukraine should give up“ because then everyone would only see that you are actually advocating the Murder of the Ukrainian people.
Well you’ve jumped to conclusions there, I’m not talking about the war but Billionaires in general and their respective countries in general.
Billionaires have too much power, live outside the existing system of government and laws, gained their money and power through exploitation and in general are undemocratic.
So I agree with your second statement, but not the first
They should exist, but we are not utilizing them correctly. Once someone has reached a billion dollar networth then they are thrown a big party and then sacrificed to a valcono. I believe this would curb emissions and fix climate change.
There was a native American tribe that every ten years had individuals return all personal wealth back to the tribe and the threw a big party, then start it all over again
They just need to make a point system. The incredibly wealthy don’t care about money itself, those are already just points to them. So once you get to say 100 M, you get a trophy saying you won capitalism. After that amount 99% is taxed, you get a penny on the dollar. But all of that taxed money gets you Capitalism points. Capitalism points have no real value and can only be exchanged/traded/gambled with other winners of capitalism. Those with most points will be published each month in the top 100. And the top 10 each year get the prestigous title if honorary economic leader. They can get a medal and a pat on the back by the president.
You can also donate extra money for more capitalism points at a 10:1 exchange rate to get people to play the game even harder and further drive down wealth.
(I believe there are slightly less than 10,000 people in the US who would currently get their capitalism trophy. There are >140,000 people worth more than $50M, is 100 to high?)
Oh and the 100M amount is pegged to minimum wage. Any increase to the capitalism cap has to be matched to the same percent increase to minimum wage.
Okay I’m gonna get absolutely blasted for this, but here it goes.
Water went out in the warehouse at 3:45am, the last workers on that shift went home at 5:00am it sounds like. And the next shift which was to start at 7am was called and told not to come in because there was a water issue.
They were called back into work when the issue was fixed.
I see absolutely nothing wrong with this at all according to the facts as stated in the article.
They were without water for about an hour before they were scheduled to go home. It would take about that long for management to even recognize the issue, contact the city and get a timeline for repair. In the meantime, just keep working until they figure out how long it’ll take to fix, and when it is clear that it’ll take awhile, call the next shift and tell them they will reopen when the water is fixed.
Sounds absolutely reasonable to me.
But I know everyone loves shitting on amazon, so this post is gonna get murdered
I will cheerfully shit on Amazon every day, which is why shit articles like this piss me off. Amazon does plenty of real harm, but articles like this give this make people think “well, if this is their workplace mistreatment, then it’s not that bad.”
It is that bad, but this isn’t an example of that. This could happen anywhere, to anyone, even the most ethical company/co-op/whatever on the planet. They handled it well. So let’s go after them for actual shit instead.
When you’re working you could go hours between bathroom breaks. What if this was your 4th hour and you step out to use the bathroom just to find there’s no water?
It’s not “just” an hour. It’s interrupting people who thought they could count on water being available
You’re not wrong, I work for the government and if our utility services shut off for more than an hour I think we go home. People are saying that time without water would suck but I mean they are pissing in bottles and shitting in buckets. Does that make it right, no. But unless you have a medical emergency an hour fifteen is not going without water.
See, the real trick amazon does is that no one is ever without a drink.
because if the water goes out, the workers can just pick up the piss bottles from the previous shift who had to piss in the aisle since they arent allowed to go to the bathroom.
Just imagine how many pissy fingerprints and straight piss might be on those packages your getting, having plenty of time to dry between boxing and delivery.
The article says the water went out at 3:00, not 3:45. The shift ends at 4:45, again from this article. That’s nearly 2 hours without drinking water or toilet facilities. That’s a fairly long time.
Your also wrong about the next shift and the notification. Again, in this article…
The issue continued during the day shift. ‘They emailed dayshift workers at 7 AM to not come to work when the starting time is 7:45 AM, so many were already on site or on their way to work,’ explains Hannah.
They sent an email, not a phone call, 45 minutes before the shift started. I’d be surprised if any of the employees checked their email at the last minute before leaving for work. It goes on to say that many employees come from a town an hour away. The email was sent while many employees were already on their 1-1.5 hour commute. The. They told them just go home.
Then, at 12:30, they messaged the employees that the water was on and they needed to be back at work in half an hour or they would not be paid for it.
Your description of events does not at all match what the article describes. Do you really think Amazon’s behavior is acceptable ad I and the article describe it?
The issue continued during the day shift. ‘They emailed dayshift workers at 7 AM to not come to work when the starting time is 7:45 AM, so many were already on site or on their way to work,’ explains Hannah.
Many workers travel to the Bristol site from the Newport area, roughly an hour and a half away. GMB union organiser Marie McDonald says workers were told to go home and advised that they would be paid for the day. But at about half past twelve, they received a message from the site saying that the water was back on, and they were expected to be on-site by one o’clock. ‘You’ve got to bear in mind that a lot of our members travel great distances to get to work. The bus stop in Newport is not centrally located. They have to walk for half an hour, so many couldn’t get on the bus in time to get back to Bristol,’ she tells Tribune.
One of our members, who couldn’t physically get to the site, was told they would have to take annual leave if they couldn’t get to the site. She doesn’t have any annual leave, so she’s being penalised for an issue completely out of her control. As far as I’m concerned, Amazon is putting productivity over staff safety.’
That sounds “absolutely reasonable”to you? Really? I hope I never work for someone with standards like that.
A whopping 80% of bosses regret their initial return-to-office decisions and say they would have approached their plans differently if they had a better understanding of what their employees wanted, according to new research from Envoy.
See, it's never their fault. Look how they're trying to deflect it back to the employees. I would say employees definitely made their wishes known in regards to returning to work. These bosses and executives can fuck off.
If there only was an easy way of understanding what employees wanted… But alas, since there isn’t, forcing people to do something and then measuring how many of them resign seems to be the best way to figure it out.
Oh no! It's the consequences of my own actions! If only someone had told me I had to listen to what every single one of my employees had been telling me literally every chance they got.
ROFL pretty sure there was like 10% of employees who wanted to return to work…most were middle management which realized their jobs relied on making sure people were at work.
I (mostly) returned to working in the office as soon as I could. For a few months it was great; almost zero traffic, relatively few distractions while I worked, with all of the upsides and few downsides. And I’d see people once in a while, and catch up. It was great. Now with people being expected to come in more, traffic and distractions are way up, fueled in large part by people who would rather be working more from home.
They knew. They say that because they don’t actually want to fulfill their employees needs.
We want to WFH because we dont want a 2hr unpayed commute. The way that ks fixed is for employees to consider the commute part of their 9-5 but that means we are really only doing 10-4 with an hour from lunch.
We want WFH because our lunch breaks don’t easily get taken over by meetings because we arent sitting at our desk of the break room. The hour is an actual hour you can’t contact me so more “lost time”.
With WFH its harder to keep people around after hours as they can quickly mark their chat so to afk. That means no more 4:30 pop ins saying we need to stay late.
Turns out that when your employees can force their work time no one givea away free time. When you end WFH and try to squeeze out more time you’re going to piss off a lot of people.
The devs that still work at the place I started at 20 years ago. They actually have a start time of 8 and are expected to stay until 5. Earliest meeting scheduling times are at 8:30 and latest starts at 4:30. Oh and they pay horrible. But its difficult to get fired there.
Its the middle of no where. To find a similar job i had to move out of state 300+ miles away.
Most of the people who work there half the household income (i was yhe only income in our house) and they all were 40+ and didnt have expectations of doing more in their lives. They all had pensions (mine got cut at a stupid low number before it ended). It was only younger people leaving who were drowning.
How about a new rule that if you vote for a war, you are automatically enlisted. And if you’re ineligible to enlist you must either abstain or vote no.
Congress members get as many votes for war as they have draft-age family members. For each vote they cast, they must enlist 1 family member. Starting with their own children.
I see an obvious exploit with this: congress members enlisting family members who would rather vote ‘No’ just so they can get more votes for their own choice.
You might think “nobody would enlist their child to fight a war that they’re against” but I promise you, there are people like that.
Senators are (with few exceptions) extraordinarily wealthy. When climate change is destroying crops and making some areas uninhabitable, these senators’ families will still be living very comfortably.
We basically had that a century ago, before the nobility moved behind the scenes and became the 1%
Unqualified scions were sent to the battlefield to gain military merits, which was generally bad for everyone. I’m pretty sure it only really stopped after WWI, when the death toll from combat started getting ridiculous
Smedley Butler solved this issue back in the 1920’s, change the vote from Congress to eligible draftees to solve us going to war for stupid reasons.
Then during times of war, lock down every individual’s income and ability to earn money to that of the soldier. Keeping war profiteering from stretching wars on indefinitely.
It’s radical, but would probably keep us from just “being at war” eternally. A reality we have had to live in since at least 9/11.
The problem these “add a meta policy” proposals all have in common is that they assume we have any control over the legislature… which we don’t have; they don’t work for us at all. At this point only organizing and other direct action will have any significant impact on actual policy.
In this particular case, legislators would continue to receive bribe income that they refuse to acknowledge as bribery.
The problem is the us hasn’t had a formal declaration of war since WW2. Basically we’ve just had military engagements. Some haven’t even been authorized by congress.
Basically we’d need to fix that issue before worrying about the other suggestions. Else it’d just be military engagement not a war so don’t need to fallow them.
Ten Chinese air force aircraft entered Taiwan’s air defence zone . . . Of those aircraft, the ministry said 10 had either crossed the median line of the Taiwan Strait, which previously served as an unofficial barrier between the two sides, or entered the southwestern part of Taiwan’s air defence identification zone, or ADIZ.
For those unfamiliar with the Air Defense Identification Zone:
Not only does it include a lot of water that isn’t part of the Strait, right off of China’s coast, it also includes a portion of Mainland China a few times larger than Taiwan itself.
People like to talk like China is flying jets over Taipei City, but you can fly a plane from one city in Mainland China to another, only passing over land, and be in this zone. Mind you, I don’t think Taiwan having this zone is bad – countries generally should be aware of air traffic nearby – but this is part of a long history of alarmist headlines by western media regarding what is often very uninteresting air traffic in the PRC.
OK, but these articles arent alerting on that type of traffic, only when military aircraft are flying near Thailand, so whats the significance of the ADIZ extending into China in this context?
Ten Chinese air force aircraft entered Taiwan’s air defence zone . . . Of those aircraft, the ministry said 10 had either crossed the median line of the Taiwan Strait, which previously served as an unofficial barrier between the two sides, or entered the southwestern part of Taiwan’s air defence identification zone, or ADIZ.
This is what the original post quoted. Flying over international air space is NOT news worthy. Unless China does it, suddenly it’s news. And yes, in case you don’t understand, the median line IS international air space. In fact, that’s USA’s whole point of freedom of navigation is that anyone can fly or sail over that median line.
So if your argument that countries shouldn’t freely fly or sail over the Taiwan Strait, you agree with China, NOT Taiwan.
My argument is that you shouldn’t fly military aircraft so close to a country in their ADIZ after stating you don’t believe they’re a country and that you will take them over with violent means if necessary.
Ah classic, your all for rule of law until there’s an actor you don’t like following rule of law. Suddenly the law should change just for them. Hypocrite.
So Chinese bots are on lemmy too now. You obviously didn’t read the article - “Of those aircraft, the ministry said 10 had either crossed the median line of the Taiwan Strait, which previously served as an unofficial barrier between the two sides, or entered the southwestern part of Taiwan’s air defence identification zone, or ADIZ.”
In international relations, militaries have defined and at times unspoken rules of engagement. This was NOT routine flight over mainland China that you are making out to be, but was a clear breach of said protocols. Thus Taiwan sent its fighter jets to observe the Chinese military aircraft.
I literally quoted the part that you just also quoted, which specifies that some of the craft were merely in the ADIZ, the one thing I was talking about in my comment
Like 6ish years ago we all, liberals and leftists together, were creeped out by the right’s sudden proliferation of “NPC” memes, correctly pointing out how dehumanizing it is and conjecturing darkly about what exactly this kind of rhetoric was priming these people for. Now, the overton window’s so fucked that the we’ve normalized deploying the exact same invective against anyone who speaks up on behalf of humanity and against a US-dominated world. I’ve driven past the ruins of the Japanese concentration camps out in the miserable desert, and to know that so many people around me who act self-righteous but stand for nothing would rebuild those camps at the snap of a finger, or the running of an op-ed, or a scary news story…well, these people may haughtily object to being called blue MAGA, but that sure doesn’t stop them from doing absolutely fucking everything they can to earn the label.
Amazing how comfortable you are being racist on a public forum.
Anyway, people should look at https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:JADIZ_and_CADIZ_and_KADIZ_in_East_China_Sea.jpg and take note of how far Taiwan’s ADIZ extends into Fujian province of mainland China and the open ocean (which is the southwest corner the PRC’s airplanes were supposedly encroaching on). These articles are obviously published to make China seem more aggressive than it really is. Meanwhile the US, with the most powerful navy in the world, parades its warships through the Taiwan strait, which for some reason is not seen as a threat or provocation. Also Taiwan claims the mainland as its own territory. Oh, poor little Taiwan. Lol, get off it.
“How am I being racist? I’m just assuming anyone who disagrees with me must be a certain ethnicity and/or bot.”
This really isn’t too complicated. Stop using Chinese as a pejorative and “bot” as a thought terminating cliche. It prevents any meaningful discussion, and yes, it’s also very racist.
The term isn’t being used as a pejorative. The term is being used as an adjective to a pro-chinese social media commentator. Mister Doi Doi with NO history in lemmy.
The term isn’t being used as a pejorative. The term is being used as an adjective to a pro-chinese social media commentator. Mister Doi Doi with NO history in lemmy.
Chinese refers to the people who live there or who’s families emigrated from there, not randos online who don’t support the rabid NATO line. your racism is showing.
Didn’t take long for that one to come out, accused of being racist and immediately compares the leader of China to a yellow cartoon bear lmao. Incredible
What’s wrong with Winnie the Pooh anyways? Who doesn’t want to live the rest of their life eating honey and being a loving, caring member of their community?
That is one of the top all time posters over on hexbear. I’m not sure why you keep thinking that established posters are new bot accounts, but it’s absolutely not helping you to look less ridiculous
The instance I’m a part of (hexbear) just federated with Lemmy dot ml a week ago. So I don’t have many comments on here obviously. I am unfortunately addicted to the internet and have way more comments than that on my accounts main instance. I wish this was my only comment in 3 years lol. Could have got so much done instead of wasting time on my phone.
Imagine going off on people for the age of their account when you’ve been here for 2 months (reddit refugee) lmao. You don’t have the highground here and your feigned elitism makes you look like a clown.
Sir or Ma’am, I am a US citizen of Chinese descent and I assure you that you are being a cracker, and you can stop any time.
My bias is towards peace and against interfering in other countries’ internal affairs. Taiwan is part of China, this was settled in 1972. It’s only in recent years that the US has taken a hostile stance against the PRC since its peaceful economic rise has started to threaten US hegemony. This is not my fight, it’s not your fight, it is the fight of the US ruling class—its political establishment and its financial oligarchs. China and the US should be allies, and we should be putting our combined labor into decarbonization, healing the ecosphere, reparations for the global south, and preparing communities for the effects of climate change.
Also, my family immigrated from Hong Kong before it was released from British rule, so by your logic I should be against China, which I’m not, because I’m capable of critical thinking.
Yes, the ADIZ includes part of China, but this article is mainly about jets crossing the median line of Taiwan Strait. Also I don’t think Taiwan gets mad over any jets intruding the “overclaimed” part of the ADIZ.
You both quoted the same exact piece of text. You said they didn’t read the article but you didn’t even bother to read their comment?
You are calling a human being a bot, literally dehumanizing them, because they don’t have the same hatred of China as you. You should really check yourself. You are full of hatred and ideological poison. It is clear from your comment that you have limited literacy skills and understanding, you should check out some other perspectives and try to broaden your horizons. Here is one. This is also another incredible resource with a lot of essays and information with a different perspective
No no never engage their statement on it’s alleged merits. Kick them in the [redacted] and then ask them why they can’t walk while laughing. It is the weirding way.
Beep boop I have been programmed to make really fucking cool historical dramas beep boop (This is my stereotype about China idk what else happens there I just really like Three Kingdoms adaptations did y’all see 2008’s Red Cliff it was dope af! John Woo directing!)
I mean, it was made solely for your benefit (though I did like reading it). For your convenience, here it is again.
They are mocking you because they have assessed you as not interested in really engaging with people. If you were more unassuming, the response would be different. It sucks to be dogpiled-on, it has happened to me – with this very group no less – but it’s good to try to have some perspective of the limits of the implications of such behavior.
Also hexbear is just a little excited to have liberals to use as punching bags via federation, so there’s definitely a bit of a hair trigger. I generally prefer to stick to my own ways of talking with people for various reasons, but I struggle to find serious fault with them when I am essentially doing the same thing in my own way with others, and OP seriously brought this upon themselves by posting such a stupid, misleading, and alarmist article (see the comments about the Taiwan ADIZ from myself and others).
Edit: also I checked back and yeah, you were picking a fight. Liberal complains about “brigading,” socialist A criticizes them, socialist B riffs on socialist A’s comment, then you come and reply to socialist B with “You seem upset,” which I would struggle to read as anything other than condescending and terse. I misread
It’s not like you said “Hey, what about the Taiwan Strait part?” and got people screaming “HOG OUT OR LOG OUT!”
I don’t think I’ve expressed any liberal sentiments here at all.
I legitimately don’t care either way tbh. All this does is once again reinforce the idea that leftist spaces on the Internet are hostile to anything besides a very narrow set of ideas which makes up a very small and myopic subset of leftist thought. I am not here to cure anyone’s ignorance. I am engaging earnestly with you because you are actually making an effort to converse instead of just posting literal pig shit.
I read GS’s thread, what do you want me to say? I have more personal, firsthand experience with China than anyone commenting there? I have family there? I speak the language? I have an actual stake in Chinese society? I think we’ve seen conclusively that none of that matters if you do a wrongspeak.
GS even admits that the brigading is obnoxious then goes on to defend it. Like I said, this is well beyond my ability to truly care, I was just really hoping that lemmy would be a place people could discuss these topics instead of just trolling, and then having double standards when someone else gently pushes back.
GS even admits that the brigading is obnoxious then goes on to defend it.
Dogpiling and brigading are two different things. Brigading is (at least loosely) coordinated, dogpiling is something people do when they are there, coordinated or not. The algorithm just happened to put this thread near the top on Hexbear, which is only federated with a handful of instances, as can be seen by the fact that I was the very first person to comment on it (next was op, then myself again, iirc). It is categorically false to my knowledge that this thread was “brigaded,” a bunch of people with similar opinions on this issue just all saw the thread.
And it is obnoxious, but “obnoxious” doesn’t mean “evil,” especially when you were speaking so derisively about the people you had to have seen made up the bulk of the thread when you made your first comment. Honestly, what did you expect? In most political communities you’d get a very similar reaction, and I’d prefer a single emote to a “Crimes of China” copypasta filling up my inbox.
Scare quotes are used for discussing definitions, as in, uh . . . “socialism” is not “when the government does stuff”. I was not meaning to convey that you used a word that you plainly did not, just highlighting that me agreeing to something being obnoxious does not mean agreeing to it being seriously wrong (which in common parlance might be called “evil”).
Whoops, I misread the reply chain pretty severely, you can ignore the edit. You were picking a fight, but not along the lines I wrote there.
I don’t they’ve expressed any liberal sentiments here at all.
Neoliberal is a subset of liberal (in the traditional philosophical sense, not American vernacular), and there is a very clear divide in the thread between neoliberal and socialist.
I legitimately don’t care either way tbh.
With due respect, you’re just a little Not Mad, but let’s not belabor the point. I’ve been Not Mad too, it’s not a sin.
All this does is once again reinforce the idea that leftist spaces on the Internet are hostile to anything besides a very narrow set of ideas which makes up a very small and myopic subset of leftist thought
There are a bunch of things wrong with this, starting with that the article was misleading dogshit and deserves to be mocked. Beyond that, the cultural clique of Hexbear can be myopic, but I think that it does not compare negatively to modern neoliberals in this respect. It is much more interested in international perspectives rather than the perspective of the “international community” (i.e. the EU + the Anglosphere + the most convenient elements of Taiwan, Japan, and SK). They quite frequently read neoliberal writing and listen to neoliberal speeches and so on, while neoliberals are usually content to hear about anything to do with their opposition exclusively through second- and third-hand reporting by their own media.
Which leads me into my next point, that “tankies” etc. are readily called fringe by liberals on the internet, but internationally represent a very common set of opinions (or a strong overlap therewith). It is itself myopia to dismiss the opinions of Chinese and many other people in the imperial periphery and consider only the opinions of the imperial core when evaluating what people think and what “leftist thought” consists of. You could not serious believe, for example, that the Collected Writings of Chairman Mao are important to only a “small subset of leftist thought,” right? Sure, you are unlikely to know anyone – or even to have ever met anyone in your real life – who regards such a thing positively, but your personal experiences are not the world.
As an aside, the “bot” rhetoric that the liberals so often display is not really helping your case about the tankies being especially closed-minded.
I am not here to cure anyone’s ignorance.
Do you see how most people would not be interested in talking with someone who says things like this? That level of condescension rarely produces anything other than scorn.
“You are being condescending to me too!”
Sure, I don’t think that’s an unreasonable view (though not my intention), but I am nonetheless explaining and substantiating my differences rather than merely denouncing what you say as “ignorant,” and even if we nonetheless accept my fault, that just results in a criticism towards both of us rather than solely towards me.
I am engaging earnestly with you because you are actually making an effort to converse instead of just posting literal pig shit.
I would not have replied at all if I didn’t recognize your username. You hadn’t been saying anything in this thread that someone would normally think merits a serious response. You were derisive right out of the gate. To act this way and then complain about other people not turning the other cheek and speaking patiently to you is silly.
I promise you that if you make an alt (preferably with a different username in case people are grumpy with the interaction here) and post a thread on asklemmygrad or askchapo to the effect of “Hey, I’m a [whatever you call your flavor of liberalism], but I want to learn about what you believe on various topics and what you think of certain criticisms . . .” you will get mostly responses that are earnest. If you expect people to be polite and unassuming towards you when you begin by being aggressive and presumptuous, you will almost exclusively be disappointed, and I don’t just mean that for interacting with commies.
Ignorance, once again, being the idea that ML orthodoxy is the only “true socialism.” We’ve been over this already and I’m not sure there’s much point in carrying on this conversation if you are going to intentionally misrepresent politics I have articulated to you a number of times.
And to be honest, it sounds like you are the one doing a lot of speaking for the Chinese while making a lot of assumptions about my relationship with Chinese society. I don’t really feel the need to justify any of this to you or trade cultural credentials. That honestly feels offensive and chauvinist.
I do appreciate the discussion though. I hope we can continue this in a different setting somehow.
Ignorance, once again, being the idea that ML orthodoxy is the only “true socialism.”
That is not the hexbear line and not even relevant to the thread. Being an anarchist or whatever you like doesn’t mean believing western smears of China – like this incredibly poor article that you keep talking around.
We’ve been over this already and I’m not sure there’s much point in carrying on this conversation if you are going to intentionally misrepresent politics I have articulated to you a number of times.
I remember now from that conversation a week ago that you insist on being some type of socialist but I am pretty sure you never specified.
And to be honest, it sounds like you are the one doing a lot of speaking for the Chinese
It’s not an unfounded opinion that the CPC has strong popular support. That doesn’t mean the majority of China is ML in any serious way – plainly, they don’t seem to be – but it does support the view that articles like this are a completely bullshit characterization of the PRC - RoC situation and most people in China (and many other countries in the imperial periphery) would agree.
while making a lot of assumptions about my relationship with Chinese society. I don’t really feel the need to justify any of this to you or trade cultural credentials.
Reading another comment you made in this thread: Whoops, I guess you probably have met a Marxist or two. That wasn’t terribly important to my argument, I was merely speculating on how you might have developed you false opinions. Given this new information, I don’t have a new guess.
I don’t care about your life and wasn’t attempting to initiate some identity game, I merely try to understand things in terms of how ideology is downstream from personal circumstances, and how an ideology that is well-suited to one’s personal circumstances can nonetheless lead them to have a distorted view of the world outside their experience. I support your inclination to not discuss these details with me but invite you to reflect on them to yourself in this context.
Yeah, obviously it’s a glorified puppet state but there’s no point in arguing from that standpoint here. If a country is to exist, it should know about local air traffic, that’s all I’m saying.
The PRC wants a peaceful reunification, which would not be aided by them continuously flying military jets over the island. I, too, would prefer peaceful reunification, which means some level of cooperation and tolerance is necessary.
The RoC won’t give up their holdings in the interest of human benefit, but liberalism shows us that there are countless ways to skin a cat. The RoC is not autarkic and is very dependent on its NATO friends and its trading partners. As the US wanes and third world nations stand up, the support for Taiwanese nationalism will surely dwindle, and RoC leadership may be put in a position where their best offer is clearly to reunify.
Taiwan is a rump state of the despotism that existed before the Maoist revolution. When the government fled to the island, the US backed them up and prevented the revolution from purging them from power and uniting the whole country under one flag. They exist today as they are because of western intervention, and is therefore a puppet state. I disagree with ‘glorified’ considering it’s taboo internationally to even call them a state.
I started writing out a timeline but I don’t know what position you’re asking from so I will say for the sake of brevity that the US kept the KMT from being run out of all of China so that the US could us the island as a threat against China – as it also attempted to do in Korea when it had more-or-less complete control of the southern half. Taiwan spent about 40 years as a military dictatorship killing tens of thousands of dissidents, native Formosans, and others (this was called the “White Terror”), while their patron the US looked the other way while it pumped resources into the country (for the ruling class, mind you) to use the island as a sweatshop site in the interim. This legacy and its connections to fellow US puppet South Korea and US ally Japan go a long way to explaining its current capacity in manufacturing, which make up its other value to the US besides geographical position.
Both Taiwan and SK have made various attempts to assert themselves (with some success in both cases), but with the pathetic diplomatic position of the former and the continued military occupation of the latter by the US, I think “puppet state” is a fair title for them, perhaps as much as Israel, but that’s its own can of worms.
I didn’t really intend on getting into litigating this topic, but I’m happy to discuss it as best I can.
I started writing out a timeline but I don’t know what position you’re asking from so I will say for the sake of brevity that the US kept the KMT from being run out of all of China […] which make up its other value to the US besides geographical position.
Yes, I know about its not-so-glorious past and the White Terror. Thousands of innocent civilians were killed. It was terrible. However, I must respectfully disagree with you on the “puppet state” part. I don’t think that Taiwan is a puppet state. The US sponsoring Taiwan is a thing of the past. Neither is a pathetic diplomatic position a good reason for being a puppet state.
if US support dropped overnight, reunification with the mainland would become inevitable. it’s a puppet state in the sense that it’s propped up by the might of the US/NATO military.
It’s kind of a weird way to define a puppet state IMO, because you could make the same case for a lot of countries. Like the US supports the Mexican government, and would have likely already been overthrown by the Sinoloa Cartel without US support. So is Mexico a puppet state?
Hey now that you mention this, it does kind of make less sense. But I think I should be taking a break from this horrible post. There is no use arguing with someone that is completely unwilling to change their mind. Look at my comment history. I’ve already wasted hours.
I didn’t see this reply before. The other commenter has it right that the relevance of its pathetic diplomatic position is that it is being propped up by the US/NATO and ultimately depends on them to exist apart from the PRC, which makes it very difficult to oppose them. Incidentally, does the US not sponsor Taiwan? Even just recently there was this, which sure seems like sponsorship to me.
I could have formatted it better, but the rest was focused on the puppet part and then I prefaced the sponsorship part with “Incidentally” to indicate changing over to an adjacent subject.
Not only did the US turn a blind eye to the White Terror, but they were positively gleeful about it, as a key target of it was of course not only indigeneous-politics based, but fundamentally anti-communist.
Indeed a basic presupposition of the US providing you such extensive economic support, as a forward base in Asia against communism, is that you crush any opposition to its ‘proper’ functioning as such an economic and military asset. That supposes that you will crush any radical, labor, trade-union, let alone explicitly socialist or communist activity which appears to challenge the state.
Do you even know why the pro-independence party (DPP) lost so badly in the local election for mayors? Because the people were disappointed in what DPP had done with the economy, not because they didn’t agree with the foreign policies DPP was pushing! (Please note that I’m not saying most people agree.) In local elections, people are going to choose whoever they believe would be the best for the city/county, not the one whose views on China they agree with.
Additionally, if you look at the latest opinion poll for the presidental election next year, you’d be surprised to find out that the candidate from the pro-independence party is leading.
Source: am Taiwanese
ps. you made a typo in your comment. it was the 2022 local election, not 2020.
i am sure the success or failure of those domestic policies were not in the least contingent on international political conditions. the economic policies of an island that imports 97% of its energy with a food self sufficiency rate of around 30% and exports accounting for 70% of gdp can in no way be considered to be overexposed or at risk to trade fluctuations and even if that were the case, i am sure that foreign policy would not play an outsize role in determining the magnitude or periodicity of said trade fluctuations.
Because a poll asking a direct question is a hell of a lot more accurate in gauging how the population feels about the issue.
Political parties can lose elections for their stances/actions outside their main one – which seems to have been the case per the actual person from Taiwan that responded to your comment. It doesn’t matter what a party is called or what their main goals are if they’re bad at their job.
If and when the people of Taiwan decide they want reunification, it will happen. Thankfully Beijing isn’t going to be allowed to force the issue.
The majority of Taiwanese people has always wanted to remain status quo, as indicated by the two triangle data lines in the plot. Since declaring independence is basically asking China to attack and that peaceful reunification is not desirable (for >90% of the population) either, the majority are of course pro-status quo. It does not line up with how DPP ate shit last year.
peaceful reunification is not desirable (for >90% of the population)
Again, this was “forced” reunification in that poll, i.e. military takeover. Of course people oppose that. I think at least the plurality opinion is against peaceful reunification under the PRC too, but it’s not by as high a margin.
No, it was NOT “forced” reunification. The two reunification choices in that poll were “unification as soon as possible” and “maintain status quo, move towards unification,” neither of which is forced.
Like asking yankoids what they want to do with “their land”, the question is pointless and only serves to legitimize a faulty preposition.
The ROC also still claims to be the legitimate government of all of China (plus Mongolia and a sizable chunk of Russia) so its not like they’re just sitting there minding their own business either.
The ROC also claims the South China Sea as its own and has build naval bases in there. Even the DPP doesn’t want to give up those naval bases. So, it’s the Republic of Taiwan to stick it to the Mainland commies, but “akctually, we’re the Republic of China, and the South China Sea is part of Chinese naval waters, so we get to build as many naval bases as we want” to Vietnam and Indonesia.
"Despite being so common in English as to be known as the "Chinese curse", the saying is apocryphal, and no actual Chinese source has ever been produced." - Wikipedia
The doom depends on where you live. Florida? Yup, probably, but you where already living in hell. Europe? Iced up North Sea, really snowy north, big ice caps, Spain and portugal getting more cool…doesn’t sound that bad, to me personally.
Mostly florida, as the “AMOC” transports the heat away from florida. Could very well be, that a stoppage of the AMOC would create a Hypercane and completely wreck everything in Florida. Cuba could also be absolutely done for. Canada would also probably have a LOT more snow - the Soutpole however would probably stop existing and what exactly is going to happen to Brazil is a complete unknown. Some simulations show the insta death of the rest of the rain forest. Some simulations actually show the opposite. However, Europe, Africa and Asia probably would see a lot lower temps - what exactly that would mean for the Climate in those areas is also highly speculative - however, it’s something that happened quite often throughout the history of earth. North America however has lots of other parts liveable, when Florida is “dead” and basically the Sahara.
No, the collapse of the AMOC was pretty rapid in the past as well. And it’s separate from climate change. Man-made global warming is very complex and there are various things contributing to it.
I just long for a time when the conspiracy theorists are yelling about the end of the world and the scientists are running the country, not the other way around.
Revolutions take over where reason stops. The people in power have the means to do the right thing, but sometimes they look out for a few people and will destroy thousands. That’s not a good option, as people get more desperate
Climate change is not something that has a simple solution to it and governments just refuse to do so for whatever reason. That’s a naive view that ignores all the complexity of this issue.
For example: stopping all carbon emissions is not going to stop climate change. Not only do you need to become carbon-neutral but you also need to get all the excessive carbon out of the atmosphere. How?
Why the extreme? Cutting back and investing in things that are better should be a mandate, not an idea or option. And certainly we cannot allow an administration to roll things backwards just because someone bribed them donated to their campaign
Carbon is causing global warming. We know how to fix global warming because we are causing it, we just have to stop doing it.
This article is about global cooling which is bizarre and not something we expected would be happening. We haven’t got a clue why it’s doing that. It maybe natural, or it maybe it’s something we’ve done in a complicated way, but we don’t know so we don’t know how to fix it.
If this is just an ice age why may as well burn all the coal now to try and stave it off.
Although in reality I think this needs a lot more research before we do anything because this announcement makes no sense within our current understanding of the environmental science.
I was going to save humanity but I have a responsibility to a handful of shareholders that yell at me in meetings so… You can really see how hard this is for me
Maybe their GitLab has the latest version? Sometimes open source apps will release first on their own repo before it gets pushed to external app repos.
I’ve always been a bit wary of apps which haven’t been released to the app store (maybe I’m overly paranoid!), so I’m just gonna stick with my crappy spreadsheet for now instead, until it gets updated. Appreciate the suggestion though :)
Still doesn’t help much if you lose it, I’m guessing you don’t menstruate? Plus, apps do the prediction for you so you don’t need to count days to figure out whether your symptoms are hormonal or physical or whether you’re late or not, etc.
So in other words you’re trying to make excuses for doing something you know you’re not supposed to be doing because you refuse to let yourself be inconvenienced in the name of doing what’s right or even basic self-interest.
Uh, why exactly am I not supposed to be tracking my period? Are you really trying to mansplain how to deal with menstruation?
There are ways of safely recording data that don’t involve pens and paper, believe it or not.
-Maybe if you take a second away from furiously mashing that downvote button and have a think about things, you’ll realise you’re being a little bit silly.
If periods get you this worked up, I think you may have bigger fish to fry. As for me, I finished high school decades ago which means I don’t have to deal with people like you. Toodles!
As “innocent” as they are portrayed, the hypocrisy is the least of their problems. Their abuse of both people and animals is extremely widespread and rarely talked about.
Part of mainstream Amish theology is basically that it’s the job of the community to handle people sinning, not outsiders, and after rape has been “handled” by a period of shunning it’s basically forbidden for community members to not re-embrace them, including their victim.
Fucking nightmare for the victims, for obvious reasons.
The man they mention in this article (Eli Yoder) regularly brings it up and confronts it.
He interviewed a woman one time who was raped by her brothers and she got in trouble right along with them for being “tempting” and not modest enough.
The abuse started when she was a small child.
They don’t go to the police when they catch people, they take them to the elders and punish them within the group. They usually just get shunned for a bit.
Wives regularly get blamed when their daughters are abused by their husbands. “You should do your wifely duties so he isn’t tempted.”
I’ve heard some wild stories watching this guy.
He really works hard to bring education and information to people who are trapped in that reality. He also provides resources and support when people want to escape.
Literally nobody ever believed it was about “protecting the children.” This was never anything more than a cheap shot by those with low and questionable moral value to force everyone else down to their own level in the swamps. Anyone who tells you they are doing this “as a proper Christian” are the same kind of people who are so morally bankrupt that they can’t even tell you what it means to love thy neighbor without looking up the words in their favorite piece of fiction.
Literally nobody ever believed it was about “protecting the children.”
Liberal rubes sure did. They’ll keep insisting that’s the case too, even as bans on trans adults existing sweep forth. Liberals absolutely don’t give a fuck about us.
I originally read it as “Germany says ‘Fuck wind as an alternative energy source’ and begins reverting back to coal”, so I figured I’d clarify in case anyone end thought the same thing.
Doesn’t seem like this article indicates that Germans is giving up on alternative energy.
No but it does clearly show prioritization when the 2 conflict, which is the point of contention (as well as using coal at all, if you give a shit about our planetary environment)
Yep, there needs to be real consequences. In addition, no member of that board or executive team should be able to act in those positions in any company for like 5 yrs.
Yeah but then how would I be able to get that napkin holder that I ordered in my underwear delivered tomorrow! You don’t understand how much I need this thing right now even though I can’t be bothered to get dressed and drive my ass to the store.
How about if the company is so large and sewn into the fabric of the modern world then instead of dissolving the company it instantly becomes a public utility, turn the shares into treasury bonds, and jail the executives?
I don’t really see any other company building massive warehouses that employs millions of underserved people and providing them with decent paying jobs with good benefits. I don’t think 1.6million Americans should be unemployed because of shady actions of the execs.
People are still fling to buy shit. Maybe they have to do it locally instead? Probably some other company would step up to replace their monopoly. It’s only be an improvement.
So we should just make almost 2 million Americans unemployed because some execs shredded some papers. I don’t know if you know anything about retail work, but they pay less than Amazon does, very few actually pay over $15 an hour, Walmart starts you out at $12 an hour.
It wasn’t necessarily Amazon that killed of the competition, it’s the tech behind Amazon (e-commerce) that killed retail stores. Just like UBER demolished the taxi industry, just like cars replaced horse carriages, and just like AI’s about to make knowledge workers completely obsolete. Amazon still has a great deal of competition from Walmart, Target, and lots of retailers.
Shopify accounts for 1/3 of all e-commerce sales in the US in 2023, and with the rise of way cheaper Chinese alternatives to amazon like shien, Temu, & Alibaba express no one really has a monopolistic control in the e-commerce space.
Yes but no. E-commerce got rid of many retail jobs. So did WalMart. But Amazon also uses a ton of monopolistic and dirty practices. Amazon is working hard to eliminate the competition, because capitalists would rather control the market than compete.
There are so many things that we could talk about. I think the simplest thing to realize is that Amazon was losing money for years so that they could become the central hub of vast numbers of shoppers and sellers, and after they got control of the market, they had a huge amount of leverage over all of those people. Now they can increase prices and manipulate search results, as recent court cases have shown us. They also do horrible things to their workers, they try to bust unionization, many of their delivery drivers are peeing in plastic bottles because they don’t have time to stop at a public restrooms, the list goes on and on.
Because it’s such an exhaustive list, and because I don’t think you should take my words at face value, I highly recommend that you read the newspaper. There’s so much great information compiled by people online. When in doubt, start with Cory Doctorow.
I don’t think forcing people to work in inhumane conditions while paying them close to nothing, so that they still need to use food stamps, counts as employing. It sounds more like exploiting the most vulnerable people, which have no other employment option, because big monopolies like Amazon killed all the competition
No one’s forced to work at Amazon. For unskilled uneducated Americans $16 an hour is higher than what you can make in retail or fast food, which are some of the only options left especially for Americans in the rust belt. It’s not monopolies that killed jobs that used to provide livable wages like manufacturing it’s globalization. I’m not mad at your ignorance because I didn’t realize how bad parts of America were until I moved to the rust belt. If you want to blame anyone for the lack of quality employment for undeducated Americans blame the politicians and greedy companies that let high paying jobs go overseas to China and Mexico.
Honestly, I don’t think the company needs to be dissolved, but I think that accountability for the law should exist at director level and up. For a company the size of Amazon, that’s probably around 100 people that should face the consequences - and that’s only the retail org.
The best description of Amazon is that it is a management company. It’s not a retailer, or a tech company. It’s output is its management process, and it’s this that it uses to build products in different markets.
So, remove the source of those processes. Let people move up to higher roles, and let someone not breaking the law take the senior positions.
So because somebody has a lot, you have nothing? Because somebody has a house worth 5M and don't have a house, means you have no dwelling? Because somebody earns 10x what you have, you have no income?
"They have more capital than I do, therefore I have none".
"A person with more capital than I chose to vote and lobby, that means my vote is null and void and so are my efforts".
"There's no point in doing anything ever if somebody else is better at it".
First recorded in 1175–1225; Middle English; (adjective) from Anglo-French or directly from Latin capitālis “of the head” (capit-, stem of caput “head” + -ālis adjective suffix; see -al1); (noun) from Medieval Latin capitāle “wealth,” noun use of neuter of the adjective capitālis
You can argue that national poverty lines are made to be kept under a certain percentage, sure, then we can ignore that. Globally, yes, the majority doesn't have capital (as in financial capital), but per country, there are stark differences. More things to consider
Especially GNI PPP: if you live in Europe, North America, Australia, China, Japan, and a few other countries, there's a good chance you belong to the global 20% of high income earners. The minimum wage in your country will probably be higher than what a low income family earns in a year
For the current 2024 fiscal year, low-income economies are defined as those with a GNI per capita, calculated using the World Bank Atlas method, of $1,135 or less in 2022; lower middle-income economies are those with a GNI per capita between $1,136 and $4,465; upper middle-income economies are those with a GNI per capita between $4,466 and $13,845; high-income economies are those with a GNI per capita of $13,846 or more.
We are talking about people who have the capital in society to make actual systemic changes to society. Such as restructuring our economy to value lives, wellbeing, and sustainability over profit.
Quite obviously 80% of people do not have that capital.
You are cherrypicking statistics, seemingly to deliberately miss the point.
Global comparisons of income mean exactly nothing to the quality of life of people living within their country.
Even people deemed in that global top 20% are living paycheck-to-paycheck, and are unable to leverage that to make changes.
At the beginning of the Industrial Revolution there were an estimated 200 million people and virtually 100% poverty.
Now there are over 8.5 billion people and yet we've managed to reduce both poverty and hunger to the lowest levels in history. Along with the lowest rates of people dying due to war.
So in your fantasy world we would be at 8.5 billion people along with low poverty, hunger, and deaths from war... but replacing capitalism with socialism.
Likely you fantasize no income and instead it would be the whole "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" thing, right?
Unfortunately for your fantasy... the result of socialism has always been the deaths of millions of people through starvation and murder (followed by collapse and/or acceptance of capitalism)
What I wrote is completely germane, you just can't admit it or argue against what I'm saying because then it would be harder for you to gaslight people into voting for socialism.
I'm not ranting about anything, I'm just responding to your posts. It's not my fault you choose to speak in euphemisms rather than directly say what you mean.
Anyway, this is not about me. So unless you want to try and defend your indefensible positions... have a nice day.
'm not ranting about anything, I'm just responding to your posts. It's not my fault you choose to speak in euphemisms rather than directly say what you mean.
So you have imagined my entire worldview and all the positions you are arguing against.
No, dickhead. When I argue for socialism, I actually argue for socialism with my full chest, not with euphemisms.
Anyway, this is not about me. So unless you want to try and defend your indefensible positions... have a nice day.
So you slither into my mentions, hallucinate things I didn't say, and expect me to "defend" arguments that only exist in your head. Sod all the way off.
Dropping the biggest turd of an argument and expecting me to pick it up. Pick it up yourself, and eat it.
And there it is, the extremist trademark. Attack and demonize anyone not in your "tribe". They're just an "other" right?
I haven't demonised you. I called you a dickhead. And I called you a dickhead because of your actions, not your beliefs.
Thanks for confirming everything I thought about you.
Think whatever you want about me. It was clear from your first message that you were going to do that anyway, considering you imagined my entire worldview.
No, that’s a complete lie. It has never resulted in the death of anyone, but rather has saved millions of lives and improved their - and our - standards of living.
But then, you don’t actually know what socialism is, so you just make up lies for the evil boogyman hiding in your closet.
Now imagine if you lived in a society where someone gave a shit about your problems. And maybe they even have the skills and resources to fix them more efficiently than you would. Or not, does it matter, theyre willing to help.
It actually is. We all have problems. Humanity formed society to solve problems. Society has been hijacked (for a loooong time in many different ways) to extract value from others. Some people want to combat that.
Who is "us"? Unless you're politically well connected or have nine figures in the bank, you aren't wielding significant power to make systemic changes.
You know that UBI is cheaper than policing the problems that runaway wealth disparity causes, right? UBI also means that employers cannot easily exploit workers with the threat of destitution, meaning that wages, including yours, go up. It also makes society more pleasant as people with prospects turn to drugs or crime less frequently.
The only people UBI doesn't benefit, is the absurdly wealthy. Your myopic worldview has you voting against your own interests.
Maybe you’d like to explain who and why people would choose to work when they entirely don’t have to?
Two reasons:
UBI provides a baseline level of income to keep people out of poverty. But people tend to want more than just the basics, and deciding to work provides additional income for luxuries.
People, in general, are inherently motivated to create, and will do so without the threat of death on the streets. Meaning people will still voluntarily work, only they will do so on their terms.
But also, with the increasing levels of automation possible, human labour is needed less and less to fulfil our needs. We need to decouple being able to live from employment. Because the path we are currently on involves artificially increasing consumption and creating meaningless jobs to justify paying people enough money to live.
What do you mean doubt? That people often choose to work more to afford more stuff is utterly uncontroversial. That's how the capitalist system is argued in favour of today.
On the other hand if you are admitting that capitalism forces people to labour under the threat of death, then it is an evil system, and morally must be eradicated.
Well it’s a nice utopian thought but not realistic.
Because of troglodytes like yourself. Here I thought you were asking in good faith. Serves me right.
No. It isn’t. Some people? Sure. Many people already live off of welfare and already choose not to work.
Yes. It is utterly uncontroversial. Most people aspire to have some luxuries in their life. And people go the extra mile to afford them. The fact that some people are on welfare, which often effectively prohibits even small amounts of work those people might otherwise want to do, doesn't change that.
And who cares if some small proportion of people just want the basics and aren't willing to work more? Do you literally want to force them with death to make them work? Why? They don't want to be there, they're unhappy to be there, they aren't motivated, they aren't productive. And I don't blame them!
And now you think I’m not? Why? Because I didn’t roll over and agree with everything you said?
Because you responded to something easily observable with the brainless "doubt".
You are either trolling or just remarkably stupid. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt.
And who cares if some small proportion of people just want the basics and aren’t willing to work more?
Not “work more”. Work at all. Because society needs people to work to function. Money doesn’t grow on trees, it represents other people’s time. If there’s no time, there’s no money. Money just becomes completely without value .
Do you literally want to force them with death to make them work?
What even the fuck are you talking about?
Because you responded to something easily observable with the brainless “doubt”.
Buddy your position is the only thing here that’s brainless.
You are either trolling or just remarkably stupid. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt.
I see we’re persisting with the personal insults. I think it’s pretty clear you have no interest in an honest and productive discussion and simply desire to lambast those who disagree with you. I have no interest in such a discussion, so you can be gone, thanks.
Lots of people pick up garbage “for fun”. Where “for fun” means “because they care and it’s the right thing to do”. And by lots, I mean it’s such a common thing there are thousands of organisations around the world who do it. There are multiple national days in many, many countries based around picking up garbage. I myself have organised several beach clean-ups for a local group as part of a larger nation-wide beach clean up day.
Look up the organisation “Trash Hero” for another example.
Then there’s the engineers who work on ways to clean up the Pacific Garbage Patch.
There’s people who clean up slobs’ tables in fast food places because it doesn’t take any extra time to help out when you were going to do it anyway.
The point is: who picks up garbage for fun? Everyone else but you.
As for nurses… there are huge international volunteer organisations based around doctors and nurses volunteering their time. How have you never heard of any of this before?
If someone has “more” then yes of course someone needs to have “less”, merely by definition.
The question is really whether those with less are living below the poverty line or living comfortably. I guess it’s a question of semantics whether “capitalism” requires people to be living below the poverty line but I don’t think it does. It’s just shitty regulations which allow wealth to become as concentrated as it has.
Socialism in principle sounds great, but most times it’s been implemented it’s suffered from the same problem as capitalism - the people with power are greedy and use their power to manipulate and oppress the populace.
German politics and energy consumption aside, I think they have the best base of knowledge for what your proposed economic model has in store for them and their allies. They had that model forced upon them, and fought for change and economic freedom. There was a freaking wall dividing their country over that.
Are we just going to ignore the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact, wherein Stalin let Hitler invade Poland as long as he got half of Poland, Lithuania, and Estonia?
You know what the US never did? Call Hilter and agree to a joint imperialist effort in carving up sovereign nations.
Edit:
“there is one common element in the ideology of Germany, Italy, and the Soviet Union: opposition to the capitalist democracies” or that “it seems to us rather unnatural that a socialist state would stand on the side of the western democracies”.
No he’s a historian, all of their videos are extremely well researched and he’s gone on record to clarify multiple times that he is not a socialist. There was even a video where they complained that their work could only get reach if they framed it as entertainment, making it very clear the only reason he does these videos is because they get a lot of reach and make him a lot of money.
You just don’t want to watch the video because it showcases how fundamentally evil your underlying views are and you’re not ready to accept that maybe you’re a lot more pro-nazi than the western media and education has programmed you into thinking.
You think I give a fuck? Liberals will always just dismiss anything with “source??” if they disagree with it, but accept nazi lies wholesale.
For example whenever Ukraine, Russia, China, or North Korea come up, people just believe everything they hear unquestioningly even when they’re saying shit like “NK believes that unicorns are real”
I just think it would be funny if you talked all this talk about being antifascist and yet haven’t ever put your money where your mouth is.
Like are you genuinely antifascist, or are you just a racist liberal who hasn’t come to grips with the fact that they’re not the good guy, because I’ve dealt with a lot of guilty white people caked up on cognitive dissonance who will go around projecting accusations but the instant it’s time to show up for real action, they’re nowhere to be found. You don’t have to answer because normal people don’t get this invested on picking a side when both sides are overwhelmingly evil.
50 bucks. Food not bombs. Prove me wrong. Don’t do it for me, do it for your community.
You can address the fascist roots of Nazi Germany originating from America while also recognizing the fascist roots of modern day Russia originating from the USSR. This is the problem with building your world view around “which side” you’re on, it makes you completely blind to the underlying evil from your faction. Like bless their hearts because they’re absolutely in the right place but I cringe every time a communist feels they need to side with something everyone can agree was bad because it was their side doing it, just like I cringe every time a liberal opens their mouth because they can’t go three sentences without supporting some fascist regime.
You’re the one supporting a fascist regime, this entire discussion started because you claimed that being anti USSR is someone being pro Nazi.
The USSR was demonstrably more friendly to Hitler than the US, because it was fascist, ruled by a dictator, and had imperialist dreams of cutting up Europe with Hitler.
The US sure is imperialist and fascist and bad, the USSR was the imperialist and fascist parts of the US, dialed up to 12.
I cringe every time a tankie opens their mouth because every sentence is a nostalgia-fetishizing ultra-nationalism for Soviet fascist dictatorship.
I give up. You refuse to do even the bare minimum to address the fascism that you carry. You’re a fraud who deep down believes in the nazis and likes what they did. You’re just waiting for an opportunity to betray the left, mark my words it’s only a matter of time before it happens and when it does, remember that I told you so and that there won’t be any going back when people see you for who you are.
No man, it’s really easy to denounce fascism. Fuck fascism in Nazu Germany, in the United States, in Russia, and in the USSR.
You’re the only one who feels the need to defend a fascist institution. Ironic to talk about addressing “that fascism that you carry” when you have that going on my dude.
Socialism in principle sounds great, but most times it’s been implemented it’s suffered from the same problem as capitalism - the people with power are greedy and use their power to manipulate and oppress the populace.
This is true, the “dictatorship of the proletariat” is self-contradictory and impossible IMHO. Because as soon as a member of the proletariat is a dictator, they are now no longer a member of the proletariat.
Now you don’t need a dictator, you can enact socialist policies democratically. This is very slow and kind of difficult, because the capitalists will lobby and fight so hard against it, and you need to maintain public support.
That isnt what dictatorship of the proletariat means. It means that the former bourgeoisie are temporarily politically disenfranchised from proletarian democracy
But if we raised the bottom up enough, it wouldn’t really matter if they were on the bottom. Many people would be happy if they had a stable place to live, food, healthcare, and freedom, and many don’t really need or even want “more” all the time. The problem is the vast differences in wealth and ownership.
Conservatism is built on hierarchy. Capitalism just says markets work and investment is gambling. You can do that and still keep everyone fed / clothed / sheltered, specifically because markets work, and can make food / clothes / shelter more plentiful. Some people having more doesn’t require private space station versus duplex cardboard box.
Conservatives only say market failure demands misery and successful gambling means unchecked power because that’s what they always say. That’s their only conclusion, applied to literally everything. That’s how conservatives think things work. The entire tribal worldview boils down to “well somebody’s gotta be king.” Just a fractal pyramid of militaries over empire, rulers over courts, owners over workers, and patriarchs over families. If you’re at the bottom you’re lucky to be alive, and how dare you question your betters.
The unspoken assumption is that change is impossible. This is genuinely how they think everything works. Like the universe itself dictates a steep gradient, and the only way things could be different is by shuffling around who goes where. So if someone is suffering, they must have fucked up to deserve it, and if you want to help them, you’re putting someone else in their place.
Like the one recent CEO saying the quiet part aloud by saying government should promote higher unemployment, since in the high employment environment employees aren’t desperate and have more demands costing him money. That employees arent feeling enough pain and despair in economy.
To be fair, this isn’t that far away from the economic theory underlying using interest rates to manage inflation - it’s just phrased in a different way.
That’s the problem with fractional reserve banking it’s making up money for those who lend theirs. It’s about extracting value from those who work for those who accumulate. It’s not a tbf, it’s a this is also an issue in every area of our society.
In most cases, yes; but in this case in particular, with UBI increasing the buying power of the poor, those with capital would actually profit off of implementing such a service. No, this one boils down to good old fashioned classism.
Remember that politics can be changed with votes. Tax them to finance change.
I agree the wealthy need to pay a lot more in tax than they currently do.
They also have disproportionate control over the electoral process in many countries, and most political parties are not even considering taxing them to the extent that they need to be taxed. Nor are most political parties challenging our capitalist society in any significant sense.
Voting is important, but don't expect voting alone to solve our problems.
It’s difficult, but blaming billionaires takes away our agency.
No it does not. Sod off with that. Correctly identifying a major contributor to an issue does not take away agency.
People have tried to fly for centuries. The nonexistance proofs nothing. It just indicates that it is not easy.
Voting doesn’t work because voters are like internet users, they are a given. Citizens have to offer their votes like lobbyists offer money to have an influence.
Voting alone also doesn't work because the options provided and the specifics of the voting system are decided by people who have an incentive to rig them in their favour. You cannot vote for options that are not allowed.
Hence needing to vote, and do more outside of voting, rather than sheepishly just doing the same thing for decades while it fails over and over again.
I would like to believe in your approach but I don’t believe in protests. That’s transferring union tactics from companies to the state. It’s valid in a monarchy but in a democracy, you can talk to other voters and have them support your cause. The citizens are the state.
Votes drive change. Believing in other means distracts from the real origin of power.
But votes have to be negotiated. Blindly voting for one’s own team turns citizens into a product.
There are other origins of power but votes are special because they control the law.
No votes do not control the law. They elect the government, who controls the law,
The government can be influenced by various means. Voting is but one of them.
Nobody cares if you do not like other methods, such as strikes and protests, they are still effective. And the owning class already uses other methods, such as lobbying and outright bribery, so to constrain oneself to methods that don't work is voluntary surrender.
Which protests are not ignored?
Pretty much every civil rights and liberation movement around the world has been accomplished through a diversity of strategies, which almost always include protest.
If citizens debate before the election about what they want and coordinate their votes, then the state represents their will.
If we could change politics by voting, we wouldn’t be allowed to vote.
We’re not stretched thin to finance these changes. Taxes aren’t holding us back. This is what those with true power in society and their cronies say to not do anything. This is the whole point.
No one is only blaming “billionaires.” This is you patronizing them, portraying yourself as a genius and the person you’re responding to as too naive and stupid to understand how life really works.
And no, we don’t have agency. We have a deluded sense of agency where we think we can vote and change the system from within.
There are levels. Voters don’t have agency. But if voters would coordinate they would have agency.
The difference is believing in agency.
I am aware how stupid I sound. But how else can I phrase it that there needs to be a believe in change to create change? Right now I just hope that readers ignore the stupid part.
There hasn’t been internet for most of history, nor global warming, nor automation.
The joke is that people don’t want a fair revolution because the situation will be worse at first if resources are shared globally. People don’t want agency because they would be responsible for all problems.
Thank you. Judging by the downvotes and objections, people deeply don’t believe it. I had expected some technical issues that prevent UBI but reading those replies makes me sad.
This is Lemmy. People on Reddit will feel even more disenfranchised. But it could be the other way round because Marxism states that capitalist democracy doesn’t work and that a revolution is needed.
I don’t like this logic because it’s predicated on an nondescript “they” with unlimited shadowy power. It leads to unhelpful conspiratorial thinking bordering on the magical. It obfuscates the real problems we face, and if we don’t understand them, even a violent revolution to defeat it would eventually replicate the system we destroyed because we didn’t understand how it came to be in the first place.
The reason it’s hard to change the system is because the system is self-reinforcing through individuals acting in their own immediate best interests and not acting as a class, not because “they wouldn’t let you change it, they’d just [rig the elections/not let you vote/kill you with a space laser]”. But that’s a complex answer, and it’s much easier to believe in the latter and call it a day.
Holy shit, what an anti-Semitic piece of shit you are. Absolutely classless.
It doesn’t matter that you think this sort of “logic” leads to conspiratorial thinking. There is a “they” and it’s the ruling class. The ruling class, and its defenders, is made up of a lot of people and institutions who create, dictate, and govern the systems that keep them and their power firmly in place. Sorry that society is a bit more complicated than you want it to be. Reality is a hard pill to bite sometimes for you racists.
And if you knew anything about anything, you’d know that democratically elected leaders are toppled by their ruling classes and/or outside forces (i.e. US) when something doesn’t go in the interest of the ruling class. To think somehow the US is immune from this is absolutely delusional thinking. Not surprising you’re into Western exceptionalism with your views on race.
And again, I just want to reiterate how much of a bottom barrel racist scum you are.
It makes perfect sense. What are you confused about? Are you going to try to “it’s just an OK hand symbol” your way out of this? What else would “space lasers” mean in the way you meant it?
My entire post was warning against gesturing towards a vague power controlling everything because it leads to conspiracism. One major example of that conspiracism is antisemitism. I have literally no idea how you can read my comment and come back thinking I’m arguing in favor of antisemitism. Yes, the space laser thing was a jab at the infamous “Jewish space laser” conspiracy, and I was explicitly saying avoid that kind of thinking.
The problem with our society isn’t that there’s a nonspecific ruling class directly dictating everything. There doesn’t need to be. We proletariat as a class are fractured instead of united. There’s no need to rig elections or prevent us from voting because we don’t act as a threat against power in the first place. The system amorally chugs along unimpeded as we go about our individual lives instead of acting together. Our daily compliance is what sustains it, and the system is designed to punish noncompliance automatically.
The scary truth isn’t that there’s a puppetmaster pulling our strings, it’s that there’s nobody at the wheel at all.
…maybe we need to take a step back on this international community thing, at least until the people in power aren’t the same ones who want to use it for neo-colonialism. Or maybe we could rebuild it, this time with common individuals being the basis instead of corporations and their subversive power struggles. Because right now it looks like the “international community” is going to have the effect of turning us all into the bad guys…
No, you shouldn’t do it because it’s stupid. If you had real arguments you would use them, but you don’t, so instead you trot out this garbage. It’s a sign of intellectual weakness and dishonesty.
If it really was such a bad and stupid argument, why can’t you address it? Spending paragraphs telling me an argument is bad without actually addressing it screens entitlement and incompetence to me.
Most of those actual deaths were Muslims killing Muslims. Deaths caused by United States soldiers are comparatively low.
For example, the Iraqi body count website tracks 210,000 civilians killed between 2003 and 2020.
According to your article, it cites US-led wars in countries such as Pakistan, Libya, Yemen and Syria. However, the United States did not launch a war in any of those countries and certainly did not fight a war in Pakistan which is a US ally.
The Washington Post article as well as research from Brown University has Lucy affiliated anyone who has died outside of the expected peacetime death rate in any country in Africa in the Middle East to be attributable to the United States which is, frankly completely unfair. ISIL aka the Islamic State for instance killed tens of thousands of people, yet those deaths are attributed to the United States. Which is completely crazy!
While I was completely against the 2003 Iraq war, and even March and protest against it, the truth of the matter is that Saddam was a complete bastard, the bath is party were fascist, and destroying them created enormous power vacuum which resulted in chaos death and destruction. However, this was probably an inevitability Saddam wasn’t going to last forever and had no system of governance to transfer leadership to someone else. The Middle East has been well known for centuries as a chaotic and violent region of the world and Sunni and Shiite Muslims have been at war with each other since time immemorial.
Maybe take a good look at that last paragraph you wrote and think about why you blame the conflicts in the middle east on a reductive basis of “they are savages” rather than looking at the actual historical context of what has caused instability in the region.
Seriously, this entire comment is just a racist write-off of the middle east that is completely devoid of any true consideration of history. Ignorance personified.
Sorry to see you downvoted, but in ukraine topics you can’t have any other opinion then West=Good or you are a Putin apologist. We are back at cold war red scare disscusion levels, no nuace is allowed.
While I’d like to believe this, if Putin comes to some peaceful agreement with Ukraine, the international community will just wait until people are distracted by the next big news story and then let Putin back in.
I’d rather be cynical and happily surprised than optimistic and disappointed.
Actually likely not, he’s been building international relations similarly to the Russian criminal code of behavior, and while it’s sad that even Americans and Europeans would consider this kinda acceptable, now he’s shown himself to be weak and humiliated. In other words, of the lower caste, and simply said, a pidor.
So no, he won’t be let back in. But some other (in appearances mostly, not in essence) government in Russia may.
I tried to look it up, I am only finding that it is a slur used to call people gay when they may or not be. U.S. equivalent seems to be like saying “Suck a dick, fag!” With pidor being the word at the end that would be shunned for being said.
I halted on submitting this over and over because I feel like I am going to get downvoted for using that term even to define a word/usecase. (Then I remembered the points don’t matter and intent changes context)
Western genociders are “international community” leaders? Things have changed, Anglo racist. BRICS+ is the new international community, and West will never get accepted into it.
Imagine objectivity from a clown who literally runs a community hating China. A fascist like you probably wants China to be either enslaved to whites or nuked.
More than 95% people approve of CPC, according to Harvard’s 20 year study of China. China is more democratic than USA, and even Hong Kong said during the 2019 riots that USA is a bigger threat to their democracy.
“Slava Ukraini” is fascists slogan used by, and mainly associated with, the mass murderers of hundreds of thousands of Poles and Jews. I guess that doesn’t count as terrorism in your worldview.
I really think “Slava Ukraini” is a fascist slogan, because it is. Since you’re mad at me for pointing it out, I suspect it might be you who would get banned if you said what you really think.
In April 1941 in German-occupied Kraków, the younger part of the OUN seceded and formed its own organisation, called the OUN-B after its leader Stepan Bandera. The group adopted a fascist-style salute along with calling “Glory to Ukraine!” and responding with “Glory to the Heroes!”. During the failed attempt to build a Ukrainian state on lands occupied by Germany after its invasion of the Soviet Union in June 1941, triumphal arches with “Glory to Ukraine!”, along with other slogans, were erected in numerous Ukrainian cities.
So it’s perfectly normal to revive a slogan that was last used by fascists? I’m sure the fact that Ukraine also made Bandera a national hero and put up statues of him and named streets in his honor right around the same time that slogan made its comeback is just a coincidence? Totally innocent slogan my ass.
Look, you can’t just present an argument and then tell me not to reply.
The history of Ukrainian support of him is fairly new and is far more complicated than “we like fascists”,
I’d like to hear your arguments why worshiping the leader of an organization that took part in the Holocaust is somehow “complicated”. It’s not like this isn’t some well-known fact. Seriously, this is obviously totally fucked. Why would you feel to need to defend this? It’s not, actually, fucking complicated.
It’s mainly associated with “Ukrainian Nationalists” since WWI, adoped by the fascist organization which took part in the Holocaust and massacre of Poles, whose members have been granted veteran benefits in 2019, and its emblem is being used by present Ukrainians.
edit: you still waiting for your response to be sent to you? arent able to think of one yourself? pretty sad. what about the other tankies downvoting, got any thoughts of your own fellas?
I already responded to this in a reply to another user:
So it’s perfectly normal to revive a slogan that was last used by fascists? I’m sure the fact that Ukraine also made Bandera a national hero and put up statues of him and named streets in his honor right around the same time that slogan made its comeback is just a coincidence? Totally innocent slogan my ass.
You might be blind in your right eye if you think this isn’t some fascist shit. This is like “the swastika is an old Hindu symbol” type defense, only worse because you’re ignoring the Hitler portrait right next to it.
It’s mainly associated with “Ukrainian Nationalists” since WWI, adoped by the fascist organization which took part in the Holocaust and massacre of Poles, whose members have been granted veteran benefits in 2019, and its emblem is being used by present Ukrainians.
I’m not defending it, and as a Pole I’m definitely suspicious of Ukraine’s true intentions behind the slogan and the emblem… but I’m also pro-EU, and right now it’s better to support Ukraine, than to let Russia think about which EU member state to invade next.
Afterwards, if Ukraine wants to get its shit in order to a level where it could join the EU and NATO… then go ahead. Germany did it, Italy and Spain did it, and we’re all better for that.
Germany and Italy literally did not get rid fascism willingly, they were defeated and this was imposed on them. And being from Germany, I assure you denazification was incredibly half-assed.
I know de-nazification was half-assed; I lived in Italy, now I live in Spain, and man, 45 years after the fascist regime was “gone”, there are still those opposing the removal of some fascist symbols. They used to argue that “it’s too soon”, now they’re arguing “it’s too late, let them be”, while there are still people killed by the dictature laying unidentified in some ditch or another.
Guess we’ll have to live and see where it all goes.
Ah yes, “Glory to Ukraine,” seems like a super specific slogan that can only be associated with one movement. In no way is it a generically nationalist slogan.
“ahhhhhh splat” is the current warcry of the woefully unprepared orcs getting slaughtered in a war that could end today. maybe you guys could at least come up with something original before winding up as compost?
as expected tankies and brain-dead conservatives take issue with the fact I’m mocking the vatniks out there being converted into soil. guess what? I give as much a shit about you guys as the decomposing corpses of the mobiks, and find your opinions on the topic to be as usual, laughably silly and predictable. no, I’m not gonna have any need to humanise a bunch of trash that are invading another country. do I feel genuine sympathy for the conscripts who have no choice and no possibility to surrender? sure. that’s their lot unfortunatly, but you won’t find me crying over dead Russians in Ukraine
Calling russian soldiers orcs is litteral dehumanisation straight out of the faschists playbook. Can we please collectivly agree in not becoming the strawman putin used in his “justification” for this war?
I would understand if at least 20% of the Ukrainian Armed Forces personnel would be comprised of western volunteers talking about terrorists and no negotiations.
But that is not a thing. So looks a bit ballsy, cause one would think that in a rather apocalyptic war on Ukraine’s soil, after they’ve reclaimed large swathes of territory, they’d be interested in some reduction of monthly casualties and rebuilding various capacities on that territory. Which a ceasefire would provide.
I mean, even if you are right, you are eagerly advocating for spending mobilized Ukrainian lives on a costly offensive.
I’m only repeating what Ukrainians say. They know any concession with ruzzian terrorists now will only lead to ruzzian terrorists regrouping and reloading to perfom more genocide in a few months/years all over again. The fascist moscow regime needs to be stopped NOW.
You don’t fucking know which things the words you use mean. And since you still dare voice your opinions on real world - blocking me is an important first step at stopping that.
I mean, you say “genocide” as if China is being sanctioned or punished for Xinjiang, and very little pressure would be required to make them stop, or Azerbaijan for Artsakh, and Azerbaijan is a bug to squash, one phone call would be enough, and Turkey itself mostly does all the things it does to pressure concessions, so they are ready to negotiate in every moment.
Ah, and Ukraine supports Azeri genocidal crimes in Artsakh, so fuck them.
Your country, if that’s US, doesn’t do anything about these. It cooperates with the criminal terrorist states I’ve mentioned. And yet you have the gall to throw the word “genocide” around about something which is war crimes, yes, and even sometimes acts of genocide, but that would mean that a Ukrainian life is worth more than an Armenian life, and I don’t agree. A Ukrainian life is worth more than your life, surely, but not more than an Armenian life.
Now, you can say that yes, these are all genocides much more real about which you don’t care, cause your side is of the perpetrators there.
I would understand if at least 20% of the Ukrainian Armed Forces personnel would be comprised of western volunteers talking about terrorists and no negotiations.
Now do Russia. There must be more western volunteers on that side, I take it?
Like the 2014 ceasefire? All it does is give Russia the opportunity to retrench and dig in. When the Ukrainians ask for a ceasefire, then I’ll support one.
I suppose right now Ukraine just wants some better guarantees while it has a strong negotiating position.
So that it takes some effort from Putin to even be heard.
Or maybe what Zelensky says is what he means, you can’t negotiate with a pathological liar (just like a few of Ukraine’s allies, though) who doesn’t know how to lose with dignity. Be it a person or a whole elite of some country, like Russia. I mean, emotionally I’ve met some and I’d agree. Just don’t know what it is rationally.
He’s making fun of all the libs/fascists who want to kill all the Ukrainians in the hope of owning Putin, while sitting comfortably on their gamer chairs in their mom’s basement.
Shell made 40 billion in profits in 2022. 100 million is one quarter of one percent of that. That’s what they couldn’t spare to even look like they were trying to help the environment. The things that should be done to these executives would probably get me banned from Lemmy if I said. Fuck these villainous asshats with broken glass.
To them it’s all about the money. They don’t give a shit about us, the ignorant moronic cunts. They should be offsetting all carbon emissions they ever created, but instead we have this flimsy corporate bullshit.
The things that should be done to these executives would probably get me banned from Lemmy if I said.
Funny you say that. I was banned from Reddit for suggesting that suicidal people should take oil-ceos with them instead of wasting their death. Of course I learned my lesson and won't do that again.
i dunno, i’m not encouraging anyone to take to arms, but it’s exactly the kind of shit that happened a lot in the end of the 1800’s, beginning of the 1900’s. Anarchists directly attacking high-ups with terrorist attacks, ignorant to the working class people, is arguably one of the reasons why for example the general populace got the right to vote, the christian churches started trying to come up with alternatives to socialism/anarchism (rerum novarum) and why high-ups like bismark introduced ideas like pension, krankenkasse etc. I don’t understand the general aimlessness of all the mass shootings in the USA. “i wanna make a point instead of going out silently on my own, but the only people i can take with me are my peers, no higher ups”?
TL;DR greedy guys do get scared if their jobs become too dangerous in an destabilized society.
People really don't realise/want to see the scale of the problem.
There are nearly 3000 billionaires in the world, at least six of them are worth more than a hundred billion.
Each.
The amount of money other resources, and power these people hold and hoard is literally unfathomable.
How do you even visualise 12.2 trillion dollars?
No amount of personal "every little helps" can make a dent in that.
People need to get their heads out of the sand (or in some cases the boot out of their mouth) and start putting the energy and time they waste on pointless exercises in "personal responsibility", and instead invest them in holding those who are actually responsible, accountable.
The system that not only allows, but enables and encourages billionaires to exist needs to be abolished, and their resources need to be redistributed and put towards building a better world for all of society, globally, which they could easily do.
But they won't do that willingly, nor will they let you vote them away.
I know it's an uncomfortable realisation, but it's reality, and the quicker people come to accept it, the sooner we unite to tear them down.
Don't forget - revolutions aren't just about violence on the front line (and eventually on the billionaires' door steps), they are also about solidarity and supporting those on the front line (be it protesting or striking or other direct action), but also about supporting your community every day, donating and volunteering what and where you can (directly where possible rather than via large organisations with advertising budgets and highly paid execs), lifting each other up, helping with meals or with childcare, teach, create posters, propagandise, everyone can find the right roll for them. Strong communities and dual power (communal structures to replace state-capitalist ones) are a necessary basis for a better, co operative future.
Exactly - the title and the article is incorrect. Americans will still be afforded a visa-on-arrival for tourism and other approved short term stays. Additionally, the authorization is valid for three years and can be used for multiple stays within the EEA. I believe the UK is also implementing an ETA (edit, maybe I got the acronym right this time), but I think it is only valid for two years at a time.
In a way it's silly, but it also reduces that chance of a disruption/entry denial at the entry point to the Area.
I think a key benefit here is that the pre-registration allows for faster processing at the border itself, cutting down on queues at the airport. Singapore runs a system where after preregistration you can just walk through an automated (though somewhat finicky) scanner. No queues after arrival, I basically stepped off the international flight and went straight to the city with barely a wait.
I know how boarder checks work. And I know that the schengen area has the best border crossings.
I want more schengen. The US and Canada should make their own north american schengen area, it will cut down on so much unnecessary government expenditure.
worldnews
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.