Food has a cultural component tied to its manufacture and identification. And IPAs are food that probably shouldn’t exist and which only does as a byproduct of market capitalism. They’re the Lacanian ‘object a’ - an empty, manufactured falseness. We don’t desire the thing itself, but the thing whose absence it symbolizes. What you’re really consuming when you drink an IPA is its innate mechanical predictability.
(Thanks to the thread last week arguing about pumpkin spice lattes for giving me a new copypasta to use about anything I personally dislike.)
I’ve been watching Voyager for the first time and just got to the episode. I think I agree with the decision (as a lever-puller) but it does raise some interesting questions. As Janeway mentions, if they’d been able to do it immediately, she’d have done it without question, but after two weeks of Tuvix integrating with the crew it’s a more difficult question. If Tuvix had been around for say 5 years I think I’d disagree with separating him. I think the way I look at it is that the social bonds possessed by Tuvok and Neelix are more important than the mere two week old bonds of Tuvix, but if Tuvok and Neelix were long dead and their loved ones had already mourned them, while Tuvix had had more time to become a fixture in people’s lives, then the circumstances would be different. Tbh I disagree with the idea that Tuvok and Neelix get the biggest say - I think that the input of Kes and the rest of the crew is valuable, and Kes pleads to get Neelix back while none of the crew back Tuvix.
Does that mean the worth of lives is based on popularity? Not generally, but I do think that social connections are a relevant thing to consider. Part of what makes murder bad is not just the loss of the individual’s life, but also what it means for everyone else. If you could press a button to create a life then press another to end it, would you have made the world a worse place by doing so? I don’t think so. But if you press a button to create a life then go out and murder someone who already existed, then I think you have.
I’d also say that the captain’s responsibilities in her role as captain are relevant and also support the decision.
I am Ganesh, an Indian atheist and I don’t eat beef. It’s not like that I have a religious reason to do that, but after all those years seeing cows as peaceful animals and playing and growing up with them in a village, I doubt if I ever will be able to eat beef. I wasn’t raised very religious, I didn’t go to temple...
I was raised Catholic and left it at a young age and spent a lot of time uprooting the brainworms so I don’t think there’s much left. However, whenever I can’t find something I really need and start getting stressed, I’ll still recite, “Dear St. Anthony, please come around, my X has been lost and cannot be found.” It’s a useful way to calm down and focus instead of freaking out and panicking.
Other than that, I still retain a lot of the theology I learned in high school, and I can still sometimes get a little opinionated about various things even though I have no dog in the fight.
Years ago I tried my hand gambling on politics on PredictIt, and I didn’t lose all that much, but there were a couple bets I lost that seemed like sure things. Mostly the lesson I learned is that talk is cheap and there’s no real consequences for people saying one thing and doing the other.
For example, in the 2016 election, there was a market on whether no-name Carly Fiona would qualify for the CNN debate, and by the rules they set she didn’t qualify, but there hadn’t been as many polls in the right timeframe as had been expected. Still, they released a statement days before the debate, saying “rules are rules,” so I took a bet at like 90% odds thinking it was completely safe - then they let her in at the last minute and I lost big. I don’t remember the exact circumstances, but I think I lost a fair bit on a market about Trump meeting with Kim Jong Un, which was a pretty chaotic market. The most chaotic market I ever saw, which I avoided and wanted no part of, was whether Bernie would win Iowa in 2020, and watching it closely in real time made it very obvious that some really shady stuff was going on. Probably the most I ever lost was Biden winning the 2020 primary, which is about when I got out of it.
I would not recommend gambling like that because if you have money on the line there’s an incentive to be glued to the news in a way that can be really unhealthy. Honestly the stress was worse than the money I lost. It’s more trouble than it’s worth, the fees will get you, also it’s generally more about predicting what the market will think so you can profit off the swings, and personally I think it’s kind of a distasteful way to engage in politics. At the same time, it can be a learning experience - it definitely got me in the habit of asking “And what consequences will this person face if they’re lying off their ass?” every time I see a headline about someone saying something, and of not paying as much attention to statements in general.
If people are skeptical of Söhnlein, he understands. “Forget OceanGate. Forget Titan. Forget Stockton,” he tells Insider, referring to his late partner at OceanGate, Stockton Rush, who was one of the passengers aboard the doomed Titan.
Pumpkin Spice Lattes are good and also the official drink of hexbear.net (the other ones are good too).
Hexbears in this thread having a knee-jerk contrarian reaction to the “let people enjoy things” sentiment even though nobody actually has a problem with any of these things lmao.
I don’t think anybody’s being pressured into drinking pumpkin spice lattes or eating avocado toast lmao. D&D is a fun and good creative, sociable activity and more people getting into it is good, actually.
Any popular thing is going to have hype around it, that doesn’t mean that it’s inherently bad. You’re free to dislike popular stuff but saying it’s bad just because it’s popular is a bad take.
Yeah we had a wrecker a while back go full mask-off over pumpkin spice lattes calling them “whore coffee” and making death threats over it. Granted that might just be that one wierdo but hating on PSLs and other “basic” stuff at least was a thing a while back.
How dare anyone ask me to stop criticising a thing I have no problem with and no intention of criticizing! We stand in solidarity with all cynical killjoys across the world! Even if we don’t hate something, we will defend to the death the right to hate it!
There’s probably a way to link literally any given thing to white supremacy and cis heteronormativity provided you don’t care how tenuous the connection is. Hating mainstream stuff when you don’t have an actual reason is just a way to make yourself feel superior. Hell, I could probably draw a more compelling connection from hating basic stuff to white supremacy and cis heteronormativity than you could for the reverse.
The infamous Drones are Queer paper is probably a good example of how it’s possible to draw a connection between virtually any two things if you try hard enough. Or just tell Chat GPT to write an explanation on how X and Y are linked for any two things.
Have you considered the possibility that some people like the taste of pumpkin spice lattes? Or do you just get to dismiss everything you personally dislike as “The Lacanian ‘object a?’” You could substitute literally any food or drink for PSLs in what you said, it’s completely meaningless.
It’s just empty words and phrases for you to feel superior to others based on what treats you enjoy or don’t enjoy.
“If Trump somehow manages to win 2024 from jail, it’s our fault on the Left that he wins.”
Are you so willing to let the country go to shit if you don’t get your own way?
You bet I am. Lesser evilism is a clearly failed strategy and the country is already going to shit because of it. If your vote is guaranteed then your concerns are meaningless.
I saw where lesser evilism got us with Obama. 8 more years of war and bloodshed that accomplished nothing and brought it no closer to an end. Hundreds of thousands of innocents slain for no reason. But suddenly everyone was fine with it because “he was doing it the right way.”
Fuck that, I promised myself then that I would never vote for a hawk, and I never will. Now we have one of the guys involved in perpetrating the War on Terror (also one of the architects of mass incarceration) and we have the highest military of any country of all time. Absolute non starter. I refuse to prioritize my own safety over the victims of US imperialism abroad.
So instead you just lie and pretend the lesser evil is the greater evil?
Never said this, no.
I’m guessing you didn’t have a lot of family or friends directly devastated by Trump’s actions? If so, how can you be so bloody heartless?
You’re right, other than the fact that I moved away from my home state in part due to the rise in anti-trans sentiment and legislation (and obviously he continued the wars too so he’s at least as bad). I and my family were, however, directly affected by Obama’s actions in pointlessly extending the wars of aggression in the Middle East. You can read about my experiences here
Peace is absolutely not even close to being enough to address all the impending and on-going crises affecting this country. I am being extremely lax, generous, and accommodating by setting it as my sole precondition. The fact that you want me to abandon all of my principles and every single precondition so the democrats can keep following the republicans right in a self-defeating strategy is not my problem.
I call this “taking the majority hostage”
Excellent, if I have the power to take the majority hostage to the end of achieving peace, I intend to take full advantage of it.
I thought that there was one guy named Michael J—son who used his fame as an NBA star to launch a career as pop singer, radically changing his appearance in the process. I don’t think I realized they were different people until high school.
Tfw you’re hanging out in a cell getting ready to testify against a bunch of super-powerful people, in a prison that’s prevented every attempted suicide in decades, after having made repeated statements that you have absolutely no intention of killing yourself, and then suddenly both the guards leave to go take a nap, and at that exact time, you notice that the multiple cameras watching your cell all randomly glitch off at the same time, so at that moment you decide to kill yourself using a method that’s indistinguishable from being murdered stress
For me it is the fact that our blood contains iron. I earlier used to believe the word stood for some ‘organic element’ since I couldn’t accept we had metal flowing through our supposed carbon-based bodies, till I realized that is where the taste and smell of blood comes from.
I’m sure it’s not the worst but I felt like the adaptation of Watership Down changed the tone/message compared to the book. Now granted the infamous violence is present in the book (though seeing it is more visceral than reading about it). But in the book there’s a nice story at the end where Hazel is injured (iirc) and is taken in by a little girl and her parents who take care of him while he recovers before releasing him back to the wild (which only adds to his legend, of course).
Removing this bit, the only positive interaction with a human, makes the message feel more like, “Humans are bastards and inherently anethma to the natural world, which is also a brutal war of all against all even down to the cutest softest creatures.” It just makes you feel bad, whereas the book might make you feel bad at times but it also offers an example of what you can do right. It’s kind of a pet peeve when a work with environmentalist themes falls into that line of “Humans are the problem and there’s nothing you can do but feel bad about it.”
Well, on the one hand, you have an old book you might read all the way through once (but probably not) that says to be responsible stewards of the earth. But on the other hand, you have people on the TV every night telling you to support whatever makes corporations the most money.
Old ideas can have value but it’s hard to compete with new ideas when those new ideas have a lot more money and can be crafted to appeal to a specific audience (regardless of what’s true).
So, instead of rehashing the same old talking points for the upteenth time, would anyone be interested in discussing China’s political project in a broader and more mature way? Like for example:
Who do you think should’ve come to power following the fall of the Qing, through to the civil war (if not the CPC)?
Do you agree with the direction of Deng’s economic reforms and opening up to foreign investment? If not, should he have stayed closer to Mao’s policies, or should he have gone further towards liberalization, or something else?
What aspects or projects of the CPC have been good or successful?
What aspects or projects of the CPC have been flawed or unsuccessful?
What lessons can be learned from the successes and failures of the CPC?
Ngl I don’t have high hopes for this comment but I’m tryin’ over here.
Did you know that Deng Xiaoping, the leader of China during the Tiananmen Square protests, resigned from all official positions shortly after the protests? I don’t recall Nixon doing anything similar over Kent State, however.
I agree, though I think it may have gone too far. Allowing billionaires is a dangerous gambit due to the possibility of them gaining political influence, and allowing landlords was a mistake. However, these reforms have helped lift 800 million people out of extreme poverty and were necessary at the time.
Land reform, the Barefoot Doctors program, Deng’s reforms, and the Belt and Road initiative have all been very successful and increased the standards of living for an enormous number of people. The CPC has had a focus on improving the lives of their poorest people, and in that regard they’ve done a very good job.
The Great Leap Forward, the Sino-Soviet split, the Cultural Revolution, LGBT rights, and past China’s foreign policy such as supporting Pol Pot/the Khemer Rouge and invading Vietnam. A lot of the blame for the Sino-Soviet split lies with Khrushchev, but I think there’s enough blame to go around. I think the Soviet policy of “peaceful co-existence” was more correct, and more in line with what China ended up doing anyway (libs will roast me for that, I’m sure). Some positive things did happen during the Cultural Revolution (such as the above-mentioned Barefoot Doctors program), but generally it was a chaotic mess and I’m not sure it accomplished very much. The GLF had a lot of factors, including the Sino-Soviet split, but there’s plenty of blame to ascribe to Mao (the sparrows did not, in fact, deserve it)
Kind of trite but one take-away is “seek truth from facts.” When Mao was successful, it was because of his experience living among rural Chinese, and looking at what they needed. Where he was unsuccessful was when he got too caught up in theory, sometimes assuming something would work without paying close enough attention to whether it actually was. I consider the overall political project successful due to the improvements made in people’s lives, but how the devil’s bargain with the capitalists will ultimately play out remains to be seen.
Yeah it’s like, typing this out really drew my attention to how much conversations about China are dominated by random noise that’s largely insignificant or bullshit. It’s always this 24 hour news coverage level of analysis, with no actual study of history or major trends and themes. Hell I realized myself the other day that there were two leaders between Deng and Xi who I couldn’t name and know basically nothing about.
I think that most people fall into certain ideological traps that allow them to simplify narratives to the point of never really feeling the need to study anything, in part because the world is just so big that it’s hard to actually be informed about things. You never have to decide how you feel about specific events in China’s history if you just scream “CHINA BAD” every time it comes up, and that’s a whole lot of history you never have to bother learning now.
Omg that’s like straight out of a movie. I’ve seen that “too young, too simple, sometimes naive” quote before but I had no idea that’s where it’s from. I love it.
The use of depleted uranium munitions has been fiercely debated, with opponents like the International Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons saying there are dangerous health risks from ingesting or inhaling depleted uranium dust, including cancers and birth defects.
Oh, so you consider Deng’s reforms to be right-deviationist? Are you a Maoist, then?
Whether you consider the CPC to be communist or not, the fact still remains that they’ve made a lot of improvements in the lives of the average Chinese person.
Deng was alive and well when two of those stock exchanges were opened
That’s… what I said? Obviously, Deng was the one who implemented economic reforms, such as opening stock exchanges and allowing foreign investment. Some Maoists consider this to be right-deviationist and counter-revolutionary, and that he should’ve continued more in line with Mao’s policies. That’s why I asked if you’re a Maoist, since you consider his reforms incompatible with socialism.
I’m not sure who’s whole argument was “look at the improvements only possible under Communism.” China’s conditions were much worse off than places like the US, so obviously it’s possible to improve conditions to be better than per-revolutionary China (which is not saying much) without communism. It’s just that in China’s case, it was the communists that did it.
Over 60, actually. I think that doubling live expectancy over a single generation is, in fact, pretty impressive.
So I take it you’re not a Maoist or a Dengist. Can you tell me who you think should’ve been in power in China instead? The KMT? You can see how much they did on the graph, if you don’t find the CPC’s numbers impressive then I’m sure you’d hate them even more. The invading Japanese perhaps? The European colonizers? Or maybe you think the Qing dynasty should never have been overthrown.
Of course I know that, did you not read what I said?
“China’s conditions were much worse off than places like the US, so obviously it’s possible to improve conditions to be better than per-revolutionary China (which is not saying much) without communism.”
It’s not hard to double your life expectancy when you’re starting out with the same life expectancy that existed in the Roman Empire almost 2,000 years prior. Thanks, Mao!
It really is wild that no other faction was willing to do anything that would increase Chinese life expectancy above that of the Roman Empire, yes. I agree, thanks, Mao!
It’s pretty funny that you criticize Deng for implenting economic reforms that led to further industrialization, while also crediting the rise in life expectancy to that very same industrialization.
What even is your ideology? And can you answer my question about who should’ve come to power instead of the communists?
I have no idea what thought process led you to post that but ok.
There were a lot of really simple, basic improvements that the peasants in China desperately needed. Anybody could’ve done what was needed, but nobody else was willing to, because nobody else cared. There was no special technical economic policy that uplifted them, it was just a willingness to address their needs that no other faction possessed.
That’s all you fam, I never said anything like that. All I did was point to graph and say I liked it when people do things (and political projects) that make life expectancy skyrocket. You seem to have read a bunch of stuff into that.
Life expectancy doesn’t always give the whole picture. For example, in my graph, there are times where China’s life expectancy is rising very rapidly, but it was still considerably lower than that of other countries. It’s necessary to analyze what policies lead to what results and what the reasons are for the success or failure of a given political project or policy.
I haven’t studied South Korea’s policies and material conditions closely enough to offer much of an informed analysis, as the world is a very big place. You could always make a thread about it on c/askchapo or something.
I think your problem is that you jump to conclusions too quickly. I think you’ll have better luck with Hexbears if you slow down and make sure you actually understand what our point is instead of just trying to win before you have a clear picture of what the other person’s position is.
I can’t speak for every user on my instance (nor can you for yours), but I can say that many of us also respond in kind to what we get. When you tried to dunk on me, you got PPB’d. You’ll get the same if you lob baseless accusations (like calling us “the QAnon of the left”) or confidently assert bad, uninformed takes.
I believe that Russia should’ve waited things out because its the open state of war that gives Ukraine enough diplomatic cover to push to its pre-2014 borders.
That’s kind of a fair point I think but I don’t think the Donbas would ever be able to join Russia in this timeline. Without Russian intervention, the separatists likely lose and the years that follow establish precedent for Russia control of Crimea but also for Ukrainian control over Donbas. I think it’s a valid, if cynical, argument to say that Russia should’ve cashed out with Crimea instead of going all in to try to take Donbas, but it means leaving the separatist out to dry. I do kind of agree with it though, I guess it comes down to what happens to the separatists if Ukraine wins, and I’ve seen people say they’d be genocided but I don’t really buy that, seems speculative and like propaganda.
Watch out guys. (lemmy.ml)
it's that time of year (mander.xyz)
Remember that time Kate Mulgrew and AOC talked about Tuvix? No? Well take a look (startrek.website)
It's an experience (lemmy.zip)
Great deal ngl (files.catbox.moe)
Atheists, is there anything religious that sticks with you to this day?
I am Ganesh, an Indian atheist and I don’t eat beef. It’s not like that I have a religious reason to do that, but after all those years seeing cows as peaceful animals and playing and growing up with them in a village, I doubt if I ever will be able to eat beef. I wasn’t raised very religious, I didn’t go to temple...
What's the most expensive lesson you've learned?
Capitalists are the true supervillains (lemmygrad.ml)
Anti-socialism propaganda be like (lemmygrad.ml)
US Geography (file.coffee)
Can we please (lemmy.zip)
edit: now it’s a meme and we can all hug in the comments.
Head of NATO says Russia invaded Ukraine because of NATO expansionism (www.nato.int)
From the guy’s own mouth.
The American garbage parties (lemmygrad.ml)
What is the one most astonishingly dumb things that, as a child, you believed was absolute truth?
I dont remember the age, but it was before Kindergarten, thought men came into the house at night to load the next days shows into the TV.
People of Lemmy, I dare you to name ONE billionaire that's done anything good.
What are some commonly known facts that are too bizarre for you to believe to be true?
For me it is the fact that our blood contains iron. I earlier used to believe the word stood for some ‘organic element’ since I couldn’t accept we had metal flowing through our supposed carbon-based bodies, till I realized that is where the taste and smell of blood comes from.
What was the worst bastardization of a classic book into a movie?
and then they called Moses a socialist (i.ibb.co)
Russian Anti-War Activist Sentenced To Six Years In Prison For Internet Posts (www.rferl.org)
Genzedong get mad when people don't like the CCP
Image
Exclusive: US to send depleted-uranium munitions to Ukraine (www.reuters.com)
The use of depleted uranium munitions has been fiercely debated, with opponents like the International Coalition to Ban Uranium Weapons saying there are dangerous health risks from ingesting or inhaling depleted uranium dust, including cancers and birth defects.
Defediverse (lemmy.ml)
EDIT: no, I don’t sympathize with nazis (neither I sympathize with those who call everyone nazi when they’re losing an argument ;)
Ukraine tells critics of slow counteroffensive to 'shut up' (www.reuters.com)