“THERE IS NO THIRD OPTION” because you accept the options that you are given and try to convince others that they are acceptable options. They are not, stop deluding yourself.
People are “just going to fold over” because you keep telling them to! Stop doing the fascist’s work, there are always other options but the fewer people who understand that means that more force per person is required to apply the needed pressure to make those options a reality.
You’re arguing from the premise that fascism is the only option and anything else is “fantasy”. Is that what you really believe?
I was promised riots and unrest when Roe V Wade was overturned and there was crickets instead. What are you going to do in November after the democrats get Trump elected? Do before to prevent that current inevitability?
What would you rather have?
A non-fascist option. Abortion access, housing, not the world’s highest incarceration rate (which Jim Crow Joe is directly, but not solely, responsible for.) etc.
You’re arguing from a false premise.
You mean far-right groups like Israeli officials = Zionists = genocidal terrorists?
Except that’s not even how most bus systems work because most of them are majority funded by taxes with fares originally meant to serve as a stopgap but then slowly converted into a profit engine (usually after privitization). Fares are a way to gatekeep a service which your taxes already pay for, which I would argue, is by itself a form of theft.
As an example check out the latest MTA report only 26% of funding comes from fares, and that ones a bit in the higher end from what I’ve seen (NYC public transit, picked as the example a it’s recently been in the news for issues with fare evasion)
All that aside, it’s also worth noting that fare increases are extremely unpopular and it’s not that easy to increase them without potential serious backlash (ie the mass protests in Chile a few years back that were in part set off by the fare hikes.)
Less than you would expect, this looks like it’s a good, balanced synopsis if you’re interested however you’re not wrong about it being a problem, and pointing out the PR/gaslighting that surrounds the issue.
Also it’s worth noting that SpaceX is using LOX-Kerosone because it’s “cheaper” than options which pollute much less (namely LH2-LOX) because the cost of the kerosene is “externalized” and you are correct that something like appropriate taxing could start to fix that issue and force them to make better decisions…
If you build a base on/near a bunch of ore nodes and dedicate it entirely to mining your pals will mine it for you and it respawns daily (passive ore generation ftw!!!)
So… Just like probation?
You should think a bit more about that “ladder” concept. In the same way that advocating for manumission doesn’t fix any of the issues with slavery a “path to the rights of the group above” doesn’t fix any of the issues with an apartheid state.
Unless you’re fine with a little genocide, any apartheid state is not a solution.
It’s not, the underlying data is still just as biased. Taking a bunch of white people and saying they are “ethnically ambiguous” is just statistical blackface.
That looks like a pretty standard utility tunnel. The video conveniently stops at the “blast door” which isn’t actually weird because electricity is hella dangerous. I would be willing to bet the most dangerous thing found behind that door is a surge arrestor.
The hostages being led inside the hospital isn’t great, but it looks to me like they needed medical attention. What would you prefer happen? If I were a hostage and needed medical attention I would much rather live in a world where the hospital cooperates with the “baddies” to provide that medical care and do the “recovery” later, wouldn’t you?
Those videos show living hostages. If the goal is to recover the hostages then why is the IDF only recovering bodies?
Based on that evidence you provided I would offer the counter-narrative that it appears that Hamas is trying their best to keep the hostages alive while the IDF prefers them martyred.
It’s not defeatist, it’s pushing back against the wishful thinking that “voting with your dollar” is effective and your responsibility ends there.
That’s not what I’m saying, I’m saying the act of “not buying it” (even if it was a complete and total boycott) has no impact on the production due to the system of subsidies, futures, derivatives, etc. that is set up explicitly to make sure production continues. And therefore has no impact on land/water usage, suffering etc.
With the point being that it’s a good first step, but if your expectation is it will change anything without first changing the underlying system you will be very disappointed.
You are making the false assumption that your consumption is causative to the production of animal products which is, unfortunately and non-intuituvely, untrue. The only difference between vegan and non-vegan diets is whether animal products end up on your plate vs. in “cheese mountain” type stockpiles, exports, landfills, etc.
That being said, ‘commie’ is a terrible communicator if that’s what they’re trying to say. Going vegan does help to highlight some of the contradictions of capitalism and you’re on the right track as it should be advocated for. However, the ‘invisible hand of the free market’ does not translate veganism to any reduction in farmed animals, land or water use.
No they don’t… You do and the media is engaged in a terrifying amount of manufactured consent, but the raw data from those same polls does not agree with that claim.
Ignoring the sampling methods used, lack of transparency on filters and other methodology, clearly biased questions, etc. The latest CBS news poll on the topic lists:
52% believe less weapons and supplies should be sent to Israel.
76% believe more humanitarian aid should be sent to Israel.
57% believe more humanitarian aid should be sent to Gaza.
56% disapprove of how the situation with Russia and Ukraine is being handled. (Though there isn’t much of a breakdown on the “how is it being mishandled…”)
A few things that should be explicitly pointed out as this is a bad poll, but it would appear the inherit bias is trying to agree with you, so the margin of error means the “true feelings of Americans” is even further in contradiction to your statement.
Note how Isreal is kept consistent without a single reference to Netanyahu/Israeli government compared to the constant switching back and forth between “Hamas” and “Palestinian people”
poll is 63% white, 62% of that group has “no degree”, 33% aged between 45-64 (amongst 4 categories).
So even when polling predominantly uneducated* white baby boomers who are the exact demographic that agrees the most with you, and doing the typical statistical magic the numbers still cannot be finagled in such a way as to make your statement true.
That’s the point…
I’d recommend at least reading a Wikipedia article or 2 about the role of police in society and the state and coming back when you’re a little more informed on their role in society.
People are capable of more than 1 emotion at a time and that doesn’t make any other emotions invalid and it certainly doesn’t make any of the other possible ones people may feel or express “immoral”.
Yes, someone is dead. They were flawed, but so is everyone and their passing is a tragedy to those close to them. Sadness, mourning, and empathy for those who will be most affected by his passing is a valid emotion.
Ryan actively chose a profession dedicated to inflicting violence upon those around them including the deaths of many others. Relief that he is no longer able to cause harm is a valid emotion.
Ryan was unable to stop causing harm to others on his own volition. He likely did it with the best of intentions, but through a steady diet of misinformation and lies he was conned into acting as a violent enforcer of capital. Frustration that this is what it took to prevent him from inflicting further harm is a valid emotion.
The empathy you are demanding with “it’s bad when people get killed” is the same moralistic argument that “it’s good when killing is avoided”. Celebration that Ryan will no longer be causing the deaths of others is a valid (and morally equivalent) emotion.
Etc.
In short: It’s a good platitude, but it’s a poor moralistic argument, and is a narrow-minded viewpoint. Lemmy isn’t the problem, your lack of empathy for those outside of Ryan’s direct social circle is.
I think you misunderstand that I’m talking exclusively about electoralism. It can be a useful tool, but it’s largely a scam.
Can you please not just roll over and die. I’m begging for you to put up an ounce of resistance now before you need to put up a gallon later.