I'm sorry but unwaveringly supporting a nation ruled by ethno-Fascists when they're committing Genocide because of the ethnicity of the majority and the leaders there is the same old extreme racism as in the old days and passing laws to punish anybody who criticizes that ethno-Fascist nation is the same authoritarianism in defense of Fascists claiming to represent an ethnicity as in the old days.
If the mindset that was the foundation of Nazism had changed in Germany we would neither be seeing such an extreme version of supporting a regime that claimes to be supporting some people because of their ethnicity (even against the will of many of those very people, who again and again point out that Israel and the dominant ideology there does not represent them), nor would be we be seeing the use of the Law to force everybody else to either go along with it or shut up.
A Germany where the power elites had learned the Humanitarian take of "never again" (i.e. "never again shall this be done to anybody") rather kept the racism going and hence using a racist version of it (i.e. "never again shall Germans do this to Jews"), would not be doing this, not even close.
What's going on in Germany is not merely "crushing guilt of what happened in WWII", it's the racism and authoritarianism coming out of hiding with the excuse that "It's for the Jews rather than for the Arian Race, so it's alright".
A USB DVD Reader/Writer costs 15 bucks. (I'm too used feel like that meme, and then at some point I needed to find a way to get a Mini-PC to read CDs, and as it turns out it's quite simple - I reckon it was more a case of "can't be arsed to do it" than a case of "can't do it").
I still remember well how the New Labour faction, in order to attack Corbyn, deemed him an anti-semite by association because in a conference he sat on a panel with a guy who compared the actions of Israel to those of the Nazis. Turns out said guy was a Jewish Holocaust survivor, so they they were saying that a Jewish Holocaust survivor was an anti-semite in order to slander Corbyn by association.
Also quite a lot of Israel-linked "Jewish" associations cooperated in that whole campaign of slandering Corbyn and Labour as "anti-semite" (remember how the Labour Party was said to have "many" anti-semites, and they turned out to be in a lower proportion than society in general and way less than the Tories) to bring Corbyn down and replace him with somebody from the New Labour faction, which succeeded.
The New Labour leadership has quite the debt to the Zionists for that, so don't expect them to be any less unwaveringly supportive of a genocidal ethno-Fascist Israel than the Tories - at best it's going to be like Biden in American: claim to want Bibi to stop all the while by action de facto supporting him.
Not the previous poster but I think the "dirty translation" is because in Portugal some things weren't translated at all (we use the actual word "copas" even though it's not a Portuguese word) and others are translated differently (were the Spanish use "bastos" - clubs - we use "paus" - sticks).
Your "you're not with us so you must be against us" is an old Fascist trope.
Might want to tone down that rabid tribalism as your "arguments" are awfully close to the other guys style of argumentation.
It doesn't even need to be alone to gain energy and still works fine with just one or two people who you're close to.
It's the "lot's of people" and the "people I barelly know" that are exhausting.
If everything was started from scratch tomorrow, the likelihood of present day California and Texas naturally ending up together in the same nation is pretty much zero, IMHO.
Those two are kept together by pretty much a country-sized version of a Sunken Cost Falacy.
One can't even count on language or culture as a unifying element, otherwise the whole of Latin America would be 2 countries, Brasil & Everybody Else.
Well, since I will also browse Lemmy quite literally "at Work" it makes sense to check the Profile option that blurs the Not Suitable For Work stuff even if having the Show NSFW content also ticked.
Explicitly going back and forth changing the option depending on where you're accessing Lemmy from is a recipe for mistakes, at best embarassing but, depending on where one works, which can go all the way up to being fired for cause.
It also depends on the sorting used under All.
In my instance you generally need to scroll a lot before finding NSFW stuff when sorting by Top for anything longer than Day.
Ticking the option in user settings to "Show NSFW content" because of scientific curiosity...
That's the rational take and I'm sure plenty of people will vote Biden following that rationale.
The top poster's "pestilence is a good thing" (i.e. Biden is a "good guy") statement on the other hand is insanelly tribalist and pure fantasy.
Being a Lesser Evil by comparison with an extremelly Evil option is not at all the same as being Good.
Lots of talk, no action: that's bullshit Political Propaganda 101 when a politician in power wants to do something which most of his voters are strongly against.
His Administration's actions are exactly the opposite, from the weapons shipments to Israel going around Congress that included 2000lb bombs to UN Vetos and saying that the ICJ shouldn't even be evaluating the case against Israel for Genocide (clearly this Administration fears a veredict of "guilty", which means they do believe Israel is likely comitting what amounts to Genocide under International Law).
The non-sociopath path for America would've be "Perfect Neutrality" (no action at all), yet Biden choses actual military and diplomatic support, including condemning anti-Genocide demonstrators as "anti-semitic" and condoning the use of police violence against them all the while in this specific subject lying just as shamelessly as Trump.
Well, they seem to be replenishing their submersible fleet in the Black Sea with lots of new under water vessels: for every ship they lose they get a new sub...
Russian Propaganda: "Our Glorious Nation has acquired a brand new submersible to help its fight against NATO in Ukraine"
The American voting system is not Proportional Vote and instead is massivelly Mathematically rigged with (for Congress) huge single representative electoral circles which in some cases have borders designed exactly to make it near impossible to defeat incumbents (aka Gerrymandering), with (for the Senate) even larger electoral circles (literally, each state) with 2 representatives, and something somewhat similar for Presidential elections (though worse since ultimatelly it all adds up to a single representative electoral circle with 300 million voters for a position with lots of power, unlike most European countries - with some notable exceptions like France - which either don't have a President or have one which is mainly symbolic and has little power).
Further, the very nature of the system will, beyond the Mathematical rigging, push the people who would otherwise go for a 3rd party to instead go for the "useful vote" (i.e. chose an electable candidate instead of the one they want) - it's not by chance that the heaviest argument of the Biden campaign was "vote Biden to defeat Trump".
Since new parties take various electoral cycles to grow, it's pretty impossible for them to do so because it's Mathematically near impossible for them to even establish a foothold that shows its earlier supporters they do have a chance to one day influence what laws are made in the US and how the country is ruled, so new parties invariable lose steam after the first or second election they go through.
You can see something similar to this in the UK, were for example the Green Party gets 1 million votes out of 40 million (2.5% of votes) but only 1 member of parliament out of 300 (0.33%), and remember this is with lots of people chosing electable candidates from other parties, so the Green Party natural vote would likely be larger in a different system
This stands in marked contrast with, for example, The Netherlands, were vote is Proportional and there are 15 parties in their Parliament (Tweede Kamer).
Please don't become the thing you likely abhor (Trumpists and alike) by reacting in a knee jerk fashing to things that "insult" your tribalist morals with a variant of the Fascist take "If you're not with us, you're against us".
It's perfectly rational and reasonable to think that Biden is not a "guy with good intentions" whilst also thinking that Trump is no better, whilst it's irrational and unreasonable to think that just because one doesn't like Person A, one must like Person B.
By any human being standards anybody who supports somebody mass murdering children with weapons is a shit person, hence Biden is a shit person. That doesn't mean Trump is any less shit.
Even by American President Moral standards (which, sadly are way lower than Normal Person Moral standars, when they should be higher), activelly supporting with weapons a nation committing Genocide is pretty bad, though far from novel.
The point being that trying to pass that specific sandwish as "gourmet" doesn't make this less of a contest of shit-sandwish vs double-shit-sandwish.
The take of top poster of this thread - that Biden is an "old man with good intentions" - is quite a different and far more tribalist and propagandistic take than your "the one that’s a bit less enthusiastic genocide supporter".
Your take is perfectly reasonable, whilst the original take is, as the previous poster pointed out, complete total bollocks for anybody but a complete total sociopath (who would be ok with mass murder) or ultra-tribalist numpty (who is ok with whatever their tribe's leader supports, no matter how inhumane).
A guy that supports a Genocidal ethno-Fascist regime doesn't have "good intentions", not even by the lousy standard of the subset of politicians that climb their way into the position of "leader of a major country" - normal human beings don't give guns to people purposefully murdering tens of thousands of children, starving 2 million people and targetting journalists and medical personnel.
"Not quite as extremelly bad intentions as the other guy" would be a more correct take.
Trying to spin this as a "good guy vs bad guy" is quite a tribalist take on a plague vs pestilence contest.
Democracy requires its 3 pillars - the Judicial, the Press and the Political - to be independent.
In the US all three are tied, some even Constitutionally.
It's thus not surprised that the country only ever got close to being governed for the Many rather than the Few at times when other Civil Society movements (such as Unions) were strong and healthy. Certainly that's not the case nowadays, not even close.