Krono @ Krono @lemmy.today

Posts

0

Comments

226

Joined

2 yr. ago

Comparing a rigorous Philosophy degree to an internet argument is something said only by the uneducated.

Philosophy is the spearhead of science, most scientific breakthroughs begin first with philosophy.

I think it's pretty evil to campaign strongly on enshrining women's reproductive rights into law and then abandon them the moment you step into office.

One week he was leading a stadium full of people in "Yes we can!" chants saying Roe will be the law of the land, and the next week he was saying 'not a priority'.

Lesser evil, definitely, but still quite evil.

I read the interview you posted, and they talk about strains in depth. The interview does not assert that "strains don't mean anything", in fact it strongly implies the opposite.

I think the more accurate and enlightening quote would be this:

Dr. Russo: There are biochemically distinct strains of Cannabis, but the sativa/indica distinction as commonly applied in the lay literature is total nonsense and an exercise in futility.

Anyone suggesting that the US is too sexist to elect a woman president has to explain the election of Claudia Sheinbaum.

By every metric I can find, Mexico is more misogynistic than the US. You can look at crime statistics on domestic violence, rape, murder; or opinion surveys showing men's negative attitude toward women -- all the stats coming out of Mexico are worse.

Yet somehow, Mexico overwhelmingly elected a woman (a Jewish woman in an 85% Christian population, too).

My hypothesis is that policy matters much more than the gender of a candidate. Kamala had absolutely pathetic policy proposals, supporting the status quo of corporate economic domination and a foreign policy soaked in innocent blood. but maybe I'm biased.

That's old school thinking. They will smear the progressive movement no matter what Katie does. They call Nancy Pelosi a communist. Wolf has been cried too many times, now those types of attacks are no longer effective.

still better than Bruce

None of that washes the blood off of the hands of Democrats.

The lesser of two evils is still evil.

What "argument" are you referring to?

I agree that Republicans are the worse of two evils, by far.

I was just pointing out that Democrats are not a benign sandwich, they are violent conservatives. Just less violent and less conservative than the alternative.

The secret sauce on the Democrat sandwich was the blood of Palestinian children being killed by US weapons. Those who still possess a moral compass found the copius amounts of blood difficult to stomach.

Personally I would have preferred ranch or avocado spread, but the DNC and Biden admin looked at the menu and actively chose blood.

"invited" is questionable, I know my governor was pressured and put under duress in order to accept Trump's national guard deployment during George Floyd.

But what about a clearer example: President Eisenhower deployed National Guard troops to Arkansas to enforce the desegregation of schools. The national guard was explicitly not invited by the Governor of Arkansas. Was this a civil war?

The front lines of the Ukraine war are well defined. You can see them on a map.

So it was a civil war when National Guard troops were deployed in an attempt to quell the George Floyd uprising?

In the 60s we had everything you just said: extreme state sanctioned violence, mass shootings, national guard being sent in, judges houses being burned, many political assassinations...

And they all happened in much larger numbers. There were so many bombings and bomb threats, and tons of plane hijackings, and the overall crime rate was so much higher, and there was so much racial violence, and and...

So do you think the US went through a civil war in the 60s?

I agree that things are looking bad, and getting worse, and this may end up in some sort of a civil war. But it seems you and I have a much different definition of "civil war".

You're totally right, but things get a lot murkier when we get into secondary- and third-order effects.

Bush's economic policy of bailing out Wall Street while letting Main Street fend for itself lead to 10s or maybe 100s of thousands of excess deaths.

Bush's defunding of education created an unknowable number of excess deaths, and this undereducation was a major factor in the election of Trump.

Well I agree that is a bad move; it's authoritarian, violent, expensive, unnecessary, and most likely unconstitutional.

But does sending National Guard troops to another state constitute a civil war?

You're right, saying things like "front lines" is an oversimplification. I have listened to a lot of Robert Evans, and I agree that if a civil war happens it will Balkanize America.

With that being said, you agree none of this is happening yet? Surely we are backsliding into fascism and violence, but you would agree we are not in a civil war, because we do not yet have multiple different factions, upstart states, militias and insurgencies?

So what are the 21st century metrics for a war?

I have an honest followup question to this meme (because I lived it): how long do you expect the girlfriend to stay?

At age 23 I was in a great relationship, we were in love, then I was diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis. I stopped being able to do physical things, I dropped out of school, I was bedridden. She went from being my girlfriend to being my nurse. She cared for me for a year, one long miserable year, then she left.

Is she at fault for leaving?

If this is a civil war, then what are the two sides? Where are the front lines?

W Bush is responsible for 1-2 million deaths, depending on how you count the bodies.

They were killed for political reasons, they were killed for profit. They were labeled "terrorists" in order to justify mass extrajudicial killings.

We can argue which is worse: Trump or W? Trump has done more damage to institutions, W has more blood on his hands, Trump has 3.5 more years to do damage, etc. But let's not whitewash the horrific and unjustifiable crimes of the W administration.