Silly and grudge are very interesting terms to describe an illegal embargo that brings millions in the brink of starvation and poverty.
Silly and grudge are very interesting terms to describe an illegal embargo that brings millions in the brink of starvation and poverty.
My “attitude” in no way excuses the very offensive remarks on your part, but I guess that’s what happens when you try to defend undefendable claims. You jump from claim to claim, when you are proven wrong, like how you edited out the part where you claim the European trend can be extrapolated to the entire world and you personally attack me with the excuse that I was taken aback by the ignorance on a straightforward Google search.
From what you remember (from where? That’s a good question I guess no one will ever answer us apparently)that does not make up for the overall downwards trend of consumption and emissions. Ok let’s deconstruct that quickly. Consumption has not been decreasing, it has been increasing, proven by the ever rising GDP, which measures exactly that, the total output of goods and services and considering the imports and exports are roughly equal for Europe and that material consumption is coupled to gdp, that’s the consumption.
When I say that Europe has outsourced its heavy industry to third world countries, I wasn’t talking just about “importing goods”. I was talking about their entire production. And the fact that fossil fuel consumption is still ever growing in Europe as well as in the entire West, coupled to the GDP growth is proven in Hickel(2019) “Is green growth possible”, where the domestic material consumption index is proven not to be accounting for the outsourced fossil fuels and materials consumed in third world countries to produce the goods imported, vital for Europe. The actual material footprint(which is the fossil fuel consumption and materials combined) is growing along with the GDP. And when you understand this, you realize it is all an illusion of accounting.
These are your two tragically false claims. For the third paragraph I don’t have much to say besides that third world countries need to increase their GDP to be living comfortably since they are destitute and the first world countries need to degrow like we said. Scientists have been saying this for so many years. There is a space between planetary boundaries and the decent living conditions that all people can and should be living in. The west exceeds the planetary limits(per capita), the economic south is below decent living conditions. That’s what degrowth preaches. It refers to the west, not the world in general.
Why would you assume I am talking about Europe which accounts for 1/10 of the global energy consumption and why would I be talking the continent that has mostly outsourced its heavy industry to third world countries? Why would you assume this?
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/global-primary-energy?time=2000..latest
Here’s your source. Here’s your total energy consumption. It couldn’t have been that hard to look at our world in data right? How can you be so absolutely wrong about data in plain sight while being confident about it? Do you have an agenda?
Wasn’t expecting this under a random unrelated post. A very welcome comment nonetheless.
Never forget that the exponential boom of renewable energy tech the last 20 years has entirely served as additional energy, not as replacement of fossil fuels.
Because it’s a far right party. Trump happens to be more far right, but that doesn’t change that fact. I’m not voting for far right, neoliberal, genocidal freaks.
At how many genocides do you draw the line? If the democrats committed a second one along with the Palestinian genocide they are committing right now? You’d again say trump would be worse, vote for Harris. If they committed three? Four? No matter what they do, Trump would do worse, so again you’d tell us to vote for Harris.
I draw the line at a genocide and at everything this neoliberal party stands for. I am not giving that party my approval because it is going in the exact opposite direction of what I stand for. At some point, the lesser evil is too evil.
I’m not mad, I’m just trying to express how little this accomplishes besides pr. Maybe you’ve forgotten how he was the first to ban Palestinian flags and protests, deeming them as terrorist.
That’ll show them!! Netanyahu is shaking rn. Honestly fuck Macron
Ayn Rand’s fountainhead, by a fat mile. I was young and didn’t know better
On one hand I think it’s very positive that everyone starts using decentralised platforms that don’t run on profit, that work for their users and not their shareholders, but on the other hand having a space mostly without conservatives is great.
That’s fair, but I believe cities can’t be like that regardless. It’s where you live everyday, the forests do not fix that. Your surroundings everyday affect mental and physical health (and these two interact with each other as well) and although a Sunday walk in nature is important, it will be negligible.
You have a much higher chance of living a sedentary life because you have to be in a car all day, so statistically less exercise, more obesity, worse quality of sleep (shown in scientific studies) all of which lead to mental health deterioration. There is also more noise pollution the more cars there are and the less trees there are, not only in the house(let’s suppose you have good insulation) but also when you are out of the house. This is causing stress (you can’t always realize this but it’s happening), so high blood pressure, mental health issues etc. And of course air pollution. Besides all that, there are also less interactions with other people, less public spaces, so less socialization which is also a big factor in mental health and overall wellbeing. I personally really value the latter.
I’m not trying to throw shade to the country, I wish the way of life was better, cause I’d like to work there for some years and I’m not saying Europe is perfect, obviously the problems exist there as well but to a very lower degree. I could live almost wherever in Europe, but I can never live in the US.
Haven’t been there, I can imagine, but could it be any other way? I mean, what would the alternative be? Have no forests and green spaces in the entire country? That would not be sustainable.
Your urban planning. Your cities are unwalkable, the scenery makes me depressed af, everything is scaled up for cars, even restaurants are for cars, the highways are huge, all I can see is tar. I don’t know how you can live like that.
There are ways to get it without destroying the machine. If it’s an electromagnet it will cost you several thousand dollars because there is cooling helium inside you have to remove, but you can stop it. Even if it’s a permanent magnet there are techniques to remove metal objects. Incidents with metal objects in these rooms happen all the time in hospitals.
I don’t get why you would defend this stupid cop, especially by making stuff up. A medical device like an MRI scanner is infinitely more important than a gun, for god’s sake. Even if we assume they cost the same, what deserves to be saved is the medical device.
I don’t know which part is worse, that they destroyed a several hundred thousand dollar machine for a fucking gun, that they left the magazine behind, or that they did all that for cannabis.
I don’t think you can easily judge a judge. Once you get the job, which very few do as you have to go for an additional degree for two years after law school, you’d have to really fuck up to lose your job.
Only the government/state can impeach a judge by popular vote of the officials. But there is no clear legal ground for this, it can only happen when they feel like it, or when there is evidence for criminal activity, bribery, which any serious individual can get away with pretty easily, or for a grossly immoral decision and a public outrage for that. That’s why it’s so rare.
What does it mean to be against a religion? As in you don’t follow it? Or that you oppress people following it?
So it’s ok to call students that are protesting against a genocide Nazis but not the people actually committing the genocide. Got it.
There’s AC in public transport.
Your privacy is of no concern to us, like you could claim you want more privacy, which you can achieve by commuting with a jet(people can stare at you through the car window) - that doesn’t mean the world has to cater to your unreasonable demands.
The fact that there is a park in your neighborhood doesn’t mean anything, since the public spaces are simply not enough. We don’t have more green instead of this sea of tar, because some people like you don’t care about either the environment or the alienation of the communities or the health implications of car centric cities.
The opposite of one trip every two weeks isn’t everyday, it’s once a week on a bike, I’m sure you can make this sacrifice since…yk I specifically explained how our world and lives are ruined from car centric cities. And if you are not willing to make this insurmountable sacrifice, you are just a lost cause and an enemy to green walkable vibrant cities and therefore to us.
You are not fucking crazy, you are fucking toxic to comment in this place to begin with.
If only it had a widget like the other news apps
Depends really. What do you value in your life? What ethical framework do you use? Do you value freedom and self determination, do you value people different from you as much as people of your nationality/race? Or perhaps do you value the Western stability, growth, dominance and wellbeing at the expense of the economic South more? There’s no objective answer, it depends on you and your viewpoint.
If we do away with the propaganda and misinformation we are left with this question. Because the US and Europe would never support anyone for the sake of them being the only democracy in the middle east or fighting terrorists or whatever. If that were the case the US wouldn’t have been complicit with the dictatorships of the gulf countries or any other of the innumerable dictatorships they have established throughout the years in the world. And they would also not be funding the ISIS or other terrorist groups in Columbia, Cuba, Nicaragua and so many other countries.
No dominant organisation in the world like the US state would give a significant amount of money(like it does for Israel) for something that doesn’t serve their material interests, namely the perpetuation and/or increase of their power and influence.
So what do you value? Freedom and dignity for all, or more power for the Western states and corporations (- and whatever religious crap you want to excuse colonising and ethnically cleansing a nation)?
If you see this, it’d save you a lot of time from arguing about every single event of the conflict. If you see every human in the world as equal and deserving of freedom, then you’d see that Israel and the West is bringing these people at the brink of extinction, torturing, killing, humiliating, starving them, expelling them from their land, destroying their vital civil infrastructure, stealing their land and property for 75 years now. And when you see all this (not from Western mainstream media though), you’d recognise the right for armed struggle against a colonizing entity that Israel is. No civilian casualties are acceptable, but the ones affected in 7/10/23 would have to turn against their government for ethnically cleansing Palestinians, bringing them to that desperate point of retaliation, not Palestinians.