It doesn't. Re-read my last two comments, but this time actually read them instead of just getting hung up on the time factor. I used the time reference as short hand assuming basic reading comprehension initially, but then fleshed it out over the next two comments where I discuss what that time difference implies and boils down to when you look at the totality of circumstances and societal/legal norms and technology between the two eras.
You're being purposefully obtuse and you know it. When taking the totality of the circumstances between the two events into account, I still argue that the US sedition acts are wholly irrelevant to the discussion at hand re: modern UK policy and privacy violation creep.
You're hung up on cherry picking out individual parts of my comment instead.
Careful to not conflate Trump's personal popularity and ability to get voters to the polls with other Republicans, even those blessed by Cheeto himself
Yes it's another example of something similar, but again, with the vastly different times, cultures, technological capabilities, and legal frameworks, I'd argue that relevance is largely nonexistent or the connection between the two attenuated to the point that any similarities are largely useless for comparison and irrelevant when discussing the issue in the current context.
Yes, but this is a thread about UK trying to criminalize dissent in 2020s. What the US did hundred+ years ago is wholly irrelevant to the discussion of UK policy in modern times imo.
Great write up. Thanks for making the post and this follow up comment. For what it's worth, to answer your original question, you can't go wrong with Brothers Karamazov. It's one of my personal favorites, and if you're into character-driven vs plot-driven reads you're in for a treat
"Speaker for the Dead". Despite the authors horrendous personal views on a lot of issues, this book has a profound impact on me as a young teenager with an interest in philosophy. What really stood out to me was the way complex philosophical concepts were made easily accessible. I also liked the reckoning journey Ender went on and how it took his personal struggles in the first book to their extreme (though imo logical) conclusion.
Love this. I just finished reading Huey Newton's "Revolutionary Suicide" and what struck me most about it was how ahead of his time he was on issues of intersectionality and class warfare. Yes race, gender, sexual orientation...etc are all things that matter, but until we have a system that works for ALL people (which can only be gained through class solidarity and crushing the entrenched oligarchy), all of the other issues will only sow class division and play into the hands of the oppressors.
Not going to keep repeating myself. See my response above. TL;DR: you're presenting a false equivalence and the self-determination argument on the Russian side is tainted by their 2014 invasion and the meddling they've done since then to build this so called "native" ethnic Russian coalition.
As for giving peace a chance, I agree with you there. Russia should pull all of their troops from all Ukranian regions and stop attacking its neighbor. It's the aggressor. Ukranians have zero reason to negotiate peace with a hostile foreign invader.
The regions are only "disputed" because Russia invaded another sovereign nation under false pretenses 9 years ago, brought in their people, set up sham elections, and is now claiming there's a legitimate, native contingent that wants to break away.
Also, while I won't dispute the serial killer analogy (I get it, USA is a shit hegemon), it's again a bit disingenuous because you yourself have enjoyed chopping up boddies from time to time (to keep the analogy going) so the pearl clutching is not as strong of an argument as you may think. Likewise with the cameras: they're setting up cameras in the neighbors yard, not yours (because again, the neighbors house is NOT YOURS).
NovaPrime @ NovaPrime @lemmy.ml Posts 4Comments 500Joined 2 yr. ago
It doesn't. Re-read my last two comments, but this time actually read them instead of just getting hung up on the time factor. I used the time reference as short hand assuming basic reading comprehension initially, but then fleshed it out over the next two comments where I discuss what that time difference implies and boils down to when you look at the totality of circumstances and societal/legal norms and technology between the two eras.