Shalakushka @ Shalakushka @kbin.social

Posts

0

Comments

236

Joined

2 yr. ago

Godawful clickbait title. YOU'LL NEVER BELIEVE WHY HE WAS ON THE WING OF A PLANE. NUMBER TEN WILL SURPRISE YOU!

Greg Abbott discussing how he would definitely shoot migrants if they wouldn't be brought up on murder charges: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/texas-gov-abbott-defends-remarks-stopping-short-shooting-migrants-rcna133748

Greg Abbott blocks border patrol from reaching river, drowning two children: https://www.newsweek.com/greg-abbott-condemned-after-migrant-children-drown-murder-1860554

Greg Abbott installs buoys placed to push anyone in the river to the more dangerous parts of the river in an attempt to drown people: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/aug/29/greg-abott-texas-governor-mexico-border-asylum-seekers-risk

I get that you're not really arguing in good faith, anyone who has read anything about this bastard knows this stuff, but at least try and do a better job of acting like you don't know anything.

By that logic, I guess we should all live our lives in fear of the potential backlash of fascists to any social action. Wait, doesn't that just result in them deciding how we live our lives anyway?

You're right, the guy who wants to murder people at the border is probably that way for super legit non racist reasons, the media has just been a big meany pants to poor Greg Abbott

People need to expect to pay reasonable prices on a reasonable basis for art and entertainment, and pretending everyone should be cool with fifty different streaming services and never owning anything again is its own sort of immorality and lack of ethics.

If we had those sorts of standards for posting on Lemmy, we wouldn't be able to get super cogent viewpoints like yours, though!

We have way more than enough livestock. Humans should be eating less meat.

Catholicism still a tyrannical hate org and child molestation ring, more at 11. Who would have thought a bunch of people sniffing their own farts thinking they literally know what the supposed omnipotent creator of the universe wants (to be overly concerned about human dongs) would be hard to convince otherwise?

If you're going to post something long, why oh why use Twitter/bluesky/similar?

Agreed. Capital, states, etc all have issues in the same way. I just think the state can work for the people and I'm not convinced of the alternative. Both libertarians and anarchosyndicalists have some wild basically religious ideas about how everyone will basically just work together and not dick each other over because of... Social norms, I guess? I just have a hard time believing it.

It is, a lot of people just have pseudo mystical beliefs about how people will act when there is no state. They like to imagine everything bad about humans is capitalism/the state/insert Boogeyman, not that the state and laws exist because we tried the alternative and no system at all always does work out to might makes right. A warlord always moves in to fill the power vacuum.

Some people are bastards and any system you create has to be created with the explicit assumptions that people are bastards. Some people just want to believe no one is a bastard or that there are not enough bastards to hurt the reasonable people. I think those people are wildly optimistic, and removing power structures does not remove the temptation to exert power or the ability, only one specific means.

Aren't you the guy chomping at the bit for China to take Taiwan and Hong Kong over? Like a jingoist might?

Marketing and evangelism are fucking terrible too while we are at it

Yes, all politicians are exactly the same and you are such a special snowflake for seeing through the illusion, you very smart heckin valid person.

source: my rectum

No, I am proposing that sufficiently large groups of people have some right to self determination, to only be part of nations which they choose to be part of. I'm saying Hong Kong is culturally, philosophically, and historically distinct from the People's Republic of China at this point, and pretending they're not is silly. You're talking as if, like, Singapore doesn't exist, that if any city state exists that's somehow an absurdity.

Hong Kong has some shared history with China but not a shared philosophy. That's why there's the AND clause there. If you have shared history but not shared philosophy, it's merely imperialism with a patina of historicity, i.e., "we should own this because we did at one point, regardless of the wishes of the people." If you have shared philosophy but not shared history it may work out, but don't be surprised when different cultures within your state react to issues in ways that are informed by their differing histories.

You are effectively saying that you don't have an issue with colonialism, just that the wrong people were doing it before and now the right people can do it. I'm saying that the people of Hong Kong deserve self-determination if their political will is not represented in the state of the People's Republic of China, which it will not be.

That people who desire self determination should be able to have it, that they should not be expected to be ruled by whomever is most powerful and happens to be ethnically similar. I think states should be based on a shared history and philosophy rather than ethnically segregating them to suit China.

Nah, there needs to be a federal law to prevent exactly this sort of idiocy.

Oh well if it is just to make Russia big again like the imperial days, I guess all that death and destruction is totally acceptable and a fine course of action, then. What was I thinking, imagining that allowing a naked lebensraum style land grab go off would let world leaders seeking more territory know they can take whatever they want? Obviously that would be fine if you could point to a map from a few centuries ago where it says "we totally own this forever guys". Gosh, I was so silly, I should pay more attention to geopolitics.