Pup Biru @ pupbiru @aussie.zone

Posts

0

Comments

869

Joined

2 yr. ago

https://www.hks.harvard.edu/centers/carr/publications/35-rule-how-small-minority-can-change-world

you need 3.5% of the population engaged in non-violent protest for guaranteed political change

for the USA, that’s about 10m people - no small number… the protests keep growing. what’s your solution? because so far that’s the best idea that anyone has simply because

Nonviolent protests are twice as likely to succeed as armed conflicts

sure, the systems should be better equipped to deal with the situation, but they’re not… so it’s a shit situation, moving on from that: realistic paths forward?

sorry to say that hopes and dreams don’t make reality

trumps america is absolutely america… it’s the america that the system and people put in place, and a huge number of americans still think he’s doing a good job

is it all of america? na there are decent people still… but this absolutely is america

didn’t they try to get them banned a couple of times, and it fell over in court? afaik this determination allows those attempts to retry with more evidence… it’s been an ongoing process; it just takes time

banning a political party should be hard, because it’s something that can very much be abused

everyone there is doing fuck all about it.

i think it’s important not to downplay the protests… people are organising the most political action that’s happened in most people’s lifetimes

but it’s by no means proportional to the situation

and perhaps more importantly: there are still a huge number of people that are drinking the koolaid

i don’t really see how… it’ll make movies from outside the US more expensive inside the US, but it doesn’t effect the price of US movies elsewhere

… without retaliation from many other countries of course, but idk if that’ll happen really: europe has kinda gone with retaliating in other areas: specific to applying pressure rather than broad

the onion is about as factual as the right wing news and is pretty left leaning

soooooo they’re worse then

“screens for everything”.
\ “screens for three diseases”.

you never answered my question about what other diseases are relevant to the conversation

these are the STDs that are actually relevant to talk about. there are no others, unless you have some information on some novel new STD, in which case i’d love to hear about it

caution information and talking about sex is not FUD

i agree! what is FUD is overstating the risks with statements like “pustules on your genitals” and suggesting that there are relevant STDs that aren’t well tested/treated/prevented

there are risks, but the risk of contracting STDs if using condoms is very low. the risk of contracting antibiotic resistant STDs is also incredibly low

there is, however, and actual risk in stigmatising these things so that people don’t talk about them and educate themselves

getting an STD is absolutely fine! get tested, get treated, tell sexual partners, no drama… that’s exactly what the public health messaging is because that’s what works to keep people healthy

mitigate risks, don’t pretend like they’re irrelevant.

of course: you should always mitigate risks… but don’t act like something is more dangerous than it is… you’re making out here like having sex is as dangerous and base jumping, and that’s such an unhelpful position to take that it is actually dangerous to people’s health

this is exactly the issue with “abstinence based” sexual education: if you go too hard, people won’t actually trust when they hear the real risks because people have overblown the risks in the past

it’s worth calling out all on their own because it surfaces a specific problem… just saying “billionaires ruin everything” isn’t helpful, because it simply shifts blame to a nebulous concept that’s further removed from everyday people

also, following orders is no excuse

as an aussie, who lived in melbourne, so was inside for 80% of 3 years enforced by police including curfews enforced by police helicopters… all of which the general public by a very large majority agreed with in order to save lives

what yall in the US went through was absolute hell. what was forced on you was in many ways worse than what we went through… the constant fear must have been horrible

but the US response was pathetic and needs to be remembered for exactly what it was: a complete shit show, that SPECIFICALLY DID NOT INCLUDE LOCKDOWNS… australia and countries that did lock down… a real lockdown had significantly lower death rate… your lack of lockdown led to over 1 million deaths

by using language like that, it leads to things like holocaust denial: people forget, and then people say it didn’t happen

never forget that trump and his administration, along with that of many republican governors, were directly responsible for a huge number of those millions of deaths. never let them spin the narrative

… also, yknow, saying what you went through was a lockdown completely trivialises our hellish experiences… you didn’t lock down; we put in the fucking work and saved lives… it’s a comment on the US and how toxic individual liberty at all costs can be, and something that we are very proud of how we handled: for years we traded individual freedoms to save the lives of those around us

i think they mean programs they use in order to track ordinary citizens

like the shit they’ve said about sending depressed. autistic, or adhd people to camps

be happy knowing this is money that will be spent on trivial immature bullshit rather than donated to conservative PACs

the world is not binary. there are many people who bare part of the responsibility:

• the republican party - all of them
• republican voters
• the democratic party
• no-voters (who didn’t want to “support genocide” and now you have a worse genocide and a bunch of other horrible shit including a shit load of extra war crimes in ukraine for the foreseeable future)
• the media

these and many more can have played a part all at the same time

it’s a lot of risk that is worth considering before making an informed decision

i would agree that there is some risk and it’s always worth being educated but stigma and FUD contribute to people not wanting to talk about sex

“getting tested” doesn’t cover most STI’s unless you’re symptomatic

patently untrue. a standard STI screen covers HIV, chlamydia, and gonorrhea

these are by far the most common STIs that’s cause anyone issues without other complications, and tests accurately catch them within weeks. standard public health advice is STI tests every 3mo for sexually active individuals (and in fact if you’re on PrEP to cover you against HIV, you get a 3 month script so it’s pretty much ensured)

HPV, Herpes, and many others are diseases for life

the HPV vaccine is very effective, herpes i’d agree with but causes minimal issues for the enormous majority of people without complications, and i don’t know what you mean by “many other”. if you can list them, id be happy to engage but otherwise the rest of that is more FUD

skill in knowing who to trust…

nope not at all! it’s public health. it has very little to do with trust, other than trying to limit as much as possible to people who know that telling their sexual partners when they get a positive test result is a healthy thing to do, and they won’t be berated for it… the main thing here is that you should feel confident that your sexual partners are going to tell you ASAP when you’ve been exposed, and that more than anything reduces that 3mo timeline and keeps everyone safe… but that only happens when people don’t stigmatise and fear the outcome

… i guess it also helps that here in australia STI tests are free and treatments all cost a couple of $

or you can just make sure everybody “gets tested” but that’s not how getting tested works.

as i’ve stated previously, it is with PrEP and with gay men - i don’t know much about the heterosexual community, but we have very active sexual health campaigns and they work

and walking down the street isn’t 100% safe

gee i guess the fact that we scored 2nd in the world on the IMF balanced budgets globally is nothing! if you don’t win you’re a loser

it’s okay to criticise… i saw noting anywhere about anyone saying we shouldn’t vote, or even vote for ALP

and hopefully all these conservative losses means more governments pushing back against trump harder, which can only mean good things for yall too!

perhaps, but they also had an absolutely miserable campaign and labor was phenomenal… it wasn’t a single issue that they won on

1: afaik placebos have no effect on vaccines that’s correct, because it’s not something that’s subjective… you either have an infection or you don’t: you can’t think yourself better

2: the way we do efficacy trials is already exactly this: we give trial participants the vaccine and compare their infection rates to known infection rates in the general population that match the demographics of the trial participants as closely as possible