sous-merde @ soumerd_retardataire @lemmygrad.ml

«hallowed be thy Name, thy Kingdom come», that's 'the christians Aim'/Islam

---

Read more

Posts

12

Comments

47

Joined

2 yr. ago

Yeah well, fuck David Ricardo(, it's obvious that we should buy&produce locally, his counter-intuitive results are only valid from a consumer viewpoint, not taking into account the jobs created, the taxes collected by the state, the more secondary enterprises benefiting indirectly from a good economic health, ...), he was only used to justify a neo-colonialist "free trade" locking "poor"(exploited) countries into selling raw materials, as well as selling the ownership of their companies/mines/'natural resources', etc.
Their invaluable ressources were formed over (hundreds of )millions of years and are now sold over a few decades at a very low price set by the market according to the competition(, which isn't the case for the more advanced manufactured products with less competition, such as selling planes instead of t-shirts).
So fuck David Ricardo, and these countries should ABSOLUTELY agree together to form an economic(&military because coups would follow,) alliance to raise in a concerted manner the prices of their raw materials, who should be at the very least 10, if not 100, times higher, and then use that money to manufacture these objects themselves. But they won't, tsk, so w/e.
D.Trump is right in his desire to get back american companies in the u.s.a., even if he only did so once he stopped benefiting from it, the u.s. is too powerful to be oppressed for such decisions, unlike :

• Haiti in the 1980-1990s, who tried to protect its rice, but the unholy trinity forced them to give up on that measure, and Miami's rice quickly took over, assholes ;
• Before the 1980s, Ghana produced its own clothes, but because of the western SAPs, they were forced to buy clothes from Europe and Asia and lost their textile industry ;
• In Argentina during the 2000s, Kirchner also tried some protectionnism like China, but as usual the unholy trinity came to order people around, the US, EU, and Japan added to the criticism of the WHO, and commercial pressures forced them to change their mind ;
• Tanzania also tried to do the same for its agriculture, etc.

I won't forget that the People's Republic of China was the only non-western aligned country to ever emerge since the colonization(, South Korea and Japan's rise were only strategic, we helped them at our expense like Israel or Taiwan), and also one of the only ones who refused to follow western advices/orders(, i still consider them protectionnism even if they complied — unwillingly in 1842, 1858, 1860, ... ; willingly in the 1980s — with our demands on tariffs, because they :

• subsidized their economy ;
• 'obtained, through explicit demands of real partnerships unlike the more submissive(trusting?) global South,'&'are now improving upon' western technologies, as well as creating new ones(, they were faster) ;
• had reglementations such as forbidding foreign investments in some sectors past a certain percentage ;
• favored local companies for state projects ;
• ...
  They've demonstrated the unprecedented success of their system/'set of conditions', and should be imitated by the Global South if it's indeed better/'validated by these last decades'. And the chinese civilization has only just started to marvel us if you also like techno-scientific discoveries).

Fuck Ricardo.

More arguments here, among many books.

mass graves

feels like a dissimulation, not only of war crimes but also to prevent the identification of the victims' status(, children, women, elderly, humanitarians, ...), and a body count of the operation.
They wouldn't have been found if Israel didn't communicated the location.
So many bulldozers and yet many more lies, they're even killing patients in hospitals, and have destroyed everything :

If the current territory covered by Israel and Palestine was splitted into three between christians, jews, and muslims, then it'd be more easily accepted(, by the israelis,) if the shares were 33% jews, 16.5%+16.5% christians, and 16.5%+16.5% muslims, the five territories with Jerusalem as their capital(, perhaps with a slightly larger territory than currently). The goal of uniting one day in the future as a common territory with three governments may even be stated along with the redrawing of the borders(, and even end up with only one if the three religions of the Book ever fuse one day, Jerusalem/Israel/Palestine would be even more symbolic).
If Israel ends up with a territory of ~9.500km²(, sharing the rest with the two other religions of the Book), they should ideally also be offered a second country of less than 20.000km² somewhere in the world, accepting the location because of their shared 'presence in'/'ownership of' the Sacred Lands. In that case, no need for the division 33 // 16.5+16.5 // 16.5+16.5, a simple 33//33//33 would do. And if it's spitted 50//50 for jews//muslims, then a second territory of less than 15.000kms² would be enough.

Material conditions enforces coercion(, bargaining power). His decision upon the Washington Post, and admittance that only Internet criticizes the capitalist viewpoints/mistakes, is also an illustration of how capitalism enforces its decisions upon its possessions, long live democracy in the workplace instead. No master except God(, by definition one can't escape its/our determinism, and shouldn't reject Idea(l)s).
State-driven innovation is obviously more efficient than a company driven by profits instead of goals/vision/values(, who'll choose planned obsolescence, monopolies, stealing from other companies, ..., over genuine progress). Their theory states that the price would end up so low that they wouldn't waste profits in dividends and huge salary gap, but that's only one of the discrepancies between their theory and reality.

That countries should selfishly think about themselves, and not serve the common good instead by helping each other, is the exact same trash "ideology"(, and certainly a consequence of the mindset of individuals,) than encouraging citizens' selfishness instead of altruism/empathy, even if it's at their own expenses.
They said that (the religious )empathy/goodness failed, and that selfishness/individuality would end up producing the same results in every single case.
I don't care if westerners fail as long as we don't bring the rest of the world with us, but i'm not the one deciding, the strong do what it can and the weak suffer what it must.

Huh. I didn't take a look at your links and kinda expected to have problems with the mods for that comment anyway.
Seems like we have the same opinion and lemmy.ml is indeed not Reddit. Sorry for such a bad comment, i'm french and our president, but far from only him, said a few annoying things that made me want to vent out, honestly i don't know why, just that it's one of these times when everything i'm hearing from the radio or t.v. or some twitter accounts of politicians just annoy me, it was a pointless comment in that sense, probably the equivalent of seeking a (verbal )fight in a pub, i was just getting ready to be angry at a poor pro-ukrainian as if it was productive, 🤷

So Ukraine wasn't building up an army to recover Crimea and fight against anti-n.a.t.o. separatism in its south-east ? Zelensky was elected as an alternative to anti-russians(, without the vote of south-eastern ukrainians under an economic blocus among other things), and did the opposite.
It's just like saying that Russia will invade the rest of Europe or other lies(, probably the russian interferences as well since Russiagate was debunked and we have a strong history of lying, Georgia was the aggressor during the Beijing olympics), we just can't tell the truth and our population is even ignoring the talking points of the opponent. The non-westerners know our point of view, never difficult to understand, we're the ones systematically ignoring theirs, and lying with biases visible even to those agreeing with us.
Netanyahu is also a liar but that's what we(sterners) do, the end justifies the means our leaders/representatives don't speak from/with their heart, there's an assumed propaganda of talking points, e.g. unprovoked for Russia or terrorists for Palestine, what are palestinians supposed to do to stop the ongoing colonization and live peacefully together ? What is Russia supposed to do if it's rejected by the west because of their desire to be independent and in favor of multipolarity, supporting the declared enemies of the "policemen of the world" ? Iran wouldn't be considered authoritarian if it was zionist.
What matters here is that there are solutions for each problem, we have a strong tendency to consider our opponents crazy/incomprehensible, without explaining/justifying in order to seek a national unity.
Now we're censoring people for their opinions even more than before, it comes from the state and not platforms, with jail time and fees, but since we're not killing people for posting unapproved opinions it could be worse. JD Vance was right to criticize the censorship wave of these last years in Europe(, and the US as well in a lesser measure), liberty is our only answer for a lack of egality 🤷(, in some forms, « poverty is slavery » though)

One day he's criticized for saying that Hitler was a communist, the other for apparently assuming his love of nazis.
There's an old series of books by Terry Goodkind that i've read as a child, named the Sword of Truth, each book has a wizard's rule, and here's the first one :

People are stupid. They believe things mainly because they either want them to be true or fear them to be true.

I'm not particularly fond of these books nor do i agree with this rule, but if you're political then you're judging real political actions, such as enacted laws, like adults do, or you're eventually discussing assumed theories, but not unfair little excerpts regretted afterwards by the one who did them, and we can hopefully both agree that we should not explain our worldview or vote based on the latter, its 'just for fun'/'not serious'.
At least most journalists know that it's only about influencing his future decisions, but you don't if you believe it was 'a coming out'/'something to be discussed seriously'.
That's just my two cents, thanks for reading my insults towards ~you, and let's continue not changing.

conspiracy theorists taking us for idiots, nothing new(, even if you're taking it quite farther than usual).

On the side of real stuff happening : D.Trump said a lot in his inauguration speech, and just put Cuba back on the terrorist states list, as well as signing over twenty executive orders, etc. Seems worth more discussion than your fantasies.

Just unfortunate that, like for D.Trump, you're too used to discussing the form instead of the content, we're worth more than selected/biased excerpts.

The title isn't exact :

Moreover, their relations were only re-instaured after the western-supported coup by J.Añez :

(Here's Colombia's president 6 hours ago b.t.w., among other examples)

(no need to point out that it would be safer for them not to take position for//against any side. The article also spoke of Argentina, here's an interesting 2mn-long point of view)

Unless the creatures, overall, would prefer to have never existed in the first place, then the Creator isn't evil and should be praised(, that's only one reason, for example an other one would be our search for Absolute/Greatness/Good/..)

And they've long gone past the retaliation of "an eye for an eye"

The worst is that we're still not offering a solution for this decades-old conflict, there must be a way to please both sides ! That's what our medias should talk about instead of always act as a powerless spectator or judge, where is the list of solutions, why don't we all know about the different possibilities ? Our actions only aim for the prolongation of the best outcome for us and the worst outcome for them, that's not fair and they have every right to hate us for this injustice. Once again, how to resolve permanently&virtuously this conflict should be the main topic 'on our televisions'/'in our newspapers', so that our leaders make the right/just/correct decision.

And an other word that they would refuse to attribute to fighters from our side, but would hate you if you refuse to use it for the fighters of the other side :

One post and zero comment from criitz.
Ideally a fusion of Reddit and Lemmy's content was what your bot is aiming to do, first thought it'd be illegal, but since we don't have human reposters i'm glad there's at least a bot instead.

I don't entirely agree with my comment either, because there's multiple interpretation of Hell.
One of them is interesting, it says that if our consciousness survives after our death, our mind will finally think clearly, we'll remember our past better than if it happened today, and we'll be overwhelmed by shame, this hell would be created by ourselves.
Another one would talk about a real place, but not in the afterlife but right here, on Earth(, it combines perfectly with this talk of afterlife if you believe in reincarnation), and says that if we all live our lives 'searching for'/'aiming at' God, then our descendants/reincarnations will live in Paradise(, or in Hell if we don't).
There're other interpretations, as well as the thought that we're not free since we're determined, so God decided before our birth whether we would end up in Hell or in Paradise, a thought discussed in the Middle-Ages and rejected in favor of free-will(, i don't think Spinoza would disagree with the conclusion that God predestined us for Hell, if he believed in Hell).
Obviously, the most common explanation is that police(wo)men didn't existed back then, God-fearing people was the equivalent of virtuous people, even when nobody can see/stop them.

They merely said that being separated from God means suffering, while following H..er.im means walking towards the establishment of H..er.is Kingdom/City unto Earth. They talked more about Hell as a state than as a physical place, but, well... who cares nowadays, right ? Parabola never taught us anything about the real world, the spirit doesn't exist, and morals are relative, they were simply naive ignorants who never had anything to teach us, embrace modernity and reject 100% of the past.

anyone who worships God is also good by default, and of course this logic follows that anyone that doesn't worship God is evil by default.

If that was the case they wouldn't put an emphasis on hypocrites.

Justice≠Revenge, otherwise Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, and the rest, would be justified.
If every evil was stopped though it would be the end of 'our trip'/'any possible progress'.

Yeah, of course, violence is needed to stop violence, i'll probably always keep in mind the belief that debate is the best path, but that's not always a possibility.
I've been thinking for quite some time now on how to be united in diversity, because it's desirable and feasible, that's why i had to consider that both sides deserved the same rights/respects. In fact, i'm obviously biased, but that's where my (public )questioning on double standards came from, i'm thinking about a situation in which i'd try to be united in diversity even with fascists, with the hope of changing them by our examples, it just really sucks that we(sterners) are hurting so many people around the world instead of helping each other, that's all, thanks for the chat

Oh, ok, i understand now.
If murder was always wrong, then we would have to hang the hangman.
However, we could say that voluntarily murdering an innocent person is always wrong.
Seems like we're getting closer to a universal rule, but we can always get closer, yes.

Violence against violent people, in order to prevent more violence, seems justifiable. Yet whistleblowers are put in jail for, e.g., hacking computers in order to get the proof of one's misdeeds. And there's quite a lot of people responsible for a lot of sufferings who receive presidential honors, or other stuff as their advisors, one can't kill them though, things are indeed complicated, but saying violence is not an answer while passing a violent socio-economic law is bullshit yeah, in a real democracy we could at least vote to cancel such law.

In any case, we'll support manifestations in a country we don't like, but "condemn violence" when these manifestations happen in our streets, it's simpler for me to equate both situations and talk about a double standard.
But i could agree that street violence is less justified in a socialist country compared to a capitalist one. However, i've heard enough times people saying that violent manifestations are justified in an "authoritarian" country(, almost always socialist), but not in our "democratic" country.
There are indeed some cases in which violence is more acceptable than others, my personal bias is that it's justified in order to prevent capitalists from doing even more misdeeds, but, yeah, i'll loop over with the justification from the other side that violence is justified in order to prevent socialists from supposedly doing more misdeeds(, like helping the poors, having democracy at work, healthcare, more equal opportunities from birth, a collective goal, ... ?).
Some pro-capitalists are sincere when they talk about preventing the evils of socialism, so the best would perhaps be to create international unbiased rules that mistakenly consider that capitalism is as virtuous as socialism, even if that's not what i believe it'd probably be necessary in order to be united in diversity.