spiderplant @ spiderplant @lemm.ee

Posts

0

Comments

196

Joined

2 yr. ago

Israel doesn't represent every Jew that ever lived around the world.

Yes I support the Warsaw uprising.

Yes I support the dismantlement of apartheid states.

These are not conflicting stances.

If the oppressed become an oppressor my stance can change on them. Not taking the side of the oppressed while they are being oppressed is cowardly and indirectly supports the status quo/the oppressor.

Oh no! Not a German overcompensating for their countries role in the holocaust.

Both sides fucking suck, the only difference I can see is that HAMAS is bad for Israelis and Palestinians moreso than the Israeli Government is for Israelis.

• Israel has effectively removed freedom of speech in Israel and are incarcerating thousands of dissenting Israelis (believe it or not this is bad for Israelis)
• Israel has policies for killing soldiers and civilians if they are going to be taken hostage (dying is generally seen as bad for everyone)
• Israeli helicopters indiscriminately shooting at the festival are responsible for most of the deaths at the festival on the 7th (pretty bad for Israelis)
• Israel has killed more Israeli hostages than Hamas and has tried to refuse accepting the return of hostages (I'd be more scared of Israel than hamas if I was a hostage right now)
• Israel has a 99% civilian kill ratio when targeting hamas in this latest operation (IOF just being a shit army, bad for Israelis to be linked to this)

If you want to dismantle Hamas for the the operation on the 7th, by the same logic we should dismantle Israel 10x for all their operations since 2003 such as operation lead.

Ah yes the choice between democracy (fascism lite) and fascism.

It'd be nice if Americans finally overthrew their system or just voted for other parties/independents.

Also not everyone here is from the US btw.

If you aren't anti-oppression or anti-apartheid you aren't progressive

Unless you want to do crazy gerrymandering then democracies are as a rule ran by a majority

Unless you want to do crazy gerrymandering then democracies are as a rule ran by a majority

South Africa is a representative state dude

So you're for a 1 state solution with equal rights and a government ran by the majority like south Africa?

So you're for a 1 state solution with equal rights and a government ran by the majority like south Africa?

It's like there's a historically sound reason for that or something...the events didn't even happen that long ago.

Its like there's a historical correlation for large armies and fascist states.

But to counter your point, Taiwan keeps on shrinking their army and even dropped conscription despite the even bigger threat of China. They know the US will bail them out just like they would Israel in an all out war. Even looking at all the defending forces in Palestinian or defensive based armies around the world you don't need a large or extremely well equipped army unless you are looking to invade am area.

Yes, because of the aforementioned large military. And maybe they haven't lost someone in the particular fight (although it's a rather asshole thing to even mention) this is not the first time Israel and other Jews have suffered casualties from surprise attacks.

Every surviving family or friend of someone killed is another person given reason to pick up weapons and fight. Every person who is under threat of starvation, physical violence and death is a person justified in their right to defend themselves. When there is a 36x difference in deaths and one side facing such brutality and oppression, the other side has no right to claim victim.

You say that like it's an indicator that they're doing alright. How many people in your area feel the need to have fortified bunkers in in their homes to prevent them from being murdered by people living a few miles away? And how many of those people actually had to use those bunkers in the last month (like many Israelis just did)?

When one side has the psychological and physical safety of a bunker in their home and the other has to face the bombs without any protection it absolutely is an indicator that they are doing alright.

If they've been there more than 400 years then then you should consider them to have a claim on the land. Either you are a massive hypocrite or you advocate for indigenous peoples in the Americas to take back their land from colonist descendants.

Ah yes let's apply it to the side with rights, running water, food, the biggest military in the middle east, backed by the US, given free reign to commit war crimes by the west, deeply racist, most of the population have not lost family in the fight, has fortified bunkers in every house and have no fear of having their house bulldozed to make way for a stronger neighbours population.

Proportional in the context you're using it doesn't mean what you think it does.

Proportionality is important in international law which is one of the reasons that the UN keeps calling out Israel for war crimes. Another cool fact in international law is that the threat to national security has to be imminent to strike into another country. They can't just bomb in retaliation and say they are preventing future attacks.

You're probably one of those people who says things like genocide when the population has doubled since 1950, or apartheid when Arabs serve in the IDF, sit as judges in the courts and hold seats in the parliament.

Big Zionist misinformation here, population numbers going up can not disqualify acts from being genocidal. Also black people participated in South African society in the same way but no one would say SA wasn't an apartheid state because a minority existed in the army or parliament.

75 years isn't that recent

What do you mean war, the west bank is not controlled by hamas.

This is brutalisation by an occupying force on a population living in an Israeli controlled Bantustan.

My problem is not with inclusivity but with promoting uptake. If you are familiar with the grammar or phonetic sounds or some of the vocab, you are more likely to find that language easier to learn.

Both English and Esperanto share the same problems of universal languages that I mentioned. English does have the advantage of number of speakers but it is a mess of a language for people to have to learn.

Again to reiterate my counter to universal languages, why not learn and potentially help revive your local indigenous languages. In a world where universal translation exits on our phones everybody being able to speak the same language matters less.

Someone already said that either the created language takes from too few source languages and alienates speakers of languages with no common characteristics or takes from every language family and becomes a horrible mess that's hard to speak for everyone.

So if a world language is a bad idea no matter what languages you use as a source, why not have Esperanto or something similar for Europe/English speaking world and then a different language for Asia, and another one for Africa. You've reduced the number of translators needed and left most people with a language close to their mother tongue. You could also break the suggested regions in to smaller sections eg give Germanic Europe a common Germanic language. West/south Europe get Esperanto, east Europe sets a common slavic language. You still get languages that don't neatly fit like Hungarian but its better for most language learners than the last example.

Personally I'd not propose universal languages as a utopian idea and instead promote indigenous languages such as Catalonian, Breton, Irish and promote learning many languages in a post work society.

Capitalism has been also associated with stagnation(recessions, austerity, stagflation or economies such as Japan's), hunger(poverty, famines), neighbours turning neighbours to secret police(Americans reporting people who have gotten abortions), and at least 20 year wide gap in the mindsets of people compared to their western peers(read this one as conservative Americans and other similar countries vs more liberal and social democracy style countries). It's inherently violent(state violence eg. police in protecting property), authoritarian ideology. Facisms rising popularity in the developed world is a feature of capatilim.

That would be a ecumenical philosophical matter.