I doubt it but I hope it somehow signifies a lasting slowing down of imperialism, of protecting the interests/profits of foreign corporations over local populations.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d'état
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_involvement_in_the_Iraq_War
Would he even arrive in hell? To my knowledge, God (at least of the old testament) never really condemned sexual assault/rape or hurting children (the latter is even encouraged - “spare the rod, spoil the child”, the binding of Isaac, etc.). A rapist could marry his victim as a “punishment” (as long as she’s single, otherwise if she was another man’s property, both her and the rapist should die)
I mean, it’s been a threat to people and democracy across the world since at least 1898
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish–American_War / https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_Wars
y’all need to stand up against racism and discrimination
I concur, I think they should push towards a more positive internet. Though I think they are a bit wary of doing it ever since the toxic backlash to this blog post
https://blog.mozilla.org/blogarchive/blog/2021/01/08/we-need-more-than-deplatforming/
After they had gotten ahead and were in charge
Chiming in that I do agree with this specific sentiment. I think the issue with your overall statement is that it seems to imply that all boomers did this, while it only applies to the ones that got ahead. The system we’ve been living in for ages has been creating and rewarding cutthroat psychopathic/sociopathic tendencies - so it absolutely makes sense that the people that rose up in the economic ladder abused their position accordingly.
What’s needed is a program that analyzes and pinpoints the conditions that create violent behavior and uproots them (for example, living in scarcity with no economic security and feeling marginalized, having no empathetic communal support system, etc.)
(cc: James Gilligan)
This is heartbreaking. The psychopaths at the top are actively sacrificing human lives. Cutting back programs like FEMA/disaster aid.
The population. This theoretical organization would need to be safe guarded enough that the people would believe they can be frank in expressing their wants without being afraid of repercussions from their regime or external forces. (so for example, if the people say they want socialism, with things like cooperatives and local gardens, then the people from the international organization would help them achieve that)
The problem is that the people at the top don’t want informed citizens. There should be a citizenry(?) class through 3 years of high school, and there should be a sort of public access channel (including online) that disseminates all relevant political information (local and general).
Iranian people need to overwhelmingly decide to do it
The issue with this is that it’s terrifying for the vast majority of people to try and resist a murderous autocratic regime, especially when you’re not sure if enough other people in your vicinity will (successfully) have your back to make sure that you’re not kidnapped and tortured or shot right in the street.
Ideally, we should have an international nonviolent organization that could arrive wherever needed to help a population get out of the shackles (with no strings attached)
They will not use their massive amount of money and resources to create a society that eliminates the conditions that generate criminal behavior (scarcity, no communal support systems, etc.), but they will do this shit.
Though not a single word, I’ve always loved picket fence
try this in userchrome:
#eme-notification-icon { display: none ; }
This is correct, armies can do well in defending populations. The issue is that wars tend to cause more of what they are trying to solve/prevent. For example, Nazism rising out of the aftermath of WWI. Authoritarian/aggressive USSR/Russia rising out of the west’s reaction to the socialistic revolution of 1917.
I think that, ideally, armies should be converted to be a positive force of cooperation (for example helping people all across the world with self-sufficient and sustainable local agriculture), instead of an aggressive/destructive one (of course, this can not realistically happen in the current way the world works, but I’m talking theoretically)
You are absolutely right, and I do believe that the vast majority of soldiers worldwide are well-intentioned and doing what they’re doing for perceived right reasons. What I’m getting at is that, generally speaking, wars do not actually solve the underlying issues they are purportedly trying to fix. The Nazi ideas are still with us to this day. The North Korean regime is still a threat to its own people and others. Armies should be a deescalating force, building bridges between nations.
Also, they didn’t even “die for you”. That’s a lie they’ve been sold - they died protecting corporate/imperialistic agendas. They died for the upper class.
edit: and it also implies that we are safer - but we are not. There’s no true conflict resolution through military means. The conflicts are “maintained”, simmering/enhancing until they boil over.
Or send their goon squad to your IRL location to beat some sense into you
lending any of your texts, voice, image, writings, etc. to any AI tools
I would think an even worse scenario would be having your entire brain mapped and uploaded, with everything you ever said/experienced/thought/felt/seen/etc. available to whoever. We should be able to take stuff to our graves.
I can only add my own personal experience - generally I can only stomach water in small amounts. It just doesn’t go down as smoothly as other drinks (juice for me). It feels like my mouth/throat rejects it a tiny bit.
(for reference, I drink some filtered tap water after every cup of juice)
COINTELPRO never went away