• 0 Posts
  • 28 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 14th, 2023

help-circle
  • It’s funny that Walz is preaching nuance and critical thinking, and yet the people who purport to agree with him in this thread apparently can’t synthesize your point. The Holocaust is a stark reminder that genocide will not only continue, but will be improved and augmented by new technologies and ideologies. Like you said, though, that doesn’t make it worse than others. I think the issue you’re running into is that the point here is Walz is being subjected to ad hominem to distract from a broader discussion on the nature of genocide because such discussions are bad for Israel and their conservative benefactors in the US. Folks ITT probably have it in their heads that you agree that Tim Walz is an antisemite, but as it turns out, two things can be true. The Holocaust is unique in a particular sense, but that is not what Walz is talking about; in the context he is speaking, the Holocaust is not unique. Essentially, the Holocaust, as a vivid and well-documented case study, can and should be a window into the broader history of genocide and human rights abuse.


  • I agree with Walz here, the Holocaust was not unique in the sense that genocide is an ongoing feature of human history and events. I also agree with the dude elsewhere in this thread that the Holocaust was unique among genocides, because it was the first industrial genocide. That doesn’t make it worse; we don’t need to play victim olympics. In the grand scheme of things, Walz certainly should not be called antisemitic for saying that we shouldn’t hyperfocus on the Holocaust at the expense of understanding the prevalence of genocide in general, and we should realize the reason he’s being called antisemitic is because, right now, it benefits Israel to derail any broader discussion on the nature of genocide.


  • If you read the full article, it seems as if the Saudi religious establishment was infiltrated by Egyptian extremists fleeing a crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood following the assassination of Sadat. Their ideology meshed with Wahhabism and Bin Laden’s religious vendetta against the United States. The Saudi state apparatus did not have effective oversight over the religious establishment and so this all happened under the House of Saud’s nose. The countries in red are (at the time) places with either US puppet regimes or some form of Arab Revolt descended, nominally secular/socialist regimes. The religious extremists pushing Islamic rule operated in these countries under various militias and terrorist groups, notably Al Qaeda, backed by the newly radicalized Saudi Wahhabi establishment, and of course, Iran.

    From that perspective, the US was waging war against militias and terrorist groups with roots and support in Saudi Arabia, but the House of Saud was not considered to be complicit. The article goes on to say…

    Astonishingly, the attacks of 9/11 had little effect on the Saudi approach to religious extremism, as diplomats and intelligence officials have attested. What finally changed royal minds was the experience of suffering an attack on Saudi soil. In May 2003, gunmen and suicide bombers struck three residential compounds in Riyadh, killing 39 people. The authorities attributed the attacks to al-Qaeda, and cooperation with the U.S. improved quickly and dramatically.

    Interesting stuff, to be sure.


  • In the US, there are positive and negative stereotypes, too. German efficiency and Japanese perfectionism and perseverance are among them. Jewish intelligence and commitment to education, too. These things have a basis in reality, of course, but they shouldn’t be mistaken for reality itself. It seems to me these things appearing in your textbooks were probably attempts by your own government to get its people to emulate what it sees as positive traits in other cultures, rather than an attempt by foreign adversaries to paint Chinese people as inferior. Of course, when the message was a little too unclear or negative as in the “toxic textbooks” incident, your government deflected blame.




  • For gaming, you’ve got Steam, which is pretty close to the ideal legit content delivery service. You don’t even necessarily have to pirate in order to demo games if you’re comfortable paying up front and making a decision within 2 hours.

    Nothing similar exists or has existed for TV/Movies. Netflix was pretty good for a while, but you’ve never had the option to download the content to your own hard drive. Now you’re not even allowed to log in to your account on as many devices as you want.

    Give me a service that’s a free storefront where I can pay a one-time fee for content that I’m actually interested in and download it to my hard drive as many times in as many places as I care to. Bonus points if I can stream to other devices that I’m logged in to and lend my purchases to my friends & family like I can with Steam. I don’t care if there’s DRM in the form of me having to log in to actually use the content if I can use it the way I want.




  • I’m not going to tell you all the things you mentioned are impossible. I’ve read your other comments too. I’ve seen homeless women crying in the street, people with obvious mental or physical problems begging. Homelessness - visible homelessness - is terribly common. As far as crime goes, I don’t know, maybe people target tourists? My rental car visibly full of luggage was broken into in San Jose once, and they stole a bunch of electronics. Learned my lesson on that one. Apart from that I’ve wandered around some rough areas on occasion and in 36 years I’ve never been victimized in person.

    Anyway, one last point: according to official stats, the rate of homelessness in Australia is nearly 3x that in the US, although I imagine that Australia probably counts homelessness differently, so it’s hard to compare, but 3x seems like a big difference for simple differences in methodology to account for. That said, I’m sure Australia has better services, so it may not be as visible to the average person, and less of a struggle for those experiencing homelessness. Hard for me to believe things are all that much better in the land of Murdoch, though.











  • That’s not an excuse to allow the wanton exploitation of migrant labor that does, whether you want to admit it or not, undercut US labor on the margins. Not to mention the tolerance of labor violations against undocumented workers undoubtedly trickles up to legal labor and harms a lot more workers than just the migrants.

    Illegal border crossings are a serious problem and the proper solution is not to hand wave away conservative concerns about it. All that does is maintain the status quo wherein migrant laborers are kept in legal limbo, facilitating their continued exploitation. That’s bourgeois shit and if I wanted to get a little conspiratorial about it, I’d suggest that maybe that’s the whole point of the “Americans don’t want to do those jobs” rhetoric.

    The proper solution is to legalize the migrants, get them documented, and protect them with US minimum wage and labor laws.