I thought the third one was Cookie Crisp

Several cultures throughout history have used base 12 for their numbering! You can count to 12 on one hand by counting the segments of your fingers (excluding the thumb).

This is becoming frustrating. We are on the same page that violence is the only answer; I’m only insisting that we understand that the violence has to be done against our fellow humans. It is a tragedy, but one that must be enacted because, as you say, there is no negotiation to be had here.

Denying their humanity weakens the claim of righteousness and, moreso than enabling room for their bad faith bullshit, directly feeds into their bad faith claims of antisemitism as dehumanizing them removes genocide from the argument and all your left with is killing animals/barbarians/evil monsters. I don’t know about you, but that argument is wholly unconvincing to me. You can certainly claim that because they’ve engaged in genocide, that’s why they’ve lost their humanity, but again, it’s an unnecessary mental step that gains us nothing and weakens the argument for deploying violence against them.

For the soldier / PTSD argument, I again disagree. Soldiers kill people. There should be no way around that fact. Dehumanization and making it easier for soldiers to mentally compartmentalize the taking of life is not a good thing and can easily be warped to make soldiers follow any order, regardless of the moral imperative. The soldiers can and should be made to understand that they are committing a traumatic amount of violence and death in order to stop an entire genocide. Violence is a tool and it must be wielded responsibly and with full understanding that the violence is both necessary and just.

Also chill with the faux philosophical ramblings of simulations and video game analogies. I don’t care what you believe outside of this context, but this is a serious issue and talking about “disabl[ing] PvP flags for the middle east” belies that this is the real world (simulated or not) with real, serious consequences. It damages your entire argument and makes you come across like you don’t see the actual human pain and suffering this massacre has caused.

Yeah, I agree with everything you just said, but make no mistake, the monsters committing genocide are still human beings. Denying that blurs the line of the purpose of violence done against them and makes it difficult to understand that we must constantly be vigilant against rhetoric and propaganda that advocates for genocide as it is scarily easy for people to fall into patterns of thinking that can justify genocide.

It is irresponsible to say that, because they are actively committing genocide against a population, they are no longer human beings and that is why they deserve violence. It’s an unnecessary extra step that opens the door for the very same genocidal thinking. They are people who have engaged in genocide with no signs of slowing down or stopping, and for that one reason alone, deserve violence until their threat is quashed. That is enough for me; I see no reason or benefit to dehumanize them to justify righteous violence.

No, they are people. Ignorant, hateful, and actively supporting a genocide, but people nonetheless. My comment was explicitly calling out and criticizing the impulse to dehumanize the “enemy”, real or imagined. Thinking of Zionist Israelis or Nazis as less than human not only perpetuates the mindset that allows these groups to carry out genocide, but at the same time denies how easy it is for average people to fall into such traps.

It leads to thought processes similar to “If you have to be less than human to support a genocide, then obviously what I support can’t be genocide because I am definitely a human.”

And I’m definitely not one of those “oh, we just have to talk to these hateful ignorant perpetuators of genocide because they simply don’t understand why they’re wrong”. I’m of the opinion that violence is absolutely necessary to uphold equality if the situation has been left to get as bad as it has. I’m mostly just railing against the idea that people who support genocide are somehow less human because of that hatred.

She didn’t write the Harry Potter books under her pseudonym, but a lot of her mediocre crime dramas are written under the name Robert Galbraith. The conversion therapy psychiatrist I’m talking about was named Robert Galbraith Heath.

Listen to how a large portion (obviously not all) Israelis talk about Palestinians. They genuinely do not view them as humans and certainly do not value their lives. They speak of the ongoing genocide with gleeful anticipation. People will literally go to the border to taunt Palestinian parents who’ve lost their children or the orphans themselves.

They’re not shooting a 4 year old kid, they’re simply shooting another “worthless” Palestinian. This way of thinking was and is specifically crafted to enable almost every genocide that has ever happened.

Not even just a man’s name, but the name of one of the most infamous conversion therapy “psychiatrists” from the 20th century.

it’s actually a really great conspiracy thriller. I’d fully recommend it. I’m sure right wing weirdos could read too much into it and find a message they agree with, but they do that with everything anyways.

I didn’t find it overtly political beyond money = corruption = shady people being able to get away with shady stuff

distance: how far you’ve traveled if you put all the steps in a line (may also be gps tracked too)

azm: active zone minutes or how many minutes you’ve spent with your heart rate in the “active zone” where you burn more calories

floors: how many flights of stairs you’ve climbed

calories: estimate of how many calories you’ve burnt based on all the other stats

we’re not removing fossil fuels? We can just recycle coal/natural gas/oil after burning it? someone should tell that to all the scientists

Your understanding of the distinction between personal and private property is simply flawed. Personal property is something that is owned by a single individual for their personal use, i.e. buying a house for you and your family to live in, while private property is something owned by either an individual or a corporation of people for the sole purpose of making money, i.e. buying a house that you never plan to live in for the sole purpose of renting it out to make more money.

A corporation can own consumer goods and it be private property, like Walmarts warehouses of consumer goods, and an individual can own producer goods as their own personal property, like tools and raw materials in their workshop.

The distinction is important because it boils down to intent and the inevitable consequences of that intent. Private property solely exists to make money, and therefore will put that goal above everything, leading to things like market manipulation, exploitation, and enforced scarcity. Trade is not capitalism, and capitalism isn’t “when people trade”.

“We are all domestic terrorists”

transgenderism has been a prominent aspect of virtually all human cultures dating back to the dawn of civilization. it wasn’t until the Victorian era and colonialism that it was demonized. it’s not some new phenomena caused by microplastics

“Reps choose…him or her” lol I’d eat my shorts if the GOP ever nominated a woman for their presidential bid in my lifetime

That’s the idea. US prisons are designed around cruel and unusual punishments. sexual violence by guards is already rampant, and sexual violence in general is so ubiquitous it’s literally one of the first things people think of when they think of prison. The judge that ruled she needed to go to a male prison did so intentionally and the cruelty is the point.

Honestly, the only reason this made the news is because her fellow prisoners are helping her and doing favors for her, instead of punishing her further. There wouldn’t be a news article if it was just another story of violence done to a trans woman

How many people are needed to run an equivalent amount of non self checkouts? Just because they need some employees doesn’t mean they aren’t reducing the amount of jobs overall.

Surely it’s supposed to be Vicar Amelia?

I always interpreted “heat death” as “the death of heat” instead of “a hot death”

So we can’t criticize a government invading a foreign nation under false pretenses because a different government is also invading a foreign nation under false pretenses?

Two things can be bad at the same time.