My friend, you are still confused.

I was giving the framing that comes from the billionaire owned western media oligopoly position.

that isnt my position

What gave you the idea that I’m dismissing them? I think you’re confused.

Good quote tho

I think the “temporarily embarrassed millionaire” idea is overstated, most people I interact with have a somewhat negative outlook on the economy and their future wealth.

I think the real issue is that no viable alternative is presented to most people.

The alternatives presented are Russian-style authoritarian oligarchy, Islamofascism, or a Venezuela-style “socialism” in which the narrative only focuses on poverty.

I never said anything at all about Afghanistan.

You posted a meme about the current leadership of Afghanistan.

I think it’s terrible the state if affairs.

Then why would you post a meme smugly extolling the virtues of the current state of affairs? You can’t have it both ways.

I find this meme to be absolutely vile.

The good people of Afghanistan have been under violent US occupation for decades, and as their final move, the US looted the central banking reserves.

This effectively drained the savings of everyday Afghanis. They no longer have access to their bank accounts. The US stole all the money.

I often wonder, would the good people of Afghanistan be able to overthrow the evil leadership of the Taliban? I wish they could, but overthrowing the Taliban is much less likely when the US has left you in a state of devastation, poverty, and famine.

Then those same western chauvinists can post memes like this, delighting in the Afghan people’s suffering after causing so much of it. Disgusting.

It would be better to have war crimes trials to show how fucked up specific wars are.

Being able to make movies showcasing your past crimes is not a sign of a healthy society…

I’m a little surprised that this comment has gotten so many upvotes.

Would you apply this same logic to the real world? For example, imagine if a manufacturing facility for Lockheed Martin or General Dynamics was bombed and thousands of working class Americans died. These people are building bombs that are being used in an ongoing genocide.

Would you consider this a heinous terrorist act, or a noble strike in the fight for freedom?

But what about the terror group known as IDF? They have unlimited free reign to spread their genocidal message and recruit followers. They also buy ads, and have a budget larger than all the terror groups you mentioned combined.

Saying “maybe people are the problem” is reductive and unhelpful. But I agree with you broadly, religion is just a system or a tool, it can be used for good or evil.

To judge if religion is a good system or a bad one, we can use a cost benefit analysis. This is what we have been attempting to do in this thread.

But when it comes to sensitive subjects like religion, many people have a tendency to avoid, overlook, and deny the associated costs.

Anti-science, misogyny, etc may be bad independently of religion, but they aren’t independent of religion. Religion is a source of these problems.

You can imagine a hypothetical religion that is simply a “social club” or whatever, but here in the real world religion comes with baggage.

Religion is why my cousin’s children have never seen a doctor in their life. Religion is why my gay friend in high school tried to kill himself. Religious indoctrination has led to lifelong shame and trauma in many of my friends.

And this was just from a “moderate” sect of Christianity- the millions living under fundamentalist religion have it even worse.

What you said is all true, but you are ignoring the negative aspects of religion.

Religious influence, both on their followers and on government, is anti-science, misogynistic, and anti-LGBT.

Religions are funded like pyramid schemes, with the most desperate and vulnerable as their victims.

Religious indoctrination is child abuse.

Someone please bribe the Supreme Court with a free ocean submersible ride

If we “all agree” and do a moonshot construction plan we could have electricity in 8 years. This is a fantasy, tho.

Best case scenario in the real world is operational in 12 years.

In the capitalist hellscape here in the US, a reasonable expectation would be 18-20 years.

20 years also happens to be the lifespan of our wind turbines. In 20 years, all of the currently running wind turbine blades will be in a landfill and new ones will need to be manufactured to replace them.

No reasonable person is suggesting nuclear as a short-term option. It’s a long term investment.

Are solar and wind really “clean” energy? Everyone in this thread seems to ignore the costs of these methods.

Every modern wind turbine requires 60 gallons of highly synthetic oil to function, and it needs to be changed every 6 months. That’s a lot of fossil fuel use.

Lithium mining for batteries is extremely destructive to the environment.

Production of solar panels burns lots of fuel and produces many heavy metals. Just like with nuclear waste, improper disposal of these toxic elements can be devastating to the environment.

Of course, solar and wind are a big improvement over coal and natural gas. I dont want the perfect to be the enemy of the good, I just want to be realistic about the downfalls of these methods.

I believe, with our current technology, that nuclear is our cleanest and greenest option.

Accurate representation of US veterans.

Alright most of this slang is overused and a bit outdated but wtf is “jitz”?

What does jitz mean in slang? Noun. jit (plural jits) (US, originally prison slang, derogatory) An inexperienced, foolhardy young man.

bruh.

You’re not wrong, these Trump trial judges are bending over backwards to avoid any grounds for mistrial. In one sense they are doing the right thing inside the legal framework, but look at the downsides.

The public is watching how a rich and powerful man can game the system, even as a criminal defendant the system is working for him. Every incarcerated person can see the reality: they were treated with default brutality, but Trump is treated as royalty.

And even worse, they are allowing Trump to delay every verdict until after the election. If he wins the election he pardons himself, this is a horrible precedent for our democracy.

It’s not naive to learn from history, like when Reagan told Israel to stop their assault on Lebanon and Israel stopped in less than 24 hours.

Or when HW Bush called up Israel and ended that conflict overnight.

But maybe you’re right, maybe Netanyahu is too entrenched to stop this time. Biden can still stop sending the bombs. He can stop sending the money. He can stop vetoing UN peace resolutions. He could tell his press office to stop running cover for Israel. He could stop bringing up the “40 beheaded babies” lie.

He could do so much to stop this genocide, yet he refuses.

What makes you think a vote for Biden is voting for genocide that “can be curbed”?

Every statement and action from the Biden admin, even the meme we are commenting on, shows that Biden is unwilling to curb the genocide.

I would start with MLK, collected essays, no one writes about protest more eloquently.

A Peoples History of the United States by Howard Zinn gives a great broad overview.

Death in the Haymarket by James Green is a great history of the first decades of the labor movement.

Doris Kearns Goodwin’s Leadership in Turbulent Times goes in depth on LBJ and the civil rights movement.

On the Duty of Civil Disobedience by Henry David Thoreau for the classic philosopher’s take.

We’ve Got People by Ryan Grim details the successes and failures of the movement in the last decade.