Yikes, pretty mean to call her an idiot. Seems like a high probability she was suffering from an eating disorder and/or other mental health issues. Most people don’t starve themselves to death out of stupidity.
Veganism isn’t a diet. Veganism is an ideology that excludes animal exploitation from human life. Veganism is about animal rights, not diet or even food. People who are vegan eat a plant based diet because that aligns with the ideology. There are many plant based diets, some of which are not adequate like eating nothing but fruit, but the diets are not vegan.
One friend told 116.ru: "Ms Samsonova's idle starvation was causing her to melt before our eyes, but she believed everything was fine.
Seems similar to dying in a car crash because you didn't wear seat-belt. By not taking basic precautions her body wasn't prepared to survive something that many others can. To be fair- the survival rate for untreated cholera is only around 40% I just don't think her starting point of "slow starvation" was doing her any favors.
I have come here for a climate demonstration, not a political view
What he really means is that he only wants to hear about one slice of a political view, or he doesn’t understand that climate change is a political subject too.
I've been told that if your protest isn't disruptive, it's not really a protest, so I'm sure everyone here will be fully understanding and supportive of this guy for standing up for his beliefs /s
Whoever told you that, stop listening to them. An effective protest is one that expresses your views, and ideally changes people’s minds and builds support for your cause. Disrupting people’s lives is typically counterproductive to actually gaining support.
The only way to be heard is to burn down your neighbor’s businesses and rob Target! And if you do anything to protect your livelihood you’re just a right wing nut job!
There are genuinely people who think like that. To be fair, the George Floyd protests/riots changed things in a way that peaceful protest had so far failed to do.
Some minor progress was made because of the millions of people who turned out to peacefully protest. Those who rioted and destroyed shit only contributed ammunition to the opposition.
I disagree, I think having an entire block burnt down made a lot of people decide they don’t want to see this happen again, in a way a regular protest wouldn’t have.
Really? You think people had their businesses burned down and their town destroyed and thought to themselves “boy I hope these people get what they wanted!” or do you think they thought “These people are human garbage and I hope they rot in prison”? Which one of these thought processes makes more sense to you?
The protests started because the police murdered a man in full view of a group of witnesses, a lot of people had a vested interest in making sure that didn’t happen again, in a way that non violent protest would not have achieved.
Correct. English sufferage was only gained after a group of women took on learning jujitsu, wearing badass capes and paper body armor and went out burning government buildings and breaking all the windows in anti sufferagette buildings/homes and when police showed up they’d kick the shit out of them with jujitsu and then they’d make a speech the police couldn’t break up because their faces were meeting their asses for the first time and in a most uncomfortable way.
Ed: because it’s interesting and I’m sure people won’t take my word.
The point is that people on lemmy (and reddit, and other left leaning forums) tend to dump on people who object to protestors disrupting shit, like closing roads (without a permit), etc.
And then get hypocritical when a protestor does the same thing to counter protest a popular (in this forum) cause.
Don’t get me wrong, I think this was a shitty move. But I also think fucking over completely unrelated people’s days by blocking traffic is also a shit way to conduct a protest.
I think the difference between these two situations is the disruption of commerce.
Capitalists do not give a shit about protests until the protests start affecting their bottom line. That’s why blocking freeways is such a big deal–it speaks to them in a language that they understand. It’s effective not because John Q Taxpayer can’t get to work on time, but because Corporation Q Capital-owner can’t exploit John’s labor without his butt in his seat and without trucks full of resources coming in regularly. Corporations lose much, much more than regular people do when commerce is disrupted.
Grabbing the microphone like is disruptive, but it does not disrupt commerce. If anything, it shows that his goal is to deplatform someone (someone whose platform is the very reason he is there tonight, by his own admission) or to elevate his own platform.
No it’s not! Fighting climate change can be addressed as legitimate issue to fix from both sides of the political spectrum. Talking about the gaza conflict and picking an arbitrary side, does nothing except, drive potential fff supporters away. People will hate Greta and everything she stands for even more. Only for virtue signaling points on social media.
Nah. She is spot on when she says that a movement for climate justice cannot ignored the marginalized, the oppressed, and those fighting for justice and freedom.
Those who would hate her for being anti-genocide and anti-apartheid are already very unlikely to be allies to the climate justice movement, a movement that highlights the way that impoverished peoples and nations, especially non-white non-european equatorial and global south nations, are uniquely suffering the consequences of climate change.
But this is such self pleasuring ineffective rhetoric. People in the first world which is the group you wanna adress. So western (not necessaryly white) rich people who enjoying their comforts in the first world. If you want them to actually do something. Like sell their car and become vegan. You have to show them climate change hitting their home turf. Pictures like Italy and Greece Burning for Europeans, smoke covered NYC, etc. If you talk about a “climate justice” movement, in which the main message is, “dont you care about the brown poor people?” you denigrate this catastrophy as an UNICEF Donation event. No one will give up their SUV for that.
Now the Gaza Conflict is complex and polarizing for muslims and Israel supporters, in which you can only make a bad choice, people will turn away and ignore whatever you are trying to sell.
Greta, like many climate activists, is not appealing to rich people. Rich people will never comply with climate regulations. They are almost all sociopaths who do not fucking care if global warming continues to worsen or not. Greta is appealing to the people of the world, people of the working class. There are many of us and the rich are very few. Billionaires and the wealthy will have to be forced to stop destroying the environment by the nation’s they exist in.
She’s also a socialist. As most climate activists are. We don’t give a shit what rich people think. They should be forced to comply. They will never comply of their free will.
This is such a deranged worldview. Progressive liberals and leftists are the rich people! California is a democratic bastion and filled to the brim with progressives and its one of the richest states in the nation. George Soros and Bill Gates support progressive causes. How can you not see that. And shes is definitely not pondering to working class people. Because working class people support political parties which have climate change denying tendencies. Like the republican party and the afd in germany.
Another example from my home turf. Bavaria is the richest state in Germany. BUT also very conservative. Wealth is concentrated around munich. The wider you go away from munich. The “poorer” the population. Last month were the state elections of Bavaria. And the turnout in Munich was nearly 50% for the green party. The wider you distanced yourself from it, the more right wing parties profited. Which used anti green bashing as their main rhetoric. Poor working class people dont vote green en masse.
Conservative economic policy is literally, entirely, “make the country nicer for rich people”.
Socialism centre’s working class people. It advocates for the dismantling and end of the upper class. Rich people should have their wealth taken from them and redistributed to the people. Socialism is the polar opposite of an ideology of the rich. At its most radical Socialism advocates for… getting rid of the rich people by any means necessary. That’s all I’ll say on that.
Leftism is based around the tenants of Socialism. George Soros and Bill Gates are capitalists. Capitalism is why they are wealthy. Conservatism and more broadly neoliberalism (the modern day ideology of most Conservative and liberal parties) promotes capitalism and the free market. Rich people are decidedly neoliberal. Socialism stands in direct opposition to neoliberalism, advocating instead for heavy regulation of every single industry and the public acquisition of all infrastructure and industry. This would be taking the rich people’s assets, their companies, their means of production, and nationalizing them such that they are collectively owned and benefited from by everyone.
Liberals and Conservatives are identical in terms of economic policy. They only differ in terms of how authoritarian they believe the government should be, and how much minorities should be made to suffer in society. Economically they are the exact same. Look at Biden, for example. Look at new labor. Liberals and conservatives are largely allies, and their best friends are rich people. Leftists seek a society where rich people do not exist.
I don’t see a connection between climate justice and justice for Palestinians, other than that it’s both about justice. Could you elaborate why it’s necessary to bring these seemingly unrelated struggles for justice together?
I btw totally see how a lot of social justice is tied to climate justice, but specifically the Palestinian struggle seems totally unrelated. Happy to change my mind.
I think you might be narrowing the definition of politics. Something is political not just when two arbitrary political “sides” disagree. Something is a political issue when government policy is involved, and Greta is absolutely in the business of changing government policy. Climate change is also a political issue because it does create a divide among political groups: the rich and the poor. The people who own the most stuff will profit from irresponsible pollution, and have the most means to avoid its consequences. They will be using their political power to make sure things stay that way. The poor will suffer.
As Hbomb said, “People who say they don’t like politics in games actually like politics in games the most, they just wish they were seeing different politics in games, and that’s who Caesar’s Legion is here to stroke off!”
I’m gonna get downvoted for this but this is just wrong.
Climate change is science, not politics. We are trying to address it from multiple angles at the aame time (such as political angles, scientific angles, lifestyle angles, etc)
So the fight to make our politicians accept that climate change is sceince and not politics is, ironically, a political fight but climate change and the movments to stop it are not only political.
But then I realized, this is the same demographic that would shoot up a drag show, simply because of men wearing dresses. Now they’re wearing diapers in public support of a convicted rapist that shits himself.
As a trans woman, the thought that they would even wear diapers to justify their hatred of me and love for their incontinent idol, it is disgusting. I’m literally nauseous right now, they think people like me are beneath an actual man baby.
These guys weren’t against wearing diapers to begin with. They were at least curious about it, or even desperate to finally try it in public. Maybe being out as their true selves will help them develop emotionally a bit. I support more MAGAs wearing their diapers in public spaces.
Well they did make chin-diapers fashionable during the whole ‘i ain’t complying with your public heath and safety mind control bullshit’ during mask mandates.
Yeah, it’s funny but in a gallows way. Like, of course these are the people putting my life at risk. It’s funny like Goebbels’s limp. Like you fuckers can’t even have the ideological purity to not be the sort of person you hate or to side with the people who don’t care and think it’s fine.
She’s never been afraid to speak her mind. How do we address the issue of climate change, if we turn a blind eye to the suffering of innocent people and children done intentionally for vengeance’s sake?
Well focus is generally useful for getting things done so one way to address climate change would be to stick to climate change discussion at climate change discussion events.
At some point an acute issue takes precedence over your long term goals. These are pretty wild hyperbole, but I acknowledge I am trying to paint an image.
Let’s say you were an activist for the welfare of cattle. But then you find out chickens are hooked up to a new feed system that increases their weight by 20% but also causes them excruciating neurological pain, to the point the chickens are even trying to peck themselves to death to avoid the torture. Would it not make sense to pivot for a moment to the worse animal cruelty for a while? The cows aren’t going anywhere.
Let’s say you were an activist for climate and a nation state was running towards genociding an entire group of people. Would it not make sense to pivot to the genocide speed run for a while? Climate change isn’t going anywhere.
Want to sabotage a protest? Encourage advocacy for increasingly tangential issues. Focus splits, folks start disagreeing on new issues, folks start disagreeing on how issues get prioritized, everything falls apart.
Sadly, this doesn’t even require a malicious actor encouraging it. Well-meaning folks see a potentially sympathetic audience for their pet issue and boom.
Not sure why you think it’s valueless. Bringing up the mere topic of Palestine suffering gets your mic taken away, prosecuted and look at like a Hamas sympathizer. It’s as much virtue signalling as getting arrested blocking the entrance of an oil conference - as in it’s not.
Wars tend to lead to built and natural areas alike getting razed, it’s a huge waste of resources and lives. And what for? Political gain? Money for the Military Industrial Complex? All those vehicles except for drones use fossil fuel, and rightwing governments rallying support over wars definitely don’t give a rat’s ass for the climate. So in summary, the Gaza issue and yhe climate are definitely related.
It is extremely valuable. She has a powerful voice and far-reaching influence. She is using her voice to advocate for the voiceless. Israel is an apartheid state, and they must be held accountable for the crimes against humanity they are committing and have historically committed against the people and nation of Palestine.
You can’t just spout off a buzz word as tho it’s an actual argument.
She’s standing with Palestine against those who are mass murdering them. She has powerful influence. Her choosing to say this legitimately will influence public opinion.
No it wont. Greta is the climate lady. And if the climate lady says stuff which i disagress with, i wont listen to the climate lady anymore. I even hate the climate lady now.
Greta is one of the most influential people of her entire generation. She is a powerful orator who has already had major impacts on climate policy around the world, and she has a massive audience.
<span style="color:#323232;">She is a powerful orator who has already had major impacts on climate policy around the world,
</span>
I really don’t think she’s as important as you think she is, or anywhere near as influential.
Her influence extends to rustling the jimmies of mainstream media, I get to hear all about it the next day from coworkers over lunch … “did you hear about what she said this time?”
Someone once asked me if I’d like some glacier-covered land in Alaska. I said “no, but I would like some non-glacier-covered land in Alaska later, so yeah”
Please. I live on one of the busier streets in my town, right by an intersection. The amount of people driving by with cars that sound like someone's farting through a megaphone are insanely obnoxious. Fuck, most the time they're shit boxes that go slower than normal cars. People in my area buy cheap, shitty cars, pay to have a falsified safety, then make them loud and obnoxious while slowing down traffic because their cars can barely accelerate.
Are the customers forced to pay for tracking? Does Etsy have a rule against sellers paying for the tracking? I’ve never used Etsy before so I’m not sure exactly how it works.
I’d feel more comfortable having a tracking number on any package I order.
The article also goes on to show the typical Etsy customer and seller mentality (and as an Etsy customer I can say I also share this mentality. Keep in mind that most of the things sold on Etsy are small artisan/crafted goods and a lot of times the shipping cost can cost more than the item itself, much less tracked shipping):
A lot of sellers don't want to force their customers to pay for tracked shipping because international tracking can rack up a huge cost.
Steen Ross, from Norwich, has £1,800 held in a reserve on her Etsy account.
She has sold custom costumes to a largely American customer base on Etsy for a decade and relies on her Etsy income to pay rent.
"Most of my sales go to America and about 90% of people don't want to pay the additional cost of tracking because it's so expensive, they are happy for me to just provide proof of postage.
"I'm worried that if I raise prices to include tracking, I'll lose a lot of sales, but if I don't Etsy won't release funds from my reserve before 45 days."
These are often bespoke items, somtimes the materials must be brought and then customised. If I went into woodworkers shop and asked a bespoke item they may ask.for.more than a 25% deposit
If you want something welded or smashed on with a hammer and you don't bring me the materials, I want cost of materials + 50% up front for custom work. Shit's expensive.
They are both senile. But take it from someone who lived under Robert Mugabe, senile dictators seem to live frustratingly long lives - even in the face of terminal illnesses. If the choice has to be between two seniles, take the one that doesn’t have dictator aspirations.
Biden is not senile. Anyone who has ever dealt with an actual senile person knows that he’s a damned site far from senile. He has good mental faculties for a man his age. The issue with Biden isn’t his mental fitness.
It’s not deliberate. His decline just started before he ran for president.
There are videos of him giving interviews in the 90s. He was still himself, but he had no trouble keeping track of what he was talking about and getting through several sentences on a single topic. Seen side by side the difference is quite stark.
Trump was described by one of his college professors as the dumbest student to ever walk through that class.
His "business empire" has been a long string of outright stupid decisions. If he wasn't born rich, he'd be that one guy constantly losing his life savings on get rich quick schemes.
As it is, Trump actually lost a lot of money trying to get rich(er) quickly.
Also, saying that Trump talks like an imbecile on purpose is like saying he shits his pants on purpose.
If he could string a coherent sentence together, he would. If only to stop people from making fun of his stupidity.
It’s really hard to say it’s not a big deal when Biden does it, because when trump does it Biden gives him shit about it.
A gaffe is just slipping on words once but still knowing what you meant. If you look at Biden full quote, he made multiple mistakes and was just rambling.
They’re both old and get confused which is 100% normal for their ages…
It’s just illustrative of why people of that age shouldn’t be in important and powerful positions in our government
Sotomeyer is a type 1 diabetic, and is literally at the life expectancy for a woman with type 1 diabetes…
People make the argument that she “has the best healthcare” but one of the most important things with that is managing stress, and she’s repeatedly making public statements about how stressful it is .
She’s 100% going to die in office before she resigns, she learned absolutely nothing from RBG.
We need to stop ignoring that chronological age is a real thing, and has real effects on a person’s ability.
But since everyone in our top positions are so old they’re personally losing their mental abilities, they’ll never admit it.
And the boomers that are “next” sure as shit aren’t going to make better decisions, and we can’t afford to wait another 30 years for them to die off.
Seems like that could be abused. Some 80+ year olds are in much better shape than some 60+ year olds. Besides, the voters put them there, we’re all to blame.
They aren’t getting the votes to be viable in the general election, but there are primary candidates from both parties. I would love to see a ranked choice voting system or something that would promote a wider field.
Dude discovered that you can’t criticise Israel and says it’s the same as people being locked up or executed under Mao.
Yeah it’s fucked that anyone critical of Israel is shutdown by pressure from various associations and lobbying groups, but it’s a massive reach to say this is the same as under Mao.
Yeah, a guy comparing getting his art exhibit canceled over a poorly worded tweet to Maoist China, where people were imprisoned, exiled, murdered, and worked to death for having wrong opinions, or wrong parents, or wrong possessions.
There is an entire universe of difference between the government telling you you can’t say something and arresting and/or disappearing you if you ignore them, and privately owned museums, exhibit halls, or online platforms refusing to do business with you if you say something stupid in public that harms people’s perceptions of you. You’re absolutely free to spout every hot take and conspiracy theory you want (there’s certainly no shortage of people who do), but nobody is obligated to respect you or do business with you if you do. What’s not going to happen is an FBI agent or cop coming around to “have a chat” and if you refuse to publicly retract your statements then quietly sending you off to some gulag without telling anyone where you’ll be worked to death and then your organs harvested and sold. That’s the difference between “the West” and China.
There is of course another option, which is to fully arm, equip, and support Ukraine, now.
They can and will win with sufficient support, and its a far better investment than waiting for things to get far worse (and far more expensive).
Money spent supporting Ukraine now, getting them to victory, represents a material savings over having to further spend later to fix the mistakes we’ve made in failing to fully support Ukraine up until now.
Castelain, who was initially charged with rape, was handed a one-year sentence, while his colleagues, who were found to have beaten Mr Luhaka, were given ones of three months.
That’s grotesque. The cops damage this guy for life and they get a slap on the wrists. The seriousness of the punishment should fit the seriousness of the crime.
news.sky.com
Hot