To him, therefore, every luxury of the worker seems to be reprehensible, and everything that goes beyond the most abstract need – be it in the realm of passive enjoyment, or a manifestation of activity – seems to him a luxury. Political economy, this science of wealth, is therefore simultaneously the science of renunciation, of want, of saving and it actually reaches the point where it spares man the need of either fresh air or physical exercise. This science of marvelous industry is simultaneously the science of asceticism, and its true ideal is the ascetic but extortionate miser and the ascetic but productive slave. Its moral ideal is the worker who takes part of his wages to the savings-bank, and it has even found ready-made a servile art which embodies this pet idea: it has been presented, bathed in sentimentality, on the stage. Thus political economy – despite its worldly and voluptuous appearance – is a true moral science, the most moral of all the sciences. Self-renunciation, the renunciation of life and of all human needs, is its principal thesis. The less you eat, drink and buy books; the less you go to the theater, the dance hall, the public house; the less you think, love, theorize, sing, paint, fence, etc., the more you save – the greater becomes your treasure which neither moths nor rust will devour – your capital. The less you are, the less you express your own life, the more you have, i.e., the greater is your alienated life, the greater is the store of your estranged being. Everything which the political economist takes from you in life and in humanity, he replaces for you in money and in wealth; and all the things which you cannot do, your money can do. It can eat and, drink, go to the dance hall and the theater; it can travel, it can appropriate art, learning, the treasures of the past, political power – all this it can appropriate for you – it can buy all this: it is true endowment. Yet being all this, it wants to do nothing but create itself, buy itself; for everything else is after all its servant, and when I have the master I have the servant and do not need his servant. All passions and all activity must therefore be submerged in avarice
— Marx, Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844
“Regarding the question of whether or not we’ll continue to provide support to the ICC with respect to crimes that are committed in Ukraine, yes, we continue that work,” Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said at a news conference after a virtual meeting of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group on Monday.
Rules-based international order only when the rules benefit us.
If your country was suddenly invaded and had 1200 mostly civilian, including women and children gunned down in one of your cities, including shooting up a concert, and your country had the means to stop it from happening again, would they?
Ignoring that your country is a settler-colony built upon the land of the displaced people resisting, and that this concert was right next to the fence of a concentration camp housing the repressed native population, that Hamas exists because of Israel, and that Israel’s own helicopters shot up the crowds and their own forces blew up houses killing many of the total, and everything else, I hate this framing.
So that’s the reason. Isreal was attacked with no regard by a country that ran by a group of people after the goal of completely eliminating Isreals existence.
“It is not a war against terror, and not a war against extremists, and not even a war against the Palestinian Authority. These too are forms of avoiding reality. This is a war between two people. Who is the enemy? The Palestinian people.
Why do we have to make up a new name for the war every other week, just to avoid calling it by its name. What’s so horrifying about understanding that the entire Palestinian people is the enemy? …the morality of war (yes, there is such a thing) is founded on the assumption that there are wars in this world, and that war is not the normal state of things, and that in wars the enemy is usually an entire people, including its elderly and its women, its cities and its villages, its property and its infrastructure.
They are all enemy combatants, and their blood shall be on all their heads. Now this also includes the mothers of the martyrs, who send them to hell with flowers and kisses. They should follow their sons, nothing would be more just. They should go, as should the physical homes in which they raised the snakes. Otherwise, more little snakes will be raised there”
— Uri Elitzur, former chief of staff and advisor to PM Benjamin Netanyahu; shared by Ayelet Shaked, Israel’s Minister of Justice (2015-2019) and Minister of Interior (2021-2022), in 2015
Read up on the open admissions of Israeli leaders and Zionists. Israel itself exists as a country by eradicating the native population and it will continue to do so to its ability.
But what would you feel your country would be justified to do if they were invaded by surprise like that? Would they make sure it couldn’t happen again? Would you feel it was justified? It may not be a clear yes or no answer, or where a line should be drawn.
If my country were a brutal genocidal state built on the repression of the native population? I’m not denying the Zionist entity is doing everything to keep their state afloat and expand it; their motives are not unknown. But to put me in their shoes as if that justifies anything is ridiculous nonsense that could be applied to numerous scenarios you wouldn’t like.
The term “civilian” has been actively stripped of all meaning when people willfully occupying native land and displacing the population as those natives are slaughtered are included.
Even ignoring that these people are mandatorily required to serve in the IOF, there are very few settler-colonial civilians (children, others without agency, and anyways these civilians are only here by the will of the settlers). It’s ridiculous to equate Palestinian civilians with “Israelis” not actively in the IOF when the latter chooses to occupy Palestinian land and displace the natives in the brutal practice that is settler-colonialism.
In late October, Israel signed on to a joint statement of concern with more than 50 other governments about alleged Chinese crimes against humanity in its predominantly Muslim Xinjiang region.
LMAO
China is fundamentally opposed to any Israeli military operations, even in self-defense