also 1D fascism.

Fascism cannot sustain itself if the society it is strangling to death becomes unconvinced it is under existential threat from an opposing and equally horrendous Fascism that is so awful that it makes being choked to death by the Fascism right there at home “preferable” because at least then people can be sure the victims and perpetrators are their neighbors, not some unknowable foreign evil people invading!

First I re-emphasize this.

It is unclear when the statements were made.

Second does calling it a “successful resistance action” mean the person/people believed it was a moral or ethical?

Words matter here.

As Palestine is a political entity/governing body, yes it has no special right to exist the same way human beings have a special universal right to exist, have a special right to freedom and a special right to be meaningfully represented in the power structures they are enclosed within. These rights extend to Palestinians, Jews and everybody else.

A country is not a living creature, humans are living creatures.

Authorities also accused the group of supporting terror, highlighting remarks made by a prominent member who described the 7 October attacks on Israel as a “successful resistance action”. It is unclear when the statements were made.

This is all you have to go on!???

Where have I spoken positively about China?

You are trying to erase any nuance between being highly critical of the US, Canada and Europe and being pro-China or functioning somehow as a propaganda mouthpiece for China which I am not… which was the entire point of my comment on your post.

It also must be emphasized that saying “Israel has no fundamental right to exist” does not mean that jews living in Israel do not have a right to exist, or live in Israel, what it means is that the theological/ethnic identity of the COUNTRY of Israel that brutally excludes the humanity of others (including christians) living in Israel who aren’t jews, has no special right to exist as a political mechanism.

Countries are political constructions, they have no right to exist and they do not represent the identity of the people who live in said countries. People, countries and religion are THREE DISCRETE CONCEPTS.

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck

Where is your evidence of antisemitism?

You aren’t even making a clear and coherent enough argument for me to respond to.

Nope, this is your bias speaking

before anyone says Microsoft/Xbox are idiots and are sabotaging themselves… yes they are but also this strategy is an extremely successful longterm strategy so long as you have enough money to survive the temporary collapse and can buy up large chunks of the industry during the downswing.

Eventually if you keep doing this then you own most of the industry and neither developers nor gamers have any choice but to accept the crap you serve them. Problem solved.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shock_Doctrine

No, that is the healthiest/least draining thing to do, the militant and most effective thing to do is relentlessly shit on corporate social media with your old corpo account while moving the rest of your social identity to the fediverse.

Obnoxiously link to the fediverse, talk about it unprompted, strip mine the relevance of your posts to the algorithm before you leave.

I am not saying everyone has to do this, I am not even necessarily recommending it as a general suggestion but this is clearly the best way to hate on billionaire social media and fight back against it. If you have the energy, don’t throw away the value of your social connections to the corpo algorithm without first converting as much as possible of it to awareness of the fediverse and how shitty corpo social media is, if your objective is to fight as hard as possible.

edit corporate social media is toxic as hell, I make this point not as a judgement of people who just log out and never log back in to corporate social media, take care of yourself, this strategy is for if you have the mental headspace to do it.

Do Both

This is one of the reasons why the narrative is nonsense that renting games is better because you can easily own “too many games” if you keep buying them and then… oh no!!! You own too many digital games!!!

When you buy an indie game you are supporting art whether you get to the game or not, remember that, which isn’t to say buy random games but I think this statistic underlines how much it does matter to the smaller game developers to take a leap and buy their indie games. It helps that they usually cost 1/50th the cost of a AAA game lol…

Yes Europe CAN afford not to be scammed.

This article is nonsense marketing.

No shit

In a sense this AI bubble is really two things, it is partially a bullshit bubble full of idiots and it is partially an embodiment of the basic philosophy of Sun Tzu demonstrating the act of losing a war before it has ever begun by becoming obsessed with pouring everything into a costly illusion that only the elite are really enamored by.

The same thing with the F35, that thing is a thesis and world monument to the philosophy that the way to win a war is by making the opponent lose on multiple levels before you begin the outright war part. It doesn’t matter how well the F35 works or doesn’t work, the amount of resources and waste have already “lost a war” entirely from the diversion of a Trillion plus dollars of resources that could have transformed the US in any number of other more productive directions. The F35 already lost an entire war before it ever even fought in a battle.

DINO

Trump doesn’t really bluff so much as waffle between committing and backing down because he is too cowardly to ever directly concede he has lost until the system he is contained within shatters apart.

People very dangerously misunderstand Trump when they think all he does is bluff, which isn’t to say that Trump isn’t a bullshitter and that Trump isn’t a bloviating idiot, but understand that what makes Trump so dangerous is that he is too cowardly to ever back down even when it makes no sense not to back down.

It didn’t make them any better as a people though, and other religions haven’t faired so great in the ‘be good to each other’ department either

I am not religious and I am not here to claim that religion has been a net good, but on the other hand many aspects of modern ethics and philosophy that are unarguably good came out of religious schools of thought, or perhaps to put it another way most of what we all accept as ethical and what we frequently point to as philosophical standpoints to begin difficult negotiation (i.e. “we can all agree human beings are all created equal even if we disagree on…”) has come out of or been heavily influenced by religion… which isn’t to argue that these ideas should have stayed confined within one particular religion’s school of thought but rather to point out the opposite.

No religion was the sole source for this logic and development of thought around human rights and the human condition and there is no reason to believe religion was a necessary precursor for these things to form, rather I mean to say our knowledge of these things came as a dawning awareness that the good aspects of disparate religions and ideologies could be connected and translated via shared universal statements of solidarity like “treat others as you want to be treated” and “tolerate your neighbor”. The details might not agree, but it is easy to do the math, draw the shared connections out and confidently say “yeah, they both pretty much think you should be a decent person and try to pursue happiness in a way that doesn’t hurt others”.

I am not saying religion isn’t dangerous however, and in particular I think religion becomes exceedingly dangerous when the followers of that religion become convinced the structures of their formal religious institutions are not inherently political the same way any power structure composed of humans unavoidably is… which is why the separation of church and state (and the associated freedom to practice or not practice whatever religion you so choose so long as it does not hurt others) in a free society is existentially necessary.

Where I draw the line for whether it is ethical to light things on fire is when they start destroying rare knowledge and books as fast as possible for no other reason than to hoard and obscure knowledge for private benefit.

It is one thing to fund the creation of knowledge and then hoard it, it is entirely another to begin actively attacking and destroying pre-existing publicly shared resources of knowledge in the pursuit of monetizing access to that very knowledge behind a gargantuan profit motivated entity.