We’re talking about an Israeli, not a Jew. One who has a prominent role in the cultural life of that country. As a “liberal”, I would not have had an issue with questions being asked if some high profile Saudis were invited to a festival in October 2001.
It’s pretty immoral in the current day and age, but it is something that should be made (near) impossible with better regulation until it can be done with a reasonable carbon cost
That’s a five year old video.
General strikes worked in 19th century Europe. I think y’all might have it a little better then they did. More to the point: union memberships are used at the time of strikes exactly to break the cycle of not being able to protest for being too poor.
deleted by creator
If Epstein got murdered, wouldn’t they kill his wife too?
How anyone that lives in a country that has HOAs can unironically call it “land of the free” is beyond me
The dinos are back, but of some species, every generation is smarter than the last, until they actually start speaking. Because they had a super civilisation, and their scientists encoded the key to rebuilding their civilisation in the DNA we found. The next generation becomes smart enough to invent a time machine, and try to manipulate us into going back in time to prevent the comet strike that took them out. Joke’s on them - they were in fact aware of the comet strike, but as we travel back in time together, the human part of the crew sabotage their Armageddon mission and make sure the strike actually happens, to pave the way for mammal domination!
That’s really very old. They renamed it XBUS. Which of course has zero sexual connotations.
79 in fact. Pretty low for a country that rich, but to find 69 you have to go to Africa or the poorest Latin or Asian countries.
Whether or not violence is morally acceptable isn’t the most interesting thing in my opinion, but rather “what strategy is most likely to win”. It’s not a subject I’m well versed in, but the first analysis I found showed that non violent protest movements tend to win, see https://www.datawrapper.de/blog/are-peaceful-protests-more-successful-than-violent-ones (I know I know, correlation is not causation, so digging in deeper is needed). If you read this article, you can already see that a little bit of violence is enough to help turn people against you. The more restraint, the easier it appears to be to let people join your cause (or at least not turn against you). That doesn’t mean being meek, you can still be incredibly obstructionist while being non violent. In Europe, a huge amount of rhe progress we made was because elites feared the masses. Because of the potential of violence, maybe, but not because of actual violence. Most of all because of huge union movements who could grind whole industries or even the country to a halt. What works in one place doesn’t necessarily work on another one, of course.
Security services use things like airgapping, but our politicians talk to each other using WhatsApp…
Hey that’s insulting to the super popular chairman of our social democratic party!
With ICE already acting like nazis as it is, that sounds very scary. Something I heard is that people may already be self-censoring themselves for fear pf the consequences - not just at the high levels but also normal citizens
Is it worse then Lemmy filtered news lets on? (Edit: just an honest question. News here is pretty negative, I just wonder if the lived experience is even worse)
I haven’t read recent research on this, but at least until a decade or so ago, consciously not having children is a very small part of this. It’s more about economic outlooks and the immense pressure of expecting both parents of working full time and raising kids at the same time. Or wanting to have two kids, but putting off the decision so long that the chance of not having successful pregnancies rises a lot.
I think this is exactly where the deepest crises of capitalism come from. What you describe is a natural consequence of unregulated capitalism. Either you start regulating (breaking up monopolies or nationalising them, high tax brackets on the very rich, etc.) before you hit a depression, or you risk a revolution by only enacting them after the shit has hit the fan. Then you can have a generation, maybe two, who reap the benefits of enforced redistribution. And then folks get complacent and start deregulation again.
Apparently, they have been able to not be blatantly racist enough in their new incarnation. Perhaps they should have gone more after the core leadership instead of only the party.
I would assume they were happy to close the door behind them, when it comes to immigration. I think they did not expect their friends and family would be deported.