[-] wpb@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

but I don’t think companies should be allowed to sell it as “milk” in any form

Well sure, and they haven't been able to in almost a decade. This court ruling is about something else. They're not calling it milk, they're not mislabelling their product. In fact, the campaign this is about is them saying explicitly this is not milk, and apparently that goes too far. I'm totally with you that food labelling should be clear, but this is not about that. This is not consumer protection. This is anticompetitive agribusiness lobbying, no more, no less.

[-] wpb@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

I don't think this is quite true. People that call themselves centrists can come from a benign place. In my mind, the folks that call themselves centrists tend to mainly care about preserving the status quo, no matter what it is.

They'll usually use terms like "big tent", "adult in the room", and if they went to school "realpolitik". Usually privileged, they don't understand the urgency for change for those in need, so they'll balk at any method that may actually achieve some progress for the marginalized and underprivileged. Usually they'll say some wise, enlightened thing about "optics".

And they'll tell themselves that they care. They'll tell themselves and others that they're the good guys. They'll watch CNN and read the economist, and they'll tell themselves they're informed. They're always on the right side of history, but only ever when it's already too late. I think they genuinely don't know.

[-] wpb@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago

The purpose of a system is what it does. Capitalism is functioning perfectly fine.

[-] wpb@lemmy.world 45 points 8 months ago

"Such weather we're having huh?"

Truly peak romance

[-] wpb@lemmy.world 44 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

..... for zsh users

[-] wpb@lemmy.world 79 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Thank goodness he lives in a country where the cancer hospitals haven't been bombed out of existence with weapons funded by the United States under the leadership of Joe Biden.

[-] wpb@lemmy.world 45 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

In their moral justification, the argument of the lesser evil has played a prominent role. If you are confronted with two evils, the argument runs, it is your duty to opt for the lesser one, whereas it is irresponsible to refuse to choose altogether. Its weakness has always been that those who choose the lesser evil forget quickly that they chose evil.

-Hannah Arendt

[-] wpb@lemmy.world 69 points 1 year ago

What he did was right. Yes, much like how Hitler's death would've been sad for Eva Braun had she still been alive, Brian Thompson's death is sad for those who survive him, but the world is a brighter place for it.

[-] wpb@lemmy.world 44 points 1 year ago

Jury nullification occurs when a jury returns a Not Guilty verdict even though jurors believe beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant has broken the law. Because the Not Guilty verdict cannot be overturned, and because the jurors cannot be punished for their verdict, the law is said to be nullified in that particular case.

[-] wpb@lemmy.world 71 points 1 year ago

The same way I don't think we should capitulate to framing "cracker" as a slur, or to framing "black lives matter" as a racist thing to say, I don't think we should capitulate to framing things like "from the river to the sea" or "zionist" as antisemitic.

But, as a thought experiment, let's indulge in this doublespeak trash. What is a good alternative? So far I've got:

  • Israeli colonizers
  • Jewish supremacists
  • genocidal sacks of shit
  • Israeli apartheidists
  • Isreal expansionists
  • Israeli warmongerers
  • people in favor of the genocide and apartheid committed by Israel (in full, every time you need to say zionist)
  • modern day nazis
  • zionazis (technically not zionist!)

So all of this liberal crybaby nomenclature trash aside, I actually do think "zionist" is in itself a fairly useless term for the Israeli apartheid question (as Norman Finkelstein and Judith Butler do too). While one faction of zionism pursued the nakba and massacres from fairly early on, and while this faction has been quite successful, there are other notions of zionism which do not entail murdering children or colonizing a country. When Netanyahu and Chomsky can both legitimately refer to themselves as zionists, I think it's clear that zionism is too broad a term to be useful in the current ongoing genocide and the ethnic cleansing that has been going on for the better part of a century.

[-] wpb@lemmy.world 50 points 1 year ago

Oh won't someone please think of the poor nazis?

Liberals and fascists, name a more iconic duo

[-] wpb@lemmy.world 58 points 1 year ago

What 1000 year conflict? The nakba was less than a century ago. Plus "please stop giving 2000 pound bombs to Israel to commit a genocide with" is a very far cry from "please end the Israeli apartheid state".

view more: next ›

wpb

joined 2 years ago