216
top 49 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] dohpaz42@lemmy.world 38 points 2 weeks ago

For evil to triumph, all it takes is a good man to do nothing.

[-] bruhduh@lemmy.world 15 points 2 weeks ago

But what if we're the baddies and keep silent

[-] Engywuck@lemm.ee 14 points 2 weeks ago

You shouldn't hide. It's others that are wrong.

[-] alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 weeks ago
[-] The_Picard_Maneuver@lemmy.world 24 points 2 weeks ago

I tried pineapple on pizza, and it's actually pretty good.

[-] AFallingAnvil@lemmy.ca 12 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I'll die on this hill with you fellow person of culture.

[-] InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago

Keep the degeneracy in .ml pls

/sj

[-] prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 weeks ago

Yep.

The acid from the pineapple and tomato sauce almost pair for the same acid hit and their sweet flavors complement each other.

We like pineapple with doughy things

We like tomato with doughy things

Pineapple and tomato are a shockingly good combo

And cheese makes juuuuust about anything better.

This who say pineapple on pizza ought not exist probably think Italians “invented the tomato” too.

[-] Smoogs@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

And it’s such a nice compliment to the salty ham

[-] prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 weeks ago

don’t even get me started on how ham and pineapple pair

[-] ThermonuclearCactus@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

My high school used to serve pineapple, ham, and jalapeno pizza. It tasted pretty good.

[-] PapaStevesy@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

That plus cream cheese is one of my favorite pies. Though I tend to sub ham/Canadian bacon for "regular" bacon as I think the saltier, more savory American bacon plays off the sweet pineapple better than ham which is usually already relatively sweet.

[-] casmael@lemm.ee 3 points 2 weeks ago

Apparently the Italian mozzarella association or whatever it’s called officially recommends mozzarella and pineapple as a good pairing of flavours so it’s not just you

[-] Cethin@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 weeks ago

Anyone who knows anything about cooking does. The acidity cuts through all the fatty cheese, and it also pairs great with salty meats. It's only people ignorant of good cooking techniques who say it shouldn't be done.

Personally though, I don't care for pineapple that much. It's too sweet for me. Nothing against it on pizza in particular, just the fruit itself. Still, on a salty pizza, it's pretty good.

[-] SteveNashFan@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

There are dozens of us!

[-] jaybone@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Why is this even still a debate?

[-] BetaBlake@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

It's always been good, and people who disagree have never tried it.

[-] DragonsInARoom@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

Based and I will speak up!

[-] pineapplelover@lemm.ee 1 points 2 weeks ago

Every pizza party I go to I ask for pineapple pizza and I never get it

[-] TOModera@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

I always feel that good pineapple, well caramelized, can be good on pizza. The problem is the majority of pizza places don't properly caramelize it, thus why most people never have a chance to try it well made, and thus the strong feelings against it.

At least that's why I dont usually grab Hawaiian pizza.

[-] CaptPretentious@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

I don't think it has to be caramelized, but that would be good. But if someone uses low quality pineapple it's going to suck. And you kind know, like if you see a pizza place and your thoughts are "well it's cheap and quick" I wouldn't get from there. But, if someone says "OMG, the pizza here is so good", that's the kind of place to get it. Local family pizzeria, yes. Dominoes/Pizza Hut/Pizza Ranch, probably a no.

[-] tdawg@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago
[-] Jackthelad@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago

How do I delete someone else's post?

[-] PapaStevesy@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago
[-] Passerby6497@lemmy.world -2 points 2 weeks ago

The pizza is always soggy....

[-] chunklefurnk@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 weeks ago
[-] errer@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

Well…you might as well drive me home now

[-] houstoneulers@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Going against Mr. Burns violates every sycophantic bone in my body

[-] HawlSera@lemm.ee 4 points 2 weeks ago

I'm very concerned that you have this picture of me.

[-] AeonFelis@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

Do you agree just with their opinion, or do you agree with their reasoning as well? If it's only the former, don't bother defending them - associating yourself with hot takes is one thing, but never get associated with stupid.

[-] meep_launcher@lemm.ee 1 points 2 weeks ago

I'm anxious that all the praise for the CEO shooter is revealing that "eat the rich" wasn't a euphemism for "tax the rich" but that people actually want the streets to run red with blood and cranberry sauce.

Cook me daddy

[-] JayDee@lemmy.world 12 points 2 weeks ago

'eat the rich' specifically means 'we should eliminate the existence of the rich - by any means.' so taxation works, but more extreme methods are not ruled out. It's entirely up to the rich on how they'd prefer to respond to this motive - and it's then up to the working class extremists on how they respond in kind.

[-] sxan@midwest.social 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

I agree with you; I think you have the meat of it.

There are two problem here: first is that "rich" isn't clearly defined. When the billionaires are all dead, are the millionaires next? Where doors it stop? Maybe that fucker in the house that's bigger than your's deserves to get her bullet too? How about anyone who's rich enough to own a house?

Second, kill the rich and we still have a system that enables consolidation of wealth. We'll just get a new group of 1%ers, only they'll probably be more dedicated to repressing the public to ensure that what happened to their predecessors doesn't happen to them.

Maybe the biggest problem, for me, is that I don't know what's better than what we have. Probably a limited capitalism, maybe modeled after one of the Nordic countries? Semi-socialist? I don't know. I'm pretty sure a huge part of the problem is the stock market (if not specifically, then the economic model that enables it), and laissez-faire economics is a shit-show fantasy that doesn't exist, but which the striving for causes all sorts of issues. But beyond that, I don't know how to limit consolidation of wealth, and outcomes like Citizens United.

So, people can kill all the CEOs they want; I don't expect it to improve anything.

[-] CaptPretentious@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

You're first point ends up just being a slippery slope fallacy. If we take out the billionaires, it's just a hop and skip until we take out the people in mobile homes! Just using a single data point provided by census.gov is 'Real median household income was $80,610 in 2023'. A person who's a lowly billionaire (i.e. JUST has $1,000,000,000) made 12,405 YEARS worth of money. Someone who's JUST a millionaire ($1,000,000) would have 12 years. Which if you flip that, it's possible for someone to earn a million dollars w/o exploiting people. It's clearly not possible to become a billionaire (using USD as the base) w/o being an immortal being who had a successful career starting in 10,381 BCE. The order of magnitude ends up being overlooked since it's just the next thousand -> million -> billion. And to answer, when would it stop, it would probably stop naturally. Prices keep going up so billionaires can be multi billionaires and now we have one jack-ass gunning for being a trillionaire. And our taxes goes to subsidies these pricks too. If homes became affordable, if food was affordable, if our education system was up to snuff and affordable (K-12 and higher education), our healthcare was up to snuff, our roads were in good shape, our internet wasn't nickle and diming everyone... you'd see a general lack of interest in being pissed off. It would happen organically, just like it has in the past... the wealthy get got, things change, and we peasants get less "eat the rich" motivated.

To you're second point, yes the system is broken. But not everyone who's family of the one in control of the estate, agree with that person. Also, fear is a great motivator. Most people fear homelessness or starvation. The 1% don't fear much. Also, if vigilantes start taking out multiple 1%ers they're either going to hire a lot of security (putting money back into the system, back into the hands of the people) or they're going to start doing something to not be viewed as "dinner". And we literally saw that. UHC gets got... and Blue Cross Blue Shield immediately reverse the change on anesthesia. They claimed it was due to backlash, but they're a for profit company, they don't care. But the CEO being targeted and seeing the people cheer... that sends a message.

I don't think anyone has a clear plan as to what would be better. There's certainly a lot of ideas out there. But so long as the ultra rich control the government, control the means of communication (news outlets, social media) it's difficult/impossible for change that would negatively impact them that would positively impact the rest of society.

And you might not believe in it, but the French of utilized this method to much success. Honestly, we did to way back when if you want to throw in the revolutionary war.

[-] sxan@midwest.social 1 points 2 weeks ago

And you might not believe in it, but the French of utilized this method to much success. Honestly, we did to way back when if you want to throw in the revolutionary war.

There are many more examples of revolutions that did more harm that good, than vice versa. It may be there only viable avenue left, but I think it's grossly ignorant to think it won't sweep up a whole lot of innocents, with a good chance of ending up in a defacto brutal dictatorship for a few decades.

Those are heavy dice to throw. If they're the only dice, then so be it, but I really hope not.

[-] Cethin@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 weeks ago

The point is that the rich have purchased a system that protects them. If they're scared that people are resorting to other methods, because the system won't go after them, then they can choose to fix the system so people actually see results without murder. As long as they feel safe and cozy, they have no incentive to fix the system they rigged.

[-] sxan@midwest.social 1 points 2 weeks ago

Well, insofar as violent revolution increasingly appears to be there only tool remaining, but I have more faith that The Rich will be able to successfully manipulate the masses into slaughtering each other, a-la another civil war, than that the masses will be able to accomplish anything lasting. But, then, The Rich are few and control all of the media, and masses are by nature not intelligent constructs. If we're really lucky, we'll just have a limited civil war; if we're not, we may end up with a Khmer Rouge, which won't be fun for anybody.

[-] Cethin@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 weeks ago

True, but I'd rather the fear of doing something not stop us from doing anything.

[-] sxan@midwest.social 2 points 2 weeks ago

sigh I can agree with this sentiment.

Ok, you convinced me. I'm in.

[-] meep_launcher@lemm.ee 0 points 2 weeks ago

Yea that's exactly what I'm afraid of.

[-] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 1 points 2 weeks ago

The streets should run red with the blood of billionaires.

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 weeks ago

"Eat the Rich" just means "rich bad, and make them accountable." Depending on who is saying it, it could mean anywhere from taxation to revolution. A good chunk of those saying it are revolutionary leftists, like Marxists and Anarchists.

[-] meep_launcher@lemm.ee 1 points 2 weeks ago

I mean that's what I assumed it meant. I didn't think we were actually going to come out murdering people.

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 weeks ago

Again, depends on who is saying it. The sentiment behind hatred for the rich is what is expressed, though the methods differ between leftists, who seek revolutionary change, and disaffected liberals, who seek reforms.

[-] meep_launcher@lemm.ee 1 points 2 weeks ago

Oh of course, person by person there are folks who wouldn't hesitate to grab a machete and get to work.

Hell, there are people in leftist camps who decided to join when they heard the word "guillotine"

[-] Mwa@lemm.ee 1 points 2 weeks ago

What if it was a controversial opinion, your cooked.

this post was submitted on 08 Dec 2024
216 points (98.6% liked)

memes

10557 readers
1433 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS