Communism will not be achievable until it is a global project. You also are treating "countries" as a monolith, with the entirety of the "country" being the problem rather than its ruling class. That is liberal idealism and totally lacking class consciousness. We're talking about class conflict here, are all the working class people within a country responsible for what their bourgeoisie does to keep them oppressed? In a world where socialism is thriving and capitalism is on its back foot, it would not be materialist let alone Marxist to just leave capitalist oppressed nations to their own devices, even if it's true what you say (and I don't think it is) that you can't peacefully address the rotten superstructure even though you can solve the base by putting the means of production in the hands of the working class.
I understand the thought process, but I don't think carnism is based on "They're too weak to stop me"
Not OP, but I don't think he's saying carnism is "based" on that presupposition, rather it is ultimately the justification that allows for the objectification of something that undeniably possesses sentience. It is the point of failure in the supposed reasoning that most carnists would use as their rationale for not doing to humans what they readily do to animals.
Just as you might not eat an animal due to e.g. its capacity for suffering. A carnist wouldn't eat you due to your being a human.
But that's just it. Why did you change the second sentence to "a carnist wouldn't eat you due to your being a human" rather than stick with the reason you gave for a vegan not eating an animal? Yeah, a vegan wouldn't eat an animal due to that animal's capacity for suffering, but so too, a carnist wouldn't eat a human due to their recognized capacity for suffering.. The fact that you further distanced the carnist from the root of the issue as you already stated it (empathy - the recognition of a capacity for suffering) by making it about "being human" is very telling. Why should the humanness matter? Ultimately it's because (or it should be - it's what most would claim is because) we empathize with other humans - we recognize their capacity for suffering. What is it about an lifeform being human that stops we modern people from thinking it's ok to objectify humans to the extent that we would be ok with slaughtering them because they taste good? Empathy - the recognition of their capacity to suffer as we ourselves do. But many non-human animals who carnists still are ok slaughtering because they taste good have that capacity to suffer too, and that is where the carnist's disconnect in their stated reasoning occurs, that is where BeanisBrain is pointing out that the carnist is failing to live by the thing that they (and generally we as a society) claim is what matters when it comes to other humans - as a human I know other humans suffer. We are now at a point scientifically, philosophically where we can say with the same certainty as the previous statement that as a mammal I know other mammals suffer. So carnists have to come up with other excuses, often telling themselves the lie that these non-humans don't suffer, but it is too obvious of a lie that they don't on some level recognize it as such, so doing so reveals that ultimately, it is not actually their empathy that keeps them from harming other humans, because that empathy fails when it comes to creatures that don't lack the capacity for suffering but only DO lack the capacity to stop the carnists from objectifying them, ignoring their suffering, and slaughtering them because they taste good. I'm really tired, inebriated and I know I've been repetitive and less than perfectly cogent, but I really hope some of this has been enough to shine some light on how your comment is really proving OP u/BeanisBrain's point.
Nobody's calling for the consumption of orphan children.
u/tomenzgg beat me to it, but apparently you haven't read A Modest Proposal.
The picture is definitely just some artist's conception, but it's not claimed to be a photo or meant to be anything other than what it is, an artist's conception. You're right that for the most part, a star is needed for aurora, at least for the kind of aurora we have on Earth since it depends on the solar wind interacting with the planet's magnetic field. But if there is anything that can be said about what we've discovered astronomically in the last century or so it's that there are always exceptions to every supposed rule.
The authors attribute the auroras to SIMP-0136’s magnetic field being vastly more powerful than Jupiter’s (750 times stronger according to a previous study). Electrons (presumably stripped from atoms by internal processes) would flow with the field and hit atmospheric molecules fast enough to make them glow, they conclude.
Aside from the aurora part though, none of this is exceptional or rare (and maybe even the aurora part isn't rare either). Rogue planets are probably extremely common, possibly even more common than planets that are gravitationally bound in a star system. And objects of this size, which is really around where we'd start calling it a brown dwarf, are also very common, with more of them than there are main sequence stars.
I am vegan. I have been a vegan for over a quarter of a century now. I also have a cat. There was of course breeding of his ancestors for exploitational purposes, but there was also co-evolution that benefited both species. Regardless, my relationship with him is not one based on exploitation but on genuine mutual companionship. Our relationship is mutually beneficial on a number of levels. I am confident in saying that I not only allow him to live an enjoyable, self-actualized cat life, but that I also at times bring him joy. And he certainly brings me joy. I respect him as an individual being with his own wants and desires and do my best to fulfill them. I know of plenty of other humans who have similarly mutually beneficial relationships with their nonhuman companions. This is not welfarism and it is no more exploitational than many human relationships where a power imbalance exists by necessity but is still one based on mutual caring. I think the welfarism argument also completely ignores the reality of co-evolution (as seen between many other species that don't involve humans at all). Humans and nonhuman domesticated companions can and frequently do exist in non exploitational harmony. There is no reason this should be at odds with veganism and no reason we need to move towards phasing out the domestic cat (or dogs, etc.) as a species in order to be morally, ethically, or ideologically consistent as vegans.
NATOpedia claims that the "brave Mujahideen fighters" part is an urban legend, that the dedication was always and only just to the "gallant people of Afghanistan" as Carl said. But they specifically only mention the theatrical version, not VHS. I for sure without question did see a video a few years back of someone recording their TV while playing the VHS with the "brave Mujahideen" script visible at the end, but I can't rule out that it might have been an edited video.
It would be cool if someone really could confirm whether the "Mujahideen" message was there. Not only for the obvious reasons, but also as yet another example of natopedia spreading lies, calling something an urban legend that was real.
you aren't necesarily a racist for arresting a black person
Yes you are. You're racist if you enforce a deeply racist system, especially one that regularly executes black people with and without trial.
It was Target that was well known for doing this, tracking shoplifters and waiting until someone could get arrested for a felony when a minimum amount of dollar worth was stolen. I never did, but from my understanding, Target was the place shoplifters knew not to shoplift as it was and likely still is extremely aggressive this way and more likely to break the law itself by detaining you against your will (which in the US is technically not legal but that doesn't always stop them from doing it, especially if they think you don't know that). Walmart on the other hand, was actually surprisingly hands-off and one of the easiest of those kinds of stores to steal from, I was told. It's possible this has changed in the last couple years that I haven't kept up, but well into "post"-covid times, if you were shoplifting from one of the big box stores like that, a good bet was Walmart while Target was regarded as the hard-ass goon-hiring bastards and hence the one to avoid.
-- EDIT: Removing a bunch of stuff I'm not 100% sure is wise to leave up
I will note here, that while these are among the laws you should know about and use to your full potential benefit, it doesn't mean that the stores necessarily will, know them or follow them. Regular grocery stores, from everything I know, really don't give a shit. The method I described above works so well because even if someone does eye what you're doing and get suspicious, it will be underpaid retail workers and grocery baggers that almost certainly don't care or are even glad to see that kind of thing happening. BUT other kinds of stores are not necessarily like that. Part of why Target was so bad is because they were known for not caring that they themselves and their thugs were the ones breaking the law. A time could be coming when even grocery stores start getting more like this, and there are probably ones that already do. It can't hurt to test out the situation on something light. A single bottle of shampoo. Get a feel for the store. Items do matter. Don't steal the alcohol. THIS is watched heavily in large part because of minors who frequently try to steal it for obvious reasons. I knew someone else who often stole from grocery stores literally by walking in, taking shit and walking out. None of this trying to look legit shit. He was shockingly successful until he tried doing it with liquor. That ended his shoplifting career. At least from grocery stores. In that town. For a little while.
I hope this has been a helpful comment.
Mods: If any of this shouldn't be here, I get it, no hard feelings if it's deleted. I'll also gladly be the creator who removes it if that's better.
The Preacher and the Slave as performed by Utah Phillips
Written by Joe Hill
Joe Hill was a labor activist and songwriter, active during the Progressive Era.
He was executed in 1915 at the age of 36, after being convicted of murder in Salt Lake City, Utah. The subsequent appeals garnered international publicity, with many activists alleging that Hill was an innocent scapegoat.
I've been here since the r/cth days, but I rotate names (without wiping accounts). That may not be the best solution either, but it works for me. Then again, I'm not a famous (nazi) cartoonist, so I doubt anyone would go to the trouble of even trying to dox me. It's also not like hexbear has the kind of tracking apparatus that major social media sites do.
This. I have no doubt we would have communism if given enough time. The contradictions of capitalism (and therefore imperialism) make it an inherently temporary system. And oh are those contradictions intensifying! It can't last simply because it expects infinity from the finite. Contradictions that only socialism then communism can fix, even if that happens after a wave of horrifying reaction and fascism. But I don't think people take the severity of climate change, its pace, and its consequences seriously enough, even here. It's not "doomer" to recognize how bad the range of very real possibilities actually is. If anything, it's important that we know how much we're fighting the ultimate clock, and hoping it isn't already too late.
Fundamentals of Marx: Surplus Labor and Value. (video is only 10 min long)
E: This one goes into more depth, is a bit more polished of a production, and is 17min: Marx's Law of Value: Intro to Marxist Economics | Socialism 101
Exactly this. Not only did it essentially wipe out entire populations and even drastically alter the course of civilizations (repeatedly), it has not "disappeared." It is still endemic in mammalian (mostly rodent+flea) populations in some areas including in the US. Every year there are people who get infected with it. I think it's an average of like 7 people per year in the US, but as usual, countries more heavily exploited by the US and its vassals get it worse. Hundreds of cases per year in DRC for example. It's hasn't "disappeared," this antivaxxer nitwit just doesn't know about it because modern medicine has made it treatable and precluded its ability to spread as it did in previous centuries.