[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Look they first thing I’m confused about is why you started your comment with a sympathetic viewpoint to North Korea, like I would’nt open my essay about how nuclear energy is good with Chernobyl wasnt that bad. Your basically delegitimising everying else after that

That's a perfect demonstration of my point. The only thing I said about North Korea is that there are fake stories about it, which is true. I have no interest in saying or tolerating false claims just to make my position seem more appealing, or to avoid being accused of something. If speaking truth delegitimizes me somehow, if it makes people think I'm a bad person or something, then so be it, it doesn't change what's true.

And then I disagree with the false and exaggerated claims unchallenged part. What exactly do you mean. This seems like a catch all to dismiss anything that you disagree with.

I linked a video to give an example of what I was talking about. I recommend watching it, it's a little long but it's informative while being entertaining and well-produced (it has 3.6 million views with good reason). The video describes a story that was very widespread in the media with lots of mainstream sources talking about it, which claimed that everyone in North Korea had to get the same haircut as Kim Jong Un. That story was completely and totally false, it was a wholesale fabrication. The two guys in the video travel to North Korea and get a perfectly normal haircut to disprove it. It also mentions several other stories that turned out to be fake news.

You're jumping to conclusions when you say that I "use it as a catch-all to dismiss anything I disagree with." I'm not going to dismiss claims that are actually backed by evidence, but I am going to investigate whether there is actually evidence backing up a given claim.

More importantly, because the only state you’ve mentioned is North Korea I’m now prompted to assume the AES’s you’re talking about is north Korea.

That's a silly assumption, as there'd be no need for a term like that if it only applied to one country. AES states also include for example Cuba, Vietnam, Laos, China, and the USSR (prior to it's collapse).

[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 month ago

Looking forward to the grand American tradition of having candidates accuse each other of doing good things while vehemently denying the other's slanderous accusations that they would ever do anything good.

[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 month ago

I thought critically about the issue and came to the conclusion that genocide and apartheid are bad and that fascism is wrong. Not my fault if enough other people reach the same conclusion for it to be trendy.

[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 4 points 3 months ago

Yes, it would be bad to start another war somewhere else.

[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 4 points 3 months ago

The word "privatization" originates with describing the economic policy of Nazi Germany

[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 4 points 4 months ago

I don't think that lab-grown meat will ever replace animal agriculture on a large scale, at least in my lifetime. That being the case, I'd rather leave any ethically produced meat for people who would've been eating unethically produced meat instead.

If the situation is basically full on Star Trek replicator, then I wouldn't have ethical qualms but I might still find it gross and it might not digest well since I'm not used to it. Either way, it's very distant from the actual situation we're in now.

[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 4 points 5 months ago

Providing something you’d yourself strictly agree with is harder. Providing a link that the opponent won’t discard if they want to discard it is possible, but unlikely

No idea what you're talking about. Have you, or have you not, seen an ML call the Cambodian genocide "justified?" There's nothing for me to "strictly agree with" or "discard," if you've seen someone say that, then all you have to do is show me, and there's no room for disagreement.

I’ve reached that last point with ML’s for a few times.

Great, where's the link?

That’s just what fascists say.

Fascists question whether ML's call the Cambodian genocide justified? Wtf are you talking about?

Oh, I get it. Now that you've been caught in a lie, you're trying to pretend that I was asking for proof of the genocide itself, as opposed to what I actually asked for, which is proof of an ML calling it "justified." Nice bit of weaseling.

Let's be absolutely clear - the Cambodian genocide happened and was not justified, and @nonailsleft@lemm.ee and @rottingleaf@lemmy.zip are blatantly lying and making things up by claiming to have seen MLs call it justified.

[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 4 points 5 months ago

Tribalism is a hell of a drug.

[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 4 points 5 months ago

Trump is a third-party candidate? Fascinating perspective.

[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Who I would vote for would be, for example, the third-party candidate I'm actually voting for.

The democrats can't be "shamed" into doing the right thing. They might be able to be pressured into doing it, and establishing a credible threat that you'll withhold your vote if they do something unconcionable is one way of exerting that pressure. They have exactly zero interest in the concerns of people whose votes are guaranteed.

And if they are completely unresponsive regardless, then the only hope of having our concerns listened to is to unseat them, by means of a third party. No matter how unlikely or how long it takes, it's still more likely than the possibility that Biden randomly starts caring about Palestinians out of the kindness of his heart.

[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 4 points 5 months ago

Does this also apply to more fantasy oriented war games?

No, the ICRC is talking about video games that simulate real-war situations. It is not suggesting that this apply to games that portray more fictional scenarios such as medieval fantasy or futuristic wars in outer space.

A few media reported that certain virtual acts performed by characters in video games could amount to serious violations of the law of armed conflict. Is this correct?

No. Serious violations of the laws of war can only be committed in real-life. A person cannot commit a war crime simply by playing a video game.

https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/resources/documents/film/2013/09-28-ihl-video-games.htm

[-] Objection@lemmy.ml 4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Totally get that. I was also poor after school so I became a hitman. Just a few easy murders and I was able to pay for college and get enough for a down payment on a starter home. I know some people don't approve of it, but it's important to understand how much of a resource joining the mafia can be for social mobility.

And not everyone has to be a hitman like me. My buddy is a getaway driver and he's never harmed anyone and he's helped me get out of a lot of tight spots. Want to sit in a room messing around with numbers all day? I hear the boss is looking for an accountant. Want to change jobs to patching up bullet wounds after a shootout without going to a hospital to get medical experience? They'll pay for that.

Everyone will downvote me too, let's keep up the anti-mafia sentiment.

view more: ‹ prev next ›

Objection

joined 6 months ago