Good praxis

But in a response to her visa application, the Home Office told Ashkar that it had been denied on the grounds that granting it would “harm the public interest”, without giving any further reasons or explanation.

It’s part of a shifting norm and shifting norms are always controversial. Especially norms that involve opening up bodily autonomy, dignity, or respect to previously excluded groups.

Yeah and also your comment might be illegal in the US soon

Boys becoming Men, Men becoming Bears

A third take: Authoritarian groups have been historically successful in wiping out (usually by force) less authoritarian groups and their methods of organizing.

This is not a right wing resource, but if you’re interested in learning about the arguments and historical evolution of ideas that underpin economic liberalism/neoliberalism, I highly recommend Geoff Mann’s Disassembly required : a field guide to actually existing capitalism. It’s concise, relatively short, and treats the ‘other’ side like rational actors (which is important for understanding, I think).

Ofc this would only help understand people who are quite well informed.

https://archive.org/details/isbn_9781849351270

interesting, I added an external link. good to know that feature doesn’t play well for now, thanks for flagging.

I posted it with an embedded photo, can you see it? I’m in kbin and perhaps embedded photos federate weird

You guys will enjoy this one from Subway

edit: link for those that can’t see embedded images

I guess I’m worried primarily about internal enemies too, but I don’t think we’d agree on which entities are the problem for some reason…

If I was in politics or was looking to get into politics in the future, I would be trying to get arrested publicly for this. Look at the people who got arrested during the civil rights movement.

Imagine being the warehouse employee who opened the package

i are, I generally have to make about the corrections per message in order for it to even be legible

(left it in all its glory for you guys)

Me too, eyelash extensions that rival the city’s stadium in importance.

The nazi party used a lot of euphemism surrounding their genocide plan and a lot of german citizens claimed afterwards they didn’t know the extent of it (davon haben wir nichts gewusst), but the antisemitism was immediately visible obviously what with the kidnapping. The camps—a bit less so, but a lot of historians feel they were more of an open secret than a secret. It was definitely less globally visible than what’s happening in Palestine though and the international community was justifiably outraged when they saw the extent and brutality of the camps.

Wtf, breaches aside why would a health care company be working with advert companies?

Active support of something totally morally unacceptable seems more morally culpable than refusing to participate. I don’t think most people are consequentialists—the how matters.

It boggles my mind to think multiple humans in a boardroom somewhere okayed this at some point. For babies.

To me if a certain method of organizing fails to give people power over their own needs without infringing on the needs of others than it should be avoided. Privatization of -everything-, which is core to ancap theory, is itself an aggression. The enclosure movement in the UK is a good example. The ‘best’ way for people to organize would incentivize people to be good towards each other and good stewards of the planet. It would not allow one person to gain power over anyone else’s right to exist. You should be highly skeptical of a movement whose theorists support slavery, free market organ sales, etc. which are antithetical to freedom of the individual (at least one person in the relationship is getting the shitty end of the deal).