We need to look at things in their entirety. Protests are easy to get in to for the average person, and this plants the seed for further actions on their part. The problem with protests is when the organizers start imposing counter-productive rules (such as no party flags at the protest) or don’t use that time to educate. I’ve had major success reaching out to individuals after protests. We need to deprogram them from the thinking that “one-time march = my job is done”, but I also don’t think we can ask people to go from 0 to sabotaging an elbit factory without intermediate steps and victories in-between. They build solidarity and community in that they show us that we’re far from alone.

Pro-Palestine protests in Europe have been much more repressed than in the US, when it’s usually the other way around. Everything moves dialectically and – we owe this to Clausewitz – so does conflict expand dialectically. If a protest was not bothering the establishment, then they would ignore it and eventually the protestors would go home. They would not spend resources to stop it or repress it. This is actually what happened to the Maidan protests in 2014 Ukraine, they were about to end and the false flag sniper attack had to be engineered to give the coup attempt some new momentum.

From being attacked, we know that this bothers the establishment somehow. “To be attacked by the enemy is a good thing”, because it shows that you are annoying them and making enough noise that they have to pay attention to you. Maybe they’re wrong to think marches should bother them; I wrote once that our oppressors are not infallible, they sometimes make mistakes too and we should exploit those mistakes, but above all not think that everything they use to repress us is being allocated efficiently.

There was a debate not long ago, I don’t remember on which platform specifically, about legal vs. illegal protests. The consensus seemed to be (or at least I wanted it to be) that illegal protests are great, but should be made clear to the participants so that they know what they’re getting themselves into if they choose to show up.

(compliment)

Thanks for reading!

Thanks for reading! They mentioned it in my high school history classes as part of the Cold War, but we basically spent maybe two classes on it and then moved on as “nothing major happened”. The Battle at Chosin Reservoir wasn’t “minor” though. It’s still called the Forgotten War nowadays in the West because our involvement didn’t last very long compared to WW2 and Vietnam and it gets kinda sandwiched between the two. I doubt that for Koreans it was as silent as it is for us.

Also he’s getting old and inshallah he will not see many more birthdays

The limits of comedy talk shows tbh. It’s just one step removed from being Vaush; even with an entire team writing your jokes and scripts beforehand, you still end up having to put comedy first. He’s a good speaker, he has cadence, timing and inflexion. And good speakers often are able to create a following with that.

He’s part of an older disappearing breed I think of the “overly snarky commentator”. People are moving away from that, it’s just not trendy anymore.

I think it’s more than passive. When I saw the video going around I only read the subtitles of the first few seconds and thought “oh cool the boomer has another take”, but once I sat down and went through all of it, he brings up the usual hasbara points. I haven’t looked into his backers and sponsors but I wouldn’t doubt he’s on AIPAC or similar.

I love it when the government gets to decide what I’m allowed to wear outside the house

Settler-colonies recognize each other

I don’t know, I just find it funny that you care so much about this. It’s just lemmy.

What’s the difference between an opinion section and what you deem “speculative conspiracy theories”?

As a matter of fact what’s the difference between their front page news and the NYT directly quoting Bush making the case to go to war with Iraq? Weren’t they also passing off speculative (Saddam was responsible for 9/11) conspiracy theories (Iraq had WMDs) as News?

Or is the problem that they are more famous than me thus their opinion is worth more than mine?

You didn’t answer any of my questions and your hostility is more funny than anything. Do you also get this kneejerk reaction when the NYT or the Guardian publish an opinion piece calling to bomb Iran? Because these count as news, they’re published in real newspapers after all!

Way ahead of you!

Isn’t it world news that “Israel” attacked Lebanon twice with compromised pagers, or do articles have to come from state-approved sources to be considered news?

This is a self-promoting opinion piece boring on conspiracy theory.

What makes you say “conspiracy theory” exactly?

The part about cold fusion was strange and I completely occluded it in my original article (the OP). I think he had to mention it because he had to find a way for these nukes, if there were indeed nukes used on Gaza, to be conspicuous. Cold fusion would allow for payloads that, like he said, would be no bigger than a baseball bat.

But the findings stand on their own. For example I don’t believe Busby is lying when he said he analyzed air vent samples and soil samples and found what he found. They definitely require further investigation and Al Mayadeen was looking for more vehicle air ventilation filters and long hair samples from people and vehicles that have been around “Israeli” bomb craters to analyze through another researcher.

Oh, they believe in very material things. They believe in settling land and using the native population as slave labor, for example. I wrote about this before

Nice strawman have you ever talked to one of us

sick af. I don’t write as much these days (read none at all) because I’m busy with lots of stuff but I’m glad someone was impacted by my writing.

Yooo 22 days later but thank you for quoting from my essay!!

Counterpoint: I think we should totally forbid nazis