We’ll go down in history as the first society that wouldn’t save itself because it wasn’t cost-effective.

— some say Kurt Vonnegut, but I’m not sure.

I’m not concerned with right-wing propaganda, nor with those who believe it.

How nice it is to see genocide apologists get so worked about anti-genocide protests across the US. College kids, young people generally, the protest votes during the primary, a small number of voices in congress, etc — they really are having an impact, for the first time in my lifetime have I seen a top-ranking senator — not to mention president — make the slightest suggestion that Israel is in the wrong.

They, along with the rest of the world, can see through the bullshit of those who want to complicate something that’s not at all complicated: stop killing innocent people. You don’t like it done to you, then stop engaging in it yourself. End your genocide, and your illegal occupation, and your illegal settlements in the West Bank, stop blocking UN resolutions, stop the “mowings of the lawn,” and you’d easily have the moral high ground. Until then, expect more October 7ths.

He’s been a fairly staunch critic of Israel, Brazil, Indonesia, etc. Despite your bogus suggestion, he’s done so for decades.
— Mikie

I admit he's been a critique of Israel. But he mainly focuses on US actions because of the reasons he has given. — ssu

He’s been a staunch critic of Israel…and Brazil (especially under Bolsonaro but even beforehand with the treatment of Lula— in fact visited Lula while in prison), Indonesia (the Suharto regime, etc), the Philippines, China (“hardly saintly by any means”), the USSR (“a dungeon”)/ Russia, Germany, the UK, Canada (especially the policies regarding tar sands), and so on.

Yes, his particular interest is on the US, because not only is it a superpower, it’s also here he lives. That’s very different from “the only job is criticizing the US and never criticizing other countries,” or any such nonsense even implying that.

What’s wrong with trying to understand the beliefs and worldview of an interlocutor? I like to understand why people think as they do. — Moses

Yeah, which is why declaring what others believe or think is stupid and embarrassingly funny.

Eh, nevermind.

New study calculates climate change’s economic bite will hit about $38 trillion a year by 2049

Probably a huge underestimate, but hilarious that they have to put a dollar amount on it so the corporate masters can actually understand.

Also, this is a good summary by Michael Mann of what we’re dealing with these days from the newest form of industry propaganda/ denialism:

“Delayers.” Examples of individuals occupying that niche in the media today are folks like Judith Curry of the Georgia Tech School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, former UC Berkeley astrophysicist Richard Muller, and “skeptical environmentalist” Bjorn Lomborg. Rather than flat-out denying the existence of human-caused climate change, delayers claim to accept the science, but downplay the seriousness of the threat or the need to act. The end result is an assertion that we should delay or resist entirely any efforts to mitigate the climate change threat through a reduction of fossil fuel burning and carbon emissions. Despite claiming to assent to the scientific evidence, delayers tend to downplay the climate change threat by assuming unrealistic, low-end projections of climate change, denying the reality of key climate change effects, and employing lowball estimates of the costs of those impacts. When the cost-benefit analysis of taking action is skewed by a downwardly biased estimate of the cost of inaction, it is far easier to make the Pollyanna-ish argument that technology and the free market will simply solve the problem on their own. It is a backdoor way of saying that we do not need to pursue clean, non-fossil fuel energy sources, which are arguably the only real ways to avoid locking in dangerous climate change.

Spot on. Best not to pay them any attention.

You're an atheist who doesn't believe in anything. — BitconnectCarlos

You don't view intention as morally relevant. — BitconnectCarlos

You are _____. You do ____. You believe ____.

Always hilarious. :rofl:

You're an atheist who doesn't believe in anything. — BitconnectCarlos

:lol:

Then there are Jews like you I feel mostly sorry for for having been brainwashed to the point where you have no moral backbone to stand up to the scum amongst your midst. — Benkei

:clap:

Nor have I been brainwashed. — BitconnectCarlos

Oh, well that closes the book on that one I guess.

Nice. Although I don’t love leg extension machines…

Chomsky aside, this sort of thing sure is represented around here. :D — jorndoe

Yeah, maybe. But not by me, and certainly not by Chomsky (of which there’s 70 years of printed evidence).

Chomsky and others see as their role to criticize the US while to critique other countries "isn't their role".
— ssu

Nope. Not what was said. — Mikie

That's exactly what he says. — ssu

No, it isn’t:

It’s very simple: criticize countries all you like. Iran citizens can criticize Israel, etc. But that’s not what we admire dissents for— we admire them for speaking truth to power in their own country, where they can have an impact. — Mikie

Dissidents, almost by definition, criticize their country’s actions. We praise others for it, but they’re not treated well in their countries. Chomsky often uses the prophets or Socrates as examples.

Critiquing other countries is something Chomsky often does. There’s plenty to criticize all over. He’s been a fairly staunch critic of Israel, Brazil, Indonesia, etc. Despite your bogus suggestion, he’s done so for decades.

When speaking specifically about dissidents — those critical of their own countries — it’s kind of silly to ask “is there anything good about the US foreign policy?” The response, “All the countries we haven’t invaded — I like that,” and his explanation of why it’s silly is pretty obvious. In that context, it’s “not the job” of a dissident to discuss things he likes is clear.

“Their task is to condemn the crimes of their state.” (Referring to Iranian dissidents.)

You somehow get out of this that Chomsky “sees his role” as not criticizing other countries, which in fact he’s done for decades. The emphasis should be, however, on where you have the most impact. “The reason I’m particularly interested in the US [apart from being a superpower] is because I’m here.” Which is exactly right.

So this:

Yet when you just criticize one actor and be totally silent on everything else — ssu

is complete bullshit. Another ridiculous misrepresentation.

Worry less about critics and more about the “tunnel vision” of brain-dead jingoists.

Many of us realize climate change is a threat to our well being. But what we have not yet grasped is that the devastation wreaked by climate change is often just as much about headline-grabbing catastrophes as it is about the subtler accumulation of innumerable slow and unequal burns that are already underway — the nearly invisible costs that may not raise the same alarm but that, in their pervasiveness and inequality, may be much more harmful than commonly realized. Recognizing these hidden costs will be essential as we prepare ourselves for the warming that we have ahead of us.

Let’s start with heat, which is killing more people than most other natural disasters combined. Research shows that record-breaking heat waves are only part of the story. Instead, it may be the far more numerous unremarkably hot days that cause the bulk of societal destruction, including through their complex and often unnoticed effects on human health and productivity. In the United States, even moderately elevated temperatures — days in the 80s or 90s — are responsible for just as many excess deaths as the record triple-digit heat waves, if not more, according to my calculations based on a recent analysis of Medicare records.

In some highly exposed and physically demanding industries, like mining, a day in the 90s can increase injury risk by over 65 percent relative to a day in the 60s. While some of these incidents involve clear cases of heat illness, my colleagues and I have found that a vast majority appear to come from ostensibly unrelated accidents, like a construction worker falling off a ladder, or a manufacturing worker mishandling hazardous machinery. In California, our research shows that heat may have routinely caused 20,000 workplace injuries per year, only a tiny fraction of which were officially recorded as heat-related.

Unseen Ways Climate Change Effects Us

Injuries can definitely hamper progress.

these three men have managed to say so little about what Midgley actually wrote. — Banno

Haven’t read it. Maybe they’re thinking of the freon guy.

You have to be for or against!!! — ssu

What a stupid way of characterizing things. It’s like being in middle school. Embarrassing.

Chomsky and others see as their role to criticize the US while to critique other countries "isn't their role". — ssu

Nope. Not what was said.

It’s very simple: criticize countries all you like. Iran citizens can criticize Israel, etc. But that’s not what we admire dissents for— we admire them for speaking truth to power in their own country, where they can have an impact. Did you even watch the video?

That such a simple point is confusing just shows how clouded one’s judgement must be with projection. At least try hearing what’s being said first and THEN find a way to distort it.

totally silent on everything else — ssu

:lol:

Yeah, that definitely describes Noam Chomsky. Totally silent about “everything else” for the last 70 years. A world renowned genius like you — some internet dude — is surely the man for the job of setting him straight.

But yes, keep portraying yourself as the one person who truly “gets it” about international relations in its true complexity.

Okay— sorry for the hostility. I feel it often leads people away from meditating rather than encourages them, that’s why I get annoyed. I’m sure that wasn’t your intention.

If it's so powerful, why does it feel that Israel is calling the shots and the US simply follows? — ssu

You know very well why that is: the Israeli lobby and Israel’s strategic position in the Middle East.

Who is saying that the US is “all powerful”? Why must every statement be caricatured?

And that's simply my point. US one actor, the largest, and Russia is another, China another and the local countries are also. — ssu

They’re of differing power and influence. So “ one actor” is true, but not “Just” one actor.

Yet many indeed think it's very bad, like Noam Chomsky. — ssu

Often very bad, yes.

you don't have to be a dissident, you can support your country when it does something good. — ssu

Do you really think being a dissent means never supporting something your country does that’s good?

What is going on with you? What’s with these odd strawmen?

Not saying, I am breathing, not counting breaths or focusing on the breathing. These too are the story. — ENOAH

No it isn’t. No more a story than “being breathing,” which is just a hokey phrase. Just look at whatever you feel or think, try to sustain that awareness with equanimity. That’s all.

I really dislike when people sentimentalize meditation.

Does anyone even listen to this Trump cultist anymore? Lol.

Eh, whatever. Carry on; you’re doing God’s work changing everyone’s minds about the degenerate, pornstar-fucking con man. :up:

It’s just free market principles at play. :wink:

Is this a joke or are you really just incapable of understanding the fairly simple idea?
— Mikie
All those interventions, including the theoretical ones aren't fairly simple. — ssu

That’s not the idea I’m referring to.

Secondly, it's not a world where first the US acts and then everybody else responds. The US is just one player among others, even if it is a big player. — ssu

You really have no idea how the world works, in that case.

Yeah, it’s nice to pretend to have special knowledge about international affairs, that everybody is being too “simplistic” and you alone see the true complexity — but leaving stupid bullshit aside for a moment: the United States is by far the world’s superpower and has been for decades, beginning only now to be rivaled by China. Their influence militarily, economically, and politically (in the UN and otherwise) is enormous. Any scholar worth a damn will know this.

So yes, the US is one player, and a major one, shaping world affairs. That’s not being “US-centric,” it’s being realistic. Moreover, nearly any country in the world — including Russia and China — know this to be true, and their leaders have said so.

Is the US a “bully”? If this fails under “a narrative” in your mind, then you can be easily ignored.

I just realized Ethel Kennedy is still alive. How is that possible? Wow…

RFK got killed in 1968 and they already had 11 kids.

Don Poorleone

Haha— never heard that one before. Made me chuckle a little, especially after just watching the Godfather.

strategic interest — RogueAI

Exactly.

:rofl:

Yes yes, whatever you say. Now please continue using your “extensive” historical knowledge to justify genocide. :up:

I can guarantee I know history in this region better than you. — BitconnectCarlos

:rofl: Wow! Good job!

Keep the jokes comin’, please.

Read. Your. History. — BitconnectCarlos

:rofl:

Zionism is decolonization. — BitconnectCarlos

:grin: Okay buddy.

Since I notice no people at all falling down stairs, I have to ask: Does Mikie live or work in a building with exceptionally perilous stairwells? — Vera Mont

:lol:

Touché.

That is the point: without US support, Ukraine, Korea, Vietnam, the Iraqi government, Israel, etc., wouldn’t have lasted too long. US support is crucial. Okay, then we ask: so what? Given this fact, the further question is: Why Korea and Ukraine and Israel or Nicaragua, but not Sudan or East Timor or Nigeria or Haiti?
— Mikie

So what?
What do you have against K-Pop? Of having South Korean electronic gadgets and cars? Of them being wealthy and not on the verge of famine? — ssu

Is this a joke or are you really just incapable of understanding the fairly simple idea?

Here is a large report that explains some of the tipping points and what we might expect and what we ought to be doing about it politically. It's fairly up to date, and well researched. Seems mightily optimistic to me about the ability/possibility for human society to find its own transformative positive tipping points in terms of world governance and mitigating technologies and lifestyle adaptation. But hope springs 'til the last minute. — unenlightened

Thanks for the reference. Very interesting.

And they have here the agency. We are just giving them support. What's so wrong with that. — ssu

Nothing wrong with supporting people against aggression. The question is: why these people and not others?

So what's your point? — ssu

That is the point: without US support, Ukraine, Korea, Vietnam, the Iraqi government, Israel, etc., wouldn’t have lasted too long. US support is crucial. Okay, then we ask: so what? Given this fact, the further question is: Why Korea and Ukraine and Israel or Nicaragua, but not Sudan or East Timor or Nigeria or Haiti?

Because it’s somehow in the interest of the United States to intervene or militarily support some countries and not others.

Therefore determining exactly what those interests are is what’s essential. And when we look into that a little bit, it’s not pretty.

It's not just the US fighting a war through it's proxy. — ssu

I didn’t say “Just” meaning ONLY. That’s the big picture. On the ground, it seems much different— it’s Ukrainians fighting for their country against an illegal invasion. No one doubts that.

But do notice that Europe combined has actually given more than the US. — ssu

So Ukraine should be doing just fine without American weaponry. Even discounting training and the fact that NATO is essentially run by the US.

Come on— let’s at least admit that without US support, Ukraine wouldn’t have lasted too long. That doesn’t prove my contention about the causes of the war— just seems a basic fact.

Statement of opinion, no reason for your opinions given in this paragraph. — Sir2u

No, a descriptive statement based on experience. You know, an “observation.” But it’s hilarious you think it’s an “opinion” that needs “reasons.”

“I notice a lot of people are falling down stairs.”

“That’s your opinion! What are your REASONS for this opinion? Not an argument!”

Good lord.

About wankers that have taken an introduction to philosophy course in high school and thought that the 5 ideas they got from reading about ten philosophers were the only ones that counted and everyone else was dumb because they did not agree with them. — Sir2u

Cool.

If you did not have your head stuck so far up your arse that you can lick your own cerebellum you might have responded more reasonably when I posted this. — Sir2u

I did— I had a laugh, thinking it was a joke. When you started going on about it, I was quickly disabused of that notion.

Try to read the room a little better. This rant piece is me offering an observation and, yes, an argument. It’s very personal and not meant to be taken too seriously. Yes, of course not everyone uses the phrase wrong. Yes, the definition I offer for “argument” isn’t the final word on the matter. Yes, it doesn’t really annoy me as much as I let on — that’s just a little humor, you see. Etc.

Why anyone would choose to turn a goofy post (in the lounge) about people over-using a phrase into a “serious” academic discussion is beyond me. But you do you. I’ll give you the last word if you like— that’s all I have to say.

one cannot colonise the land to which one is indigenous to. — BitconnectCarlos

Yeah I’m sure every American will gladly give up their home and property if and when Native Americans declare it to be theirs. (Despite having a much more convincing claim than Zionists).

IOW, almost a genocide! — RogueAI

Yeah, we all get that you have no clue what genocide means. How hilarious that 10,000 dead children would be considered such. Everything must be genocide— or nothing must be.

Everything is genocide — BitconnectCarlos

obviously genocide — RogueAI

10,000 children murdered after decades of living in an Israeli-made concentration camp. But definitely not genocide, because — again — Israel doesn’t do that. :up:

That's the most compelling argument I've read today. — Vera Mont

That one was more of a statement. An encouragement, if you will. As in, “I encourage you to fuck off and to stick your nonsense up your ass.”

But I agree it’s compelling.