soumerd_retardataire

@soumerd_retardataire@lemmy.world

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Headlie⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  From edition.cnn.com/2024/08/19/…/index.html :

  Netanyahu shot back, saying Israel will not be “giving in to Hamas’s demand” to end the war in Gaza as a condition of a deal.
  “The Prime Minister has strongly insisted on this fundamental demand, which is vital to achieving the goals of the war, and Hamas changed its position,” a statement from his office said Sunday. “The Prime Minister will continue to work on advancing a deal that will maximize the number of living hostages and which will enable the achieving of all of the war objectives.”

  But even from the article you’re citing : axios.com/…/hamas-rejects-us-ceasefire-hostage-pr…

  More specifically, Hamas objects to the fact that the proposal doesn’t include a permanent ceasefire or comprehensive Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  You’re doubting that he’s defending free speech, it’s better than if you accused his policy of being too excessively libertarian by allowing people you’d like to censor.
  If you’re talking about these accounts they’ve been reinstated, and shame on you(r short-sightedness) for criticising him(, and other social media owners,) instead of the pressure from governments, that you’ve accepted congrats, Meta may or not be happy to comply, but our governments don’t protect us from censorship it’s tge contrary, yay. Yes, E.Musk opposes this otherwise he wouldn’t be targeted.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Yeah, now people don’t like Musk, freedom of speech, and expect the government to make laws on hate speech or misinformation, such a weird timeline, i agree with you fellow Musk lover 💪❤️

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  Our medias and politicians

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  No man, we care much more about deaths in the west than outside of it, e.g. in the u.s.a. instead of Iraq, or Israel instead of Palestine, partly because we divide between supposedly good civilians and evil terrorists with human shields, tsk.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  Thanks for asking !

  I’ll take more time tomorrow to answer in more depth(, even if only for me), but for now i can quickly say that this set of rules/conditions won’t be defined by a single person(, much less myself), as i see it it would take at least 25 years to build, and 5 years before the first experimentations. It’d be, after all, one of the most important thing that humanity could do.
  This disapproval of other values can easily be solved through propaganda, we naturally aspire to peace and thinking that our side is better than the other doesn’t imply we need to wage war against the “inferior ideologies”, even for their own good, we should aim to change them only through the proximity of our example(, if they accept such proximity).
  An obstacle i can see is our leaders, they’ll think that they have to act for more supremacy while they still have time, and may honestly believe that the pax americana is desirable, or at least preferable to the alternative of an “anarchic” world. They won’t immediately believe that we could make rules that can’t be broken, such that “showing kindess” won’t turn up against us in the end.
  Among many other goals behind the experimentation of such rules, we’ll have to think of every possible way to break these rules/conditions, and devise the most effective counter-measures ever thought of, i don’t see any other way.
  There’re certainly other problems to tackle, do you have one in mind ?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:
  • We can harmoniously be united in diversity ;
  • We can be united without diversity ;
  • Or we can be disunited in diversity.

  I obviously choose the first option, you’ll probably agree, but our western leaders somehow prefer the second one, and they’re the ones with the power to improve things.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  That’s a topic i love and i don’t often have the possibility to see someone not thinking it is possible(, i’ve never met someone arguing that it is not desirable).
  If you pointed at our arrogant/selfish desire to be “on top” of the other, then my answer would be to explain why everyone would gain and be more powerful if we’re united, and it must be lonely at the top, with only one culture, if we have friendly countries who are really different in many domain then it’s better to be friends with equals, we have to think of infallible measures against treason but that’s not impossible.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  And what would i gain by trolling(, in the sense of not engaging in a debate but simply responding by mocking the other ?the context of the sentence i read :
  Image

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  Tribes or nationalism, what’s the difference except perhaps size ? I’m just explaining why i saw an interest in this sentence.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  Don’t move the goalposts. You didn’t say we don’t. You said we aren’t able. We absolutely are.

  Oh, i agree then, except in the case of apology of terrorism/enemies.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  What i meant in my previous comment didn’t took into account the propaganda about other humans being evil, the logic was that once you refuse to kill a non-human it’s easier to refuse killing a human, and once you have non-humans it’s easier to accept the thought of having human slaves.
  But we may indeed still hate other humans because they’re evil and we’re liberating their population, or ourselves, yet every conflict could have been avoided if both sides agreed to unite in diversity, i don’t see an exception to this rule. And we’re still nowadays attributing the roles of good//evil instead of seeking solutions to please both sides(, usually because the strongest side, very often the west, refuses to change or make concessions).

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  Thanks, because that how it should behave, not only towards humans but non-humans as well.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  Yeah no, we don’t , double standard is everywhere.

  Just take what’s happening in Palestine if you want the most recent examples, some lives are more important to us than others, there’s a difference between what we proclaim our values to be and our practice of them.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  Interesting, so criticising our tribalism makes me the one with a limited world view, how so ?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  As i wrote somewhere else, the aim of my post would have stayed the same if i titled it :
  « If you tell someone “There’s been a bombing in the Middle-East !” with anguish in your voice, they wouldn’t care nor be surprised as much as if it’s in the west. »
  Such claim wouldn’t be less true. It still seems to me more linked to the word anguish and our lack of care than to the absence of a location(, but ok, w/e 🤷‍♂️).

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  Yes and no, while i do agree that this is considered normal behaviour, i also long for a world in which we would be able to say “there’s a bombing !” with as much anguish whether its in ‘the U.s.’/Europe, or in the Middle-East, Africa, etc. It’s not that much normal i think

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  👍

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  And your argument is ?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  And your answer wasn’t a counter-argument

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  And what you consider local is the countries you consider belonging to, i.e., the west, ⟳ .

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  Thanks for your comment, may i have your opinion on this answer ? lemmy.world/comment/5083460

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  As i said previously :

  There’s been a bombing

  Place is implied. Could be anywhere in the west, if i’m in France it works for the south//north of France, the United Kingdom, America, Australia, or any country i feel like i belong to, that is in my tribe.
  But if you say afterwards :

  There’s a bombing in some place

  And that place is in the Middle-East, or in Afghanistan, we would say “yeah, of course, like yesterday and probably tomorrow, no need to ne surprised”

  But thanks for wanting to correct me, it’s nice to have a chat with other people than from Lemmygrad for once.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  Oh, ok, so that’s because we’re not concerned by this, they’re not “us”, understood.
  (it’s not geographical since europeans will be more impacted by deaths in the west than, e.g., in Africa, it’s more of a tribal thing)

  I also hesitated to post « If you always agree with “the”( only) point of view of mainstream medias, then you should find it weird », because it’s different in foreign medias that we never read(, iranian, venezuelan, russian, chinese, zimbabwean, …), we usually call “foreign medias” those who are still in the west and aligned with our international policies. But i thought that this sentence was even more im14andthisisdeep material than showerthought, do you agree ?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨They use to tell us we couldnt trust Wikipedia. Now we know. Wikipedia is the only website you can trust.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:

  Thanks, trusting wikipedia because it has a “source”(, as if a source meant the truth 🙄,) is super weird, and a lot of sources are inaccessible anyway, such as those pointing to books. Wikipedia will hopefully be replaced one day, it’s long overdue.