1·
4 months agoI was unaware of that when I posted this.
- 0 Posts
- 21 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
Cake day: September 11th, 2023
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
I’m not naive to that fact, I just don’t like it.
I’m not gas lighting you and I didn’t know that was the intended acronym of .ml
If that’s true then I will be moving instance.
BTW I’ve not been blocked (to my knowledge) by anyone- I’ve just had a couple of instances where I’ve been in discussion with someone and when they turn to ad hominem attacks they’ve called me a tankie or some such. Regardless of what was being discussed or my views.
This sentiment is exactly what I’m talking about.
I’m not associated with the moderators anymore than your average user of .world is associated with their’s.
My point is, yes I can choose to change instance but why should I? Lemmy is meant to embody the best of us - and yet some of us are creating “us and them” situations.
This sentiment makes me sad.
I chose .ml because it was smaller than .world (and that seemed to be the point of federation) but was also generic (my interests are very varied) and had great uptime, and didn’t de-federate or had been de-federated by many instances. Now people say stuff like this and I feel the need to change instances because I don’t want people to tar me with that brush (and I have been accused directly multiple times just because of my instances) but I feel conflicted because the whole point of this while thing was that we could be on any instance we liked and it shouldn’t impact our “social standing”. I’m disappointed in people that they can’t judge a person by the content of their character rather than the instance they are on. And alas - I feel it’s only a matter of time before I’m forced to change instance because of other people’s prejudice.
In 1885 the legal age of consent in the UK was raised to 16. The average life expectancy of adults had barely changed.
So while this disproves your correlation theory, it’s also important to remind the reader that correlation is not the same as causation. Society, the role of government, the rule of law and its encroachment on personal choice changed hugely from the 13th Century and 17th Century - I would therefore claim that society would not have been accepting of paedophilia in the 13th Century despite the lack of law.
Sexual desire of prepubescent children has, as far as I know, never been considered the norm.
Yes. And that’s why life expectancy of a 20yr old was 60yrs not 80+.
Source: https://ourworldindata.org/its-not-just-about-child-mortality-life-expectancy-improved-at-all-ages
Isn’t the average life expectancy caused by infant death? Anyone living through pubity probably had a good chance of living to 70.
Oof that’s very closed minded of you
That’s not at all what I meant.
I’m an ml user - just because it seemed okay to me when I first started with Lemmy - and now I learn it’s got a rep for being for tankies etc
If you look through my comment history you’ll see I’m probably just some lefty twit from Europe.
I by no means meant you should tolerate the scum that promote Putin or Pooh Bear’s agenda.
Just don’t assume everyone on .ml is a cunt. Be more open minded and less label driven.
Pay walled.
You are wrong.
This war is also in the interests of Putin.
Putin decided to start the war of aggression.
Putin invaded Ukraine.
Ukraine gave up its nuclear arms on the guarantee of security from Russia. Russia has violated that guarantee by invading them.
Putin can end the war today.
US can not end the war today. Even if it left Ukraine alone, Ukraine would still fight to the end.
EU can not end the war today. See above.
The fastest and easiest way to end the bloodshed is for Russia to withdraw today.
Leaving Ukraine to defend itself wouldn’t even end the bloodshed. After Russia has completed its revised objectives it would invade the entirety of Ukraine under newer revised objectives. Then it would invade other neighbours under other revised objectives. The bloodshed would continue until the USSR is reformed and a new cold war begins.
Those suggesting the only way to end the bloodshed is through capitulation to the aggressor need to study their history better to see that capitulation to the aggressor never stopped an aggressor, it just lead to them going further until stopped.
Imagine if the USA invaded Mexico - no one would be saying Mexico should end the bloodshed. And the USA’s adversaries sure as hell would be doing everything they can to help Mexico.
For those in the back: Putin withdrawing from his war of aggression is the only known way to end the bloodshed today. All other solutions would result in further bloodshed.
Oof that’s very closed minded of you.
Yeah the irony certainly seems to be lost on them. I guess they just hope everyone had forgotten about how they lost the proxy wars of the cold war era, and are looking for a do-over.
Not to be a pedant but the US (and UK) armed and trained the mujahideen who largely went on to become the Taliban who oppressed their population and allowed al’qaeda to reside, train and plan attacks from within their borders which ultimately lead to the 9/11 attacks which precipitated a lengthy occupation by allied forces in which many more thousands died, and the eventual withdraw of said forces resulting in the Taliban taking back control, oppressing their population and no doubt once again providing a safe haven for terrorists aligned against the west.
I would say that if Ukraine ends up “like afghanistan” it would be a very bad thing indeed for everyone. Russia, the west, Ukraine. Everyone.
The US is a net exporter of oil. They don’t have a hard dependency on the list and it doesn’t matter if they’re 6th or 60th - they have more than they need.
Which is what they said…GB is England, Scotland & Wales.
You’re thinking of United Kingdom, which is short for United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
Note that the island of Ireland is 2 countries and you can’t sink one without sinking the other…unless you saw it in 2 first…
I think a careful balance needs to be found somehow.
Speaking only from my own experience: I have never touched C, and that is undoubtedly because of its legal status…while I smoked for more than half my life, undoubtedly because of the tobacco industry’s highly effective influence through the 20th Century.
I remember when cigarette brands were ubiquitous at sports events and media. Race cars, movie stars, sport stars, soldiers…pubs, clubs, planes, trains and automobiles. It was everywhere - killing people in horrificly slow and painful ways, making everything and everyone stink, staining our hands, clothes, walls, teeth and facial hair, littering our town centres and countrysides alike. And this was all happening with our eyes wide open - it wasn’t ignorance. It’s only through decades of government intervention through health campaigns, law changes and huge taxation that the tobacco industry’s grip finally weakened enough for us all to realise the horror we had walked into with our eyes open. Slowly, some parts of the world have managed to walk it back and smoking is now in the minority, but you only have to look at vaping to see how ready corporate greed is to take advantage of our influential children.
I’m not saying the above to scare people into thinking legalising cocaine would be the same - I am just highlighting what happens when the corporate world is allowed to act with impunity. I don’t think it’d be long before cocaine was back in coca cola.
On the other hand, “the war on drugs” seems to do more harm than good.
So can we trust governments to properly litigate and control legal and responsible distribution? I don’t know the answer, and I have no solutions…but the stakes are high - and so while I hope for change, I am also wary of it.
Happy to oblige.
Basically the North is a totalitarian state in which one family has retained absolute control of the state and its population. They have prioritised military programmes and their nuclear ambitions above the needs of their people and thus they have one of the worst economies and their people are often starving and diseased.
Recently they have also been arming Russia to help with their war of aggression against the innocent people of Ukraine.
All of this is in contrast to South Korea which is a democratic country with one of the world’s strongest economies which provides for a very good standard of living for its population.
There is much more, I’m sure, but these are the first things that pop to mind and the reason why the North is not the best Korea, and infact the South should be considered the Best Korea.