OBJECTION!

It did start back up though. And we don’t know if further research could bring the costs down. I’m not proposing it as a magic bullet, just as one potential way to get nighttime coverage.

There’s some promising research in using heliostats (mirrors to direct sunlight) towards a central tower to create molten salt, allowing solar energy to be stored and released at night.

Funny you should say that, because if you actually read the article, the event had to be organized in secret to avoid being targeted by far right groups and then dispersed after 30 minutes because those far-right groups showed up to attack anyway.

It’s wild that the US is trying to escalate tensions with China when it’s still busy with Russia.

I don’t think that lab-grown meat will ever replace animal agriculture on a large scale, at least in my lifetime. That being the case, I’d rather leave any ethically produced meat for people who would’ve been eating unethically produced meat instead.

If the situation is basically full on Star Trek replicator, then I wouldn’t have ethical qualms but I might still find it gross and it might not digest well since I’m not used to it. Either way, it’s very distant from the actual situation we’re in now.

I’m not talking about changes over time, talking about things I’ve seen recently on here regarding Russia’s current status, in response to news stories and comments discussing the danger of escalation going nuclear.

Shroedinger’s Russian nuclear arsenal. When there’s a story about risking escalation, libs tell me it’s fine because Russia doesn’t have the money to maintain its nukes, so it’d only be a “limited” nuclear exchange. When this story comes out, the libs tell me that Russia has a much larger and better maintained nuclear stockpile, so it’s only necessary for the US to spend more on it to catch up. It’s sort of the same way that Russia simultaneously is on the verge of defeat, yet also has the intention and capability to conquer all of Europe, like Hitler, if we don’t stop him here.

The enemy is both strong and weak, and you never know which one it’s gonna be.

The reason I specified is that random people may make random comparisons all the time, so if I just said “where people did not compare it” it wouldn’t really mean anything. Estonia doesn’t tend to have as many wars they need to drum up support for so they don’t do it as often, but it’s still a greatly overused analogy in general. People said it about Korea. They said it about Vietnam. They said it about Iraq. All of those comparisons were ridiculous in hindsight but worked well enough at the time. It’s basically just a go-to thing you can say and people will just knee-jerk get on board with whatever military endeavor you’re doing at a given time, regardless of what it is.

Just out of curiosity, can anyone name one war the US has been involved in since WWII where a high ranking government official did not compare it to WWII to drum up support?

The New York Crimes is a garbage propaganda rag. They don’t deserve a red cent from anyone after pushing their transphobic agenda, (and responding to widespread criticism by publishing an article defending JK Rowling) or after they blatantly lied and published a fake news story about Hamas conducting mass rape in an attempt to sway public opinion to be in favor of Israel’s genocide. If you have a NYT subscription, you are paying people to lie to you.

You can go to archive.is and put in the url of a news story you want to read in the second box and it will usually let you bypass the paywall.

Thank you, yes. It’s pure chauvanism and falls apart easily under examination, which seems to be why they always disappear so quickly.

1.4 billion people live in China and I’d venture to say that a large chunk of them consider themselves to be communist and the party to be communist. That is easily the majority view of self-indentifying communists worldwide. But surely, they think, as a Westerner, I’m the authority on what communism is and not these backwards Chinese.

“beliefs” are based on “faith” and “evidence” is up for “interpretation.”

No, they are not. I believe more of the earth’s surface is water than land. Is that belief based on faith? Is that evidence up for interpretation?

Some beliefs are based on faith and some evidence can be interpreted in multiple ways but that doesn’t mean that there’s no such thing as a rational, evidence-based belief.

A room full of people can read a story and all take something different from it, if we could all just study history and decide what the best course of action is, that’d be cool.

Yes, people disagree on things, but when they are grounded on evidence and reason, they can discuss them rationally and present reason or evidence that the other person might not be aware of, and possibly resolve the disagreement. If you just go off vibes, and someone else senses different vibes from you, then there’s nothing you can appeal to to convince them of your perspective.

That doesn’t seem to describe me very well. Seems like a strange take. I would think that studying history and basing beliefs on evidence would lead one to arrive at a more nuanced understanding than going, “idk seems bad.”

I said that to make the point that what they said was irrelevant to what I said, unless this thread was full of Chinese people.

I guess I don’t really operate on vibes too much when looking at geopolitics.

Because I’m trying to understand their perspective. I consider China to be communist in the sense that the people in charge are communists, the same sense that it was communist under Mao. They call themselves communists, they explain their reasons for doing things from the perspective of communist ideology, they teach Marxism in schools, etc.

To say that they are specifically no longer communist, when they claim to be, seems to be weighing in on what communism is and isn’t. Specifically, it seems to be taking the perspective that Mao’s leadership constituted “real” communism while Deng’s leadership constituted “fake” communism. As I am not a Maoist, I disagree with that perspective.

It’s strange to me that you think understanding someone’s stance on China’s economic reforms, the point in history where they allegedly abandoned communism, would be irrelevant to understanding the standard by which they consider China to have abandoned communism. What could be more relevant?

I never said that he did.

I don’t see how this point matters. Yes, Chinese people shared the story, because they cared about it. I still think it’s a non-issue personally, but people care about all sorts of things, and I’m sure I could find some celebrity gossip with a wider spread. Perfectly fine with all of that.

Then the BBC reports on it internationally, and people on here use it to spread a narrative that China is a nation full of liars. Am I repeating myself? I think I said that part already. That’s the only thing I’ve taken issue with. I fail to see how what you’re saying, that Chinese people originally shared the story, has anything to do with that.

Contrary to popular belief, there’s actually nothing wrong with calling out bad arguments and illegitimate or irrelevant criticism of anything or anyone, regardless of what you think about the thing or person. I’ll apologize for whoever I please, in other words.

I guess I’m just confused then. When China enacted economic reforms in the 80’s, there were people who opposed them and felt that these reforms entailed a right-wing deviation from communism. Those people were/are known as Maoist hardliners. You can see where I thought you might be one.

If you’re not that, then does that mean you do approve of those economic reforms? Perhaps I misunderstood, when you said China abandoned communism, did you mean it as a good thing, and you support China’s direction from a pro-capitalist standpoint?

If that’s not it, I give up. I’m afraid I’m at a loss what your ideology is or what you think about Chinese history or the country’s economic reforms. If you could explain it to me, I’d be quite grateful, I see a lot of people around here who appear to me to be Maoists, but when I ask if they are, they don’t answer or elaborate. It’s very confusing to me.