Do you know what’s worse than stimulating your fear response? Stimulating your anger response. And millions of people choose do that daily in their interactions with social media.

Can they sell the mansion from abroad?

Plenty of different reasons.

Historically, Greece was a poor country in Europe because it was the periphery of the Ottoman empire and therefore barely received investment.

Through the 20th century, the country went through pretty corrupt governments (one of them being a dictatorship).

When they joined the European market, it was already a very unproductive country in relative terms, which tends to force you into remaining in the periphery under normal market conditions; and their most educated citizens saw a very easy and profitable opportunity in just migrating out.

On top of that, the only sector of the Greek economy that had any sort of strength was tourism, which very rarely provides good wages.

By the 2007 crisis, they already had a dangerously high debt. Because they were, again, a tourism-focused economy, when the countries that had the most tourists going to Greece entered into recession, Greece’s income plumetted as well, and the debt just soared.

A little bit later, Greeks elected Syriza, which had simply accepted that they were in a debt spiral that would ultimately crush the country. Syriza’s leaders told the other European governments that their debt had to be renegotiated (annoying for Greece’s creditors, but at least it would be possible for them to pay in some capacity), or they’d leave the Euro-zone and just declare bankruptcy (thus they wouldn’t pay back anything) (terrible for Greece, but perhaps not as terrible as the alternative).

The rest of Europe told them to fuck off for a variety of reasons (plenty of German newspapers had chosen Greece as their sacrificial lamb, often calling the people of Southern European countries lazy, the Spanish president back then wanted to crush Syriza because they had been associated with a growing Spanish opposition party, generally a lot of them were into fanatical fiscal conservatism).

Then Syriza chose not to leave the Euro-zone anyway (which provoked Varoufakis to leave the government, out of principle), and just stick to managing the country’s misery. It has only been shit year after shit year for Greece since then, as any possibility of steering into a different direction was shot dead. It’s just a country without hope at this point.

This is what colonial rhetoric in the 21st century looks like.

Is this bill going to be voted by the previous representatives or by the ones we just voted? Because that page shows the ones who are leaving.

Not “an”. Plural.

I would have agreed some time ago, but they’ve shot the prices through the roof lately.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thích_Quảng_Đức

Thích Quảng Đức was a Vietnamese Mahayana Buddhist monk who died by self-immolation (…) protesting against the persecution of Buddhists by the South Vietnamese government of Ngô Đình Diệm, a staunch Roman Catholic. Photographs of his self-immolation circulated around the world, drawing attention to the policies of the Diệm government. John F. Kennedy said of one photograph, "No news picture in history has generated so much emotion around the world as that one.

Calling them brainwashed is disrespectul and ignorant of similar acts that, while they haven’t been enough to change policy, have invigorated social movements that sometimes resulted in the goals they were aiming for. The fact that you use “brainwashed” specifically almost makes me think that you can’t even understand how people could see the murders of tens of thousands of children as something worth taking radical action for.

I’m not attacking the UN, I’m establishing the comparison that explains why neither can do all they want so that you can understand why the argument makes sense. My mistake, because I assumed you did actually have working brain cells.

Are you daft? “Well where is the UN on Xinjiang protecting the Uyghurs if it’s about protecting human rights?” Not all organizations have the means to achieve their goals. Think for two seconds before posting shit.

Sure, but in the meantime, Israel would have the capacity to do absolutely anything they want, which would permanently cripple Gazans. If you want proof, look at the settlers in the West Bank, who have been eating Palestinian territory uninterrupted because the Palestinian Authority plays nice with them, even though they’re criminals.

If there’s one thing worse than getting ruled by Hamas, that’s Hamas unconditionally surrendering to Israel. What do you think would happen to Gaza’s borders if Netanyahu could do whatever the hell he wanted without insurgences nor opposition?

All my support to Gazans for them to regain their own self-determination and democracy, but this might be the worst possible moment for Hamas to disappear from existence.

It’s incredible, because by the looks of it, Macron’s party seems to be the one that’s reacting the worst to Macron’s own move, the fascists haven’t been caught on the wrong foot, and the real surprise is the leftist coalition that has been pacted in record time after they were at each other’s throats during the European elections, so Macron might actually be the most fatal victim of his own strategy if he doesn’t even make it to the second round.

Let’s cross fingers so that the two sides of the French left compromise on taking the good side on Ukraine, and the good side on Gaza, and not the other way around 🤞

For your own link:

The ANC repeated its position that the armed struggle against the country’s white-ruled government, which began in 1960, was a just war and that civilians had not been deliberately targeted.

But the ANC statement said some of its guerrillas weren’t sufficiently trained and “were never thoroughly under the discipline of the ANC.”

Avoiding harming civilians was a deliberate modus operandi of the ANC, the same way that Hamas deliberately kidnapped civilians. They cannot be blamed for attacking military bases - they should be blamed for attacking that which was neither military bases nor infrastructure.

If you want a general ethical position on the issue that I have found consistent so far:

• Hamas is fundamentally different from other liberation groups, in that Hamas doesn’t intend to integrate the descendants of colonizers into the country they want Palestine (the whole of it) to be. For instance, the ANC saw the white South Africans as South Africans - they were colonizers, sure, but they would be citizens of the country they intended to rule, so instead of targeting civilians, they attacked military targets and infrastructure.

• We see everyday what the Israeli government does on this sub, any person who isn’t predisposed in their favor can easily understand that they’re a few steps away from going full nazi.

• The vast majority of civilians on both sides are innocent, and don’t deserve to be brutalized.

So it isn’t really a matter of whether you prefer Israel or Hamas, it is first and foremost, a matter of making sure civilians aren’t subject to abuse, and are capable of living their lives freely and in peace. Of course, it also needs to be understood that the construct that is the political system of Israel-Palestine (this is, only Israel exists as a sovereign country, while “Palestine” is a couple of not too self-governed territories over which Israel practices sovereignity) provokes a continued abuse and misery that will ignite further conflict sooner or later. So while the first priority is getting a cease fire now, aiming for a real, practical 2 state solution or 1 state solution where both Palestinians and Israelis are free citizens without being subject to the whims of the other party is needed if we don’t want to have a similar mess in 5, 10 or 20 years.

Every time I see an article from The Daily Beast posted here it’s such an annoyingly clickbaity headline that I wish the whole thing would just burn.

That does sound less terrible.

Absolute bullshit move. If we’re going to help Ukraine, it shouldn’t be by forcing them to take a loan when they’re at their lowest, at their moment of highest need. They should just be given the Russian assets and be called a day.

In case anyone wants to argue we aren’t “forcing them”: if your only options are living amongst the rubble for years and selling your future, you are going to have to sell your future in order to be able to eat today.

Still, I hope my metaphor went across.