Following someone once is not stalking. For stalking there has to be a persistent pattern. Or else women would be able to get stalkers arrested a lot more often instead of being killed by them.
Fucking thank you for the nitpicking. I’m sure you can deduct where people live if you followed them somewhere once.
Christ almighty the thickness.
Encouraging people to do crimes IRL, while posting on the internet anonymously, sitting on your fat ass consuming resources that accelerate climate change.
How do the boots and assholes of the Uber wealthy taste btw? From the way you are munchin down I would guess pretty good but I would like to know your first hand knowledge.
A felony is a type of crime which doesn’t exist here.
You can’t just get upset if someone points out you’ve used a word wrong. Words have meanings and while getting it wrong, especially as a second language, isn’t bad, it’s still incorrect and can be confusing (e.g. most people would assume you’re talking about US law when you talk about felonies).
They won’t do that. That would involve being killed. There is a reason why Peta throws red paint on old ladies wearing fur and not on biker gangs wearing leather.
The very worst thing the UK government is going to do is throw them in jail for a few months, maybe a small fine.
Actually the pessimism turned me left. How can one be pessimistic about the future and turn to those who will make it even worse? Stupidity or self harming behaviour?
People are not good at critically evaluating options and don’t have the time or attention to do so. Not a knock on young people, pretty much everyone in 2024 has divided attention 24/7.
So we turn to heuristics, ways to short-circuit decision making. Like looking at what arguments experts make, how often we hear arguments, who is the most confident, etc. Those are easily exploited by right-wing populists.
They position themselves similar to classic revolutionaries - they claim to be the counterpoint to the “establishment” or to the “out-of-touch elites.”
That’s pretty tempting for people who don’t like the direction the world is heading in. Most don’t see or don’t want to see that the AfD is chock full of the exact people who rule them from the top down, police their opinions and take away their personal liberties.
What’s tragic is that, historically, a left wing group would normally find itself in the position the AfD is holding now. Yet here we are, after 50 years of slowly shifting rightwards until the social contract began breaking, with a party that offers a harsh jump further right as the revolutionary cure.
If you go with the worst POV on far-right, it’s the same promises that lead men to war: after the war you’ll have money and will be able to marry
In a world where money is hard to come by, and society and culture are deconstructed (and nothing is built to replace it), there is no much else they hold dear. So “war” is all that’s left
This has been the most effective form of climate protest by far. When they block oil terminals or spray paint car dealerships no one will cover it making the protest pretty much useless, like a guy set himself on fire to protest climate change and that was barely covered. The stuff they do doesn’t actually cause any damage but the media actually covers it because they can spin it as rage bait against the protestors but at least it gets coverage.
Coverage, yes. But the result of that coverage? Making people not want to support climate activism, and maybe even have a negative reaction to anything climate positive. And how effective is that coverage in helping the climate? What changes in climate related policy can be traced back to any of these actions?
It spreads awerness, no other climate protest has even managed that. Some people obviously fall for the news rage bait but if even 1% of people gain any awerness of climate change it will have been the most effective form of climate protests by far purely on what reach it has had.
The UK also has a weird hatred of trans people, I’d rather not get my opinions from there. Also the UK has been passing police state shit long before this.
I’m not taking the bait. There’s obviously many worse countries than the UK to be trans in and like I’ve already said, the UK isn’t perfect but it wouldn’t be as diverse as it is without being as accepting as it is.
You can reply to this if you want, but don’t expect me to reply in turn, this is my final statement on the matter.
If you wanna measure your country against those that outright kills trans people then sure, there are worse ones but in Europe, most North America and most of Asia the UK is one of the worst places to be trans. Also both of your relevant politician parties have the same policy there.
The UK has become completely irrelevant on the global stage be grateful I capitalised the names. Like your economy is being out paced by fucking Poland, shame is the proper response there, not national pride.
Nice try, here in Estonia we hate Russians as much as the French hate anyone not French.
Like if you wanna defend your failing country that has a two party system worse than the US go for it but at least try facts instead of national pride, it doesn’t work if your country is being out paced by eastern Europe.
Yeah it can cause disruption, I agree. However it should preferably cause disruption for the people you have a problem with. Or simply by using public space which is equally theirs.
Making headlines by defacing historical monuments and art isn’t really getting the public on their side. I’m left wing, most of the people I engage with are, and I’ve yet to meet someone in real life who thinks what Just stop oil are doing is helpful
Do you remember when their protest outside the HQ of BP made the news? Me neither, but I’m sure the high rollers on their 6, 7, 8 figure salaries felt terribly inconvenienced!
I don’t have to agree with their methods or their ideology to recognise their right to protest. We’re talking about dyed cornstarch here, it’s not like they blew the thing up.
If the high rollers didn’t feel inconveniences then their protest wasn’t very effective! If they can effectively inconvenience the public to the extent that the government can pass new authoritarian anti-protest laws, but they failed to actually inconvenience the high rollers then what the hell are they doing and isn’t this opinion that they’re not really benefiting the movement actually quite an accurate one?
I don’t have to agree with their methods or their ideology to recognise their right to protest.
And I don’t have to not recognize their right to protest while also recognizing that their protest, while bringing attention to the cause that won’t move the needle, is also bringing attention to the cause that will also set their purported goals back.
And there are thousands of people that express their hatred for her and the movement she stamds for, even threatening to rape and kill her.
In Germany there are regular street blockades and Airport disruptions and the average response to these things was people wanting to run them over with their cars.
Much like my witnessing PETA protestors screaming in the face of little children with a bullhorn because they happened to be waiting in line for the circus. I can support removing elephants from a life of circus performing, but I absolutely cannot stand PETA (for this and other reasons like euthanizing people’s pets).
Pretty much every shocking PETA truth is either taken out of context or completely fabricated. They’ve done one thing which I disapprove of, which is the weird “milk makes autism worse” advert they ran. other than that they’re fine imo.
I don’t know if the euthanasia stories are true, but I witnessed the screaming into bullhorns personally as I was also waiting in the line with my kid.
Sorry but being held responsible for what your ancestors did is bullshit. The very same bullshit as trying to reclaim the land your ancestors had. Both are not mine, it’s in the past and I have nothing to do with it.
Also, it is most likely that everyone’s ancestors did some bad things. Sad but it is a process in the human history.
That’s why wealth redistribution should be applied as indiscriminately as possible based on wealth, instead of discriminate cash payments based on cherry picked events that occurred more recently. Most people born into the rat race aren’t there because of their own failures, but because their lineage were historically screwed by the wealthy stretching back thousands of years, and everyones ancestors contributed to the current state of civilization, so rather than discriminate cash injections which create a new generation of people left behind and continue the imbalance, it should be focused on reducing the deviation from the mean and median both domestically, and internationally.
Do you really believe that cash injections to developed economies will benefit the people instead of their domestic oligarchs?
I don’t disagree. Yes, the effects of what happened are ongoing. You cannot expect to fix a joy of children by paying them money for their father’s loss, they won’t be ever the same. You can only make their living standards better. What’s done is done, no one can revert it. The whole issue is no different than this.
I wish the world was fair but I don’t think it will ever be. We cannot even fix our own countries, own municipals. We can only fix the future by taking an act today, we cannot fix the past.
The migration of tribes had shaped the world. Is there anything we can do about it? Industrial revolution had shaped the world, the world wars had shaped the world. Even though we have no intention to continue affecting the world negatively, there is no end to that. Sorry but we haven’t reached that serenity as homo sapiens. We must work for it but we won’t see it in our lives.
We should learn from our past, however we mustn’t try to fix it since we cannot, it’s plowing water.
Dude, I’m not descendant of slaves and I’m pretty much a slave of the Portuguese state at the moment. If this corrupt cast of politicians wants to pay reparations, I do not oppose to it, but they need to pay it from their own pockets.
What is the difference between direct and indirect descendant? Also how does the original sin interact with the physical body in such a way that it knows how to follow direct descendant lines?
Ok say I am a slave owner and I have five children. The original sin does it couple with my eldest child or all five, does it divide into 5 equal parts or multiple into 5 or does divide in half with each child? What units does ancestor guilt have, is there a SI version or is it just industry standard units? If I adopt a kid does the original sin particles connect to the adopted kid? If one of my “direct” descendents becomes a slave does his inherited original sin particles meet anti-originao sin particles and cancel out or not? Can original sin particles be passed like a STD, say for example one my kids married a women, has a kid with her, then my son dies, woman remaries and has another kid, would that new kid have the original sin particles or just their older sibling? If two people pass through double doors at the same time do the original sin particles form an interference pattern like waves do?
So many questions. Maybe just show me the equations governing your original sin particle wave thing and how it knows how to follow families
I don’t believe the children should pay for they fathers mistakes. I was replying to the OP comment that suggests that we should take into account slavery has something to do with poor conditions some of said descendant of slaves are atm.
I came from a long line of poor people in the sense of money, and only one of my uncles was able to get a degree (from his pocket money and hard work, you have to pay even if it’s a public university), recently a cousin was also able to get a degree as well. And me and my brother pursuit more technical courses.
I can have a decent income by working on projects from abroad but the Portuguese state takes ~70% of that in direct and indirect taxation.
Meanwhile I don’t have a family doctor for 14 years now, and if I need something to be taken care of I need to get help in the private sector. Justice is slow, the streets and public buildings are decaying to a point of rupture, public administration is a complete disgrace in general…
I’m basically a slave to this corrupt politicians. They take my hard work in the form of taxation and provide nothing/almost nothing in return.
It’s not about what somebody’s ancestor did. It’s about what the country as a whole did. Country X had Y policy that oppressed Z group, and has resulted in that group still being impoverished today? Country X is on the hook then. They caused the problem, they need to help clean it up.
By the middle of the 1920s, the whole of Angola was under control. Slavery had officially ended in Portuguese Africa, but the plantations were worked on a system of paid serfdom by African labour composed of the large majority of ethnic Africans who did not have resources to pay Portuguese taxes and were considered unemployed by the authorities. After World War II and the first decolonization events, this system gradually declined, but paid forced labor, including labor contracts with forced relocation of people, continued in many regions of Portuguese Africa until it was finally abolished in 1961.[55]
I spoke generally but in this specific topic, Portugal should be fined by European Court of Human Rights for those individuals. Because it’s unlikely there are still people alive who caused this incident in the first place. So yes, ancestors, for those who didn’t commit these crimes.
The closest for fairness we can get in this is for the descendants of those who suffered getting compensation and that coming from the money inherited from those who did the deeds.
Through most of the XX Century, the vast majority of the Portuguese weren’t big land owners in the “colonies” (horrible word, by the way, but representative of that mindset), rich trading or industrial burgeoises making money from cheap raw materials, or a descendant of those: they were incredibly poor subsistence farmers who couldn’t afford shoes for their kids and put them to work by the age of 12, in a country that even got food help from The Netherlands.
In this like in every other situation were such a concept is applied, group guilt and group compensation are just going to move the injustices around and create new ones by making mainly those who are blamless and never got a cent from those actions pay for the deeds of those who never get punished - the rich from the Fascist regime and the Monarchy before it - whilst the ones that end up getting compensation are the pointy-elbow middle and upper classes in some african nations rather than the ones who need the help (and very likely deserve it) who are poor, illiterate and would have no clue how to claim the help.
I think some measure of justice needs to be done here, I just disagree with the whole group guilt approach since it’s invariably a way dilute the blame from the old wealth who are generally the one who inherited most of those historically ill gotten gains.
Colonialism is a structure, not a historical event. So it still needs to be dealt with. Just because you’re not to blame doesn’t mean you’re not the only one who can do the right thing as voting citizens. Nations that colonise absorbed wealth of other nations and that advantage can still be seen today in infrastructure that was built, wealth amassed. Museums today hold stolen artefacts and even bodies from lands they colonised.
Please don’t use ancestors as a smokescreen for what is happening right in front of our eyes.
The Germans have a guaranteed welfare system for migrants. That is one major reason they are the preferred destination, and able-bodied people who go to another country just for welfare, are not good people, which coincidentally linked to increased crime. It seems to me, white folks try hard to convince people they are not racist. Then they live safely in their gated communities.
I’m pretty sure the increased crime among refugees here in germany is largely due to the laughably long wait times (months, if you’re lucky, on average 3 years) until their case gets reviewed, and them only gettting a tiny allowance (max. 182€ per month) and not being allowed to work during that time. Of course they end up committing crimes more often in such a situation, it’s not because they are bad people.
Das kann viele Gründe haben. Rassismus in der Polizei ist nur einer davon. Heißt immer noch nicht, dass Flüchtlinge generell schlechte Menschen wären.
edit: hast du deinen Artikel eigentlich selbst gelesen?
Die überproportional vielen Ausländer unter den einer Straftat Beschuldigten erklären Soziologen und Kriminologen mit verschiedenen Ursachen. So sind die meisten Zuwanderer junge Männer, die in jeder Kriminalitätsstatistik auffällig stark vertreten sind. Hinzu kommen die bei Ausländern in Deutschland besonders oft schwierige soziale Lage und womöglich eigene Gewalterfahrungen im Herkunftsland oder während der Flucht nach Deutschland, die die Hemmschwelle zur Gewaltanwendung sinken ließen.
Zudem passierten viele Straftaten in Ausländerunterkünften und in deren Umfeld, wo einerseits die Unterbringungssituation extrem angespannt ist, andererseits Polizei und Wachschutz besonders präsent sind. Ferner haben Soziologen aufgezeigt, dass die Anzeigebereitschaft deutlich höher ist gegenüber Menschen, die als nicht zugehörig zur eigenen Gruppe wahrgenommen werden.
Das Bundeskriminalamt hält aber auch fest: Der Anteil der einer Straftat Beschuldigten unter allen Ausländern ist im vergangenen Jahr sogar gesunken Weil aber zugleich deutlich mehr Ausländer in Deutschland leben, ist die absolute Zahl ausländischer Straftäter dennoch gestiegen. Ein Zusammenhang zwischen Zuwanderung und Anzahl registrierter Straftaten ist damit offensichtlich.
Unfassbar guter Journalismus daraus so eine Überschrift herbeizudichten…
I came to say this exactly. Also I just realized that I would love to move to a beautiful beach area in one of the Pacific facing tropical countries…places where poor people migrate away from… Does that make sense? That having money protects you from climate change? If basically a middle class person from the US can be rich in these poor countries, does that mean that they are less affected? You can afford fruits and vegetables if you have money? What if more rich assholes move into the area? Do they also get to still afford fresh bananas, and strawberries? Something tells me that they would quickly saturate the area like here in Seattle where every event seems to be packed to the brim with people. There’s just a packet room no matter what you choose to do. Hiking? Shoulder to shoulder. Swimming? Sardines in a can. Etc.
We are just recovering from a similar situation here but the Overton window has shifted so far the supposed left-wing workers’ party now look like centre-right conservatives.
Well…that and the thinly repressed racism that’s been simmering in Europe for decades has finally boiled over.
Everyone in the US just kinda assumes that we’re an outlier in the racism department, but that’s just because they haven’t ever heard a drunk French man pop off about Algerian or Romani people.
For real - there’s a real strong “France for the French” thing in some areas. I was a bit shocked when I learned about it… but then again, any society is going to have its regressive elements. It’s just disconcerting to see them getting so much popular traction these days.
Are you suggesting people culturally removed from your own are a threat to you in some way?
I can rather confidently say that there are cultures with values that are a threat to me, my society and my values, yes.
Cause damn. That’d be embarrassing.
Not in the slightest.
Or are your own police not more violent to their citizens?
No. For a very long time our police was amongst the least violent in the world. Probably still is.
What is it that allowing immigrants in doesn’t improve?
It reduces the productivity of society. Most certainly on an output/capita level, probably even on a total output level. Previously we were able to afford huge amounts of support to organizations such as the UNHCR (almost 1% of GDP) - money that could be used to make the places these people are moving away from better. That isn’t the case anymore.
The solution isn’t to move everyone to developed countries, it is to improve the situation in developing countries. We can’t help with that if our country is an unstable mess of migrant gangs attacking each other and the rest of us.
lol I’d be embarrassed to have such a narrow-minded worldview. You should be too. But go on and stay stubborn, I don’t care. I’d tell you to enjoy your life, but that won’t be possible for you. Is sad.
It’s amazing how quickly you resorted to toothless personal insults when you ran out of relevant things to say. Would be sad if it wasn’t so funny. Thanks!
You’re correct. I tagged you as “low value user” and will only respond to you as such from now on, because I don’t value your opinion in any way shape or form.
Nah, but the sinking rafts bullshit is a super dangerous ploy and needs to be addressed somehow. We cant incentivize it. Maybe just jail everyone involved so no one wants to pay just to sit in an Italian prison?
I’m sure people who accept the realistic risk of drowning - most cannot swim - will be discouraged by the threat of… being in a prison with better living conditions than their home?
No, this was the right comment to respond to - your comment lacked empathy to why people might become migrants and reminded me a lot of Ebenezer Scrooge commenting on the poor without empathy to the fact that he was contributing to their poverty.
Us first-world nations play a large role in the global warming that drives climate refugees… I think it’s extremely immoral to just put up a big wall and tell people fleeing desertification to go somewhere else after making their home uninhabitable.
It doesn’t, but we’re all humans and if some of us wreck another person’s country it feels unjust to leave that person stateless.
There might be a basic misunderstanding here… at the rate climate change is going some areas of the earth that are currently inhabitable are becoming uninhabitable. There are farms being swallowed up by desert and the people who were fed by that farm have no where to go.
There are people who live in the artic and those who live in deserts. People even farm in the desert. It might not be great, but itll be more than inhabitable.
You do know that not very many people live in those places, right? It wouldn’t be sustainable. India has over a billion people and the Himalayan glaciers they depend on for water are not getting replenished.
I’m pretty sure moving from a place that has no water to a place that has water does, in fact, fix the problem. Maybe you would prefer them to just die?
Okay, so the plan is move tye entirity of china here then? All 1.4 billion people?
Thats not a reasonable goal. Even you moved in 10 percent of china, youd overwhelm every social service and everything else for that matter. And youd be leaving 90% of china to die while destroying the west’s ability to function.
Now you’re moving the goalposts. And you’ve moved them more than once already.
First you claimed that it would be sustainable for the over a billion people in India to stay where they were because it’s possible to survive in tundras and deserts.
Then you said that moving them to a place where water exists wouldn’t fix the problem of them dying due to a lack of a water.
Then you asked why water would exist in the new place, which was just a silly question for anyone who understands basic geography.
Now you’re talking about moving all of China, when China wasn’t even discussed.
And at each step, you haven’t gone back to the previous one and acknowledged it was a silly thing to say.
I never said India, this is the first comment india was uttered. Youre the one that brought up glaciers. And China is largely watered by glaciers, its the logical next part in the discussion. And even it was India, they also have over a billion people and you face the same problem with simply too many people.
Do you know what the word sustainability means, though?
Or are you just piling us all into one stereotype and now I have to starve along with everyone else while the rich that caused the problem are the only ones that can afford to live?
This is xmunk’s secret plan for cleansing migrants and low socioeconomic majorities off the planet. Put them all in areas that can’t logistically support them until only those that could afford to survive remain. The same that ruined the climate.
Yup, I’m an evil villain. In actuality I just don’t believe in borders or nationalities - being born into a western country is an extreme advantage and it’s a matter of fucking chance. I dislike discriminating based on country of origin and I think we should strive to ensure everyone gets as equitable a chance at success as we can.
Also, our climate isn’t under pressure because we’re at the population limit for earth - climate change is happening because of greed. In theory we can fucking fix it if we work together.
Living in a stable safe country is a privilege we’re born into, much like inheriting a trust fund. It’s an ethical duty to take in people in a less fortunate position. The emphasis should not be on numbers of immigrants so much as better integration once they’re here. And also on helping less fortunate countries (yes I realise why they aren’t as fortunate) become more developed. People don’t tend to migrate if the place they live is good. Oil wars are not helpful.
I think its not ethical to just let in everyone who was born in a third world country. That doesnt even make sense, its just not sustainable, fucks a lot of things up, and doesnt solve problems for anyone. It makes their country worse, make our country worse, what is the plan here?
No clearly, but people don’t usually want to leave their home country to live. It’s usually just people who are displaced or academics. A good solution would be offering scholarships to gifted students from developing countries on the condition that they then use that education within their home country. But in the case of war /persecution, yes every country needs to do their part. Integration classes actually help.
Just look at the difference between Norway and Sweden. Norway has compulsory classes for non eea immigrants to learn about what it means to live in Norway and will actually help people get into work. Sweden sticks them in husby and puts them on benefits. Which country has more problems?
The alternative would be helping those countries most affected to prevent migrations from happening. In practice, that would look like giving them [Shitloads] of (www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8694300/) money .
Like, regardless of ethics, those people will not stop existing once climate change makes their homelands unlivable. The two available plans appear to be “solve climate change as rapidly as possible and bootstrap poor countries up to developed countries pro Bono” or “shoot migrants at the border”.
We should tell right wingers that if they don’t stop climate change there’s gonna be more migrants. That will unironically work better than warning them about the world ending.
Yes they do. Did you know, in healthcare, they can do this with all the nurses in more than half the states? It’s about whether or not your state has rules against it. The ones who have restricted it recognize how dangerous it is for patient safety. Kids have died because of errors made in these scenarios. And that’s just the publicized court case stuff. I’m sure grandma, with a no CPR choice logged in her chart, gets swept under the rug or not noticed as an aberration.
Hospital administration is cheap so they’ll use it as a standard staffing strategy rather than call an outside, more expensive agency, to fill in, when the state lets them.
These are usually the same states that do not have lunch break laws.
So you can get a nurse: post-surgical, ICU, ER, or elsewhere who hasn’t slept in 24hrs. Hasn’t eaten anything in 15hrs. Maybe longer, because these people have kids and go to class. There’s no sleeping between call lights, they have to be attentive for the duration.
They’re tapped on the shoulder about an hour or two before shift end and told they’re staying. On penalty of abandonment on their license.
Idk about you, but I can’t read words at about 18hrs. Working tired is like working drunk. This is scary.
That’s what I want when I’ve been in a bad car accident and need to be hospitalized. My safety in the hands of one person who is in their 21st hour awake and hasn’t eaten for 10-12hrs because nothing that sells food is open at night, including the hospital cafeteria. Even the food prep crowd is screwed on this one.
Another fun fact. At night, hospitals run with a skeleton crew of docs. Normally, this is fine. You have competent help, read: nurses, who can see and predict the patient having problems and can then call the doc, or page an emergency overhead and get even more people for the patient. Enter mandatory overtime nurse. How well is he going to do on this while essentially working drunk?
But hey, if it saves corporate a buck then it’s worth playing this game of Russian roulette, amiright?
Most Americans are trying to get their children into schools in China so they can move there long term. Chinese people are migrating to North Korea but it’s hard for Americans to get visas there.
Edit: for the people who seem to be misunderstanding me, I want to be quite clear. Practically every American would move to North Korea to enjoy advanced society, peaceful and prosperous, if they could, only they don’t meet the strict criteria for a visa. There are a small and ever-shrinking handful who would stay in America given the chance to emigrate, but they’re either hard-line idealists who believe in the long-term rehabilitation of their country, or deluded. Most of the major demographics surveys have confirmed this, and any media that disputes it is already known to be carefully overseen by anti-humanitarian pseudo-state-funded conspirators.
Do you have a source for that? I’ve heard of folks being sent to China for a work appointment, and therefore looking for schools for their kids, but never Americans just straight up moving there to make a go of it, and place their kids
Edit and I assume when you say “most Americans” you mean “most Americans already interested in living in China” not “most Americans” because the latter would be a comical statement.
Most Americans are trying to get their children into schools in China
lol wut? I’ve not met a single person trying to get their kids into schools in China. All the people I know who have immigrated from China are like “fuck that place, but I love going back because it’s my home and my family is there.”
Remember what Disney taught you. “Just Believe!” When you believe, it’ll be true, and all the occasional people you meet who aren’t heading to China will be unusual outliers.
Listen to your feelings. You know it to be true. Everyone wants to move to China. Just Believe!
That bubble also includes everywhere I have been which covers a good chunk of the west coast, southwest, and northeast. Where are these people that want to move to China? I think the only spots we haven’t covered is like Alabama and Oklahoma? So maybe they are there?
They’re all the people you haven’t talked to. Practically every American. You’ve probably not even talked to 1% of Americans seriously about whether they want to move to China. Idk man, you’re just bad at statistics or something.
*Disclaimer: I have never been to America but I’m sure I’m right.
I realize you’re being facetious, but you make an interesting point. That being said, I can recall having conversations about people wanting to move to many different states (ca, ma, co, tx, fl, hi, at least). And I’ve even heard people talk about wanting to move to different countries (india, Spain, Ireland, Germany, Brazil, at least) and I’ve never heard anyone say they want to move to China. I’ve had 3 close coworkers from China and asking them if they want to move back to China, they all laughed at the idea and essentially said “fuck no.” My Indian colleagues seem to be mixed on the idea of returning to their homeland.
People who have experienced various other countries want to settle in the US. People here who haven’t been elsewhere, idolize the idea of X country and post about wishing they could go, knowing deep down they wouldn’t even if they won the lottery and could go anywhere.
So, I was telling the truth when I said I’ve never been to America; but I have lived in Asia and most people I know would gladly move to America if they had the chance. They love their homeland - some of them, at least! But “America” or similar sounds like a better life, and who doesn’t want a better life? Unfortunately there’s a lot of feeling of hopelessness about improving things, so even those who try to improve their home area easily burn out and often skip out if they can.
Many Westerners (orders of magnitude fewer) do want Asian visas, but mostly only because they have specific desire to help. Again, they love the Asian country they move to, but it’s usually with the idea in the back of their minds that they can move back home when the time is right or if they need to. I can’t speak for those who stay in Asia because they’re disillusioned with their home country: such people are around but I don’t often meet them.
lol no they’re not. North Korea is like a real-life SNL skit and China’s population and real estate will implode in a couple decades. You can’t even tell what’s sarcasm anymore because after Trump told them it’s okay, the stupid people are coming out in hordes.
Well, luckily I’ve never met this Trump, so any stupid in me is my own bona fide stupid :-p
Are… Are you sure you’re not itching to go to North Korea? Perhaps you’re just in denial? I mean, I’ve not been there myself but people keep saying we should look out for Korea opportunities, and I have this low, ominous feeling about going South, so I think NK must be good.
Besides, I saw SNL once and it was funny. Sounds like an endorsement from you for NK!
Thank you, but I can hear my digestive noises quite fine without warping time and space to bend my anterior to my posterior.
And those digestive noises do say, that every American desires a better life in North Korea, but will settle for China as second best. Don’t your digestive noises say the same thing?
The Georgian Republic is also called Sakartwelo. The US-state named after some 18th century British monarch is hopefully not renamed to Savannah or something, creating more confusion…
Gee, the title sure is sensationalist. Nothing has been ‘won’ yet. The actual percentage here don’t matter, the system works using two rounds in each circonscription (subdiv of France which can elect 1 MP). What really matters now is who will call to vote for who. The NFP (Left Alliance) leaders said no vote for Far Right, and Macron (in spite of how much he shat on the left) called for a ‘grand coalition against the RN’ (RN being Far Right here).
And I’ll repeat it as many times as it takes 34% IS FAR FROM 50% (The RN is unlikely to find allies, as all the traitors of the trad right wing party have already gone to them)
Edit: forgot to mention that not all votes have been counted yet, the big cities finishing up later, which will likely drive the NFP’s score up and RN’s down.
34% is already lower than what they polled (and it will go down more as cities’ vote get counted). Though, you are right, the normalization of Far Right IS scary af. But it’s not a recent thing in France, it started nearly two decades ago, but surged to an extreme during the past few years esp with:
Bolloré (our own personal Murdock) bought more and more media, fired the journalists, and put propagandist in their place.
Macron started taking Far Right’s talking points (immigration), language (‘national preference’, which is a concept that makes no sense) and methods (just two days ago, his party made, published and propagated on social media a fake ‘NUPES’ (name of the last Left Alliance) website to calculate one’s future pension based on their ‘program’. As it turns out, the calculations were not based off their program at all and was nearly always defavorable to the person)
Macron, when asked about the surge of Far Right, had only one response: bUt WhAt aBoUt tHe LeFt? (And goes on and on to try and sell a ‘both sides’ to try and make himself more popular. Spoilers: it didn’t work) It’s also why it’s refreshingly suprirsing to not hear him bash ‘theLleft’ tonight, and instead call on everyone to vote against Far Right.
FWIW, I'm seeing projections based on the counts that still have them at 34, but I guess we'll see.
I agree that a resurrection of the cordon sanitaire is probably a positive and I agree that Macron was extremely clumsy, like much of the EU's centre and demochristian right, in sliding towards far right positions they just can't defend any better than the actual fascists. But still, from an international perspective France is now firmly in the club of Central European countries with a major fascist problem in a way it wasn't yesterday, even if the outcome was already understood to be going this way.
The vote finished in the night and we got the official results now. Paris voted massively NFP and Renaissance, so Far Right is now at 29.3% while NFP is just behind them at 28.0%. Honestly? Given the polls we had, RN is lower than anyone could have hoped.
I’m kind of surprised this image of France having a Far Right issue is only becoming a thing now though. These results are close (if not better for non far right voters) than the last 2022 Presidentals, and Far Right already had a huge score in 2017.
Thanks for the link! International press is still running the 33% estimate they probably got from the French morning papers or have taken down the results, so my references hadn't updated the number.
For the record, the image is not new, there was a lot of international coverage regarding Le Pen's presidential chances in 2022. But presidentials are presidentials, only one person gets to win. Legislatives raise a lot of questions about parliamentary dynamics, alliances and the potential for the second round to generate another bout of Macron shooting himself in the foot followed by him shooting everybody else in the foot for good measure. That, and there is more paranoia about the tilt right across the EU and internationally about the US.
These days it seems there’s a rough third of the population in most places that’s stupid and/or bigoted enough to vote for shit like this. Those numbers don’t shock me. But I’m hoping France proves more resistant at the national level to the hyperconservative/neofascist resurgence at the we’re seeing in a distressing number of countries.
Our current republic was founded by de Gaule, and our constitution was written by him as well. The thing, he’s a millitary general, who (much like a good chunk of the French population at the time) held disdain toward parlementarism, due to the lack of stability of the Fourth Republic.
What that means? Our current system has much of the power concentrated in the hands of the gov (see 49.3 and to some extend 47.1 where the PM can just decide to override anu vote on law. It was something taboo, only used a fair few times before Macron, like once in 2014(?) and it ruined the PM (at the time Manuel Vals)‘s carrier. Macron used it dozens of times throughout his years as President), leaving the National assembly with little manuveur than the censor motion (dissolves the current gov, but leaves the president in power).
That and Macron preparing to sell our public media and hospital to the private certainly don’t give me mich confidence in that regards if the RN were to win (’ •_•)
It’s extremely frustrating watching this happen in all of our countries. It’s even more frustrating that a lot of us saw it coming and have been concerned for years, even decades.
dw.com
Top