It’s hard for westerners to understand honor based moral codes, but that’s exactly how it works. You can disgrace someone’s honor by doing bad things to them and it’s not really a fault thing, it’s more about protecting honor and it’s preservation a virtue.
This is how honor killings work, it’s part of systems designed to restore individual or family honor by killing someone who is disgraced.
There are several models of morality, not just the individualist morality models we understand intuitively.
Fuck the AfD Voters…I’ve been destroying years of friendships, because it turns out they voted AfD. I’m sick and tired of these fuckers enabling these clowns. This is definitely not my Germany anymore.
The friendship purge hurts… it’s tough to see that people you knew for years are lost like that.
I also feel kind of helpless with the current political climate. I don’t get why people are so hateful and stupid otherwise they would see right through the BS Höcke et al are making up all the time >.<
It sucks, for sure. As an American, I went through this back in 2016, and in the years since - with another notable wave occurring after January 6th.
It’s frustrating, but I genuinely do feel a moral duty to aggressively shun and abuse fascists, no matter how long I’ve known them or how I’m related to them before I found out.
It’s not just a moral duty, it’s a damn duty for your country. Those idiots shouting “We are the true patriots” have lost everything both our countries stood for since we lost the war and you won it. The respect for people, the respect for different cultures, the knowledge that many of the laws our societes stand on are written in blood - hell, the respect to disagree and the ability do have different opinions.
I have no issue if political views don’t line up, in fact I welcome discussions and I have been wrong many times on some topics. However, the line has to be drawn somewhere, and that somewhere is openly advocating for racism or other views, that simply cannot stand in a society that aligns with modern “western” views. (Too many individual points that we take for granted these days)
I totally sympathize. A lot of us Americans had to do the same thing back in 2016. I cut off contact with a lot of people and have never gotten back in touch.
do you need to condescendingly question other people’s freedom of expression? if you pearl clutch over seeing a comment which says ‘fuck’, maybe the internet is a little much for you to handle.
If dropping an F-bomb is your pinnacle of free speech, maybe you need a refresher on mature discussions. The internet might be too advanced for you if that’s the best you’ve got
Orbán’s visit to Putin has EU leaders fuming, accusing him of undermining European unity. Classic U.S. spin: make Russia the villain at every turn.
Orbán’s actions show not all EU countries are in lockstep, but the U.S. media is quick to twist this into their preferred narrative. It’s all about keeping things black and white for their own agenda. Nothing new.
Actually, The Guardian is not just a “publication,” it’s a British newspaper. But thanks for the geography lesson. And by the way, whether it’s British or not doesn’t change the fact that the UK media often mirrors Washington’s stance. Keep up with the grown-ups next time.
I’ve watched maybe 6-8 hr+ interviews of his. Like, if he could have just abandoned the nutjob schtick after getting to 10% in the polls, he easily could be contending for the office right now when both candidates are as deeply unpopular as they are. But its like a bad penny he just can’t give up. Like he just won’t stop doubling down on some absolutely wackadoodle positions.
This was probably the “best case scenario” year for a third party run of all time with how bad the two current options are. If he could just shut the fuck up, he would probably be polling at 30+ percent.
He’s an anti-vax piece of shit. No amount of white washing his history or tightening up his talking points for public events would ever convince me to even consider for one second voting for that monster. If he ever polls at even 20% this country is so beyond fucked. Tinfoil hats are our #1 export at this point I swear.
Oh 100%. I’m just making points from a purely Machiavellian/ real politik point of view.
I think he could have used the idiot/ anti-vax crowd to get to 10%, then abandoned them to move from 10 % to 25-30% by shifting/ reforming his positions. Instead he just doubled down on the nutjob shit. That nutjob shit will get you to 10% but it wont get you past that.
None of that sounds nearly as unnerving as the insurrectionist convicted felon that Putin and other fascist nationalist organizations want to place into power who’s polling around 45%
When one side is obviously right and the other side is obviously crazy…. “Not taking sides” says the crazy side has the same merit as the obviously correct side.
Not surprising. He was sadly too divisive to be a widely-popular Labour leader, but afaik he’s well-liked by his actual constituents, and this backs that up.
If someone being consistent with Labour’s values is too divisive to lead Labour, there can’t be Labour at all. I disagree with some of his stances, but what this man suffered wasn’t internal opposition, it was political assassination.
They basically did something similar to what happened to Bernie with the DNC. they did a full court press antisemitism campaign against him, but like many of the charges of antisemitism in the US right now, it was largely based on criticism of Israeli policy AFAIK.
Edit: to clarify—they ousted him because labor was looking ascendant, and the more centrist and corporatist elements of labor could not stomach the idea of actually having a PM that wanted to do left wing things that aligned with the theoretical purpose of the labor party, so they took him out by getting enough articles published in the famously above-board uk media to force him from leadership.
To add, the vast majority of the antisemitism complaints involved other Labour ministers liking and posting anti-Israel Tweets that were consider too extreme. These ranged from ones that “crossed the line” of criticism against Israeli policy and the Israel lobby in the UK (some of which you can read in the report on pages 27-30) to ones that allegedly blamed Jewish members of the Labour party for making false complaints, or even tried to dimish the Holocaust (although I can’t find the exact details of those).
Either way, none of the complaints involved Corbyn himself but his reputation was tarnished and it made him an easy target for his opponents.
Just to illustrate the nature of that campaign, at one point and in order to accuse Corbyn of being anti-semitic, they said that he had sat on a panel in a conference where one of the members of the same panel compared the actions of Israel to those of the Nazis, “hence” (by association) Corbyn was an anti-semite.
The thing is, said member of the panel who compared the actions of Israel to those of the Nazis was a Jewish Holocaust Survivor.
If such words made Corbyn an anti-semite by association then, having said such words, said panel member would even more so have to be an anti-semite.
In other words, the anti-Corbyn campaign was so rabid ragingly extremist and sleazy that they were accused a Jewish Holocaus Survivor of being an anti-semite in order to try to taint Corbyn by association.
PS: And, by the way, this very newspaper - The Guardian - was an active participant in that campaign and published this slander, amongst others.
He was sadly too divisive to be a widely-popular Labour leader
Bullshit. He was elected leader because people wanted to go back to the party’s left wing roots.
The Blairite Neoliberal wing of the party didn’t like that, so they ousted him with a smear campaign calling him “divisive” (read: agrees more with the broader population than with the neoliberal establishment and their rich owner donors) and “antisemitic” (read: isn’t in the pocket of the fascist apartheid regime, has empathy for their Palestinian victims)
In 2017, under Corbyn, Labour got over 40% of the vote compared to about 34% yesterday. Even in 2019 under Corybyn, Labour got like 32%. The narrative in Britain might be that Corbyn was too divisive and Starmer is a unifier but the real issue is that the right wing was split this time in ways it wasn’t under Boris Johnson.
I mean, say what you want about Corbyn — lord knows the garbage UK media will — but his Labour Party did very well once and about average the next time. The main issue is that using a “first past the post” system in a country with more than 2 parties is silly and undemocratic.
As with the legislative removal of former President Collor from office once again Brazil is demonstrating to the U.S. that you can actually enact Democratic policies and enforce legal due process.
Has the US Supreme Court been reached for comment? I mean, technically, it isn’t in the US Constitution that the Brazillian President isn’t allowed to launder money.
theguardian.com
Active