barsoap

@barsoap@lemm.ee

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

barsoap,

the germanic honor-culture has survived here and we value doing the right/honorable thing more than anything else.

If you were the Swedish kind of neutral I’d accept that, but you’re the Swiss kind of neutral. You may have stopped selling weapons to both sides of a conflict, you may have even stopped providing offshore accounts for both sides of the conflict, but the overall attitude of “eh it’s not in Switzerland it doesn’t matter” is still around. Heck, you still harbour Nestle. At least you had the sense to go after Steinmetz, though.

barsoap, (edited )

They’re overpaying for them. Which then makes companies calculate “we could sell a lot of product at small profit margins to the general vegetarian and flexi public” vs. “we could not invest in production capacity and charge affluent urban vegans and arm and a leg” and guess what they’re going for.

The reason why there’s tons of almond etc. milks costing 3-4 times as much per litre as actual milk is not because of subsidies. It’s because vegans are stupid enough to buy 20 cents of ingredients for that price.

barsoap,

“wait why did I support this and then stop the second they said ‘dog’?

It’s a bad idea in general to eat predators because the higher up the food chain you go the higher the chance you’ll contract an illness. Humans are not alone at all among predators to practically only go after grazers, and not other predators. We leave the rest to carrion eaters who specialise to deal with all kinds of nasty stuff.

People thinking that this is some kind of grand ethical-philosophical argument or conundrum just shows how alienated they are from the ways of nature.

barsoap,

Ok. We’re on the prairie. There’s literally nothing here to eat but bison, though somehow you’ve got it into your head that you can eat grass. Fine, we’ll let you try for a bit until you come to your senses. Two weeks later your digestion is fucked, you’re lethargic, and we have to carry you.

You, MindTraveller, have just become a burden to the whole group, lowering all of our chances of survival, all over some so-called “principle”. I know of gods, I know of spirits, if your principles are anything like that then certainly they must be evil. Maybe shaming won’t help to drive them out, we can try other rites, but if nothing helps then we will have to leave you behind.

barsoap,

In certain areas it has practical know-how we don’t. CATL is a good example. Not just their sodium-ion batteries, but their production processes in general. We might be able to readily reproduce their battery chemistries in a lab but that’s not the same as having an industrial production process and the experience from ironing out all the kinks that feed back into basic research. With a joint venture, you can tap into that stuff.

If we had invested as heavily in the tech as they did we probably would be ahead right now but we didn’t so we aren’t. If they had invested as much into fusion as we did – oh wait they did. They’re behind, Max Planck is currently looking into the details of building a commercially viable reactor in the early 2030s, they’re confident to have the plasma physics down now it’s about stuff like “do we use a cheap material for the diverters and replace them often or do we develop/use something fancy”, that is, about actual operational costs.

barsoap,

I mean China can’t really do anything about the autonomous mainland provinces steadfastly refusing to declare independence, even if you can find precedent of a sovereign state kicking out its provinces unilaterally it’d still be a dick move.

barsoap,

The one China policy is first and foremost about the principle that there is only one China. Hence the name: That the Republic of China and the People’s Republic of China are still locked in a civil war, that neither declared independence from the other. There is no “reuniting” because you cannot unite what is not split, they’re still one.

Which is a rather different situation from divided Germany: The East declared independence as a new state, and the West accepted it. The West still considered Eastern citizens who made their way across the border her own citizens, but there was no “you can’t have your own sovereign state” stuff going on, from either side. Upon reunification the East re-introduced its federal states, which then jointly but individually joined the West, leaving the East without territory and people which thus vanished in a puff of how international law defines the concept of a state.

The Mainland could pull an East Germany and declare independence at any time, Taipei would accept it. Some old-guard Kuomintang would gripe but they’d get over it. Taipei declaring independence makes no sense… independence from whom? Imperial China? They won that struggle before the PRC even existed. It’s the PRC which is rebel faction in the civil war, you don’t declare independence from rebels if then you grant them independence and, well, the rebels don’t want independence.

barsoap,

Western Germany recognized the border between Poland - the Oder-Neisse line in 1970.

There was no final settlement until 1990. Because you cannot give up claims on territory you don’t actually control, the ROC is in a similar situation with Mongolia. In Germany’s case there’s the additional complication that until 1990, occupation statutes still applied.

This implied there was only one Germany, in area and population greater than just Western Germany.

No, it didn’t. First off, the preamble isn’t actually part of the constitution, secondly, it did not in any way or form claim rule or sovereignty over the Eastern states. “We’d like to re-absorb those territories” is a different thing than “those territories remain ours”.

Also, German public broadcast used the upper left map for weather reporting up until the 70s, when they switched to the one on the top right without any borders.

Until the early 60s, both sides claimed to be the successor state to the German Empire, the GDR dropped that claim with the construction of the wall. After literally a decade of discussion the West changed to the Neue Ostpolitik in the early 70s and recognised the GDR as a separate state in its territory but did not change its own self-conception as successor state of the Empire. With that it also stopped applying the Hallstein doctrine, stopped to consider other states recognising the GDR as sovereign to be a hostile act.

Then came the two-state period, then there was a revolution in the GDR and while we call it reunification, legally it was the absorption of federal states which happen to be on the territory of the now-former GDR into the constitutional framework of the FRG. Nothing special, happened before with Saarland. If you want to draw a parallel to China I guess you can make one: To the until 1960 situation, with the PRC saying “There’s going to be trouble, ROC, if you move to any other position, it’s the status quo or proper unification no alternative”.

Also, German public broadcast

…is not controlled by the government, least of all the federal government which is responsible, or at least co-responsible, for all foreign policy (but religion and culture because there the federal states are completely sovereign). It does reflect the political attitude back then: That the status quo borders were “arbitrary” and until there’s a better set, the old ones still somehow apply even if it doesn’t match the situation on the ground. The switch in 1970 was the broadcasters throwing their hands up in the air.

And you know what I think the map until 1970 is missing the border to Denmark if I’m not mistaken.

barsoap,

Shit being uncomfortable has no relation to whether it’s true or not.

barsoap,

Maybe not for him, he very well might lose his neolib majority in the assembly, but looks like it’ll definitely pay off for France.

barsoap,

Without snap elections the right would have torn him apart and endangered his foreign policy. The left is going to be a headache for him when it comes to internal policy… but OTOH also stop people from burning cars in the street with their policies. And they’re quite likely to back him when it comes to Ukraine, his grand plan to Europeify French strategic autonomy, all that stuff.

Guy is still a man of boundless ambition and still wants to go down in history, and he can still do that with a left-dominated national assembly. Pension policy isn’t exactly a corner stone to his visions for the history books, it’s negotiable. Also just for the record it would be mistaken to have the impression that Macron thinks he’s the second coming of Napoleon: Completely to the contrary, he thinks that Napoleon was the first coming of Macron.

barsoap,

Melenchon is definitely not in favour of Russia keeping Ukraine. If I were him I’d take the chance of left unification to silently give up all my previous positions on the Russsia/Ukraine thing. France overall is less hawkish than Macron when it comes to boots on the ground, when it comes to NATO – Remember when Macron called NATO braindead? Melenchon doesn’t like EU austerity politics and such stuff but he’s not an Eurosceptic, he just wants a different Europe. His opposition to a European army was rooted in “an army against what”, again, he should use the chance to make people forget what he said about Russia in the past, if he really wants to get out of NATO strengthening European security integration is the way to go. Though personally I think it’s a good idea to have Europe overall in NATO after all someone has to keep somewhat of a leash on the US.

In any case foreign policy and security is presidential prerogative in France, Macron doesn’t need the assembly to do anything there – and the assembly doesn’t need Macron to do other stuff. If either of the sides is smart they’ll agree to disagree on a couple of things and not oppose each other too heavily, table any remaining issues until 2027 (next presidential elections).

barsoap,

He condemned the invasion but yes his policies on the issue are generally shit. He’s also not terribly popular as a unifying figurehead and candidate for becoming prime minister, though.

Basically it’s the same vulgar pacifism that you also see from some European lefties elsewhere, “we need to give diplomacy a chance”. I would be absolutely in favour of that if Russia ever gave it a chance, and if those chucklefucks wouldn’t completely ignore Ukraine’s sovereignty and instead substitute some “It’s the CIA, again” narrative.

barsoap,

Deliberately targeting civilians qualifies as terrorist and that’s exactly what they’ve been doing. There’s also no need, like, not a single need or even excuse, to associate the Palestinian cause specifically with Hamas. It’s like turning up at an environmentalist rally with a sign glorifying the Unabomber.

barsoap, (edited )

Banderites were fascists and contributed to plenty of massacres but they also fought the Nazis because they didn’t feel like bending the knee to Hitler, unlike, say, the Ustaša. In that sense they weren’t collaborationists. It’s why the whole national hero emotionality surrounding Bandera gets so frustratingly complicated.

Makhno is a much more suitable national hero but he was on nobody’s mind as the very idea or existence of Anarchism was suppressed in the USSR while Bandera was a suitable boogeyman. “Enemy of my oppressor is my hero” kind of mechanism.

barsoap, (edited )

IDF, yes. US military, no. One is deliberately targetting civilians, the other fails to give sufficient fuck about avoiding civilian casualties, those two things are not the same. The US is not saying “let’s kill civilians so they become scared and do what we tell them”, they’re saying “huh why are they suddenly angry at us”? There’s a naive innocence to it, you have to judge the US military using juvenile law.

barsoap,

When it comes to those numbers – on both sides, btw – it’s important to note that neither side is consuming media that is in any shape or form neutral. Journalists on both sides rely on people tuning in so even the most well-intentioned are forced to be, at the very least, quite selective in their reporting. The whole situation is too awash with propaganda for things to play out differently, putting an edge to it if you see that the other side is accusing your side of sacrificing children to Satan and eating them, you’re not very likely to believe their accusations of your fighters indiscriminately killing civilians.

barsoap,

Are the civilian victims less dead? Do their families feel differently?

No, and no. But intent still matters. Afghans learned that when you stand next to the wrong type of person, you could be hit, that if you stumbled across the wrong spot, like a hidden US observation post while herding your sheep, you could be hit.

There’s at least a plausible connection to military necessity. The US approach helps them fuck all when it comes to winning hearts and minds, and you’re still breeding resistance by eliminating that shepherd who stumbled across your position instead of calling a chopper to evacuate and relocate, but the people overall don’t feel like they’re being exterminated – because they aren’t. Because in the end, the US does have restraint, sometimes even to the degree that they’re willing to lose a battle over it, that was the case in Afghanistan for Taliban etc. holed up in Mosques.

That is, there’s insufficient regard for the civilian population on the US side, they’re prioritising tactical military goals too much – but not completely. The IDF doesn’t even know what regard for civilians is. The US is court marshalling soldiers left and right when they misbehave, Israel is applying military law to 10yold Palestinians who lobbed a stone at a tank, dishing out decade-long sentences. US soldiers carry sweets to hand out to kids. Those two attitudes are not the same, and if you think they are, you’re trivialising genocide.

barsoap,

Two, how the fuck are rural Afghanis supposed to know who’s on the CIA kill list?

The fuck does the CIA have to do with anything. And you don’t need to be a genius to infer that hanging out with insurgent commanders is not a safe thing to do.

How stupid do you think Afghans are. Do you think that they are capable of language, of exchanging observations and experiences and drawing collective conclusions from them.

Motherfucker.

If you kill civilians with an air force, that’s “collateral damage”. If you kill them with a truck bomb, that’s “terrorism”.

Bullshit. In both cases, collateral damage is if alongside with the enemy commander or whatever, any legitimate target, you take out civilians. It’s in the world “collateral”. Look it up. If you’re targeting civilians directly that’s not collateral.

barsoap,

Military “intelligence” has a lot of holes in it to rely on it as an authority on who lives or dies-- and that’s before we even get into “collateral”.

And that is why Germany’s kill lists had juridical oversight, and collateral damage was not measured in civilians but “people who at least look like they’re probably fighters”. The Taliban also once sent the Bundeswehr an apology letter, saying “Some idiots of ours thought your convoy was a US one hope you’re not mad”.

You seem to be under the impression that I’m defending the US approach, I’m not. What I am doing is contrasting it to the IDF while you’re engaged in trivialising IDF actions by insinuating the US is even half as bad. Even in Vietnam it wasn’t as bad as the IDF is right now. US military intelligence blindly believing random accusations? The IDF doesn’t even need those accusations to target you. Stochastic terrorism is part of their strategy.

Can you get it into your head that this isn’t a simple, binary, “good” and “bad” thing, that there’s degrees to everything?

barsoap,

IDF is worse than Hamas because of the context.

Hamas very much is an occupying force, too. They’ve been brutalising Gaza for quite a while and are very very happy with the result of October 7th. It got the exact response they wanted it to have, what’s luckily missing is the reaction among Palestinians they wanted it to have, those accelerationist fucks. “Make Israel crack down harder to make the population madder”.

Can you please stop that campism it’s brainrot. Just because fascists happen to be on the underdog side doesn’t make them in any way worthy of supporting, fascists love fighting other fascists as they can reinforce their respective holds over their own population.

barsoap, (edited )

Hamas and the variety of militias comprise the Palestinian armed resistance to Israeli occupation.

No. Generally speaking, that’s the role of the PLO, a bunch of secular lefties and also Palestine’s representative to the UN, which Hamas very much is not a part of. Hamas is an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood, rabidly Islamist, very much more interested in martyrdom than liberation, more interested in making sure that male hair dressers don’t serve female customers for whatever fucked-up reason, and also very much funded with the at least aid of Israel. Because the PLO has too much foreign goodwill.

Note that I’m saying here “Hamas” as in the organisation. Individual fighters might indeed have better motives, and individual paramedics definitely have better motives. But the middle to upper levels of the organisation, the strategists, the mullahs? Islamofascist, the lot of them. Not a single bit better than the Kahanites on the other side. They love each other, as the existence of the other means their war indeed can be eternal (see Umberto Eco). There can be no Israeli security without Palestinian freedom, and there also can’t be Palestinian freedom without Israeli safety. The rest of Palestinians generally understand that, Hamas refuses to acknowledge it.

You know what you’re doing right now? You’re applauding the Mujahideen because they can be used to fight against the Soviets, blind to the Taliban you’re creating. You’re using the same fucked-up US doctrine that you slammed a few comments earlier. As said: Stop that “enemy of my enemy” campist bullshit.

barsoap,

They are following their strategy, not yours. Your bloodlust doesn’t matter.

barsoap,

It’s you who’s equating having military capacity and using it. It’s you who’s equating resisting occupation with massacring far-left hippie Kibbutzim who were out there in Gaza, helping Palestinians left and right, and on the 7th you probably also made fun of them having a rave.

The average Palestinian is channelling Ghandi hardcore and all you care about is giving Kahanites pretext for genocide while freeing them of the inconvenient lefty voices within Israel. That is what your support for Hamas does, critical or otherwise, because that’s what they’re doing. There were plenty of other targets in reach, plenty of other civilian targets, Hamas chose the hippies. Why?

barsoap,

Fuck noble how about strategically opportune. Is that a thing you can do, prioritise strategy and the achievement of aims over your bloodlust.

barsoap,

Have you actually ever had a look at what Palestinians say. Their political discourse. Would be a much more useful use of your time than mindlessly parroting thought-terminating cliches such as “If you are against bombing hippie civilians you’re pro genocide”.

Do you seriously think you know better what to do than Palestinians themselves. Is that some white saviour shit or something.

barsoap,

No. Which doesn’t have to do with anything. I also didn’t ask you to move there to have an opinion, all I asked you to do was you reading up a bit on Palestinian politics. Was that so unthinkable a suggestion that you need to get all defensive now and attempt to deflect.

barsoap,

I am aware of the limitations of my own perspective,

Then be aware of the average attitude of Palestinians towards stoking the bear, will you, instead of coming here with an attitude of “The PLO is invalid because they’re not fighting they’re complicit in their own genocide”, as you very much insinuated.

Because, you know, being aware of the limitations of your own perspective includes not running your mouth when you haven’t done your research.

barsoap,

You’re still putting complete trust into Google by using any android that isn’t thoroughly de-googled, built from scratch, and installed on a jailbroken phone. They’re integrated on the OS level they can do whatever they want.

barsoap,

I’m confused why would you need a phone to pay via NFC. All you need is your card.

barsoap,

Last I checked making a statement stating that you’re confused about something counts, semantically, as a question. No question mark needed.

But, fine, if you don’t want to tell me you don’t have to. I’m able to contain my curiosity. Certainly can’t put my ID, driver’s license, cash, and a hair tie into my phone. Nor, for that matter, put my phone into an ATM.

barsoap, (edited )

You usually wouldn’t use genitive, though, but dative: “Die Filmnacht meiner Freundin und mir” (the movie night [of] mine[gen.] gf and me[gen.]). Which a bit confusingly turns into straight nominative in English, “The movie night of my gf and I”, I’m usually very insistent on putting objective everywhere I can but “the movie night of whom” really doesn’t sound right. Don’t ask me why do I look like a linguist.

Alternatively, sufficiently nordic, “Meiner Freundin und mir unsere Filmnacht”, which’d be “mine gf and I our movie night”… by proxy via “Mien leevste un ik uns Filmnacht”, that is, Low Saxon, where the construction comes from. Trying to match the Standard German rendering up with English case-wise is breaking my brain. Low Saxon has the exact same case structure as English so I’m declaring it correct. Or is it “un mi” / “and me”? It shouldn’t. But I’ve spent way too much time thinking about it so now I’m unsure.

barsoap, (edited )

Yes it is the lowest form of participation and that’s also why there’s no excuse not to cast your ballot. Unless the ballot literally gets stuffed, turn up, if you can’t bring yourself to vote for any of the parties with reasonable chances vote for a satirical or random micro party. The animal protection one seems to be popular in Germany, heck they might get a seat and cause something to happen from the opposition benches, I rather have an opposition full of vegans than full of Nazis. That failing, invalidate your ballot. Nothing too untoward, ballot counters aren’t your enemy.

barsoap, (edited )

Regarding trolls in general, and especially troll feeding, a couple of hackers figured out how to deal with them ages ago (in German): Throw comments into a bayes filter (like those spam filters), have them rank it according to what it learned and, most importantly: Don’t just block the comment. Have the user solve a captcha. The more incited the thread is, the more the post looks like trolling or responding to a troll, the more often randomly fail the captcha.

Thus you make the unwanted behaviour annoying, people often simply say “nah it’s not worth it”, but on the flip side you’re also circumventing accusations of censorship. Trolls, now having lost the massive reaction they so crave, and themselves having to jump through captcha hoops, migrate to darker pastures.

No right wing wave in Finland as Left Alliance take record result in EU elections (yle.fi)

Finland’s results in the European election bucked a continent-wide trend of rising support for parties on the outer fringe of right-wing politics, with the Left Alliance and the National Coalition winning big at the expense of the nationalist Finns Party....

barsoap,

Winter is the nice season in Finland, the other one is swamp season.

barsoap,

Oh no they didn’t copy from the UK, it’s a thing going back straight to Vichy France. Have a look at the biography of this character.

barsoap,

I’m not a fan of the US, its imperialism, and its geopolitical meddling but even I have to admit that the last time they annexed something was in 1900, Hawaii. Two years earlier, Puerto Rico (from Spain).

barsoap,

The second operation, carried out by the internet access providers at Hadopi’s request, consists, inter alia, of matching the IP address with the civil identity data of its holder.

Which just opens more questions: How long are ISPs allowed/required to store customer IPs, and then what happens if I have an open wifi: Can they just assume that I did it or declare me responsible anyway, that is, is it possible for a private individual to enjoy ISP privileges?

barsoap,

You’re telling me Germany of all countries isn’t putting troops on land for the chance to fight russia??? Kind of seems like it should be their wet dream!

Saying that Germany is in any way dreaming about putting troops anywhere is right-out delusional. That also applies to France who are more willing to engage, but still don’t get off on it.

Poland. The Poles are the ones who wouldn’t mind marching straight to Moscow and have their cities nuked in response. But that’s not because they’d be a particularly quarrelsome bunch, either, it’s because they consider Russia a proven and irredeemable existential threat and like pretty much all Slavs, have great enthusiasm for the “find out” part of “fuck around and find out”.

barsoap,

Never eat those maggots live, unlike mites they actually can fuck you up from the inside. Which isn’t the reason it’s outlawed though, that’s because Sardinians have no sanitary source for the maggots.

barsoap,

But now that i think about it… would i really care?

Meanwhile, Takemura: “Anything that isn’t local?”

That’s not to say that you can’t make excellent food like that, it’s just that expecting culinary refinement from Night City’s food-chain is a bit of a stretch. Nestle meets American palate.

barsoap,

The EU approved some bugs under the novel foods regulation. In short, to place some ingredient on the market that didn’t get grandfathered in you have to jump some bureaucratic hurdles, some companies did that for some bugs, and the rightoids twisted it into a world-ending conspiracy.

All it means that they are legal to use as an ingredient in foodstuffs, still has to be labelled etc. as is usual.

barsoap,

You maid a claim, I asked for links. Then I provided 2 that are in relation to the way I see meaningful approaching european colonialism,

Wasn’t me who made that claim. You provided one link that showed Sweden’s colonial empire, tiny in comparison to the big powers (UK, France, Spain, Portugal, Russia), and one to DDG.

There are many criteria on colonial varieties and impact, borders is just one of them.

You might have an argument with Belgium, there. Sweden, ehhh not really. Germany is a bit of a mixed bag, let’s just say be sure to also ask Samoans. The Herero and Nama was a genocide, yes. Not something you could single Germany out for, though.

participation in slave trade, both legal and illegal

By that account Nigeria has been the primary colonial power. Or better put native-run empires in the rough area.

barsoap,

Things like the trail of tears don’t come to mind? The Native American genocide is generally quite well-known. But there’s a thousand all over the place, random example Tasmania. If you now say “But that was the result of an uprising and a war, not premeditated as genocide”: Same goes for the Herero and Nama one.

since it has the common ground of white supremacy.

It has the common ground in technological and military supremacy flanked by the native, European that is, population being really into the enlightenment, insisting that there be a distinction between power and justice, and the feudal powers that be then sought new people to oppress abroad, also due to a relative power stalemate among empires/alliances in Europe, everything that could be conquered at home already had been conquered. That’s like multiple centuries summed up but it’s the main forces. Scientific racism was invented to rationalise the whole endeavour to the less power-focussed but at its core it’s plain ole feudal imperialism. Which is why the continent is so up in arms about Ukraine: Russia wants to re-start that shit, re-conquer some of its previously ill-gotten possessions. As if it didn’t have plenty still.

barsoap,

you meant that others where responsible for this genocide, not only the Germans.

Nope. I meant that Germany isn’t the only country to have committed colonial genocides.

Ouch. That’s a colonial narrative. Scary.

That’s a) out of context quoted like that and b) historically accurate. Colonial expansion pre-dates scientific racism. If you want earlier evil motives try Christian missionaries, universalist in their own twisted way. Though going back in history on that one I think we’d need to start with Charlemange and the christianisation-by-genocide of the Saxons.

barsoap,

The Congo is quite common. Articles in front of country names are rare in English, actually quite common in e.g. German, and in any case neither of the two have anything to do with the v vs. na distinction in Russian. Which doesn’t even have articles those are prepositions.

Seriously the “sounds like a province” thing doesn’t make a lick of sense in English. It’s not “The Massachusetts”, “The Ontario”, or “The Tasmania”. Gotta be some phonetic quirk that’s above my paygrade.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • fightinggames
  • All magazines