uriel238

joined 2 years ago
[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

Dude, I already have doubts if I am worth my footprint, if we're going to think in transactional terms. It's easy to decide if cutting out meat is the only way I can make a difference, then why not cut out everything else as well? Should people kill themselves in order to spare nature the cost of their upkeep?

When we talk about the generation of greenhouse gasses, and the rising global average temperature, companies pollute in a day (in some cases, an hour) what humans produce across their lifetime. US suicides (49,000 per year, as of 2022, and rising with hate-crime and rampage killing rates) are barely a blip.

Maybe folks in the alt-right believe that human lives, at least the ones they don't like, are worth less than the resources they consume, but a lot more believe the lives are worth the food and poop,, which is, again, insignificant to the ever-burning fires of industry.

Quitting meat doesn't stick it to the man in any significant way, any more than self immolation does.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

Nazis are monarchists. Granted, for starters they'll settle for oligarchy or dictatorship but the end result is getting back to classic feudalism.

That was Hitler's fantasy at least, to have his principals become his upper nobility and the SS become their landed knights. He was attracted not only to the wotanic gods, but in fact the Wagnerian interpretation of them. It would be as if MAGAs believed not only in Thor, but the MCU version.

In the case of the new Trump administration, Musk is not the only one who wants to control political power, but the tech bros do as well. Vance is Peter Theil's toady and is Theil's vector to get his voice heard. They want to be kings, and ultimately kings over each other. It may even result in a violent contest. (Not a gladitorial one between them, themselves, but whatever armies and assassins they can raise.)

The horizon point of the far right is the consolidation of all power to one point, and given they are really into passing that power to their next of kin (or trying to live forever, so far failing) it's monarchy.

According to Karl Marx in Das Kapital, this is always the bitter end of capitalism, and so, given an unlimited amount of time, eventually we give up on systems that focus power, or have stratified wealth, for something else that works. Communism, anarchism or something we haven't fully fleshed out yet.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 hours ago

Not if you don't want to. Maybe you think I'm wrong after a couple of sentences. That's okay. The majority of American voters voted for an autocratic usurper. We can't expect everyone to get it or care.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 hours ago (3 children)

I'm not saying you're wrong, but our elite class seems determined to stay there, and historically violent revolution is what unseats them and allows their wealth to be redistributed from their Scrooge McDuck vaults.

Nonviolent resistance might work, but we haven't seen the kind of mass wealth dispersion that will be necessary.

And the elite are content to drive us right into extinction via the climate crisis and the plastic crisis. Even if you make technology that disrupts the meat market, they're going to legally wrest control of it from you (unless you are rich enough to defend it from Nestlé). Regardless, when it comes to the climate crisis, the deal is done. The pooch is screwed. We know after the collapse the upper limit of sustainable population will be about one billion, and that number dwindles with each day of inaction.

Meanwhile the industrial world is choosing far-right parties over the usual neoliberal crap we've endured through the latter half of the twentieth century, so we're not even serious about managing the climate crisis without the aforementioned revolution (and in that case, into some kind of communal government, since the typical outcome of a people's revolution is a chain of dictators).

Good luck convincing our officials, elected or not, to choose veganism over the meat industry, or even nutrition over junk food. You will need all you can get.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 16 hours ago (5 children)

Let's put it this way, our bodies really like the smell, taste and mouthfeel of meat. So long as our system is focused on compelling people to eat via yummy food, there's going to be a market for it. It's not prescription, just description.

That's why I was saying we'll have to overcome capitalism before we can really beat this. Otherwise actual balanced nutrition will be a < checks spelling > commodifiable feature of food, rather than its essential point.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 17 hours ago

I have no question that everyone across the industrialized world would gladly switch to your delicious recipes.

Maybe you should start a business!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 17 hours ago

Trump made it super clear what he intended to do, which was entirely in line with neutering the election system and installing a one-party autocracy. Fascism is merely a tool that prolongs peace before discontentment and public unrest. War follows.

The only reason for someone had to vote for Trump was because they wanted a one-party autocracy, maybe because they agreed with the white Christian nationalist movement and its mission.

Maybe they voted for Trump out of ignorance. I'm sure some of the 77 million who vote for him fall into this category. It doesn't matter. They voted for one-party autocracy.

Maybe they voted out of criticism of the Democratic party. Maybe they were tired of neoliberalism (I sure am!) but what they voted for was one-party autocracy. Again, I suspect no small percentage of that 77 million were motivated this way. It's happening throughout Europe. But it means they get to duck and cover while King Heron chooses what frogs get eaten.

Maybe they voted for Trump because Harris was not white enough or male enough. Those people, again, voted for the one-party autocracy guy. I can't tell how many of the 77 million that voted for Trump did this, but the votes that pushed Harris out of the battleground states were single-tick voters (they voted only for Trump, leaving the rest of the ballot blank. It's a common behavior in US elections.) Guess what they voted for? (Hint, it wasn't the continuity of democracy in the US.)

And yes, a small percentage (probably millions, still) voted against Harris on a specific issue. She was a hard line corporate neoliberal probably going to do what Obama and Biden did, too little too late. Maybe they're angry because we're letting Israel massacre the whole of Palestine. I get that. But what they voted for was: You guessed it, one-party autocracy.

Trump's entire campaign was about what he'd do as dictator. Project 2025 and Agenda 47 both featured largely the objective of seizing power, consolidating it to the executive, neutering the election system and installing a one party autocracy. Trump may even be looking to being the monarch, and passing the presidency to Don Jr.

So even if Trump voters were shocked and dismayed by Musk's salute, there was an orgy of evidence and indicators that fascism, dictatorship and a fuck-the-public-twice agenda were on the table if they voted for Trump. It was a Faustian deal from the get-go and they signed on the dotted line in blood.

And in blood they will pay. We're not even at the find out phase. This is still the prologue.

But yes, absolutely, every one of the 77 million Trump-voters are responsible, not for Musk's salute, offensive or no, but that we're staring down the barrel of what it represents.

PS: I have secret hopes that there are a lot of Edmund Pevensies out there, who get they fucked up and want to make right and put heart and soul into the resistance.

Especially because I'd rather this end in overthrow and reform (the Magna Carta ending) as opposed to the China bombing Washington (the Allies storm the US ending) or the nuclear holocaust (the Dr. Strangelove ending)... but all this is speculation.

(Yes, there is the possibility that civil rights lawyers and Democratic lawyers hold off Trump's agenda and a Democrat gets voted in a mandate like Obama did in 2008, but that will only lead to four-to-eight more years of neoliberalism, after which we'll get a new autocratic usurper, and we get to play the game yet again.)

PSS: Note this moment, and the flying sabot that is DeepSeek (and make sure you know what it is) because it's about to disrupt the economic power that the tech-bros were depending on to install their camarilla around Trump. The game of thrones is about to get crazy.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

But that argument is utter tosh. Anyone sprouting it is a Nazi collaborator.

So you're dismissing the (granted, slight) majority of voters in the United States? Or the wave of elections choosing far-right-wing parties over more of King Log's neoliberalism across Europe?

I mean you can do that. They often seem inaccessible to me. Certainly, my stanch-MAGA father is. But then the next step is for Trump's weaponized law-enforcement machine to come collect you for the detention centers.

To borrow a quote from Aliens (1986), Maybe you aren't up on current events, but we just got our asses kicked, pal!

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

France showed us the way. The problem is getting from the piles of heads to an ironclad constitution that doesn't allow the slave industrialists from corrupting the process.

You'd have to convince the public to accept demographics that are unpopular, like sex offenders, furries and Juggalos. (We're struggling with equality for blacks and women)

I still stand behind the idea of writing a constitution before the uprising, and include a proscription against the principle revolutionaries from governing.

The Constitution of the United States was built on the foundation of Enlightenment ideology of ending the aristocratic class. And it worked for a while.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

I would have called him a fascist and a monarchist (interested in being king, himself) but memes seem to work better using simple street language unless explaining the language itself.

e.g. The scary part is not the fascism, but the one-party autocracy, which can marry / fuck /kill the public without its consent. The fascism just slows dissent and unrest.

 

Release candidate with feedback considered. Release candidate provided no critical problems.

Use! Spread! Teach the world!

 

Text:

Musk's salute at Trump's Inauguration (sic) doesn't make him a Nazi

Musk's $250 Million donation to an autocratic usurper Makes (sic) him a Nazi-producing industrialist

Musk is to Nazis what the Hostess board of directors is to Twinkies


Sorry about the additional caps. I may also darken the background for legibility.

 

February 2017. Similar sentiments.

129
Rule Practice (OC) (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 
25
Who will rule (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
 

Another one of my old-man memes.

42
Rule of peer pressure (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 

EARLY TRAINING
🫳: Sit!
🐶: <hesitates, then sits>
🫳: Good dog!
🐶:

🫳: Sit!
🐶:
🫳: Good dog!
🐶:

LATE TRAINING
🐶: I would like a treat, please.
🫳:
🐶: I would like a treat, please.
🫳:
🐶: I would like a treat, please.
🫳:
🐶: I would like a treat, please.
🫳: Maybe you've had enough treats for now?
🐱: I, too, would like a treat, presented in the usual manner.
🫳: DAMMIT!

Pet tax in the comments

51
Get MacDruled (OC) (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
 

An early meme that did not pass muster when I showed it to family, but it makes me giggle.

I may just be an esoteric nerd.

 

Art by Erik Carnell one of the LGBT+ artists who was featured in Target during Pride and then removed thanks to white Christian nationalist pressure.

So here we are, and yeah, we need you all.

 

A semicolon after "youth" will help keep it clear.

 

Note: Most of the info here was ripped from the most recent You're Wrong About podcast ( On Buzzsprout ), Halloween History with Chelsey Weber-Smith Go! Listen! Enjoy! Tell 'em Large Marge sent ya!

Yesterday, I learned that the current American Halloween tradition of giving candy to costumed kids represents an uneasy truce between civilization and the trickster spirit.

There are a lot of traditions regarding Samhain, many of which include bonfires and naked dancing (because they all included bonfires and naked dancing. Who are we kidding?) But in the Irish farmlands, Samhain was mischief night, at least for adolescent and young adult boys (we assume they were boys.)

The idea was to haze the local grownups, particularly the crabby ones who yelled at clouds or didn't like young'uns much. There were plenty of old standby pranks: carving faces into produce or shepherding livestock to the rooftops to dressing up like ghosts and monsters and ambushing them at night to send them running.

It was a mostly accepted tradition. Teenagers got to go bananas for one day a year, and were (more or less) on ~~good~~ better behavior for the rest of the time. Skittish folk did the Purge thing of holing up in safety.

And then the Irish and their wily teenagers came to the United States.

Our Halloween pumpkin-smashers were called guisers from those in disguise. Note that there were other guising traditions that exchanged DNA with our dark cabal of malicious tricksters. (One fond one was of drunkards who'd sing at your house until you gave them food, beer or money to leave), but for our antagonists, it was the black bloc of the time, a means to ensure that you weren't identified at the scene of a fresh crime.

Do an image search of "vintage halloween costumes" and you won't see people trying to look like Mario or Misty or Mickey or Megatron, but just people in spooky clothes and spookier masks clearly up to no good. You didn't buy your costume, rather you made it with whatever was on hand, and hence there were a lot of sheet ghosts.

In the early 20th century pranking in the States achieved an apogee (a nadir?). The great depression drove everyone to despair, and wanton destruction that once was meager and required a morning of repair might be the fire that broke the farm. Also some pranks went wrong, leading to a resonance cascade failure, starting a wildfire or other unnatural disaster.

And then WWII happened and we were not only trying to salvage what we can, but had real (alleged) monsters that might even be infiltrating the homefront as we speak. Pranksters then were losing the war for the Allies and serving the Axis, even if inadvertently.

Something had to be done, and even President Truman got involved regarding The Halloween Problem.

A couple of early attempts to trade Halloween for a nicer holiday failed drastically, and the pranking continued.

Eventually an armistice came when the neighborhood spooky pageant emerged. Creative neighbors would turn a part of their house into a spooky diorama and light the path with candles and jack-o-lanterns and other Halloween kitsch. Rather than hopping onto a war-wagon (that's a mischief team stuffed into a motor vehicle) they'd go visit the local spooktaculars. (This would in turn fuel the haunted house craze, assisted by Disney's Haunted Mansion opening in 1953)

Feeding the roaming guests kept the rotten eggs away. While there was candy, there were also cookies, apples, (toothbrushes, Chick tracts) and other treats. Sometimes there were activities, though I never could figure out bobbing for apples.

The transition from free-form snacks to packaged candy came due to The Candyman who was much less exciting than the movie version. Ronald Clark O'Bryan made custom Pixy Stix laced with potassium cyanide, one of which he fed to his son, Timothy on Halloween, 1974. He was far removed from a master criminal, and inconsistencies in his story kept the police interested until it all fell apart. He was also deep in debt and took out a beefy life-insurance policy on his son. The police didn't have to investigate too deeply.

O'Bryan was executed in 1984, but by then the damage he had done to Halloween had been done, and moral panics would persist about tampered Halloween treats. By then it was common for everyone to just give packaged candy.

Related was also the 1982 Tylenol poisonings. They had nothing to do with Halloween, but secured into the public conscience that people could tamper with products in order to cause mayhem to the general public. And at least by my recollection, this not only ended all Halloween offerings of home-made cookies by kitchen-minded families but also made sure safety seals were added to every food and hygiene product in the US.

By the aughts, everyone was familiar with the "fun-sized" candy which was totally not that fun.

(It's noted by some that Tylenol doesn't really need all that much assistance to poison you. As painkillers go, it's hard on the system, easy to overdose, and Tylenol poisoning incurs a yearly body count in the US. There's been an ongoing effort to convince the FDA to rethink its approval of Tylenol, for convincing cause. But big pharma really wants to keep selling you stuff. Anyway I digress.)

These days, we hear a lot of calls from the religious right for the end of celebrations of Halloween, a holiday too macabre for families who purport to have family values. Many churches tell their parishioners to skip the holiday for Jesus, while more clever churches simply hold a party there as an alternative to trick-or-treating. Some churches forbid witches, or even only allow approved costumes from the approved costume list. There's a lot of, as Dan McClellan would put it, costly identity signaling between members of right-wing religious ministries to show they're on team-purity.

But this is not a holiday we celebrate to honor benign gods and favored spirits. This is not an Apollonian holiday we keep up for the morale of the people, rather it's a Dionysian holiday, one we celebrate in respect for spirits who would wrong us if we don't acknowledge their presence and the unsteady peace they offer in exchange for our tribute.

Hallowe'en as it is celebrated in the US is a rite we engage in every year to keep away malevolent trickster monsters, who will return (and will start fires) if we don't placate them with yearly treats.

400
Rule Studis. (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
 

Another Qu'ils mangent de la brioche moment.

43
submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 

Refrigerator logic, or a shower thought:

According to Genesis, God forbids Adam and Eve from eating fruit of the tree of wisdom, specifically of knowledge of good and evil.

Serpent talks to Eve, calling out God's lie: God said they will die from eating the fruit (as in die quickly, as if the fruit were poisonous). They won't die from the fruit, Serpent tells them. Instead, their eyes will open and they will understand good and evil.

And Adam and Eve eat of the fruit of the tree of wisdom, learning good and evil (right and wrong, or social mores). And then God evicts them from paradise for disobedience.

But if the eating the fruit of the tree of wisdom gave Adam and Eve the knowledge of good and evil, this belies they did not know good and evil in the first place. They couldn't know what forbidden means, or that eating from the tree was wrong. They were incapable of obedience.

Adam and Eve were too unintelligent (immature? unwise?) to understand, much like telling a toddler not to eat cookies from the cookie jar on the counter.

Putting the tree unguarded and easily accessible in the Garden of Eden was totally a setup

Am I reading this right?

view more: next ›