Only 5.000 views, wtf...

"My name is Matt Nelson, and I'm about to engage in an extreme act of protest.
We are all culpable in the ongoing genocide in Gaza.
We call ourselves the greatest nation in history, yet we spend more on weapons of war than we do on educating our children, helping the homeless, ensuring all Americans have equal rights, and protecting the environment combined.
We are slaves to capitalism and the military industrial complex. Most of us are too apathetic to care.
The protest I am about to engage in is a call to our government to stop supplying Israel with the money and weapons it uses to imprison and murder innocent Palestinians, to pressure Israel to end the genocide in Gaza, and to support the ICC indictment of Benjamin Netanyahu and other members of the Israeli government.
I urge any of you who are of the same mind to call your senators and representatives and demand that they introduce and advance legislation to achieve these goals. If sitting lawmakers won't, vote for those who will.
A democracy is supposed to serve the will of the people, not the interests of the wealthy.
Take the power back. Free Palestine."

Here, i'm trying to add nuances to what i wrote, i guess that i don't have time to really argue on the Internet with people who'd disagree with me, yet the desire is still very much there, i don't like echo chambers :

We'll regret our current republic if times go 't/r'ough, since that usually means a more authoritarian governement.
Without robot-slaves, it'd also seem unavoidable that the wealthier will desire a higher rent to sustain a way of living and live above the peasants, if they need 10 times the peasant's salary to do so, then we'd tend towards 10% of (neo-)nobles and 90% of (neo-)peasants.
It's true that every(?) society of large enough scale was divided between the workers, (the soldiers, the clergy, ...), and the privileged class, who didn't have to work(, except for taking care of h.is.er fortune). One could argue that nobles of the past had more responsabilities than nowadays capitalists(, as well as an even more pronounced inequality in the face of the judicial system), but it'd be more interesting to know if technology will avoid the return to the "natural" order between the laborious class and the noble/annuitant one.

There's a future in which capitalism could still lead to a utopia, e.g. with robot-slaves, that'd make my/our fears wrong :

Despite what i wrote in this comment, better times are ahead, in particular thanks to these "robot-slaves", and while everyone wants more, i don't think we're evil to the point of refusing a mostly labor-free life to every human on earth if we have the capacity to do so.
Capitalism wouldn't announce an horrible future if we can still eat freely, if money/'renting your body/time' stop being a necessity, it could lead to some socialist ideals in a utopia.
I refuse to be cynical to the point of believing that the capitalists' greed would be more important to them than allowing technology to free wo.men from (the loss of their entire lives to )work.s they hate.

Perhaps will i be old enough to see that happening, i don't think that we're evil, and i dare think that nobody is, we could very well be allowed to live in a utopia, they don't hate their population.
Hence, i don't really care of what we're doing in our countries, if capitalists want to stay in power and enjoy their privileges, then so be it.

The solution to our fight against other countries, to our desire of security, to the threat of cultural hegemony, would be to be united in diversity, it's doable&desirable :

What's annoying is refusing to allow/'live with' countries that want to walk a different path, we need this diversity to think ouside the box, if every creation is a little birth then every synthesis is a little death.
We have to cohabitate, and while i'd prefer to live in a communist utopia like everyone on Lemmygrad, i wouldn't want capitalism(, royalism, etc.,) to disappear all over the world, it's their problem, and it's interesting to know how they'll evolve.

The usual counter-argument is that we have to coup/"convert" other countries because it makes us more secure, i don't think that cultural hegemony is the only way to prevent military invasions, and i'd go as far as to say that it's also not the only way to prevent covert operations and foreign propaganda, we need to have rules against them and a way to enforce them.
Capitalists would have to be certain that their privileges wouldn't be overthrtrown by a communist revolution for them to accept socialist countries.
Or perhaps that these "robot-slaves" will make useless this need for a superior monetary/social position, having your basic needs met should be enough for everyone, independent communities with their own rules could flourish in the "land of the free", who knows what the future has in store.

================================

If the only reason for the moderator to have deleted my comment is that it was confusing h.im.er as said in the modlog, then i hope that these titles quickly written will have solved the problem. If that really was the only motive for deletion.

If the real problem is only that it is too confusing, if i'm to believe the moderator, then here it is with explanations :

Answer to -6-6-6- about France as a vassal of the 3rd most populated country on Earth, the u.s.a., or, in his words, « France, like the rest of Europe, grovels at the will of the American Empire and does exactly what it demands of it. » :

Oh yeah(, the last paragraphs of https://x.com/RnaudBertrand/status/1823393948775133302 stayed on my mind, and divided we(sterners) will be more easily conquerable), 100%, you won't find many people here to contradict you.

Answer to the rest of -6-6-6-'s answer about the influence of wealth in our society or, in his words, « The funny part is that in France the capitalist bourgeoise also control the government and just use different mechanisms of power to do so. » :

On medias ownership in capitalist-owned countries :

The most obvious is the control of the medias, it'd be different if every single french media was saying that Venezuela is awesome and mocking the awful capitalists for being conspiratorial about the elections of countries they dislike.
Instead, every single french media will underline that venezuelans need to be saved from a tyrant, the same goes for other countries.
That's why american medias could easily make Bernie Sanders president if they changed their definition of "objectivity".
That's why most people never heard of the awesome Jill Stein or other 3rd party candidates, France is obviously no exception with little candidates hardly spoken of.

On preventing citizens to present themselves in an election in capitalist-owned countries :

A less obvious one is that in France we don't even need to explicitly ban political opponents(, awful when it happens in Venezuela, but not in Ecuador or many other countries, they almost succeeded with D.Trump, and apparently succeeded with R.Kennedy), we only have to require candidates to have hundreds of signatures/endorsements from mayors.
Hence, only a handful of candidates manage to get these endorsements, and not only did this number of required signatures went up, but it's not anonymous anymore(, with the possibility of repercussions).
As expected, while anti-Europe or anti-imperialist candidates could have gotten enough signatures in the past(, strangely), they don't anymore(, and even if they did the medias wouldn't talk about such a little candidate, frankly never heard of by people i've spoken to).
Even very large political parties only get their signatures in the last weeks, weird.
My candidate would have been Clara Egger on this list of the citizens who tried to have these signatures, but i've never heard of most of them.

On election fraud in capitalist-owned countries :

And that's not even considering that they may be cheating, which wouldn't surprise me honestly.

Other influences of capitalists :

Obviously it doesn't stop there : you need money in politics, and the thieves/capitalists sponsors don't want 'to give back'/taxes. Medias aren't enough for our oligarchs, they also want control over the education, survey institutes, think tanks, as well as helping our capitalist-owned state in meddling in foreign countries, which is the real crime here i.m.o. : destroy your country if you want, but leave others alone.

Conclusion about elections :

People aren't stupid, on the contrary, but they don't have the time to document themselves, they don't know that we're being manipulated.

Out-of-topic : On Israel and the medias :

I do have to acknowledge that i expected more support for Israel, but the latter only said that it wants to take revenge for the (very partial )revenge taken by palestinians on Oct.7th. Israel tried to argue that it was more than revenge that guided its actions/'useless murders', but the argument of protection wasn't bought by our medias, and since we agreed on our previous western wars that revenge was enough of a motive, Israel thought that it didn't need to do more(, we did pretend that the hostages weren't released because of "Hamas", and not because Israel refused to agree with a permanent ceasefire in exchange).
Still, i expected more support for Israel, not sure if/'how much' it helped in restraining israelis.

Out-of-topic : On the medias and the islamists fighters/separatists/heroes/terrorists/rebels/martyrs/humans/murderers/victims/..{choose your denomination} in western Africa :

A good example of propaganda is that islamists in the Alliance of Sahel States are now progressively painted as the good guys since they're fighting Russia(, even if i don't expect us to go very far in that direction, we didn't talk a lot about them in the past and will continue to do so, but the shift of narrative is very obvious, they're promoted from terrorists to rebels now). Unbelievable i know since we fought them until very recently, and at least as late as president Hollande, but it's similar to what we did with Bin-Laden in Afghanistan against the soviets after all(, or in Yugoslavia, Chechnya, Xinjiang, ..., whatever serves our temporary interest).

To be fair, a reminder that censorship/bias/manipulation isn't only anti-communist, but on both sides of the Overton window(, which doesn't have only two directions b.t.w.) :

And the propaganda isn't only anti-communist, but anti-fascist as well(, the far-right doesn't identify itself with fascism though). Of course, you're not going to like this obvious statement, and rightly state that at least far-right movements are supported by some billionaires, it's just that the censorship&manipulation is directed towards both sides of the Overton window.

A reminder that more direct state censorship is also practiced in western countries :

Then there's also direct state censorship, with so many examples(, "disinformation", anti-"terrorism apologia", "foreign actors", even Rumble has been banned), but oligarch manipulations is probably more influent, not as if it was a competition.
Sure, things could be worse, especially since we still have the Internet(, for now ?), but keeping power isn't that hard to do, even if the global distrust towards (legacy/mainstream )medias is a growing thorn is the side.

Oh, i was thinking that the confusion you were alluding to was about the last paragraphs that were added.

It has been deleted but you can still read it in the modlog if you want me to develop 1-2 paragraph.

https://lemmy.ml/post/18928441/12863732
I'll agree that the comment above wasn't anti-capitalist enough to be posted here.

If numbers went up(, despite the relentless attacks), then socialism worked ?

America's weird for never voting 3rd parties, i personally don't care to vote for someone who'll only get 1% in the end, and certainly wouldn't vote for the "lesser evil" as long as i have a choice.
Well, that's an american thing i never understood, i hope that France won't end up as much of a two-party system as the u.s., 🤷

Yeah, and everyone should be happy about this, a greener Earth is a good thing for everyone, they did it, and we can avoid the apocalypse by simply copying them(, not on coal but on everything else, and they're not only successful in ecology, we're so aggressive, as if collaboration/harmony wasn't desirable&doable).
Usually, it's "their system is better than ours in those domains, and i want to imitate that", here it's more that we're going to die by the end of century because the forces of the market aren't quick enough, apparently.
As in Wandering Earth, we could collaborate peacefully, at least if it's a question of survival ?
What i was trying to point out is that ecology was already very much discussed in the 60s, with the question of the scarcity of ressources already in mind contrary to what one could have thought(, now there's some talk of "eco-terrorists", but again eco-fascism isn't a word that appeared last year), and the majority of the population believes that we're going to die if we don't do something, and we've already killed a large part of the biosphere.
If our leaders believe that we absolutely have to act NOW, like we're being told, then journalists should help the viewer understand why the current strategy to survive( climate change) hasn't borne fruits yet, or is it not an imminent threat that has to be resolved ? Perhaps are we already doing the most that can be done, and/or are on a good track, so there's no reason to talk about it anymore ? Well, the People's Republic of China found a more efficient solution, yet we're not glad to have a greater chance of survival ? Are we even going to use it ?

I'm not satisfied with what i wrote, i'm trying to write in a logical manner, but it still appears to be nonsensical.
There's either a big conspiracy to make us believe that climate change is real, or we indeed have to act NOW because we're not even sure if we'll make it in time to stabilize the rising temperature of the planet. I don't see a third option(, we're already 'doing what we can'/'on a good track' ?).
My uneasiness may originate from me not having grasped the fact(?) that we're going to die because we're not changing our behaviors fast enough, and/or i suppose that any talk of impedent doom wouldn't seem serious in the first place.
A majority may indeed believe in the urgency of climate, but perhaps only in theory, as some distant conceptual object, i.d.k., but we're not voting for the most ecological political parties b.t.w., perhaps are we kinda hoping that the temperatures will stop rising by themselves, or that we'll find out that we were already quick enough, 🤷.
If we have 'to change/act now'/'no time left 'for more experimentations'/'to find a better method'' though, then we should be glad that a safer/'more successful' method has been found, and increase our chances of survival by imitating it.

A long comment that should probably have been reduced to a few sentences, ~sry.

And while we can't see the west's hand everywhere, it's interesting to point out these kind of events our medias are ignoring, such as Haiti or Bangladesh : https://news.sky.com/story/bangladesh-prime-minister-resigns-after-deadly-protests-reports-13191184
(or we'll talk about Venezuela instead of Rwanda or Tunisia(sry🤷), this kind of things, and when we talk about something it's in order to act, out of "duty" or sthg)

t'was the main reason of the post above 🤷(, besides hoping to learn 1-2 things)(, i don't intend to make one about Bangladesh but it's always worth spending a few hours to learn more)

Thanks for the discussion

You're saying that this program was a bad thing for the venezuelan/haitian/nicaraguan/cuban population, and i'm saying that 3 out of the 4 countries' names were considered "terrorists" or w/e, without judging whether such decision was bad or a good, and mostly as an excuse to learn about Haiti.

This decision may have been taken solely on the basis of the number of illegal migrants, and not according to the ideology adopted by these nations(, although these two things are linked since by destroying their countries we're creating a strong emigration).

But yes, i easily agree with you that the number of immigrants increased since the adoption of these immigration permits, and hence canceling them could be seen as a "good" thing for these countries. Instead of acknowledging that, i presented(, although not explicitly,) this decision as some kind of punishment towards these countries, sorry for that.

As a last note : if what matters here is whether this decision is a punishment or not, it should be asked if « The policy, introduced for Venezuelans in October 2022, and for the other three nationalities in January 2023 », was then purposefully directed at haitians in order to punish them for something ? Perhaps not.
Well, i.d.k., just thought it was weird to see its name alongside the three others, it reminded me that anti-westerners have been quite vocal there these last years, and i only wanted to make a post about it i guess

edit : At the same time, i wouldn't be surprised to learn that i've made a mistake by agreeing with you that emigration will always weaken the country of origin, you could think that they may come back later with money, contacts, and diplomas, that they'll send money to their family while working in the u.s., etc. If you have data that clearly illustrate your point i'm interested, from what i gathered it depends on the nature of the country of emigration(, e.g., it was a clear loss for the u.s.s.r. since education was free ?). It doesn't seem to be something that everyone agrees with.
Which would mean that stopping this policy could in fact be a punishment instead of a good development(, even if that is still not my personal opinion : i agree with your reasoning that migrants mostly strengthens the country of immigration compared to their country of origin, larger is usually better, the arguments of the anti-immigrants are usually cultural and not economic b.t.w., and they're often natalists).

Totally unrelated, but americans get offended when i'm implying that they're not christians, and i think that very few israelis are indeed jews. But if we were truly religious according to my criteria we would just be destroyed by those who aren't :

"Thou shall not kill" is great in theory, and it's easy to say that i'd gladly prefer to be harmed than to harm, even to the point of being killed rather than defending myself ; that even the "Hitlers" wouldn't be fought back by me, but what about defending someone else ?
I'm glad that many people( i haven't read) researched what a "just war" meant in the past, yet i don't think that those harming others for "good" are right either.
I don't know...

And it was the birthday of el Comandante/Presidente Hugo Chávez yesterday.

An amazing victory despite all the fucking unjust western interferences and sanctions who destroyed their glorious country. Let's destroy the u.s.a. so we shall see if they'll elect a communist in order to escape further destruction.
But then some people will complain about frauds instead of western interferences/sanctions, fuck them.
B.t.w., even if we can never be certain that fraud didn't occur, including in western countries :

And polls are unreliable, so the opposition cannot use them to affirm their victory :

Also :

I guess there's no need to be angry, and i'm still so happy for the liberation of Julian Assange, just disappointed by the lack of support of (one of )the last french "leftist" newspaper, but there's no reason to be surprised here as well, only Internet is left.

He's transphobic but that's the only point i'll agree with(, a.f.a.i.k., he thinks that anti-transphobia is encouraging transexual thoughts at the difficult time of puberty, i don't( care)), he's clearly not a fachist since he's even in favor of direct democracy and is always talking about being driven by virtue. Even in international relations he's weirdly not anti-China nor anti-Russia(, and had problems because of that). And i guess i'd still feel indebted to him even if he was a white supremacist since those two things don't overlap, but it'd be better to stop developing here. Again, thank you very much for developing your point of view, even if i don't agree.

I unfortunately haven't synthesized my notes about neo-colonialism, but please tell me if you know better authors than : Jason Hickel, Ha-Joon Chang, Zak Cope, and Erik Reinert.
(I'm less interested by older authors such as Samir Amin)
I'm still shocked many years later to have discovered that western countries(, who had a headstart,) are still growing faster than so-called poor(exploited) countries. With the exception of the few countries who didn't listened to the "unholy trinity" of the i.m.f., the world bank, and the w.t.o.. And it's weird that our closest political allies such as Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, or Israel, are coincidentally those who escaped the fate of every other country(, ex-english colonies also weirdly fared better than ex-french ones), if i'm skipping many arguments in the end i believe that the root of our problems that prevent a true international solidarity/'mutual aid' is that we're afraid of allowing potential enemies to develop, we want to keep our control, even at the expense of global equality, there's perhaps also a bit of selfishness/nationalism of course.

I didn't expected a serious answer, thank you very much for the effort.

I don't believe that introducing androids will lead to communism, but such a change is hard to anticipate : what will we(sterners) do with all these unemployed ? Allowing them to live like the nobles of the past and encouraging them to pursue higher goals than solely pleasure(, e.g., playing video games and/or partying all day) ? I don't know, but getting rid of jobs we hate doing wouldn't make the western world a worst place(, well, except in this case though)
Or we'll just become useless for the powerful, and barely survive :

Furthermore, is a billionaire's "successes" his to appropriate? Who created his capital? Why does he own others' labour to exploit?

I know, Elon Musk is akin to Thomas Edison, clearly not Nikola Tesla. But i don't have an answer to the argument that "his" many discoveries would have happened many years later without him. Hence why i can only feel grateful.

And since this is the second time you're talking about it, i can talk quite a bit about neo-colonialism if you want to exchange authors recommendations. I've personally lived in a van since 2015 and rarely have more than 1000€ in my bank account(, time's more precious than money, no regret), yet i'll insist until the end to explain why i'm very clearly in the aristocracy of the labour class, it's not even something that can be questioned for it is very obvious. I don't see why only the west would have access to androids if that was your argument, and yeah, it won't be a solution to neo-colonialism either.

If his past successes don't make you believe in his ability for more successes in the future, then you're entirely free to believe so !
As i wrote in the selftext : let's wait until China does its own androids, perhaps only then will Lemmygrad begin to praise this technology.

Ok, i don't want to annoy anyone here, sorry if i did, and thanks for not banning me, this sub doesn't like contradictions very much.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fully_Automated_Luxury_Communism

They killed negotiators as well, and there's a possibility that they'd kill V.Zelensky if he (re)joined Belarus and Russia at the expense of their european "dream".

If i'm cynical, and pretend that we can know the future(, afghans and many others, including separatists during colonization, or communists during the Cold War, proved that some impossible fights can be won despite the odds) :

• If palestinians can win, then they will take back their land, and the jewish dream of rebuilding the Jerusalem's temple will disappear. Jews will still be able to live on these lands, but not with their own laws(, an ethnostate isn't necessarily a bad thing, it's a preservation of diversity).
• If palestinians can't win, then they should do what they can to enable a two-states solution, and in my eyes it's the right-wing part of israelis politicians that prevented many attempts, at least from what i know. I've talked elsewhere of other solutions, but i don't know. I like the idea of a world united to colonize, e.g., Mars, in order to give it to the whole islamic community in exchange, but i guess that it would be taken even less seriously than giving palestinians a part of Europe or the u.s.a., way better than the one they're losing, and a one-state solution wouldn't be the jewish ethnostate israelis want.
  I don't know, they can't just submit and die, or lose their land(, without receiving something of equal value), it's clearly not fair, and hence can/must not be accepted. The palestinian suffering of these last decades is more obvious than the israelis we're supposed to pity. I don't see why Israel isn't satisfied with the lands they already have, i don't know what palestinians can still do at this point.
• Besides palestinians, if we're considering a united muslim world, and if it can't win as well, then it would have preferred if Israel was at its fringes and not in its heart/center, that's a shard. However, judaism is not a foreign religion, and we're still talking of a relatively small territory. If there's no choice, then Israel could perhaps be seen as a way to keep a bond somewhere with the origins of islam.
  Israel will/can never be as important as real (large )countries : the Maghreb, the Arabic peninsula, Türkiye, Persia/Iran, the north of India and even further east and north, the muslim world is so vast that they could afford a shard, even in its heart, and that'd be a bit like a museum, with muslims tourists going to Israel interested to see what people believed in the times of the Prophet, and grateful that we kept a.n originality/curiosity like this one.
  It'd be thinking that they didn't unilaterally lost a land by agreeing to a "two-states solution" with the borders of 1967, but obtained a weird one in exchange, some kind of relic of the past, a curiosity that the muslim world(, as a whole,) could afford due to its vastness(, unfortunately still not united enough according to me, since they didn't defend each other in the past, it's so insulting to criticize them, and say that they shouldn't be poor, but it's the fate of many continents, i'll always bet on them and i hope that they'll be back stronger than ever soon, e.g., french people would emigrate to Algeria because the salary would be twice the french average, if the world is still as unfair as the current one).

.

• If ukrainians can win, they'll be able to help in destroying/westernizing Russia.
• If they don't, then i don't see why it'd be so awful to abandon their n.a.t.o&e.u. desire(, they could even gain more than their territories by uniting with Belarus&Russia again). A frozen conflict has also been mentioned.
  They wouldn't necessarily have to follow many russian laws, in the same way that european countries have european laws, what they'd only really lose is their ability to help anti-russians, i suppose.
  The history/past(, as well as post-1991 events,), their geographical position, or the concentration of Russia 'on its west'/'around Moscow', are factors that made russians consider that Ukraine would be too dangerous in the hands of enemies(partners?). I'll add that the population has always been manipulated by the powerful/wealthy and that state entities also had an interest in manipulating ukrainians ; so, while Russia tried its best to manipulate as much as it could, it didn't succeed.
  Being asked to come back is not the worst sacrifice one could imagine, they were a team after all, it's such a waste. I know that such a change of side wouldn't happen overnight so i don't think it will, it's only my personal belief it should. They will probably choose to be some kind of demilitarized "buffer state", and perhaps that links could be created again along the following decades, or russian presidents would fail somehow, and lose Ukraine again.
  Switching to the west despite the bad economic outcomes resulting from listening to us doesn't make sense either, they made a decision in 1991, because they expected results that weren't obtained in more than one part. Perhaps that this thing of giving to their citizens companies' shares could have worked with some more rules, such as not being able to sell them, i.d.k., it's not people here that would tell they shouldn't be proud of their past. Before them socialism was only an idea, they proved it worked, and vigorously, they survived but apparently afterwards were promised peace if the Cold War ended.
  Peace with a country won't happen until its submission, unless we find a way to stop fearing the rise of opponents.

And :

• If israelis can win, they'll be able to take the lands they want, even from Lebanon why not.
• If they can't, then there's no reason to refuse the two-states solution i guess, as well as finding a way to improve their relations with their neighbours, if it's possible. Perhaps that one day the israeli army would fight against 'the u.s.a.'/Russia/China/'a.n african/european country'/.. alongside an islamic country in order to defend them.
  The Holy Quran talks with a lot of respect of jewish prophets, religious people should go along well, i clearly don't believe in some kind of inherent antisemitism in islam(, on the contrary)(, and they obviously wouldn't care about Israel at all if it was in Europe or the u.s.a. instead). Jewish people will always be people that should convert(, like the samaritans of the past), but they're not enemies. (Religions were supposedly enough to bring the Kingdom/City of God upon Earth...)

.

• If russians can win, they'll destroy the western part of Ukraine that refuses to join them(, they've stopped at the anti-n.a.t.o. part), by putting them on their side, or forcing a part of them to join a european country such as Poland. They'll also be able to solve the problem of Transnistria.
• If they can't, then they'll be destroyed/westernized. It wasn't great during the 90s, they'll be dismantled into a few parts by a western support of separatists, and quite a lot of countries would cease to receive their help.

Not a great comment but, i.d.k., tell me if you have a thought about it ?

Yeah :

And they're talking elsewhere about being/having proud warriors but are only killing disarmed civilians.

An outdated flag of Afghanistan, here's the current one, which says : "I bear witness that there is no deity but God, and I bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger of God."

I'm naturally opposed to their sexual apartheid denying girls the right of education(, they can still read though, and don't have to work), but they've been among the 20 poorest countries for decades, and i can only dream about their honesty towards God's research/worship/enlightenment/direction/...
I'd need to live among them before ever hoping to understand/judge them adequately, and they can become many great things(, if worthy and که خدای کول evidently/rationally/logically/mystically/really/.. ), it wouldn't have been the same with a country as wealthy as Iraq.
But i don't know the future, perhaps was it for the best, probably not, i'm an outsider and shouldn't talk about what i don't know, it feels like they were right. People dying while shouting/affirming God's eternal Greatness/Glory/.. makes me shiver, it's perhaps even sadder than thinking about the millions/billions of non-humans currently mistreated, at an industrial scale larger than any human tragedy(, i would hate to have their life, but fortunately they're only machines without the aptitude to suffer i guess, and they don't know that they could expect more, we had a duty/power/responsability, we could do more and care for their well-being, invent new ways of making their lives as enjoyable as possible, instead of aiming for a lower selling price, &).
Let's say that we're gradually evolving towards less evil and that i'm misrepresenting the virtues of the past(, they did many mistakes but wars were less murderous, people were trying, nobles wrote better than nowadays, non-humans were less objectified, etc., the colonization&'many genocides' as well as the most awful form/scale of slavery came afterwards or at the end of this period, but i know it was far from being a blue sky, just that nowadays is so artificial/dishonest, i.d.k., i'm probably wrong,), if so then i hope we'll continue to progress and soon stop with thefts, lies, ..., and live united in diversity finally learning that hegemony isn't a desirable goal, nor is it necessary. There's so much to do and also quite a lot of paths to be afraid in front of us, stopping the possibility of wars/conflicts is probably less than 10% of the problems we're facing.

edit

Palestinians could have killed the hostages before being killed, but didn't. There's still more than a hundred and they're still being taken care of.
It's my personal belief that unfair(, because they could have negociated a ceasefire, and i don't see us supporting a killing of hundreds of israelis in order to liberate palestinian prisoners/hostages, which is arguably what happened the 7th of October since they asked for an exchange of prisoners as if it was their only goal,) massacres like this happened many times in the Middle-East(, Lybia, Syria, Iraq, Palestine, Afghanistan, Yemen, ...,) but we've never heard of them, not sure why it's different now. It's certain that many massacres in south Asia were hidden, african and south-american dictators were also covered as long as they fought communists/utopians.
I'm not going to excuse myself for eternally regretting that they weren't united, and being banned for that would be one of my proudest accomplishment, lies are fucking everywhere, i'll never trust what we're being told about designated enemies, people dying for God and calling for a more virtuous life can't possibly be the opposite of what they're preaching, they're all dead now anyway(, 🇦🇫).

Which would usually mean almost 300.000 more injured(, minor and major). And 400.000 victims represents 20% of Gaza's population(, a percentage which hasn't been attained since Vietnam), so i hope that this analysis is wrong.
Apparently Israel's throwing bombs of 2 tons each, and they destroyed a lot of buildings, so there's still hope.

But the "polemic" last month when the UN revised the numbers down reminded us of the way that numbers are counted, some are identified, some are reported missing, and it's unfortunately likely that there's more deaths not taken into account, still buried under the rubbles without anyone to signal their disappearance.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/terror-and-security/gaza-conflict-is-creating-a-generation-of-child-amputees

I only knew this one from him, prior to Lemmy(, even if i still haven't seriously read any of his essays), worth a look[1] : https://dessalines.github.io/essays/us_atrocities.html

edit( post-@Blursty@lemmygrad.ml's answer) :
[1] : What sucks is that i'm certain we could live in peace, help each other, etc.
Is it simply that capitalists fear to disappear if they allow communism to survive ? Then they should strictly restrict communist ideologies if they don't entertain the thought of fusing both ideologies to keep the best in each(, e.g., by only allowing capital's revenues for enterprises in order to keep this organic distribution, which is obviously not the solution, just an idea, theses need antitheses to evolve).
So, if we agree to stop spreading capitalist ideals(, and even more our covert operations[2]), and other countries agree to never spread communist idea(l)s, as well as (c)overt operations ; and we're adding that, e.g., citizens who want to change the ideology of their country will have to leave, they're not allowed to be in politics ; then we'll have found/searched ways to enforce a long-lasting diversity.
But even if we've found these rules we'd also need for them to be strictly followed, supra-national institutions would have to be able to protect (from )(non-)westerners, with national armies gradually evolving towards a world army(, e.g., for natural disasters), and a support for countries to help them prove that foreign powers are interfering, and obviously a thousand more things, with as many "stress tests" before being adopted, etc.
We're not even trying to walk this path, yet cooperation/assistance is the path, we're in it together.

It's also important to note that the current world would need to have much more diversity than currently, we would indeed preserve and be proud of our diversity/uniqueness while not trying to convert the others, but we'd need at least 5-6 different ideologies, and even thousands if we're hoping for local variations.
At most, we've currently got 3 of them(, free-market capitalism, communism, and theocracy/islamism), i suppose that royalism, republics, and direct democracy could be three more, and the kind of south-american indigenous movement that tries to revive its past a seventh one, but we're still too homogeneous/'close to hegemony' on Earth, Africa has to carve its own path, and South America is too similar to the western world, Europe is also too similar to the u.s.a., and Australia&New-Zealand as well. And there's obviously many more ideologies that have to exist, and also on other planes than socio-economy//'political representation'//'importance given to God/religion'.
In comparison to westerners, Russia is more different from China, itself different from India, but it could/should still go further, and i'm not going to cite every country you got the point.
If we reach a state where every "zone" has the same standard of living because we couldn't fear anymore to help a future enemy, if we jealously preserve our own particularity, and once again can't possibly fear to be attacked by anyone, then we would focus on something else than military expenses, (war )propaganda, ... It's not perfect but it gets closer, we simply need to get rid of every possibility of fearing something, from ideas to missiles. We'd first have to accept the possibility of definitely protecting ourselves&others, and then actively research how to do that.
Kinda out of topic with @dessalines(, but not with u.s. atrocities)

You're probably right, i jumped on it when i read the text, without checking first(, and didn't even realised that it's an old story from 2021) : https://www.washingtonpost.com/media/2021/12/04/media-cnn-parwana-afghan-child-marriage
Do you think i should delete this post ?

I still remember that when they took control we were only talking about the few hundreds(, or thousands w/e,) people who wanted to leave the country at the airport, that was more than ~70% of our coverage over almost a week, and despicable.

Random thoughts, sry i guess 🤷‍♂️

I'm always making mistakes, so feel free to add a correction if you'd like

God(&gods)( in the material world, but also) in the world of Idea(l)s(, and probably other worlds inaccessible to humans as well) :

Yet, correct me if i'm wrong, but in my memories ~90% of the redditors used "social justice warrior" as a.n insult/criticism(, against someone who's acting excessively nice in defense of someone when there's no need, like the expression "white knight" for those men on the Internet excessively defending other women, underlining that "social justice" deals with psychological "injuries" and not real injustices, the correct term should have been "societal justice" though since it never dealt with socio-economic matters), while nowadays only conservatives use "woke" as an insult towards other people, sometimes with a larger focus than the previous SJW, targeting everyone believing that some things ought to change in order to make a better world(, while conservatives generally don't think that such things should improve/change[1]).
Well, i.d.k., not that it matters but would you agree with this impression that "social justice warrior" was used all over the political spectrum ~ten years ago ?

[1] : Far-right political parties want some things to change b.t.w.(, as well as parties unaligned with left//right such as separatists, ~ecologists, ~democrat{for a direct democracy with referendums}, ~royalists, ~theocrats, ...).
If conservatives are only defined with their unwillingness to change the current direction, then centrists are the real conservatives. Center-left and center-right bourgeois political parties were elected everywhere in the west(&'most of the world') for the last decades(, and had disappointed a hundred years ago in Germany leaving only two alternatives).
We(sterners) saw a lot of societal changes in the last 70 years though(, not so sure for socio-economic changes however, once the productivity increase and its expected consequences for the workers are taken into account).
If people don't vote(, in the primaries in the u.s.,) for "extremist" parties that's because we'll vote for whom we're being told to vote, and won't stop trusting our (billionaires-owned )medias as long as we're personally satisfied with the current situation.
The problem is that our consent isn't real/informed/enlightened, and we don't use our collective intelligence, so we may collectively 'agree with falsehoods'/'make mistakes', and it doesn't feel like our republics represent the will of their population.
If our government represented the will of the people then they wouldn't hesitate before putting any important decision through a referendum, and having 3-4 of them every year(, emerging from the population instead of the government,) wouldn't make our "representatives" afraid(, and if we're realising our mistakes afterwards then there's usually nothing that another referendum can't fix).
Beyond direct/real democracy, we'll still say that it's our duty to "democratize" the rest of the world, otherwise dictatorships would bloom everywhere and freedom would die, chinese people are happy but we(sterners) have to save them and paint a dystopia instead of rejoicing and teaching mandarin in american schools as a second language.

They're also saying that these talks about inclusion are racist because positive discrimination is still discrimination. However, when you end a race second-to-last with weights around your feet you probably have more merits than the one ending in third place. Moreover this is about ending social reproduction more than rewarding personal merit, apparently India is the example of a long&successful experimentation of positive discrimination for their castes, of course that rich kids are better at school but that's not justice.
And while black neighbourhoods have the same results as white urban neighborhoods of the same level of poverty(, or arabs in France, etc.), and that the main reason is that they were raised by poor parents with friends of the same mentality, in a school for children like them, in a neighbourhood and an environment very particular, and while it isn't genetic since their lives would be totally different if they were adopted, i could envision like 1-5% of their situation being related to a collective psyche, like you don't want to do a shitty job for a white country, in comparison to asians who are excited to seize the occasion to rise again while it seems possible, it's a different mindset but this kinda stupid/'outrageously wrong' racial explanation is marginal if it ever exists, and makes much less sense in my eyes than the environmental determinism that made peasants of the past engender peasants, and nobles engender nobles.
Which would be good news since we could give everyone the same education as such nobles and that'd be good in theory.
Minorities and people considered abnormal can be disliked and unjustly oppressed, perhaps not a lot in some cases ; in comparison normal people are privileged(, perhaps not a lot but, relatively, they are).
Well, i don't really care about these questions and there's no point in talking about that here/'with people that'd agree'. Woke seems like the new term for SJW

with a 1W battery planned for 2025

I don't know if you have the answer but, if i understood correctly, such 1W "battery"/generator would produce/refill 24Wh every day ?
If we put 10.000 BV100 in parallel(, to obtain 1W at the same 3V), that'd theoretically be 10 000 * 1125mm^3 = 1,125.10^7 mm^3 = 11L for 24Wh and 110L for 240Wh filled per day ? Ah well, w/e 🤷‍♂️. (edit : thanks for your answers though !)

It'd be very interesting to think of an hybrid system in which the betavoltaic cells are coupled with lithium batteries to give them some kind of natural regeneration over time(, a phone or computer could recover go from (50, or 20, or )0 to 100% overnight/'when it's not used')

This current model only gives 8.64 joules per day, but that's because 86400 is the number of seconds in a day, so if i divide 8.64 per 86400 i obtain 10^-4 W(, P=E/Δt), and the official/rounded number is 100μW.
Its volume is 1125mm^3 (15*15*5mm)

So, to drive 100km in an hour(, without the need to take into account accelerations for now), we'd need 100*200W=20kWh, or 2.10^4 Wh.
Most electric cars would only enable 4 hours at this rate with an 80kWh battery, but since this nuclear "battery" needs to be able to deliver 24h a day, we'd need 24 * 2.10^4 = 4,8.10^5 Wh

Hence, if we need 4,8.10^5 Wh and we have 100.10^-6 Wh for 1,125.10^3 mm^3 , a rule of three would give us 4,8.10^5 * 1,125.10^3 / 100.10^-6 mm^3 , that's 5,4.10^12 mm^3 , which is indeed 5400m^3 and not realistic.

Even a 200Wh computer would still need 54m^3 , and a 10Wh phone would need 2,7m^3 , the size of a car.

If the output was mutliplied by a thousand(, 100mW instead of 100μW,) then it'd be 2,7dm^3 , the size of a bottle and still a bit too big for a phone, but a "free" energy for 50 years, and if i'm keeping the thought above of an hybridation as a self-regenerative battery it'd refill 240Wh every day(, 24*10Wh,) but that's only if the output was multiplied by a thousand, which is unlikely.

Thank you very much for the correction, i didn't know that.

I wonder if i haven't made a mistake somewhere though, does it make sense that i'm obtaining 100μW by using seconds, and then comparing it with Wh ? If i had to multiply by 3600 before making this rule of three then that would change the conclusion.
8,64J/day would give 0,36J/h = 0,36Wh ? And would also give 100μJ/s = 100μW ?
I.d.k. anymore, but if i'm right this time then we'd need a 75cL bottle to refill 240Wh every day(, and for electric cars only 75L to refill 24kWh). I wouldn't be surprised if i made mistakes elsewhere so tell me what you think.

You're probably right but(, the energy density being a hundred times better than hydrocarbons, we'd roughly need the space for 6 months of fuel(, 50 years divided by 100), and) if your only argument is knowing how to get rid of the excess heat then i can hardly see that as more than a moderate security hazard towards users removing the protection(, and it could even generate money by connecting it to something while unused !)

Furthermore if this technology encounters enough success then we'll probably find a way to have an impact on the rapidity of the reaction chain, as we do with nuclear reactors, but on a microscopic level, perhaps with a material that can emit the equivalent of carbon atoms, i.d.k., it doesn't seem impossible.

But yeah, once again you're probably right, we'll see 🤷‍♂️

Oh yeah, i wouldn't advise anyone to take this breakthrough as a promise for the future(, as someone who used to read futurism.com i'm well aware of that).

But i could counter your objections if you're interested :

• it can already be done currently : David Hahn built a nuclear reactor with the radioactive material extracted from clock hands. The nickel-63 is already present elsewhere(, armour plating, boat propeller shafts, ...), as well as many other radioactive materials ;
• but it's probably not feasible : A stronger argument is that the radioactive material is composed of a layer only 2µm thick, in between two layers of diamond, i don't know enough about the subject to confirm or deny that such extraction would be too difficult/expensive ;
• and even if it were other materials would be a better choice : Finally, at first sight and in my ignorant opinion, i don't think it'd add much to a bomb, it seems like it'd only infect people in the vicinity, and is only described in the first scenario here(, see the article titled "Terrorism: Nuclear and Biological Terrorism"), which considers it more useful for polluting water reserves for instance, contrary to ^137 Ce, ^131 I, ^32 P, or ^67 Ga. It'd be cheaper/easier and possibly more effective to steal such materials from hospitals rather than extracting it from batteries.

You'd probably have to drill through more than a few of them to have enough radioactivity leaking, at this point the number of people dying because of their stress testing would probably be equivalent to those dying because of chemical batteries explosion. It'd be up to the authorities to estimate the risks correctly and, as you said, we'll see how much a battery made to last 50 years will cost.

Since it's already in use for decades with pacemakers i don't think that the radiation is that hard to stop, no need for inches of lead.

And i could have said that it's not a completely novel technology, i used "commercial" in the sense that it's apparently destined for the general public instead of specialised fields, the wiki article says that :

We'll have to see the price before finding such batteries in the supermarket though.

As for reliability, the articles say that another advantage is that it doesn't ignite nor explode, but i suppose that something could happen if you drill through it.

SABC News as well(, not western channels though) : https://youtube.com/@sabcdigitalnews?si=NJVpLshupTA-SkI-

Quite literally apparently, weird : https://twitter.com/dwnews/status/1744900071261458617

And this comment isn't going to be loved, but if they don't want more immigration for w/e reason then they should be allowed to do so.
The nuances are that this desire is artificially built by billionaires who (pretend to )believe that immigration is a more important problem than socio-economic conditions, that everything will be better without immigrants, that our culture(, who has already been destroyed and replaced by a(n americanised) nothingness(, i don't like the modern culture, those who died centuries ago are more interesting than our living idols,) is in danger since their children supposedly don't want to be french/italian/..(, which is apparently incompatible with a dual nationality/culture, you're a better french/italian/.. citizen if you're virtuous, wearing or not a veil/turban/.. isn't going to destroy whatever our culture became, since school the rich/privileged doesn't hang out with the poor, and if other cultures are obviously less virtuous then 'the proximity of our example'/'our contacts' should be enough to let them raise the issue, there's a set of rules that could enable countries to be (almost )as diverse as they want without fearing for their liberty/security, and i hate that we(sterners) know that it's possible, we're not trying to make this world even better(, we're still young hopefully), otherwise we would share a plan/vision and be excited about this utopia), and that we shouldn't help "poor"(impoverished/exploited) countries, just prevent them to seek a better life instead of helping each other to reach an equal standard of living, etc. If immigration was a cultural problem they would try to revive the extinct culture of our past, beginning with greco-roman authors, i don't know what is the french/italian/.. culture they're speaking of, it has disappeared many decades ago, we're euro-american now and that doesn't mean much(, i.m.o.), french poets or painters are dead, if it's movies nowadays then we're not present, same for the internet, getting rid of exploited immigrants ready to give up their life for a future they deserve more than us won't change that.
We'd need more diversity/'french exceptionalism' to have an identity.

Unrelated thought : It is said that with rising inequalities there will be more investments and that this wealth will benefit everyone else, it's inefficient for enterprises because of inequal wages and other money-pocketing practices that would be considered corruption in a state-owned enterprise, but it's even more obvious when these investments are made outside of the company : investments in housing raise the rent and make it more&more out of reach to become an owner ; investments in actions raise the dividends and make it more&more out of reach to gain back the full control of the direction, ... That rents are representing an increasing part of our salary, or dividends an increasing part of the companies' profits(, despite increasing wage inequalities), shouldn't be suprising.

👍

The u.s.a. was already condemned in the case of Nicaragua and nothing changed and nobody knows that, in the very improbable offchance that Israel was condemned, they would just act like Russia when the International Court of Justice ordered them to leave Ukraine.
Let's say that our medias talk about this improbable success and, even more improbable, support the ICJ and condemn Israel, everyone would just forget a month later. Sure, there's nothing to lose by trying, but not much to gain either, it's not the beginning of an effective solution, it'll be the exact same shit as before.
And the ICJ wouldn't even need to be considered the bad guy, the contradiction wouldn't raise an eyebrow, but let's say i'm wrong, have an hope in this if you want.

edit : That's an exaggeration, those who hate Israel won't forget such judgment and would remind us when they got the chance, that's the difference i'm seeing, so you're right to say that it's not nothing to be able to label them officially as genocidal, it'd add a new argument/insult of choice.

That's ~two every three years :

Somalia needs some support with Somaliland, and https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/Biden-Approves-Redeployment-of-US-Troops-to-Somalia-20220517-0003.html

Jamaica doesn't give any certainty either : https://globalvoices.org/2023/10/30/jamaicans-express-disappointment-over-their-countrys-no-show-un-gaza-vote/

And i don't think Brazil would want to expose themselves as much as South Africa did(, nor China for that matter), more to lose than to gain, that's justice. Bolivia probably only supported the case because Luis Arce has forbidden Evo Morales from being reelected and is trying to show that ~'he's not a traitor to the movement' despite that.
Let's say that they have a chance if you want though, it doesn't matter because that's not what would make a change, do they only have the option of a full-scale war with unknown consequences to do what's right ? We're just supposed to watch and then it'll be as if nothing ever happened, ok.

They were already finally accepted by Iraq, Iran, and everyone else more than 20 years ago, but instead of giving back the illegally occupied territories to the palestinians they considered that such proposal was dishonest and would come back to bite them, that finally being recognised for the first time since 1948 wasn't worth it. If even such proposal is rejected then (pro-)palestinians aren't left with any other choice than fighting them, they unequivocally refused the most reasonable peace offer, because they believe that they're strong enough to give up on impartiality(, still a unilateral gain for them and a unilateral loss for palestinians/arabs). They could have been recognised but refused. Here.

https://twitter.com/SamaanAshrawi/status/1742644725469909284