• 0 Posts
  • 87 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 30th, 2023

help-circle

  • Sort of a side tangent about definitions. I was always taught, by someone that was previously pro Israel, Zionism is simply the desire of return to the homeland. Which is a very watered down dishonest definition hiding the nationalism of a desire for an ethostate. If someone thinks it means just returning home, then their view of others calling it evil makes it feel like antisemitism, even if it’s not. People can’t communicate because the laymen’s words often get used in 100 different ways that don’t match. I think that’s often one source of miscommunication even among well meaning people. Another is that the anti Israel movement is peppered with actual anti-Semites poisoning the well. I’ve protested against Israel, but as a Jew it can be very uncomfortable, I’ve repeatedly met actual anti-Semites that way. I think these things make it very easy for people dug in to see antisemitism everywhere.

    I see that reaction from my father all the time. He’s a lefty, progressive, but talk about Israel and you have to tread very carefully. He hates the Likud and present day genocide, but is suspicious of the motives of a lot of the outside criticism.


  • On the other hand, in my admittedly short visit there, it seemed like the public sector was broken there. You have to summon a magical spirit to find out what day of the month the post office pretends to be open. You have to be currently on fire for the fire department to consider showing up to an emergency… Beautiful country, excellent food, but, I’ve never seen such a dysfunctional “developed” country. If I was a citizen I’d be pretty pissed all the time as well.


  • Ahh, got it. Well the party is just a mechanism, it can be completely replaced and/or highjacked. I think the problem is really the lack of a cohesive block of people on the left. People on the left have about as many beliefs as stars in the sky, and too much pride to merge those together into a movement with a consensus. I don’t think the left has ever really given real organized effort to highjacking/replacing the party, they’ve spent more time protesting it instead.

    Additionally, we are smaller than people on Lemmy believe, part of highjacking the party has to be vastly improved messaging and outreach. Bernie isn’t even that far left and I remember about 3/4 of Dems over 50 in my area hating him, calling him an extremist. True left wing people are smaller than we think.



  • I worked with and encountered many politicians in the past and maybe 1 in 10 Dems was “pro” corporate that I encountered. The problem is that the 1 in 10 are enough to slow progress to a crawl. Just assuming that all Dems are beholden to billionaires is silly.

    Many of those running for office are using the only left wing mechanism available. Left wing people are all over the party in state and federal governments. If we want our government to move left, we need the Dems to move left.

    You move them left by becoming the party and forcing them further left, imo. The party is a sum of it’s people, if the members become more left wing, then the party will. See what Trump did to the Republicans, half the party despised him, they feed his agenda because without him their party ends. The left wing could do the same if they didn’t see giving up as a viable strategy…





  • MonkRome@lemmy.worldto196@lemmy.blahaj.zoneMr Rule
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Even if it’s not about other people expecting money, people adjust their lifestyle to their money, even when it causes them to be 10 times as busy as a result. Suddenly you’re managing your house cleaner, your cook, you have contractors at your house every week, you decide you need more things, that all need maintenance, you’re constantly managing people. One day you look at that and think, why do I always have so much on my plate when I’m so rich.

    If people simplified their lives at the same time they became rich, they would be much happier, imo.


  • MonkRome@lemmy.worldtoScience Memes@mander.xyzErasure
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    If someone hired someone provably less qualified that would be easy grounds for a discrimination lawsuit. The problem is actually usually the opposite. People from disadvantaged groups often have to work way harder and be way more qualified just to be treated equally in society.

    DEI isn’t about who we hire and fire specifically but about how we as a society of institutions act overall. People in DEI might review the hiring and firing practices more holistically as one part of their job. Possibly focusing on recruiting practices including all communities (who are you advertising the job to?), job descriptions being simplified and more honest to what is actually required (broadening who qualifies), training hiring and firing authorities about unconscious bias, etc. That enables them to follow the eeoc laws and truly hire people that are most qualified while having a more representative candidate pool, resulting in a more representative group of employees. When you’re correcting your hiring practices to be more equitable, you don’t need to hire people less qualified.

    DEI would also be how they are treated once there, how the organization treats their staff in a fair and equitable manner. How current policies and processes can be changed to remove structural bias. How to best utilize a broad range of perspectives to improve your organization. For business often how you can include a broader range of targets to market to, etc. Analyzing the structure as a whole for institutional bias. That’s all DEI.

    The right has perverted the concept of DEI to make people believe unqualified people are landing positions when that’s not what DEI is even there for.



  • MonkRome@lemmy.worldtoComic Strips@lemmy.worldLooks like a pretty good life to me.
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    I’m married and 41, I’m just pointing out the real time needed. If you are actually trying to be healthy, and not just shoveling extra sugar and saturated/trans fats down your throat, then often the best choice is to cook your own food. Restaurants almost all prioritize taste, cost, and efficiency over health. Our society makes it difficult to stay healthy. So doing things while also staying, healthy is time consuming.

    Edit: Also getting takeout still takes time, order, wait, pickup, eat, cleanup, you’re still down at least an hour unless you get fast food.







  • Medications

    Sometimes worse side effects than the thing it’s trying to cure. Sometimes used to cure something that better diet and more exercise could take care of. Made by companies more concerned with money than your health outcomes. What’s to be afraid of?

    GMO

    Nothing wrong with GMO itself, but every company using GMO doesn’t use it to make food higher quality or taste better. They use it to engineer pesticides into your food, increase crop yields, and patent our seeds, for, you guessed it, money! Insecticides specifically can be neurotoxic to humans. What’s to be afraid of?

    Maybe you should listen to your mom instead of badmouthing her to strangers on the Internet.