what, the other guy can do it by calling for us to kill “Arabist” but once the genocide isn’t about some people you can’t just ignore it’s bad? and for the same reason, mind you.
so what exactly is the difference in these positions other than the ethnicity you are fine with geocoding?
no, you’re just wrong and need to brush up on your English comprehension, believing the Nazis existed (past tense, since the Nazis are an outlawed political party, the group that believes these things are neo-Nazis, since we are being pedantic here) is not the same as believing in their doctrine.
these are two very different statements, one is about the existence of the Nazis, and this is a view that I take it you do think superior to the idea that Nazis did not in fact exist.
the other view you mentioned, you did not have is the notion that Nazis are good, hence, to remove the negative, the view that the Nazis are bad, a view that I do hope you think is superior to its counterpart.
AIPAC is a very public Zionist lobbying group working on behalf of the most radical elements of the Israeli state. they were founded to help smooth out Israeli US relations after the Qibya massacre in 1953.
Removed by mod
about how we’re just going to sit, watch and fund a genocide? or the thing about multiple Lukid cabinet members labelling Palestinians as “human animals”? I mean, there wasn’t more than those two points, so not much to get confused about…
and so what if we watch a few animal (yes, members of the Israeli ruling coalition have called the Palestinians animals) die in Gaza? it’s good for our geostrategic interests in the region.
are you saying that the only choice we have is genocide?, that is sick, twisted, and wholly untrue.
Surprisingly, yes. as AIPAC said, they got a 100% ousting of all candidates who were “anti-Israel”(translated to normal speak: against slaughtering Palestinians because Israel embraced the 14 words), this is a very clear democratic mandate to support the slaughter of innocents, so the land can be used for more settlements.
to believe in something means you must hold the belief that something is superior to all other options.
as for the abolishment of the government, sure, some want a minarchy instead, the issue is that a weak government is literally as good as none at all, or may even be worse, as for example a government that only cares about policing will just become the paid thugs of the powerful
because the outcome is the same
that a lack of government does not equal an increase in freedom, instead it just allows those with power to exert it more directly upon the less well off.
tit-for-tat works in a larger setting as well, in fact it works better because you can ostracize and punish.
you know, like WHAT IS LITERALLY HAPPENING AS WE SPEAK!? do you think greed-flation just happened out of nowhere?
but no, like every libertarian, you propose the destruction of regulation because you promise yourself that somehow people will be better off if they need to waste their lives on crap. “you didn’t put weeks of research into the three bio-med testing labs to ensure they wouldn’t lie about the insulin, I guess you should die now, lol”, and you know how I can tell you’re an American? BECAUSE LITERALLY NO NE ELSE HAS THIS ISSUE. yes, this issue is entirely an American thing because you’re the main drivers of the deregulation and reactionary enforcement that has lead to insulin costing you $500 for a 2-week supply, and your reaction is to make the US into more of a banana republic by destroying the goverment even more.
Not sure what consequences you are talking about
my point exactly, and no libertarians outside the USA still advocate for low government interference
I think what the person you were replying to was trying to say was, that land is an investment platform, and nobody better touch his stuff, or he will enact capital punishment as judge jury and executioner
so you fall into the camp of not knowing the consequences.
the issue inherently is that the power imbalance of stuff like wealth inequality, coupled with material conditions, always end up curtailing the freedoms of those who are not on top, ironically making them less free (bit of an irony, eh?)
Are we discussing a situation in which only the FDA is gone, or complete anarchy?
the premise was no government services paid for by taxes, and without taxes there are no government anything.
Do you believe that regulatory capture is bullshit?
regulatory capture is commonly trodden out by people as an example of big government bad, when it doesn’t happen as often as these people like to pretend it does (take, for example, your misconception that the FDA is the cause of high insulin prices), not the fact that it is just a failure to deal with corruption.
People knowing about a prisoner’s dilemma doesn’t make it go away.
that’s the fun part tho, both parties knowing about the prisoner’s dilemma DOES make it go away, as the most successful models, over a longer set of games, tend to be Tit-for-Tat models
ah yes, use the totally legit bio-med test service down the road, due to the FTC not being a thing they can totally and without any repercussions just lie to you because they have a deal with the person selling you the insulin.
Then again, you have been hoodwinked into some “regulatory capture” bullshit, in reality, insulin is so expensive in the USA because no one has the capital wants to sell it cheap, it’s a risk for minimal rewards, the demand is literally your life, so the cost can be as high as anyone wants it.
as for the whole “but the free market” and “supply/demand”, do you think the people setting these prices don’t know what the prisoner’s dilemma is?
[starts to stretch insulin with paint thinner]
every day it seems like people forget what things like the FDA are for, but hey, the snake oil salesmen love this state of affairs
how exactly could it get worse? we seem more than happy to have our bombs hit refugee camps.
this might shock you, but pointing out that neither the democrats not the republicans give a shit isn’t some sinister plot to undermine Biden and get Trump elected, and it’s not like there aren’t enough reasons to go out and vote against Trump. but with regard to the genocide? they are both about the same.