Double response!

Double response!

Double post!

Double post!

“What are they fighting back? They’re the perpetrators.”

Call it what it is, this is indiscriminate murder.

I don’t think that excuses this.

It takes emotional labor to separate people from the situations/context you interact with them in. Part of work culture should be making sure that people aren’t too stressed and tired to do this labor by unrealistic work demands and inhumane treatment.

From what I understand about nursing, at least in my country, this is systematically an issue of pushing people too hard so I would say give yourself slack for not being perfectly aloof.

Hmmm good point!

ah gotcha!

Lol so do the right and center score +15 on this course typically? Or more like a DNF type awkward situation?

Why did such an internationally respected english news source go with such flimsy evidence on a topic where the consequences of leaning into rightwing narratives are so high?

Pathetic and disgraceful for the guardian.

Jones demonstrated his “compassion” for the mentally ill by all but declaring they don’t deserve it. “Put him in a mental institution, put him in a jail, and you guys figure it out,” Jones said, referring to the man MAGA seized upon as its latest pretext for authoritarianism. “But people having to duck and dive on the trains and the buses, walking through the street, this is one case, but this is happening all across the country.” Jones went on to complain that “billions of dollars” have been “given” to the homeless population and that “a lot of them don’t want to get the help that is necessary.”

That was followed by an outright call for murder, agreed to by all three cohosts.

BRIAN KILMEADE (FOX HOST): Or involuntary lethal injection.

JONES: Yeah.

KILMEADE : Or something. Just kill them.

Just a preview of how much of a shitstain Charlie Kirk was.

…and a great eulogy to the US right on the cusp of its collapse.

Kirk’s violent rhetoric helped shape this world, and yet, it has been deemed “civil” by those on both sides of the political divide. This is the mark of a sick society, one that is perfectly fine with an unconscionable body count as long as none of the disfigured, barely recognizable faces are ones we know from a screen. Some of the pundits fake-crying for Kirk probably found his views privately appalling. Again, networks made the deliberate choice to shy away from engaging with the substance of his debates. They were almost certainly aware, at least on some level, of the kinds of things he regularly said. But that didn’t matter. They had to put on a show. The show, after all, is what keeps the meat grinder that is America moving, and it must – at all costs – go on.

Brain automatically put “new” next to “england” and we have piles of ospreys here so I was very confused for a second.

@floofloof@lemmy.ca has a better response to this than I can write

liberalism is a political ideology rather than a political party, and that the problems of liberalism extend beyond registered Democrats. It’s important globally too: liberalism is problematic everywhere, whereas the Democratic Party exists only in the USA. Whatever a politician’s party, if they subscribe to liberalism their politics are going to problematic in the ways liberalism always is.

From that Wikipedia link:

Liberalism is a political and moral philosophy based on the rights of the individual, liberty, consent of the governed, political equality, the right to private property, and equality before the law. Liberals espouse various and sometimes conflicting views depending on their understanding of these principles but generally support private property, market economies, individual rights (including civil rights and human rights), liberal democracy, secularism, rule of law, economic and political freedom, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, and freedom of religion. Liberalism is frequently cited as the dominant ideology of modern history.

Establishment Democrats are a problem that was created by liberalism, just because neoliberalism is dead as an ideology doesn’t mean that the structural impacts that have been established over decades of uncontested domination in the sphere of ideas by liberalism/neoliberalism aren’t still dominating the currents of power in the US and elsewhere.

Neoliberalism attempts to hallucinate some middle ground between the brutality of wealth inequality, colonialism and extractive capitalism and progressively better treatment of human beings on the other and there just isn’t. I don’t know what more evidence the world needs, the majority of people in the US have realized it, but the neoliberal wing of the ruling class in the US is still utterly in denial about it.

I agree with you for the most part and I genuinely give the general populace of the US immense credit for evolving and remembering the lessons we needed to learn from the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, especially younger people in the US. Not that we deserve any praise for it, “credit” is the wrong word, I guess I only point this out to underline how it wasn’t necessarily a foregone conclusion the US public would in this late moment of empire reach a state of self-awareness about the actual systematic issues at play undermining this country.

You are right that the liberalism I am attacking is more prevalent in the ruling class and politicians than the general populace these days, but that was not always the case, on the contrary this is a recent development.

I am having a conversation about the way liberalism took the oxygen out of the room from other ideologies that might have given all the people dying and about to die a better chance at making it through and living a decent life.

Liberals would rather lose to outright fascism than win on an actually progressive platform and that isn’t being hyperbolic at all, it is the brutal reality dooming this country to a very dark future.

We are in a cult of scarcity, the foundations of the globalized late stage capitalist world rely on there never being enough for everyone.

When there is enough for everyone, that is considered a fail state of capitalism and unless violence successfully forces scarcity back into the system capitalism must move on to a new realm of scarcity or risk extinction.