There's many ways, from benign organizing of protests or involving the media all the way down to armed insurrection or terrorist threats. Again, you're a protagonist - choose your own story!
Then there's Ghandi, the Arab Spring, Milošević, the Iranian Shah as examples of things going the other way - and those are just the ones that immediately came to mind.
Again, don't be a bystander believing in foregone conclusions - that way you make them self-fulfilling prophecies. Be part of writing the story instead!
You believe that things only happen to people because they don't "speak up" but it is a goofy belief. There are people that will first fire you, then hit you with sticks and jail you, then shoot you and your kids.
You are not the first person to complain. There is no manager to call. Standing in the street with your friends is a social event. If you're not telling people where and when to show up, what to bring, and why it will work, you're just on the internet stealing valor from real heroes.
Qualcomm is the USA, how do you imagine Qualcomm blocking access from the USA?
Leaving aside the fact, that Israel is USA's ally, Palestine-Israel is quite different from Ukraine-russia.
In his pre-SVO speech putin promised to solve "Ukrainian question" once and for all. It's not even a nazi vibe, it's straight nazi ideology. russians burn Ukrainian books, destroy Ukrainian museums. All on purpose... Israel, OTOH, has >20% Arabic population, all free to speak their language, to celebrate their culture and even to practice their religion.
We can discuss and condemn many terrible things Israel does, but it's not even in the same ballpark with russia... comrade.
If pointing double standards is making me stupid, so be it.
Russia is doing and saying awful things : yup.
"straight nazi ideology" apply also to Israel, which is doing and saying the same things Russia does, and more.
I don't need the extra hasbara of the famous "arabic" (sic) population living in harmony. The apartheid is documented, as is the violent colonisation and genocide.
The previous comments were talking of IQ in a quantitative way ("x points less"), so they fit in the first definition.
Even the second definition is not really a thing. Intelligence as a concept doesn't mean much and needs to be defined properly. Using it this way is just another way to divide people superficially.
I started the thread with '"5 iq points dumber" (whatever that means)'. I intended that to be read something like "as if there was an objective measure of intelligence that scaled like iq'.
I cannot say what other intended, but at least some people are reading this whole thread in that context and I would expect you to as well even if others didn't intend that. (that is "respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith." - hopefully this helps you see context better)
> talking of IQ in a quantitative way ("x points less")
I read that as a within a single individual, case A (no brain damage from cause C) vs case B (with brain damage from cause C), where using it as a shorthand for intelligence differences within a single individual makes it a useful shorthand for most readers, IMO.
If you were in an "open air prison" (silly term, but ok), would your next move be to raid a peace and love festival and slaughter kids ? Just wondering?
Downplaying the severity of despots like Mao by comparing them to democratically elected leaders is incredibly disrespectful to the 45,000,000 people that died as a direct result of catastrophic and coercive policies.
I assume the reference was to Bush’s foreign wars, which killed _dramatically_ fewer people (under a million even in the most expansive estimates I can find)… although they also brought widespread poverty, rather than mass industrialisation and wealth.
A democratic leader remains democratic throughout their term. W did his time and bowed out at the end of it. Another party stepped in peacefully afterward.
The only way Hitler could have gone out was in a pine box. That's the difference. He may have been democratically elected, but he wasn't a democratic leader.
I guess you mean Jr who consumed a lot of coke when young, not his late CIA father who was shielding Jr from jail numerous times.
Middle east is as it is currently largely to his fuckups and made up invasions for reasons barely better than russian invasion of Ukraine, and Afghanistan failure is proper second Vietnam for US to the last details, just less movies about it so far so its largely ignored and people act like it didn't happen.
Republicans still uncritically celebrate him, when I dared to criticize him even here I got downvoted to hell pretty quickly. Yet he is directly responsible for death of millions of innocent civilians and indirectly caused ie Isis, not on Mao or Stalin level but still.
Because tech and society, like everything else, is inherently political. Backdoors, surveillance, control. These are things fascist and proto-fascist societies try to achieve. And they are thriving as of late.
Fascist behavior and actions aren't limited to the political right wing. Anyone can do it, you just choose to cherry pick the one you dislike under "fascism" and be OK with the fascist behavior that allies to your political views as being correct and justified.
Do you see any conservatives firebombing people's private property right now, or is it only the "tolerant left" doing it?
How much online free speech was censored under the leadership of the left in the years prior, all under the guise of "protecting free speech" and "creating safe spaces"?
One can abuse the "think of the children" emotional arguments to justify a lot of fascist totalitarian behavior and policies, all in the name of "good". Remember: "The road to hell is paved with good intentions".
So any destruction of private property due to political or ideological reasons is inherently "fascist"?
Anyway not that this justifies anything but wouldn't insurance pay for the destroyed Teslas? If so the terrorists are doing those people a service in an indirect since they would be able to buy a car they wouldn't have to be ashamed of driving anymore, so win-win (as long as nobody is harmed, there is no valuable stuff in the car etc.)
And just to be clear, even if you are responding in a tongue in cheek way. One person is joking about damaging physical property, and you're joking about about sending that person to prison for 20 years for their sarcastic remark. Do you really think a Tesla is more valuable than a human life? Do you really think a low effort joke is more valuable than a human life?
In what way was I promoting or justifying anything?
I mean it's horrible if you car is destroyed by dumb and violent people (just burning lithium batteries makes it much worse, which IMHO is the greater crime but that's somewhat tangential) but if it doesn't affect you financial it's not a big deal and you are much less of a victim than the fire fighters who have to put out that fire.
Damage to property seems secondary and barely significant compared to uncontrolled burning of dangerous materials. Thinking otherwise is quite something...
People labeling everyone who disagrees with them as "fascists" or "right wing", aren't capable of any kind of discussion or rational thought.
It's my fault I got involved in the silly discussion in the first place since nobody starting a discussion with blaming "the right wing", is fully allright in the head. We closed down the asylums, and so they moved online.
Why do you think they label everything they disagree with fascist, not just some things? You only have one example of a thing which they disagree with, and labeled fascist. You are arguing against something someone didn't actually say (a.k.a. a straw man).
now we have president and his apostoles publicly calling on journalists to be jailed. “free speech” for right means “only shit we want to hear” and for left means “you can’t really say shit that entices violence and is blatantly false” neither of course is “right” but as you initially stated this shouldn’t be political and then you proceeded to politicize it fully :)
Telling someone to "grow up" is ageist and dehumanizes little people. Being large or "mature" is normative. Implying that someone needs to "evolve" implies that simpler life forms are less valuable. You really should check your privilege and stop committing microagressions.
