forcing politicians to vote along party lines

They are not forced to vote along party lines. However, they don't get to stay in the party unless they vote with it. They become Independent.

Some issues, usually moral issues, are "conscience" votes and there is no party line for those.

No on both counts.

The US president is literally going around his own Congress to ensure the Israelis are always well stocked with weapons during their genocide.

No, it's like if you owned a massive chain of Italian restaurants that notoriously exploited people, and you were actively paying the mafia to intimidate your workers and to bust unions.

The judge saw through Chiquita's ridiculous fabrication, I'm disappointed to see you parroting it here.

One of the largest countries in the world and a hell of a lot of ethnic diversity, so it's hard to make generalizations. Kerala and, say, UP are very different. But here's my attempt.

Geopolitically as an entity it's currently suffering from some of the same things the world's other largest countries (China, US, Indonesia) are suffering from - namely: populist leaders and a large group of poorly educated people in the population propping them up.

Consequently there is way too much militant nationalism and complacency about aggression towards other nations, territorialism, persecution of certain ethnic minorities, religious fundamentalism. All the biggest countries have those traits at the moment, so it's not specifically a reflection on India.

In terms of resource and development it's dealing with a similar situation to other ex colony LICs - years of resource exploitation left it with a low GDP per capita and consequently major challenges when it comes to provision of infrastructure (eg pollution management), health, education, living standards etc.

India has made huge strides in the past but the current wave of populism relies on leveraging social conflict (as it does elsewhere in the eorld) so I think that growth has slowed. For the same reason the fault lines along ethnic, religious, caste lines - which colonialism entrenched or deepened within the region - are still a big aspect.

My personal experiences with Indian people is that just like from anywhere else there are good and bad. Cultured, well educated people are easier to deal with because there is more shared knowledge. Statistically speaking, many of the world's worst arseholes you are going to meet are going to be from India, China and the US, and that holds up.

It's a false analogy. Chiquita were paying the paramilitary to do its bidding.

Here is a more in-depth article.

To determine that, I will need two pieces of information:

• do you stand to profit from the killing or intimidation of Palestinians?

• are you one of the US Government's main sources of money and weapons?

When I think of genocide, it comes to mind images of some evil dictator using poison gas in a population, chemical weapons, an atomic bomb, etc.

That's just lack of education on your part, though. Neither the Cambodian Genocide nor the Rwandan Genocide would be a genocide according to you, but in reality these were two of the worst genocides in the last 50 years.

Come to think of it, neither would the Bosnian Genocide according to you, because it mainly targeted males for execution.

then cry genocide

The people who are "crying genocide" are those of us in the international community who know what a geenocide is, including experts in international law.

That's an interesting theory but there are many churches where women are supposed to put on a hat especially for church.

Probably it has more to do with this rather ridiculous passage from Corinthians:

Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.

5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. 6 For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.

7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. Source 1 Corinthians 11: 2-16

@CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world

Speechless that two people have come in here to defend United Fruit Company/Chiquita for its well known use of death squads.

Remind me not to post about Nestlé.

Disappointing.

Great analogy.

Killing civilians doesn't avenge anything, no matter who does it.

Yet that rescued hostage from yesterday did not look very pregnant.

Out of order. You can easily make the same point without resorting to perpetuating a misogynist myth about rape.

Californians don't live in Death Valley.

The countries with the hottest temperatures in inhabited areas are places like Kuwait.

She might be a TOFI.

What part of "no matter who does it" did you not understand.

I'm embarassed for you.

I think arseholes are distributed evenly too.

If 5% of all people are arseholes, everywhere, then a country with 50 million people has 2.5 million arseholes. But a country with 1,428,000,000 people has over 71 million arseholes. This is why they seem to be over represented by the large nations.

You are right that we are more likely to notice them if they travel near us or communicate in a language we understand. This is why Estonians are more likely to think badly of Finns whereas South Africans are more likely to think badly of Nigerians.

Israel have already said that they are not interested in the agreement.

Why on earth do you mostly have pro-terrorist facebook friends? Did you not realise you can just block people like that?

After reviewing their modlog history, I think Masquenox displays a level of emotional incontinence that is effectively the same as trolling.

I do see what you mean. I think when a dork engages in repeated personal attacks they cross the line for me regardless of their intent.

It's a philosophical question akin to Baudrillard's "simulate a robbery" idea.

You may be right. It may have been an innocent attempt to turn the discussion away from this landmark decision and back onto the more well trampled ground of US politics.

Witty.

I like hypotheticals myself, but not when they are used to mislead.

Chiquita was the entity calling the shots and the death squads were killing and intimidating anyone who went against their commercial interests, including politicians.

For that reason, the hypothetical above reads like an attempt to pretend Chiquita was somehow a passive participant.

This article makes it clearer.

You're arguing for both sides of the argument.

First you argue that people obeyed rulers because they didn't question authority.

Then you argue people obeyed rulers for their own benefit and material gain.

Putin is not a communist in any sense of the word.

Of course you did, or I wouldn't have commented on it.

Here is a wikipedia page that explains what a tankie is.