Israel was never the Nazis' victim, Jewish people were. Israel is not equal to Jewish people and this is doing a huge disservice to all the Jewish people around the world fighting against this colonial state.
Israel was never the Nazis' victim, Jewish people were. Israel is not equal to Jewish people and this is doing a huge disservice to all the Jewish people around the world fighting against this colonial state.
Yeah, two years ago I was kinda not sure what the issue was not actually following the thing too closely. Then I watched Shaun's video essay on YouTube, discussed with some trans friends about the issue and started checking her twitter.
She literally only tweets about trans people all day every day and often insinuates they are rapists/pedo etc.
She's crazy.
Do you have a source for that? As I have close friends affected by MS I'd be really interested in reading a paper about it and sharing it with them.
From my initial searches I can't seem to find anything else than this being a proposed theory among others.
Edit: I've found this article https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/study-suggests-epstein-barr-virus-may-cause-multiple-sclerosis suggesting it's at least one of the factor but not the source of it.
The idea behind it really appeals to me. However, Guix is so niche that I felt like it was not worth the effort to actually daily drive it. I went the NixOS way instead and have been daily driving it now for almost 2years. I'm really satisfied with the paradigm immutable and reproducible os. I also manage my servers this way and it makes it really easy to rollback stuff.
The learning curve is the same as for any language but you have to relearn how to manage an os this way as it can be really different than a trad os. It forces you to really understand for example how packages traditionally expect to link to various libs available on your system.
That's it, now I'm gonna go eat twice as many legumes as I usually eat just because of this post!
It clearly has nothing to do with the dairy lobby pushing hard everywhere to prevent people from switching to ecologically and humanely better alternative because they don't want to lose the fat subsidies they get from the government.
They try to push these legislations under the guise that it could induce the consumer in error, my ass.
Let's blame fun cartoons instead.
Let's not forget the cost with their lives the cows have to bear for us to get milk.
Forcefully impregnated, their babies taken away to be slaughtered as veal or to become milk cows. And all that for a fraction of their lifespan only to be slaughtered when their milk production starts to decline...
https://ourworldindata.org/environmental-impact-milks
https://insideclimatenews.org/news/02042021/meat-dairy-lobby-climate-action/
At least sometimes there is a bit of push back: https://www.just-food.com/news/eu-rejects-dairy-lobby-proposals-to-restrict-plant-based-alternatives/
This isn't true anymore in Switzerland. Since January 2023 you just go to your civil office state you want to change your gender and pay the administrative fee and you're good.
You don't even need a medical diagnostic.
Pignorant is another investigation into UK gas chambers for pigs that's available on Prime video btw.
Let's abolish slaughterhouses.
As long as he sticks to subjects he clearly understands. Everytime I've read or watched one of his take on veganism/anti-specism I was left dumbfounded and ashamed for him.
Actually most leather seems to be coated in plastic as well.
I actually just watched a nice video on vegan leather vs animal leather and comparing the ecological impact (as well as other factors)
I know that 15years ago on the scene usually they cracked games for bragging rights so no DRM version was no fun hence you would find mostly the cracked version uploaded by the scene.
I don't know if it still operates this way.
https://libro.fm is a an interesting alternative to audible if you can pay.
No DRM and if your local bookshop registered themselves a percentage of what you buy is paid to them.
They were working from another office per the article.
There was a chapter in his book "Starry Messenger" dedicated to this subject. I unfortunately cannot reproduce the entire chapter here. However, here is a video essay on it that you can watch if you're interested. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbXw13Npvlg (25min)
One of his dumbest argument imho was trying to claim that vegans were specist towards plants, even though no scientific existence of sentience in plants exist which is the moral criteria used in most anti-specist philosophy. I will add that even if plants were all found to be sentient, we'd still kill less sentient beings by eating them directly rather than feeding them to non-human animals and then killing them.
Here is another video of him talking about this very chapter for example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z9HrMdNEKPA (6min). I think this shows a complete misunderstanding of what veganism and anti-specism is about. To me it seems like he does not even consider the sentience of the animals and considers them as machines. He also seems to straw man the position to "vegans want to protect life".
I guess words can't be used in different context, especially when the plant-based alternatives are drop-in replacement for animal milks and the term has been used for hundreds of year to describe both plant-based milky substances and animal secretions.
Works perfectly on my end as a daily user
Just as it still makes it not right for cows and chickens it makes it not right for monkeys. Or would you be OK if I was breeding humans for slavery purposes?
Let's abolish slaughterhouses and animal husbandry.
One of the worst sector for human exploitation and the worst for animal exploitation.
Hey thanks for the precision. The frustration was not directed at you directly, moreso at the argument I thought you were making, I apologize for that. I have just heard this fallacious argument so many time in real life used seriously that I react strongly to it.
Add fishing to that.
Yes CS2 has an offline mode.
Drink water and don't eat fish!
As someone not playing valorant I think it's really confusing to watch. Not quite to the level of League of Legends or DOTA2 but still.
Counter strike is more straight forward as you don't have multiple heroes with their own powers.
On the other hand street fighter or rocket league are the easiest to watch, followed I feel like by CS.
I'm pretty sure their app are Foss software. Here is the android client https://github.com/ProtonMail/proton-mail-android which is GPL 3
Isn't she the one that's always ranting about trans people as well? Yeah seems like the scene changed a lot since I was last involved.
Again that's a misunderstanding of the position. The discriminatory criteria is sentience. If a plant was found to be sentient, this plant would be included in the moral circle. You can make the same argument for things we consider animals but lack all of what we currently consider needed for sentience. An example would be a sea sponge. I personally do not include a sea sponge in my moral circle and I do not think they have any sentience even though they are considered animals. I would also consider someone that says sea sponge should be included in our moral circle just because they are part of the animal kingdom to be quite dogmatic.
And even if we want to debate on whether a sea sponge is sentient, there is absolutely no debate on most animals we currently kill for food or exploit for entertainment. They are clearly sentient.
Aww that's unlucky. I mostly listen to popular sf/fantasy books and always found them.
Thanks, that's really interesting. I'll try to find the opened paper somewhere else, but the abstract already gives a lot of interesting informations :)
Ok it feels like you're just starting to spam answers without even taking the time to argument on why you think something. I try to take the time to justify my position and you just answer with small sentences that don't do anything for an interesting discussion.
Let's stop there, have a nice day.
But you would agree that the rocks themselves cannot have an issue with it? That's the gist of the sentientist position. Sentient beings have an interest in living, not being exploited and thus the sentientist position goes further and say that for the same reasons we say that humans have a right to live (i.e.: not being killed) or being exploited, we should extend the same rights to sentient beings because there is no morally relevant difference between us and other sentient beings that would justify killing them when you would not kill a human being in the same position.
Note that this does not mean all sentient beings should have exactly the same rights. Obviously giving the right to vote to a cow does not make sense, the same way we don't give the right to abortion to cis men because they cannot make use of this right.
Ok let me unpack your two points:
The difference with the sentience criteria is that a non-sentient being by definition cannot be hurt by actions taken against their being as there is quite literally no subject, no one, to experience anything. Would you say that someones that likes smashing rocks is discriminating against rocks? Of course not because it makes no sense to speak about discrimination for a non sentient being/object. The only time where you can make an argument that doing something to a non sentient being is an issue is when it affects a sentient being.
Again as I've literally stated in my earlier comment the discrimination is not based on species but on sentience. If you want a more concrete example, let's imagine a philosophical zombie or in other terms a non-sentient human. I would not include such a being in my moral circle by itself as it would lack sentience.
I guess we all have our blind spots :)
Yes I agree in principle that it's a discrimination. They way I used discrimination was implying that someone on the "bad" side of the discrimination could be discriminated against. My bad I should have clearly defined the way I used this term. Sorry English is not my first language as well.
In any case a discrimination that does not hurt the discriminated or another sentient being is of no consequence for me.
Yep that's what I was alluding to :). Unfortunately the first DOI did not return a result. I'll probably email the contact author. They usually are quite willing to send the PDF.
What's your morally relevant argument for killing for example cows for taste pleasure and not humans then? What's this special trait humans have that other sentient being do not possess that allows us to do that to them?
Yeah we totally don't do anything over here (and the rest of the world), except for pigs, cows , chicken and many more non-human animals.
They are not even trying to overturn the decision. The far right has consistently walked back on every social mesure they had in the past 2 weeks to the surprise of noone who knows what right means.