These guys are as bad as the terrorist group Palestine Action (sarcasm, directed at the fact that the proscribing of Palestine Action as a terrorist group happened in the same vote as this group; if an MP had wanted to vote to outlaw RIM but not Palestine Action, it would have been impossible to do so)
A friend of a friend is the daughter of a Russian oligarch. It was a messy situation in which she was at risk of being drawn into the politics, even though her dad was an asshole who she would’ve been glad to see defenestrated. I only know the surface level info, but it sounds like a fucked up situation in many ways
I don’t feel good about this. I used to be heavily in favour of assisted dying rights, but I fear that disabled people who have been failed by the system will end up going down this path. I’ve seen examples of it happen in Canada. I have very little trust in the UK’s health and social care system at the moment, because as a country, we don’t seem to care about actually supporting people.
This reminded me of a delightful comedy sketch by John Finnemore (“Penguin Diplomacy”. 20ish minutes long radio clip). https://archive.org/details/BBC_Radio_4_FM_20170628_173000_John_Finnemores_Double_Acts?start=80
I like it. Let’s get philosophical on this shit. What even is a chair?
The genocide is ongoing.
The person you are replying to left a “cricket” emoji (it was actually generic bug because they weren’t aware that a specific cricket emoji exists). They are clearly agreeing with your original point about how MLs are oddly quiet in circumstances like this. I get that it’s super easy to become hypervigilant towards bad faith discourse in online discussions, but please take a step back and see that the only person trying to start an argument here is you
Yet again we see students being the ones to stand against injustice. It’s a shame that in Israel, as in other countries, such protests are harshly suppressed.
Hence the quietness
I don’t disagree, but to lean into your analogy: I worry that we don’t have any viable long term solutions here, and I’m very nervous about how that will affect the fallout from a ban. My own stay in a mental health ward comes to mind, because it took years after that point before I was able to get the kind of support that helps someone build wellness long term. The hospital stay did the job, in the sense that I’m still alive, but my mental health was probably worse in the initial aftermath.
(This comment brought to you from the UK, where the Reform party (not nearly as bad as the AfD, but still racist shits) made heavy gains in recent local elections.)
“But previous attempts at banning them have failed because such an official report was missing.”
Man, this is peak modern society, and the absurdity makes me laugh. I don’t mean that in a derisive way, more in a "wow, making democracy work is haaard ". Hopefully this will lead to something positive though, even if I’m anxious that banning a party like the AfD may lead to some things worsening.
They’re a minority, to be sure, but you’re right that there are Israelis who were fighting apartheid and continue to fight against the ongoing genocide. We just don’t hear about the good people who are resisting evil from within Israel, because that’s counter to Zionist rhetoric.
Edit: made it clearer that I’m agreeing with you
I wonder if we’ll ever find out why they did it.
You’re comparing between different sample pools, which matters when we’re talking about probability adjacent stuff. We’re not asking “from this large pool of people at an airport, who is likely to receive additional scrutiny?” Because of this, your comment about how you’ve seen people of all backgrounds get scanned isn’t relevant to OP’s point.
The scope we’re looking at is the pool of experiences across one person’s trips. Imagine if it was every time that you got stopped for additional checks at an airport, even when you couldn’t see any mistakes that you had made. If you get checked because your keys triggered the sensors, then that’s a mistake that you can learn from, but consider how it would feel if you meticulously complied with everything you were meant to do, but were still consistently pulled aside for additional checks.
I know that on the internet, you never know whether someone is being hyperbolic, or straight up spinning a yarn, but try to take OP on faith here and consider how dismissive your comment comes across. I don’t know OP’s particular circumstances, but I have previously made a comment similar to yours to a friend, who called me out on being an asshole. Back then, I was oblivious to the reality of these things.
My friend explained that the first time they were pulled aside for additional checks, they opted to believe that it was just a random thing. The second time, they felt more uneasy, but actively resisted the “victim mentality” (their words). By the 20th time, they had come to expect it as inevitable, and that no change to how they packed, or what they wore would change things. They desperately wanted to believe that they weren’t being targeted for additional searches, but after a certain point, it becomes impossible to believe that these things are random.
A facet of Scientism, as I understand it, is a sort of hero worship of “Great” scientists. Part of this is because it’s easier for us to build a narrative of history if we focus on key figure, but that’s antithetical to how science actually works. It neglects the importance of the wider scientific “ecosystem”, which includes mechanisms of peer review, academic teaching and learning etc.
I’ve known people who were pretty prominent academics, who got some of their best ideas from random places, like hanging out in a bar with academics from outside their field. But a good idea on its own matters very little: science, in practice, works on a foundation of trust and community, and basically any research has an entire team of people behind it.
I have no doubt that the scientist mentioned in the headline is exceptional at her job, but by presenting her as the scientist who is working on this presents an inaccurate perspective of how these things actually work. I see why the headline chose to present her as more essential than she likely is, but as it seems to for the person you’re replying to, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth
I find Scientism concerning because I am a scientist who is quite concerned by the gap between actual science, and how people use science-shaped rhetoric. An example of this is how in the UK, during COVID, the government repeatedly claimed they were “following the science”, despite many of their policies being completely contrary to what the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) had recommended.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m a big fan of the scientific method — I wouldn’t be a scientist otherwise. But writing news headlines about the achievements of scientists exists beyond science. Being opposed to Scientism isn’t being opposed to the scientific method. Rather, it’s more like acknowledging that science isn’t a universal tool for solving all ills. Personally, being against Scientism also means being against the weird way we put science, and scientists on a pedestal. I understand the sentiment (and hell, I’m probably a scientist in part because a younger me was chasing that pedestal), but I think it’s probably harmful long term — both to society and to science
Edit: fixed grammar
My friend has had quite severe ill health, including some unfortunate, impromptu hospital trips. I bought them a Steam Deck as a gift, shortly before their health worsened, and it has literally been a lifesaver for them. It has been tremendously powerful for them to have a way to stay connected with their gaming friends, even when they can’t make it to their desk.
I don’t own a Deck myself, but this alone would make me a big fan (though I also appreciate that the Steam Deck has made streamline gaming on my Linux desktop)
I can see why the French right love her so much, given that the right wing do a lot of “rules for thee, but not for me”
That quote from Natalia Zubarevich goes hard
Because it’s so repairable, you might be able to find a 3rd party to fix it for not too much. I don’t know what that would do with your warranty, but I figure that attempting the repair yourself would also void the warranty.
High availability of parts and repair guides tends to lower the price of repairs, even from 3rd party people. It’s why right to repair is so important