migrants were capturing the geese from the local park pond and eating them

This is totally fine by me, I don’t see the problem

deleted by creator

Next you’re going to tell me you can solve homelessness by giving people housing

Why not? They’ve been boosting a far-right, anti-Muslim Israeli extremist for years

deleted by creator

The idea that “we should take drastic action to stop global warming” is more extreme than “we should do nothing and allow the planet to become incapable of supporting civilization” is a huge problem.

Well, no, but there’s a big gap between “not helping” and “wounding”, and this is much, much closer to the “not helping” end of that gap.

What wound?

I mean the critique behind “why didn’t he do it when he had the majority” still applies: calling for a constitutional amendment is ineffectual. There’s no way a constitutional amendment is going to happen in today’s political environment.

Also the court reform he’s proposing isn’t a constitutional amendment, but since he waited until he didn’t have a majority, that can’t happen either.

It’s almost like he doesn’t want change.

The #1 factor destroying the environment is unregulated capitalism allowing agri and petro corporations to run wild. Watch what you’re eating, sure, but atomized individual action can’t solve a societal problem

She should be bankrolled by the state for the grievous harm it did to her, but she’ll probably get nothing.

For the curious, this is factual, not just true. Source: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/homeless-man-vs-corporate-thief/

Keto-mojo asked for their address and phone number, so they said they were homeless and lost their phone, and it worked

I’ll never not post this when people talk about Kirk this way: Freshly Remember’d: Kirk Drift

Well obviously presidential felony convictions aren’t. But election fraud? Sure, republicans have been claiming that to some degree or other for a long time. See for example the false claims that Trump would have won the popular vote if it weren’t for undocumented immigrants voting en masse.

In any case, the specific claim I was making was that calls for civil war on social media are routine. Maybe they’re more serious this time! But maybe look for concrete plans rather than vague threats.

One thing to note is that Republicans have been talking like this for years. Minion Death Cult (tagline “The World Is Ending. Your Uncle’s Facebook Feed Is Responsible. We’re Documenting it.”) have coined “Minion’s Law”, which is that right-wing comments on a news story will have at least one person calling for civil war.

Does this mean we are at zero risk for a second civil war? Of course not. But finding people online calling for civil war isn’t sufficient cause to be worried; there needs to be at least some evidence of mobilization, as there was leading up to January 6th (for instance).

From the Order of 20 March 2024:

4. The State of Israel shall take immediate and effective measures to enable the provision of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance to address famine and starvation and the adverse conditions of life faced by Palestinians in Gaza, by:

(a) immediately suspending its military operations in Gaza;

(b) lifting its blockade of Gaza;

(c) rescinding all other existing measures and practices that directly or indirectly have the effect of obstructing the access of Palestinians in Gaza to humanitarian assistance and basic services; and

(d) ensuring the provision of adequate and sufficient food, water, fuel, shelter, clothing, hygiene and sanitation requirements, alongside medical assistance, including medical supplies and support.

Despite media claims, the ICJ already ruled to halt the Gaza genocide:

The State of Israel shall, in accordance with its obligations under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, in relation to the Palestinian people as a group protected by the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, desist from the commission of any and all acts within the scope of Article II of the Convention, in particular:

(a) killing members of the group;

(b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to the members of the group;

(c) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; and

(d) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group.

(source)

It’s hard to imagine how they could continue the Gaza “fighting” and “desist from … killing members of the group”.

This has placed the prime minister in a political vise. If he commits to postwar Palestinian rule in Gaza and begins acting seriously to establish it, he loses the far right. But if he commits to resettling Gaza, he loses the Israeli majority and the international community. And so, as he has often done in the past, Netanyahu has chosen not to choose

Oh, he’s chosen.

Bari Weiss 'bout to start caring about free speech again