Do you have any insights on how that works? Is it just something rather gets passed down from parent to child? Because I would assume the education system would try to tilt everyone towards the Republican side there (I’m not from the US)
Whether or not violence is morally acceptable isn’t the most interesting thing in my opinion, but rather “what strategy is most likely to win”. It’s not a subject I’m well versed in, but the first analysis I found showed that non violent protest movements tend to win, see https://www.datawrapper.de/blog/are-peaceful-protests-more-successful-than-violent-ones (I know I know, correlation is not causation, so digging in deeper is needed). If you read this article, you can already see that a little bit of violence is enough to help turn people against you. The more restraint, the easier it appears to be to let people join your cause (or at least not turn against you). That doesn’t mean being meek, you can still be incredibly obstructionist while being non violent. In Europe, a huge amount of rhe progress we made was because elites feared the masses. Because of the potential of violence, maybe, but not because of actual violence. Most of all because of huge union movements who could grind whole industries or even the country to a halt. What works in one place doesn’t necessarily work on another one, of course.
Security services use things like airgapping, but our politicians talk to each other using WhatsApp…
With ICE already acting like nazis as it is, that sounds very scary. Something I heard is that people may already be self-censoring themselves for fear pf the consequences - not just at the high levels but also normal citizens
Is it worse then Lemmy filtered news lets on? (Edit: just an honest question. News here is pretty negative, I just wonder if the lived experience is even worse)
I think this is exactly where the deepest crises of capitalism come from. What you describe is a natural consequence of unregulated capitalism. Either you start regulating (breaking up monopolies or nationalising them, high tax brackets on the very rich, etc.) before you hit a depression, or you risk a revolution by only enacting them after the shit has hit the fan. Then you can have a generation, maybe two, who reap the benefits of enforced redistribution. And then folks get complacent and start deregulation again.
Best of luck to you all
I remember reading that they get extra suspicious of you don’t have social media profiles active on your phone…
It looks like they’re just going to lobby trading partners to please direct (actual) retaliatory sanctions towards products from red states, not their state. In general, I like that idea. But maybe now any excemptions for blue state products should come with a promise to actually fight the incipient fascist government…
They’re really pretty easy to find. But it’s just basic physics. A cow doesn’t eat to turn food into meat, it eats to stay alive. The business of living (and not in the least, that means farting lots of methane) consumes 90% of the food, only 10% is turned into meat. This varies a lot of course, depending on species and feeding regime.
The organic stuff itself, maybe. But there’s a lot of carbon involved in driving tractors and transport. All of which is vastly reduced by eating 1 plant instead of growing 10 plants to grow one steak.
Funny thing is that congestion is basically queuing for mobility services. And queuing is exactly what you get in communist systems where the state provides for you. So highways are socialism!
Thanks for the insights!