a lil bee 🐝

I’m going to take a different approach than most of the other comments here: you can’t. Microplastics are in the air and a large chunk of it comes from car tire residue. You’re breathing it, likely right now. Research is still in the early phases and we just don’t know how bad it is yet, both from the proliferation and the impact side of things.

Source is Breaking the Plastic Wave and Overview on the occurrence of microplastics in air.

We’re all trying to be SpongeBob, but we’re all subject to being a Squidward some days.

There is a lot of nuance to that. If Trump appeals on constitutional grounds, the Supreme Court can choose to hear it. State cases can be appealed to the SC if their interpretation of federal law or the constitution are in dispute. They normally just outright deny hearing most cases decided by state courts. A good chunk of the supreme court is likely to grant whatever the hell he wants though, so I’m not so certain anything that boils down to interpretation is safe.

Ah, good call, I forgot the context. Does this apply if he escalates to supreme court and they grant certiorari?

That wouldn’t be necessary. Presidents have the power to pardon and nothing says it cannot be used on the self.

Not doing this with you. If you can’t follow the logic between the post topic, this thread’s OP, and the common experiences of anyone on the internet, that’s fine, just don’t discuss. Not going to do the thing where you’re “just asking questions” and critiquing every pedantic little point along the way. That’s sealioning and it’s tiring and lame and why half of the people here don’t want to discuss the issues they’re bringing up. The only one here who can’t seem to follow the logic is you.

Yknow, it’s really something else to come into a thread discussing topics people don’t want to talk about because they get treated to shitty behavior and sealioning, and proceed to sealion on one of those topics.

See, I think this is what they’re talking about though. I hate Christianity. I was raised Protestant and because of other factors in my life, Christianity effectively ruined large swathes of my lifespan. It’s still an active threat to me, and likely will be for my entire life. I’m likely to be a fairly stringent atheist forever.

All that said, edgy internet atheists are one of the most annoying archetypes to run into online. If even a whiff of a religious topic comes up, they pounce and nip and bark. They satisfy almost every stereotype the religious people have of them because they often seem to delight in the cruelty of knocking on beliefs. Like, my whole top comment still being relevant, religion has a reason to exist. It gives people feelings of hope, love, and belonging. Anyone who has experienced a lack of those can understand why people fall into religion and why it’s like any other addiction.

I’m breaking one of my rules right now, talking about religion on social media, but I figured the “meta” aspect of this thread would make it productive. I hope I don’t regret it.

Oh, oh! I have a more recent example of a cringy militant atheist now, do you need a link? Here ya go.

All kinds of ideologies are viewed as fascism by all kinds of people, but that’s not a source. Just because you yourself are Jewish does not mean you have an understanding of Jewish people as a whole. If you want to assert something about Jewish views on Zionism, you need to provide a real source. It also doesn’t tie directly to your followup with “affluent Jews are why universities are invested in Israel”. Why would one follow the other at all?

I also know what Israel is and how it was founded. Your wording this time is much more palatable! “Puppet state” has connotations that I agree with, but would not say if I was trying to be neutral. On a different thread, I think that’s entirely fair. Again though, when people ask for raw info, I think it’s only fair to provide that from as neutral a standpoint as possible.

This is a fantastic answer with a lot of great context. Thank you for sharing!

I think we would need stats before making that first conclusion. I’ve seen a lot of favorability polls of Israel amongst Jewish people, but not sure I’ve ever seen an explicit ask for Zionism or its definition. I’m sure it’s out there, but I wouldn’t expect the OP to take that for granted without a source.

Your second sentence is arguably correct, but lacking a lot of context and really not presented from a neutral standpoint like the other commentor and I were trying to strike. I think when people are looking for raw information, it’s fair to provide that with as little bias as possible, especially on a heated current issue. And fwiw, I likely agree with you on that issue.

I think this covers everything except for one last question the OP might have had. Israel was, and still is, a US ally. Trading is generally pretty open with those allies, so citizens are fairly free to invest with any company headquartered in those countries. Investing in an Israeli company was no different than investing in an Australian or UK company. Offshore investment can be smart too, as they can potentially insulate you from the effects of economic shocks in America (in the short term). I’m sure someone much more versed in economics or finances could give you a better summary of that end though.

Just in case they’re wondering whether/why it’s possible/common to have foreign investments in the first place. Your comment is a great explanation for why Israel specifically.

I think it’s both for me, which I think is what you might be saying as well. I would absolutely push the button to create the copy, or whatever, because I think I would derive satisfaction from creating a life (identical to mine, no less) that was free of the circumstance I was in, which must have been dire. However, I definitely don’t consider that instance “me” even if I do consider the copy a legitimate, separate version of “me”, so I don’t feel that I have perpetuated my own instance, leaving me in whatever fight-or-flight terror I was in to cause the scenario in the first place.

Define “BLM”, “protests”, and “success” because any combination of different variables produces a different result. Additionally, even then, there is a lot of nuance to being successful when it comes to political movements.

The protests undoubtedly brought more attention to policing and racial issues in general. They obviously didn’t solve either problem. Some states passed progressive policing laws, some regressed out of spite or in reacting to the other states.

Then you also have the category of “well, it might have made an impact on this but we’ll never know”. For instance, does Biden win in 2020 without the Black Lives Matter protests? No idea, and nobody truly does or even can. That would be an enormous impact on many things, some of which may not even have been goals of the protests.

Oh, so we’re even bringing back the full cringe, fedora variant of atheism from early reddit? Cool.

I have even more personal reasons than most to hate Christianity, but this is so reductive of Christianity, black people, and the reasons why people seek out religion.

While I absolutely think the latter exists, I just cannot justify assuming that every dumb opinion I see from someone I am on the same “side” with is some evil spy. Any movement with that sort of view will eat itself alive in no time. Starting to see traitors in your midst is falling into their trap just as much as the conservative who thinks that’s what leftist thought is defined by.

Lol I guess it wouldn’t bother me much. I’m a SocDem, which makes me fail the purity tests pretty quickly. I just want a movement with a leftist heart and a pragmatic head, so we can actually win rights instead of performing while the Titanic sinks.

Why is it that everytime someone on the left does something stupid online, it’s automatically propaganda? Why can’t it just be the case that there are a lot of politically and generally uneducated people that are part of the movement, which is consistent with every populist movement for all time? This has to be reckoned with and mitigated if the left ever wants to actually hold power and do something with it.

This is my take. If this held true, why are advertisers not pulling out or drastically limiting their deals with these companies? They obviously find the value proposition worth it, bots included. So, by that metric, I don’t think they’re overvalued. They’re valued on what they bring in from advertisers and that seems to be working well. I wish it didn’t (hence me being here), but reddit is exceptionally effective at delivering ads. I don’t think reddit is going to fail as hard as we all wish they would.