In the sense that the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) is visible from every point in space. No matter where you are you can determine your position relative to the CMB, making it a common reference point for the entire universe.

And you don’t think it may have had more to do with what you were saying / the way you were behaving than your looks? I don’t doubt that incel may be thrown around more as a basic insult these days - it’s just reaching that level of ubiquity in everyday speech - but I have more often heard it used towards men who are saying or doing things that are misogynistic. The same kind of misogyny that betrays a deeper insecurity has long been common in adolescent boys who are going through puberty and dealing with feelings they don’t know how to deal with yet, and the word incel has become a convenient way to call it out, but I do feel that when it comes to adolescents there should be some charitability and understanding. Andrew Tate and the rest of the Manosphere are giving these kids the opposite of what they need, though.

It’s more like a cross between RimWorld and Stardew Valley, with a bit of Terraria-like RPG mechanics.

This is precisely the image Jesus uses when He speaks of the “eye of the needle.” Tradition holds that this phrase is in reference to a small gate that required a camel (or other pack animal) laden with goods to be unencumbered in order to pass through.

There has never existed in all of history a gate in Jerusalem called the “eye of the needle.” This interpretation was made up by some rich prick in the 11th century and repeated by other rich pricks through to the modern day in order to avoid the uncomfortable truth that Jesus said in no uncertain terms that they weren’t getting into heaven.

Trans are less than 1% of the population

And that makes protecting their rights unimportant?

But yeah, please tell me how trans is literally worse than the holocaust and slavery.

Did I say that, or did you imagine that I did?

Btw, do you think civil rights would have gone better or worse if someone more closely aligned with Hitler gained power before WW2?

I assume you’re saying this because you believe that Democrats advocating for trans rights cost them the election, giving it to Trump. The only way you could have come to this conclusion is if you heard it from some talking head and believed it without critical thought because it feels right to you. The thing is, it’s just completely false. The Democrats’ advocacy for trans rights has been lukewarm at best and overtly hostile at worst. Most of them have the same mindset as you, where they prefer to retreat from difficult topics like trans rights, ceding the narrative to conservatives while failing to create any consistent narrative of their own. That’s what cost them the election.

Again my point was that I would want any opposition party in the USA to have enough awareness of global politics to know The Houthi Militia will not get US support

And again, there’s a whole lot of room between giving the Houthis US support and bombing every civilian who happens to be in close proximity to them.

The Houthi are not making a blockade. They are murdering sailors on boats and claiming solidarity with Palestine.

Which is worse, violently resisting a genocide or enacting one? I don’t think the Houthis should be murdering sailors, but even though they are overzealous in this instance they still clearly have the moral high ground, not because they are particularly moral but because the bar has been set so low.

You wait for the right moment, with the right issues.

MLK Jr. had a lot to say about this position. Desegregation and civil rights were once just as unpopular as trans rights are now. If you’re feeling impatient skip to the last passage, though that would be quite ironic given you are calling on trans people to be patient waiting for their rights.

While confined here in the Birmingham city jail, I came across your recent statement calling my present activities “unwise and untimely.” Seldom do I pause to answer criticism of my work and ideas.

…

But since I feel that you are men of genuine good will and that your criticisms are sincerely set forth, I want to try to answer your statement in what I hope will be patient and reasonable terms.

…

You deplore the demonstrations taking place in Birmingham. But your statement, I am sorry to say, fails to express a similar concern for the conditions that brought about the demonstrations. I am sure that none of you would want to rest content with the superficial kind of social analysis that deals merely with effects and does not grapple with underlying causes. It is unfortunate that demonstrations are taking place in Birmingham, but it is even more unfortunate that the city’s white power structure left the Negro community with no alternative.

…

One of the basic points in your statement is that the action that I and my associates have taken in Birmingham is untimely. Some have asked: “Why didn’t you give the new city administration time to act?” The only answer that I can give to this query is that the new Birmingham administration must be prodded about as much as the outgoing one, before it will act. We are sadly mistaken if we feel that the election of Albert Boutwell as mayor will bring the millennium to Birmingham. While Mr. Boutwell is a much more gentle person than Mr. Connor, they are both segregationists, dedicated to maintenance of the status quo. I have hope that Mr. Boutwell will be reasonable enough to see the futility of massive resistance to desegregation. But he will not see this without pressure from devotees of civil rights. My friends, I must say to you that we have not made a single gain in civil rights without determined legal and nonviolent pressure. Lamentably, it is an historical fact that privileged groups seldom give up their privileges voluntarily. Individuals may see the moral light and voluntarily give up their unjust posture; but, as Reinhold Niebuhr has reminded us, groups tend to be more immoral than individuals.

We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct action campaign that was “well timed” in the view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. For years now I have heard the word “Wait!” It rings in the ear of every Negro with piercing familiarity. This “Wait” has almost always meant “Never.” We must come to see, with one of our distinguished jurists, that “justice too long delayed is justice denied.”

…

I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action”; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a “more convenient season.” Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.

That’s because all of that is immaterial to my point which is that any opposition party in the USA should not be lead by people who think the Houthi Militia are worth supporting.

That’s a very convenient principle to have when opposing the indiscriminate bombing of civilians is conflated with support for terrorism. Just because I don’t think we should be bombing them doesn’t mean I support the Houthis, and I don’t have to align myself with them to acknowledge that they are right to enact an economic blockade against Israel to pressure them to stop their genocide.

You didn’t respond to the part about targeting hospitals and civilians. The moral conclusion here is the same as with Israel’s targeting of civilians in their so-called “war against Hamas.” Hamas and the Houthis are terrorist organizations that grew out of victimhood and justify hatred against their oppressors in the name of resistance. They are victims, but because they aren’t perfectly moral in their resistance you condemn their entire people to indiscriminate bombing. The saddest thing about this is that it won’t eliminate the terrorist groups, only bolster their support and make them more resentful.

And the largest terrorist organization - the US military - will continue its campaign of terror, creating ever more.

And they chose Henry Ford of all people, the man responsible for the modern assembly line (capitalist alienation at its most extreme) and an actual Nazi.

This Pantheon? That’s a cerebral sci-fi drama with some pretty disturbing scenes of violence, it’s definitely not for kids. Teens maybe, but not kids.

They might have soaked fabric or some other material in animal fat (which is just oil that’s solid at room temperature), wrapped it around the end of a stick, and lit it on fire. 🤓🤓

I have the version that was made for the OG Switch and the build quality is garbage tier. Developed stick drift in both sticks in less than a month.

It never fails to baffle me how media has managed to gaslight Americans into thinking that creating pointless busywork jobs for their own sake is some sort of moral imperative.

It’s a good thing we can surpass the limitations of our perception by creating external tools that augment our senses and translate extra-sensory information about the world into something human perceptible. We’ve even gone so far as to send such devices into space.

I get what you’re doing and that’s totally your right to do whatever with your body, but you shouldn’t go around saying it’s completely safe. You’re taking a risk with your health that others should be made aware of when you choose to share advice.

Nor does it end with the UK, which is the perspective I assume you were speaking from when you said owning a car is a privilege and that people should just walk.

Not in the US we don’t. A car is a necessity for the vast majority of Americans because of how our cities and towns are built. The car lobby makes sure that doesn’t change because they can take advantage of that fact to put people in massive amounts of debt.

It’s a good thing we have a robust public transportation system and pedestrian infrastructure then. /s

Campism is Trotskyist criticism and not a term we use.

That’s not a response to the criticism, just a dismissal of it based on who it originated from. I personally think it’s a valid criticism of many who consider themselves marxist-leninists, and I am not a trotskyist. People I’ve spoken with in the past have had a tendency to dogmatically subscribe to a campist mindset in total disregard for the particulars of any given situation, and for how much shit MLs give liberals for practicing lesser-evilism, many sure seem to love their own version of it.

Accelerationism is an edgelord meme that some baby leftists might subscribe to, but is generally a very dumb concept.

It’s far more prevalent than you’re giving it credit for, and in my experience many MLs’ understanding of revolutionary defeatism tends to boil down to accelerationism when questioned.

However, I’ll give props for knowing about revolutionary defeatism, which is a factor in our analysis. It was, pretty indisputably, the correct position to take in WWI, when it was developed.

Indisputable suggests it’s largely undisputed now, which you must know is absolutely not the case. I am currently disputing it. There is no significant historical pattern of countries that faced a military defeat becoming socialist or even having better revolutionary conditions afterwards.

Only in Russia did the socialists stay true to their promise and used the opportunity to turn the imperialist war into a civil war, and eventually managed to nope out of the meat grinder everyone else was stuck in.

Starting a civil war while the country is in the middle of an imperialist war is not an example of revolutionary defeatism working. If Russia had been defeated in their imperialist war and then had a socialist revolution that would be an example, but even then one example is not a pattern.

Furthermore, history cautions us to be skeptical when our country tells us a war is justified, as we see many examples throughout history where people fell in line behind narratives that did not hold up, whether it was WWI or Vietnam or Iraq - whenever any country goes to war, there is a strong pressure and lots of propaganda that is able to convince the vast majority of people to support it, everyone always thinks, “but this time, it’s different,” and more often than not, they’re wrong.

I agree completely, but this is just an argument for being anti-imperialist and anti-war, not an argument for revolutionary defeatism.

Generally speaking, arguments that are grounded on things like territorial integrity or national sovereignty don’t really have traction with us. Revolution involves aggressively violating national sovereignty, after all.

Those sorts of arguments don’t have any traction with me either, I’m an anarchist. I don’t believe I have made any such arguments, unless you conflate collective self-determination with national sovereignty.